Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

hotstuff — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 20:21:26 GMT

Well. the earlier the Dems choose their nominee, the better their chances of beating McCain in November!

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

char12 — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 22:40:41 GMT

http://www.commonvoice.com/article.asp?colid=8310.

Obama Connection

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

kshortSD — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 23:00:02 GMT

I hope this contest ends long before the convention. It seems the only way that's going to happen is if Hillary gives up, and she should if there is any truth to this article.

Besides, if she could possibly get the nomination, imagine the John McCain ads when he runs against her! An honored war hero against a candidate that lies about being shot at! Awful...

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

Integrity first and foremost — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 23:32:59 GMT

Dear char12 -- there are numerous links which substantiate this -- hope this helps.

http://forums.therandirhodesshow.com/lofiversion/index.php/t128336.html

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

JeanneBeans — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 00:14:06 GMT

Yep--it gets stronger the longer he's around. Thank God he got over a month in PA because he needs it. What will they say when he wins there? Or will Hillary win by only 2% and the blasted media will call it a huge win? That, in reality, would really be a loss, given how she should or could have won.

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

azulgoddess89 — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 01:54:36 GMT

Posted By: kshortSD (April 2, 2008 at 7:00 PM)

Besides, if she could possibly get the nomination, imagine the John McCain ads when he runs against her! An honored war hero against a candidate that lies about being shot at! Awful...

Well McCain can run attack Ads against both of them. He can dub Obama as unpatriotic and inexperienced and Hillary as a liar and dishonest woman.

I'm not really sure who will win in this state. In fact, I'm not really sure who I am going to vote for yet, but I am still thinking deeply about who I want to be the next President. >.<;

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

Nins — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 03:12:22 GMT

I was down in PA recently on business. I'm reading ALL of the candidates' books. Since I was traveling and eating out a lot, I read books while I ate. It was crazy, but whenever I was reading Obama's book, people would come up and talk to me, ask me about it, or say that they had read it and wanted him to be president. Not even once while I was reading Clinton's or McCain's book did anyone interact with me.

I'm a Republican, and just trying to inform myself about the candidates, But I can tell you, Obama is on to something BIG in Pennsylvania.

After Clinton's recent "sniper fire" I would say her goose is cooked. Average people in PA might be under-educated, but they are not stupid, and they still value HONESTY.

McCain or Obama. The only choice.

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

es3196 — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 04:38:47 GMT

If they value honesty in pennsylvania then they should be a bit upset that Barrack lies about not knowing his preacher was a racist, hate spewing individual. I mean he knew the guy for 20 years and considered him a mentor. I know the msm and you Barrack supporters want that stuff to go bye bye but the truth never does. Trinity church was built on a theology that hates the white. But the Obama supporters are the ones who kept putting Marion Berry in office in D.C. They don't care about the person's character or plans for the country, just as long as he is african-american. I guess this country will have to learn the hard way that socialism does not work.

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

es3196 — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 04:42:11 GMT

His pastor/ his fellow church members gloated about 9/11. What has happened to this country? God help us all.

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

tobon_05@yahoo.com — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 10:11:35 GMT

All you haters are trying to paint Obama as a racist. It's not going to work. He is half-white. Your tactics are not going to work. See ya in November. Viva Obama

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

hotstuff — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 13:45:42 GMT

To lmccesn, es1396:

Please, tell us what a racist is or else look in the mirror!

In the mean time, read up Billy Graham,

Pat Robertson

John Hagee

Jerry Falwell

Edward Peck......... , all white folks!

You´ll find that Rev. Dr. Wright is a good man, who was only PLAGIARIZING,

what all these good white folks had said BEFORE!! Got the grip, racists? Truth is truth!!

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

Cazador72 — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 14:20:29 GMT

"His pastor/ his fellow church members gloated about 9/11. What has happened to this country? God help us all." By es3196

Do you mean Robertson and Falwell? Because they did gloat about 9-11. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H-CAcdta_8I

I think you should find something else to fake outrage about; this attack tactic is only going to come back and bite you. Then again, rationality and consistency are not strong right wing suits.

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

kyletormey — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 15:28:36 GMT

hotstuff-

well said. lmccesn, don't you find it rather difficult for a man who's half-white half-black to be a racist? Whose extended family pretty much covers every color, race, religion, practically region of the globe. I can't believe you're one of those idiots who ACTUALLY believes he was sworn into the Senate on the koran. That his middle name means he's a muslim; but what about Rev. Wright? Doesn't seem to be a muslim to me. Why on God's green Earth do you think he's a racist? How can you say such idiotic, uninformed things so quickly? Unfortunately, there are too many out there who think like you. Not enough, thankfully, because it's rather obvious he's going to be the Democratic nominee. And if that's the case, he'll more than likely, God I hope so, be our next President.

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

Pia1981 — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 17:59:05 GMT

Andrew, Hillary is irrelevant. She has been since February. Enjoyed the article , though.

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

5interiors5 — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 18:21:19 GMT

Here we go again with the airheads. Its like the "do not trust anyone over the age of 30". Let's try the next new thing. This is such an important election and its too bad that the media is leading the way to the presidency. If we think the Bush administration was such a joke, what we get with Obama would be even worse. At least we know McCain. I have been a life long democrat, but DNC has dropped the ball even considering an Obama run. McCain will win in a landslide.

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

vtcallan — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 18:48:52 GMT

I think the voters in PA are tired of seeing and hearing coverage of the Dem primary on cable news networks. This way they can go back to watching water-skiing squirrels.

I live in PA and I can't walk past the TV without an arm coming through the screen handing me some campaign literature.

The article is right. The Dem party is leaning toward ending this thing quickly. I hope we have seen Clinton in her last throes. She blusters about dragging this thing into the convention. She has to say this to her supporters so that the money keeps coming. I suspect that after a less than compelling win in PA (and maybe even a loss) Clinton will lose support and most importantly, MONEY. Then it's on to defining the hell out of McSame.

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

vtcallan — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 18:54:29 GMT

Read this all Pennsylvanians!

If Hillary Clinton loses PA then the superdelegates will flock to Obama and this nightmare can end!

Vote Obama in PA and put this baby to rest.

We have to go after McSame NOW!

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

Radmanaustin — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 19:35:08 GMT

Obama has to show that he is a closer. It will all come down to the media wars that will happen the weekend before. Republicans will do everything in their ability to smear Obama to make this go longer and cause confusion. The Clinton machine will be in high gear throwing the kitchen sink, boiler, and bathtub at Obama. PA has early absentee voting by mail but it is restricted. If it is close then watch all H-E-DOUBLE HOCKEY STICKs happen starting April 19th. The reason for this is voter apathy. Many voters wait until only a few days before the primary to make a decision on a candidate. Hillary knows and is betting on this.

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

msjentay — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 21:55:09 GMT

Even if I weren't an Obama supporter, the Clinton tactics I think would still have become tiring. Just a theory: I don't think there would be as much pressure from the higher-ups had they run a "cleaner" campaign. I think the fatique people are feeling is because of the attacks and the drama. I suspect that's what Pelosi and others are feeling - Clinton fatique - and they just want them to shut it...

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

Thevail — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 22:25:07 GMT

Actually the rumors about Hillary Clinton being in court over criminal fraud about donations to her Senate campaign are true. Here's the info.

The Case Management Conference hearing in Paul v Clinton et al on February 21, in Los Angeles Superior Court will finally set a trial date in the long delayed civil fraud case and it will set a schedule for discovery that will include the sworn depositions of the entire Clinton family and the Clinton hierarchy of the Democratic Party.

A trial was set for March 2007, but it was delayed due to an appeal of a lower-court's decision to dismiss Sen. Clinton as a defendant. The California Supreme Court upheld the decision, but Sen. Clinton, nevertheless, will be required to testify under oath along with her husband as material witnesses.

Seven years ago Peter Paul began whistleblowing to the government and alerting the media of numerous illegalities committed by Hillary and Bill Clinton in order to win Hillary’s first election to public office.

The multi-million dollar donor to Hillary’s Senate campaign that caused Hillary’s finance director to be indicted and tried in May, 2005, for hiding his contributions, and whose complaint to the FEC resulted in a finding that Hillary’s campaign broke the law resulting in the only FEC fine imposed against Hillary’s campaign, will begin the discovery process leading to a trial in Los Angeles later this year of the Clintons and others for destroying Paul’s public company.

The lawsuit claims that Peter Paul was fraundulenty induced to make a 1.2 million in-kind contribution to Senator Hillary Clinton's 2000 senate campaign in exchange for former President Bill Clinton to be a rainmaker for this company once he left the White House. Paul claims that former President Clinton backed out of the $17 million deal, and his company collapsed.

Paul contends Clinton has filed four false FEC reports, in an attempt to distance herself from him after a Washington Post story days after the August 2000 fundraiser reported his past felony convictions. Clinton then returned a check for $2,000, insisting it was the only money she had taken from Paul. Clinton, Paul asserts, continues to hide from the public false statements about his contributions and her relationship with him, made to the Post through her spokesman Howard Wolfson. Clinton vowed publicly she would not take any more money from Paul, but one month later, she demanded another $100,000, to be hidden in a state committee using untraceable securities.

Paul’s allegations that his $1.2 million in donations were hidden by Hillary’s campaign have been corroborated by the Justice Department, FBI and FEC General Counsel- while the lying has been done by the Clinton appointed Judge in the Rosen trial, Hillary’s lawyer David Kendall has maintained Hillary’s campaign filed accurate reports until the campaign admitted hiding more than $720,000, and her lawyer Lyn Utrecht in false statements made to the FEC General Counsel denying Paul’s contribution of $1.

In May 2005, Sen. Clinton's former finance director, David Rosen, was acquitted for filing false campaign reports that later were charged by the FEC to treasurer Andrew Grossman, who accepted responsibility in the conciliation agreement. Paul points out the Rosen trial established his contention that he personally gave more than $1.2 million to Clinton's campaign for the fundraiser that his contributions intentionally were hidden from the public and the FEC.

The cover-up of the largest campaign finance fraud in U.S. history will soon be exposed.

The complete corrobation of the records can be viewed at Hillcap.org

re: Should Clinton Worry About Pennsylvania?

mhundt — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 19:55:40 GMT

Andrew, you said "PPP...it was one of the few outlets to correctly to pick Clinton in both Ohio and Texas."

Actually, Obama won Texas, at least if we're talking about delegate count.

It'll be made official at our Texas Democratic Convention in June, but the recent county conventions pretty much confirmed that Obama is ahead by 5 delegates (99 to 94). Remember, we vote, then we caucus to determine the remaining assignment of the additional 67 delegates.

Obama overwhelmingly beat Clinton in the caucuses...

Here's one link to a Time article about this development. How come NEWSWEEK hasn't jumped on this? http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1726737,00.html