Hillary Supporters unite part 2; no bashing please

[Dolce27]

I think that NOT picking Hillary as VP is rather insulting even if I understand the reasons why (strange as that might sound). I'm hoping for someone I can at least relate to.

I don't want Hillary as his VP. I don't want Hillary tied to that sleazy Chicago politician. People like him will eventually fall and I don't want him to take her down with him.

 

[Planogirl]

I think it's important to figure out who the less of evils is. One has to win, wouldn't a Lib be better than whatever McCain is? Or not?

 

[Dolce27]

So, the rumors going around are that the DNC will be removing Hillary’s name from the ballot for the convention for party “unity” aka: “force everyone to vote Obama because their worried that HC could still nab the nomination”.

To my understanding, everyone that still holds super delegates should have their name on the ballot. Hillary still holds her super delegates, she hasn’t released them. Apparently Edwards name will be on the ballot. Can this primary be anymore corrupted? Geeze, it’s a good thing that I’m not a registered Democrat so I don’t have to take the time to reregister as an Independent.

 

[punkin]

I think it's important to figure out who the less of evils is. One has to win, wouldn't a Lib be better than whatever McCain is? Or not?

Yes, what is the lesser of two evils? How important is the makeup of the Supreme Court? It is a very difficult decision. I can tell you that if the Court was not at issue I would definitely be voting for McCain.

 

[Planogirl]

So, the rumors going around are that the DNC will be removing Hillary’s name from the ballot for the convention for party “unity” aka: “force everyone to vote Obama because their worried that HC could still nab the nomination”.

To my understanding, everyone that still holds super delegates should have their name on the ballot. Hillary still holds her super delegates, she hasn’t released them. Apparently Edwards name will be on the ballot. Can this primary be anymore corrupted? Geeze, it’s a good thing that I’m not a registered Democrat so I don’t have to take the time to reregister as an Independent.

I hope that the rumors are untrue. Even if Obama doesn't want Hillary (or Hillary doesn't want Obama - whichever) I understood that those with delegates would remain on the ballot. This would just be another slap at her and her supporters.

Party unity my foot.

 

[punkin]

I hope that the rumors are untrue. Even if Obama doesn't want Hillary (or Hillary doesn't want Obama - whichever) I understood that those with delegates would remain on the ballot. This would just be another slap at her and her supporters.

Party unity my foot.

Rumors. I do not believe it for a minute. However if that does happen, it will be the final straw for me as far as the party is concerned.

 

[Buzz's Girl]

So, the rumors going around are that the DNC will be removing Hillary’s name from the ballot for the convention for party “unity” aka: “force everyone to vote Obama because their worried that HC could still nab the nomination”.

To my understanding, everyone that still holds super delegates should have their name on the ballot. Hillary still holds her super delegates, she hasn’t released them. Apparently Edwards name will be on the ballot. Can this primary be anymore corrupted? Geeze, it’s a good thing that I’m not a registered Democrat so I don’t have to take the time to reregister as an Independent.

Hillary released her delegates and told them to support Obama back on June 9.

 

[jacksonsmom]

I think it's important to figure out who the less of evils is. One has to win, wouldn't a Lib be better than whatever McCain is? Or not?

For me right now McCain is the lesser of two evils. Not by much mind you, but seriously I truly think Obama is not suited to run this Country and will do more harm then good.

 

[Planogirl]

Hillary released her delegates and told them to support Obama back on June 9.

I understood that to be just a rumor, since proven untrue.

 

[jacksonsmom]

I just read an article from my local news channel.

Looks like Minnesota might not be a true blue state this election. I don't think Obama can count on Minnesota going into his column.
Here the article:

New poll numbers show Barack Obama’s lead over John McCain slipping among Minnesota voters.

The exclusive 5 EYEWITNESS NEWS/SURVEY USA Poll shows Obama holding a one-point lead over McCain, a statistical dead heat. The margin of error is +/- 4.3 percent.

Just two weeks ago, Obama held a five-point lead in Minnesota.

 

[punkin]

Hillary released her delegates and told them to support Obama back on June 9.

Not as far as I know.

 

[moon]

I don't want Hillary as his VP. I don't want Hillary tied to that sleazy Chicago politician. People like him will eventually fall and I don't want him to take her down with him.

Dolce, that's one powerful video! BO reminds me so much of Bush

I'm glad that "priest" was suspended. What a shameful display right from the pulpit.

And Dolce, I agree with you. Obama didn't get the bounce in the polls he said he would after he became the presumptive nominee. It's looking more and more like an uphill battle. After saying he couldn't wait to debate McCain, now he is avoiding it (That should have been included in the video). After the eight years we've had, the Democratic nom should be way, way ahead in the polls, and he is not. it's a dead heat.

I don't want Hillary anywhere near this mess

 

[moon]

I understood that to be just a rumor, since proven untrue.

Yes, it was only a rumor

 

[Dolce27]

I think it's important to figure out who the less of evils is. One has to win, wouldn't a Lib be better than whatever McCain is? Or not?

No, not necessarily. But then, my views are more right than left. I can’t support Obama backing partial birth and full birth abortion. That’s murder – that’s not a fetus – that’s a baby being killed. You know, it’s hard to pin him down on issues – why? Because he refuses to take many stances on the issues as his voting record proves. He basically copied Hillary’s platform to run on but based upon his voting record – or lack of – can we be certain that would be stances he would take should he be elected? He’s already proven to flip-flop as needed to help him in this election. Healthcare? Isn’t his the worst of the three – or rather two now? Isn’t McCain’s similar to what we have now? I’d rather to keep things same instead of them being worse if we aren’t going to elect the one person that actually had a plan to improve things.

So, if I can’t hold him down to issues he won’t commit to, then I look at his character. He’s tied to Chicago dirty politics. Completely embedded and this has truly upset me that the media has been so biased and not covered this. Anytime a story about this begins to become mainstream – it gets scrubbed. If you do searches on the internet you’ll see bloggers that have had to resort to taking screen caps of stuff to prove this information was once there – even on Obama’s official site.

He’s proven to be extremely immature; flipping off Hillary, not speaking to the media for what was it – 11 days? Because he was asked hard questions for that last debate and it was ‘unfair’. You know what was unfair? Making Hillary go first in every single debate so that Obama could basically come back and replicate what she just said when it’s his turn. He can’t think for himself, he didn’t create his platform, he can’t answer anything on the spot and he refuses to be held down to issues. As President, he would have to make choices and take firm stances on issues – right or wrong.

Honestly, I don’t think that the man cares anything about the liberal issues, I honestly find him to be corrupt and power hungry. It’s beginning to look like Dean is running the show anyways. I guess we should go back and look to what Howard Dean’s plans are for our future America.

And, as of today, I still haven't decided to vote McCain but I know that I won't be voting Obama with his empty promises of 'hope' and 'change'. I don't yet know what I'll be doing.

 

[Duckfan-in-Chicago]

Party unity my foot.

PUMF? Doesn't have the same ring.

I'm glad that "priest" was suspended. What a shameful display right from the pulpit.

He's already back as of this Monday I believe, and will be speaking about his suspension on Sunday. I'm sure all the local media will have people there watching.

 

[punkin]

No, not necessarily. But then, my views are more right than left. I can’t support Obama backing partial birth and full birth abortion. That’s murder – that’s not a fetus – that’s a baby being killed. I am about as far left on abortion as you can get. While I personally would not get one, it is not the governments business to tell me or my doctor what is medically proper. It is a real issue for me.You know, it’s hard to pin him down on issues – why? Because he refuses to take many stances on the issues as his voting record proves. He basically copied Hillary’s platform to run on but based upon his voting record – or lack of – can we be certain that would be stances he would take should he be elected? He’s already proven to flip-flop as needed to help him in this election. I agree. It seems to me he has no principles to stand onHealthcare? Isn’t his the worst of the three – or rather two now? Isn’t McCain’s similar to what we have now? I’d rather to keep things same instead of them being worse if we aren’t going to elect the one person that actually had a plan to improve things.His plan is unworkable. It's just expensive. Hillary's plan was a lot more thought out-no wonder she has been working on it for the past 20 years or so.

So, if I can’t hold him down to issues he won’t commit to, then I look at his character. He’s tied to Chicago dirty politics. Completely embedded and this has truly upset me that the media has been so biased and not covered this. Anytime a story about this begins to become mainstream – it gets scrubbed. If you do searches on the internet you’ll see bloggers that have had to resort to taking screen caps of stuff to prove this information was once there – even on Obama’s official site.True

He’s proven to be extremely immature; flipping off Hillary, not speaking to the media for what was it – 11 days? Because he was asked hard questions for that last debate and it was ‘unfair’. You know what was unfair? Making Hillary go first in every single debate so that Obama could basically come back and replicate what she just said when it’s his turn. He can’t think for himself, he didn’t create his platform, he can’t answer anything on the spot and he refuses to be held down to issues. As President, he would have to make choices and take firm stances on issues – right or wrong.

Honestly, I don’t think that the man cares anything about the liberal issues, I honestly find him to be corrupt and power hungry. It’s beginning to look like Dean is running the show anyways. I guess we should go back and look to what Howard Dean’s plans are for our future America.

And, as of today, I still haven't decided to vote McCain but I know that I won't be voting Obama with his empty promises of 'hope' and 'change'. I don't yet know what I'll be doing.

Yeah, I pretty much agree with almost everything you said, but abortion is not the only thing about McCain that worries me.

 

[moon]

Looks like Obama is also Flip Flopping on Iraq. Well, it depends who he is talking to.


After a talk with Obama Iraq's foreign minister thinks BO "doesn't differ all that much" from JMcC

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/17/AR2008061702034.html


Mr. Zebari's Message
Iraq's foreign minister has a chat with Barack Obama.

TOOLBOX
Resize Text
Save/Share + DiggNewsvinedel.icio.usStumble It!RedditFacebookmyspaceYahoo! BuzzPrint This E-mail This
COMMENT
washingtonpost.com readers have posted 139 comments about this item.
View All Comments »

POST A COMMENT
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register
Why Do I Have to Log In Again?
Log In Again? CLOSEWe've made some updates to washingtonpost.com's Groups, MyPost and comment pages. We need you to verify your MyPost ID by logging in before you can post to the new pages. We apologize for the inconvenience.



Discussion PolicyDiscussion Policy CLOSEComments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

Who's Blogging» Links to this article
Wednesday, June 18, 2008; Page A14

SEN. BARACK OBAMA told Iraq's foreign minister this week that he plans to visit the country between now and the presidential election. We think that's a good thing, not because Sen. John McCain has been prodding the candidate to do it but because it will give Mr. Obama an opportunity to refresh his badly outdated plan for Iraq. To do that, the Democrat needs to listen more to dedicated Iraqi leaders like Hoshyar Zebari, the foreign minister -- who, it seems, didn't hold back during their telephone conversation.

Mr. Obama laid out his current strategy for Iraq in November 2006, shortly before announcing his candidacy for president. At the time, Iraq appeared to be on the verge of a sectarian civilian war, and Mr. Obama was trying to distinguish himself in the Democratic primary race by offering a timetable for withdrawal. Nineteen months later, the situation in Iraq has changed dramatically, with violence down 75 percent from its peak and the Iraqi government and army in control of most of the country. But Mr. Obama has not altered his position: He still proposes withdrawing most U.S. troops according to a fixed timetable, set to the most rapid pace at which commanders have said American forces could be pulled out.

Mr. Zebari, who has served as foreign minister in every Iraqi government since 2003, finds Mr. Obama's proposal worrying. In a meeting with Post editors and reporters Tuesday, he said that after all the pain and sacrifices of the past five years, "we are just turning the corner in Iraq." A precipitous withdrawal, he said, "would create a huge vacuum and undo all the gains and achievements. And the others" -- enemies of the United States -- "would celebrate."

Mr. Zebari said he told Mr. Obama that "Iraq is not an island." In other words, an American withdrawal that destabilized the country would also roil the region around it and embolden U.S. adversaries such as al-Qaeda and Iran. "We have a deadly enemy," Mr. Zebari said. "When he sees that you commit yourself to a certain timetable, he will use this to increase pressure and attacks, to make it look as though he is forcing you out. We have many actors who would love to take advantage of that opportunity." Mr. Zebari says he believes U.S. forces can and should be drawn down. His point is that reductions should be made gradually, as the Iraqi army becomes stronger.

The foreign minister said "my message" to Mr. Obama "was very clear. . . . Really, we are making progress. I hope any actions you will take will not endanger this progress." He said he was reassured by the candidate's response, which caused him to think that Mr. Obama might not differ all that much from Mr. McCain. Mr. Zebari said that in addition to promising a visit, Mr. Obama said that "if there would be a Democratic administration, it will not take any irresponsible, reckless, sudden decisions or action to endanger your gains, your achievements, your stability or security. Whatever decision he will reach will be made through close consultation with the Iraqi government and U.S. military commanders in the field." Certainly, it makes sense to consult with those who, like Mr. Zebari, have put their lives on the line for an Iraq that would be a democratic U.S. ally. Mr. Obama ought to listen carefully to what they are saying.

 

[DISUNC]

hello!


Muslims barred from picture at Obama event

Two Muslim women at Barack Obama's rally in Detroit on Monday were barred from sitting behind the podium by campaign volunteers seeking to prevent the women's headscarves from appearing in photographs or on television with the candidate.

The campaign has apologized to the women, both Obama supporters who said they felt betrayed by their treatment at the rally.

"This is of course not the policy of the campaign. It is offensive and counter to Obama's commitment to bring Americans together and simply not the kind of campaign we run," said Obama spokesman Bill Burton. "We sincerely apologize for the behavior of these volunteers."

Building a human backdrop to a political candidate, a set of faces to appear on television and in photographs, is always a delicate exercise in demographics and political correctness. Advance staffers typically pick supporters out of a crowd to reflect the candidate's message..........

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11168.html

 

[moon]

hello!


Muslims barred from picture at Obama event

Two Muslim women at Barack Obama's rally in Detroit on Monday were barred from sitting behind the podium by campaign volunteers seeking to prevent the women's headscarves from appearing in photographs or on television with the candidate.

The campaign has apologized to the women, both Obama supporters who said they felt betrayed by their treatment at the rally.

"This is of course not the policy of the campaign. It is offensive and counter to Obama's commitment to bring Americans together and simply not the kind of campaign we run," said Obama spokesman Bill Burton. "We sincerely apologize for the behavior of these volunteers."

Building a human backdrop to a political candidate, a set of faces to appear on television and in photographs, is always a delicate exercise in demographics and political correctness. Advance staffers typically pick supporters out of a crowd to reflect the candidate's message..........

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11168.html

The new Democratic era, indeed!! Shame on them!

 

[Dolce27]

Does anyone recall this?

CTV, Feb. 27: Within the last month, a top staff member for Obama's campaign telephoned Michael Wilson, Canada's ambassador to the United States, and warned him that Obama would speak out against NAFTA, according to Canadian sources.
The staff member reassured Wilson that the criticisms would only be campaign rhetoric, and should not be taken at face value.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/the_facts_about_nafta-gate.html

Obama’s stance for campaigning in Ohio had been:

Clinton: I have said that I will renegotiate NAFTA, so obviously, you'd have to say to Canada and Mexico that that's exactly what we're going to do. . . . Yes, I am serious. . . . I will say we will opt out of NAFTA unless we renegotiate it, and we renegotiate on terms that are favorable to all of America. . . .

Q: Senator Obama . . . Simple question: Will you, as president, say to Canada and Mexico, "This has not worked for us; we are out"?

Obama: I will make sure that we renegotiate, in the same way that Senator Clinton talked about. And I think actually Senator Clinton's answer on this one is right. I think we should use the hammer of a potential opt-out as leverage to ensure that we actually get labor and environmental standards that are enforced. And that is not what has been happening so far.

Democratic Debate in Cleveland Transcript
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/the_facts_about_nafta-gate.html


And in response to the leak from the Canadian television:

Burton: There was no one at any level of our campaign, at any point, anywhere, who said or otherwise implied Obama was backing away from his consistent position on trade.

But now Obama says this:
http://money.cnn.com/2008/06/18/mag...ma.fortune/index.htm?section=money_topstories

In an interview with Fortune to be featured in the magazine's upcoming issue, the presumptive Democratic nominee backed off his harshest attacks on the free trade agreement and indicated he didn't want to unilaterally reopen negotiations on NAFTA.
"Sometimes during campaigns the rhetoric gets overheated and amplified," he conceded, after I reminded him that he had called NAFTA "devastating" and "a big mistake," despite nonpartisan studies concluding that the trade zone has had a mild, positive effect on the U.S. economy.
Does that mean his rhetoric was overheated and amplified? "Politicians are always guilty of that, and I don't exempt myself," he answered.

After that he does have to back track a bit as it is being pointed out to him his stance is a bit different now than it was just a couple of months ago and he has to explain with this:

Obama says he believes in "opening up a dialogue" with trading partners Canada and Mexico "and figuring to how we can make this work for all people."

And Bill Burton follows-up with:

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said that Obama-as the candidate noted in Fortune's interview-has not changed his core position on NAFTA, and that he has always said he would talk to the leaders of Canada and Mexico in an effort to include enforceable labor and environmental standards in the pact.

But I have to agree with the article’s columnist when he states:

Nevertheless, Obama's tone stands in marked contrast to his primary campaign's anti-NAFTA fusillades. The pact creating a North American free-trade zone was President Bill Clinton's signature accomplishment; but NAFTA is also the bugaboo of union leaders, grassroots activists and Midwesterners who blame free trade for the factory closings they see in their hometowns.

This new tone is too similar to what the CTV stated that Obama’s aide told the Canadian Prime Minister, you know the NAFTA discussion they 'didn't have'.