I would have to say that it is Obama who is violating civil rights and promoting discrimination. In his support of suppressing the delegates from Michigan and Florida is is going against everything that Martin Luther King stands for.

How can he run on “I have a dream” and the idea that he will unite and then tell 2,000,000 people that their votes are worthless and separate them out.

HE TOOK HIS NAME OFF OF THE MICHIGAN BALLOT. He also ran television ads in Florida.
There were ground campaigns ran for the undecided voter telling voters that if they want to vote for Obama or Edwards they could do so by voting undecided. I believe the state democratic website even said this.

OBAMA support the DNC in suppressing these votes instead of supporting the the voters. What is this saying about him as a president. NOT TOO MUCH.

I urge everyone to look below the surface of his nice smile and great speaches to what he is really about. Look into 17 years of support from Rezko (the house is just a small part of the connection), look into his refusal to disclose the donators to his election under “bundling” as required by election law, look into $694,000 in donations to the campaigns of super-delegates, look into his support in Africa of groups that are not supported by the United States. Ask about how he has been charged with plagiarism. There is alot to know about Obama that is not being told but you can believe that the Republicans will tell it all.

Of course they want you to think that Clinton will have trouble beating McCain - they don’t want to face her in a general. They want Obama - virually fresh territory to tear up and expose.

I don’t know about you, but I don’t want a president who finds a FEMA director out of the Yellow pages and I also don’t want a president who claims to be free from owing anyone yet has managed to get the endorsements of long-time Washington politicians. Who will run the White House?

If you want to know why his speaches remind you so much of John Kennedy it’s because they were written by the same person. Isn’t that remarkable. I could sound like someone with the same speach writer and some training in voice inflections and tones.

Be careful what you wish for my friends, Obama’s dream may become America’s nightmare.

Dear Chris.
You quoted from your source: “While Obama rightly acknowledged that Saddam Hussein was “a bad guy,” he also pointed out, “Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States or to his neighbors.”

Let me remind you:
In 1991 when Saddam invaded Kuwait. No one thought Saddam would be stupid or have the balls to declar Kuwait the 19th province and invaded it. That was the first Gulf war.

When the 2nd Gulf war was declared, the background was far more gloomy : terrorism on american soil, possibility of WMD, and Saddam calling down threats again…so faced with these circumstances, (compare this situation to peaceful 1991 pre-1st Gulf war), any leader seated in the white house would consider war as a viable and realistic option.

While i understand the logic of argument that careful and due consideration should be taken before going to war, what Obama states ““Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States or to his neighbors” is incorrect and irresponsible statement.

Ummm Sherry; Obama was a small child when he came back to the United States and he’s not Catholic. I would suggest you get more than one skewed data point to back a claim; it makes it more genuine than spreading propaganda…

I shouldn’t be surprised by the blind hatred of Clinton supporters or Rebulicans; you’d think Bush was running again… There are many things about Obama I don’t like. I disagree with a lot of his stances and ideals. However, I think he is what America needs and is the best person for the job so; I have left the Rebulican party and I support Barack Obama.

To Juli Ann:

1. Who are you suggesting he doesn’t represent? It’s suddenly a bad thing in this country to promote civil rights and fight against discrimination?

2. So, candidates are supposed to stop fundraising when they have more money than their candidates? Obama has the support that he does because more than 2/3 of his donors are small-amount donors who give a little here, a little there, mostly because they can’t afford to write the big checks in one fell swoop. These small-dollar donors then feel much more personally invested in the campaign, and they are happy to donate again and again. That’s the heart of grass-roots fundraising. If she were smarter, Hillary would have done the same the thing (in fact, now that she’s behind, that’s exactly what she IS trying to do now)

3. Ted Sorenson is 80 years old, and serves as a sometime-advisor and mentor to 26 year-old Jon Favreau (not the actor/director), who is Obama’s chief speechwriter. James Carville was Bill Clinton’s campaign advisor and is now a CNN analyst. Karl Rove is now a Fox News analyst. My point: people in politics continue to look for new jobs in the public sphere when the gig that once made them famous is up. I don’t see how this argument of yours is relevant to anything, other than to fill out your top ten list of reasons not to vote for Obama and slam the Kennedys in the process.

4. 14 of BILL Clinton’s advisors work for Obama. Last I checked, it’s HILLARY Clinton who’s running for President this time (though there were times earlier in the campaign when it was a little hard to tell, I’ll give you that). New Decade, New Candidate, New Game. And there is no way any of you can argue that Barack is the only one doing the “disparaging” of their opponent.

5. Wow, so someone else had the idea first that you can change the way a government or society thinks through community development and a little bit of passion? Game over, Barack, the jig is up. All of you social workers, political activists, teachers, union leaders, city council members, town elders, mayors, etc. you can go home too. All you’re doing is *plagiarizing* the ideals of an Ole Miss professor who has the market cornered on inspirational messages and grass-roots community-building.

6. Hillary used Obama’s “Fired up and ready to go!” line in Iowa. John McCain ended his victory speech the other night with saying he was “Fired Up and Ready to Go!” Plagiarism? Candidates use emotionally-charged language to rally their supporters. Evoking a popular sentiment with historical connotations to underscore a message of unity is one thing, ripping from one of your campaign competitors using his own campaign slogan is quite another, and far more shameless in my book.

7. Just because he was opposed to the war from the beginning does not mean that once it is underway any member of Congress should be critisized for voting to provide adequate funding to our troops who were sent over there. A vote in favor of additional armored vehicles and pay raises for troops is not the same as support for the war. If anything, it underscores how irresponsbile the initial architects of the war were that our troops were so embarassingly underprepared for combat in the Middle East in the first place. Furthermore, Obama was against the way the Iran Revolutionary Army terrorist designation was specifically crafted by the same warmongerers who were looking for a new angle to justify our ongoing occupation of Iraq and looking for an excuse to maintain a presence in the region, and maybe even spark a pre-emptive strike into yet another country without diplomacy. If Obama exercised some caution there, I’m sure that’s viewed by many as naivite or something worse, but please wake up and realize that there is a significant majority of Americans who think enough is enough, that our global reputation as self-appointed World Police has done more than enough damage to our national security.

8. What are you basing this on? Surely you’re not saying Michelle Obama is the first person to have ever attacked Hillary Clinton.

9. One word: Whitewater.

10. “Universal” health care is such a misnomer. Both candidates say that it’s their ultimate goal, but Hillary’s version of getting there is by mandate. I live in Massachusetts, where the “universal health care dream” was first realized last year, and which served as a blueprint for Hillary’s plan. Guess what. After the MANDATE went into effect, and after creating a privatized system that was designed to offset the costs to the government to subsidize coverage for those who couldn’t afford it, it turns out Governor Romney’s team had grossly underestimated how many residents were actually uninsured, and how many people still couldn’t afford to buy health coverage, by HALF. This thing is costing twice as much as was originally predicting, which means our taxes are still going up and the MA government is having to ask for additional federal subsidies to help stem the flood. And, best of all, we still have hundreds of thousands of uninsured residents! Obama’s plan to make health insurance AFFORDABLE first before MANDATING it for all is much more realistic.

UNITED DEMS, WHERE ARE YOU? HOW DO I CONTACT YOU. YOU ARE EXACTLY RIGHT - ALMOST.

Add to your statements the following: The DNC (Democratic National Committee) VIOLATED THEIR OWN AGENDA when they took away the delegates from MIchigan and Florida. Their agenda under voter reform on http://www.democrats.org states that:

“A fundamental tenet of our democracy is the right to vote and have the vote counted.
We must be vigilant in protecting this right and ensuring that our voitng system is fair
for every American.”

This is not about candidates or a single primary. It is about the improper suppression of OVER 2,000,000 votes.

Then Howard Dean, the Chair of the DNC made the following statement this past week about how reapprtionment in Texas affected 100,000 votes:

At the same time, it’s disappointing that the Court failed to uphold the rights of thousands of Texans, both African Americans and Hispanics. The right to vote and have that vote counted is the most basic, precious right of our democracy, guaranteeing every American a chance to participate in our democracy. Recently we’ve seen that right under siege across the country by Republicans engaging in partisan political schemes that undermine our democracy .

Well what exactly is the DNC doing that is so different?

Why are these votes only basic and precious when they have been suppressed by republican actions. Dean needs to be concerned with how the DNC is doing exactly the same thing to more than 2,000,000 voters. He needs to admit that the DNC made a mistake and violated their own agenda, stand up and REINSTATE THE DELEGATES!!! Whomever wins from ALL 50 states, wins! We can’t honestly elect a president from 48 states. What are you saying to Michigan and Florida. THE VOTERS DID NOT CHANGE THE DATE AND SHOULD NOT BE PUNISHED BY HAVING THEIR VOTES DEEMED MEANINGLESS AND WORTHLESS.

Some people say simply to just re-vote and take care of the mess. THE IS ABSURD. DO THEY REALIZE WHAT THEY ARE SUGGESTING??? The protection of your right to have your vote count is far more important that the candidate you choose to support. Should you choose to support that over 2 million votes be cast out today you are establishing that this can also be done in the future by different leaders, for different reasons.

THIS WOULD BE SETTING A VERY DANGEROUS PRECEDENCE. To discard as worthless the votes of over 2,000,000 Americans puts us back before the amendments, before Martin Luther King, before Susan B Anthony and the suffrage movement to a time when votes were only as secure as the people in power allowed them to be.

If anyone truly has a dream it should include that everyone in this country who is a citizen is entitled to vote and that that vote is protected. IT IS a fundamental of democracy that many have sacrificed their lives to protect and spread throughout the world. It is not the place of the DNC to take this away. THEY NEED TO CORRECT THEIR MISTAKE NOW - TODAY - and reinstate the delegates from Michigan and Florida. I, AS A CITIZEN OF THE UNITED STATES, STAND HERE TODAY AND “REQUEST” THAT ALL CANDIDATES STAND UP FOR THOSE CITIZENS WHO HAVE BEEN STRIPPED OF THEIR VOTES AND INSIST THAT THEIR DELEGATES BE SEATED AT THE CONVENTION.

If anyone feels as we do that this is a travesty against democracy please contact us at seatourdelegates08@yahoo.com. This is not about candidates it is about restoring democracy in the democratic primary. Please - United Dems - we would like to hear from you.

cla

Obama was against war because he didnt want to invade Iraq.

it seems there’s allot going on about RACE, RELIGION and the far LEFT AND RIGHT….why are we arguing these things? The arguments are all made with -out the validation of you actually being in the same room as someone and living a life that actually backs your words. How many of you that hate the war actually do things to promote peace? How many of you actually hate big business are lazy and use windows or mac instead of Linux? Walmart-made in China- drive a car instead of walking across town??? I mean your vote doesn’t matter at the ballot box as much as it matters at the pump! get off your butt and make a change!

I’m not an educated guy. And i “fear change”.
Why?

Because the guy who claims he can ‘change’ things runs his campaign like an “old washington style politics” pro. Boasting of big donations more than his opponent, Big spender in ads, more than his opponent. Bask himself in big spot-lights stadiums like a rock star, pour heavily into buying superdelegates votes more than his opponent, and most of all, had “changed” nothing in his own state since he was senator.

So do i “fear change”? Yeah, if thats the change he promises, I ought to be terrified.

If this information does not punctuate how ambitious Obama was even 2 years prior to running for President, I do not know what does. He obviously had desire to run way before his conversation with his wife, that she stated on Larry King. As I suspected, he has honed his message over a long period of time, checking the pulse of the nation and crafted his message of hope and change to fit the need. No specifics, only borrowed ideas and pure ambition for selfish reasons. Just what you would expect from a Snake Oil Salesman. I am not buying.

Just say Nobama.

McCain or Clinton for President, from an moderate Independent.

‘On Oct. 26, 2002, Obama gave a speech in Chicago opposing the invasion of Iraq.
While Obama rightly acknowledged that Saddam Hussein was “a bad guy,” he also pointed out, “Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States or to his neighbors. … I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences.”
“I am not opposed to all wars,” he said. “What I am opposed to is a dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.”‘

Source: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution Published on: 02/03/08, title: Obama was courageous on Iraq; Clinton was not

On October 10, 2002, Clinton gave a floor speech in favor of the war. Here are some parts of her speech. “If we get the resolution that President Bush seeks, and if Saddam complies, disarmament can proceed and the threat can be eliminated. Regime change will, of course, take longer but we must still work for it, nurturing all reasonable forces of opposition. If we get the resolution and Saddam does not comply, then we can attack him with far more support and legitimacy than we would have otherwise.

Because bipartisan support for this resolution makes success in the United Nations more likely, and therefore, war less likely, and because a good faith effort by the United States, even if it fails, will bring more allies and legitimacy to our cause, I have concluded, after careful and serious consideration, that a vote for the resolution best serves the security of our nation.”

Source: Floor Speech of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton on S.J. Res. 45, A Resolution to Authorize the Use of United States Armed Forces Against Iraq

Which candidate showed more insight and better judgment on the Iraq war?