<p>Stockmarket, Obama was able to attend a private prep school because he received a scholarship to attend.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes. It’s true. Obama’s representatives pushed for the 100% loss of delegates because they knew that Clinton would win both states by huge margins. </p>
<p>At the time the rule was changed, Howard Dean was saying, “don’t worry about it, of course we are going to work this out and seat Florida and Michigan”.</p>
<p>Obama made a deal with Edwards and that guy from New Mexico to take their names off the ballot on Michigan. They never told the Clinton campaign. Then, Clinton honored her pledge to not campaign there while Obama ran a campaign out of the black churches in Michigan to turn out the vote for “undeclared” in the primary.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>She’s lying. She’s been an Obama supporter for more than a year.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But, he had plenty of money for “a little blow” in high school. Twice divorced, Obama’s mother may not have had a lot of money, but the grandparents were hardly poor.</p>
<p>When Joe Biden said Obama was articulate a year ago, almost all the press branded him a racist. He did not get any chance to put his ideas across, he had to basically explain why he said that from that point onwards.</p>
<p>BTW, when the Obama campaign prepared a list of talking points labeling the Clintons as racists before the SC primary, Donna Brazille got caught calling media outlets and faxing them the talking points. She was actively working to help Obama accuse both Clintons of racism. One of the major news outlet bloggers outted her as the “off the record” source of the Obama talking points memo.</p>
<p>Later that day, she appeared on CNN as an “undecided” Democratic strategist accusing Bill Clinton of racism.</p>
<p>Now I know where I’dad has been. He has been researching Obama’s history (and finding out all the evil gossip)!</p>
<p>Maybe hoping that a complete denigration of her opponent will raise Hillary from the ashes? :o</p>
<p>Too late. Where’s tommy?</p>
<p>“An Obama delegate to the rules committee made a motion to change the rule and Obama superdelegate Donna Brazille rammed it through the committee”</p>
<p>I don’t think so: [2008</a> Democratic Convention Watch: Superdelegates who haven’t committed to a candidate](<a href=“http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/2008/01/superdelegates-who-havent-endorsed.html]2008”>Democratic Convention Watch: Superdelegates who haven't committed to a candidate)</p>
<p>“Good grief. It’s ok to totally bash Obama, but nothing bad shall be said about Hillary”</p>
<p>I’m happy to oblige 1sokkermom. :D</p>
<p>HRC is a carpetbagging, coat tail riding, inexperienced legislator, who will say and do anything for power. She gives women who have achieved greatness in their own right reason to cringe. Had she not married Bill, she might be practicing law in AK. She can’t in DC, remember, she failed the DC bar.</p>
<p>Feel better now?</p>
<p>How come no one brings up HRC’s racist slur: [Hillary</a> Clinton regrets Gandhi joke - Race & ethnicity - MSNBC.com](<a href=“http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3890946/]Hillary”>http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3890946/)</p>
<p>CelticClan07,</p>
<p>:) You are awesome. :)</p>
<p>Idad - do you find it emboldening to slander political views with which you disagree in every post? You make the word “liberal” out to be this horrible, deformed worldview, when in fact it was the liberals who had to fight against the conservatives to found this country. It was liberals who have engaged in and led our most important war efforts and stood strong against manipulated wars. It has been the liberals who have fought for the realization of this country’s potential by empowering blacks, women, other minorities, and now homosexuals. It has been liberals (at least since Teddy Roosevelt) who have worked to ensure we have stable planet on which our descendents can grow. </p>
<p>I don’t want to get into a big debate since it’s somewhat off topic, but please stop slandering other peoples’ perspectives. The most enlightened founding fathers understood that the balance between those pushing for progress and those holding the reigns back was a critical tension for a healthy democracy.</p>
<p>CelticClan07, the same thing can be said about Obama, and Oh, add empty suit to that. </p>
<p>When he needed the black votes to win his senate seat in the south side of chicago, he agreed with Rev Wright, now that he has to win the working class white vote he is pushing him under the bus. Had Obama not known Rev. Wright, he would not have been elected to anything in the south side. He certainly would not have been able to get sweet heart deals from his buddy Rezko. I think he will throw him under the bus very soon. A</p>
<p>He is no different from all the other politicians. For him to even suggest otherwise is an insult to the electorate. I have done my research on this guy, and I am glad to say that I wont even vote for him for city council.</p>
<p>What is wrong with failing the bar exam? I know a lot of smart people who failed the bar because they did not study enough. They are making a lot of money now, and people don’t even care.</p>
<p>Cetic You’re kidding, no? Hillary failed the bar exam? Did she take it again?</p>
<p>1 sokkermom :</p>
<p>You should support your candidate but not try to put people down if they ask questions. It only creates anger and resentment.</p>
<p>stockmarket,</p>
<p>You’re kidding, right? Have you looked at some of the other posts putting Obama and his supporters down? Some of I’dad’s posts were NOT asking questions. Why is it that only certain questions and put downs are allowed? :rolleyes:</p>
<p>PS - I don’t have a candidate, do you?</p>
<p>Yes I have a candidate who could win general election for democrat be barack or Hillary. If Barack or Hillary looses in primary and do not come back again, I do not care. It is not against you, but an anxiety that here we are on the path to loose again despite all this economic problems. Democrat are again self destructing. </p>
<p>Interest group will give money and no problem solved for poor working people for next few years. Bad bad sign.</p>
<p>If a reublican (very unlikely) can solve problem facing by working poor then I will vote for the republican candidate too.</p>
<p>Not kidding momofnewP: [WikiAnswers</a> - Did Hillary Clinton fail a bar exam](<a href=“http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Did_Hillary_Clinton_fail_a_bar_exam]WikiAnswers”>Did Bill Clinton fail the bar exam? - Answers)</p>
<p>It’s my pleasure 1sokkermom. Nah, not really that awesome, just ask my kiddos and the Clinton supporters!! :)</p>
<p>Tega- Dynastic political rule is not healthy. Sheesh, I would really like for my children to have a president other than a Bush or Clinton in their lifetimes. IMO, Obama has better ideas, <health care=“” immediately=“” comes=“” to=“” mind=“”> a realistic vision and brings out the best in others. Just look at me :D</health></p>
<p>Can anybody restate this, please? I think there’s some information in the following quote and the quote imbedded in it, but I’m missing it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ll try again.</p>
<p>The Democratic National Committee (DNC) rules called for any state that moved its primary ahead of the agreed upon dates could be penalized by losing up to 50% of their delegates. This is the same rule the Republicans had. The Florida and Michigan primaries would have gone on as scheduled, candidates would have campaigned, and 50% delegates would have been seated.</p>
<p>When the Florida and Michigan legislatures moved the dates up, the Republican party imposed the 50% penalty. The DNC rules committee met in late August with the widespread expectation being they would do the same, since that’s what their rulebook called for. </p>
<p>However, by that point, the polling data was clear that Clinton would win both states in a landslide. The Obama delegates to the DNC rules committee surprised everyone and ramrodded thru a 100% disenfranchisement of both Florida and Michigan. Keep in mind, the DNC represents the left-wing of the Democratic party, the die-hard Democrats from states like Alabama and Wyoming where their are three Democrats in entire state and they are still burning their draft cards and cheering Jane Fonda to visit Hanoi. The DNC despises the Clintons and any Democrat centrist enough to win elections.</p>
<p>At the time, Howard Dean said, “Don’t worry.” This is just a warning to prevent any other states from moving up. We’ll fix it before the actual primaries. Of course, we aren’t going to disenfranchise two key states. That would be suicide.</p>
<p>But, then the DNC (and the media) realized that the nomination was over if:</p>
<p>Obama wins: Iowa, SC.
Clinton wins: NH, Nevada (Latino), Michigan (landslide), Florida (landslide).</p>
<p>So, there was a concerted effort to pretend that millions of voters didn’t go to the polls in Mich and Fla and give landslide victories to Clinton.</p>
<p>Now, Howard Dean has let it drag on so long it’s a complete disaster. The Dems have to seat Fla. and Mich. or they have no prayer in November, disenfranchising two of the largest electoral college states. But, Obama’s supporters will be furious. Conversely, myself and approximately 30% of the Clinton supporters (according to this week’s national polling) are fully prepared to vote for McCain in November if the DNC doesn’s seat Fla and Mich and essentially “steals” the nomination from Clinton.</p>
<p>It is a total lose/lose situation and it is ALL Howard Dean’s fault. This never should have happened. Of all parties, the Democratic Party should know that it has to count the votes in Florida. Duh.</p>
<p>interested dad:</p>
<p>is there a google link or you tube link for wha you say. I mean Dean stating that this “At the time, Howard Dean said, “Don’t worry.” This is just a warning to prevent any other states from moving up. We’ll fix it before the actual primaries. Of course, we aren’t going to disenfranchise two key states. That would be suicide.” If he did made this statement then it is wrong to go back to his words. </p>
<p>I am not question your integrity but just there are many flames in this thraed. I just want to educate myself and want to see this on you tube or in newspaper columns such as ny times or even cnn or any news website. How do I serach it? what you claim is a chnage of the game and I wouldlike to see a concrete things in writing or on a web site.</p>
<p>Here is the Huffington Post account of the Fla/Mich debacle. While the title appears to blame it on the Republicans, a careful reading of the article shows where the blame really lies:</p>
<p>[Wayne</a> Barrett: Could the Republicans Pick the Democratic Nominee? – The Untold Story of How the GOP Rigged Florida and Michigan - Politics on The Huffington Post](<a href=“HuffPost - Breaking News, U.S. and World News | HuffPost”>Could the Republicans Pick the Democratic Nominee? -- The Untold Story of How the GOP Rigged Florida and Michigan | HuffPost Latest News)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Maybe you need your sense of perspective re-aligned, but on this forum over the past few weeks there has been a pretty consistent stream of Hillary-bashing, without a word leveled against Obama (except over the Wright matter, and then only by self-admitted Republican posters).</p>
<p>Taking you as an excellent example, you have consistently taken every opportunity to slander HRC (calling her a liar, saying she cares for no one but herself, and so forth - whether those things are true or not is immaterial) and defend Obama. It is incredibly ironic that you would complain about nothing being allowed to be said about Hillary when the preponderance of posts on this forum lately have been pro-Obama, and to the extent that Hillary is involved (often not at all except by your repeated and boring cries of “LIAR” and so forth), anti-Hillary.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not sure whether to laugh or start banging my head against a wall. Accusations of gossip-mongering coming from you is the very definition of the pot calling the kettle black, given your consistent history of gleefully denigrating HRC at any opportunity.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You may not have a candidate, but it is immediately obvious which candidate you don’t like the most. Anyone want a guess?</p>
<p>(By the way, if I were voting I’d only be marginally more likely to vote for Clinton than Obama, I’m just tired of your never-ending stream of vitriol towards Hillary and anyone associated with her)</p>
<p>Now, something I really do need to do:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Last time you said this kind of thing I was pretty stridently opposed to your viewpoint. Evidently, you were right. My apologies.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just head a couple of threads down to whichever thread full of 1sokkermom calling Clinton a lying witch comes up first. There’s lots, I’m sure you won’t have much trouble.</p>