home

Hillary Makes Argument for Counting MI and FL

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:45:45 PM EST
Tags: Hillary Clinton (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

In Oregon today, Hillary Clinton explained why the FL and MI votes count:

"Some say their votes should be ignored and the popular vote in Michigan and Florida should be discounted. Well, I have a different view," Clinton said at a rally here. "The popular vote in Florida and Michigan has already been counted. It was determined by election results, it was certified by election officials in each state, it's been officially tallied by the secretary of state in each state, and the question is whether those 2.3 million Democrats will be honored and their delegates seated by the Democratic party."

...Both states saw record turnout in their primaries and the former first lady won both contests.

5,000 Oregonians came out to see her at one stop.

And Helen Thomas weighs in, arguing Hillary should hang in there: [More...]

Obama has captivated the enthusiastic support of America's youth and ignited their interest in presidential politics. His eloquent speeches are designed for the bully pulpit. But does a good speech make a good president?

Obama stresses he was against the invasion of Iraq, but he doesn't say he was not in the Senate when it was initiated. Since become a senator, he has twice voted to fund the war.

I am still trying to find the key that has made Obama a prime candidate for the presidency, and to understand what he has done for the country beyond his middle-of-the-road political moves to make his name known and to steer clear of hot-button issues.

The Rev. Martin Luther King had a dream, too. But he acted on it. He went to jail, he marched, he led.

< 27 FL Delegates Picked for Denver Convention | Hillary and Obama Speak at Montana Dems Dinner >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Hillary Makes Argument for Counting MI and FL | 167 comments (167 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    I love Helen Thomas (5.00 / 10) (#1)
    by lepidus on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:53:14 PM EST
    I hope the rest of the blogosphere doesn't take this as a reason to abandon her.

    She said what I was thinking yesterday.... (5.00 / 7) (#5)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:04:49 PM EST
    ...as I watched the MLK observances. One of the academics interviewed on MSNBC, sorry can't remember which one, said that Obama could be a great civil rights leader if for some reason he didn't win the presidency. But I just couldn't see why he said that. Not saying that Obama isn't an advocate of civil rights, but he hasn't stood out in that area any more than he has in any other. He has just given a speech, one that he wouldn't even have given if he didn't have to address concerns about Wright. So yeah, I'm still waiting to see it.

    [ Parent ]
    OMG.. is there a diary at Daily Obama (5.00 / 6) (#2)
    by MarkL on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:54:45 PM EST
    on Helen Thomas's tax returns yet?

    Or worse, (5.00 / 6) (#6)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:05:39 PM EST
    ....or will they say the Bush admin was right to try to move her to the back of the pack.

    [ Parent ]
    OMG... (none / 0) (#8)
    by workingclass artist on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:18:51 PM EST
    I think you had better purchase the special internet connection to receive specal psychic updates from the OPRAHSPHERE, where the real news from OBAMEDIA is told. The connection also doubles as a water devining tool which is handy what with the global crisis and all...Clearly this is not about the returns but the alleged conspiracy..... I'm not judgin' Im just sayin'....

    [ Parent ]
    Helen Thomas is terrific.....Cannot believe (5.00 / 9) (#3)
    by athyrio on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:56:46 PM EST
    she is still there, and not being a patsy to anyone...Good for her...She commands a great deal of respect not only from me, but from a large part of America....:-)

    Yep Helen she's my girl (5.00 / 5) (#4)
    by Saul on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:02:44 PM EST
    She was the first lady of news corp.  Question every president I believe from Kennedy to the current Bush.  She the one that said this  about George Bush
    at the very beginning of his administration.

    This is the worst President ever. He is the worst President in all of American history.
     

    Guess what she was right.

    Yep Helen she's my girl.... (5.00 / 5) (#7)
    by workingclass artist on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:12:24 PM EST
    Helen is great. She's been covering the white house since before God made dirt. She has always been an astute critic, old school journalist. Bush can't stand her cause she often uses words that have more than two syllables. She's fiesty and won't let anyone push her around. Thanks for posting the article.

    [ Parent ]
    Helen, (5.00 / 6) (#25)
    by Gabriele Droz on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:13:36 PM EST
    I emailed her once after one of her outstanding Bush press conference questionings, telling her how much I loved and appreciated her.  I got a personal email back from her.  Just a few words, very humble and appreciative of my email.  I was quite surprised (thrilled).

    [ Parent ]
    Thank you for the Helen Thomas article (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by BostonIndependent on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:20:29 PM EST
    The comments in response to her piece illustrate how heated and divisive this contest has become. People calling others and the candidate they support all kinds of names. Sigh.

    Senator Obama didn't show up in New Orleans. He wasn't there in Memphis. Not one of his supporters or the main-stream media is wondering why.

    If elected, his Presidency will epitomize the 'entitled generation' that so many of his young white supporters represent, and 'disappoint' his black supporters. I have been reading another Susan's book on education in the inner city and I can certainly see why African Americans vote in such large numbers for him. It's a pity because they seem to think he is one of their own. As Susan Anthony points out, he has carefully uhm.. avoided taking any detailed positions on important issues .. a strategy which will perhaps help elect him, but won't provide him a mandate to govern. And then his inexperience will truly begin to tell.


    Thanks for the Helen Thomas article (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by PennProgressive on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:43:34 PM EST
    I would not have seen it otherwise. As always Helen Thomas makes wonderful arguments. However, these are nothing new. Hillary and Bill Clinton along with others from the Clinton ccampaign made these arguments many times before. But it is nice to see that Helen Thomas has the courage  to point these out again. But I am afraid that either her column will go unnoticed or worse she would  be colored as someone who is in the  pocket of the  Clintons. Come to think about it there is another possibility--and this is the worst: she will  be  criticized as a "racist."  

    [ Parent ]
    What is particularly courageous about it? (none / 0) (#23)
    by CLancy on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:08:18 PM EST
    The column seems rather bland, quite honestly. In it, she offers very little that can be deemed insightful. Also, she seems to cherry pick the supporting materials, i.e. the poll on media favorability that predates the Wright scandal. I find her characterization that Obama's comment on Clinton remaining in the race as patronizing to be fairly out of left field as it removes almost all context from the statement.

    Another observation Thomas makes, which is particularly bland, is that, "There is no question that the pundits and the news media have been harder on Clinton, perhaps because she has been longer in the public eye and there is more to pick on." Of course, this is partly true, but I suspect that the facts that she's a Clinton, a Democrat, and a woman, are much more likely reasons for the media to be so hard on her. That profession has shown no love for the first two of late, and has a misogynistic streak a mile wide (and I'm shocked Thomas didn't bring these up to explain this).

    I love Helen Thomas, but this is hardly one of her better pieces of work. It seems it could only be deemed otherwise by those who seem to relish in her denigration of Obama.

    [ Parent ]

    It's true then (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:23:08 PM EST
    It doesn't go far enough in her denigration of Obama.

    There's a lot of things she could have said, but I think she's trying to be nice.


    [ Parent ]

    She has class... (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by Stellaaa on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:27:15 PM EST
    No need for the nasty stuff of current journalism.  She makes the points, they may sound bland, but I guess they are fact based and not from some modern partisan hystrionics.  

    [ Parent ]
    No leader + media free pass = my concerns exactly (5.00 / 2) (#72)
    by Ellie on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:13:10 PM EST
    Senator Obama didn't show up in New Orleans. He wasn't there in Memphis. Not one of his supporters or the main-stream media is wondering why. [...] If elected, his Presidency will epitomize the 'entitled generation' that so many of his young white supporters represent, and 'disappoint' his black supporters.

    Damn, you're good for zoning on on it so well. I'm a block of stone to those arguing that "it's our turn".

    No, just ... no.

    There's a huge gap between the concept of "our turn to be corrupt" and when any disenfranchised group rightly object to people slamming a historical, milestone choice when s/he isn't the perfect ideal. Everyone has warts.

    Obama isn't the candidate of change, as he has promised, or even shown himself to have the merest fraction of  the ideals he promised to deliver (and hasn't despite every chance to do so.)

    He's just gaming the system and doing karaoke for people who have never seen real leaders for change.

    Obama "inspiring" speeches point out squares on cards and instruct people what about what precise phrases to spout at caucuses.

    Filling out forms isn't the kind of inspiration that led me to put human rights activism at the core of my actiism -- hell, at the center of my life -- when I learned about Gandhi, MLK, Mandela, Coretta Scott King, the Dalai Lama ...

    [ Parent ]

    Unfortunately (none / 0) (#191)
    by blogtopus on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 03:01:06 AM EST
    This is how the situation will be:

    1. Hillary will win the nomination and the presidency, and, like New York, she will earn our trust and admiration and will perform beyond what Obama supporters would have expected from her.

    2. Obama will win the nomination and the presidency, and, as with his Senatorial debut, will underperform and disappoint many of his supporters by not walking on water as expected, and the other percentage of his supporters will act as if he is walking on water with every tepid, half-assed measure he puts forward through his bully pulpit.

    3. Obama will win the nomination and the presidency, and he makes a 90 degree turn and becomes the president his supporters expect him to be, opens up a golden age of kindness and acceptance not before seen in the U.S., and shows the world that the U.S. is a bastion of honor and wisdom.

    4. Hillary will win the nomination and the presidency, and she brings the U.S. to a new low of corruption and war, dragging our name through the mud and once again showing the world that we just don't care.

    I don't put anything in there where McCain wins because, frankly, I can't think about that yet. :-(

    [ Parent ]
    i submit that ms. thomas (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by cpinva on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:36:59 PM EST
    will very shortly be subject to the "ferraro" effect; vilified for having the temerity to voice in public what many, many, many of us have been thinking in private.

    i wish it weren't so, but there you have it. i must admit though, it would be quite entertaining watching her question "president obama".

    My first thought... (5.00 / 2) (#15)
    by michitucky on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:56:12 PM EST
    was of her grilling him!  Ah.....That thought makes me grin!

    [ Parent ]
    The Obamabimbos wouldn't do that to her - (3.00 / 2) (#69)
    by Donald from Hawaii on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:11:04 PM EST
    - would they?

    But then again, this IS a candidate who recently dismissed his own grandmother as a "typical white person."

    Helen Thomas certainly ain't Grandma, though. She reminds me so much of my late great-aunt, who always held her own peace, spoke her mind whenever she felt compelled to do so, and would give just as good as she got in any verbal spat. She was one of my favorite relatives whilst I was growing up. Lived her entire life as she saw fit, and to the ripe old age of 95, too.

    [ Parent ]

    Wow, I have a great-aunt like that too (none / 0) (#180)
    by RTwilight on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 12:01:39 AM EST
    wonder if they're related :)

    [ Parent ]
    Helen summarized (5.00 / 4) (#16)
    by Stellaaa on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:56:37 PM EST
    the points we have been making here all these months.  What did he do?  

    Take back the government to do what?? (5.00 / 4) (#19)
    by MarkL on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:00:56 PM EST
    Obama displays no passion for policy, and little interest in details, compared to Hillary.

    Nice take.. how does Hillary win? (5.00 / 7) (#21)
    by TalkRight on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:02:38 PM EST
    How does Hillary win?


    It's that simple.
    Work.

    Obama's worries are such that the only scenario he has for a "victory" is to disenfranchise millions of voters in Florida and Michigan. Any nomination that does not fully respect the voters and the votes of Florida and Michigan will not be legitimate.

    How does Hillary Clinton win? By winning - in Pennsylvania and some of the states that follow. Obama wants to distract from the issues and Big Media wants to talk about tax returns and other nonsense. Voters want to hear Hillary Clinton talk about issues that matter to their lives.

    How does Hillary Clinton win? By fighting for the voters of Florida and Michigan. Hillary Clinton wins by fighting against any back room deals that steal the election by disenfranchising, in George W. Bush manner, millions of voters. Obama wants to steal the election by proposing formulas that award him 50% of votes he did not get.

    How does Hillary Clinton win? By staying in the race until all voters vote in all the upcoming primaries and demonstrating in a real world manner that Obama wants to shut them out of the process while she fights for their right to be heard and to vote.

    How does Hillary Clinton win? By fighting for every vote at the Democratic National Convention.

    How does Hillary Clinton win? By winning the popular vote of Democrats. Let the Democratic Party disenfranchise its own voters with skewed formulas and Republican interference in our primary calendar and Obama's "Democrat for a Day" schemes.

    Hillary Clinton wins not by talking about defending the right to vote, but by defending the right to vote and counting every vote.

    How does Hillary Clinton win? By her supporters working. Make calls to Pennsylvania and travel to Pennsylvania and the upcoming primaries and win.

    Donate to help the campaign in Pennsylvania.

    That's the way to win.



    You got it (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by Stellaaa on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:04:50 PM EST
    Change does not happen overnight, it's a struggle.  

    [ Parent ]
    Yes, you are absolutely right.. (5.00 / 5) (#36)
    by FlaDemFem on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:37:08 PM EST
    And what I want someone to ask Obama is how someone who touts himself as a constitutional lawyer can stand by while millions of voters are disenfranchised. I don't want a President who wins by asking the opposition to quit, I want one that will fight to the bitter end for what they believe in. The problem with Obama is that it's hard to pin down what he believes in, other than hopes and dreams for everyone. I hope that person who sent him her grocery money doesn't get too hungry. Hope is nice, but not very filling.

    [ Parent ]
    Every time I hear Clinton speak (5.00 / 5) (#24)
    by Suma on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:08:34 PM EST
    she speaks of how proud she is that in this election we have a woman and an African American running for the presidency of this great country, for the first time. And that she will work hard to see that a democrat is in the White House after this election. How many times has anyone heard Obama say that he is proud that a woman is running for the presidency? "My attitude is that Senator Clinton can run as long as she wants" Oh pleeese..

    And of course, it is ok for Michelle Obama to say that she will have to think about supporting Clinton!
    I would really like to know who belongs to "we" category.

    Obama says 'we' and hides MLK said it and led (5.00 / 4) (#26)
    by Ellie on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:13:57 PM EST
    There's a difference. When Obama says "we" he could easily be referring to the mouse in his pocket. When there's the slightest whiff of controversy, he's nowhere to be seen. If he's pinned down, he'll tap dance his way out of it and let his wife or others say the harsh stuff.

    Helen Thomas pinned it down:

    I am still trying to find the key that has made Obama a prime candidate for the presidency, and to understand what he has done for the country beyond his middle-of-the-road political moves to make his name known and to steer clear of hot-button issues.

    The Rev. Martin Luther King had a dream, too. But he acted on it. He went to jail, he marched, he led.

    When Dr. King and other genuinely courageous leaders say it, they're at the head of the march, not hiding out fear in case some media type might pin him down on a quote.

    If a lightweight like BO gets you inspired, run with that. As someone who's more concerned about restoring our vanished constitutional rights, I'm sorry to hear you demand so little from leaders.

    I hope you remember your superficiality when Obama Unites with the One Party fools, as he has repeatedly promised is his main objective.

    This ridiculous and dangrous mindset is what has shredded our vanished rights and freedoms this century. I want to stuff the Bush Cheney era into the dustbin of history, not continue it with "our" version of a phony, self-important monarch who calls hiding being "above the fray."

    Oh thank goodness (5.00 / 4) (#29)
    by BarnBabe on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:26:22 PM EST
    for us boomers and beyond. The young up and coming will get their chance as we did and be just as annoyed at the young up and comers. I thought I knew it all in my 20's. Woe de me, was I ever wrong. Now I have experience and know where I screwed up. And if Helen Thomas has the experience to know a good President or not, and if she tells Hillary not to give up, I will respect that as a You Go Girl!

    As a member of the post boomer age group (5.00 / 2) (#105)
    by RTwilight on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:52:07 PM EST
    I totally agree with you...long have I been ashamed at the arrogance, disrespect and general ignorance that have been so common amongst my contemporaries.

    I have always sought(sp) out mentors from previous generations, and will continue to do so until that is no longer possible...and it has really made me a bit of a freak amongst my peers...

    [ Parent ]

    "Expendable" (5.00 / 3) (#32)
    by Stellaaa on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:33:39 PM EST
    And since Hillary is slightly trailing Obama, she becomes expendable in this war against republican incompetence (is that redundant).

    Maybe you got it wrong.  You don't decide who is expendable.  Let the voters do it.  The Elites don't make the decision, the voters do.  Since when did it become scary to let people vote?  

    No, still people have to vote (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by Stellaaa on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:49:30 PM EST
    the primary is not over.  G States still have to vote, MI and Fl have to be settled and SD's have to vote.  He is not ahead.  it's 50-50.  it's a tie.  Enjoy the ride.  No need to rush.  There is time.  Let McCain shadow box.  

    [ Parent ]
    You should have just say no.... (none / 0) (#91)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:36:57 PM EST
    ...I think Edgar got you on that one. LOL.

    [ Parent ]
    Boy this post really popped up in the wrong place. (none / 0) (#95)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:38:03 PM EST
    It was a response to a post that it is nowhere near.

    [ Parent ]
    There you go again..... (none / 0) (#97)
    by waldenpond on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:42:07 PM EST
    'dislike Hillary.'  I need to point out that Obama may be ahead by your count in delegates and popular vote, but some of us think Obama will lose in November and hope the superdelegates step in and exercise their judgment and nominate Clinton.  Some of us think the superdelegates should support Clinton because she is the better leader.  Some of us think the superdelegates should support Clinton because she has the better policies.  Rules are rules, the superdelegates are independent.  Can't change the rules in the middle of the game.

    [ Parent ]
    Actually you missed an important calculus. (5.00 / 1) (#151)
    by hairspray on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:32:27 PM EST
    The superdelegates at the end of the day, must decide between two candidates, one with more primary votes, and one with more delgate votes. Additionally they will decide which of the voting states will be the most important to count on in the GE. Their job is to weigh the variables in the case of a virtual tie.  They shouldn't and probably wont't award the nomination to someone who didn't win at least one of the two criteria.That is why the Obama people are so agitated.  They are trying to make their case for the one criteria they will win, the delegate count.  Of course, Hillary is making her case on the primary votes and after PA, IN, WVa, NC and KY we will have our answer.

    [ Parent ]
    Hillary can't win (none / 0) (#121)
    by Traven on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:07:23 PM EST
    And a lot of us think that Hillary can't win -- her negatives are way too high and I know too many Republicans (my traitorous brother among them) who are ready to vote for Obama over McCain, but would vote for the Devil himself before voting for Hillary.  

    [ Parent ]
    I used to believe that too. (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by LHinSeattle on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:13:37 PM EST
    But now I know of 1 acquaintance who would vote for McCain first before she'd ever vote for HRC.   And about 10 or  12 who say the same about Obama.    The later folks are the ones who don't read blogs or get very active in politics.

    If Hillary is so disliked, why has she been winning all the big states? The states that if we were counting Electoral College votes would put her ahead of Obama.  

    Nope, they are virtually identical on the popular vote, even with all the nasty press against her.

    "Voters hate Hillary" ---  That dog won't hunt any more.

    [ Parent ]

    Again, evidence -- please. Polls show (none / 0) (#128)
    by Cream City on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:10:29 PM EST
    favorables not far apart at all between Clinton and Obama (see quite a few at RealClearPolitics, for example) -- and his support is starting to go "soft," according to the new CBS/NYT poll.

    [ Parent ]
    Polls (none / 0) (#147)
    by waldenpond on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:28:45 PM EST
    Your immediate info indicates one thing.  (I have three democratic family members that are going to vote for McCain).... Exit polls, and subsequent polls show that the number of people unwilling to vote for Obama is higher than the number of people who won't vote for Clinton.  I don't understand how people can be unaware of this info.  It's been on the news networks, the cable news networks and written up in articles.  Only one poll showed that 22% of each wouldn't vote for the either.  The one that was very telling was that 28% of Clinton supporters would vote for McCain and another 13% would stay home.  That's 41% of Clinton supporters that aren't supportive of Obama.  Also, polls have had Obama's negatives within the margin of error of Clinton's.

    Whether a large number of Repubs vote for either candidate is not going to have as big an impact as whether the supporters of one candidate votes for the other.

    [ Parent ]

    Tit for tat (none / 0) (#195)
    by magisterludi on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 07:47:59 AM EST
    My mother hated HRC and now will only vote for her. She's a lifelong republican. Her red hat friends are the same.

    Another anecdote- my husband is in the music business and we are around a certain demographic a lot. When politics come up and I find some are Obama supporters, i query them as to what they know about the "One". You would be surprised how many don't know that he voted for war funding once elected to national office.
    Some seem quite crestfallen and have decided to rethink their position.

    Just sayin'.

    [ Parent ]

    actually, he isn't. (none / 0) (#171)
    by cpinva on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:12:28 PM EST
    The voters so far have made their views known and Obama is in the lead in both delegates and the popular vote.

    you (and many others) conveniently overlook the fact that in several caucus states, there is no formal "popular vote" count, because of the way caucuses are conducted (rube goldberg would approve!). we don't really know, for certain, which one is ahead in the popular vote.

    to say that sen. obama is in the lead assumes facts not provable.

    [ Parent ]

    Are you sure you're not (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:33:52 PM EST
    52% for Obama and 48% for Clinton?

    One of the best Clinton bashing prototype diaries on an Obama blog goes like this:  "She's a great person and I could be convinced to vote for her if she wasn't a lying selfish corrupt sell out!"

    It's laughable.

    It's sometimes really annoying.

    Let's give this a try (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:00:43 PM EST
    More than a year ago, an Obama surrogate, David Geffen called the Clinons liars.

    Do you agree with Geffen's statement?

    [ Parent ]

    I was considering voting for Obama (5.00 / 2) (#110)
    by Edgar08 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:54:01 PM EST
    Before you posted a comment here.

    [ Parent ]
    Ha! Ha! (none / 0) (#99)
    by waldenpond on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:43:47 PM EST
    You just can't help yourself.

    [ Parent ]
    well that clinches it... (none / 0) (#70)
    by white n az on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:12:35 PM EST
    she won't have the delegate lead after PA, NC and IN unless you count FL and even then it's doubtful.

    But thanks for the pretense that you are open minded.

    [ Parent ]

    Because we want a winner in Nov---not (5.00 / 2) (#81)
    by MarkL on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:25:21 PM EST
    another McGovern.
    To lose THIS year because of a tomato can candidate like Obama would be unbearable.

    [ Parent ]
    Never (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by waldenpond on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:53:12 PM EST
    It never becomes a battle not worth continuing.  The fight will continue.  That's what people do who think winning in November is important.  I will continue to donate to Clinton, campaign for Clinton, discuss Clinton's policies and experience.  I really believe she will be the best leader.  I think her policies are important to creating the legislative change that will benefit this country.  I want to win in November.  I want someone in the White House that is actually going to accomplish some real policy changes in this country.  There is no 'hope', no 'believe' no 'unity'.  None of that.  Just issues... schools, energy, war, health care, infrastructure.....  Real issues, real people, real problems and supporting the person who I think can actually get some of it done.

    Never give up, never give in.

    [ Parent ]

    Bill Clinton said she had to do well in (none / 0) (#92)
    by athyrio on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:37:07 PM EST
    Pennsylvania not North Carolina....

    [ Parent ]
    Uh (none / 0) (#199)
    by cmugirl on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 11:27:45 AM EST
    Don't you understand that's a signal to motivate people in NC to get out and help her win.  That's why he said she had to win in Texas and not Rhode Island - she was ahead there.

    People always love to support an underdog and if the supporters in NC think she's an underdog, they'll work their butts off for her.

    [ Parent ]

    What about the popular vote? (none / 0) (#153)
    by hairspray on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:37:11 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I haven't voted yet (5.00 / 3) (#34)
    by BarnBabe on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:35:23 PM EST
    April 21st. Yep, I get to vote. Finally. So remember, this is a 50 state primary. Er, 48 state primary. I am not getting tired of the fight. If she was not fighting on, if she was giving up, I would be wondering why do I even bother supporting a candidate. But he has not closed the deal. Why, because the people without blinders on want her to keep fighting for them and their votes.

    seeeteee- you rip Hillary for being so evil as (5.00 / 3) (#43)
    by kenosharick on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:46:25 PM EST
    to dare criticize Barck but you have no problem with his constant attacks on her? That he STARTED the negativity? That his campaign played the race card? And continues to do so? It is in reality the constant name-calling and viciousness of many of his supporters that have repelled many of us.

    It's a ploy (5.00 / 3) (#52)
    by Stellaaa on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:51:16 PM EST
    I have seen this many a time here.  This alleged Hillary voter or ex Hillary voter who is now so over to the Obama side, who bashes Hillary day and night.  The voices are all so familiar.  

    [ Parent ]
    You make no sense here- (5.00 / 2) (#60)
    by kenosharick on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:59:56 PM EST
    "kitchen sink" is an invention of the media. And Obama went negative before Iowa.

    [ Parent ]
    Do you... (none / 0) (#65)
    by michitucky on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:05:55 PM EST
    Measure your preferred candidate by the same standard?  Hmmmmm.......

    [ Parent ]
    Well... (5.00 / 3) (#75)
    by michitucky on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:16:56 PM EST
    That's where I disagree with you...I blame him for starting it.  I guess we'll agree to disagree, as I find your reasoning quite disengenuous.  Go figure...

    [ Parent ]
    Actually... (5.00 / 3) (#93)
    by michitucky on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:37:28 PM EST
    I wouldn't give your finding me disengenuous a second thought...I'm a military wife, so I have rather personal issues when choosing my candidate. I prefer someone who knows the difference between an F-16 and an F-18.

    Senator Obama started taking potshots before Iowa...Then he and Senator Edwards double-teamed her right before the NH Primary.  As for race being injected into this race, for me, it was Oprah who did so at the SC Rally.  

    The ironic thing is, if you were to pigeon-hole me into a demographic, on the surface, I'd be a pegged an Obama supporter...I drive a Volvo, I have a MSW, and a nice chunk of disposable income......Big difference......I actually WORK in the inner-city.

    [ Parent ]

    seriously (5.00 / 2) (#148)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:29:18 PM EST
    Daily howler.  Look it up and search "jeff gerth" and "obama".  The kindergarten stuff was a direct response to obama advancing the discredited 20 year plan line.  

    Are you sure you're not more 75-25?

    (Btw - you can also goggle marc ambinder to see how the obama people were trying to get reporters to write about b clinton's "post presidential se life" - last fall.)

    [ Parent ]

    well (5.00 / 2) (#118)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:03:33 PM EST
    Clinton actually didn't start this.  Obama was attacking her last year (d-punjap ring a bell?)

    There's another thread on the fantastic media critic bob somerby.  I would suggest you check out www.dailyhowler.com.  Start with last fall and you'll be able to see the constant attacks on clinton and how the media ran with them.

    [ Parent ]

    And if rev wright said it- (none / 0) (#198)
    by kenosharick on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 09:46:10 AM EST
    Obama must agree, as he sat there listening to it w/o a peep for 20 years.

    [ Parent ]
    What Obama does (5.00 / 5) (#49)
    by waldenpond on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:50:27 PM EST
    I think when some ask that,  they are referring to his accomplishments and policy goals.  Raising money is part of getting elected, not an accomplishment. The govt actually does quite well with fundraising already.  What tax policies and structure (govt fundraising) is Obama supporting?  All candidates, including Obama, get money from the right places and the wrong places, it's part of politics.  What policy is Obama promoting regarding campaign finance?

    Exactly what kind of school system (do you agree with Obama's support of school vouchers which run the risk of decimating the public school system are a good idea), health care (do you believe, like Obama, that UHC is not possible), energy policy (do you support nuclear energy), foreign policy (do you agree with Obama that private security forces which have no accountability should remain in Iraq) etc. are what you envision for your country?  What policies is Obama committed to implementing that match up with your goals for your country?

    exactly! (5.00 / 4) (#109)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:53:52 PM EST
    What is his signature issue?  What will he use his vaunted skills to achieve?  What will he put to congress first?  I have no idea.

    I know clinton will fight for health care.  I knew edwards would fight for anti-poverty.  What will obama fight for?  I mean besides "unity" and "washington is broken so I'll work with republicans to fix it.".

    Well.

    Sorry, I'm not interested in "unity" with people I disagree with or compromise for the sake of compromise.  So what else you got?

    [ Parent ]

    Quite frankly (5.00 / 3) (#152)
    by standingup on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:35:52 PM EST
    I have never understood the unity ploy.  Who decided that the biggest problem our nation faces is that we are too polarized?  Electing a person that will unify the country does not interest me in the least bit.  

    [ Parent ]
    yeah (5.00 / 1) (#156)
    by ColumbiaDuck on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:45:24 PM EST
    I'm always reminded of a 2007 story by dan balz in the washington post when the immigration reform bill died.  It was an "analysis" piece and he was outraged that the bill was killed.  Not because it was a good bill on merits but because it was a compromise that would have "settled the issue".  No mind that reasonable people (on both sides) might have has serious issues with the solution.  Balz just wanted a bill to pass.  Blech.  Lame.

    Obama"s supporters always point to how "passionate" people are for him.  that's great.  But it's a means, not an end.  What's the end?  Still no answer.

    [ Parent ]

    unity in a nation this diverse (none / 0) (#160)
    by RTwilight on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:48:49 PM EST
    is an impossibility anyways...like marxism or pure capitalism, it's looks great in a book but falls to reality

    [ Parent ]
    What are we supposed to do . . . (none / 0) (#164)
    by nycstray on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:53:27 PM EST
    after we "unify"? perhaps we can sing like this:

    http://tinyurl.com/yu6dd3

    [ Parent ]

    Bother.... (5.00 / 1) (#167)
    by Stellaaa on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:01:05 PM EST
    he could not unify the Democratic party how is he going to unify the nation?  

    [ Parent ]
    I thought I would (none / 0) (#168)
    by waldenpond on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:09:31 PM EST
    laugh, but I didn't. :(    It was scary. :0

    [ Parent ]
    sorry! didn't mean to scare ya! (none / 0) (#186)
    by nycstray on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 01:40:17 AM EST
    That darn commercial pops in my head often these days. I may just have to make my own video with the audio  {evil grin}

    [ Parent ]
    when Obama says 'we' will do this and that (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by thereyougo on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:25:08 PM EST
    he reminds me of GWB, the great delegator. Everything Bush takes credit for is somebody else's doing. This what I think Obama will do.

    I understand that is what a president does, but when Bill Clinton was pres. and the price of oil  rose back in the 90's, he led by dipping into the reserves. It had a temporary effect on oil prices, but it was SOMETHING that I'll never forget, thats leadership. But what does Bush do? NOTHING NADA zilch. Lets the 'free' market dictate oil prices whatever that means.

    I get the idea this is what an "Obama presidency" will be like . Long on delegating and less hands on. While in the Senate, he  voted present when it was a politically expedient; too often for my taste.   Hillary does it too, but she's stood in the well of the senate and criticized the president saying the  US screwed up the Iraq war.
                                                   Obama comes across as too calculating and we don't get to see what he's made of which leads me to believe he's the empty vessel without any experience except when he was in the IL state legislature. For 6 years he was a bench warmer, until the 7th year when the Dems got the majority and all the bills were sent to him so he could look like he did SOMETHING and was this great legislator. Except he wasn't and the ones who did the heavy lifting for 6 years weren't very happy  he got the credit.  

    A nice speech here and kind word there. Nice guy, but not ready for prime time.

    [ Parent ]

    Helen poin (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by Stellaaa on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:56:46 PM EST
    I am still trying to find the key that has made Obama a prime candidate for the presidency, and to understand what he has done for the country beyond his middle-of-the-road political moves to make his name known and to steer clear of hot-button issues.

    Example from today, he refuses to talk to gay press, he did not show up in Memphis, he did not show up in New Orleans for Tavis Smiley Black State of Union.  Hillary did.

    Where is Obama on Democratic hot button issues?  Hiding under the aura of post partisanship.  

    oh, and did you notice Feb. (none / 0) (#181)
    by thereyougo on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 12:16:12 AM EST
    was Black history month and a couple weeks ago it was Maya Angelou's birthday? Never saw Obama come out to pay homage to his roots, did anyone?

    Angelou was on Ophrah getting her due, but Obama?

    Maybe he sent a card but you'd think he's a media hound, this would play nicely.

    [ Parent ]

    His pastor was there. (none / 0) (#184)
    by oculus on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 01:33:59 AM EST


    [ Parent ]
    It is worth going all the way. (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by BarnBabe on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:57:33 PM EST
    Who knew that a Presidential candidate's mentor was going to cause a problem. Well, Obama did right from the beginning. If you think that the chances are nil that there will not be some other revelation before June, then you are a very optimistic person. BHO wants the primary over with before we find out who he really is. We know who Hillary is. We even knew who Bill was and we liked what we saw.

    And (none / 0) (#144)
    by ROK on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:27:32 PM EST
    I'm glad you seem to know that we're not going to like him.

    [ Parent ]
    Obama as opportunist. (5.00 / 3) (#57)
    by Marguerite Quantaine on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:57:46 PM EST
    This is what I don't understand about Obama mocking Hillary when she held him accountable for his "just words" rhetoric.

    In his Philadelphia speech on race, Obama said Reverend Wright's ranting was "just words."

    It seems "just words" becomes a get-out-of-controversy-free card when Obama applies it. But he's highly offended and indignant when anyone suggests it of him.

    Also, Obama said African-Americans wear a mask for the white world, that they take off when in barbershops and churches and the company of their own.

    So how are we to know he isn't wearing a mask when courting the presidency?

    I now look at all my African-American friends and wonder if they're wearing a mask with me. If, behind my back in the company of their own, they're damning me.

    He may have instilled hope in you.

    But he's troubled and saddened me. Deeply.

    I'm 51% for Obama, 49% for Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by waldenpond on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:14:22 PM EST
    uhhhhh..

    You just wrote she is self-righteous, a martyr, she's tedious, she's expendable, you don't like her 'attitude', she's excoriating your candidate,

    You'd be happy to vote for her? I don't know.  Look at some of your past comments...

    .....Hillary basically called Obama a coward.... If Hillary can't legitimately win the delegate count, she should drop out....how Hillary voted on the war or how Hillary compared lobbyists for a nurses' group to corporate lobbyists?

    Hillary needs to bow out with what little grace is left in her campaign. (That comment, BTW, is the first one you ever made here)

    I understand you're talking 'unity' but your bias is showing.  I think you want people to unify around your candidate.  It may happen if he gets the nomination, it may not.

    why would any sentient being (3.00 / 2) (#94)
    by RalphB on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:37:38 PM EST
    care how you feel?  duh.

    [ Parent ]
    just a little ego massage (5.00 / 1) (#115)
    by RalphB on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:59:38 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I was at the HRC event (5.00 / 4) (#82)
    by ruthinor on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:26:32 PM EST
    in Hillsoro OR today and whoever said that it was mostly women is totally full of it.  The crowd consisted of mainly young families, men and women plus their kids.  There were also many teens of both sexes as well as  middle aged and older folks.  It was quite a mixture of age groups, and there were LOTS of men.  I was in the overflow crowd that viewed the speech on a large TV screen.  The people I was with listened intently to the entire speech.  There was no talking, fidgeting etc.  Whoever said that Hillary was not a good speaker has not heard her lately.  She was extremely knowledgeable  on all topics.  Very impressive !

    Obama says "I" an awful lot.... (5.00 / 2) (#85)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:30:09 PM EST
    ..I'm surprised people don't hear it more. He always saying...as I said before, as I said in a speech, etc, etc. Many, many "Is" especially when it come to taking credit. Yes he does say "we" when it comes to doing the hard work.

    "We " is used for inclusion (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by MichaelGale on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:30:57 PM EST
    and to imply "identical" or one in the same.
    Orators use it to pull in an audience as do religions.

    Self help organizations use "we" to denote togetherness, sameness, such as Alcoholics Anonymous (AA).

    MLK used it to identify with African Americans and their civil rights and set goals to meet with his leadership.

    However, when a politician uses it one might be a little cautious.

    Obama and I are not the same except via party label and even that is suspect.  

    I'm pretty unique, not into "sameness". <snark>

    Michigan vote (5.00 / 3) (#96)
    by sister of ye on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:40:20 PM EST
    I live in Michigaan, too, and I went to the polls despite being in physical therapy and snow that made it a challenge to walk with my cane. I went because I had the hope that in the end my voice would be heard. I knew that Obama planned for the vote to count from the fact that here in SE MI his supporters ran ads pushing "uncommitted" as a vote for him. They wouldn't spend that money without expectation of a return.

    It was only when Clinton took a solid majority that the yelling started about the election being illegimate. Clinton consented to a revote, even if it wasn't her first choice, knowing she could lose.

    As I heard the revote plan described, only those who cast a Republican vote wouldn't be allowed to vote again. I don't care if some were following Kos' suggestion, but you don't get to vote twice because you made a dumb decision.

    Sorry you had better things to do that day, but you need to live with your choice, just as Obama needs to live with his choice to take his name off the MI ballot.

    Why has there been no attention (5.00 / 1) (#114)
    by RTwilight on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:59:17 PM EST
    on the fact that Obama's entire political career started with tactics that disenfranchised voters in the dem primaries in chicago?

    Using b.s. legal challenges to eliminate all the competition, including the very popular incumbant, seems a bit inexcusable for a candidate running on the 'holier than thou' platform.

    What tactics? What primaries? (none / 0) (#129)
    by fiver5 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:12:33 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    In the primaries for the state legislature (5.00 / 1) (#139)
    by RTwilight on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:20:56 PM EST
    for the district he ran for, Obama's campaign used lawyers to tie up the other dem candidates, including the incumbant, in challenges to the signitures on their petitions to run, until the primaries were over...he ran unopposed in the primaries when he should have gone up against a candidate that would have smeared him

    [ Parent ]
    Google Alice Palmer and Obama (none / 0) (#136)
    by ding7777 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:18:50 PM EST
    Here's one article about it

    [ Parent ]
    Thanks for the link (none / 0) (#154)
    by fiver5 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:37:35 PM EST
    But I'm still not understanding what was unfair.  He challenged his opponents nominating signatures and was found to be right.

    BTW, watch out for the Chicago Tribune.  As a kid with a Tribune paper rout, I remember wrapping each paper in a "Vote Republican" plastic bag on election day.  The McCormick Family (former sole owners of the Trib) were wildly conservative, and neither the Tribune Corp. or present ownership have varied from the theme.

    [ Parent ]

    The information I had (none / 0) (#174)
    by RTwilight on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:33:18 PM EST
    available pointed to the challenges being rather more tactical in origin than ethical...I will recheck my sources for bias...thank you for local veiwpoint

    [ Parent ]
    Sorry (none / 0) (#177)
    by fiver5 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:40:07 PM EST
    Paper "route" not "rout."  I hate when I do that.

    [ Parent ]
    Polls don't mean squat, it's the votes that (5.00 / 2) (#116)
    by FlaDemFem on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:59:43 PM EST
    count. And I live in FL. so I am not going to get counted either. And if Obama really cared about your opinion, or your vote, he would have left his name on the ballot. And then demanded that all the states be seated. But he didn't, he felt he needed to suck up to a couple of other states instead. So, let him take half the undecideds. He hasn't earned any more.  

    What polls? I've checked all for Michigan (5.00 / 1) (#124)
    by Cream City on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:07:54 PM EST
    -- a couple of dozen -- at RealClearPolitics, and none showed Obama doing well in Michigan at all. All showed Clinton ahead by huge margins. So what polls are you talking about? Link? At least a name or two of such polls in your state? Without some evidence of at least something you say here, I can't put credence in it -- since I'm next door to Michigan, talk with folks there, and haven't heard them suggest anything like what you say here.

    Speaking of Michigan, on Press the Meat just now (none / 0) (#197)
    by Ellie on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 08:33:19 AM EST
    ... Russert tried a fake "gotcha" on HRC and Rendell, blurring MI & FL as shifting the goalposts. Rendell smacked him down handily.

    Now Russert's mawing the phony "naked under their clothes" AHA! about the money (from speaking and book fees) and how that's gonna play "in Altoona". I guess Altoona was in Little Russ's thoughts when he swung through the state flogging his crap book, which, apparently, he offered gratis rather than take any money for such a labor of love.

    Rendell's stooge slapping's pretty good on Russert's knee jerk charge, appropos of nothing, that the Clinton foundation must be dirty because, um, his research squad hates them I guess. (Little Russ offered no tangible reason for the insinuation; he's just on malevolent cruise control.)

    Russert is at the vanguard of the Obama rules and formula for holding him up as the candidate "of destiny" and HRC going home with her statistical tie right now is based on the  But If If If If and IF ... all this goes against HRC, which is possible since we hate her, will she THEN drop this silly bid for office that bugs us so?

    (DISCLAIMER: Why am I even watching? I plead a combination of trans-pond work, fax barf and my inability to refrain from rubbernecking atrocious media.)

    Upside: next instalment is about Dr. MLK Jr.

    [ Parent ]

    'Both' do it unfair; BO said he wouldn't AT ALL (5.00 / 1) (#175)
    by Ellie on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:33:22 PM EST
    What will it take for this phony to be held to his own promises and standards even once? He's the only one who set that ridiculous bar FOR HIMSELF.

    So stop this BS right now.

    BO gets cred for saying he'll bring a NEW post partisan era of One Party unity. He collects kudos for that from the fawning koolaid kidz in media and in his camp, and hasn't once delivered on this high ground (unless he meant that's where he'll hide out cause it's a good place to sling sh*t. at others.)

    When he's exposed as being as cynical and opportunistically negative as every politician since the dawn of time, the typical TeamO response is, so? [/Cheney]

    Like, HRC did it too. But she only promised that she knows full well how the game is played. She beat it yesterday. She's beating it today. She'll keep beating it tomorrow. And she'll stay standing at the end.

    She didn't promise nor sign onto Cumbaya -- then hide out while surrogates accuse people of egregious racism, corruption or 'secret thoughts' that only media and TeamO telepaths can detect and are 100%, like, accurate and stuff.

    She gets hit with the multiple whammy of being thought guilty of even imagined crap related to her campaign, and whupped when Obama is revealed yet again to be a fraud.

    Hillary did not (1.00 / 1) (#143)
    by dem08 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:26:50 PM EST
    speak out against the Florida and Michigan Primaries being examples "of disenfranchising" because she thought she would win.

    I hate when Obama fans cannot see her principal-ed leadership:

    She voted to give the Idiot his War because she thought we would win;

    she didn't protest the Florida Michigan "disenfranchisement" because she thought SHE would win the clear nomination by Super Tuesday.

    That is The Clinton's at their finest, and that is why we pay Bill so much money for advice and speeches.

    Hillary will bring The Clinton's back to The White House. We all know what that brings with it, so it is no wonder everyone loves her so much.

    It's nice to hear (none / 0) (#13)
    by lepidus on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:45:56 PM EST
    the positive side of why someone supports Obama. Thank you.

    Okay... (none / 0) (#31)
    by kayla on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:29:25 PM EST
    You spent half your grocery money on Barack Obama?  I don't know you and you are your own person, but I'm impressed that there we have a presidential candidate that has inspired so many to think outside of themselves and push for change through someone else.

    push for change (5.00 / 4) (#90)
    by LHinSeattle on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:36:45 PM EST
    I keep waiting for them to define exactly what that "change" is. so far all I hear are things like:

    work w/repubs?
    keep mercenaries in Iraq?
    no universal health care?
    continue coal, nuclear
    foreign policy like the 1st bush and like reagan.

    sounds like "Meet the New Change, same as the old status quo."

    [ Parent ]

    Well, all I can say is that I find myself (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by Anne on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 11:10:34 PM EST
    changing the channel when I see him looking down his nose and bestowing pearls of wisdom upon the people, and I change the radio station when I hear his voice, and I've changed some of the things I used to say - "the notion that..." is an Obama-ism I just can't speak without gagging a little.

    And I give whatever change I can afford to Hillary.

    Yes, I am a changed person.

    [ Parent ]

    Brava! (none / 0) (#201)
    by cmugirl on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 11:37:32 AM EST
    Rated this comment.  Excellent - I may steal it an use it myself.

    [ Parent ]
    They knew the rules-early primaries shouldnt count (none / 0) (#35)
    by MSS on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:37:05 PM EST
    They knew the rules from the day they planned those primaries -- and they knew what the penalties would be!

    Every stated wanted "the earliest" primary, the Democratic Central Committee set up a date and said "no earlier or there will be penalties, your votes won't be counted." Every state but FLA and MICH complied.

    In FLA the Democratic leadership LAUGHED when they debated holding off the primary to meet the rules.

    Just think, if they had WAITED, they would have had a far bigger impact with FLA & MICH.

    It's so not fair to try to count those votes now!

    Donna Brazile is laughing at YOU right now (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by MarkL on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:41:59 PM EST
    for believing that fairy tale.

    [ Parent ]
    No No No No No-Wrong (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by BarnBabe on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:48:32 PM EST
    We keep having to repeat this and I will until it is understood.

    Florida Republican legislators, in control of the Florida legislators d