Join the Discussion

Reply
Report this post

Question, when a person run for President of the United States, why do we as a nation do back ground checks? We do not know much about Obama and just wheir is the press? The talk Obama gave after the video came out on Rev Wright in the church that Obama has been for 20 years. I did not hear a thing just why he went to the church other than they did good work with poor people. So many churchs do many services for poor people. So that was not it. Do not believe that citizens can not follow someone that we know the full back ground on him. When Richardson just said he heard the talk and went with Obama, what is Richardson thinking. Yes Obama can speak well and sounds great, however need a whole lot more. It is almost like the followers of Jack Kennedy years ago, but the press would not do anything in way of telling us about him either. Why do we become like fools, and in todays world we need more information about this guy who wants to be President.

Reply
Report this post

FRANKLY, I HOPE THAT POLITICIANS LEARN A LESSON THE CLINTON MESS.. FROM DAY ONE, PEOPLE WITH THE RIGHT MINDSET WERE WARNING THAT HILARIOUS HILLARY WAS TOO NASTY, A BAD ACTOR AND JUST PLAIN UNELECTABLE. WELL, WE NOW KNOW THE TRUTH. REMOVE THE SINGLE MINDED WOMEN'S VOTE AND WHAT ARE YOU BASICALLY LEFT WITH?? FACT IS BILL CLINTON MADE A DEAL AFTER HIS SCREWING AROJND -- SHE WOULD STICK WITH HIM BUT THE COST WAS HIS FULL BACKING FPR HER RUN AS FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENT.... HE GOT OFF THE HOOK AND WE ARE AGAIN PAYING FOR HIS MISTAKES. THE LESSON AFTER THE CLINTON FIASCO IS OVER IS NEVER AGAIN RUN YOUR WIFE OR GIRL FRIEND AS ANYTHING MORE IMPORTANT THAN DOG CATCHER. ... THE TROUBLE ALL ALONG IS THAT PEOPLE COULD NOT FREELY CRITITIZE THAT xxxxc FOR BEING A xxxxxx.. WHY? RESPECT OR WHAT WAS LEFT FOR BILL CLINTON... IT WAS IN SOME WAYS LIKE PUTTING THE BOSS'S DAUGHTER OR WIFE IN A HIGH POSITION WITHOUT HER HAVING ANY REAL EXPERIENCE.. HILLARY'S EXPEWRIENCE AS FIRST LADY MERELY AMOUNTED TO TAKING YOUR DAUGHTER TO WORK.. SHE NEVER HAD THE SECURITY CLEARING NEEDED TO TAKE PART ON ANY KEY DISCUSSIONS.

Reply
Report this post

The claims of moral superiority by the Obama campaign are just part of their campaign strategy, an important part and perhaps a winning strategy. Why is it morally superior for Sen. Obama to claim that Sen. Clinton has fabricated her foreign policy experience compared to her pointing out his lack of experience? As for "moving the ball," there has been plenty of that in the Obama campaign. At first super delegates were obligated to vote as their constituents voted, but that didn't work for Kennedy or Kerry, so now that has evolved into super delegates are obligated to abide by NATIONAL primary votes. Richardson got himself into an embarrassing bind on the Today Show on Monday when Matt Lauer read what Richardson told the NY Times about voting according to his constituents. Richardson said Clinton's win in New Mexico was very narrow and, after all he is a western Governor and Obama has won in the west. Poor guy apparently hasn't noticed that Clinton won in California, Arizona, and Nevada. That IS the west, you self-serving jerk! The press is determined to install Obama as the Democratic candidate. Unfortunately they won't be able to protect him during the general election when the 527's won't be dependent upon the press to deliver their attacks.