i love you borack obama I hope you win!!!!!!!!!!!!! i'll be voting for u!!!!!!!!!

"Obama knew he could never become Prez. He doesn't stand a chance - with a name like Hussein."

Ok folks, enough with the name slamming. For those who continue to do this, you need constant prayer for your ignorance.

DAVE, CHEVERLY, MD:

Invading Iran is potentially an even more disastrous mistake than initiating the Iraq War. And Sen. Obama says that Kyl-Lieberman handed Bush a "blank check" to do it. But he couldn't wait around Washington for a little while to do everything possible to talk the Senate out of the writing the check because he had more important things to do. And that makes perfect sense to you. It doesn't make you question his judgment, priorities, or sincerity at all.

So I can only assume that if Obama had missed the Iraq War Vote to go campaigning, this would have been similarly okay — as long as he had a really good excuse. Like campaigning again in a state where he's already campaigned dozens of times and will campaign again … DOZENS OF TIMES.

What it comes down to: the dog only ate Sen. Obama's homework. I don't buy it.

Dawn Gaithersburg, MD

The facts are already posted on here why Obama missed the vote on The Kyl-Lieberman amendment. But he did take a stance against it before the vote occurred. The fact is that Hillary DID vote for it.

HISTORY LESSON:
The power and importance of Polls.

SEPT – DEC 2003 IOWA Poll:

Dean polls 38%
Kerry 17%.
Edwards 12%

Kerry WINS IOWA 38%
Dean Iowa 18%

SEPT – DEC 2003 NEW HAMPSHIRE poll:

Dean Poll 45%
Kerry 20%.
Edwards 2%

Kerry WINS NH 39%
Howard Dean 12%
Edwards 32%

This is not comparing any Candidate with Dean. But one must ask WHOM are they polling to be this far off the results?
NO Campaign should be celebrating yet.

Flip flop, twister, and has all the bases covered, she has already won. Just listen to her when she speaks "when I am president." Please people end all of this vote for someone else, I am.

It can be so simple to focus on just what the candidates have already accomplished in their past offices, and not rely on promises. It will drive U crazy to watch commercials because ALL the candidates are going to say great stuff, and promise us the world. If you just look at what they have already done that fits in with your philosophy, then vote accordingly, you won't have to read through blog comments about superfluous stuff.

What makes a good President:

1. protect America from enemies

2. strong military

3. lower taxes, to keep more money in America people's pocket and less for government to waste

4. secure the borders of this country so that every person wanting in will now legally go thru the process

5. install term limits on Congress so that career politicians can't get too comfortable with above-mentioned wasteful tax dollars

I have left off that the government owes us health care, because as with FEMA ,Walter Reed Hosp., Homeland Secur.USPS, IRS, they will screw up any new dept. that we create for federal level mgmt.

Hillary has increased its leads in the last few weeks from dem voters since Obama bashing her:

FOX News – poll date 10/09 to 10/10 - Clinton +32.0

Gallup – poll date 10/04 - 10/07 - Clinton +21.0

AP-Ipsos – poll date 09/21 - 09/25 - Clinton +14.0

Cook/RT Strategies – poll date 09/13 - 09/15 - Clinton +13.0

It isn't the general election right now so nobody honestly knows where any candidate stands. Everyone knows that the primaries are about pandering the the base of the individual parties

Dawn:
You really need to get a hobby.

I was in the spirit and praying for Guidance for this country. A calm peace came over me.
Then I saw why:

I was at an Inauguration.For the next president. People were cheering and Shouting.I look to be hold. America voted for their first Black President.

the point to this:

The American people Will Decide who the next president will be. not the Washington Insiders and Political establishment.

dawn — Gaithersburg, MD:

Hear, hear. Tell it like it is.

Obama knew he could never become Prez. He doesn't stand a chance - with a name like Hussein. His basic plan is to become a "nuisance candidate" to prevent Edwards from seriously challenging Hillary. Mark my words, soon you will see Obama gamely throw in the towel and accept to run as HRC's VP.

Obama an anti-establishment candidate ? Hah - more like a Trojan Horse for the American public.

Dave, Cheverly, MD.:

How can I say this more plainly? Every other senator running for president heard Sen. Reid too, but apparently still knew that there would be a vote soon. They didn't leave Washington for yet one more day campaigning in New Hampshire. They stayed and voted. Because Sen. Obama thought this vote was SO important, he should have stayed too. He didn't because he wanted to miss the vote AND THEN complain about it.

To Dawn, Gaithersburg,

Since you apparently have an issue with seeing/reading the TRUTH. I will post these FACTS of a fellow blogger.

If you watched Cspan you would see how things played out with that amendment. Reid did pull the amendment off the floor the day Obama was present saying that it was on indefinite hold. 24 hours later Reid put the amendment on the floor for the vote, he clearly told staff to inform senators who were not present. An hour later the vote happen. || There is NO WAY that Obama could get back to the D.C. from NH in an hour even on a private jet. || Obama was already gone after the senate session the day before. Obama released his position as soon as he was informed on that a vote would happen.

Ranting on about Obama dodging this vote has gotten old and we all are tied of reading it.

Ozark9812, KY, I am sorry you couldn't distinguish difference between Obama and Clinton' foreign policy. At 1st debate Obama answered that HE will meet Iran President, this time Clinton said America will negotiate with Iran, it means Government to Government, not personally. That proved Obama is naive and irresponsible. Do you want to know about Clinton's brain? Please read her book "LIVING HISTORY" and Just watch debate, her answers are real her brain. Obama answered incoherently or couldn't answer clearly like Clinton and he stammers at debate. Do you know why Obama skipped AARP debate??? I remind you, Hillary made Health Care Plan 14 years ago, nobody even think about it. Every candidate adopted and modified her Health Care basically. Obama and Edwards were not in political circles when Hillary made 1st Health Care Plan in America, well, who used whose brain? I am not a smart kid but I am a very sincere American citizen.I told this before to my State people, but I tell you once more because I love Kentucky. "Kentuckianas,wake up from your deep sleep".

You can absolutely trust Barack Hussein Obama to protect us from the Islamic state of Iran.

No conflict of interest here.

Obama '08 all the way !

I'm calling out CNN on its gratuitous use of the word "attack" to describe anytime Obama points out the his differences in ideas versus Hillary Clinton. These are not "attacks", they are not personal, and they are not mudslinging. If anything, Obama is simply defending his ideas and confronting Sen. Clinton with the truth. Perhaps the truth proves to discomfiting to her campaign — and CNN for that matter — that it is obviously perceived as an "attack" on Clinton.

Greg from Brattleboro:

Thanks for your comment. I've seen the transcript from the Senate floor which describes the scenario that you outline.

It is probably also important to remind everyone that Rory Reid, son of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, works for Senator Clinton's campaign in Nevada.

Don't act like you dont already know that there was no pheasable way for him to make it to washington for that vote.

Right on Iraq

Right on Iran

Right on ethics

Right man for the Job.

Barack Obama 2008!

I don't think Senator Obama will shrug off his image of being young and naive with talks about meeting with the president of Iran.

He does realize that the Iranian president is not actually the head of state of Iran right? The president of Iran is really more like the vice president of the United States in the powers he has.

Dude, someone's gotta tell Senator Obama that stuff.

Guys, "please educate yourself on the issues of the day before posting. Seriously…you have a computer, right? How hard would it have been to invesigate as to WHY Obama missed the vote? If you had taken a few minutes to find out by just using Google, you would have found out that Obama was in Washington on the day when the vote was originally scheduled, then Senator Reid tabled the bill and said it would not be coming to the floor anytime soon (you can see the video on C-SPAN.org). So Obama returned to New Hampshire. He was at a campaign event when he got word that Senator Reid had decided to bring the vote up within the hour, so what was Obama supposed to do?
He obviously couldn't get back to Washington to make the vote, so he decided to issue a statement condemning the bill, and he also spoke out against in at the New Hamphire event, saying if he could have made it on time to vote, his vote would have been a "no".

Again, just do some quick research on this topic before making up your mind….unless, of course, you actually don't want to know the truth and would rather remain intellectually lazy and therefore ignorant."

Posted By Greg, Brattleboro, VT : October 13, 2007 12:46 pm

This guys right! Y'all should do your research on what happened.

JEN, GAINESVILLE, FL:

You're right about the wording, but I don't see what difference it makes. Being willing to meet with the representative of a hostile power with no agenda, preliminary negotiations etc., especially when that representative doesn't actually wield significant power in his home country, strikes me, at best, as the kind of waste of time in which someone naive and inexperienced would indulge. However, I like being as accurate as possible, so thank you for the correction.

GREG, BRATTLEBORO, VT:

Every other senator running for president had precisely the same choice to make as Sen. Obama. ALL of them were present for the vote. Because Sen. Obama thought that this vote was handing a "blank check" to President Bush to invade Iran, he had a special responsibility to be there making the most impassioned, eloquent plea he could possibly muster to his fellow senators to turn them away from what he must surely have viewed as madness, MADNESS.

Instead, he chose to go campaign for the nth time in New Hampshire. What a magnificient grasp of priorities.

Lioness (so sorry, I spelled your name incorrectly).

You are simply misinformed. At this very moment, the United States is negotiating with North Korea on some very important issues (North Korea ALREADY has nuclear weapons), but there has been no face-to-face meeting that I know of between President Bush and Kim Jong-il.

President Bush has surely been lacking in the diplomatic arena. However, leaving face-to-face meetings as the last step in the diplomatic process is not some strange innovation of our current president. For example, although President Carter carried on lengthy negotiations with the Iranian government when they were holding our hostages, I don't believe that he personally met with any high-ranking Iranian government officials while he was president. Certainly not Ayatollah Khomeini.

And I assure you, the successful negotiations that ended in the Agreed Framework between North Korea and the United States did not BEGIN with a meeting between President Clinton and Kim Jong-il.

Nor do the lower-level diplomats "wing it." They receive their instructions from their superiors all the way up to the Secretary of State. The Secretary of State, of

Hillary, is a consumate career politician. They tell people what they want to hear, but already have plans to get your money their way.

Did anyone ever hear of a politician who got to Washington, and left with less money than they had before getting elected.

It's all money, Ego, and power, and they all lie to get it.

To Jake,

Everyone can read the facts that Jen was so good to point out just before your entry. Therefore your rhetoric is useless. It's a complement to Obama Campaign that the Media/opponents has to try Sooooo Hardddd.. to find anything or goes as far as to event some scenario to be able to say anything bad about Obama. They basically have to knowingly setup a loaded debate question. That Hillary has been briefed on or uses a US Senator to jockey bill-voting times around. Obama will have to either except the VP position and do it quietly or they will pick Edwards (as I suspect they either have or will offer to Obama before the Primary) or Obama will have to reject their offer and continue to go for the Presidency 2008. If he chooses the latter, He must do it like it is Chicago and Kick a.. and take names.. Obama would be effectively be running against Bill Clinton. So Obama you are NOW running against Bill Clinton. Formulate how to beat Bill Clinton and you win. P.S. Some of this seems to be already happening.

Maurice, you said:

"OBAMA OBAMA, WHERE IS YOUR POLITICS OF HOPE AGAIN? I THOUGHT SO, YOU COULD ONLY RUN FOR SO LONG ON THAT FAKE 'HOPE' MACHINE. BUT TOO LITTLE TOO LATE. YOU WILL BECOME LIKE ANOTHER JOHN EDWARDS, JUST DESPERATE. HILLARY WILL BE YOUR NEXT COMMANDER IN CHIEF."

Obama IS practicing the politics of hope - hope that Clinton will not get elected. And that is why millions understandably support him.

Dawn,

You said:

"….agreeing to face-to-face meetings without preconditions with world leaders is FAR DIFFERENT from agreeing to negotiate country-to-country without preconditions. In country-to-country negotiatiations, diplomats from both sides conduct the early meetings, hammering out understandings on what issues will be on the agenda, confidence-building measures to be undertaken on both sides, terms and conditions of preliminary and medium-term agreements, and what final status talks and agreements will look like."

Your argument is upseide-down. At the most, it best applies to situations where a treaty is about to be signed.

The subject of this dispute is different. Lower-level diplomats should not have the authority to even negotiate an agenda unless the leaders have first met and decided whether both sides will conduct further meetings in the first place, or whether there is no point in continuing the dialogue.

Any president who sends lower-level diplomats without first meeting the world leader herself cannot possibly have laid out even a preliminary agenda. And any president who lets lower-level diplomats wing it and meet on no pre-conditions is forsaking her duties as the ultimate decider. She is also shirking her role as leader.

Hillary has no leadership qualities. Her latest statements merely confirm that.

Does anyone else find it IRONIC that Obama criticized Clinton on the Iran vote, yet was TOO BUSY HIMSELF CAMPAIGNING to vote himself?

At the very least, Clinton was doing what her constituents wanted her to do… VOTE ON ISSUES. He was too busy campaigning in some New England state.

Classic

Tony,

If you watched Cspan you would see how things played out with that ammendment. Reid did pull the ammendment off the floor the day Obama was present saying that it was on idenfinate hold. 24 hours later Reid put the ammend on the floor for the vote, he clearly told staff to inform senators who were not present. An hour later the vote happen. || There is NO WAY that Obama could get back to the D.C. from NH in an hour even on a private jet. || Obama was already gone after the senate session the day before. Obama released his position as soon as he was informed on that a vote would happen.

Peter
Don't be worried. Mr Barak Hussein Obama will probably be there to help out.

(1) Like it's possible to run for president and not point out disagreements with your opponent.
– Coach Haughton

(2) It's fine for Sen. Obama to point out differences with Sen. Clinton, but he can't twist her words to do so.
– dawn

(3) I appreciate your differing point of view because it gives me and intelligent perspective of the other side however it's obvious that you read nothing that I wrote. You saw my name a couple times on here and assumed that what be saying.
– Coach Haughton

I assume that when you wrote (1), see above), what you meant to say was that Sen. Obama was merely pointing out honest differences that he had with Sen. Clinton on the negotiations v. face-to-face meetings issue. I responded with my own opinion (see (2) above). If that's not what you meant to say, I sincerely apologize. In my defense, it's sometimes difficult to know exactly what you ARE trying to say because of your unique phraseology featuring the absence of crucial parts of speech, e.g., verbs, or, in this case, entire clauses and/or sentences that might explain to what exactly you are responding. Again, I apologize for any misunderstanding.

P.S.: I've stated my views of Sen. Clinton's vote on the Iraq War Resolution many times. I think I'll wait to do it again until the next time it's the actual topic.

But I will say that I think you mis-remembered one crucial fact. I think everybody (with the possible exception of Republican former weapons inspector, Scott Ritter) thought that he still had SOME WMD. We just also believed that: (a) he'd never use them; (b) the weapons inspectors could handle it; and (c) the no-fly zone had him contained. I said as much to a Republican friend of mine a few months (I believe) before the war started. Nobody doubted that, after a quick ride through the desert to Bagdad, President Bush would be able to point to at least a warehouse or two of old biological or chemical weapons and hold up at least a few degraded vials of anthrax, botulinum, or ricin. And that alone would've been enough to change the whole political climate — we'd probably still be seriously debating whether the invasion was worth it.

The facts about the Iran Vote in the Senate.

Obama showed up for the vote as Harry Reid scheduled it but Reid cancelled it. Days later Obama was called precisely ONE HOUR before the vote to be told it would be happening. He was called by Harry Reid's son, who is actively employed by Clinton's campaign.

Obama was campaigning in NH and there was no feasible way of getting to Washington in time to vote. He then released a statement saying how he WOULD have voted that same day and condemning Hillary for her vote to authorize Bush to GO TO WAR YET AGAIN WITH IRAN by calling them terrorists.

End politics as usual and the petty games that these pigs play.

Obama knows that todays pig is tomorrow's bacon.

Vote Obama 08.

Guys, "please educate yourself on the issues of the day before posting. Seriously…you have a computer, right? How hard would it have been to invesigate as to WHY Obama missed the vote? If you had taken a few minutes to find out by just using Google, you would have found out that Obama was in Washington on the day when the vote was originally scheduled, then Senator Reid tabled the bill and said it would not be coming to the floor anytime soon (you can see the video on C-SPAN.org). So Obama returned to New Hampshire. He was at a campaign event when he got word that Senator Reid had decided to bring the vote up within the hour, so what was Obama supposed to do?
He obviously couldn't get back to Washington to make the vote, so he decided to issue a statement condemning the bill, and he also spoke out against in at the New Hamphire event, saying if he could have made it on time to vote, his vote would have been a "no".

Again, just do some quick research on this topic before making up your mind….unless, of course, you actually don't want to know the truth and would rather remain intellectually lazy and therefore ignorant."

Clinton doesn't understand AMERICA. How do you expect her to understand IRAN?

Hillary Clinton had no right to call Barack Obama "naive" because as we can see she's the real naive one in this race.

Goodbye and So long Hillary. I won't ever vote for you and I hope your campaingn or foolishness, negativity and lies fails!

(1) Like it's possible to run for president and not point out disagreements with your opponent.
– Coach Haughton

(2) It's fine for Sen. Obama to point out differences with Sen. Clinton, but he can't twist her words to do so.
– dawn

(3) I appreciate your differing point of view because it gives me and intelligent perspective of the other side however it's obvious that you read nothing that I wrote. You saw my name a couple times on here and assumed that what be saying.
– Coach Haughton

I assume that when you wrote (1), see above), what you meant to say was that Sen. Obama was merely pointing out honest differences that he had with Sen. Clinton on the negotiations v. face-to-face meetings issue. I responded with my own opinion (see (2) above). If that's not what you meant to say, I sincerely apologize. In my defense, it's sometimes difficult to know exactly what you ARE trying to say because of your unique phraseology featuring the absence of crucial parts of speech, e.g., verbs, or, in this case, entire clauses and/or sentences that might explain to what exactly you are responding. Again, I apologize for any misunderstanding.

P.S.: I've stated my views of Sen. Clinton's vote on the Iraq War Resolution many times. I think I'll wait to do it again until the next time it's the actual topic.

But I will say that I think you mis-remembered one crucial fact. I think everybody thought that he still had SOME WMD. We just also believed that: (a) he'd never use them; (b) the weapons inspectors could handle it; and (c) the no-fly zone had him contained. I said as much to a Republican friend of mine a few months (I believe) before the war started. Nobody doubted that, after a quick ride through the desert to Bagdad, President Bush would be able to point to at least a warehouse or two of old biological or chemical weapons and hold up at least a few degraded vials of anthrax, botulinum, or ricin. And that alone would've been enough to change the whole political climate — we'd probably still be seriously debating whether the invasion was worth it.

Its disturbing that Clinton admits she does not understand Iran

I would engage in negotiations with Iran, with no conditions, because we don’t really understand how Iran works. We think we do, from the outside, but I think that is misleading,” Mrs. Clinton said.

Without understanding Iran, how can you vote against anything about the country?

Senator Obama, we the American electorate are not listening to you anymore.

Your actions and words have demonstrated a total lack of any sense of what is important. You cannot even make it to the Senate to vote against a measure that is "equal to a blank check for President Bush".

Stuff and nonsense. Not only am I not voting for you for President, but if you were my US Senator I would vote for the other guy/woman next time around.

Bye, bye.

Clinton campaign operatives and her supporters mock and belittle everybody who dares to disagree. Hillay's niceties are gone when a person asks an inconvenient question. When things get rocky, she runs to her husband for help.

Hillary's husband is calling to get her endorsments, her husband's old hired guns are working for her,she benefits from her husband's name and political power. That is what George Bush Jr. did in reference to his father.

And just like GWB, Hillary has no clue how middle class women really live. She's never been one. Her husband gets for one speach more than what's an average middle class income per year. Hillary did not have to worry about her health insurance or colleage costs for her children. She was a highly paid lawyer who lived the life of privilege as a woman married to a powerful man. She tolerated his indiscretions and in the same time she was making condescending remarks about mothers who stay home and bake cookies. And now she is riding "The Middle Class Bus"? I don't think so.

I voted for Democrats all my life, by this woman does not represent me and I found it offensive that she even tries to brainwash American women that she "feels our pain" or has our interest in mind.The only real interest she has is to further her political ambition.

Go Barack and speak up.

Dawn,

Please get your facts right. Obama did not promise to meet with anyone in his first year of office, but said he "would be willing to meet." Even a five-year old can tell the difference between the above two.

Sen. Obama provided the best illustration of how muddled his attack on Sen. Clinton is. He acknowledged that Sen. Clinton called him "naive" for agreeing to meet with WORLD LEADERS without preconditions. Then he implied that promising to NEGOTIATE WITH IRAN without preconditions was the same as agreeing to meet with AHMADINEJAD.

Note to Sen. Obama and supporters: agreeing to face-to-face meetings without preconditions with world leaders is FAR DIFFERENT from agreeing to negotiate country-to-country without preconditions. In country-to-country negotiatiations, diplomats from both sides conduct the early meetings, hammering out understandings on what issues will be on the agenda, confidence-building measures to be undertaken on both sides, terms and conditions of preliminary and medium-term agreements, and what final status talks and agreements will look like.

Principals (the Secretary of State in the first instance, and, in extraordinary circumstances, the President) get involved intermittently only to resolve roadblocks, urge on both sides to determine agendas, complete preliminary agreements etc.

Face-to-face principals' MEETINGS occur when something has been agreed upon, NOT BEFORE. That way the President of the United States doesn't end up in a two-hour meeting with Ahmadinejad listening to him count off the homosexuals in Iran.

If Sen. Obama DOESN'T know this, then he's indeed "naive and inexperienced." If, as I suspect, he does know it but made his statements anyway, then he thinks you are.

Well said, Obama. Once again he stands out as the best candidate by a mile.

His criticisms are based on facts, carefully sourced, abd based on policy.

What a refreshing break from the gratuitous mudslinging that involves name calling of the type Hillary resorted to when she called Obama "irresponsible" and "naive," (words that could more accurately describe her).

Hillary's flip-flopping is as clear as daylight. Obama is merely pointing out the obvious.

Go for it Obama, expose this lying fraud for what she is.

The MSM tries to cover up her "doublespeak" by either not reporting it or misreporting it.

She is on record as saying the Bush admin should be holding talks with Iran (they have been for almost a year secretly) and then when Obama states it is a good idea, she screams GOTCHA and the MSM runs with it.

Define "talks" right Shrillary?

NAFTA was one of Bill's biggest blunders that he got through even though rightfully the UNIONS opposed it (but lets still vote for her?), are you aware that Monday she said "we should reassess these types of agreements every five years.

No details if she was leaning towards more, less or doing away with it, just reassess.

That is doublespeak and not only was it not in the news, nobody said WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?

She was in Mass the other day screaming about about "bringing our troops home now", sorry Hillary, didn't you recently say that you can't look that far into the future to make that type of assessment?

Haven't you been hammering Bush on a timeline, but yet, you can't provide one?

Didn't you say last year that the President should have the right to use torture in certain situations, but now you say "Americans" should never torture?

Just like your hubby, never takes a real stand, always gray area that leaves it up to your cult followers and the MSM to explain what you mean, and after they come up with something, "that's exactly what I meant".

And if a rival takes you to task, if it is a Republican, it is the vast right-wing conpiracy and if a Democrat, they are attacking "little ol' you".

No morals. no stances, nothing new.

Obama is right to discuss your distortions and yes, "flip-flops".

The ads are being made as we speak as that is why Karl Rove quit, he is in the "chamber" doing his evil.

Anyone but Hillary - 2008.

Thank you, Not a blind follower. I am not a blind follower too. Obama supports are acting like an ONE EYE, DEAF AND BLIND. Obama couldn't change because he will use other people's brain like Bush, it is dangerous for our Country. We need the President who has a strong, intelligent and own brilliant brain which combinded with experiences. Hillary combined all of four characteristics. Hillary for 44th President of United States of America.

Posted By Kyu Reisch, Radcliff, Kentucky : October 13, 2007 7:51 am

Where has your mind gone. OK, you can see your candidate flip-flopped and you want to ignore it because you want a woman in the White House as president that bad! C'mon! You shouldn't be supporting her for any reasons like that, but by what she does and says and then look at the facts. If you want a woman in the WH vote for an honest woman. A woman who doesn't call a candidate "naive" and than months later say the same as he did. Then act like "oh, it's different" because it's not different. Hillary is a hypocrite and a fool. Stop supporting her short comings.

Obama and McCain has been the only candidates in their respective parties that has been consistent and principled …even when faced with criticism from their own party and low poll numbers. A leader should be to stand on principle in the face of adversity not be swayed like chaff in the wind of public opinion.

Coach Haughton:

It's fine for Sen. Obama to point out differences with Sen. Clinton, but he can't twist her words to do so. The YouTube question was about unconditionally promising to meet with AHMADINEJAD in the first year in office, not about conducting unconditional negotiations with Iran, as Sen. Obama now seems to be claiming.

Sen. Clinton has never rejected unconditional negotiations with Iran: she simply said that she wouldn't promise to meet with Ahmadinejad before knowing what he wanted to talk about, which would be established … in negotiations.

For Sen. Obama to distort her words to improve his position is very much "politics as usual," not the "politics of hope."

Posted By dawn — Gaithersburg, MD. : October 12, 2007 8:22 pm

I appreciate your differing point of view because it gives me and intelligent perspective of the other side however it's obvious that you read nothing that I wrote. You saw my name a couple times on here and assumed that what be saying.

If you want to refute one of my comments i suggest you read them first… because what you wrote has nothing to do with anything that I wrote.

In fact I hope you get back to this one before it gets pushed under monday's news because I'm interested to see what you have to say about the lengthy one I wrote in response to buggie. Look for a couple sentences in caps.

And in response to your response to nothing…

No matter which way you spin it the Iraq vote was wrong.

The Iran vote makes new military conflict an easier sell for an unpopular president in a time that we seek to withdraw from war.

I don't think that Obama really is religious. I think that he is a front for a middle eastern nation that plans to take us over if he ever got elected. Even Al Sharpton of all people doesn't trust him.

WHATEVER

This is clearly a "switcharoo", call it what you want it is what it is.

Any kind of distinction they're trying to make is full of you know what.

Is Hillary Clinton making a clear and compelling distinction between meeting the Iranian

President and Government to Government? http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=696

.

Obama where did you leave tke high road could it be you are a flip—————————flop—-er

Kyu Reisch from Radcliff, KY. If Clinton will be using her own brain, that would be a miracle. She is using Obama's brain now ny changing her position on talking to Iran, she used Edward's brain in her Health care proposal, used both Edwards and Obama's brain in saying she will consider social security caps on taxes. Cmon I am sure you are a smart kid who can read for yourself. Dont be so blinded and deaf in your support for Hillary that you forget to make sensible conclusions.

I used to be a die-hard Hilary supporter but now deep into the campaign her true colours are coming through.

I really do believe Obama is the one candidate who has been consistent and principled right from before even declaring his candidacy.

This country need Obama. You have my vote if you get the nomination!

Obama '08

There is a difference between attacking a candidate and drawing difference. Obama is not attacking but is drawing differences between him and the "me-too" Hillary. He was merely pointing out the facts instead of labelling people without justification, as Hillary used "naive" and "irresponsible". National polls are meanings at this point, merely a refection of name recognition. The fact that Obama is black and has a Muslim middle name (he is Christian) is irrelevant to the presidential run, just as Hillary is a woman. We are in the 21st century. For the sake of our future generations, we need act responsibly by reading, thinking, and making good judgment rather than reacting to fabrications and making decisions out of hatred and biases.

Thank you, Not a blind follower. I am not a blind follower too. Obama supports are acting like an ONE EYE, DEAF AND BLIND. Obama couldn't change because he will use other people's brain like Bush, it is dangerous for our Country. We need the President who has a strong, intelligent and own brilliant brain which combinded with experiences. Hillary combined all of four characteristics. Hillary for 44th President of United States of America.

I sometimes wonder when fools play with Senator Obama's name on blogs. I don't know if it is a sign of racism or something else because I don't see people fooling around with Sen. Joe Binden's name for the same reason. Biden's name BTW has both names of Bin Laden engraved BIn laDEN

you people keep saying his judgement,what judgement he doesnt vote,missed so many critical votes,he isnt president yet,never will be..hes got you all fooled,he has visions and Hillarys laid out several plans on all kinds of issues.

This race became nasty today. Check out Clinton's response to Obama's attacks, and then Obama's response to Clinton's response. If this goes on for months, Republicans will have reason to celebrate.

Obama…this Iran attack on Clinton is getting old…can't you find anything else to go on about?

Our next President
Is Hillary R. Clinton
I can be so,proud someone,who really cares and Mr. islam Obama is all about the past.your not winning see the truth,and ya need to speak it also.

I am God;
I am Joshua;
I am Lincoln;
I am JFK;
(I am hypocrite);
I would like to be Al Gore too(to receive some prize money is not bad right?)
I know everything;
You folks know nothing;

Randy S. Lawton, OK:

The head of Iran is the Supreme Leader, which right now is Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. It is not quite as bad as it used to be as Iranian Presidency has gained some influence and power, but calling the President of Iran the head of state is almost like saying Queen Elizabeth is the head of England.

I don't want to defend Hillary Clinton at all cost, but she is an exceptionally smart woman and I think she differentiates herself from Obama's mistake of MEETING with Ahmadinejad in person. Both she and her husband are extremely sharp and would not get caught in such a blatant slip.

You can negotiate with countries without meeting with them, like Bush has tried to do with North Korea and Iran regarding nuclear disarmament. Yes, he's NEGOTIATING with them, not MEETING with them, through Condoleeza Rice.

Think things through, Obama people.

Looks like Mrs.Clinton took some courses with Mr. John Kerry. we all need a change and that change is call Obama.

You know if you go back to the first debate Barack never said he would meet with Ahmedinejad(who is a joke with no real power)He simply said He would meet with the leaders of foreign nations without precondition. When pressed with the question again he re-iterated his point.

Hillary disagreed and has every right to do so. She appeared on TV rattling off names like Hugo Chaves and Ahmedinejad and called Barack naive.

Now Barack sees the opportunity to win back that point and took opportunity with what appeared to indicate hillary stating that her position was not that much different from his.

The game is before your eyes just open them. Did anyone notice that in the youtube debate Barack stuck everyone who voted for Iraq with their vote?

Did anyone notice that in the following debate russert gave all the candidates the opportunity to stick inexperienced to barack? Its a game to them they are friends when the camera turns off.

Most of the people that post on these hillary/barack stories are democrats. These two don't hate eachother. They both understand that they are jockying political position with eachother. So why should we hate either of them?

I will admit that I support Barack…Because I like the kinds of ethics reform bills he got through the illonois state senate, and the ethics reform bill he Co-authored in the United States senate. I favor a candidate who does not accept any lobbying money because the most important issue to me is ethics reform. I think that corporate politics Is the largest domestic problem that we face. I trust Barack more than other candidates to get this done. But that doesn't mean I hate hillary being less perfect than my favorite candidate on those points.

Hey guys what you have just seen is called debating. Everyone who posts on here has a favorite candidate. Dissing someone elses makes them want to vote for that person more. Its great that so many people enjoy expressing their oppinion but whoever said you catch more flies with honey was absolutely right.

Sorry CNN if this isn't the kind of post that generates a lot of backlash and generates more hits but the voice of logic does not scream.

Obama is RIGHT!!!!
Hillary says something one day and then either checks the polls or (someone says oh no Ms. Hill….not good)and then it's changed or droped. She then Moves on to another Big Promise or Give Away.
American People …make sure you really Vote "LIKE YOUR LIFE DEPENDS ON IT" !!! IT DOES!!!

Obama better be nice or Hillary won't have him as her VP.

OBAMA,you still can't win so give up

CNN, Tom Dedham is copying my words, tell him not to do that. He has been mean to everybody all day and saying bad things. Make him stay home tommorow.

What Clinton said:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-DVmkAAZHA

Her actual quote: "So there's no doubt that we've got a difficult relationship with Iran, but here's what I would do as president. I would engage in negotiations with Iran with no conditions, because we don't really understand how Iran works….so that's what I would do, I would negotiate with them, no conditions but with some sticks that we can use as leverage etc…."

If that isn't flip flopping I don't know what is.

Don't be bamboozled by the same Clintonian tactics of trying to define what 'is' is.

Posted By Vik N, BH : October 12, 2007 3:36 pm

THANK YOU FOR POSTING THIS VIDEO….CLINTON-LOVERS PLEASE WATCH AND BE AMAZED, DISGUSTED, HAPPY, WHATEVER…PROOF POSITIVE SHE IS A FLIP-FLOPPER…

Confucius: One who throws dirt loses ground.

Hillary leads obama and edwards in all state polls, except in Illinois (home state of obama).

Her lead margin has been increasing nationally in the last few weeks: now 26 points over obama, and 37 points over edwards.

The more dirt obama and edwards throw, the farther they sink in polls….

Coach Haughton:

It's fine for Sen. Obama to point out differences with Sen. Clinton, but he can't twist her words to do so. The YouTube question was about unconditionally promising to meet with AHMADINEJAD in the first year in office, not about conducting unconditional negotiations with Iran, as Sen. Obama now seems to be claiming.

Sen. Clinton has never rejected unconditional negotiations with Iran: she simply said that she wouldn't promise to meet with Ahmadinejad before knowing what he wanted to talk about, which would be established … in negotiations.

For Sen. Obama to distort her words to improve his position is very much "politics as usual," not the "politics of hope."

Ron, TX:

How on EARTH could I take it to mean anything else? Do you suppose that President Clinton is actually going to sit down with, what, the entire country of Iran? CLEARLY, she wasn't saying that she was going to meet with Ahmadinejad, whom, she characterized just a sentence or two later as a mere "figurehead." (And small point: if you're taking "Iran" to mean "Ahmadinejad," (which in this context, it doesn't: see above), what's the objection to Sen. Clinton using "I" to mean "the United States"?)

Do yourself a favor, go to Sen. Clinton's website and read the transcript and you'll see that she's CLEARLY talking about country-to-country negotiations.

Thank you Senator Obama!

The politics of hope include having a candidate who has the courage to stand up to the manipulative triangulation of the Clinton campaign and do what's best for the American people. The politics of hope shows us that honesty and integrity will prevail.

Obama 2008

Pointing out factual differences does not mean he is running a negative campaign.

It is truly embarrassing that I am living in this America where some people make reference to Barack's middle name "Hussein" in a discriminatory way.

It appears here that Hillary supporters are very worried, because Barack began pointing out (this is not attacking as he respects Hillary) Hillary's inconsistencies, lack of judgment, and secrecy.

Yes, this movement is in a new phase to help America open its eyes to see the real Hillary Clinton.

I think what Obama is trying to say is that Hilary constantly changes her words to get as much votes as she can. Its precisely why she has become a slave to AIPAC and all other lobbying firms paying her votes and money. Her husband was corrupt and she is too.

What is this talk I hear about Hillary will never win because she has no experience. George Bush won and he certainly had no experience. Take a good look around we are all in a mess and George keeps saying America's doing great. I think he's insulting the intelligence of Republicans and Democrats.

Mr. Obama,

I am saddened that you have decided to go negative with your campaign. After watching John Edwards throw in the towel and step into the darkness with his attacks, I didn’t think anyone, especially you would fall into the same trap. It is clear that you oppose everything Mrs. Clinton says and does, and that is fine, except that you have stopped telling us what positive actions you would take instead. Negativity hangs in the air like a foul odor until it is blown away by a positive action. Your new negative campaign strategy is causing irreparable harm to your credibility. It will not work.

So here we are…Mrs. Clinton has a positive outlook and a bright vision for America. While you are wallowing in negativity and don’t seem to be able pull yourself out. Will you continue to follow Mr. Edwards down that dark path or do you have something better to offer the American people? Step back into the light my friend, step into the light!

Posted By Buggie, San Diego, CA : October 12, 2007 4:38

This is why Obama is the only Hope

I think that there were a ton of democrats in america that opposed the war before it started…WE KNEW THAT GEORGE BUSH WAS CROOKED BEFORE HE TOOK OFFICE.

HE SAID HE WOULD GO AFTER SADDAM BECAUSE HE KILLED HIS DAD.

DID WE FORGET THE EXXON CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTIONS AND HIM WORKING FOR SEVERAL ENERGY OUTFITS?

IRAQ HAS THE SECOND LARGEST PROVEN OIL RESERVE IN THE WORLD!

Everyone you talked to on the street would argue about whether al-queda and saddam were connected. As democrats we knew it was just a way for the president to chase his oil and avenge daddy. Tell me there's a majority of democrats out there who EVER believed there were WMD's in Iraq. The answer is NO!

All of you out there no matter what candidate you support knew that Iraq had NOTHING to do with al-queda. That after we removed saddam al-queda came to iraq. That this "WAR ON TERROR" george bush's ingenius little ploy to push his political aganda. Hillary is quoted as saying such!

You can't tell me that every democrat you talked to in 2002 wasn't screaming that for the nation to wake up and hear.

At that point the tricks were working and the neocons had the independants and moderates fooled. Don't you remember?

In light of… ALL… that… you guys justify hillary's Iraq Vote? We didn't need to read(or not read) some report to know that we were putting the power of the american military into the hands of a man with bad intentions.

Somebody Please! you are so wrapped up in the clinton star power that you forget how we were desperately protesting an invasion of Iraq in school, at home, at work, out on the street.

I won't attack clinton on this post because I don't want this to be called hatred. Rather it is disbelief. I just want somebody out there to make some sense of this.

A Clinton supporter..Anybody. Did you forget how we felt when the president invaded Iraq. Before he invaded Iraq?
Who needed a report? We knew It was baloney anyway!

So why do you feel okay with her voting yes on Iraq?

To me it was perhaps to her political advantage to do so at the time?

…because I could not imagine hillary clinton just not understanding the magnitude of authorizing George Bush to invade Iraq.

Wow Obama I'm beginning to wonder where you stand except that you make it abundantely clear that it is opposite of Senator Clinton. How do you expect to work with foreign leaders and diplomats when you have made it quite clear that you can't even work with Senator Clinton and she is even in the Democratic party. Why would we want someone who continues to make it clear that delaing with those off opposing views is not in his realm of possibility. Makes me wonder….
Posted By Heather, Nashville, TN : October 12, 2007 3:09 pm

————————-
That's not correct at all, but what does it say about Hillary, when she doesn't get along with anyone. Half of the country despises her and there are many democrats who will rather vote for a 3rd party than vote for her.

Obama on the other hand has appeal from both sides, and even though Hillary constantly brings up experience, Obama has the greater experience of getting things done.

What has Hillary done in Congress vs Obama?

If you want to know about their ability of uniting both sides look at their history.

A small correction Senator Obama; Clinton knows exactly where she stands. She stands for one thing and one thing only and thats on becoming president. Every move she makes is calculated to that end, especially her vote in 2002. People don't matter, issues don't matter and pricipal doesn't matter.

I sure hope Dem's start paying attention soon.

Obama 08

Is that all some of you care about, where she stands in the polls? In addition if you feel that your candidate can do no wrong, and you like everything about him or her, then you have not look closed enough. I am shocked there is even a discussion about this. Her husband redefined the definition of the word is, and now we're discussing word condition?

Hasn't anyone noticed that Hillary never talks against the other dem. candidates–she states her position on things, so we can know what her feelings are on the issues. We know very little of what Obama and Edwards think of the issues, because most of what they do is attack Hillary. This is helping Hillary, as anyone with a thinking mind would like to know what each candidate has in mind to do if they become president.
I say Hillary's intelligence and capabilities are so much ahead of the other 2 front runners that it is almost a joke listening to them.
Hillary will be our next president.
GO, HILLARY!!!

She stands 25 points above you in the polls…

Van

Ladies and Gentleman
Sen. Obama has officially enter the SPIN zone… I heard her speech, there was no flop, he is just mad she called him naive, he is 20+ points behind and someone at his campaign told him to swing for the fences… politics of hope indeed

A message for John Edwards and Barack Obama:

Hillary is tramping around America in her "Middle Class" bus, pounding out issues that resonate with real people who have real problems.

I'm getting the feeling that she's leaving you both behind in the dust….

What's the story/idea/truth regarding Ms Michelle HUSSAIN Obama? If that is really her middle name, it is a great piece of information. And I thank the writer.
If it is not, then it is a highly reprehensible, and inexcusable act of character assassination. And I apologise on behalf of the writer.

JOEL BORWSKI

You are so right and a smart man. You took the words right out of my mouth that the only reason people are hoping on Hillary is for a BEDROOM POLITICS with BILL to make decisions for America.

I will start calling Hillary supporters Bedroom Politicians.

How low can we get? I can see the world calling us BEDROOM Americans like we don't have more qualified people.

Hillary will never win it, I live in a free country not in a free bedroom.
She has no experience, what is she hiding in her library during her days in the White House? Let her reveal the memo to support her experience claims because it is the right thing to do.

When a politician starts hiding something it means there is a skeleton in the closet.

May God help us to make the right choice for America by voting OBAMA 08!

Listen people! All this talk about Clinton being better presidential material than Obama is just based on the fact that these people cannot bear the thought of Obama being president. It is a racial thing! That is petty for a great nation like ours.

What?! Wolfson said: "she was referring to meetings between the United States government and Iran, not personal meetings with the President."

NO SHE WASN'T! She said -I-! "I would engage in negotiations with Iran, with no conditions"-Word for word quote. How on EARTH could ANYONE take that to mean she meant "the government"? Those filthy weasels…

I guess it depends on what your definition of "I" is…

Yesterday CNN reported that Ms Obama was on her way to give a major policy speech in some reputable forum that I cannot recall. There has been no follow-up.
CNN, please next time you make an annauncement of that sort, have the coutesy to give us a follow-up. It's just fair.

hey OBAMA! just shut up! we are getting sick of your daily crying becuase your losing…

your not even in CLINTONS league!

I am not American. I cannot vote.

That may be so. But "I" know where she stands on all issues–and I like everything I see.
Also, Mr Obama, lately you have been stating your own positions and attacking Ms' Rodham Clinton at the rate of 1 to 5.
Are we feeling a bit free-falling, perhaps, Mr Obama?

Most campaign speeches these candidates are making are mud-slinging and unimportant things. Let's compare what conserv. candidates have actually done that indicate how good they'd be managing our country's finances. Example, Mayor Guiliani cut taxes several times and reduced crime to a great degree in NYC. That's great experience. Gov. Romney took a billion dollar bankrupt entity (the Olympics in SLC) and make it profitable. Amazing and almost unbelievable.

Now what have Obama and Clinton done except re-arrange tax money and take more of it from you?

Hussein Obama is just contributing to the dirty tactics of the Republican Party. This is just last gasps of a drowing man. There is no doubt in my mind that Hussein Obama is just the hope that the Republican Party had for him become the nominate so that they can tear him apart. Why doesn't anyone starts looking at Hussein's record.

Posted By Arturo Universal City,Tx : October 12, 2007 4:25 pm

I agree completely that we more people should look at Barack Obama's record. Most people who have…are voting for him. And the name Hussein which may influence the votes of the ignorant actually means nice in arabic.

That name was around long before saddam and doesn't indicate anything about ones character. My seven year old know the old "whats in a name" saying.

Not saying it's all of you. But just one more two digit IQ prisoner of Hillaryland.

Hassan and Hussain (both of which are derived from the Arabic word hasuna, which means “to be good”)

I really don’t know where some people come from – under rocks? The statements regarding Hillary getting where she is only because of Bill, that she hasn’t done anything in the Senate, that she won’t be able to work with Republicans…. Where does this come from? I’m not saying she’s the greatest Democrat to ever run for office but, these allegations are baseless.

If she was guilty of all these things, why did she win in NY from even heavily Republican districts? Have you listened to her make a speech? Does she sound like she doesn’t have any ideas? Does she seem unable to put 2 and 2 together? I think not. She has impressed me very much with her broad knowledge of the issues.

Stop listening to the sound bites that misrepresent.

What is with the emphasis of Obama's middle name…my middle name is Ann, does that make me a WASP? My boyfriend's middle name is Salvatore, does that make him conected to the mob?

Randy:

FYI, as Sen. Clinton pointed out in the very Q&A that people are twisting to try and make her look inconsistent, Ahmadinejad is a figurehead. The Supreme Cultural Revolution Council actually is the highest decision-making body in Iran and they tell Ahmadinejad what to do. According to Juan Cole of "Informed Comment," probably the best blog on the Middle East, Ahmadinejad is about as powerful as the Vice-President of the United States.

Furthermore, there's a HUGE difference between unconditional negotiations between the Iranian and United States State Departments and an unconditional promise to hold a face-to-face principals' meeting between President Clinton and Ahmadinejad in the first year of a Clinton presidency. Face-to-face principal meetings are held AFTER major issues have been agreed in lower-level meetings, not BEFORE.

No doubt Sen. Obama has learned this by now. But clearly he is hoping that you haven't. It's good that you're not disappointing him.

HAN XIAG:

You're the one who doesn't get it. Unconditional talks doesn't mean that Ahmadinejad (but actually the Supreme Cultural Revolution Council) gets to dictate to an American president whom its representatives will and won't talk to. It means that the American president won't demand that Iran dismantle its nuclear power program or stop funding Hezbollah, or anything of this nature before agreeing to talks. It also likely means that the two countries' state departments will cooperate in setting the agenda.

Obama was present for the Iran vote the day it was to take place. However, the vote was postponed. Obama was only told about the reschedule an hour before the vote took place…and he was in NH at the time…sorry, he didn't vote, but there was no way he was going to make it back on such short notice.

How could anyone really take Hillary seriously? I'm a die hard republican and wonder where she earned her so-called experience? Hosting parties for Communist lobbyists over 35 times while her soon-to be-impeached, lying, cheating husband granted the last bastion of communism (China) most favored nation status for the 1st time in US history? She has no credibility whatsoever, and yet I wonder whay anyone sees in her. Let her work for WalMart!

Why on earth would you support Hillary? I don't get it….seriously. What does she offer? Obama has better judgement and understanding of the issues.

The difference is; Hillary asks Bill what she should say/do/act, then responds to questions and criticisms. Or if people like Obama's or Edwards idea, she will take it and make it her own. Obama looks at the issue, goes through a thought process, and answers.

So Hillary supporters, tell me why you would choose her over Obama?

Obama is a Republican-lite. Who coined the flip-flop phrase? Next he will be calling Hillary a major leauge (bleep). Obama needs to just stop selling his ying-yang and get on the winning team and support Hillary. She is qualified, experienced and she is READY TO LEAD.

Mr. Obama,

I am saddened that you have decided to go negative with your campaign. After watching John Edwards throw in the towel and step into the darkness with his attacks, I didn’t think anyone, especially you would fall into the same trap. It is clear that you oppose everything Mrs. Clinton says and does, and that is fine, except that you have stopped telling us what positive actions you would take instead. Negativity hangs in the air like a foul odor until it is blown away by a positive action. Your new negative campaign strategy is causing irreparable harm to your credibility. It will not work.

So here we are…Mrs. Clinton has a positive outlook and a bright vision for America. While you are wallowing in negativity and don’t seem to be able pull yourself out. Will you continue to follow Mr. Edwards down that dark path or do you have something better to offer the American people? Step back into the light my friend, step into the light!

OBAMA OBAMA, WHERE IS YOUR POLITICS OF HOPE AGAIN? I THOUGHT SO, YOU COULD ONLY RUN FOR SO LONG ON THAT FAKE 'HOPE' MACHINE. BUT TOO LITTLE TOO LATE. YOU WILL BECOME LIKE ANOTHER JOHN EDWARDS, JUST DESPERATE. HILLARY WILL BE YOUR NEXT COMMANDER IN CHIEF.

Posted By MAURICE, WASHINGTON, DC : October 12, 2007 2:43 pm

A president who says he will meet with foreign leaders without pre-conditions…Like JFK did…Gives people A lot of hope.

Like it's possible to run for president and not point out disagreements with your opponent.

It's good to take a strong stance against a nation like Iran…But remember who the current President of the Unites States is.

We should not make new military action easier to sell for George Bush.

Lets wait till we have somebody in there we can trust.

Hill-arious! Did Hillary just flip-flopped with negotiating with Iran after calling Obama inexperienced?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T-DVmkAAZHA

MSM, please! do your job

Finally Obama is taking the gloves off. There's so much to attack Hillary on its not even funny. Iran vote, Iraq vote, her PR guy works with Blackwater, Sandy Berger her advisor stole classified documents, she is as pro lobby and pro corporation as it gets, she takes more money than any other democrat in the senate and all but one republican from the HMOs and big pharma companies. She's bought and sold by the establishment and its time that Obama started pointing out the facts.

First things first, the question in the YouTube debate was not whether the candidates would agree to unconditional negotiations with Iran, but whether they would promise to meet with Ahmadinejad (and other controversial world leaders) in their first year in office without preconditions. Sen. Obama said "yes," and Sen. Clinton said "no."

On the other hand, Sen. Clinton has NEVER refused to negotiate with IRAN; in fact, she has averred her intention of doing so. In stating that she would negotiate unconditionally with Iran, she in no way implied that she WOULD meet with Ahmadinejad; in fact, if you check the Q&A behind the story, she called him a "figurehead."

So, Sen. Clinton knows exactly where she stands both on negotiating with Iran and (not) meeting with Ahmadinejad. But perhaps, Sen. Obama is unclear about what HE agreed to in the YouTube debate.

As for Kyl-Lieberman: in February of this year, Sen. Clinton warned President Bush that he didn't have the authority to invade Iran. Kyl-Lieberman does NOT confer such authority, much less any sort of "blank check" in dealing with Iran. But if Sen. Obama sincerely thought that it did, then the Kyl-Lieberman vote must have been the most important vote of the year to him. He must have moved heaven and earth, not to mention stayed in Washington to warn his fellow senators of their up-coming folly and BEG them with all his eloquence to change their minds. But no, what he actually did was go to New Hampshire for another day of campaigning. Can't have too many of those. It's obvious that he ducked the vote to avoid taking a political risk and now has the temerity to distort what Kyl-Lieberman says to score political points.

All he had going for him was this "politics of hope," stuff and the promise to "bring the country together." And yet, he's prepared to distort Sen. Clinton's statements and votes to bring himself up in the polls. Sleazy.

Joel browski

You say get ready to borrow money just to put gas in your car for 4 years, don't you know that Bush is the one invested in oil. Bush is friends with the saudi's. Keeping this ridiculous war going on. He's the one keeping the gas prices high. You should be happy a dem will be in office. Gas prices will lower.

Hussein Obama is just contributing to the dirty tactics of the Republican Party. This is just last gasps of a drowing man. There is no doubt in my mind that Hussein Obama is just the hope that the Republican Party had for him become the nominate so that they can tear him apart. Why doesn't anyone starts looking at Hussein's record.

Where do people get off saying that Obama doesn't have a plan? He's had plans for Energy, Health Care, and Iraq all before HRC.

~Matt

PS: TALKING IN CAPS LOCK DOES NOT MAKE YOU RIGHT.

For the last time, the motorcyclist was at fault. Yes, his name is Hussein, but he told you that from the beginning. Talk issues, please.

YOU WROTE:

THERE IS NO WAY IN HELL HILLARY CAN SPIN THIS ONE. YOU CAN'T DICTATE TO IRAN HOW THEY WILL MEET WITH YOU, HILLARY JUST DOESN'T GET IT. WHAT IF THE IRANIAN PRESIDENT SAYS NO TO SENDING HIS ENVOYS AND WANTS TO MEET. Please someone tell me what she will do because i want to know the substance of her Judgement.

Posted By HAN XIAG : October 12, 2007 3:59 pm
—————————————

Take it easy Bro, Clinton is coming around little by little. Hillary will have no option than to belong to the Obama school of Strong Presidents of Strong Countries should not be afraid to meet and negotiate. Bullies are never scared of the skinny kids because they know they can't be harmed when the talks go wrong. When Ahmadinejad demands face to face meeting, Clinton will have the option to act like George Bush or Obama. What the hell am i talking about she will never be POTUS?

The very fact that everyone is attacking Hillary on whatever her statements come from her mouth indicate that these people don't want want to recognize her lead in the polls. By whatever means they want to erase her poll numbers. Its not that the statements made now are firm and cast forever. If Obama, Clinton, or Edward say something, these are not going to be a law if one of them become a president. (by the way statements made by republican hopefuls don't count). If that is true, then Bush had promised several things in his campaign. Except for the Tax cuts, he hasn't achieved anything. In short, there is no need to disect all that is been told to us on campaign trail.

Politics of Hope–hope that he will call her on all her flip flops. He must respond to all of her jabs. Has nothing to do with hope. He can respond, just doesn't have to be nasty about it. Did she cite a poll as the reason for him cathcing her flip flop? I can't believe she did.

Daniel, you like to refer to polls, here's my question:

Recently Hillary was reported at 50% to Obama's 20%. Minutes ago I overheard on MsNBC news that the difference between the two is now 19 points, 11 (ELEVEN) points less. Does this mean that

a/ polls are grossly exaggerated

b/ Obama is closing on Hillary

c/ Hillary is loosing her support?

Eleven points is a lot in just few days, don't you think?