It's sad to read Americans fighting over who should be the president of USA and leader of the free world. We hope you do NOT elect another of Bush type who through arrogance, looking down on others has created enemies for your country. If you cannot see that Obama is the only candidate respected by outsiders, then you have been missing out the comments that have been sent in from around the world since the campagning began. Please people of America, vote with your hearts and also for the sake of the whole world.

Obama's arrogance allows him to believe he has the nomination in the bag.

To Dap916, there is plenty of proof! Just no one wants to stand up! I wrote to several congressmen from the state I used to lice in, California, Southern California, city Irvine, BA and MA from University of Southern California in Irvine, White, Prostestant, CPA, 2 kids born 1978, so a very nice life with good income, nice car, and why rocj the boat. The truth is that although not true of everyone, most Americans are too busy with their taxes and loan payment to be bothered with big political issues, and no one wants to rock the boat. As well, no one has time! It is true people in the states are too far away physically, and too far removed mentally to be bothered mentally about anything that specifically effects them. Let us see someone who is willing to sacrafice everything like former secretary of treasurer Paul O'Neil, who received a personal pone call from Donald Rumsfield warning him not to write his book, 'The Price of Loyalty'. It is not that there is no proff, but that there is too much cover up, and anyone who votes for and supports Guiliani is votoing for a bigger monster than Bush! But anyone who votes for an supports a candidate so perfect as Obama, is inviting an ignorant disaster to foreign policy. Huckabee is good and very good for change, but too religious and not experienced enough in foreign policy. So that leaves the decision between Ron Paul and Hillary! Something about Obama sounds very good, but does't smell good! I think he is just talk, and does not elaborate in enough detail to support his talk to give a clear enough example of wht he means, leaving it open to interpretation, wait a minute, doesn't he jave a background in law?

When choosing a President, there must be a certain special quality about the candidate of choice that truly places them in a league all their own. I think Bill Clinton had it, but almost immediately after he was elected (and I did vote for him, twice) I got a sense of "we could have done better". Now, I don't vote for someone unless I am 100% sure they are the best candidate, regardless of what their chances of winning are. This is why I did not vote for Gore in 2000 and why I won't vote for Clinton in 2008. Yes, I vote my conscience and I will not apologize for it. If everyone did we'd REALLY have a great country. I will vote for Obama in the New Mexico caucus in February because he's my guy. If he gets nominated, I'll vote for him again. If someone else gets nominated, I may or may not vote for him or her, depending on who it is.

Vote for the person you want to get the job. You can't make any better decision than that. Voting for a person because you think they are most likely to win or because they are the lesser of two evils is pure hogwash. It plays right into the hands of the nitwits who run campaigns and the media that make BILLIONS from campaign advertising. It sullies the sanctity of the vote.

VOTE YOUR CONSCIENCE!!!!!

I wish people would wake up. Obama has done next to nothing for the people that elected him — the people of Illinois! And what he has done, it has been for guess who? the lower classes. He makes his pretty speeches about the middle class, but does nothing for them. And I can't help but notice that in IL, the lower classes generally mean the folks with the darker faces, the majority of which are in the big city area. I do not like this man. I think he will say anything to get elected. His record is short & sketchy, and he only got to his current elected post because his opponent was such a bigtime loser, thereby enabling Obama to walk into it. His inexperience and naievete shows on the stump, and he doesn't even make it home to vote on key issues, although Hillary and Chris Dodd have managed to discover the marvels of the airplane & make it back for important votes. I guess I should count that as a blessing, though, because I consider most of his positions as wrong.

"Credentials" ! He is one to be talking about " credentials" isn't he. He hasn't been in the Senate but 3 years!!! I am an Edwards supporter, and I always will be. John Edwards is the only candidate who has a plan to end poverity. John Edwards was born into a poor family, just like I was and many people in the South were. I say I am an Edwards supporter, meaning I am for John & Elizabeth Edwards. I think Elizabeth will be a great First Lady, she will be like First Lady Roosevelt, and John Edwards will be like President Franklin Roosevelt. FDR helped the people who were in poverity, and John Kennedy was also for the working man. We need the Edwards family in the White House, to help fix the damage that George Bush has done.

Sincerely,

-A. Miller

Jim Obama has only been defending himself from all the slurs levelled at him by the Clinton campaign. Funny how Clinton supporters seem to have forgotten those.

We need smart people in America such as you to see through the games. Obama has by and large run easily the most positive campaign. Don't forget all the smears by Clinton. She's very cunning indeed.

Even foreigners want us to vote for Obama:

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=XuTtflCcjg4

God bless you Jim,

Obama 08!

obama or not , the real issue is who is funding them ,they both corrupted,they both working for special interests,one been on the payroll for years,one is trying to get the attention raise his shaires,nothing less,the election system is simply broken,……… have you ever wonder where this money coming from? is you can track the money , you will found out who is the real winner each time from an election,…… dem or rep …. donT put much hope in either.

The more I know about Barack Obama, the more I like Hillary Clinton for President. Clinton has been focusing on Pakistan as the real danger for years; Obama, interviewed on CBS on 12/12/07, thought the real danger was Iran. But, he also told an interviewer for the Chicago Tribune that he would not take a missile attack on Iran "off the table." Obama has revealed himself to be quite the political huckster, in my view, a slick-talker, who has padded his resume, and yet, as head of a subcommittee on foreign policy, he has never held even ONE hearing of his own committee!

Barack Obama reminds me of the job applicant, who, during the interview for a job, says he doesn't want the entry level position, where he can learn the company; he wants to be president and CEO. Nothing else will do; in fact, his wife, Michelle, has said so. She said Barack's run for the White House is "now or never." I guess she isn't really interested in being First Lady and serving the country unless it is happens in '08. You have to wonder about her ambivalence as much as you have to wonder about Obama's arrogance.

With regard to the question posted here about why Bush and Co. haven't been investigated for impeachment, they have. They continue to be under investigation by one element of the democratic congress for just that purpose.

The reason there have been no serious impeachment procedings is because there is no PROOF of wrongdoing other than what various liberal political columnists put forward in the various media sources they serve.

Next question.

I live in Des Moines Iowa and have been living and breathing politics for the last six months. I have went to the events, listened to the speeches, go the the rallies and chat with the candidates. I honesty beleive the Obama can be a fresh new start for our country – new ideas, new vision. I really don't want to see another Clinton running the show. I will be cacusing for Obama on Jan 3rd, trust me on that.

changes whatever dimensions that they take are new and most feared by all, including those who proposed them. Changes are a necesity for countries like America that have lived up-to the hangover of the olden days – the experience. Yet the experience in most cases were built on patching the old with new pieces to give new look that appear deceptive and morever do not hold the capacity in anway. This timeout ,the World's great democracy, America should lead the world in ballot boxes for real changes that care for the planet Earth and deliver the hope it needs for all – not only Americans alone.

Oboma '08

Obama is a joke !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

throw mud, throw mud, throw mud, then cry when some one points out a mistake or weakness on his part. Yes I am taling about Senator Obama. I was supporting him, then I went to supporting him behind a Clinton ticket, but after this I do not even think that Senator Obama is right for Washington or the American people. There is more to this man then we know. He could be very dangerous for America. Sorry Senator Obama. you are off my short list. I am narrowing to Senator Clinton 2008

Some people are forgetting the reality that Hillary is duping the public into thinking 8 years of being a White House spouse is the same as 8 years of making tough decisions. Did anyone ever think to ask her, "Hillary, since you're campaign is riding so hard on the long years of 'experience' you had in the White House, can you tell me exactly what meetings you sat in on where you made tough foreign policy and domestic decisions?" She may have heard about her husband's affairs beforehand and afterwards, but don't tell me her husband brought her to work everyday. Exactly how does that correlate into 8 years of experience?

Here's a few other questions we all seem not to ask enough. Why is it that Obama, who has met with far less dignitaries and foreign leaders than Clinton, can make more sound judgments than she can about foreign/domestic policy? How is it that a senator, with only one year's experience, can catapult himself to the top of the presidential bid for nomination with a highly efficient campaign like Clinton's out there? It's because Obama is extremely intelligent, very sound in judgment (with the ability to admit when he's made mistakes), grounded with the American people's interests, and let's be honest, he's with it. Can Hillary say all that? And if she did, wouldn't she be lying?

During one of our "talk stations" today n Mpls/St. Paul, one of the hosts noted that Hillary was being attacked because she stayed with her husband after several of his "indiscretions."

The host said, "Hillary is in a 'no-win' situation. If she left her husband, as many people wished, is compared to "if she stayed' with her husband" because of her respect for their maritial vows.

It sems to me that if "she left, her husband,"who obviously didn't have any respect for his wife," she wouldn't be where she is today – running as president of the United States of America. .

Sadly, I think this is why Hillary stayed with her husband, despite the ridicule that ensured. Somehow, she has this hope that her role as 'first lady" will enable her to move to the second Clinton presidency.

PLEASE. . .don't let this happen. Let Senator Clinton go back to serving the people of New York, and let Obama win the nomination!!

One of the things I like about former President Clinton is the fact that he truly went into politics to make a "real" difference in people's lives. With him, ordinary Americans had a true representative. With his wife, Senator Hillary Clinton, everything she does is politically calculated. More than anything else, you get the feeling that she believes that the presidency is owed to her because she was a former "first lady." On one hand she claims that because she was in the White House as the first lady for eight years, she has the most and best experience to be the next president. However, she does not want to show the specific work and functions she performed in that capacity from which she gained the experience. It is about the judgment that one displays that matters…and on that note, she got it wrong (twice) while Obama got it right. Moreover, she is not anymore electable than Obama. I like to see any "red state" that Senator Hillary believes that she can win where Obama would have a poor showing. It is time democrates think twice and focus their energy and resources on Obama…very early.

Clinton and Edward keep talking of experience now as if it was not required of them when they handed president Bush an overwhelming O.K to enter the quagmire that is now Iraq. And like George Bush Clinton watched Rwanda generate into genocide while she was in a position to use that " experience" to exert pressure for change in that country. NO! They should be the last ones to talk about experience. In fact talking about visiting orphanages and refugee centers should not be counted as experience, by someone who was so close to power and should have prevented the existence of these refugee camps in the first place.

Another consideration for Clinton is this. America has a population of over 300,000,000 million people. Does she think that all these people are starved of experience so much that they must always look for presidency among a handful of families? This is not the American dream. American dream does not allow us to use dynastic advantage to access power and they will reject this with an overwhelming vote for Obama. As a world leader, Americans must promote democracy they adore. Dynasties in America will weaken her influence in negotiating change in countries that have been ruled by single families for a long time and therefore denied democracy. That is why America will vote for change.

Obama is at it again! Good Lord! I am truly very tired of this guy already. And, God forbid, he somehow gets elected president, it will be a very looooong four years!

No Obama!

I hope Obama can make it through and we do not have to deal with another term of Clinton/Bush. What next, Jeb Bush in 2012 and then Chelsea Clinton in 2020? Lets just set up a monarchy and save ourselves the trouble.

Its time for a real change… Obama, Ron Paul or someone else who has not rehashed the same ideas and is in the pockets of special interest. For me, Hillary's so called "experience" is a negative, not a positive.

Have any of the commentators not bothered to keep abreast with international politics? And, yep folks, do you not remember Jessie Ventura in MInnesota. He touted change and he is in heap of political history. In fact he created more politcal chaos in Minnesota. In many ways Ventura's poltical rhetoric for change is identical to Obama's naive and overstated self assessment to change existing political institutions. Yep, I guess he will be sitting down with the resurgent Taliban and Al Queda in Pakistan to have civil dicussions on how to make this world better and safer. The rhetoric of change is a paper tiger.

The candidate that has the most international experience is Bill Richardson. He was at the U.N. and has travelled the world negotiating for the release of hostages. Hillary is a poser–she had zero influence on world affairs during her adulterer husband's presidency. Obama's claim of living overseas as significant international experience would be laughable if it wasn't so pitiful. Edwards is too busy checking on the status of his offshore savings accounts from his years as a trial lawyer. Bill for President!

The candidate that has the most international experience is Bill Richardson. He was at the U.N. and has travelled the world negotiating for the release of hostages. Hillary is a poser–she had zero influence on world affairs during her adulterer husband's presidency. Obama's claim of living overseas as significant international experience would be laughable if it wasn't so pitiful. Edwards is too busy checking on the status of his offshore savings accounts from his years as a trial lawyer. Bill for President!

Every decades,every century produces some unique and genuis people.
Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosvelt and JFK are some of them.
The only man able to unite this country, to restore the lost dignity of this great nation is undoubtely Obama. He's the only one with the jugment and the common sense to put America on the rigth track.
That's what I have to say. As an African saying goes [ the real meaning of happiness is known unless we lost it]

Obama should be hammering the following point about HRC's so-called "wealth of experience":

When Jack Welch was the CEO of General Electric, he had an "executive assistant" who attended meetings with him and even assisted in providing analysis and decision-making support. This person was well above the pay-grade of an typical "secretary" or "administrative assistant."

If after a few years of being executive assistant, this individual were to have gone to to the Board of Directors of any other Fortune 500 company and said, "I was Jack Welch's executive assistant. Jack Welch was a great CEO. Therefore, I should be the CEO of your company," that person would be laughed out of the room.

America should be reacting to HRC in the same manner.

Barack Obama for President of the United States of America.

It's time for America to Rise and Shine again.

What a lame claim! Obama's experience is grounded in understanding how the world sees America, from living/traveling overseas, and having family living on foreign shores(?). Good Lord, I just realized I'm as experienced as he is! Seriously, I want someone with a bit more real-life, practical, hands-on foreign relations experience. And what was that cheap shot about: ". . .what world leader I went and talked to in the ambassador's house who I had tea with?" None of the candidates are claiming their foreign relations experience in those terms. How stupid does this guy think we are? And then he has the nerve to say that Clinton and Edwards "don't have the right credentials to bring about change". I suppose this greenhorn thinks he has better credentials to bring about change than any of the other candidates. What arrogance!!
GO, ANY DEMOCRAT BUT OBAMA!

Obama will suffer the same fate that Howards Dean did in 2004. The new caucus attendees will not show up and Edwards will end up first and clinton second with Obama a distant third. He jumped too early. He should have waited until the next round. too bad. Could have made a good president,,,,,,,in 2016!

HA HA HA HA ! Give it up for the master of smackdown:

"Those folks must really be on edge where they think we spend all of our time thinking about them. They need to think about the American people a little more instead of us."

Before I saw Obama's response, I was already laughing at Albright's statement. I grew up and worked in Africa for years. I've met with uncountable number of leaders from Africa, the Carribean, Europe and the former Soviet Unions states. I can give you directives to 340 refugee camps in my sleep and without a map, I drank unpurified water from a stream, I slept in a hut made of mud and thatch roof for years, moved from one camp to the other, got sick of Malaria and typhoid , I… I don't even know where to begin or end. Sometimes I want to call the experience a nightmare, but I thank God for letting me see what's like on the other side and for making an impact in those people's lives.

When it comes to foreign experience, senator Clinton isn't qualified to carry my bag. Obama understands these things better because he's lived it and has grandparents who are living it.

Like Barak Obama, our president also campaigned as THE person who would bring CHANGE to Washington, with his mantra about being a UNITER AND NOT A DIVIDER. You see where that one went. Obama's talk about the CHANGES he will make is just another example of his naivete.

In everything, it is always bether to have a new face to bring change or to continue with the good work of our ancesters. Otherwise, life would have no sense; That' s why Iam for a new face to the White House.

Well Ms. Albright, with all Hillary's experience at roaming the world, and not just in places where they drink tea, how did she get the Iraq invasion so WRONG? Then add to that horrible error in judgement, she then gave Bush the power to invade Iran by announcing that his army was a terrorist organization.

How many do-overs does Hillary get. Unfortunately, her decisions can mean life or death to many. Do you really want this person as president? I certainly don't.

"My experience is grounded in understanding how the world sees America, from living overseas and traveling overseas, and having family beyond our shores," Obama said. "It's that experience, that understanding, and not just of what world leader I went and talked to in the ambassador's house who I had tea with."

Well, at least Hillary has met and had tea with world leaders and ambassadors — AS AN ADULT (as insulting as his comment is).

What has he done? He heads the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on Europe. Yet he hasn't bothered to travel to a Western European country other than a brief stopover to the UK on the way from Russia.

But hey! He lived in Indonesia when he was kid. So there!

What a joke.

Clinton and Edward's vote for the Iraq invasion WITHOUT bothering to read the 92 page NIE says everything you need to know about their judgement.

So visiting orphanages and refugee camps make Clinton more experienced. Well, since she aided in sending thousands upon thousands of refugees to camps and have aided in creating orphans all through Iraq she should be visiting them. Clinton cared nothing about slaughtering these poor people – she cared how invading Iraq would further her political ambitions. Clinton's judgement is flawed – she cares nothing for anyone but herself and the power she can gain.

Madelyn Albright should go hide in shame for supporting such a wantonly ambitious, win-at-all costs woman.

the packing doesnt have to do with the outcome. OBAMA will be another HOWARD DEAN.

john edwards '08

if the is so much change that needs to be done in washington certainly will say bush has not done anything and besides all the things that the govement has not done was inherited from the clintonadminstation in wich senator clinton was part of ,so i dont know what she want to change if she failed to do it for two terms ,my gosh do we want to have danasyts in our nation bush to bush – clinton to clinton ,soon will have her daughter saying she was in state house for all her life so she should be president or soon bush wife will also be running for a sanate seat have we became so low that we dont have new people who know what it means to sleap without eating who know what it means to be a father without money to sent your child to college ,america wake up ,why do we call our selves as the best nation on eath when we cant think,pliz think lets have a president who wants to be for us not a president who wants us to make him president
obam 08

PLEASE no more Clinton's or Bush. This country needs change, this country needs HOPE. We are not a monarchy. It starts in Iowa – Caucus PLEASE. We are working in California, too.

At this point in the game, it would be nice to see clean campaigns outlining all of the candidates platforms for change. Instead we seem to only hear about the "he said, she said" fluff. So what if we have two candidates who went to law school, I venture to believe neither of them knew they would be running for president against each other in '08. At the same time while most folks don't trust lawyers, we have endured eight years of a presidency wherein the entire cabinet does not seem to know the law at all. At least there are two candidates running, who if elected, cannot claim ignorance for sidestepping the Constitution.

Obama has assisted people and help citizens in the USA as well, working as a community organizer. Meeting with world leaders isn't all what it is about. Knowing how and when to say the right thing and having the right attitute. Just because someone has not met with world leaders, doesn't mean he would make a bad president. The understanding of people psychology and deep motivations and how to find common ground to agree on and good jugment as well as ampathy. that is what it is about

In the meantime, Secretary Albright, were you ALSO aware of the fact that Hillary Clinton DID NOT have SECURITY CLEARANCE? Legality, ummmmm, legality. Perhaps the American people need this information as well.

Having tea, not having tea. Walking through villages and camps and clinics and orphanages mean exactly what?

What foreign policy decisions have Sen. Clinton made? That's experience. If Sen. Clinton hasn't made any foreign policy decisions, she doesn't have foreign policy experience beyond her senate committee duties.

Where's the proof of your alleged foreign policy experience Sen. Clinton? If you would open your White House records to inspection you could put the "experience" issue to rest. What are you hiding?

P.S. – You have a nerve getting upset given your propensity to dismiss experience such as living in a foreign country as a child and having family beyond US shores. But then you are the kindergarten cop, aren't you?

Why didn't Hillary apply for a security clearance so she could be privy to the information she would have needed to advise her husband on foreign affairs? I recall that Hillary was so unpopular as first lady, especially after her health care fiasco, that we were reassured regularly that she would not have undue access or influence on policy matters.

IT'S OBAMA TIME ! No other candidate has even a pinch of his integrity. That's the kind of President I will vote for!!!!!!!!!! GO OBAMA GO

Per Mrs Albright, the same leaders they visited with Hillary Clinton are still in power, which is why she supports Hillary ,so that Bill Clinton should have a third term in the white house. Times pass and events change as years go by; so Mrs Albright should understand that this is a new dispensation and the same old theories Mr Clinton used in resolving world issues do not necessarily apply here. America needs new ideas to keep pace with the new global dispensations. Mrs Albright has it wrong this time round, because the so called experience Hillary purports to have is irrelevant to the case in point.

I would like to point out to Obama that Senator Clinton also worked for little money for years as she helped the poor and single moms who needed assistance. I always thought if people read Hillary's "Living History" they would be more insightful to her sacrifices. Hillary is a strong woman and the most admired woman in the world. I think that speaks volumes.
Obama is beginning to sound like a desparate man who will say anything to win. He pretends to be ready, but he is not even a real Senator and has zero experience. If he won, that would equal the disaster we have endured for the past seven years.
Obama's mantra, he didn't vote for the war in Iraq is a joke since he was not a US Senator and could not vote. I think there is yet another weakness. I think eight years from now, maybe. Being Mr. nice guy and attacking all his opponents is hypocritical. Another weakness. Down the line he is weak. Now we have his wife saying if he doesn't win in 08 he won't run again. PICTURE THAT. Sounds like child physcology 101. Obama is 101.
Hillary Clinton, experienced and ready. We desparately need her.

America is a country for all and not a country for two sets of Families 'The Clinton' and 'The Bush' We should give others the try and I am convinced they will do better. Americans lets stand up on our feets and vote for real change. Change in this context means moving away from the Bush and Clinton and voting for some one else.

Its is time for Americans to stand up and say no to the old kind of politics and focus on a completely new kind of politics. Americans need to stand up for real change. Relying on the names that had been very pronounced on the political scene might put this great nation at risk. We Americans should not rely on too many years of experience because it is this same experience that has killed our beloved soldiers at war today. We should put aside all differences and vote for change and most importantly change we can believe in. Many politicians have deceived us to gain cheap votes and I guess its time to make no mistake. Obama to me seem to be the best candidate given the situation in which we are now. Clinton could have been a better candidate 10 years backward but not in present day America.

Thanks and dont be penny wise and pound foolish

PLEASE, let's not send another Clinton or Bush to the White House. They have had their day. We don't need more of the same. Let's send a new face.

I like the way he keeps packing them in. No matter what the weather.
You just don't see that with any other candidate. There is something special going on here. We are all about to get our chance to become a part of history.
Years from now our kids will wonder if we were truely a part of it or a deturent.
What will you say?

Obama08

I'd really like to know what profound insights into foreign relations can come about from the perceptions of a 6 to 10 year old child. Oh, yeah, and he's met his 'overseas relations' in Kenya once….big flipping deal.

This clown wouldn't know reality if it squatted on him.

Hello, I would like to know why impeachment procedures have not been investigated against Bush. It is very clear the current administration is entirely corrupt with many connections to the oil industry. There are too many things that point to this. There should be an investigation about many things starting with 911: In many videos it is clear the second plane is a military plane with something attached to the bottom, and the fact that both towers collapsed in the same manner, as it looks like a professional construction job. I am not an expert, but it is not conceivable to me they would both collapse in such a perfect manner. Then there is the Downing Street Memo, and then the failure to find weapons of mass destruction, and then the 2004 election scams, it is clear that he the election was stolen…. All of the no bid contracts going to Iraq, and the internet of so much information about the shabby work provided in the contracts for millions o dollars, qir condition repairmen being sent to work on hum V's, and questions about the disappearance of weapons that ended up in the hands of the enemy. It just goes on and on, and I can't beleive all of this is goinf on and has continued to go on for so many years. Even if there is only 1 year left for Bush, I would like to see him impeached and all of these events investigated. Outside of the US, the reputation and opinion of the USA is very bad, and I have not ever met 1 person outside of the States who likes the current President. His foreign policy has caused a big detriment for the USA. We are a joke to the rest of the world now. So if Obama understands how the world sees America, does he really know that we are a joke, and let him elaborate specifically on what he understands. What the rest of the world sees is that Bush is a war criminal, and the current administration is in the oil business.

Obama is right again. He is 100% correct on Pakistan. He's been trying to convince people we were fighting the wrong war in Iraq for many years. He was 100% correct on Iraq. He has the most comprehensive and clear foreign policy vision of ANY person running. If we really want to CHANGE the world, if we REALLY want to make America BETTER again, we NEED Barack's judgment. Think of it this way: some people have been artists for 30 years. That doesn't take away from the raw talent and skill of an artist, who paints many better, who is vastly superior to the "old pro"… Right now, we can't afford the old pro based on experience. We need someone with talent, with a real vision, with real judgment. We need someone who can not only repaint America, we need someone who can work a -masterpiece-.