For Democrats, Obama is the Candidate of Confidence, Clinton the Candidate of Fear

As Democrats debate on this campaign and on the future of our party, the tone among Clinton supporters has come to differ sharply from that of Obama supporters. While Obama supporters exude confidence, excitement, and the will to win, Clinton supporters seem increasingly defensive; increasingly gripped by the fear that, in debating as we are now, we are fragmenting the party and playing into the hands of the Republicans. Clinton supporters cast Obama as a dangerous interloper who threatens to rip the Democratic Party apart, as an irresponsible dreamer, as a pied piper who is leading the children away to certain disaster. His supporters are cast as misguided idealists, as starry-eyed adolescents who need to give up their "false hopes" of something better than politics as usual and face dull, mediocre "reality." Surely our unruly behavior is already putting the Democratic campaign at serious risk. Surely even now the Republicans must be watching and grinning as we divide so that they can conquer. "Shhhh…," we are told by Clintonistas, "Be careful what you say…. The Republicans are licking their lips right now."

I say if they're licking their lips now they'll be eating crow come November. For any Republican who might be tempted to put tongue to lip, think again: I and other Obama supporters will vote for Hillary Clinton in November if she wins the Democratic nomination, as I should expect Clinton supporters will do in kind if Obama is the nominee, because we intend to win. The United States and the world can't stand another four-to-eight years of Republican insanity. Hillary Clinton is not my first choice among Democrats, but she beats any Republican by far. In the meantime, let the debate continue: Debate is, after all, the essence of that clever little Greek idea for which our party is named. We have the advantage; we can afford a healthy debate. With a field of candidates such as ours compared to the assortment of flawed specimens running for the Republican nomination, and with our enthusiasm compared to the mood of bitterness and gloom among Republicans, I'd say it is we Democrats who should be licking our lips.

I talked to Reagan few minutes ago, he really regrets stepping on the unions and middle class people now.

Go Edwards!!! How can NObama compare himself to Regan and then want Union's to back him?

Obama is right!

Edwards is wrong, and demonstrates his fundamental flaw — one negative track mind!

Reagan was a mixed bag, as EVERY human is!

Reagan, like any other human, was AN INDIVIDUAL OF MANY QUALITIES — some good, some bad.

It's not a crime to admire in people those qualities that are good!
And this admiration of their good does not mean that you must simultaneously admire the bad in the individual.

Hi folks!

Before we see the "Tell me what Obama's plans are!" posts, just to save bandwidth, here's the address for the full PDF of Mr. Barack Obamas policies handbook:

www . barackobama . com/pdf/ObamaBlueprintForChange.pdf

Or, check out his "Audacity of Hope" book from Amazon or a library. It's all there in ink. If you still have questions, give a precinct captain a call, and they'll do their best to help answer any questions.

Hopefully people see this message, since these posts unfortunately tend to be thrown into a "rant session" void.

Just trying to save people time from typing the same questions

Labor unions were, at one time, very helpful in lifting up the worker and bringing fair conditions to the workplace. But like so many other 'organizations' the unions have grown major league corrupt, top heavy to the max, while taking extreme advantage of the worker they propose to protect. Just ask most union members how they faired in the retirement accounts and how their families faired when that worker died early. The unions serve now mostly to line the pockets of the leaders of the unions. As usual, the worker bears the brunt. Businesses are very competitive in trying to attract quality workers which are scarce. The important thing to remember is as God says - No work - No food. Anybody who wants to give a good day's work can earn a good day's salary in America. That is why so many folks are trying to get IN to America. Just don't see too many folks trying to LEAVE.

I agree with what Obama said. Edwards just seems like he is taking it as a I LOVE RONALD Reagan quote and not actually paying attention to what was said.
I'm a registered republican in south carolina. I'm not sure who I will vote for yet but yeah Reagan did make the country change paths.

Edwards is desperate. He is also the biggest hypocrite running for the Oval Office.

Being an independent that supports Obama, I gotta agree with Edwards, the R word should have been avoided. Many list the Bush -Clinton-Bush legacy of this country , but fail to add that the first Bush 41 was no more than a third term of Regean. It should have been avoided much as returning the Clintons now, it's just not good for the country.

If Obama was just pointing out that Reagan changed the political landscape, why did he even bring it up? What does Reagan changing the political landscape have to do with our nation today and the grave challenges we face? If Obama is trying to say HE can change the political landscape, then he should just explain exactly how he'll set about doing it and we'll figure out the rest. And, by the way, change for change's sake is not always good. Another thing, it was really, really stupid for him to liken himself in ANY way to Reagan. Too many of us Democrats remember how hard those Reagan years were and find nothing about the man attractive. I think this might have been just another example of Obama opening his mouth and shoving both feet in.

I love Obama. Time and time again we see him trying to unite instead of divide. Just because you are a democrat doesn't mean you have to hate all republicans.

I think it's a wonderful thing when you can point out something good in a field of bad.

Good for you Obama.

I'm an Obama supporter and Ronald Reagan wasn't one of my favorite presidents either, however, this is just another example of how party lines don't blind Barack Obama. If he sees an admirable quality in someone that's of another party, why can't he acknowledge that positive element? Oh, I forgot, because republicans are horrible people and not one republican president has ever offered anything positive to our nation…RIGHT…That's ridiculous and that just goes to show how divided our country is, so that a democrat can NEVER draw ANY comparisons to a republican or else he is completely out of line and out of touch with our party. It's us versus them, right?

Please, Senator Obama, gain the nomination and win the presidency so the American people can begin to heal and break down the barriers that seem to prevent us from making any progress.

I hope Edwards is smarter than that. Obama was not making policy comparisons. He was making a leadership comparison. Not to mention Regan was re-elected in a landslide.

OBAMA IS SHOWING HIS TRUE COLORS….SHAME ON YOUR OBAMA…SAYING A REPUBLICAN REAGAN WAS BETTER THAN OUR OWN DEMORCAT…WHO IS PLAYING DIRTY POLITICS NOW?
OBAMA AND REAGAN…NO
CLINTON 08 CLINTON 08 CLINTON 08 CLINTON 08

Ha. Way to go Obama. Any democrat who praises Reagan should be watched carefully. What is all the change about, if he wants to bring up people from the past?

Go Hillary.

It seems like this is similar to the controversy over Hillary's MLK/LBJ comments. While they may be true, it's still offensive to Democrats to point out anything positive about Reagan, just as it was offensive to point out anything negative about MLK.

Plus it was a quote from a 49 minute interview

Did Obama say he admired Reagan's anti-labor efforts? Did Obama say he admired Reagan's tax policies?

Nope.

Edwards' comments are so much fluff, designed to distract and misdirect.

I don't want another politician who refuses to see the opposite party except in black and white, do not touch terms. I don't want a president who engages in misdirection to score political points.

I want a leader who tells it like it is, is adult enough to admit mistakes, and who will reach out across the aisle to work with the other party, and heal the damage Republican divisive tactics have wrought on our fine nation.

That's why Obama has my vote.

Before the Hill Force 1 supporters' plane boards, please read Obama's quote.

He simply said that Reagan changed the trajectory of America.

He didn't praise Reagan for his policies. He didn't agree with his stance on unions. He simply let people know that the 1980 election changed the course of America… which it did.

Just because he is a Democrat, he can't recognize a Republican? And then we wonder why Senior Senators and folks from "both sides of the aisle" are endorsing him instead of Clinton and Edwards.

Hill Force 1 passengers,
There is no need to get emotional. It's just a statement involving the obvious.

what is wrong with praising reagan?

Obama stated that Reagan changed the direction of American politics, he didn't praise him…he stated that Reagan heard the American people…of course, they were conservative, rich and Republican, but no one can debate that he began the shift from Democratic to Republican, the so called Conservative Right, heard him loud and clear and Democrats tired of the Clinton Que heard him…heck even the Bushes ran on that concept and look what we ended up with. A trashed America, less rights, more danger, more hated, higher spending, lower wages and jobs leaving the country quicker then our Armed Forces (protect Iraq, who cares about defending America)

The Clintons will test the water on anything stated and see whats sticks. And John Edwards will speak on anything because if an Edwards falls in the woods will anyone hear it? He's the third wheel on a date…useless!!!

Thank you, John Edwards! I am looking for a progressive President, not one who spouts a lot of inflated middle-of- the-road rhetoric, least of all about how Reagan led America where it wanted to go. What a lot of baloney! Obama needed to study the past few decades in America and get his brain together before he ran for President. I simply do not understand how Obama's gauzy rhetoric has mezmerized a big chunk of America!

John Edwards and everyone else:

Breathe, relax, take your nervous pills …

The point of the quote he made about Reagan was that he was able to capture a moment and history and create a movement. Like Reagan or not - and I didn't - he did for better or worse, create a change in the political landscape. That's about all. Nothing more nothing less. Didn't say he agreed with his politics. Didn't say he admired him as a president. Didn't embrace his economic policies. Didn't smear and slime him (like some politicians we just happen to know too well in this current campaign) even though it's clear he doesn't agree with everything Reagan stood for.

I happen to find that kind of perspective rather refreshing, but unfortunately for some, it takes some critical thinking skills to see the point beyond the spin. I find it to be a nice change from the slash-and-burn, win-at-any-cost politics of personal destruction that the Clinton's have patented and paid for. They embody cynicism and corruption. This country deserves much better than that stale, old dog and pony show.

Ronald Reagan did for unions what Joe Hazelwood did for inland waterway navigation skills!!!

Is this an Obama race? it seems like no one has the guts to say anything but wait for Obama to speak so that you can respond and you dare complain the the media is not covering your campaign?! Tell us something original and you will be covered, the American electorate do not need your interpretation, they are smart enough to know what Obama said, so Hillary/Edwards be original or shut up.
Richie

What can I say? This guy is the best. The real test is for the rest of us. Are we ready to accept somebody who understands how the game is played and yet refuses to play it? Who offers us an example of what a "different type of politics" looks like? Who appeals to the highest, not the lowest common denomenator?
I think it was Nixon who said that people vote their fears, not their hopes. There is no reason that Barack can't win and be a real catalyst for change except that perhaps Nixon was right about us and Obama wrong. I'd sure like to think Barack is right.

It disturbs me that some of you are allowed to vote when you can make the jump from Obama saying "Reagan changed the politcal landscape" to "I love Reagan."

Although I entirely disagree with what Reagan did to "change" America there is not doubt that he certainly did change it when American needed a change. I felt that what Reagan did to change America caused irreperable damage and laid the foundation for the unspoken class war that exist in America today.

But the question was rather simple, what president brought change to America. It did not ask whether it was a positive or negative change. The only people that will make a deal of this are the Edwards camp which represents the radical left wing of the party. I will concede that I like Edwards message but he is not running for president of the Democractic party he is running for president of the United States.

This shows how Obama is now running a nation campaign for it looks more and more as if Clinton and Edwards are merely trying to delay the inevitable.

Does Edwards realize that the majority of Americans are sick of unions gouging this country?? Does he understand that the teachers union (who contributes heavily to the Democrats) fights education reform - and because they won't allow merit based pay…the only way to shine a light on the bad ones was No Child Left Behind??

Who is for unions? Detroit? thank UAW for emptying that city while gouging the companies into bankruptcy….I think America wants to end unions…

Let's see Regan legacy of change and uniting and hope, NAFTA, his experience former Gov of Cal! Obama talk of change and uniting and hope, none, his experience, running for higher office without serving terms fully in any position elected, always campaigning for higher office! Regan record of change proven he went into the Presidency at least having made changes when in office, Obama record of change, well his work for change was solely in changing his position of power!

1981 January: Ronald Reagan becomes the first U.S. President opposed to a constitutional amendment, which provides equal rights for women.

I didn't like Reagan and I am not voting for Obama. As a woman, I am voting for a woman who can help women finally pass the 28th Amendment first proposed in 1923.

Obama should be criticized for the Reagan comment … during the Reagan years the "gap" between the rich and the middle class and poor became greater than any other time in history … does he think we have forgotten this?

Ronald Reagan is loved by many in this country. So why John, would you go and alienate yourself from those people? This election is too much about "democrats vs. republicans" when honestly we should just try to find someone to unite us! Granted, I'm a republican, and would never vote for Edwards in the first place, but he makes too many strong, stubborn minded statements that simply alienate half of this country.

While I also disagree with Obama on several of his positions, I admire him for his ability, and DESIRE to bring this country together. Should certian repubs get the nomination, I might vote democrat for the first time ever.

For someone who thinks he is so smart, Edwards can't read or his hearing is messed up.

Obama was simply making the point that Reagan did indeed change the way our country thought, he didn't praise his policies or say he was the greatest guy in the world, just made a factual point.

Go brush your hair, there has to be an ambulance that needs chasing.

This is why I'm supporting Sen. Obama. He can see the big picture. John Edwards has been using the same, big fish, little fish speeches now for almost 7 years. He has been running for President since he and John Kerry lost and he is no further towards that goal now than he was then. There was absolutely nothing wrong with Mr. Obama's reference to Pres. Reagan. We need someone who can build a bridge in this country. Sen. Obama knows what it is going take to do that. This was brillant!

He compared his ability to change the direction of the country to Reagan, not his policy decisions. I think Regan at the time represented a massive shift in our country and Barack believes that he can bring on a similar, in scope only, shift in this country. Whether you agree with Reagan's policies or not doesn't matter because Obama does not stand for Reagan policies he just stands for change. A massive change is needed in this country and Obama is the only one in the Democratic party who represents that.

This is only a first step in Edwards' final attempt to grasp legitimacy. I expect to see more of the same in the coming months.

THOU SHALT NOT TAKE THE NAME RONALD REAGAN IN VAIN!

We would have been better off if Anderson won in 1980 anyway.

Anyone who does not vote for Obama is a RACIST pure and simple!!!!!!!!

Wake up people.

Obama was speaking of the 'sea change' that was the 1980 Reagan election.
and that the…
2008 election will be another 'sea change'.

Not in a way that Reagan might have appreciated ; )

What's part of this is hard to understand ?
Did you listen to the comment ?
Are we moving to fast for you ?

How about a reality check? what he said was 100% right. Regan was full of hope and yes he did change the way people viewed governement. Go head Obama speak your mind and unite your country. This comment may have gained you a lot of vote from republicans, and democrats are smart and they will see that you are trying to unite the country.

Obama is right!

I am not a Republican, but I do appreciate and admire Reagan's ability to coalesce the mood of the nation into strategic change. At this time in our nation's history I believe the public mood is ready for another dramatic change.

That said–I'm still unclear on who will be the best choice to lead that dramatic change in direction. None of them have real executive leadership resume's(except Richards and he's out of the race).

Frankly, Obama and Edwards tend to inspire me with their independent spirit and commitment to running their campaigns in a grassroots fashion–with no significant PAC money–I like that.

listen folks ,obama is the best thing that can happen to America now! PLS STOP misquoting him. Just join the wagon for change for a better future of our kids and the world

As an observer, I think Obama is fair, and that is where the Reagan comment came into the text. I have noticed on t.v., that he has amazing recall, if someone is commenting on that he had said, he just stops and recites per betem the speech or comment being referenced. I have also noticed that HRC will ask an opponet a question and the next day the oppondet's answer is used against them slightly out of content.. Listen to HRC re: what she is going to do for you/us, but listen more closely and it is really what we are going to do for her.,,,,,,, I am starting to believe that Obama is the more honest candidate, and Rommey when he says, if they have been in wash. and nothing has changed, why will moving into a new seat in wash. change things. HRC constantly tells us she has been in wash. 35 years—long enough, no,no, too long.

Clinton didn't change America, he just showed how the governement can be run with surplusses instead of debt and putting 23 million jobs into the economy. I guess we can call Bush a change agent, because he turned around and did the opposite.

I understand what Obama was saying, but even if you believe that, you don't praise Ronald Reagan if your a Democrat running for the nomination without expecting some backlash. Of, course people are going to take it the wrong way.

I would just like to say, how's it feel when the media takes something you said and twisted it to make you look bad. Ask Hillary, she's been dealing with it since the campaign started.

For the people who say, you don't have to hate all republicans. I don't hate Reagan as a man, I didn't know him. I hate his policies and everything he stood for. If you don't speak out against the policies that destroyed unions, bankrupted the middle class, did nothing for the poor, and sent this country into recession, then what kind of Democrat would I be. I hope, if Obama does get the nomination, he doesn't just give in to these kinds of policies so he can just say he is working with Republicans. He better stand up for Democratic principles.

Hillary 08!

Obama is the brightest inspiration in politics today. As a democrat, I must say, Regan had his good sides. I differed a great deal with most of his politics. But when it came to changing the country's economic course, after the mess the previous adminstrations left the country in, Regan was a master. Additionally, anyone who really studies or lived the Regan error can not honestly deny that Regan gave American's and our Nation confidence and credibility again.

Go OBAMA! I am with you all the way! Mr. President!

Everything Mr. Edwards says seems to somehow or another involve the words: "working people, unions, middle class, families" in some way or another. I think he just saw an opening and thought it might give him a last minute push among hard core dems that hate The Gipper and might swing their vote.
As supporter or Mr. Obama I did kind of wince at his comments though, not because I don't neccessarily agree with the point he was trying to make, but because I knew it would cause the same kind of hoopla as every other little barb-trade in this whole Democratic race.
I just hope the coverage stops here on this message board and doesn't become a "national sensation" story that would bring further blows to the Democratic party's campaign .

Mark C. Eades

Hear, hear Mark! I agreed with you completely…up until the part where you said you'll vote for Hillary in November if she's the nominee……I won't. I will change my party to Independant. I just couldn't associate with a party of non-thinkers.

Ronald Reagan ran up the deficit by tripling government spending and the military industrial complex

how that is "fiscally conservative" is beyond me

You replaced "Obama Mocks Clinton" from direct facts with this out of context complaint. hmmm…Dosen't bill seem a bit angry these days. Maybe somethings blocking his way back to the white house

stick a fork in Obama…he's done.

So funny….Obama backers can't find enough excuses to portrait their candidate holier than tho…the can't do wrong candidate, LOL. Any comment he makess has a positive purpose, any comment Hillary or Edwards made are bad! For them Obama is the reincarnation of the "ONE."

Obama followers=- desperate cult people..easy to buy with empty slogans!

Wow. I'm a supporter of Edwards….and his comments truly disappoint me.

Obama's consistent message is that he is a genuine uniter of people around problems…and cares less about their ideology or political affiliation.

The notion that Reagan changed the "trajectory of America" cannot be denied…regardless of how much you happened to agree with him. Obama was not praising Reagan…he simply said that he wants to change America (albeit in a different direction) as well.

I'm disappointed that Edwards would resort to such a strategy in order to misguide working people.

OBAMA WANTS TO BE LIKE REAGAN?? What a joke…

Iran Contra

AIDS Indifference

Voodoo Economics

I respected Mr. Reagan as a person, but he was an extremist behind and actors mask…and Barry Obama is certainly trying to mask his bizarre campaign behind "Hope"….

WE NEED A PRESIDENT WHO IS NOT DISILLUSIONED - HRC 08!

One needs only to let Obama be Obama! His mouth gets him into many, many positions that are indefensible. The more he talks his empty rhetoric, the more his inexperience as a politician are revealed. He is either STUPID, or he doesn't listen to his aides!

His comments demonstrate clearly how inexperienced, politically naive, and full of himself he is! Want to have your vote count for NOTHING? - Want to vote for empty promises? - Vote for Obama!

I think Edwards missed or simply ignored the underlying point of what Obama said. He didn't praise Reagan he simply pointed out that Reagan changed the direction of politics in America which he did. Prior to Reagan there was no real social conservative movement in the Republican party and say what you will but during his first election Reagan did manage to win the support of many dissatisfied Democrats because they wanted change.

President Reagan set in motion a series of events that led to the downfall of the Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. On that front, he will be remembered as a great President. When it came to domestic matters, in particular labor, as evidenced by his handling of the Air Traffic Controller strike, he will not be remembered by so many people as a great President. I think it ill advised for any Democrat to compare him or herself to this very popular Republican icon who every candidate in the oppopsition party holds in great esteem on every issue; both foreign and domestic.

This really seems like a non-issue.

However, change can be good and change can be bad.

In relation to Dem vs. Rep and Reagan …Iranian hostages came home during Reagan's time, not Carter's.

I think that was an important change.

If Obama keeps this up he will have no chance at being the Vice President!! Go Hillary!! Love Ya Bill!

Is Obama referring to the Iran-Contra Reagan? Or the Regan who began our economic slippery slide?

Obama has always been a traitor to the democratic party.
He ignores party loyalists by auctioning party values to so-called independants and republicans.
He seemed to have forgotton that this is democratic primary.
This is about selecting a candidate who represent party values.
He can appeal to the middle in a general election.
Before that he needs get the nomination.
He's so full of it, and thinks he's better than rest of the democrats.
He insults democrats saying they are dividers.
No one better divides party than Obama.
How can he unite the country by dividing his own on party?

This is the exact reason this country needs Obama. He makes a statement about changing the political landscape and its is used against him as complete praise of Reagan. There is a reason there were Reagan Democrats, Reagan changed the political landscape. I am so sick of Democrats acting like you can never have anything good to say about a Republican without somehow committing treason. Obama unfortunately may be a better candidate for a general election, but may lose in the primary because the Democratic base is seperatist and won't be able to see the big picture. I didnt agree with the Reagan policies, but I would be silly not to see what a paradigm shift his presidency created.

Obama made a nice comment about Reagan and its unfortunate that his campaign adversaries (Sen. Edwards) took it out of context. I'm not a politician or some one with a 200 IQ, but I totally understood what he meant. Whomever misunderstood his commentary should be sent back to elementary school. Politics in this country are so misleading and the media confuses our voters in such as manner that as a result mediocre politicians such as our beloved president keep getting elected. Sorry to say but its true…Its a waste of time.

Obama's sensationalist rhetoric is exciting for the young and politically naive, but there is little substance. I think it is too bad for Edwards he has received limited press coverage because he has been speaking well to the health care issues that concern many of us average working folks that have experienced problems getting and keeping insurance.

Senator Obama did not say he supported President Reagan's policies or its impact on union or middle class. He also did not say Reagan did a better job compared to Bill Clinton. However, the notion that just because Reagan is a republican, a democrat can not admire him is kind of narrow politics.

What Senator Obama said, if you are interested to know instead of spinning, is that the election on 1980 was a change election. People were looking for something different. People were looking for clarity from their leaders, a sense of dynamist, innovation and entreprenureship. He said Reagan was able to capture the feelings of people and won a landslide (won 49 states) because people were desperately looking for change. Now Reagan ran on a 100% red state policy positions and people have given him a mandate by a landslide supporting his 100% red state policies, and he was able to make some significant change in the way the country was going. 2008 is similar time where people are looking for a big change. And a candidate who can capture the aspiration of people this time also might get a mandate from people to bring bold changes in the direction of the country.

He did not say he agreed with Reagan's policies or he wanted be like him. Again he said 1980 was a change election and Reagan made significant changes as opposed to what Bill CLinton or Nixon did.

Don't try to parse people's word and use every single word to decieve voters.

Ronald Reagan was president when steel and manufacturing jobs left the country and the pay of a blue-collar worker was cut in half. It was also a time when neighbors became intolerant of their neighbors and the media played crisis-of-the-week to get us to hate and distrust each other. The name Ronald Reagan has nothing but negative connotations for me.

The truth keeps coming out about Obama. This is the second time this week that he has shown the country contradictory ideas and personal shortcomings straight from his own mouth!

He told journalists the other day that he needs help around him all the time because he's not well organized (this is not a presidential quality!).

Now he's praising a Republican president being sure to slip in an unflattering pass at Bill Clinton's presidency! Does this mean that he would have prefered a Republican in the 90's rather than Bill Clinton? Who's side is he on in this campaign? Repbulican or Democrat? Has he forgotten that he's a Democrat and he's supposed to be campaigning for that party's nomination?!

Furthermore, who wants to vote for someone who says in so many words "this whole thing is just too much for me to handle. If I don't get help I'm lost !

Once again we see NObama's inexperience. How could anyone who hopes to call himself a serious democratic candidate even think about Reagan? Among all the things mentioned in the article, he also gutted the education system in this country so badly to pay for his military build up (remember Star Wars?) that we are still reeling from the after effects.

I hadn't been paying much attention to Edwards, but I think I will from now on. We agree on Reagan, at any rate.

Obama is a Republican. Obama does not care about the American people as much as he cares about his ballooning ego.

Hillary Clinton is the most qualified candidate, the most experienced candidate and she's READY TO LEAD ON DAY ONE.

Glad to see that cooler heads have prevailed toward the end of these comments. The fundamental question wasn't whether or not he agreed with what Reagn did but did he bring about change. Answer is yes, Regan did and it fundamentally shifted the poliltical landscape.

As for all the Regan bashing if you remember correctly America wasn't enjoying the best of times after the "masterful" job Carter did during his four years. What Regan did, like it or not, is tap into a centerist feeling, or the "big tent" theory that allowed those on the far right to join with those in the middle. This is what I feel Obama is trying to do and if he's able he should be able to get meaningful legislation passed.

This is in direct contrast to Hillary is has taken a devisive approach and is further entrentching conseratives to oppose anything she tries to do. You may like Hillary and that's fine but realize that she's to polarizing and we'll only end up with 4 years of gridlock.

To Joe

"OBAMA IS SHOWING HIS TRUE COLORS….SHAME ON YOUR OBAMA…SAYING A REPUBLICAN REAGAN WAS BETTER THAN OUR OWN DEMORCAT…WHO IS PLAYING DIRTY POLITICS NOW?
OBAMA AND REAGAN…NO"

People like you are the reason America is divided….. Should we never cross party lines and think one on the other side did a good job. Reagan was a far superior President then Clinton ever was. I know you are going to talk about the economy, come to the table with something different. Lets, talk about how awful Clinton was on Defense allmost non existant in regards to stopping terror attcacks. Why dont you tells us about that (Hint 5 + Somalia). How about personal integrity with Clinton non exsistant.

I am a Republican and if a Democratic President did a good job I will come out and say it and I would expect the same from most people. The problem in America is people like you that no matter what good someone from the other party does you will have a problem with it.

Hopefully some day you will get the education that you need to better understand Politics. PLEASE DONT VOTE YOU ARE A MORON

I am white, a republican, and earn a lot of money. And I don't feel I should be obligated to give any more of it away to dead-beats who would rather live a parasitic life than earn an honest living. Of course I will be called a racist, but tell me - What does this Obama guy stand for that I should admire? He is a socialist, hipster who has no real agenda other than to dazzle the progressive liberal idealists who are basically out of touch with reality. I have not heard of such sensationalism over a politician since 1933 Germany. Watch out!!!

Reagan broke the back of the air-traffic controllers union in 1981 - this really marked a huge turning point for unions - and it's been a downward spiral ever since. The environmental destruction, weakening animal and bird protections - all for the betterment of big business - that was Ronald Reagan too. His biggest and saddest legacy, however, was completely ignoring the AIDS threat in its early years - for years, he never mentioned the word or acknowledged it as any sort of health threat. As we know today, the death toll is in the tens of millions. How much of a difference would it have made had he spoken out and acted as the most powerful leader of the free-world should have? We'll never know, will we? Obama was way off base to bring Reagan up a "change agent."

Why is it that everyone needs to take comments out of context or read something into it that wasn't there? I like Edwards and will vote for him if he gets the nomination but he was wrong to read something into Obamas statement that wasn't there. Reagan did change the direction of the country, not necessarily for the better but he did change the direction. I think that's all that Obama was saying. It's kind of like Time magazines "person of the year " It doesn't mean it was a good person but someone who had a major impact for good or bad.

Listen to the whole 49 minute interview, he also said he wants a "FULL AUDIT of the ENTIRIE FEDERAL government", which hasn't been done, but needed. He wants to find out where all the money is going and to route out the missing money

I too am glad to see Obama can say something positive about Republicans. I am socially liberal and a little fiscally conservative, but vote strictly Democrat because of I think freedom issues should be liberal–money issues just need intelligence, not ideology. So despite my dislike of Republicans, I will admit that I agree with a few Republican economic principals. I think too many times both parties are against whatever the other parties wants…regardless of what it is.

Finally a presidential candidate with the courage to pop the misguided bubble of Reagan-worship that's been far too rampant in this country of late.

Edwards is playing classic politics here. Take a narrow comment about Reagan's abilty to motivate and unite and parlay that into "Obama is anti-union". With our sound-bite media, I fear this will work, even though Edwards is wrong.

I wish I had more faith that we Americans could sort this type of political "hit" out from the truth. But I don't and comments in this forum reinforce that. "Reagan was a uniter" and "I hate unions just like Reagan" are not equivalent statements.

Edwards needs to get out of this race; a big loss for him in his home state of SC will ensure that.

Policies of the Reagan Administration started the long slide of the American middle class into oblivion. Most people now alive don't realize that America was not a middle class nation until the middle of the 20th century. The growth of the middle class was made possible by the Roosevelt and Truman administrations via a redistribution of income through taxation from the upper to the middle class, veterans' benefits, education grants, job training, etc. The Great Society did a lot for those in lower income brackets.

Reagan was a decent guy and a smooth talker, but he really didn't understand the policies that his subordinates implemented as if in response to his rhetoric. Neither do most Conservatives understand what actually happened as a result of Reagan/Bush/Bush policies. Incomes of the bottom 75% of the country are declining while income of the top 25% is growing. Income of the top 3% is going up like a rocket.

Conservatism is making America into the most productive third world country: a large lower class ruled by a tiny wealthy elite.

Conservatives are determined to lead us down the garden path, my fellow citizens, and Democrats do not have the guts to stand up to them.

Obama will say ANYTHING to gain voters. Every politician is like that. Obama is NO DIFFERENT. He can make stuff up because he has no experience or voting history to base on. He's running on a clean slate.

I am now more convinced than ever that the ONLY Democrat candidate who can unite the whole nation is Senator Obama.

"What does Reagan changing the political landscape have to do with our nation today and the grave challenges we face?"

When Reagan was elected in 1980, the country was ready to move-on and was hunger for change. Regardless of what you think of Reagan, you cannot deny that the country was ready and hungrey for something new and he tapped into what the country was feeling at the time and Obama feels we're at that place, yet again, in history. This has nothing to do with Reagan and his policies but everything to do with the sea change that swept Reagan into the White House.

It's funny how all you whites are so for Obama. You will now be the minority now.

Obama made a nice comment about Reagan and its unfortunate that his campaign adversaries (Sen. Edwards) took it out of context. I'm not a politician or some one with a 200 IQ, but I totally understood what he meant. Whomever misunderstood his commentary should be sent back to elementary school.

Politics in this country are so twisted and the media confuses our voters in such as manner that as a result mediocre incompetent politicians keep getting elected.

obama shows respect for all, this country is way too divisive when a member of one party cant even reference what a member of another party did in positve retrospect, he was speaking of change in our time 2008, and reminding folks of change that occured in reagans time 1980, and just hinting that our country may be on the brink of real change for the better, this type of divisive politics is what obama is trying to end, thats why i trust that he is the real candidate of hope and change, and that he will reach out to everybody, republicans and independents, to heal our nation so we can move ahead as one, remember only a nation united can stand, obama 08!

Obama cant make change…if he cant create any change in his home state of Illinois then how can he change the entire country?

Not FDR.Not JFK.Not Clinton.Ronald Reagan Obama cites as an agent for change.As a democrat Ronald Reagan should be an anathema to a Democrat running for President.Does he mean he wants to continue Reagan's anti union stances.Continue the deficit spending that ballooned under Reagan.Continue the rhetoric of "Welfare Queens".Contiue the upward moving of money to the very richest people in America.This is the change that Democrats are committed to stopping and reversing.Leave it to the democrats to try and appeal to the type of people who would not vote for them if they were the only ones on the ballot.Looks like the next picture I will see is Obama in a ridiculous hunting outfit trying to woo the NRA.

To Fred in Reston, VA

I'm an African American Female who is not voting for Obama I am not racist, I just simply prefer another candidate better. Leave race/gender out of the debate because that is STUPID and irresponsible.

Praising Reagan, the guy who crushed the middle class, does not go well with many democrats

Time and again, Obama reaches out to all Americans. The reference to Regan was benign, and yet one more way he demonstrates his strong desire to overcome partisanship and work with the entire political spectrum. John Edwards might be feeling pressure over the distance that polls show between him and Obama. I would not hold this comment against Edwards, it was purely campaign politics to illustrate a difference.

Edwards yelling about how he would be as President is only trying to knock Obama down so he can win in Nevada and South Carolina. Come on Mr. Edwards. Calm down, focus on the issues. Attacking Obama only makes you look like an idiot. Act Presidential if you want to win votes.

Well, I for one almost went broke under Reagan…I'm still trying to find out what made him so great to some people….I was just a breath away from filling for bankruptcy under that man….

Reagan is the PAST, we need a whole new FUTURE and fast…

The 70's and Jim Bob Carter were a disaster that Reagan pulled us out from. I know for most liberals history started about 10 minutes after GWB was elected but there was a world before. Reagan was a great President, Clinton was not, these are the simple facts and they are without dispute.

I must say that reading these comments are great. So many of us are finally starting to understand and belive. Barack, what brilliance send the unbelivers on a wild goose chase, all the while, for those that can actually read, bringing us all together. Brilliant. Sure is funny reading comments from the hillary supporters, the 90's weren't that great either. I am most dissappointed in Edwards now. He, I thought was smart enough not to fall for the Cintonistas bait statements. Maybe he shouldn't be vice president. Obama/ Richardson I think is the way to go now. John Edward you were this close to being vice president.

Edwards and Clinton are one in the same. Democrates and STATUS QUO, cant handle change, cant handle a look at the other side and cant be professional at all. I place Mr. Edwards in the same class as Bill and Hillary, people who openly target others on what they may say to change the country and if they reference something they dont like they use negative comments to down play something good. I'm not rich, but as for the Reagan years, they were better than what we have now and what we ever had with a democrate in office. All I ever hear from the democratic side is how bad it is, not progress and lets raise taxes in one way or the other, the goverment must control……remember the government is the people, its time for a CHANGE, Vote For Change, Not The Status Quo……

go edwards! thanks for keeping it real. my first vote was for jimmy carter and i never regretted it. reagan democrat, i am not, and proud of it.

EVERYONE, please read SCOTT, MADISON, WI above. Thanks in advance CNN for posting this.

How can you as a democratic president hopeful flounder fish over to praise what a republican president did for this country, where is your loyalty? If you want to taunt the Clintons at least use a democrat. Yuh!

Edwards just made himself no better than the media. Taking things out of context to support their own agenda.

Take the time to read Obama's full comment.

Hey Fred in Raston- Are you REALLY that STUPID!??? Your comment is off the deepend to say the least.
I WILL NOT vote for someone who has used charisma and the ability to put two sentences together as to make himn sound like he knows how to make this country rebound from the MESS the Republicans and that moron in the white house has gotten it into.

Personally dead-head Fred, Obama doesn't have the experience as a JUNIOR Senator to take this country in the direction it needs to go in.

It is gonna be a real shame if he actually gets elected and then you guys who keep pouting how wonderful he is realize just what a BIGGER mess your naivity about a candidate who "talks of change" and a candidate with a WITH a plan make when voting for President.

Obama is not the savior you guys think he is…go ahead and elect him without using your brain and in 2 years when we are still at war, the economy still sucks and the job growth is zilch..call him, thank him and draw your un-employment check!

Is it 'sea change' or "see change"?

to obama supporter he can do no wrong. It is almost cult like following.

CNN- it is interesting quite a few people are complaining that you are baised and you don't post anti-obama post even it is not as bad as the one for hillary. Just remember how voters kicked your gut in NH. You may have authority in selecting Obama favoring post. However people who are reading here are also writing and we all know what yu are upto. Pretty shameful. Having said that in the end it our vote and we will use in the right manner.

Bravo John Edwards. Reagan's legacy is our current selfishness. He made it OK to think of yourself, not your community, first. If he was an agent of change, it was a change from the United States as one nation into a division of the haves and have nots, which we have today.

I will never forget how effective the "Trickle Down Theory of Economics" was and still is today under George Bush .Daddy called it Voodoo,but Jr thinks its just great.

This article is a good example why Mr. O is not ready to be president., he is not aware of the facts. Mr, Regan started the downward spiral of ours governments moral responsibility. I am not an Edwards supporter, but he has the facts straight. We cannot afford another president who is an idealist, we need a leader who knows how to work the system and fix it.

I was 18 years old in 1980 and joined the US Army. There was still a lot of negativity expressed by the general population towards members of the military. After Reagan was in office for a short period of time that attitude started to change because, while I disagree with a lot of things that Reagan did and his ideals, he gave people a sense of pride in their country again. This is what Barack was referring to - all you have to do is look at Barack's policies and you will know that in no way does he agree or will he support Reagan type policies.

When Reagan took office it was at a time when the country needed a
certain type of leader. We are again at a time in our history when we need a certain type of leader - one that is not politics as usual, one that can work across party lines and one that can unity this country - - - that is Barack Obama.

Obama has no vision, and does not know how to change. It is a solid fact undisputable and verified by Obama himself in his book called “Audacity of Hope”.

A very extraordinary illustration from Obama himself that glaringly shows hypocrisy of spectacular proportions. From the beginning in his Prologue Obama admits to serious, flaws that contradict the very foundation of his basic platform for “Change to believe in”.

Obama said in his book: “The topics of his book how we might begin the process of changing our politics and civic life. This isn’t to say that I know exactly how to do it. I don’t”. America he doesn’t know how to change!! Incredible!!

America do you read this statement the way I do? Obama said he does not know how to change yet parades around with the theme of “Change to believe in”. Very extraordinary to write about change one way and parade around the country telling the electorate another. It’s absolutely insane.

Worse, Obama said a few lines later “I offer no unifying theory of American government”. America, for a man who taught Law and the Constitution at the University of Chicago for eight to ten years to make a statement like that is pure stupidity. Good God, The very Constitution is the most unifying document ever produced in modern history that created America and the most powerful government in history.

For those who support Obama they should ask him about his change and detail what the heck it is. If Obama has no unifying theory and completely disregards the Constitution, what does he believe in, an Islamic theory? Please when you vote think about what you’re doing this man needs to answer those questions. America has no ideal what Obama believes in, yet thousands follow him around like brain dead followers that never question his believe. Obama’s change is likely worse than chump change in my opinion.

I agree 100% with E from KY above.

It disturbs me that some of you are allowed to vote when you can make the jump from Obama saying "Reagan changed the politcal landscape" to "I love Reagan."

Edwards is putting a negative spin on Obama's words just like Bill Clinton did last week. There's a lot of that going around these days. This is the type of dirt that Obama is running against. What's funny is that less than two weeks ago the Clintons and Edwards were trying to jump on the change bandwagon.

So Obama had praise for Reagan, I would never vote for a scum ambulance chaser… But I might vote for Obama now… Time to build bridges…

Does he know how to talk about himself and what his true beliefs are ? why does he have to use every person in the worlds statements! I question this every time he says something its either MLK, JFK , Cesar Chavez which i do not appreciate since Im a mexican and now ronald regan which messed up the whole state of california with his stuff!!!!!

REAGAN HAS SPOKEN FROM THE GRAVE! And he did say this and boy are you people proving him right. The Democrat's were, and still are so jealous of his enormous success in the 80's they can't help put keep bringing it up.

RR - "However, our task is far from over. Our friends in the other party will never forgive us for our success, and are doing everything in their power to rewrite history. Listening to the liberals, you'd think that the 1980's were the worst period since the Great Depression, filled with suffering and despair. I don't know about you, but I'm getting awfully tired of the whining voices from the White House these days. They're claiming there was a decade of greed and neglect, but you and I know better than that. We were there. "

Indeed we were there. The 80's were a time of optimism and prosperity in the USA, no matter how hard the bitter leftys try to deny it…..

Someone explain to me why the first comment for this story was posted by CNN. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE STORY. Not only that, but it supplies an image opposite of what I've seen on all posts. Most Obama supporters in their comments are vile and attack oriented, so I don't know where he even gets his ideas. Most Clinton supporters are articulate and provide real arguements in their posts. There is a difference between confident and arrogant, with the latter being the impression I get from Obama supporters on these pages. CNN, if you are screening these posts, then take the time to see if the post has anything to do with the story it's being posted for. The comments begin with a blatant attack on the Clinton campaign, and the article is about Obama and Edwards!! I wonder if Obama supporters just saturate ever comment section with anti-Clinton propaganda…what a "just cause".

Why my comments have not been posted yet, when other comments posted after mine have already been posted?

The Clintons will do everything feasible to get the votes - including lying and once they are in the office at WH, if they don't loose the national elections in November, they will do the same 8 years we saw with Clinton- it will be a remake - no much change - no greats expectations there. I hope Obama will win if he doesn't, I suggest him to never - never accept to work with the Clintons - For now I wish him the best in Nevada, SC and elsewhere.

Mr. Edwards - if you ever had my vote you 100% don't now. No one, from either side should ever talk bad about a previous president, especially one that led us througha difficult time in our history. Was he perfect - no. Name one president that didn't make mistqakes or have flaws. What a disgrace you are to the American population for lashing back at another politician, even from your own party, that finds something good in a previous president - one who one the electoral and popular vote!!

Obama seems to have gotten lost in his own rhetoric. That's all there is to all his words. His concept of change still resides in the abstract that's why even the change the reagan brought to this country would fit his definition.

I admit he can deliver wonderful speeches, the guy is very charismatic. but look behind his rhetoric and you will see the emptiness of his promise for change. As for the Bluebook for change in his website, I don't see any concrete ideas for implementation that is needed. Full of ideals that we all must aspire for but definitely lacking in practicality which defines the real world.

I love Barrack Obama, and I am truly afraid for him. I've often been called on my "charming honesty" myself and have been warned never to run for any public office because of it. I admire a man who speaks the truth intelligently without any fear of the polls.

I've been making similar comments about Ronald Regan for YEARS, and I am as liberal as they come. Ronald Regan knew how to package and push the prveelent sentiments of Americans and drive us together around his candidacy. In fact, I have always despised Regan for making the Bush era possible. Obama never said he LIKED the direction that Regan chose; he just admired his campaign's ability to pull the country together as he is clearly trying to do.

I think it also plays to the democrat/independent/republican coalition message. obama wants to use Republicans as a limited inspiration too when they did indeed have strengths or his coming together campaign would be all talk.

I fear for Obama because people twist honesty to play the game. It has been going on for years, and the Clintons are Rove league when it comes to this skill. edwards is a bit more blunt and self-serving, but he too has found anopening here. I hope with my whole heart that America is ready for a President ready to speak the truth without reading cue cards or talking points or watching opinion polls and I fear we are not.

Please America, see this for what it is and dispell the illusion that we are a country of morons for allowing 8 years of George W. Bush.

Go Obama!

Obama should have a check up immediately for alzheimer's. I'm guessing Obama thinks ketchup is a vegetable. How dumb can one be?!

At least during the Clinton's presidency the middle class and poor actually got ahead, the same can't be said of Reagan's trickle down or piss down on the poor theories. I can't believe Obama thinks this is the right person to praise. Not only did he put down Clinton (nice message of hope he also criticized the other Democratic president. Who's next to criticize on his list, President Franklyn Roosevelt?

The Obama Cult is out in full force today. WOW. Next when he compare's himself to Hitler, you will spin that in a positive way also!

Obama is clearly playing doulble standards. When Hillary made comments about MLK , she was criticized by Obama and his camp by derating him with LBJ. This was clearly to instigate african-americans for snatching their votes which otherwise had gone to Hillary. And how can he idolize Reagan as a "Change" who transformed america? At the same time he is not ready to give Bill Clinton any credit for record surplus, 12 million new jobs, prospred middle class, and improving the standards of african-american people who considered Clinton as a "Black President". Reagan not only destroyed unions, but created a right wing society of republicans who divided this country as REd and Blue states. Its a shame that the same union leaders are now supporting Obama and forcing their members to vote for him. This big talks of hope and change are good when you listen this extraordinary oratory, but it requires leaders like Clinton to make it a reality.

Anyone who votes for Obama is an idiot, Fred. You want another Jimy Carter?
This election, with what's going on in the Middle East NEEDS an insider.

Obama will do anything to win the nominee. First he compares himself to MLK, Now he compares himself to Reagan. Wonder who's next, Bush? Maybe Obama should are will become a Rebublican candidate. When will the lies stop? Obama is only a dreamer.

Everything that Obama said was true. I was worried that Hillary was going to have to read everything to the staff that she appoints if she wins, since no one in her current staff was able to read the rules of the Nevada caucuses in the last year, but now I see she is going to have to read all of the press releases to her supporters as well. Barack Obama is able to see "we the people of the United States" as exactly that, not just the people of the Democratic party or people of the Republican party.

America tends to be pulled in two different directions. The conservatives want to run the country the way it was designed to run with free market capitalism and limited government. The liberals want to see an American where everyone gets a piece of the pie. The problem is that the conservative way leaves a lot of us out of the equation. The liberal way breaks the country's pockets. Reagan put an end to the extremely liberal spending from the 70's. He took a hardline conservative stance no doubt, but the alternative would have left us in a economic black hole similar to where we are headed now. We need moderation. I would love to see a country where everyone is living well, but where does this money for universal health care come from. John Edwards will break our country. When he decides to play hardball with corporate America, he will drive away corporations and jobs and he will scare the life out of the stock market. We need a little Reaganesque fiscal conservatism right now.

Reagan was an American. In fact an American President. I'm no lover of Reagan but my God have we gotten to the point to where we hate people on the other political team. This message is consistant with Obamas message, we need to end the politics of devision. Reagan as far as I recall pissed of a bunch of people but he was not devisive, controversial yes but devisive, I'm not sure. Correct me if I am wrong.

As for Edwards, I like Edwards but this is a cheap shot. He has done enough to split the vote, with comments like that he only lends support to the establishment candidate.

My fellow liberals forget that we don't control America.

We liberals are, at best, about a third of voters on the national scene.

Bill Clinton NEVER won more than 49% of the national vote. Not in either term.

In order for an African American liberal Democrat who the vast majority of voters KNOW NOTHING ABOUT, and will never read his books, and many of whom will be inclined to believe the libelous e-mails about him, he needs to reach out to independent and "enlightened" Republicans.

We liberals consider Ronald Reagan one of the worst presidents on domestic issues and on human rights in Central America. He sold arms for hostages in Iran to fund an illegal war in Central America. He sold out future generations on the environment and broke the air traffic controllers' union, which illegally went on strike.

As for the Soviet Union, even though many liberals felt that the Soviet Union was coming apart from the inside and Ronald Reagan was in the right place at the right time to get credit for its collapse, he may have sped that process up by his increased military spending and direct comments and actions challenging the Soviets.

Is it a crime to make that observation? I hope not.

Republicans have, for years, complimented John F. Kennedy and tried to steal his legacy for them. If Barack Obama wants to connect with Ronald Reagan's ability to communicate and claim that he might have the capacity to be as transformative a figure for this generation as both those candidates were for their generations, that is just good politics.

The truth is that JFK and RWR were great communicators and so is Barack. Few people would disagree that Barack is in their company on that score.

Now, imagine what it would mean for America if we elected a liberal African American with a bi-racial background because liberals, independents and some Republicans supported him.

We might actually get quality, liberal, legislation passed in Congress. We might actually leave Iraq and help our veterans at home. We might pass health care legislation that covers all children and nearly all adults. We might decide to fund pre-K education and pay teachers enough to give them respect and make it a profession people want to join. We might make real progress on global warming.

Most importantly, we would send a message to every disaffected minority young person that this is a nation where anything can happen, where discrimination, bias and bigotry is truly looked down upon and is being pushed completely into history.

Let's make the dream come true. Let's vote Obama!!

This is another example of Obama overdoing it. I respect Obama but this latest event shows he has a lot of political maturing to do.

If you count an out-of-orbit deficit, arms for hostages, which incidentally is part of the reason Bin Laden, and Al Qaeda & Company maintained such a robust weapon supply, the enhancement of the status quo, and countless other deficiencies as transforming America, then Obama is right. Ironically, even while Reagan blasted big government and unions, his economic policies actually increased the size of the welfare state, due in part to him driving many workers to the brink of insolvency.

No one but the most close-minded Republicans long for Reagan. He represented ole boy networking and big business. Where's the nostalgia in that?

This comment from Obama is nothing less than a shameless, self-serving attack on a beloved Democratic president who transformed the welfare state into a working state, eliminated the deficit, increased civil rights, and kept America safe from terrorists. Clearly, this is an extension of Obama's continued purpose of trying to discredit the Clintons, and seems to also be an attempt at pandering to Republicans. I am deeply disappointed in Obama over this.

If you want to win, Obama, instead of distorting the issues with non-important, irrelevant references and pointless, verbose speeches lacking genuine substance, then talk about issues-for a change! Tell us where you stand, not what you hope and think. I thought Obama claimed he was above this type of political shenanigenry. Obviously that wasn't true. Fortunately this Reagan thing is coming back to haunt him.

Now that's a misleading headline if I ever saw one…I guess since Edwards called out the media for ignoring him, now they have to buddy up to him?

How truly refreshing for a candidate from the democratic party pay attention to history and give credit where credit is due. All Mr. Obama did was make a declaritory statement regarding the mood of the country and Mr. Reagan's ability to read that mood. I'm quite impressed. As a republican I may choose to vote for Mr. Obama because, at this moment in time, he is certainly reading my mood.

Reagan as most people was complex. He vision of the US as a city on a hill and a beacon of light for the rest of the world was compelling.

He also attracted many democrats to his vision making him a successfull politician.

While he become very polirizng towards the end of his second term was not what we want to become.

Cheers,

I don't know what scares me more: the thought that some of you believe the comments you're making or the thought that you so easily twist the truth to fit your needs. Look people, I did not like Reagan. In fact, in my neighborhood, the parents were happy when he got shot. The truth of the matter is, though, Reagan did usher in a new era. Many people liked him. When he was re-elected in 1984, he won 49 of 50 states. In the one state he lost, which was his opponent's home state, he still got 49.5% of the vote. Barack did not praise Reagan's policies. He merely pointed out a historical fact: Reagan ushered in change. He lowered taxes, cut social programs, and significantly increased defense spending. It was the era of trickle-down economics, where the poor got poorer and the rich got richer. While it may have been safer to point to a democratic president, Obama defied conventional thinking and pointed out a real example of change who happened to play for the other team. Kudos to Barack for telling people the truth.

I just marvel as the way people think he just made a comparison to reagans change of the political scope. America is divided because of people like John Edward Does the statement mean he represents reagan or does the statement means he endorses his polcies. I was sick of clinton now i am getting sick of edwards. I want to ask a Question Is ronald reagan not american so if you are republican you shouldnt appeal to the democrats or swing voters. I just dont know what is wrong with the democratic party they are just self destructing in all circumstances. Another problem i see is people just read the headlines and post a comment they never read deep enough. HIllary is simply jealous of obama and she just cant stand him because he is young passionate likable and very humorous, Adding to that he has great speeches and very very Nice Handsome. Hilary please why dont you become governor of new york or arkansas that will be better we dont want you as our president. Edwards please go back to law school when you dont understand simple English. Obama just go to the white house we need You there.

Obama should be criticized for the Reagan comment … during the Reagan years the "gap" between the rich and the middle class and poor became greater than any other time in history … does he think we have forgotten this?
****************************************

Helen,

That is a misconception. As I recall, the disparity between poor and rich, as a percentage, increased while Clinton was president. Right now, we need a president that is strong on defense, terrorism, and instills some fear within the eyes of our enemies. Invoking Reagan took some kiwis on his part, but………….. "Obama, you are no Reagan". The last thing we need is another Carter presidency from the Dems. Edwards is a moron as well, and is out of touch with reality. (or just pandering as usual) Unions are only about power, greed, and feeding from the trough. Representing "the working man" is a joke.

Let's see, let us count the number of prominent people that Obama has invoked in his campaign: MLK, JFK, RFK(?), FDR(?), Reagan!! Any missing? Talk about a mix bag. My, he certainly is overreaching for votes, any votes.

Reagan, the president that took the United States of American from a creditor nation to a debtor nation. The president that allowed Hezbollah to murdered over 250 marines in an unarmed mission and not take out their camp in the Bekaa Valley. the president whose supply-side economics did not improve the lot of the working class. The president whose wife bought $1000 per plate dinnerware for the White House dinners.

Thank you Edwards. Keep unmasking the masked.

Hey Clinton supporters: if you think HIllary will repudiate Obama for the Reagan comments, think again!

She was on the Barry Goldwater documentary reminiscing about her days as a "Goldwater Girl", and without regret.

She is not about to alienate Reagan Democrats. Those moderate conservative swing voters are her base.

So sit back down and be quiet.

I'd really love to see CNN run something that is Pro-Obama on it's home page. If you'll notice most of the articles relating to Hillary are showing her caring side or how Presidential she appears and when the articles are written on Obama, he's always attempting to look Presidential…never full credit for any accomplishments. Although it is getting close to the Nevada caucus and God forbid if it really appears that Obama might be chosen the winner…have to thwart any appearance of a projected winner. Let's see the for the New Hampshire Primary, leave the Clinton 'fairy tale' soundbite on the home page all day. What are you planning for Saturday? And finally Edwards to getting some coverage, but once again it's anti-Obama.

And why can't I comment on Giulani's September 11, 2001 ad? Isn't everyone tired of him pimping tragedy?

Obama is lightweight… don't need to say more.

Clintonites and Edwardites give it a rest! Obama was simply explaining how Reagan's administration and leadership changed the political trajectory of this nation. That's it!

Obama is courting the "Reagan Republicans" w