Bronx politicians today have come out in support of Senator Obama and are scheduling an event on his behalf. Senator Clinton had been relying on the support of the Latino community for their voting block, but community leaders are dissatisfied with her "lip service" to gain votes, but does not sit down with them and discuss their needs or issues, rather Senator Obama has done so, engaging them in discussions on where their needs lie, and incorporates their needs into his overall platform. Here is the article.
As I have stated many times in this blog, this New York resident and our website team have spoken with many minority communities, and they all echo what is said in the article. Senator Clinton pays attention, or calls on them, when votes are needed, but is not to be seen or heard from when votes are not needed. This I see is a serioius flaw; Senator Clinton's taking advantage of minority communities to gain votes, but does not seriously comtemplate their needs, or act on them. Lacking a more viable candiate, and the spending of $50 million to ensure a platform to launch her Presidential bid, these communities put their votes behind her to ensure a Democratic victory, but given the choice of a more viable candidate, Senator Clinton would have been in trouble this past election for her "supposed" base support of minority communities in New York State is "soft" and ripe for a more "tuned in" candidate such as Senator Obama.
Showing posts with label Clinton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Clinton. Show all posts
Thursday, February 1, 2007
New York citizens gossip about Hillary
It is an interesting and unexpected bonus to live in New York, home of the would-be candidate Hillary Clinton because you get to talk to people who know things. Things in Senator Clinton's past she would rather you wouldn't know about but are certainly pertinent to one who aspires to this country's highest office. I rather hesitated to "gossip" as I would prefer to follow the example of civility that Senator Obama embraces.
However, when you come upon information that is important for voters to know you need to decide whether or not it is wise to "out" the candidate.
I just read a very long article on Hillary Clinton's choice for campaign staff, in particular Howard Wolfson and how he ever so skillfully managed to bury the misteps of Mrs. Clinton during her first campaign for the Senate in New York. I found the following passage quite informational:
"She was "banned" by Crown Heights' ultra-orthodox Jewish council for reaching out to ex-Mayor David Dinkins, who was disliked for the way he'd handled the Crown Heights black/Jewish riots. In the fall of 1999, her stock sunk even lower with Jews when, on an official White House trip to the West Bank of Israel, she embraced Suha Arafat, right after Arafat's wife charged in a speech that Israel was poisoning Palestinian children. There was more: President Clinton's offer of clemency to Puerto Rican nationalists was seen as a sop to his wife; then there was an allegation of an anti-Semitic slur. And this past fall, the campaign twice embarrassed itself, obtaining 1,400 names from a White House visitors list and accepting money from a Muslim group advocating armed force against Israel"
All of the above was skillfully handled by the staff member know to Mrs. Clinton as "Wolfie".
Here is the article
Now of course, every single aspect of Senator Obama's staff and campaign will be closely examined by the Blitz force of the Hillary Machine in the form of Howard Wolfson, and I am quite sure he is prepared for it.
Hillary is also making overtures to Andrew Coumo, Jr. for his support. If he is smart, I think he better think twice before becoming entangled in her MACHINE, and a machine it is. But this machine has a huge weakness, and that is ASSUMMING. And you know the phrase that applies to the word ASSUME. Hillary makes the assumption, that due to her husband's close ties within the Black community, he will deliver that voting block to her, wrapped up in a nice ribbon come primary time. Hillary, I have some very interesting news for you.
You see we are doing our homework. Being based in New York, we are out there already, speaking to the leaders of black communities, asking questions, taking polls, and we are finding they are reserving their decision because they want to know more about Barack Obama, and you just may lose that block of votes as we begin to inform the black communities and they get to know the candiate Senator Obama, as they are going to like what they see. We did discover one thing, they deeply resent your assumption that since former President Clinton enjoyed a wonderful rapport with the Black community and they voted for him in huge numbers, some saying he was the first Black President that they would OF COURSE vote for you. They resent the fact that so early on you are assumming you have their votes already. They don't appreciate you using their votes, then going back to your white elite "enclave" staying far away from the poor black neighborhoods, the underserved, and voters that are used for your gain rather than showing true concern for the issues they face on a daily basis. They resent the fact you spent $50 million to ensure your launching pad of a Senate seat, only to abandon the very office you were voted into practically a couple months after you were re-elected. So you really didn't want to be a Senator? Then why spend $50 million dollars to be one? If you REALLY wanted the office you committed to when you ran for it, then you would stay and do the job you were hired to do for the people of the State of New York. Wasting at least 40 million of those dollars you didn't need to spend also shows the citizens that you are willing to pay ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY for your own gain.
These are some of thoughts of the common citizen we speak with on a daily basis. Let the REAL Hillary Clinton stand up please?
However, when you come upon information that is important for voters to know you need to decide whether or not it is wise to "out" the candidate.
I just read a very long article on Hillary Clinton's choice for campaign staff, in particular Howard Wolfson and how he ever so skillfully managed to bury the misteps of Mrs. Clinton during her first campaign for the Senate in New York. I found the following passage quite informational:
"She was "banned" by Crown Heights' ultra-orthodox Jewish council for reaching out to ex-Mayor David Dinkins, who was disliked for the way he'd handled the Crown Heights black/Jewish riots. In the fall of 1999, her stock sunk even lower with Jews when, on an official White House trip to the West Bank of Israel, she embraced Suha Arafat, right after Arafat's wife charged in a speech that Israel was poisoning Palestinian children. There was more: President Clinton's offer of clemency to Puerto Rican nationalists was seen as a sop to his wife; then there was an allegation of an anti-Semitic slur. And this past fall, the campaign twice embarrassed itself, obtaining 1,400 names from a White House visitors list and accepting money from a Muslim group advocating armed force against Israel"
All of the above was skillfully handled by the staff member know to Mrs. Clinton as "Wolfie".
Here is the article
Now of course, every single aspect of Senator Obama's staff and campaign will be closely examined by the Blitz force of the Hillary Machine in the form of Howard Wolfson, and I am quite sure he is prepared for it.
Hillary is also making overtures to Andrew Coumo, Jr. for his support. If he is smart, I think he better think twice before becoming entangled in her MACHINE, and a machine it is. But this machine has a huge weakness, and that is ASSUMMING. And you know the phrase that applies to the word ASSUME. Hillary makes the assumption, that due to her husband's close ties within the Black community, he will deliver that voting block to her, wrapped up in a nice ribbon come primary time. Hillary, I have some very interesting news for you.
You see we are doing our homework. Being based in New York, we are out there already, speaking to the leaders of black communities, asking questions, taking polls, and we are finding they are reserving their decision because they want to know more about Barack Obama, and you just may lose that block of votes as we begin to inform the black communities and they get to know the candiate Senator Obama, as they are going to like what they see. We did discover one thing, they deeply resent your assumption that since former President Clinton enjoyed a wonderful rapport with the Black community and they voted for him in huge numbers, some saying he was the first Black President that they would OF COURSE vote for you. They resent the fact that so early on you are assumming you have their votes already. They don't appreciate you using their votes, then going back to your white elite "enclave" staying far away from the poor black neighborhoods, the underserved, and voters that are used for your gain rather than showing true concern for the issues they face on a daily basis. They resent the fact you spent $50 million to ensure your launching pad of a Senate seat, only to abandon the very office you were voted into practically a couple months after you were re-elected. So you really didn't want to be a Senator? Then why spend $50 million dollars to be one? If you REALLY wanted the office you committed to when you ran for it, then you would stay and do the job you were hired to do for the people of the State of New York. Wasting at least 40 million of those dollars you didn't need to spend also shows the citizens that you are willing to pay ANY AMOUNT OF MONEY for your own gain.
These are some of thoughts of the common citizen we speak with on a daily basis. Let the REAL Hillary Clinton stand up please?
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
HILLARY CLINTON 'MASTER OF DISASTER'
Recently the Fox News with John Gibson discussed the "bomb" dropped on Senator Obama by the Hillary Clinton "machine" regarding his days spent in a school at the AGE OF 6 stating it was a Madrassa (which is a radical Islamic form of the Muslim religion). Here is a quote from that show:
"You know, the Clinton team and the machine, make no mistake, it's still in place. They used to call themselves the masters of disaster. And if Barack Obama gets into the race against Clinton, I think that he can count on no small amount of disaster being forced upon him by running against one of the most effective and one of the most negative political machines ever assembled in this country."
Now, through Investigation, the Washington Post has revealed that this in fact is NOT TRUE regarding Senator Obama's schooling.
Their story today in the Washington Post says the exact opposite directly from the Headmaster of the school. Now remember, this is a Clinton attempt to muddy the waters was 40 YEARS ago when Senator Obama was 6 years old. Senator Clinton's operatives are stopping at nothing to discredit Senator Obama and they are striking early. This to me shows she is truly worried about the threat Senator Obama poses in her STRONG ARMED METHODS to get the White House. She is using OLD TIME DIRTY POLITICS in a day when we would hope that civility and honest discussion would be the way to campaign, allowing the citizens to decide for themselves after hearing where each candidate stands on issues.
We could get down and dirty with Mrs. Clinton, if that is what she so chooses. She has so many skeletons in her closet she couldn't begin to explain them all. What is interesting about Senator Obama is the gentlemanly way he responded to her announcement of her bid for the Presidency, the class he showed in his response should be a guideline for the way Senator Clinton should present herself. The way her MACHINE is working now, she comes across as a demanding, shrill, nasty woman, and not one for any woman to emulate. She I believe needs to rethink her approach because it is not going to gain her any friends from the voters.
And she certainly is keeping hubby Bill hidden right now isn't she. If she can't stand the heat the way to handle it is not to attack another candidate but rather answer some questions about HER that the citizens have. Hillary, your hands are not clean on this one, painting Senator Obama as a "terrorist" by hinting at it by putting out a story that he attended a school when he was 6 YEARS OLD that was radical and it wasn't true. Do your homework next time on who Senator Obama REALLY is.
"You know, the Clinton team and the machine, make no mistake, it's still in place. They used to call themselves the masters of disaster. And if Barack Obama gets into the race against Clinton, I think that he can count on no small amount of disaster being forced upon him by running against one of the most effective and one of the most negative political machines ever assembled in this country."
Now, through Investigation, the Washington Post has revealed that this in fact is NOT TRUE regarding Senator Obama's schooling.
Their story today in the Washington Post says the exact opposite directly from the Headmaster of the school. Now remember, this is a Clinton attempt to muddy the waters was 40 YEARS ago when Senator Obama was 6 years old. Senator Clinton's operatives are stopping at nothing to discredit Senator Obama and they are striking early. This to me shows she is truly worried about the threat Senator Obama poses in her STRONG ARMED METHODS to get the White House. She is using OLD TIME DIRTY POLITICS in a day when we would hope that civility and honest discussion would be the way to campaign, allowing the citizens to decide for themselves after hearing where each candidate stands on issues.
We could get down and dirty with Mrs. Clinton, if that is what she so chooses. She has so many skeletons in her closet she couldn't begin to explain them all. What is interesting about Senator Obama is the gentlemanly way he responded to her announcement of her bid for the Presidency, the class he showed in his response should be a guideline for the way Senator Clinton should present herself. The way her MACHINE is working now, she comes across as a demanding, shrill, nasty woman, and not one for any woman to emulate. She I believe needs to rethink her approach because it is not going to gain her any friends from the voters.
And she certainly is keeping hubby Bill hidden right now isn't she. If she can't stand the heat the way to handle it is not to attack another candidate but rather answer some questions about HER that the citizens have. Hillary, your hands are not clean on this one, painting Senator Obama as a "terrorist" by hinting at it by putting out a story that he attended a school when he was 6 YEARS OLD that was radical and it wasn't true. Do your homework next time on who Senator Obama REALLY is.
Monday, January 22, 2007
TAKING THE 'REAL' PULSE OF NEW YORK VOTERS
I read a couple polling numbers today in the New York papers as I am located just outside NYC and I sure would like to know where they are getting their figures. They "claim" that Senator Clinton leads Senator Obama 53% to his 41%. But then again, this was published in a pro-Clinton newspaper so you figure it out. I don't think I need to spell it out for you.
Now I have spoken with doctors, teachers, the garbage man, secretaries, financial analysts, well people in all walks of life, the elderly, the disabled, the poor and while Senator Clinton is discussed, the interest is in Senator Obama. Although they do express a desire to get to know more about him, Senator Obama if you read this, heed their request? Come visit New York, they are eager to hear from you. I have found most citizens are NOT READY to throw their support behind Senator Clinton, but would like to take a look at Senator Obama.
There are many reasons given as to why they hesitate to support Senator Clinton, chief among them is the fact they do not trust her. This is a result of her WASTING $50 million dollars to ensure her seat, that there would be no doubt she would keep it, AND she had to show big numbers, thereby giving her a secure launching pad for her Presidential bid. Now the citizens of New York I have personally spoken with do not appreciate her WASTE of donations, and yes folks it was a WASTE as she could have won re-election spending a 10th of that amount due to the fact there really wasn't any interesting candidate running for the job that gained much interest of the citizens of the state.
They also express suspicion on the entire progression of events and the calculated move on the part of the Clintons to move to NY to set a base for Senator Clinton. Allow me to explain. First their choice of where to buy a house nestled among the 'rich elite' who are invested in NYC but live in a wealthy little town, a rich enclave amongst themselves. Then their came President Clinton's positioning himself with an office in New York City and his unending appearances at events where the powerful and elitist also attend. Setting a stage you might say for entree for Senator Clinton to gain initial support among the 'monied elite'. Then her first run for Senate with President Clinton using his contacts in the black communities of NYC to shore up her vote in those areas. There was no mistake my friends that President Clinton would have an office in Harlem, therefore allowing Hillary to claim roots in that community therefore gaining the black voter there.
Due to the power of the black vote, and folks, believe me, Senator Clinton does not care one bit about the needs of the inner city. I have witnessed for myself her visits, and believe me, they are just that, visits, photo-ops for her future use so she can show how she 'cares" about the underpriviledged. She could not get out of there fast enough, spending only enough time to get her video and photos, then getting out of Harlem as fast as she could. With Bill stablizing the black vote, it allowed her to concentrate on upper New York thereby winning her election for first term Senator. This has all been calculated since President Clinton left the White House.
She certainly expected some payback for standing by her man while he played with his ladies at the White House. As a matter of fact, Hilary knew all about it, and I have heard reports she herself strong armed a couple ladies. Yes, she has much to hide, but it will all come out.
Senator Clinton, the one behind Whitewater herself. It was HER demand they purchase that land from her friend, yet she stood back denying any knowledge of that fiasco, keeping her hands clean and allowing the President, her husband to take all the heat.
She has been cold and calculating from day one when they arrived in New York State and the citizens of this state since this past election are realizing it. It was not her likability that re-elected her, rather the desire of the citizens to make sure the Democrats gained control of Congress that ensured her re-election. Many are unhappy with the fact of her waste of $50million dollars and then not fulfilling her promise to do a job the citizens of this state hired her to do, be their Senator for 6 more years. She knew before the election she would not want to stay in that job, and used the citizens to her advantage.
This is only part of what I have been hearing. They are unhappy with the way her opinions flipflop according to public outcry. She voted FOR THE WAR, and now puts out a half-hearted demand for withdrawal. She does not take chances, and every single word she utters is "scripted" by her handlers. Her Internet chats should be interesting as I can picture her staff, sitting behind the cameras furiously scribbling replies for her to question posed.
Senator Clinton is OLD POLITICS and do we really want President Clinton sitting in the White House with nothing to do? Hmmmmm should be interesting with a husband you don't know what to do with, with time on his hands to roam around looking for the pretty ladies.
This I DO know. The citizens of New York State are not ready to give her wholehearted support and the state is RIPE for Senator Obama to take away her little prize. I for one will be right there to campaign for him, among thousands of others already signed up to take Senator Clinton's so-called "locked up state" away from her.
Now I have spoken with doctors, teachers, the garbage man, secretaries, financial analysts, well people in all walks of life, the elderly, the disabled, the poor and while Senator Clinton is discussed, the interest is in Senator Obama. Although they do express a desire to get to know more about him, Senator Obama if you read this, heed their request? Come visit New York, they are eager to hear from you. I have found most citizens are NOT READY to throw their support behind Senator Clinton, but would like to take a look at Senator Obama.
There are many reasons given as to why they hesitate to support Senator Clinton, chief among them is the fact they do not trust her. This is a result of her WASTING $50 million dollars to ensure her seat, that there would be no doubt she would keep it, AND she had to show big numbers, thereby giving her a secure launching pad for her Presidential bid. Now the citizens of New York I have personally spoken with do not appreciate her WASTE of donations, and yes folks it was a WASTE as she could have won re-election spending a 10th of that amount due to the fact there really wasn't any interesting candidate running for the job that gained much interest of the citizens of the state.
They also express suspicion on the entire progression of events and the calculated move on the part of the Clintons to move to NY to set a base for Senator Clinton. Allow me to explain. First their choice of where to buy a house nestled among the 'rich elite' who are invested in NYC but live in a wealthy little town, a rich enclave amongst themselves. Then their came President Clinton's positioning himself with an office in New York City and his unending appearances at events where the powerful and elitist also attend. Setting a stage you might say for entree for Senator Clinton to gain initial support among the 'monied elite'. Then her first run for Senate with President Clinton using his contacts in the black communities of NYC to shore up her vote in those areas. There was no mistake my friends that President Clinton would have an office in Harlem, therefore allowing Hillary to claim roots in that community therefore gaining the black voter there.
Due to the power of the black vote, and folks, believe me, Senator Clinton does not care one bit about the needs of the inner city. I have witnessed for myself her visits, and believe me, they are just that, visits, photo-ops for her future use so she can show how she 'cares" about the underpriviledged. She could not get out of there fast enough, spending only enough time to get her video and photos, then getting out of Harlem as fast as she could. With Bill stablizing the black vote, it allowed her to concentrate on upper New York thereby winning her election for first term Senator. This has all been calculated since President Clinton left the White House.
She certainly expected some payback for standing by her man while he played with his ladies at the White House. As a matter of fact, Hilary knew all about it, and I have heard reports she herself strong armed a couple ladies. Yes, she has much to hide, but it will all come out.
Senator Clinton, the one behind Whitewater herself. It was HER demand they purchase that land from her friend, yet she stood back denying any knowledge of that fiasco, keeping her hands clean and allowing the President, her husband to take all the heat.
She has been cold and calculating from day one when they arrived in New York State and the citizens of this state since this past election are realizing it. It was not her likability that re-elected her, rather the desire of the citizens to make sure the Democrats gained control of Congress that ensured her re-election. Many are unhappy with the fact of her waste of $50million dollars and then not fulfilling her promise to do a job the citizens of this state hired her to do, be their Senator for 6 more years. She knew before the election she would not want to stay in that job, and used the citizens to her advantage.
This is only part of what I have been hearing. They are unhappy with the way her opinions flipflop according to public outcry. She voted FOR THE WAR, and now puts out a half-hearted demand for withdrawal. She does not take chances, and every single word she utters is "scripted" by her handlers. Her Internet chats should be interesting as I can picture her staff, sitting behind the cameras furiously scribbling replies for her to question posed.
Senator Clinton is OLD POLITICS and do we really want President Clinton sitting in the White House with nothing to do? Hmmmmm should be interesting with a husband you don't know what to do with, with time on his hands to roam around looking for the pretty ladies.
This I DO know. The citizens of New York State are not ready to give her wholehearted support and the state is RIPE for Senator Obama to take away her little prize. I for one will be right there to campaign for him, among thousands of others already signed up to take Senator Clinton's so-called "locked up state" away from her.
Saturday, January 20, 2007
HILLARY'S DIRTY DEALINGS
I WAS going to write about something else today, but I am MAD, Mad as hell and I need to vent.
Allow me to explain:
I am a New Yorker, almost my entire life except for some time spent in Boston for school and a short term living in Georgia. I have always voted Democratic, at times not happily given the lack of a better alternate candidate. When I registered to vote, NOWHERE did I have to provide my email address to anyone.
I have NEVER EVER signed up for ANY of Hillary Clinton's websites, nor have I ever ever worked on any of her campaigns here in New York. I am not a fan of hers to say the least.
Now today, I begin receiving emails from her campaign staff about her announcement to run for President. What I personally would like to know is this. EXACTLY HOW DID THEY GET MY EMAIL ADDRESS? The only campaign I have ever signed up for was Senator Obama's.
HOW DID THEY GAIN ACCESS TO SENATOR OBAMA'S DATABASE OF EMAIL VOLUNTEERS? This is a very good question and speaks to the underhanded dealings already of how Hillary Clinton's staff works. I have also received phone calls and I have repeatedly questioned how they got my phone number, and that I was a Senator Obama supporter. Yet they called back again and asked me to consider realigning my support behind Senator Clinton.
I called a couple friends of mine who are helping with our website, and they too received the emails from Senator Clinton and received phone calls. In all the phone calls, they asked this question: Do you think Senator Obama is a Muslim? She may not be publicly making that accusation, but in phone calls they are quietly planting the seed in people's minds. Planting the seed of racism is the worst kind of politics, damning the Muslim community as if they were terrorists, or hinting at it. I have read blogs discussing the time Senator Obama AT THE AGE OF 7 went to a Muslim school so I decided to read up on exactly what the Muslim religion was all about, even though he is not a Muslim, the accusations are there, and being armed with fact is the best defense. Did you know a true Muslim is AGAINST VIOLENCE, that it is a sin?
I WAS going to discuss this issue in today's writing, however, I am very angry that the Clinton machine is hitting hard and dirty on day one of her announcement which shows me they are going to do more of it in the future.
I say to all Senator Obama supports, don't believe the trash talking her staff is going to be doing. If you have a question, ask Senator Obama's staff for facts, not dirty dealings. I knew this was going to happen with Hillary, as that is the way her staff works here in New York. They muscle themselves to gain ground for their candidate, keeping themselves below the radar so that Senator Clinton can say she knows nothing about it.
This is outrageous behavior and I won't tolerate it and I told them so and warned them if they continued to call or email me, I would personally notify the press of their underhanded dealings.
I would like to know this: HOW did Senator Clinton's staff gain access to my personal private information when I never ever provided it to them willingly?
SHAME ON YOU SENATOR CLINTON. This is the dirty dealing old politics at it's worst and is a shameful start to your campaign. And you pretend to be all sweetness and nice in your video you also emailed to me. I don't want to hear it. Take your dirty politics elsewhere. I realize Senator Obama is prepared for this, but his volunteers should not have to suffer the dirty tactics of an old time political machine that will resort to anything for their candidate.
Allow me to explain:
I am a New Yorker, almost my entire life except for some time spent in Boston for school and a short term living in Georgia. I have always voted Democratic, at times not happily given the lack of a better alternate candidate. When I registered to vote, NOWHERE did I have to provide my email address to anyone.
I have NEVER EVER signed up for ANY of Hillary Clinton's websites, nor have I ever ever worked on any of her campaigns here in New York. I am not a fan of hers to say the least.
Now today, I begin receiving emails from her campaign staff about her announcement to run for President. What I personally would like to know is this. EXACTLY HOW DID THEY GET MY EMAIL ADDRESS? The only campaign I have ever signed up for was Senator Obama's.
HOW DID THEY GAIN ACCESS TO SENATOR OBAMA'S DATABASE OF EMAIL VOLUNTEERS? This is a very good question and speaks to the underhanded dealings already of how Hillary Clinton's staff works. I have also received phone calls and I have repeatedly questioned how they got my phone number, and that I was a Senator Obama supporter. Yet they called back again and asked me to consider realigning my support behind Senator Clinton.
I called a couple friends of mine who are helping with our website, and they too received the emails from Senator Clinton and received phone calls. In all the phone calls, they asked this question: Do you think Senator Obama is a Muslim? She may not be publicly making that accusation, but in phone calls they are quietly planting the seed in people's minds. Planting the seed of racism is the worst kind of politics, damning the Muslim community as if they were terrorists, or hinting at it. I have read blogs discussing the time Senator Obama AT THE AGE OF 7 went to a Muslim school so I decided to read up on exactly what the Muslim religion was all about, even though he is not a Muslim, the accusations are there, and being armed with fact is the best defense. Did you know a true Muslim is AGAINST VIOLENCE, that it is a sin?
I WAS going to discuss this issue in today's writing, however, I am very angry that the Clinton machine is hitting hard and dirty on day one of her announcement which shows me they are going to do more of it in the future.
I say to all Senator Obama supports, don't believe the trash talking her staff is going to be doing. If you have a question, ask Senator Obama's staff for facts, not dirty dealings. I knew this was going to happen with Hillary, as that is the way her staff works here in New York. They muscle themselves to gain ground for their candidate, keeping themselves below the radar so that Senator Clinton can say she knows nothing about it.
This is outrageous behavior and I won't tolerate it and I told them so and warned them if they continued to call or email me, I would personally notify the press of their underhanded dealings.
I would like to know this: HOW did Senator Clinton's staff gain access to my personal private information when I never ever provided it to them willingly?
SHAME ON YOU SENATOR CLINTON. This is the dirty dealing old politics at it's worst and is a shameful start to your campaign. And you pretend to be all sweetness and nice in your video you also emailed to me. I don't want to hear it. Take your dirty politics elsewhere. I realize Senator Obama is prepared for this, but his volunteers should not have to suffer the dirty tactics of an old time political machine that will resort to anything for their candidate.
Wednesday, January 17, 2007
HILLARY CLINTON- STANCE ON IRAQ SWINGS THE WAY VOTERS ARE FEELING
In doing some research on voting records of potential candidates for the Presidency, I came across Senator Clinton's record on the Iraq war compared to her statements today on CBS News. I will post both for you and YOU decide if Senator Clinton is now backtracking on her original vote. Interesting to note also, I found a ton of NO votes on Energy saving votes which I will go into at another time which Senator Obama states is key to our independence on foreign oil in the future.
Use of Military Force Against Iraq
Bill Number: H J Res 114Issue: Military IssuesDate: 10/11/2002
Sponsor:Rep Hastert, Dennis [IL-14]
Roll Call Number: 237Joint Resolution Adopted (Senate)How members voted
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton voted YES.
Read statements Senator Clinton made in this general time period. (note: could find no comment made at the time of the vote by Senator Clinton)
Official Title of Legislation:H J Res 114: To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.Project Vote Smart's Synopsis:Vote to adopt a joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq. Highlights: - Authorizes President to use United States Armed Forces against Iraq- Requires President to report to Congress no later than 48 hours after military action has started with his determination that diplomatic efforts alone could not protect U.S. national security nor enforce United Nations resolutions regarding Iraq- Requires President to submit a progress report to Congress every 60 days on matters relevant to this resolution House Passage Vote: 10/10/2002: Passed: 296-133 (Roll No. 455)Senate Passage Vote: 10/11/2002: Passed: 77-23. Record Vote Number: 237Presidential Action: 10/16/2002: Signed by President. Became public law #107-243.
COMPARE THE ABOVE TO SENATOR CLINTON'S STATEMENTS TODAY:
By Douglas Stanglin, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, fresh from a trip to Iraq and Afghanistan, said today that she opposes sending more troops to Iraq and supports instead the phased redeployment of U.S. troops out of Baghdad.
Clinton, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and a potential candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, appeared on morning television programs in making her first comments since President Bush announced plans to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq.
"I am for redeploying our troops out of Baghdad and eventually out of Iraq so that we can make sure that they're not in the midst of a civil war," she said on CBS' Early Show.
The senator said that Bush, in his call for U.S. troops to support Iraqi troops in stemming sectarian violence, "failed to put any leverage" on the Iraqi government.
"I don't think begging a government that has shown no willingness to make tough decisions is a strategy," she said on NBC's Today. She said Washington should threaten to cut off funds for Iraqi troops and for the protection of Iraqi leaders if they do not do make political compromises to win broad support.
She said the United States should make it clear to the Iraqi government that "we're not going to fund an army that doesn't show up half the time, that is more aligned with their sectarian position than with the national identity."
She said the Iraqi government is "waiting us out."
"They intend to do everything they can to impose a particular brand of dominance over the Sunnis, and there's no reason for the Sunni insurgency, therefore, to stop," Clinton said.
EDITORIAL NOTE: Senator Clinton belatedly makes a 2 day trip to Iraq, which Senator Obama did long ago, and now is "a seasoned World Affairs expert? Note to Senator Clinton, you didn't need to make a trip to Iraq, except for your photo "ops", to know the Iraq situation is a mess. I look at this opportunistic trip as just that. You needed photos of you in Iraq because you were sadly lacking in understanding and knowledge of what is REALLY happening over there.
One hopes you will give more in depth consideration before saying YES to the President.
YOU voted FOR the invasion, remember? An invasion that cost us in lives of our soldiers, and cost the Iraqi people, common citizens, to be engulfed in a civil war that shows no sign of abating no matter how many troops President Bush sends over there to die.
Use of Military Force Against Iraq
Bill Number: H J Res 114Issue: Military IssuesDate: 10/11/2002
Sponsor:Rep Hastert, Dennis [IL-14]
Roll Call Number: 237Joint Resolution Adopted (Senate)How members voted
Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton voted YES.
Read statements Senator Clinton made in this general time period. (note: could find no comment made at the time of the vote by Senator Clinton)
Official Title of Legislation:H J Res 114: To authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.Project Vote Smart's Synopsis:Vote to adopt a joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq. Highlights: - Authorizes President to use United States Armed Forces against Iraq- Requires President to report to Congress no later than 48 hours after military action has started with his determination that diplomatic efforts alone could not protect U.S. national security nor enforce United Nations resolutions regarding Iraq- Requires President to submit a progress report to Congress every 60 days on matters relevant to this resolution House Passage Vote: 10/10/2002: Passed: 296-133 (Roll No. 455)Senate Passage Vote: 10/11/2002: Passed: 77-23. Record Vote Number: 237Presidential Action: 10/16/2002: Signed by President. Became public law #107-243.
COMPARE THE ABOVE TO SENATOR CLINTON'S STATEMENTS TODAY:
By Douglas Stanglin, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, fresh from a trip to Iraq and Afghanistan, said today that she opposes sending more troops to Iraq and supports instead the phased redeployment of U.S. troops out of Baghdad.
Clinton, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and a potential candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination, appeared on morning television programs in making her first comments since President Bush announced plans to send 21,500 more troops to Iraq.
"I am for redeploying our troops out of Baghdad and eventually out of Iraq so that we can make sure that they're not in the midst of a civil war," she said on CBS' Early Show.
The senator said that Bush, in his call for U.S. troops to support Iraqi troops in stemming sectarian violence, "failed to put any leverage" on the Iraqi government.
"I don't think begging a government that has shown no willingness to make tough decisions is a strategy," she said on NBC's Today. She said Washington should threaten to cut off funds for Iraqi troops and for the protection of Iraqi leaders if they do not do make political compromises to win broad support.
She said the United States should make it clear to the Iraqi government that "we're not going to fund an army that doesn't show up half the time, that is more aligned with their sectarian position than with the national identity."
She said the Iraqi government is "waiting us out."
"They intend to do everything they can to impose a particular brand of dominance over the Sunnis, and there's no reason for the Sunni insurgency, therefore, to stop," Clinton said.
EDITORIAL NOTE: Senator Clinton belatedly makes a 2 day trip to Iraq, which Senator Obama did long ago, and now is "a seasoned World Affairs expert? Note to Senator Clinton, you didn't need to make a trip to Iraq, except for your photo "ops", to know the Iraq situation is a mess. I look at this opportunistic trip as just that. You needed photos of you in Iraq because you were sadly lacking in understanding and knowledge of what is REALLY happening over there.
One hopes you will give more in depth consideration before saying YES to the President.
YOU voted FOR the invasion, remember? An invasion that cost us in lives of our soldiers, and cost the Iraqi people, common citizens, to be engulfed in a civil war that shows no sign of abating no matter how many troops President Bush sends over there to die.
Tuesday, January 16, 2007
OBAMA 'GOSSIP'
List this under "gossip"
Inside sources say Senator Obama is expected to announce this week, maybe as soon as tomorrow his formation of his exploratory committee. Interesting to note, Oprah still has not posted who her guest will be on her website, (see, www.oprah.com) She has made no secret of the fact she fully supports his campaign and it would be an interesting way for Senator Obama to announce he is a candidate, and provide for some question and answers from the audience. It would be a great way for him to show his ability to communicate with an audience and "hit the trail running" as Senator Clinton's politico's here in New York are poised to attack him on all fronts.
OPINION
I have personally seen Senator Clinton in person "attempting" to be "real" and communicate with we "normal middle class" sort, and I can attest that she comes across as unapproachable and "cold". The contrast between the two is easy to see and their first debate will most certainly be an interesting one. The classy gentleman, gently trying to discuss issues, and Senator Clinton coming across as "hard" and unyielding in her views.
That is the issue I have with Senator Clinton. She is not one to want to listen to others, but rather she has her point of view on issues and sticks to scripted "talking points" while Senator Obama's style is more casual, and he doesn't like to use scripted "talking points", but rather discusses issues in sessions with his team, accepting input from all sides of an issue, forms his opinions, and talks without a script.
I listened yesterday to the news networks and focused in on a discussion on MSNBC about the differences between Senator Clinton and Senator Obama. One "pundit" offered up that Senator Obama has yet to be "vetted". Now, exactly what does THAT mean. They did not explain themselves but showed a hint of where they will attack Senator Obama, the fact he has only been a Senator for 2 years You can be sure the "bloodletting" will begin hard, fast and furious once he makes his announcement, but I have faith in Senator Obama's ability to forthrightly handle any question and I suspect he will respond to attacks with truth and let the people decide.
The only issue I have is the fact, many voters do not read information and true fact about a candidate and pay more attention to "dirty political ads" and as they would a gossip rag, think it is the truth. That is what dirty politics does. They don't want the citizen to find the truth of any attack, they would prefer you believe "sound bites" of 30 or 60 second ads. It is already spreading on the web that Senator Obama is a Muslim, which he is NOT, but his father was who has since passed away. Senator Obama has had an interesting past which he lays out truthfully in his two books.
We in New York know a few dirty little secrets of Senator Clinton, but as Senator Obama says, it is time for a more civil and clean campaign rather than the old time politics of attack. I could post all the info I know about Mrs. Clinton on the web and get the gossip started, but I prefer to take a higher road and discuss her stance on the issues, and the fact I hate the way they have moulded her to fit what they consider a "cookie cutter" candidate. Everything down to the type of shoes she wears is carefully "vetted" to make sure it is in line with "photo op" situations.
You may ask then why did I vote for her re-election as a Senator? Well, they really didn't offer an alternative candidate I agreed with on some issues, and I have to admit, she does make a good senator, exactly because she is so hard and down and dirty. She can go head to head with any man in the Senate which is what we need to get bills passed. However, her weakness is the fact she does not come across as "real" or truly concerned about the neediest of our citizens and to this writer, this is a HUGE weakness I see so far. She does her "photo ops" but she truly does not really seem to bridge the gap between her wealthy lifestyle and a true understanding of the needs of the lower middle class and the poor and homeless.
Inside sources say Senator Obama is expected to announce this week, maybe as soon as tomorrow his formation of his exploratory committee. Interesting to note, Oprah still has not posted who her guest will be on her website, (see, www.oprah.com) She has made no secret of the fact she fully supports his campaign and it would be an interesting way for Senator Obama to announce he is a candidate, and provide for some question and answers from the audience. It would be a great way for him to show his ability to communicate with an audience and "hit the trail running" as Senator Clinton's politico's here in New York are poised to attack him on all fronts.
OPINION
I have personally seen Senator Clinton in person "attempting" to be "real" and communicate with we "normal middle class" sort, and I can attest that she comes across as unapproachable and "cold". The contrast between the two is easy to see and their first debate will most certainly be an interesting one. The classy gentleman, gently trying to discuss issues, and Senator Clinton coming across as "hard" and unyielding in her views.
That is the issue I have with Senator Clinton. She is not one to want to listen to others, but rather she has her point of view on issues and sticks to scripted "talking points" while Senator Obama's style is more casual, and he doesn't like to use scripted "talking points", but rather discusses issues in sessions with his team, accepting input from all sides of an issue, forms his opinions, and talks without a script.
I listened yesterday to the news networks and focused in on a discussion on MSNBC about the differences between Senator Clinton and Senator Obama. One "pundit" offered up that Senator Obama has yet to be "vetted". Now, exactly what does THAT mean. They did not explain themselves but showed a hint of where they will attack Senator Obama, the fact he has only been a Senator for 2 years You can be sure the "bloodletting" will begin hard, fast and furious once he makes his announcement, but I have faith in Senator Obama's ability to forthrightly handle any question and I suspect he will respond to attacks with truth and let the people decide.
The only issue I have is the fact, many voters do not read information and true fact about a candidate and pay more attention to "dirty political ads" and as they would a gossip rag, think it is the truth. That is what dirty politics does. They don't want the citizen to find the truth of any attack, they would prefer you believe "sound bites" of 30 or 60 second ads. It is already spreading on the web that Senator Obama is a Muslim, which he is NOT, but his father was who has since passed away. Senator Obama has had an interesting past which he lays out truthfully in his two books.
We in New York know a few dirty little secrets of Senator Clinton, but as Senator Obama says, it is time for a more civil and clean campaign rather than the old time politics of attack. I could post all the info I know about Mrs. Clinton on the web and get the gossip started, but I prefer to take a higher road and discuss her stance on the issues, and the fact I hate the way they have moulded her to fit what they consider a "cookie cutter" candidate. Everything down to the type of shoes she wears is carefully "vetted" to make sure it is in line with "photo op" situations.
You may ask then why did I vote for her re-election as a Senator? Well, they really didn't offer an alternative candidate I agreed with on some issues, and I have to admit, she does make a good senator, exactly because she is so hard and down and dirty. She can go head to head with any man in the Senate which is what we need to get bills passed. However, her weakness is the fact she does not come across as "real" or truly concerned about the neediest of our citizens and to this writer, this is a HUGE weakness I see so far. She does her "photo ops" but she truly does not really seem to bridge the gap between her wealthy lifestyle and a true understanding of the needs of the lower middle class and the poor and homeless.
Saturday, January 13, 2007
HILLARY CLINTON IN IRAQ
While people on the Network news shows wondered why Hillary Clinton was not in the all important committee session in the Senate on the situation in Iraq, it was discovered that Hillary Clinton was on a plane on her way to Iraq.
I don't quarrel with Senators and Representatives going to Iraq to discover for themselves what the situation is or to ask questions while there, and certainly Mrs. Clinton, with her most obvious weakness of lack of knowledge of World affairs, should at least make one visit, I find it to be too "contrived". It allows her to then come back after spending only 2 days there and proclaim her knowledge of what is really going on there. There is absolutely no way she can truly examine the multitude of issues facing Iraq in 2 days. She will listen to those who are running the government, and as you will discover in our other blog, Letters from Iraq (see sidebar)
there is absolutely no way she can speak as even a quasi-expert on the issue. It is convenient that she would finally make a trip to Iraq after her 6 years in the Senate and voted FOR the war, and never having gone there before to see IF HER VOTE was valid. She did not bother to make the trip until the latest action by President Bush. This will give her some "talking points" in her election bid for President and her staff and she can claim she NOW has International experience. 2 days in Iraq does not an expert make, Mrs. Clinton.
The situation in Iraq was created by the invasion of American troops directed by President Bush without consideration for the thousands of years of history regarding the different religious sects and what affect the downfall of Saddam Hussein would have on the different religious sects. The disarray in Iraq at this time, well, let's call it what it is, a civil war is built on mistrust, and thousands of years of struggle by the different religious sects who now each look to gain control. An army can not control that. An army can't control the "fake" police patrols who stop people in the streets, ask for their papers, and if they are the wrong religious sect, they are shot on the spot.
The corruption that is raging in Iraq with the dollars being shoveled into the country by the US will not be brought under control by an additional 20,000 troops.
Mrs Clinton needs to come back home and do her job. We New Yorkers want her in congress working to fight this step up in troops. She missed an extremely important investigative session, therefore, we New Yorkers were not represented in a key debate.
I don't quarrel with Senators and Representatives going to Iraq to discover for themselves what the situation is or to ask questions while there, and certainly Mrs. Clinton, with her most obvious weakness of lack of knowledge of World affairs, should at least make one visit, I find it to be too "contrived". It allows her to then come back after spending only 2 days there and proclaim her knowledge of what is really going on there. There is absolutely no way she can truly examine the multitude of issues facing Iraq in 2 days. She will listen to those who are running the government, and as you will discover in our other blog, Letters from Iraq (see sidebar)
there is absolutely no way she can speak as even a quasi-expert on the issue. It is convenient that she would finally make a trip to Iraq after her 6 years in the Senate and voted FOR the war, and never having gone there before to see IF HER VOTE was valid. She did not bother to make the trip until the latest action by President Bush. This will give her some "talking points" in her election bid for President and her staff and she can claim she NOW has International experience. 2 days in Iraq does not an expert make, Mrs. Clinton.
The situation in Iraq was created by the invasion of American troops directed by President Bush without consideration for the thousands of years of history regarding the different religious sects and what affect the downfall of Saddam Hussein would have on the different religious sects. The disarray in Iraq at this time, well, let's call it what it is, a civil war is built on mistrust, and thousands of years of struggle by the different religious sects who now each look to gain control. An army can not control that. An army can't control the "fake" police patrols who stop people in the streets, ask for their papers, and if they are the wrong religious sect, they are shot on the spot.
The corruption that is raging in Iraq with the dollars being shoveled into the country by the US will not be brought under control by an additional 20,000 troops.
Mrs Clinton needs to come back home and do her job. We New Yorkers want her in congress working to fight this step up in troops. She missed an extremely important investigative session, therefore, we New Yorkers were not represented in a key debate.
OBAMA,CLINTON MAKING 2008 MOVES
NEW YORK - Democratic Sens.
Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama (news, bio, voting record), a pair of front-runners in waiting, have shown fresh signs in recent days of joining the 2008 race, hiring senior aides while they court potential supporters in Iowa, New Hampshire and other key states.
Obama has hired policy, research and press staff for a campaign to be run from Chicago, according to several Democrats. And a senior aide to the senator, Steve Hildebrand, recently told potential Iowa supporters that word of his plans could come early next week, state party spokeswoman Erin Seidler said Friday.
Obama also has held several conversations with Rep. Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., according to the congressman's spokeswoman. Clinton also has spoken to the influential South Carolina Democrat. Read More - Yahoo news AP story by BETH FOUHY
Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama (news, bio, voting record), a pair of front-runners in waiting, have shown fresh signs in recent days of joining the 2008 race, hiring senior aides while they court potential supporters in Iowa, New Hampshire and other key states.
Obama has hired policy, research and press staff for a campaign to be run from Chicago, according to several Democrats. And a senior aide to the senator, Steve Hildebrand, recently told potential Iowa supporters that word of his plans could come early next week, state party spokeswoman Erin Seidler said Friday.
Obama also has held several conversations with Rep. Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., according to the congressman's spokeswoman. Clinton also has spoken to the influential South Carolina Democrat. Read More - Yahoo news AP story by BETH FOUHY
Tuesday, January 9, 2007
ATTACKING THE MAN - A SIGN OF FEAR?
It appears there are those bloggers and quasi-newspaper writers who would strain to find something for which they can launch their pre-emptive attacks on Barack Obama. Though I am sure Senator Obama is well aware that his entire life will be examined by those who would fight to keep him out of the White House.
In my search on the internet for articles on Senator Obama, I find bloggers digging up nonsence and trying to make a case against Senator Obama and as I read further I find they also attack other Democrats and call them hypocrites when it comes to ethical behavior. What is behind this I ask myself? It is an attempt to discredit what they fear. Fear can bring out the worst in people and their words are hurtful and harmful, yet it is for Senator Obama to be straightforward and honest as he has been. This is his weapon. Being honest with the American people.
Now I just read two blogs discussing the issue of the purchase of some land by Senator Obama where his home is from someone who had been indicted back in 2005. It appears Senator Obama purchased a parcel of land adjacent to his home from Tony Rezko, a real estate developer who was under indictment at the time. This was back in 2005 and of course the writer of the article never mentions IF Mr. Rezko was convicted of anything, and if so, what he was convicted of.
However, that being so, when asked by the Chicago Sun-Times about the transaction, Senator Obama stated honestly that it had been an unwise decision, and that he regretted he had done any business with someone who was being investigated.
My take? If you have to go back to 2005 to try and find SOMETHING, ANYTHING, that you can shout about on your blog that would discredit a man who was not even a sitting Senator at the time, you are desparate indeed. Why not discuss Hillary Clinton's Whitewater fiasco? I am a New Yorker and believe me, there are many many people who do not want Mrs. Clinton to run for President, myself among them and I vote democratic. Why not question the 50 MILLION dollars she spent to ensure a victory as Senator in the past election, when she only needed to spend a tenth of that. I do not argue the fact that Mrs. Clinton has the skill set to be a great Senator. In fact I voted for her re-election. Why? Because she is "hard" and can get down and dirty with the Republicans and get bills passed. I don't argue the fact she is doing her job well as a Senator and that is where we want her. Don't spend 50 million dollars, or shall I say "waste" 50 million when New York residents are happy with the job you are doing. What is being missed in this equation is that the people of New York are not being asked if we would vote for Mrs. Clinton in a Presidental race. Many many people I have talked to state in fact they would NOT vote for her but would prefer Barack Obama. She is going to have a tough time convicing New Yorkers she deserves to be President.
They also point out in their blog that Senator Obama, at the time a state representative gave a SHORT TERM internship to a young man who happened to be the son of a man who was a friend of the very same Tony Rezko. Now, can someone explain to me why a young man, who having done nothing wrong, and with the right qualifications, can't ask for an internship? What did Barack Obama do wrong in this instance? He gave an internship to a young man for a short term who had absolutely nothing to do with the actions or business of the same Tony Rezko. If the bloggers feel this is indicative of a corrupt atmosphere, then they need to rethink their position on this one.
Senator Obama has never avoided answering truthfully when asked if he regretted anything or anything about his background, something other Presidential hopefuls should emulate. He has been forthright and truthful in his two books about his past, admitting to when he made mistakes, something you won't find in any writings by other politicians. I think that is what some fear the most. The concept of an honest man. Yes, the media at times calls him a "rock star" but that is not the essence of the man. What scares some is that a black man, of great intelligence, great credentials and education, would dare to succeed in a democracy and perhaps be the first Black President of the United States.
In my search on the internet for articles on Senator Obama, I find bloggers digging up nonsence and trying to make a case against Senator Obama and as I read further I find they also attack other Democrats and call them hypocrites when it comes to ethical behavior. What is behind this I ask myself? It is an attempt to discredit what they fear. Fear can bring out the worst in people and their words are hurtful and harmful, yet it is for Senator Obama to be straightforward and honest as he has been. This is his weapon. Being honest with the American people.
Now I just read two blogs discussing the issue of the purchase of some land by Senator Obama where his home is from someone who had been indicted back in 2005. It appears Senator Obama purchased a parcel of land adjacent to his home from Tony Rezko, a real estate developer who was under indictment at the time. This was back in 2005 and of course the writer of the article never mentions IF Mr. Rezko was convicted of anything, and if so, what he was convicted of.
However, that being so, when asked by the Chicago Sun-Times about the transaction, Senator Obama stated honestly that it had been an unwise decision, and that he regretted he had done any business with someone who was being investigated.
My take? If you have to go back to 2005 to try and find SOMETHING, ANYTHING, that you can shout about on your blog that would discredit a man who was not even a sitting Senator at the time, you are desparate indeed. Why not discuss Hillary Clinton's Whitewater fiasco? I am a New Yorker and believe me, there are many many people who do not want Mrs. Clinton to run for President, myself among them and I vote democratic. Why not question the 50 MILLION dollars she spent to ensure a victory as Senator in the past election, when she only needed to spend a tenth of that. I do not argue the fact that Mrs. Clinton has the skill set to be a great Senator. In fact I voted for her re-election. Why? Because she is "hard" and can get down and dirty with the Republicans and get bills passed. I don't argue the fact she is doing her job well as a Senator and that is where we want her. Don't spend 50 million dollars, or shall I say "waste" 50 million when New York residents are happy with the job you are doing. What is being missed in this equation is that the people of New York are not being asked if we would vote for Mrs. Clinton in a Presidental race. Many many people I have talked to state in fact they would NOT vote for her but would prefer Barack Obama. She is going to have a tough time convicing New Yorkers she deserves to be President.
They also point out in their blog that Senator Obama, at the time a state representative gave a SHORT TERM internship to a young man who happened to be the son of a man who was a friend of the very same Tony Rezko. Now, can someone explain to me why a young man, who having done nothing wrong, and with the right qualifications, can't ask for an internship? What did Barack Obama do wrong in this instance? He gave an internship to a young man for a short term who had absolutely nothing to do with the actions or business of the same Tony Rezko. If the bloggers feel this is indicative of a corrupt atmosphere, then they need to rethink their position on this one.
Senator Obama has never avoided answering truthfully when asked if he regretted anything or anything about his background, something other Presidential hopefuls should emulate. He has been forthright and truthful in his two books about his past, admitting to when he made mistakes, something you won't find in any writings by other politicians. I think that is what some fear the most. The concept of an honest man. Yes, the media at times calls him a "rock star" but that is not the essence of the man. What scares some is that a black man, of great intelligence, great credentials and education, would dare to succeed in a democracy and perhaps be the first Black President of the United States.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
