if Obama was a white man...

[rah]

That's the main problem.
If she claimed that she was influencing policy decisions and Bill was a bit of a puppet, then there would be something. But no one has claimed that so all they have left is what she accomplished as First Lady, which when any attempt to quantify it, the results come up really thin.

In the general election, the harder she pushes that the more foolish she's going to be.
I could see McCain resurrecting that 3am commercial and using it against the Clinton camp.

And I too was unfamiliar with a lot of Obama's letislative contributions until I was called out on it here. After being forced to do a touch more research I have to admit that he has accomplished a few things that crossed party lines. We know McCain has some skills in this area. Hillary seems to be the only one that doesn't.

So in summation,
Hillary, same ole partisian politics.
Exaggerates about her presidential like experience.

Since two of her primary campaing messages are about cooperation and experience, I wonder why a lot of people think Obama is the one that is all talk and no substance.

[Q Classic]

Because Obama, for one reason or another, has refrained from tooting his legislative horn. I'll admit, it's not really riveting speech material, but I'm wondering if he's expecting a little too much from the American public by thinking that they might actually do some research or even take a look at his platform.

(For Net Neutrality, Government Transparency? Hot. Stands up for GLBT rights in a town hall filled with conservative African-American Christians, saying that some of what they say is distinctly un-Christian? Guy's got balls.)

[DinoDoc]

This Rezko deal seems to be snowballing:

Obama: Rezko Raised Up to $250K
5 hours ago

CHICAGO (AP) — Presidential candidate Barack Obama said Friday that he got more political money from indicted Chicago businessman Antoin "Tony" Rezko than he has previously acknowledged.

Rezko helped raise up to $250,000 for his various political races, Obama's campaign said. The campaign had previously put the figure at $150,000 but now says that amount was only for his 2004 Senate race.

And in interviews with two Chicago newspapers, the Democrat again said it was a mistake to involve Rezko in his purchase of a new home — not just because Rezko was under federal investigation but because he was a contributor and political activist.

Still, Obama said he did nothing unethical.

"He never once asked me for any favors, or ever did any favors for me," the Illinois senator said in an interview with the Chicago Sun-Times. "He never gave me any gifts or gave me any indication he was setting me up to ask for any favors in the future."

Obama met Friday with the editorial boards of the Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times in an effort to resolve nagging questions about his relationship with Rezko, a Chicago businessman and major fundraiser in Illinois politics.

Rezko is on trial on charges including mail fraud and attempted extortion. Federal prosecutors say he tried to use his connections to Illinois Gov. Rod Blagojevich to demand kickbacks from companies wanting to do business with state government.

Obama is not accused of any wrongdoing.

But his long friendship with Rezko has hampered his efforts to campaign as a new-style politician who abhors backroom deals and insider favors.

Rezko has not contributed to Obama's presidential campaign, but he did raise money for Obama's bids for other offices.

His staff said Friday evening that Rezko raised about $160,000 for Obama's successful run for U.S. Senate in 2004 and $60,000 to $90,000 for his state Senate campaigns and a failed bid for Congress in 2000.

Previously, his presidential campaign said Rezko was connected to about $150,000, all of which was later donated to charity.

"We reviewed our records for any contributions we believe could reasonably be credited to Mr. Rezko's political support and that is the generous estimate we concluded upon," spokesman Ben LaBolt said in an e-mail.

Rezko advised Obama on buying a new Chicago home in 2005 and his wife bought a vacant lot next to the Obamas' house. Rezko's wife, Rita, later sold part of the lot to Obama so they would have a bigger side yard.

Obama said he got no price break on his new house because Rezko was buying the lot next door from the same sellers. And he said it was Rezko's idea, not his, to buy the lot.

"He said, 'Well, I might be interested in purchasing the lot.' And my response was, 'That would be fine,'" Obama said. "This is an area where I can see sort of a lapse in judgment, where I could have said 'No, I'm not sure that's a good idea.'"

[DinoDoc]

If Romney had to answer so many stupid questions about his religion, why isn't this a bigger deal? Also does anyone really believe that this is the first he's heard of the sentiments from the man his so respects?

Outspoken Minister Out Of Obama Campaign

By Peter Slevin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, March 15, 2008; Page A01

CHICAGO, March 14 -- A campaign spokesman said Friday night that the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., former pastor at Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ, is no longer affiliated with Sen. Barack Obama's presidential race after coming under fresh scrutiny for controversial comments that the Illinois Democrat called "inflammatory and appalling."

Wright, who presided over Obama's wedding and supplied the "audacity of hope" line that has become one of the candidate's signatures, has been a source of controversy for Obama for months because of the inflammatory words and themes of some sermons.

Last month, in a meeting with Jewish leaders in Cleveland, Obama said Wright was "like an old uncle who sometimes will say things that I don't agree with."

But more examples of Wright's rhetoric surfaced this week, including a speech Wright delivered in 2006 at Howard University in which he said: "Racism is how this country was founded and how this country was run. . . . We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God." The speech was quoted in an op-ed article in Friday's Wall Street Journal.

In a letter to the Huffington Post Web site Friday afternoon -- and in a later interview on MSNBC -- Obama went further than he has previously gone to distance himself from Wright's comments, while urging voters to judge him "on the basis of who I am and what I believe in."

"All of the statements that have been the subject of controversy are ones that I vehemently condemn," Obama wrote. "They in no way reflect my attitudes and directly contradict my profound love for this country."

Obama said in the MSNBC interview that he did not "repudiate the man."

"I have known him 17 years," Obama said. "He helped bring me to Jesus and helped bring me to church. He and I have a relationship -- he's like an uncle who talked to me, not about political things and social views, but faith and God and family. He's somebody who is widely respected throughout Chicago and throughout the country for many of the things he's done not only as a pastor but a preacher."

Campaign spokesman Tommy Vietor notified reporters tonight that Wright will no longer serve his largely ceremonial role on Obama's African American Religious Leadership Committee. He declined to elaborate.

Obama has worshiped at Trinity, one of Chicago's largest and most prominent churches, for nearly 20 years. He wrote in his memoir, "Dreams from My Father" that Wright had a profound influence over him in the 1990s, when his faith was reaffirmed.

Wright, 66, married Barack and Michelle Obama and baptized their two daughters. He was to give a public invocation on the day in February 2007 when Obama launched his presidential bid. But in a move interpreted by some -- including Wright -- as an effort by the Obama campaign to impose some distance, Wright's appearance was canceled.

Obama said he first learned of Wright's controversial statements at the start of his campaign. Because of the pastor's imminent retirement and the Obama family's strong ties to Trinity and its community, he said, "I did not think it appropriate to leave the church."

"The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation," Obama wrote.

Obama also responded Friday to another lingering issue from his time in Chicago -- his relationship with indicted fundraiser and developer Antoin "Tony" Rezko. He met for about three hours with investigative reporters and editorial board members of Chicago's two biggest newspapers.

Few details appeared to be new. Obama revised upward, to as much as $250,000, his estimate of the money Rezko raised for his early campaigns. He reiterated his mea culpa about coordinating the purchase of his Chicago home with Rezko and buying a piece of an adjoining property from Rezko and his wife.

Obama, who has made ethics a centerpiece of his career, told the Chicago Tribune that he made a mistake "in not seeing the potential conflicts of interest." He said Rezko asked for no favors and added that when he asked Rezko about news media reports of his questionable dealings, the developer denied they had merit.

"My instinct was to believe him," Obama said, the Tribune reported.

Rezko is on trial in a Chicago federal court, accused of using political influence to extort money from companies hoping to do business with the Illinois government. Obama has no connection to the case.

Staff researcher Madonna Lebling in Washington contributed to this report.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
He personally might not, but it turns out that historically past "experience" doesn't seem to count much for the job. Neither Lincoln nor Eisenhower had much of it.

Lincoln, sure, but Eisenhower? I don't think you can dismiss being supreme commander of a huge multinational force - twice.

[Sirotnikov]

I'm also surprised that the reverend is not a bigger deal.

[Heraclitus]

The Magic negro can't have a mentor, it dosen't fit into the archeotype. So people buy the uncle story.

[Q Classic]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Lincoln, sure, but Eisenhower? I don't think you can dismiss being supreme commander of a huge multinational force - twice.

True, he does have that, and there are politics involved. But he didn't have any civilian government experience.

[Ramo]

If Romney had to answer so many stupid questions about his religion, why isn't this a bigger deal?

What are you talking about? The mainstream media has been trying to assuage its consumers of Romney's Mormonism, but Pumpkinhead asks Obama nonsense questions in debates about Farrakhan. 'Course, in the far right wing media, they're more critical of Mormonism, but they bring the Obama coverage to a whole new level - calling him a Muslim, etc. In short, Obama gets the rough end of this situation from the perspective of the press.

Who are getting a total pass are white Christians. Huckabee was a serious candidate for a few months, winning IA, but his sermons never got any press (and you know he can bring teh craziness). Where's the press on McCain's buddying up with Hagee? Look at how close Billy Graham has been to so many Presidents, and he's chock full of controversial statements.

[Ramo]

This Rezko deal seems to be snowballing:

From the article:

Obama is not accused of any wrongdoing.

Quid pro quo requires a quo.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ramo
Quid pro quo requires a quo.

Then why lie about the extent of his involvement with your campaign before?

What are you talking about?

It's his pastor of 20 years. The man who married him. The man who baptised his children. The man who he refers to as family. A) Does he believe the same as the man? B) Do you really think Obama never heard those statements from the man before?

[Ramo]

Then why lie about the extent of his involvement with your campaign before?

Lying requires an intentional misstatement. Again, without a quo, it's all just baseless innuendo.

His aides tallied up the contributions initially, and his campaign just released a more accurate count. I don't know what nefarious implication that's supposed to have.

It's his pastor of 20 years. The man who married him. The man who baptised his children. The man who he refers to as family. A) Does he believe the same as the man? B) Do you really think Obama never heard those statements from the man before?

That wasn't the argument. Again, Obama is getting criticism for something that the media has been giving white Christians a pass. Huckabee even denied the media access to his personal sermons.

I don't know if he first heard that Wright sermon a year ago (when the campaign began) or earlier. Nor do I particularly care. But not hearing a controversial Wright sermon from before Obama was a celebrity and youtube was popular until your campaign digs it up a few years afterwards is not particularly implausible. He probably has made many controversial statements that Obama has heard, but perhaps not these particular ones. There's obviously an element of cynicism here, but that's always the case in politics.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Ramo
That wasn't the argument.

I don't really care. You're the one changing the topic of the question I was asking.

I don't know if he first heard that Wright sermon a year ago (when the campaign began) or earlier.

We're talking about statements that date back to at least 2001. This isn't a new phase of the man's preaching career.

But not hearing a controversial Wright sermon from before Obama was a celebrity and youtube was popular until your campaign digs it up a few years afterwards is not particularly implausible.

Unless you think he only utters these opinions when Obama isn't around, I find it highly improbable that he has never heard those statements and similar ones from the pulpit. Obama is making the patently nonsensical claim that he only heard of his pastor's love affair with contraversy when he started the campaign. A highly likely lie as you and I both know.

There's obviously an element of cynicism here, but that's always the case in politics.

Isn't he running as a new kind of politician? Hence the repeated Change! mantra.

[Ramo]

I don't really care. You're the one changing the topic of the question I was asking.

I don't care about your dumb question. Your point was that Obama was getting a free ride on Wright. That's complete bull****. That was my point.

We're talking about statements that date back to at least 2001.

I never implied otherwise. I stated that Obama said that he first heard these statements a year ago. I don't care if he heard it one year ago or three years ago or seven years ago.

A highly likely lie as you and I both know.

Again with the lie word. He was referring to particular statements. It is not unlikely that he didn't hear these particular statements until he started his campaign (again, a year ago).

Isn't he running as a new kind of politician?

No, he's running to change the political environment regarding the influence of money and popular participation. That's what the change mantra signifies.

[Ramo]

Look, this is all politics. As a half-white politican in Chicago, he found a church slightly tinged with black nationalism as politically useful; as a half-black politician in the US, it no longer is. All major politicians do this. The thing is, Wright's a lot less objectionable (his problem is tone and timing, rather than content) than the guys that McCain hangs out with nowadays, such as Hagee:

All hurricanes are acts of God, because God controls the heavens. I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God, and they are — were recipients of the judgment of God for that. The newspaper carried the story in our local area that was not carried nationally that there was to be a homosexual parade there on the Monday that the Katrina came. And the promise of that parade was that it was going to reach a level of sexuality never demonstrated before in any of the other Gay Pride parades. So I believe that the judgment of God is a very real thing. I know that there are people who demur from that, but I believe that the Bible teaches that when you violate the law of God, that God brings punishment sometimes before the day of judgment. And I believe that the Hurricane Katrina was, in fact, the judgment of God against the city of New Orleans.

How utterly repulsive, insulting, and heartbreaking to God for his chosen people to credit idols with bringing blessings he had showered upon the chosen people. Their own rebellion had birthed the seed of anti-Semitism that would arise and bring destruction to them for centuries to come.

It was the disobedience and rebellion of the Jews, God’s chosen people, to their covenantal responsibility to serve only the one true God, Jehovah, that gave rise to the opposition and persecution that they experienced beginning in Canaan and continuing to this very day.

http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/the_mccainhagee_connection_1.php