By XXLKlintonLobby

March 20, 2008 3:22 AM | Link to this

H. Klinton vs. Obama. How you consider, who will win elections?

By sjl

February 26, 2008 9:19 AM | Link to this

Some of the posts on this blog are simply not based on facts, infact they border on ignorance, I can’t believe we the people are going to vote in obama who had one and a half years of national service before he began to run for the toughest job in the world, especially in the serious times we face. The facts are obama has lied about Hillary’s stance on NAFTA there has been report after report that has debunked his ads factcheck.org. And his healthcare flyer is an exact replica of the “harry & louise” ad perpetrated by the rightwing and insurance co. during the 90s that defeated Universal Healthcare. THIS act alone from obama tells me he doesn’t stand up to true Democratic values, along with his constant attack on Hillary in his speeches throughout this primary season. You know, obama just doesn’t have a grasp on reality here he has run the most divisive campaign against a fellow Democrat that I have personally ever seen and then believes he is going to become president and bring the rightwing to come together. This is unrealistic, we actually have deep philosophical beliefs and I am not looking for someone to cave into republicans to just get along. We are in serious trouble here folks, are economy is in deep trouble to the point that maybe we are reverting back to 3rd World status, our Foriegn Policy is disastorous and has been detrimental to our relations around the world, let alone we are in 2 wars and face other dangerous entities. Hillary knows how to deal and address with all these issues, she knows what to do, she doesn’t need a “handbook” telling her how to do them. She is the most qualified person to be our Presiden, she has had 20 years of Executive Internship, she knows how to work the beuracracies and knows that they need to be revamped with competant and qualified people, she knows where to begin, where to reform, and how to get it done. WHAT THE HELL ARE WE DOING ALLOWING THE MEDIA TO PUMP UP OBAMA TO THE POINT WE HAVE LOST ALL COMMON SENSE?

By kay

February 26, 2008 3:38 AM | Link to this

A British-Iraqi billionaire lent millions of dollars to Barack Obama’s fundraiser just weeks before an imprudent land deal that has returned to haunt the presidential contender, an investigation by The Times discloses. The money transfer raises the question of whether funds from Nadhmi Auchi, one of Britain’s wealthiest men, helped Mr Obama buy his mock Georgian mansion in Chicago. A company related to Mr Auchi, who has a conviction for corruption in France, registered the loan to Mr Obama’s bagman Antoin “Tony” Rezko on May 23 2005. Mr Auchi says the loan, through the Panamanian company Fintrade Services SA, was for $3.5 million. Three weeks later, Mr Obama bought a house on the city’s South Side while Mr Rezko’s wife bought the garden plot next door from the same seller on the same day, June 15. Mr Obama says he never used Mrs Rezko’s still-empty lot, which could only be accessed through his property. But he admits he paid his gardener to mow the lawn. Mrs Rezko, whose husband was widely known to be under investigation at the time, went on to sell a 10-foot strip of her property to Mr Obama seven months later so he could enjoy a bigger garden. Mr Obama now admits his involvement in this land deal was a “boneheaded mistake”. Mrs Rezko’s purchase and sale of the land to Mr Obama raises many unanswered questions. It is unclear how Mrs Rezko could have afforded the downpayment of $125,000 and a $500,000 mortgage for the original $625,000 purchase of the garden plot at 5050 South Greenwood Ave. In a sworn statement a year later, Mrs Rezko said she got by on a salary of $37,000 and had $35,000 assets. Mr Rezko told a court he had “no income, negative cash flow, no liquid assets, no unencumbered assets [and] is significantly in arrears on many of his obligations.” Mrs Rezko, whose husband goes on trial on unrelated corruption charges in Chicago on March 3, refused to answer questions about the case when she spoke by telephone to The Times. Asked if she used money from her husband to buy the land next to Mr Obama’s house, she said: “I can’t answer these questions, I’m sorry.” Asked how long she and her husband had known Mr Auchi, she replied: “I will not be able to answer this question.” Mr Auchi’s lawyer, asked whether the Fintrade Services loan was used to buy the land which became Mr Obama’s garden, stated: “No, not as far as my client is aware.” Mr Auchi’s links with Mr Rezko are a new political headache for Mr Obama, the charismatic Illinois senator vying to become America’s first African-American president. Hillary Clinton has sought to make Mr Rezko, who has bankrolled Mr Obama’s political career since his first run for the Illinois state senate in the mid-1990s, into an election issue by calling him a “slum landlord” in a televised debate. She has repeatedly suggested that Mr Obama has effectively not been “vetted” by media scrutiny and will not withstand “the Republican attack machine”. Bill Burton, a spokesman for Mr Obama, told The Times: “The bottom line is Obama does not recall ever meeting him [Mr Auchi].” The house-and-garden deal raised questions about whether Mr Rezko, a property developer and fast-food restauranteur, made it possible for the Obamas to purchase a mansion they could otherwise not afford. Mrs Rezko paid the asking price for the garden but the Obamas bought the house for $1.65 million, - $300,000 less than the asking price. The sellers deny they offered the Obamas a discount on the house because the garden had fetched full price from Mrs Rezko. Mr Rezko has since been indicted for allegedly scheming to pressure companies seeking business with the state of Illinois for kickbacks and contributions to the governor Rod Blagojevich’s campaign. He goes on trial on March 3. A prosecution document filed last month alleged that a “political candidate” - identified by the Chicago Sun-Times as Mr Obama - received a $10,000 campaign contribution from what is said to be a $250,000 kickback in the corruption case. That means Mr Obama’s name could figure in Mr Rezko’s trial, although he is not accused of any wrongdoing. Mr Obama insists he never used his office to do favours for Mr Rezko but admits that, as an Illinois state senator, he once wrote letters to housing officials urging them to provide money in support of a proposed apartment building for elderly people which Mr Rezko wanted to build. Mr Obama has publicly sought to atone for his closeness to Mr Rezko, paying $150,000 to charity to distance himself from a man accused of political corruption http://tinyurl.com/39t78f So, gee, looks like Obama makes very poor deals and friends and gets away with just blowing it off as “boneheaded mistake”? Is that really what we want in the next president. Oh, and just how did Hillary vote for NAFTA when Bill introduced it? I don’t recall first Ladies having votes in congress…..

By Carole R.

February 26, 2008 2:46 AM | Link to this

We don’t need a polarizing figure like Clinton at this time. I lived through that legacy and it is done. The power hungry devisiveness of a politician touting “experience” lacks passion. She predicts a “battle” with Republicans, and touts her accomplishments to this mindset as a virtue. She forgets they too are Americans. Our spirits would suffer. The nation, and the troubling world needs a smart, genuine, person with drive and energy. A thoughtful leader, a healer, and a great thinker combined. It is preposterous to suggest that anyone has the experience which makes them qualified to hold the office of the President of the United States of America. It’s not about experience. Obama can transend us. He has that special magnetism that only comes along every 40 years. This country suffers today from a unique history. The blacks in this country have a heritage that is unlike other immigrants who came to America to pursue the American dream. The majority of Blacks in America are descendents from slaves. As a nation, we all suffer from this legacy. We could have a civil war that freed the slaves. But it did not create a reality in the minds. We could have a civil rights movement that changed the laws and after 40 years, a society that has progressed towards that original proclamation. But it will take a remarkable human being who can transend a nation and free the souls. There are many blacks in this country that live in a reality that they are disenfranchised. This hopelessness is costly to our society. It packs our prisons. This is an important time in history for the right person to take the presidency to heights we have not seen since Lincoln. If he can transcend race, it will bring us all aboard the engine of prosperity as a united nation. It will jumpstart our economy, make us more productive, make us stronger. No key thing is more important to get our house in order now than to unite us as a people. There is a tide sweeping the country and it is feeling like our destiny. It is Barack Obama.

By Howard

February 26, 2008 2:41 AM | Link to this

One word about Hillary Clinton. Look up by Googling: Juanita Broderick.

By Howard

February 26, 2008 2:41 AM | Link to this

One word about Hillary Clinton. Look up by Googling: Juanita Broderick.

By Jeanie

February 26, 2008 2:38 AM | Link to this

The point is Bill Clinton created NAFTA. Hillary Clinton has not only supported it, but voted for it. Now she argues about how bad it is and how we have to stop NAFTA. She became enraged with Obama for properly pointing out her record on NAFTA. Whether you are for it or not, she distorts facts. Clinton’s are bad news. There are many reasons why the Clinton era needs to be over. It’s no accident that he has a winning well managed campaign. He is calm, with a temperment to lead. Hillary is shrill, and hysterical at this point. She now is showing America her “voice”.

By PulSamsara

February 25, 2008 11:45 PM | Link to this

Clinton attacks two points of Barack Obama foreign policy: (1) that we should actively engage both our partners and our advisories in the world… an important distinction is that engaging does not mean tea parties, slaps on the back and watching colorful folksy ceremonies meant to procure cultural assimilation between our country and another - it means active engagement meant to spell out clear differences and to point out behaviors that need improvement or simply will not be tolerated. It is spelling out long term ‘road maps’ that will be mutually beneficial for both parties. Not at all easy… but a must none the less. —- America can most certainly sit down at a table and converse from a position of strength with any nation on the globe. To surrender to fear and not actively work toward a more civilized world community in the future is to simply be handing our posterity a future of barbarism. Barack Obama is ‘dead on’ in his assessment in leveraging America’s great reservoir of national character in order to achieve a better future for those who come after us - for our children. We have seen what the opposite approach has done for America. (2) Instead of wasting America’s blood and treasure on the Iraq blunder - Obama has LONG (more than 5 years) argued that we must use America’s might to prosecute those responsible for September 11th in the Afghanistan theater of war. This ‘theater’ includes the mountainous regions of western Pakistan where Barack Obama has stated that ‘if the Pakistanis will not go after our enemies than we will’—- We have just done this via long range guided weapons attacks and have ‘eliminated’ the ‘3rd in command’. This is the approach that Mr. Obama has advocated… and again - his JUDGMENT had been correct. Clinton can talk about her ‘experience’- but when it matters Barack Obama gets it RIGHT ! Barack Obama for President of the UNITED States of America.

By Info is there

February 25, 2008 10:21 PM | Link to this

We lambast Bush for his inability to speak, and now you lambast Obama for his eloquent capabilities? Do not let yourself be drawn away from the real issues. Obama’s voting record speaks for itself and his civil service record does as well. Read his NY Times Bestselling books, and I doubt you’ll accuse him of having ‘training wheels.’ It’s time for a change. A change that , for the first time in my life, feels within my grasp and not only the grasp of special interest groups.

By Jasb

February 25, 2008 10:20 PM | Link to this

Painfultruth - have you actually read Hillary’s book? I have and her husband’s 1000 page bore. Nor did I ever vote for either of them. But the NAFTA they enacted was good for America. In the 90’s it was a major reason for the economic boom. But when W fell asleep at the switch, many bad things resulted. We need someone in charge who understands very complex economic issues and will manage the process, not defer to big business’s that just want to export jobs for some near term gains on their ticker price. Hillary can and will do that, if we give her the chance.

By tyn

February 25, 2008 7:59 PM | Link to this

Obama’s Flier found to be misleading and untrue. Source: Huffington Post Did Hillary Clinton Really Support NAFTA? Aides, Biographers Say No February 14, 2008 01:13 PM Read More: 2008 Campaign And NAFTA, Clinton Opposition, Clinton Opposition To NAFTA, As the 2008 campaign shifts to economically hard-hit states like Ohio, so too do the topics of political debate. This week, Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign has attacked Sen. Hillary Clinton on trade, arguing that she was once a supporter of the North American Free Trade Agreement that contributed to the loss hundreds of thousands of American jobs. The attack is, most observers say, misleading. The “boon” line, a paraphrase lifted from a September 2006 Newsday article, has yet to be confirmed as an authentic quote. But, more importantly, the mailer misrepresents what former Clinton administration officials and biographers say was Hillary Clinton’s long-held opposition to the legislation. Entire article found here: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/14/did-hillary-clinton-realln86674.html www.Facts.com indicates Obama is wrong as wwell.

By aim

February 25, 2008 6:54 PM | Link to this

go to facts.com about nafta they have a whole write up stating he was wrong with his facts! Obama has been generous to superdelegates 8:29 AM Sun, Feb 24, 2008 Bruce Tomaso E-mail News tips Thanks to Metro Staff Writer Jim Getz for spotting this. Capital Eye, a newsletter that tracks money in politics, notes that over the last three years, Barack Obama has given almost $700,000 from his campaign fund to the elected officials who will be superdelegates at the Democratic National Convention. (These are party powerbrokers who could decide the presidential nomination if primary voters around the country haven’t already done so by convention time.) Hillary Clinton’s campaign fund, meanwhile, has given superdelegates just over $200,000. Bearing in mind that these donations go back three years, Obama couldn’t possibly have had the foresight to know that these superdelegates might one day hold his fate in their hands. Could he? Comments (4) Leave comment The entry “Obama has been generous to superdelegates” is tagged: campaign contributions , Clinton , Obama , superdelegates Categories: Campaign finance, Democrats

By Ruby

February 25, 2008 6:44 PM | Link to this

Wake Up Ohio!!! I am voting for Hillary Clinton. She has the experience, knows the job, is a fighter, she has a realistic perspective on handling issues and how to use politically correct negotiations. The world is in a state of CRISIS and I don’t want someone in office with training wheels on. I don’t want someone that is going in with “hands on learning as you go”. I want someone that will come in and do the job immediately. The world cannot take a chance on allowing someone to come in inexperienced and not have a realistic view on handling issues and getting issues resolved. Hillary knows the job, can do the job and will bring the economic, healthcare issue, war issues to the front table. She is a Person of her Word and she goes in with a realistic AGENDA. I have full confidence that she will make a positive difference!!!! I’m not concerned with FEELING GOOD WITH INSPIRATIONAL SPEECHES. If I WANT A FEEL GOOD SERMAN, I’LL GO TO CHURCH AND LISTEN TO MY PASTOR.

By Hedcutter

February 25, 2008 6:33 PM | Link to this

If Hillary were to regain the White House it is quite likely she will be severely compromised by the shady influence peddling, to the tune of hundreds of million$ of dollars, by her and Bill for a variety of shady billionaires. One instance: “Billionaire Vinod Gupta, the owner of InfoUSA, a data-processing and marketing firm in Omaha, has paid Bill Clinton “$3.3 million in consulting fees, has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars for the Clintons’ campaigns and contributed $1 million to the Clinton Foundation. Gupta has given the Clintons the use of his private jet, and has accompanied them on vacations, including a New Year’s Day jaunt to Acapulco in 2002. Gupta’s generosity to the Clintons led to a revolt among some stockholders in his company. They are suing InfoUSA, alleging that Gupta wasted $900,000 in company funds flying the Clintons around the world and paying the former president huge fees for little work.” (Newsweek, Feb. 4,2008 edition)

By painfultruth

February 25, 2008 6:30 PM | Link to this

Hillary Clinton lies about NAFTA. Read her book. Now, what can she lie abouut next? Everything, just like her husband! Remember “I did not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinsky?” Ooops! Gotcha!

By Concerned Taxpayer

February 25, 2008 6:18 PM | Link to this

I think Clinton (and Obama for that matter) should read up on the FairTax and it’s implications regarding bolstering the economy and getting companies to bring back jobs to the US. Changing trade agreements will only go so far.