Yes, it was Randi Rhodes at an Obama event in SF. Most (all) accounts leave out that part.

Most Hillary supporters I know don't plan to vote for McCain if O is the nominee. Most of us will not vote in the presidential race.

If we are such low priority to the Dem Party, they can go ahead and try to win elections without us. I have not heard any of our Dem leaders speak out against the blatant misogyny used against Clinton. It would have gone a long way if Obama had simply acknowledged it.

Posted at April 10, 2008 8:08 PM in response to Poll: Obama Slips Against McCain, Now Losing Among Independents

Obama's going down. Sooner or later -- hopefully sooner.

If he gets the nomination, when he goes down in flames to McCain, you can all scream how it was all Hillary's fault! That'll make you all feel better, and give you validation to continue your intense hatred of anything Clinton. How happy you'll be! Kind of too bad that we'll be so consumed fighting President Crazy Train that your Hillary hatred may have to take a back seat for a while though... ;(

Oh, the Silver Lining! If O's the nominee, you will all suddenly remember Corporate press is no friend of the Democratic Party, which you seem to have conveniently forgotten for the short-term.

Posted at April 1, 2008 4:36 PM in response to Hillary Telling Local Media In Future Voting States That Obama Wants Race To End

Ohhhhh. The Politics of Change in action! Screw the voters, just split it 50/50! LOL!! Or is this Chicago Style politics?

Posted at March 12, 2008 6:11 PM in response to Report: Obama's Michigan Campaign Co-Chair Says Obama Campaign Opposes Any Revote

I think Team Obama is so used to the free pass he's gotten from the press, and bloggers that they're feeling a little over-confident that they can say and do anything and it won't be questioned.

If he wins the nomination, of course the press will start asking the harder questions, and looking more closely at what he says, (and I'm sure even throwing in the occasional "misinformation"). Unfortunately, it will be too little, too late.

Posted at February 14, 2008 3:45 PM in response to Report: Obama Campaign Wrong On Hillary And NAFTA

"...This is great. To be fair, Hillary Clinton has talked a lot about infrastructure in the debates and in her speeches. . .but to my knowledge she had not proposed anything as tangible as this national infrastructure bank concept..."

Clinton's August 7th, 2007 Rebuilding America: Improving our infrastructure speech:

"Investing in energy efficient infrastructure is one of the cheapest, cleanest, fastest ways we know to cut energy use and reduce emissions. In fact, the Department of Energy estimates that energy efficiency along, could cut national energy use by 20 percent in 20 years. It's a no-brainer – which is slightly higher standard than the current one we have Washington.

This is an issue whose time has come. And I'm proud to co-sponsor Senator Dodd and Senator Hagel's National Infrastructure Bank Act that we just introduced to establish a federally-backed independent bank that will evaluate and finance large infrastructure projects by subsidies, loan guarantees, and bonds backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. "

Link to speech:

http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/speech/view/?id=3889

And a second source - co-sponsors listed at Thomas.gov

http://www.thomas.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d110:55:./temp/~bdyBuv:@@@P|/bss/d110query.html|

Posted at February 14, 2008 12:55 PM in response to Finally! A Serious Proposal on Infrastructure

I have to say that in naming a non-running candidate who you agree with on FP, that you chose Chuck Hagel (who I've not heard mention running) as opposed Wes Clark (who says repeatedly that he wants to run and thinks about it every day), is kind of a shock. Is Clark too liberal for you?

Posted at August 24, 2007 3:20 PM in response to Brzezinski Endorses Obama; Calls Hillary Clinton's Foreign Policy "Very Conventional"

Unfortunately, this isn't a solid blue state. Brown would do great in CA, NY, etc. Here, Brown will do well in the NE (Cleveland area) - the rest of the state - not so much.

Paul appeals to more than liberals. That's what will beat DeWine.

For those suggesting Paul run against Mean Jean in OH-02 - not gonna happen. Repubs would have yanked MJ in a heartbeat if Hackett had entered that race.

Posted at February 14, 2006 1:13 PM in response to Statement from Paul Hackett

Thank you for the brief, brilliant spark of hope you gave us Mr. Hackett. The ugly truth of politics rears it's head and reminds us that it's all a game for the elite and we are but little pawns in their game...

Haven't read through the comments yet, but wonder if anyone has suggested you run 3rd party? I know personally I've been disillusioned one too many times by the "establishment" politicians. As much as Ralph Nader is despised and blamed for 2000, he's been telling us for years what many just do not want to accept. We really do have a one party system, owned and run by Big Business...

Bless you Mr. Hackett. Peace and prosperity to you and your family always.

Will be listening for you on Ed Schultz soon!

Posted at February 14, 2006 12:31 PM in response to Statement from Paul Hackett

Posted at January 10, 2006 11:19 AM in response to Cause and Effect

Two documents just posted:

Diebold check stub to Abramoff's firm, Greenberg Traurig:
$12,500 to Greenberg Traurig

This one's a doozy: Diebold "Success fees" and a $100,000.00 "Unidentified security expense"

Anyone care to explain these success fees?

Cheers,

Bev Harris, Kathleen Wynne

Posted at January 9, 2006 7:25 AM in response to The Daily Muck