Richardson's Response and a Great NYT Article

Bill Richardson Slams 'Typical' Clinton Gutter Politics

http://newsmax.com/insidecover/Richardson_slams_Clintons/2008/03/23/82468.html?s=al&promo_code=47D1-1

A great article:

New York Times, March 23, 2008, 7:07 pm

Denouncing and Renouncing

Some years ago when a high ranking official of the Nation of Islam was being interviewed on TV, he was challenged to denounce another prominent member of the Nation who had called Jews “bagel-eating vermin who had escaped from the caves of Europe to pollute the world.” He replied, “I’m not in the denouncing business.” He did not elaborate further, but I understood him to be saying, It is not my job either to defend or repudiate every statement made by someone I know. Neither my integrity nor my life’s work depend on my clearing myself of suspicions provoked by the words of others.

At least I hope that’s what he was saying, because it is definitely what I want to say.

In politics, and in much of the rest of life, being held responsible for your own words comes with the territory. Once you’ve opened your big mouth, others have a perfect right to ask, “Do you really mean that?” or “What did you mean by that?” or “If you say that, would you also say…?” (a question that usually has you frantically disassociating yourself from Hitler). But why should you be held responsible for words spoken by someone else, even if that someone else is a person you work with or share a bed with? I frequently say things that make my wife cringe, but whatever blame attaches to my utterances certainly should not be extended to her, and it would be entirely inappropriate to ask her to denounce me or to fault her if she didn’t.

Yet this is the position we routinely place our public figures in. The demand that Barack Obama denounce and renounce his pastor, who delivered himself of sentiments a million miles from anything Obama has ever said, is only the latest and most publicized example. In previous little dust-ups Obama has had to distance himself from Louis Farrakhan (after Hillary Clinton demanded that he both denounce and renounce) and from his own middle name. Clinton, in her turn, has been called on the journalistic carpet because of remarks made by Robert Johnson, Geraldine Ferraro, a campaign manager and her husband. John McCain has had to repudiate a talk show host who introduced him and a minister who embraced him. And it’s only March. What do we have to look forward to? Denunciations of grade-school friends who grew up to become neo-Nazis or sub-prime lenders?

This denouncing and renouncing game is simply not serious. It is a media-staged theater, produced not in response to genuine concerns – no one thinks that Obama is unpatriotic or that Clinton is a racist or that McCain is a right-wing bigot – but in response to the needs of a news cycle. First you do the outrage (did you see what X said?), then you put the question to the candidate (do you hereby denounce and renounce?), then you have a debate on the answer (Did he go far enough? Has she shut her husband up?), and then you do endless polls that quickly become the basis of a new round.

Meanwhile, the things the candidates themselves are saying about really important matters – war, the economy, health care, the environment – are put on the back-burner until the side show is over, though the odds are that a new one will start up immediately.

I don’t mean to suggest that denouncing and renouncing are never serious acts. One renounces the devil and all his works in many pre-baptismal liturgies (and in “The Godfather”). Renunciation of a position you no longer hold and now consider to be profoundly in error may be helpful to your psychological health. Renouncing a group from which you have broken away may serve the useful purpose of warning others away from the dangers you have now escaped.

Denouncing is a bit different. Usually we denounce our opponents, not our friends or associates or loved ones (unless we are living in a totalitarian state where denunciations are offered as proof of loyalty). So it seems overly dramatic to denounce a supporter because he or she has uttered an opinion you find distasteful. Better to say something mild and nuanced – I don’t agree with that, but I’m not going to turn my back on someone because of a few unfortunate remarks – and get on with the real business at hand.

That is what Obama did in his justly praised speech. He rejected Reverend Wright’s rants against the United States and against the white power-structure, but he refused to reject the man to whom he had looked for spiritual guidance. And he deplored the tendency “to pounce” on every “gaffe,” because, he said, if we continue to do that, we’ll just be “talking about some other distraction, and then another one, and then another one.”

The odd thing is that the press that produces these distractions and the populace that consumes them really believe they are discussing issues and participating in genuine political dialogue. But in fact they have abandoned genuine political dialogue and have committed themselves to a conversation that differs only in subject matter from conversations about Eliot Spitzer’s and David Paterson’s sex lives. It’s not politics; it’s titillation clothed in political garb.
We should collectively denounce and renounce denouncing and renouncing.

About Stanley Fish - Think Again

Stanley Fish is the Davidson-Kahn Distinguished University Professor and a professor of law at Florida International University, in Miami, and dean emeritus of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of Illinois at Chicago. He has also taught at the University of California at Berkeley, Johns Hopkins and Duke University. He is the author of 10 books. His new book on higher education, "Save the World On Your Own Time," will be published in 2008.

Obama Staff Registers 22,000 Voters as Democrat in One Week

Saturday, March 22, 2008 12:42 PM

(Newsmax) http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Obama_Wants_Republicans_/2008/03/22/82330.html?s=al&promo_code=47CF-1

Sen. Barack Obama trails Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton in Pennsylvania by 11 percentage points in one poll, and by 16 in another.

To help their candidate overcome the odds and win this very next Democratic primary, Obama's staff on the ground is identifying sympathetic independent and Republican voters -- trying to persuade them to register as Democrats in a house-by-house appeal, according to a report in the Los Angeles Times. Only registered Democrats can cast a vote in the Democratic contest.

And something is, indeed, happening. More than 22,000 voters registered as Democrats during the week of March 10, compared with 7,223 in the entire month of January.

"I've never seen numbers like this in one week," said Leslie Amorós, a spokeswoman for the Pennsylvania Department of State.

"If she [Clinton] loses Pennsylvania," said Joe Trippi, an adviser to former Democratic candidate John Edwards, "I don't think there are many people left who carry water for her who'll think she has much of a shot."

Meanwhile, about 200 Clinton aides also are combing the same neighborhoods, trying to drum up support for their candidate.

A handwritten sign on a wall at Clinton's Philadelphia office says it all: "Phone All Day, All the Time."

Rare Clip From Sondheim's "Evening Primrose"

One of my students found this clip. It’s one of my favorite Sondheim songs.

Here are the stats:

This short musical is based on English author, John Collier’s, short story published in the 1951 collection Fancies and Goodnights. In the original story, a sensitive young man retreats from the cruel world by moving into a department store. He plans to hide in the daytime when the store is open, coming out only after closing hours at night, helping himself to food and clothing and writing materials from the store's merchandise. Then he learns that the store is populated by a Morlock-like group of subterraneans with the same idea but different motives, who spend their daylight hours hiding in plain sight, disguised as department-store mannequins. Among the living mannequins is a beautiful girl named Ella who was abandoned in the store as an infant and who has lived among the subterraneans for her entire life. The young man falls in love with her and tries to rescue her. Unfortunately for the two young lovers, their relationship is forbidden by the leader of the group, and escape appears to be their only option. The ending provides a Twilight Zone-like twist. In fact, a well-known "Twilight Zone" episode ("The After-Hours") handled a similar idea in a much better way: use plaster dummies (with the facial features of real actors) to play inanimate mannequins, then bring on the real actors when the mannequins come to life. I remember seeing this episode as a child and it scared me so much for several years I would panic when I was in a store at closing time.

Due to the short length of this musical (less than an hour), there are only a few songs ... but the Sondheim score is excellent. The best song is the poignant ballad "I Remember Sky", sung by the beautiful girl (who has lived in the store from early childhood) as she tries to recall her brief existence in the living world. This girl (the "evening primrose" of the title) is played by Charmian Carr, who gives a much better performance here than she did as Liesl von Trapp in "The Sound of Music".

Written specifically for the television anthology series ABC Stage 67, it aired on November 16, 1966. Directed by Paul Bogart, it starred Anthony Perkins (Charles), Charmian Carr (Ella), and Dorothy Stickney. The program was taped after regular business hours at the now-defunct Stern Brothers department store in Manhattan.An official soundtrack recording never was released commercially, but Sondheim did order a privately-pressed recording which he gave to friends and cast members.

The 1966 TV special "Evening Primrose" still attracts interest because of its score by Stephen Sondheim and its leading performance by Sondheim's long-time friend and collaborator Anthony Perkins. A kinescope of "Evening Primrose" can be viewed at the Museum of Television & Radio in New York City. The curator receives frequent requests to view this show.

Was Clinton’s Patriotism Comment Intentionally Ambiguous?

Clinton said today in Charlotte, North Carolina, that it would be great if the general election were between his wife, Democratic Senator Hillary Clinton of New York, and Republican Senator John McCain of Arizona. The vote would involve ....two people who loved this country and were devoted to the interest of this country,’’ Bill Clinton said.....People could actually ask themselves who is right on these issues, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics,’’ he said.

Merrill "Tony" McPeak, a former chief of staff of the Air Force and currently a co-chair of Obama’s presidential campaign, learned of the remarks while at an Obama rally in Salem, Ore. Afterward, he called Clinton’s statement horrible and compared it to McCarthy, the Republican senator from Wisconsin who held hearings on suspected Communist sympathizers in the 1950s.

"It sounds more like McCarthy," McPeak said. "I grew up, I was going to college when Joe McCarthy was accusing good Americans of being traitors, so I’ve had enough of it."

Clinton campaign spokesman Phil Singer rejected the comparison.

"To liken these comments to McCarthyism is absurd," Singer said. He said McPeak was "clearly misinterpreting" the remarks and suggested that might be an intentional effort to divert attention from a recent controversy involving controversial statements by Obama’s former pastor.

In a posting on Hillary Clinton’s Web site Friday, the campaign said the former president was simply talking about the need to keep the race focused on issues, "rather than falsely questioning any candidate’s patriotism."

McPeak, who served under Clinton and the first President Bush, was skeptical.

"It’s a use of language as a disguised insult. We’ve seen this before, this little clever spin that’s put on stuff," McPeak said. "I have no idea what his intentions are, but I’m disappointed in the statement. I think Bill Clinton is, or ought to be, better than that."

The former president has attracted criticism over earlier comments during the heated Democratic primary race. Following South Carolina’s primary in January, he was accused of fanning racial tensions for appearing to cast Obama as little more than a black candidate popular in state with a heavily black electorate.

He also criticized the news media for making a race story out of his comments.
Here’s another take on whether Clinton has a chance to win the nomination from Politico. If it is mathematically impossible for her to win the nomination then why is she staying in the race?

Story Behind the Clinton Myth

http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080321/pl_politico/9149;_ylt=AqDJvjfMHx8.0hYByu9.IGRh24cA

Why Richardson Endorsed Obama

Well...In regards to Richardson's switching his endorsement to Obama, James Carville has compared Governer Richardson to Judas betraying Christ.

“Mr. Richardson’s endorsement came right around the anniversary of the day when Judas sold out for 30 pieces of silver, so I think the timing is appropriate, if ironic,” Mr. Carville said, referring to Holy Week.

Considering the fact that Richardson is a smart guy with well-developed political chops and five Nobel Peace Prize nominations, he knew full well what he was doing and what the vindictive ire of the Clinton machine would be. Yet, he followed his conscience. He believes, as I do, that Obama is a remarkable leader.

Here are some of Richardson's thoughts.

“Senator Barack Obama addressed the issue of race with the eloquence and sincerity and decency and optimism we have come to expect of him,” he said. “He did not seek to evade tough issues or to soothe us with comforting half-truths. Rather, he inspired us by reminding us of the awesome potential residing in our own responsibility.”

He added: “Senator Obama could have given a safer speech. He is, after all, well ahead in the delegate count for our party’s nomination.”

Mr. Richardson said he was dispirited by the tone of the Democratic nominating fight, reflecting a sentiment that has been increasingly voiced by party leaders. Unlike many others, though, Mr. Richardson placed the blame on Mrs. Clinton.

“I believe the campaign has gotten too negative,” Mr. Richardson said, speaking to reporters in Portland. “I want it to be positive. I think that’s what’s been very good about Senator Obama’s campaign — it’s a positive campaign about hope and opportunity.”

Read the entire New York Times article at:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/22/us/politics/22richardson.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&th&emc=th

Righteous Anger

Check out cnn.com/360 for full texts of Rev. Wright's sermons.

Rev. Wrights sermon is powerful and passionate. His sermon is also angry *BUT* it is righteous anger. How ironic this issue of race has occurred at Easter.

After his triumphal entry into Jerusalem, Christ overturned the tables of the money changers in the temple in righteous anger. Was he a coo coo? Was it wrong for him to be angry because people in his country were using the name of God to extract money and make a profit from the poor? I see no difference when a pastor who has devoted his entire life to helping the poor, weak and undefended becomes angry about the way the poor are mistreated in this country and by corporate greed allowed by this country. Is it wrong to speak out against injustice? Maybe we need a little bit more passion in our churches. Maybe we need to be a bit more passionate about what is righteous and just. Or have we lost sight of what it means to be a true Christian?

It is not difficult to find a full text of Rev. Wright's sermons...and yet....those who WANT to hate will not even look for the truth but justify their hatred by intoning FOX entertainers' hateful mantras or by asserting they can judge a man's entire life and thought by a questionable 30 second sound bite.

Reading these blogs, it is apparent generations of hatred and fear have blinded many of my fellow white Americans. They are like sheep led by media wolves in sheep's clothing. I'm sure there is a corresponding degree of hatred and fear in the black community and among other minority peoples. When our selves or our personal worldview is threatened we tend to protect ourselves by reaching for what is familiar and safe. For some, hatred feels like safe ground. However, it is possible to rise above such a visceral response.

I admire Obama for rising above the usual political dialogue and reaching for the higher ground of mutual understanding and reconciliation. I am encouraged there is the possibility and the call for open dialogue. I am relieved many Americans have evolved to embrace a broader view of common humanity. I am inspired by Obama's courage to plainly state the truth even though he knows the American people are more used to the manipulative Soma of spin. He is telling the truth...and the truth is hard for some people to hear.

America...take a deep breath...then open your eyes and hearts to the Truth.

Healing the Wounds of Race

By Jim Wallis

It has simmered throughout this campaign, and now race has exploded into the center of the media debate about the presidential race. Just when a black political leader is calling us all to a new level of responsibility, hope, and unity, the old and divisive rhetoric of race from both blacks and whites is rearing its ugly head to bring down the best chance we have had for years of finally moving forward.

And that is indeed the real issue here. A black man is closer to possibly becoming president than ever before in U.S. history. And this black man is not even running as "a black man," but as a new kind of political leader who believes the country is ready for a new kind of politics. But a new kind of politics and a new face for political leadership is deeply threatening to all the forces that represent the old kind of politics in the U.S. And all the rising focus on race in this election campaign has one purpose and one purpose alone—to stop Barack Obama from becoming president of the United States.

Barack Obama should win or lose his party’s nomination or the presidency based on the positions he takes regarding the great issues of our time and his capacity to lead the country and the U.S.’s role in the world. He must not win or lose because of the old politics of race in the U.S. That would be a tragedy for all of us.

The cable news stations and talk radio are playing carefully selected excerpts of the most potentially incendiary statements from Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s fiery sermons. Wright is the retiring pastor of Barack Obama and his family’s home Trinity Church in Chicago. Obama, while affirming the tremendous work his church has done in his city and around the nation, has condemned the most controversial remarks of his pastor. But the whole controversy points to the enormous gap in understanding between the mainstream black community in the U.S. and the experience of many white Americans. And that is what we are going to have to heal if we are ever to move forward.

Here is what I mean.

There is a deep well of both frustration and anger in the African-American community in the U.S. And those feelings are borne of the concrete experience of real oppression, discrimination, and blocked opportunities that most of America’s white citizens take for granted. African Americans across the spectrum of income and success will speak personally to those feelings of frustration and anger, when white people are willing to listen. But usually we are not. In 2008, to still not comprehend or seek to understand the reality of black frustration and anger is to be in a state of white denial - which, very sadly, is where many white Americans are.

The black church pulpit has historically been a place of prophetic truth-telling about the realities that black people experience in their own country. Indeed, the black church has often been the only place where such truths are ever told. And, black preachers have had the pastoral task of nurturing the spirits of people who feel beaten down week after week. Strong and prophetic words from black church pulpits are often a source of comfort and affirmation for black congregations. The truth is that many white Americans would indeed feel uncomfortable with the rhetoric of many black preachers from many black churches all across the country.

But if you look beyond the grainy black-and-white clips of the dashiki-clad Rev. Wright and the angry black male voice (all designed to provoke stereotypes and fear), and actually listen to what his words are saying about the U.S. being run by "rich white people" while blacks have cabs speeding by them, and about the U.S.’s misdeeds around the world, it’s hard to disagree with many of the facts presented. It’s rather the angry tone of Wright’s comments that provides the offense and the controversy.

Ironically, a new generation of black Americans is now eager and ready to move beyond the frustration and anger to a new experience of opportunity and hope. And nobody represents that shift more than Barack Obama. There is a generational shift occurring within the black community itself. This shift is between an older generation that is sometimes perceived to be stuck in the politics of victimization and grievance, and a younger generation that believes that opportunity and progress are now possible—not by ignoring, but by being committed to actually changing the facts of oppression and discrimination.

Barack Obama represents that hope of dealing with the substance of the issues of injustice while at the same time articulating the politics of hope, and even the possibility of racial unity. Obama’s attraction to many who are white, especially a new generation, demonstrates the promise of a new racial politics in the U.S. But to be a leader for a new generation of black Americans, Barack Obama had to be firmly rooted in the black church tradition, where the critique of white America, the sustenance of the African-American community, and God’s promise for the future are all clearly articulated. That’s why he began attending Trinity Church, where he was converted to Jesus Christ in the black liberationist tradition of, among others, Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.

So it would be a great tragedy if the old rhetoric of black frustration and anger were to now hurt Barack Obama, who has become the best hope of beginning to heal that very frustration and anger. Obama has never chosen to talk about race in the way that Rev. Jeremiah Wright does on the video clips that keep playing, and indeed has never played "the race card" at any time in this election. It’s been his opponents that have, especially the right-wing conservative media machine that wants the U.S. to believe he is secretly a Muslim and from a "racist" church.

This most recent controversy over race just demonstrates how enormous the gap still is between whites and blacks in the U.S. - in our experience and our capacity to understand one another. May God help us to heal that divide and truly bless America.

Appealing to Our Higher Selves

McCain is a legitimate war hero. He survived being blown up in a accidental plane accident, he survived a airplane crash and near drowning and he survive imprisonment and torture in a concentration camp. McCain is one tough guy. As a senator, McCain has demonstrated his toughness, stubbornness and childhood tendency to buck authority and think for himself. He garnered both a reputation as a maverick and a fun guy to have at a party. But the question is what has McCain really done? When he was a soldier, did he lead men into battle? Did he formulate military strategies? Was he a military leader? He is a war hero because he survived incredible odds and showed great courage. Is he a leader or a survivor?

The Clintons are survivors. Throughout their political careers they have survived missteps and serious allegations of misconduct. They survived misguided financial involvements and outrageous affairs. In office, they seemed to be on a Juggernaut of disaster on a monthly basis. They were able to weather partisan attacks and come out smiling. They’ve proven they can protect themselves in a hostile Washington climate. Can they lead? Sure, Bill has proven he can lead with incredible charm and political skill. Can Hillary lead? Well…Hillary was on committees. Now I’ve been on a lot of committees. Everyone says their piece (sometimes merely to justify why they are on the committee), members toss some ideas around, duties get assigned and not much gets accomplished. If we were to rate Hillary on her leadership by assessing the role she played in pushing through more progressive health care reform Hillary wouldn’t get high marks. Sure she was there. Sure she worked on the committee. The question was what got done? Bill does claim Hillary worked with him on many issues he negotiated as president. But were the decisions Bill made his or hers? Hmm? Maybe both. If Hillary is elected will we just be electing Billary again for a third term?

Obama seems to be the only candidate to have legitimately been a leader. Obama has proven he is a highly effective community organizer. His ability to organize, inspire, delegate, pick quality talent and make things happen is well proven by both his community work and by his brilliant campaigns. In the Senate, he has shown good judgment in making thoughtful choices and taken leadership positions while working with others. He consistently takes strong stands for the rights of all Americans. He has pushed consistently for reform and shown such exemplary skill as a politician and brilliance as a person he has earned the respect of everyone he has worked with. During this campaign, he has shown remarkable restraint and wisdom while under heavy personal attack. He has done more than survive. His articulate reframing of incendiary issues has set new precedents. Hillary has appealed to what is worst in America. Obama appeals to our higher selves and asks us to believe there is hope for a brighter tomorrow. While the Republicans and the Clinton campaign seek to win by dividing the country, Obama seeks to win by bringing the country together. Aren’t these the qualities every American wants in a president?

It is my hope the American people will elect a president I can respect. I hope that president is Barrack Obama.

Obama's Statement

Is Hillary Worthy of Being The First Woman President?

I'd love to see a woman break the glass ceiling and become President of the United States. I've always thought a woman would bring a new perspective to the "boys club". However, (and unfortunately there is a "however") I was hoping the first woman president would possess the strength of character and personal integrity needed to still all future criticism. Sadly, I don't feel Hillary Clinton possesses either strength of character or personal integrity. Therefore, I shudder at the thought of her representing her sex as the first woman president of the United States.

Hillary does possess the political acumen to be President. But, apparently, Hillary’s handlers felt she was handicapped by her analytical stoicism and a cold, calculating demeanor. They prompted her to soften up and use tears as a manipulative device, brighten her piercing gaze and changed the timbre of her voice. Unfortunately, that act made her passive aggressive (or a two-faced...take your pick) tendencies all the more glaring. It is stomach turning to watch her smile sweetly while saying she admires Obama and would love to have him as her Vice and then turn around and make subliminally racist references followed by comments that McCain is more qualified to be Commander in Chief than Obama. Hillary, the artist formally known as Mrs. President, has changed her image each month like a chameleon and deflected criticism even as she twists around and stabs her opponent in the back. This duplicity seems to have contributed to problems with her team’s unity and organization. Her clan and her compatriots rile and compete and leap before they look as she fires, rearranges and reins in her "overly enthusiastic" hubby. It is painful to watch her hug Bill with a grimacing smile as he stands near or far, depending on the polls, always reassuring the “white male voters” that the ex-Prez of the White House is ready to step in if needed.

Why is this terrible "game" so reminiscent of a "Mean Girl" running for High School class president? Hillary, and her corporate cronies and supporters in the media, has already been instrumental in dividing the country along racial and economic lines. Yet she glibly asserts that once the nomination is secured the democratic base will coalesce against the “evil Republicans”. Hmmm? I have my doubts black voters will forgive the racial hatred the Clinton campaign has fanned into a flame. I doubt the "Latte-Sipping" Internet crowd will all jump back on board enforce. McCain is a touted as a maverick moderate…true or not. If Hillary is the Democratic nominee there is a very good chance we will have a Republican president next year.

Has Hillary, in her hunger to be the historic first Woman president, destroyed the integrity of her party, dampened an amazing new enthusiasm for participation in the democratic process and undercut a real chance for progressive governmental change by undermining a truly exemplary leader? I hope not. I hope the people of the U.S. can see beyond the increasingly virulent attacks on Obama and realize where these attacks are coming from and what they mean. The "ruling elite" (and there is one) do not want Obama to be the first black president because Obama does believe in and will work to ensure life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for ALL the people of this democracy. I respect Obama's calm and compassionate response to those who seek to wound him and the ones he loves. I would be honored to call him Mr. President.

Where there is HOPE there is a WAY.

Is Obama Mocking?

There were 951,000 hits on Google for articles using the word “mock” in reference to Obama. Obama did technically mock Hillary by mildly imitating her in the YouTube video listed below. But upon examination most of the articles that used the word “mock” to describe Obama “mocking” Hillary, instead go on the describe him using very mild humor, defending himself or just stating his case. The word “mocking” is a strong accusation. I believe is being used as a subliminal attack because when Hillary actually mocks Obama quite intensely the press says she is “being tough” and is not being negative or derisive. Incredible!

mock (m k)
v. mocked, mock·ing, mocks
v.tr.
1. To treat with ridicule or contempt; deride.
2.
a. To mimic, as in sport or derision. See Synonyms at ridicule.
b. To imitate; counterfeit.
3. To frustrate the hopes of; disappoint.
v.intr.
To express scorn or ridicule; jeer: They mocked at the idea.
n.
1.
a. The act of mocking.
b. Mockery; derision: said it merely in mock.
2. An object of scorn or derision.
3. An imitation or a counterfeit.
adj.
Simulated; false; sham: a mock battle.
adv.
In an insincere or pretending manner: mock sorrowful.

Adj. 1. mocking - abusing vocally; expressing contempt or ridicule; "derisive laughter"; "a jeering crowd"; "her mocking smile"; "taunting shouts of `coward' and `sissy'"

Hillary Mocks Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzoiPnrCwSc&feature=related

Obama Mocks Hillary
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uI57PxjUL_k

New Race Row Rocks Democrats as Mississippi votes
by Evelina Shmukler
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080311/pl_afp/usvote
Obama leads by about 100 delegates after 45 Democratic contests, and has mocked the Clintons' talk of a presidential "dream ticket" headed by the New York senator. The Ferraro race row made that prospect seem even more distant.


Obama mocks trailing Hillary's veep proposal
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/World/Obama_mocks_Hillarys_veep_proposal/articleshow/2856220.cms BILOXI (MISSISSIPPI): Barack Obama headed into Tuesday's primary in Mississippi, a state he is tipped to win, mocking talk of a "dream ticket" headed by his rival Hillary Clinton.

Obama mocks Clinton… mocking Obama
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/01/obama-mocks-clinton-mocking-obama/
PROVIDENCE, Rhode Island (CNN) — It was one week ago Sunday that Hillary Clinton stood in the rec center at Rhode Island College and mocked fellow presidential candidate Barack Obama for his campaign's theme of hope, saying Obama can't just "wave a magic wand and have the special interests disappear."… "I think she was here, right?" Obama said toward the end of his stump speech. "She was saying 'Oh, you know, he thinks that the clouds will part and… [that] he's so naïve.'" The room quickly erupted in "boos.""Wait, wait, wait," he said. "He thinks he can wave a magic wand," he continued, mocking Clinton's impression, "and suddenly everything will be great."

Obama tells Clinton: I don't whine
By: Ben Smith http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8717.html Obama, in response, accused her of whining about losing political battles, and countered her attacks with mockery.

Obama mocks idea of ticket with Clinton
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-03-10-joint-ticket_N.htm COLUMBUS, Miss. (AP) — Democrat Barack Obama ridiculed the idea of being Hillary Rodham Clinton's running mate Monday, saying voters must choose between the two for the top spot.

Obama mocks Clinton’s ‘vast foreign policy experience’
Posted by: Caren Bohan March 2nd, 2008
http://blogs.reuters.com/trail08/2008/03/02/obama-mocks-clintons-vast-foreign-policy-experience/WESTERVILLE, Ohio - Democratic U.S. presidential candidate Barack Obama mocked his rival Hillary Clinton’s “vast foreign policy experience” on Sunday, saying her 2002 vote to authorize the war in Iraq showed a lack of judgment on national security matters.

Obama mocks Clinton 'impatience'
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7196902.stm US Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has turned to humour in an effort to boost his campaign against rival Hillary Clinton.

Rubert Murdoch Support Hillary's Campaign

From NewsMax.com...

While Rupert Murdoch and the company he runs, News Corp. which also owns Fox News, may have a decided tilt to the right, the firm’s employees have contributed far more money to Democratic presidential candidates than to Republicans.

Opensecrets.org, which tracks campaign donations, found that of 27 contributions from people who identified themselves as employees of News Corp., 25 went to Democrats.

The majority of contributors, 19, gave to Hillary Clinton’s campaign, donating $32,100 in all. Five gave to Barack Obama, totaling $3,600.

Only two employees gave donations to Republicans — one each to John McCain ($2,300) and Fred Thompson ($1,000), Broadcasting & Cable magazine reported.

News Corp. president/CEO Peter Chernin gave $2,100 to Democrat Chris Dodd and also gave to Clinton and Obama.

And News Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch made one contribution, giving $2,300 to Hillary’s campaign.

Hillary’s Foreign Policy Record Examined

Associated Press: Clinton's Foreign Policy Record Examined

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080308/ap_on_el_pr/clinton_s_experience;_ylt=AtjoyXgoc53oJE2MDFwxvoVh24cA

Check it out. Not quite what she says it is...hmm.

If Hillary is Nominated I’m Voting for McCain

Maybe I'm not in the know, but when did the people of the U.S. decide it was exemplary to try to win an election for President by changing your persona several times to "find your voice", dish dirt, stir up bigotry and fear and be openly passive aggressive? I have no respect for Hillary Clinton's attempt to win the Presidency at any cost. Is that the kind of President we want? She's manipulative and secretive. She's not an agent of change.

The press also changes colors as easily as a chameleon. I get to watch the spin on all the news stations because I live with Fox fans. Currently, FOX has all but endorsed Hillary. Is that a red flag or what? Even on CNN...when Hillary attacks Obama she is "being tough and proving she has what it takes to be a strong president". When Obama counterattacks Hillary he is "being unfairly aggressive and mocking". Hillary responds by shedding a few tears and tenderly sharing about how hard it is on the campaign trail (for the women), then she hucks it up on Saturday Live (for the youth) then puts ads on Fox Sports channel (for the "rural" folks). While Hillary is lauded for handing the Republican campaign whatever dirt she can dig up on Obama, Obama is being encouraged not to dump the honking truck load of dirt the whole world knows about Billary because it might damage a Democrats chance of being elected president. Huh? That dump truck is going to get unloaded by McCain in a heart beat if she is the nominee? Why is that being ignored? Haven't the Clintons already used up their nine lives? Yeah, they are survivors and fighters but they keep having to fight for and survive their own foolish mistakes. DO THEY HAVE A TRACK RECORD OF GOOD JUDGEMENT? NOPE! Then Hillary keeps claiming Obama has no policy platform and is just a good speech maker. Huh? First, what is wrong with having clarity of thought, good judgement, articulate speech and the ability to inspire people? Second, I just heard some political pundits on NBC concede Obama has developed an extensive and detailed policy and has many great ideas...but there is a public PERCEPTION (carefully groomed by conservative media outlets, the Republican pundits and the Billary machine) that he doesn't. Could it be there is an entity that does not want Obama to be president because he is empowering the PEOPLE of the U.S.? Empowered people are hecka difficult to manipulate and control.

So, Obama is in the chess game of his life. How does he face off with Hillary without taking the low ground, attacking a weeping white woman and destroy the chances of the Democratic party to win the election? Behind the "softer eyes" and "sweet smile" Hillary has adopted of late to appeal to her target demographic there is a cold and calculating player who loves being on the attack and revels in the kill. She is a strong debator with a brilliance for strategic planning... DOES THAT ALONE MAKE HER THE BEST CHOICE FOR PRESIDENT? Not in my book.

Obama is standing toe to toe with an entrenched political machine. He also stands as a beacon of reason in a crazy political circus. I'M PULLING FOR OBAMA! Don't be discouraged. Keep fighting for change!

Wake-up America.

Hillary's True Colors?

Hillary Buys Advertisement Time on Fox

Financial concerns have also played a decision by Clinton’s campaign to buy time on the Fox sports channel to broadcast across Texas a town-hall-style forum that she will hold Monday near Austin.

Her aides said the venue was chosen in part to reach white male voters who had moved steadily to Mr. Obama. But the bigger factor, they said, was that the channel was a relatively inexpensive outlet.

See original article:

Obama Spends Heavily to Seek Knockout Blow

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/02/us/politics/02primary.html?_r=1&th=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&emc=th&adxnnlx=1204477842-Innd74lqIk7V2ZQRdo7nLw