Who will endorse Hillary tomorrow? Take a wild guess.

1. There is already lots of chatter out here how a Ravenstahl endorsement could backfire. I take it with a grain of salt, honestly.

   But how much do you want to bet the national media will play this as a HUGE endorsement by Pittsburgh’s young, wildly popular superstar mayor?

2. I am sooooooooooooooooo psyched! As Tina Turner sings, Hillary is “simply the best.”

   http://youtube.com/watch?v=cCG5Tp4ZwZI

   Get the message OUT, she needs to win by much more than 18 points, I would like to see 30

3. Hopefully who ever does also denounces Obama for his continued support of Pastor Wright.

   http://www.kptv.com/video/15590623/index.html

4. Obama is not fit for any office since he belongs to a church that is the equivalent of the KKK.

   Go hillary. We need 85% of PA to stop this race from dragging on.

5. Wouldn’t you endorse Hillary? Obama now has three strikes and he is out! First, his pal Slum Lord Tony Rezko, second Louis Farrakahn, and now Pastor Wright! Obama is going to be banned for life!

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4WMqlfiQKo

6. Potter, how would you explain the Greek chorus of shrill Hillary mudslingers populating the Slag Heap, seeing as how 2 Political Junkies, for example, and the independent pittsburgh blogs seem to be populated with Obamaniacs?

   Bram
   pghcomet.blogspot.com

7. I have no explanation for the disconnect, Bram, except to say that you’re the only local blogger who posts here on a regular basis. Everyone is welcome, of course, and we’re certainly doing nothing to encourage or discourage posts from either side.

8. Chris, your thoughts on how the Wright news effects Pennsylvania voters?

9. I was speaking more of the commenters posting on 2pjs and a few others than the bloggers like myself, Chris, but thank you for answering. Obviously you are doing nothing to encourage either side. I am just wonder whether and to what degree your Hillarific commenters are “canned”, as it were, or if the City Paper online readership (who seem not to chime in on other topics) is a Clinton readership.

10. Oh, to the previous commenter, I think the Wright news will whip up both bases. I think it will in fact move a handful of undecideds to the Hillary side, but Obama’s forceful denunciation of Wright’s remarks (abhor, reject, etc) will keep all of his present informed voters on his side.

    I *do* think that if Hillary wins the nomination, the negative narrative y’all are pursuing will depress African-American turnout by about 50% (if not move some of it to the opposite camp), effectively sealing the deal for McCain.

11. Folks, don’t get your hopes too high. Voters are too intelligent to judge a candidate based on someone else’s comments. Besides, the Pennsylvanis primary is in 6 YEARS, if you know what I mean. The Wright controversy will be over in a few days. The silver lining of it all may turn out in one way or another in Obama’s advantage.

    The expectations are too high for Hillary. The whole of Pennsylvania has sided with her to the point where it’s almost as if it’s not a Democracy. So no one cares who else will endorse her, unless it is Al Gore or Nancy Pelosi. Unfortunately she’s not going to win by more than 10 points and that will be devastating for her campaign.

12. Unfortunately it’s essential to follow-up on any Clinton speech with a hefty dose of truth serum. In the latest debate, Hillary regurgitated her familiar mantra that she would veto the falsely maligned Bush taxcuts which resuscitated the U.S. economy from the inherited Clinton recession; but, which Hillary says favor only the rich. That tired old populist ploy of “soak the rich”. However , a brief review of IRS statistics related to post-Bush tax cut revenues reveals exactly the opposite. Specifically, the share of individual income taxes paid by the bottom 40% of American taxpayers, as a result of expanded child tax credits and earner income tax credits, was reduced from 0% to a -4%; and, took another ten million low income Americans completely off of the tax roles. That is, a very significant four(4) % decrease. On the other end of the scale, the tax burden on the top 20% of income earners, the so-called rich, increased to a full 85% of the total tax burden. For example a Single Individual making 30K paid $8400 in taxes under Clinton; under Bush $4500. A married couple making 60K: under Clinton $16,800, under Bush $9000. So Hillaryspeak, an economic strategy that left our Nation in a RECESSION on the Clinton’s departure from the White House, would damage the poor more then any other group. One can summarize this quite simply by noting that IF Hillary’s Marxist philosophies of soaking the rich were valid, Communist societies throughout the world would be exorbitantly wealthy, in lieu of economic basket cases a’ la Castro’s Cuba. The same can be said of her forced plan for Socialized Medicine. A program which is failing miserably in such Nations as Canada and the United Kingdom. Canada, as just one example, is now experiencing a dramatic shortfall in physicians. Greg Neubeck

13. OBAMA TRIVIA
    ============

    Here are some less known facts about the brilliant orator and presidential hopeful:

    – His first name Barak is a specific Arabic first name and his middle name Hussein is
    a specific Muslim name

    – he used alcohol, marijuana, and cocaine during his teenage years to
    “push questions of who I was, out of my mind”

    – according to his own claims both parents were declared atheists

    – Despite the fat that he claims that he has never been raised as a Muslim, in the
    various schools he attended in Jakarta, Indonesia, he was registered as a Muslim;
    also, according to his sister Maya Soetoro, “the family did not attend the mosque
    for regular worship, but for communal events”

    – his father was a polygamist, as he was already married with a child, in Kenya,
    when he married Barak Jr.’s mother: Ann Dunham; before divorcing her, he married
    a 3rd woman, Ruth, while studying in Boston, MA

    – his father’s 3rd wife, Ruth, finally left him after he repeatedly
    flew into whisky-fuelled rages, beating her brutally

    – four years after his father’s death, Obama Jr. traveled to his father’s ancestral
    Kenyan village. There he learned the full story of his father’s life and met some of
    his relatives

    – after his father, he has 6 step-brothers and a step-sister

    – after his own told recollections, he was tortured by fellow pupils – who let out monkey hoots –
    and turned into a disenchanted teenage rebel, experimenting with cocaine, marijuana and alcohol
    However a former classmate, Alan Lum, radically contradicts Barak’s claim:
    “Hawaii is such a melting pot that it didn’t occur to me when we were growing up that
    he might have problems about being one of the few African-Americans at the school. Us kids didn’t see color. He was easy-going and well-liked.”

    – While at Columbia University, his book claims, “no matter how many times the
    administration tried to paint them over, the walls remained scratched with blunt
    correspondence (about) niggers.”
    But one of his classmates, Joe Zwicker, 45, now a lawyer in Boston, said:
    “That surprises me. Columbia was a pretty tolerant place.
    There were African American students in my classes and I never saw any evidence
    of racism at all.”

    – Why would a devoted Christian from Chicago name his daughters: Malia and Sasha ?

    – According to Chicago Sun of Feb 13, 08, a volunteer setting up an Obama office in Texas
    had a Cuban flag with a picture of Che Guevara tacked up in her office

    – the Italian translation of the book “Audacity of Hope” was published with an introduction
    by Walter Vetroni, a former leader of the Italian Communist party

    – One of Obama’s good friend, campaign contributor and advisor is Tony Rezko, an Arab American, born in Syria, who is currently facing federal charges of attempted extortion, money laundering, and fraud; Obama had actually received nearly three times more campaign cash from Rezko and his associates than he has publicly acknowledged

    – Obama’s spiritual leader and counselor is Reverend Jeremiah Wright, who said in the
    newly disclosed video that the 9/11 attacks were brought on by US “terrorism.”

    – One of Obama’s fervent supporter is boxing champion Floyd Mayweather,
    who was in fact several times convicted for violence;

    – Barak has close association with the domestic terrorist organization
    members William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, as well as with Luis Farrakhan and
    the Nation of Islam seniority

    – he repeatedly ducked controversial stands in an apparent attempt to make it easier
    to be elected to higher office. For example, as a state senator in Illinois,
    he voted “present” rather than “aye” or “nay” nearly an astounding 130 times

    – he is endorsed by former Black Panther Charles Barron, and by Louis Farrakhan, the leader of the “Nation of Islam”

    – Obama is the most liberal of all 100 senators who has absolutely no military, executive or foreign policy experience

14. MORE FUN TRIVIA ABOUT BARACK OBAMA:

    1. He’s going to be our next president. Ha Ha!

15. I think this says it all:
    Barack Obama’s speech was amazing, mesmerizing, and historical. Indeed, it did tackle an issue in very blunt, honest terms. No doubt, Obama was speaking from his heart. Undeniably, race is an issue worthy of our attention. It requires a strong and robust dialogue. And the time for that dialogue is long overdue. Nobody denies that Obama seized a moment and brought many of us to tears.
    The problem is that in seizing that moment, Barack Obama twisted logic and pulled off a very clever bait and switch. In short, Barack Obama acted like a politician. Nothing wrong with that but for the fact that Obama’s whole political narrative (his “story”) sold to the American electorate is antithetic to such behavior.

    Yes, ironically, Obama’s refreshingly open, candid speech on race actually served another entirely different purpose: that of a smokescreen to distract the American public from the core of his current dilemma — his long, deep, and formative relationship with an extremely divisive figure named Reverend Wright.
    Conveniently, Obama has taken something that is an absolute and undeniable truth (race relations are a problem in America) and attached it to something that is flawed and wrong (Wright’s hate speech). It’s called a play on logic. His attempt is to confuse people and get them to agree with him on overriding theme (it’s time to be open and honest about race relations) and, therefore, tacitly and inadvertently approve of and forget about the very reason of what brought us all there in the first place (his questionable and close relationship with Wright.) You know what that technique is called? Political spin. You know who uses it? Politicians.

    True, the complexities and history of our nation’s race relations do help to explain Reverend Wright’s anger, bitterness, and hatred towards “white America.” However, race relations neither help to explain nor quantify the effect that such detrimental exposure had on Barack Obama — a current candidate for President of the United States.

    Look, I will give you Wright’s hate speech. I will condone it in context and parse it in proper perspective. I will give you all of it because of Wright’s “black experience.”

    But I will not grant you a pass on the impact such incendiary language and thoughts might have had on a very young, troubled, and impressionable Barack Obama who by his very own admission also turned to drugs to help carve out his place and identity in the world. It is indeed troubling.

    So where exactly should I find solace in the “blank slate” of Barack Obama — as a lost young man trying to figure out who he was in the world — finding himself at the knee of Reverend Wright?

    A facet of Obama’s personality — indeed a part of his core being — has now been revealed and should be examined and considered. It is fair to do so. It is responsible and necessary to do so. And, it is certainly not racist to do so.

    For me, it is disturbing to think that Obama chose such a man to be his mentor. Why would he? And perhaps, most importantly, to what effect? That is the question that Barack Obama is trying so desperately to distract us from asking ourselves.

    I don’t know what concerns me more: the fact that Barack Obama thinks that after listening to such hate-speech for 20 years, Reverend Wright didn’t leave any damaging impression on his personality and character or the fact that Obama supporters are willing to “hope” for the best, gamble the White House, and trust that Obama does not harbor any belief in any of Wright’s disturbing and divisive rants.

    Look, there were plenty of other black churches on the Southside of Chicago that Obama could have attended. Obama and his wife knowingly chose to attend and stay at Wright’s church. Just like he chose to have Wright officiate his marriage, baptize his children, help lend the words to the title of his book, and until recently serve as an advisor to his campaign. Why would anyone allow someone so divisive to so totally permeate their lives?

    Why would Barack Obama — the candidate of feel good hope — want a man who preaches such hate, anger, and bitterness around him?

    Why would Barack Obama — the candidate of change — want a man so allegedly mired and parked in the past to mentor him?

    Why would Barack Obama — the candidate of unity — want a man so divisive in nature to work on his presidential campaign?

    Why hasn’t Barack Obama — the candidate of openness and transparency — given the media access to Reverend Wright?

    None of it makes any sense. None of it adds up. All of it makes me uncomfortable — and that lack of comfort has nothing to do with our nation’s flawed race relations and everything to do with Obama’s growing hypocrisy as a politician (something he was not supposed to be).

    Written by Kristen Breitweiser

16. “In short, Barack Obama acted like a politician. Nothing wrong with that but for the fact that Obama’s whole political narrative (his “story”) sold to the American electorate is antithetic to such behavior.”

    I don’t think anyone begrudges Obama the necessity of acting like a politician. He IS a politician, and he has to be a good one. I think he does a good job not doing this in every breath, at every polished moment … but he had to give a speech as a candidate and he gave a speech as a candidate. I don’t see how this is a betrayal of his “narrative.”

    Now, to the rest of your stuff. (Which I wish I could still see, but the page changed).

    Basically, you are still confounded by his relationship with Rev. Wright, who said some hateful things and holds some hateful opinions. Okay.

    You say Obama’s speech was a “distraction” from these issues. I don’t see this. He spent a goodly portion of that speech talking about it. Of course, he could only tell his side of the story. Now we’ve heard his side of the story. I feel it gives us a lot to think about.

    You may still be repulsed and uncomprehending of his continued relationship and valued formative experience with Rev. Wright — but that is fine.

    I wonder that there has been no Hillary response for so long. I am guessing she is kind of impressed. Personally, I think Obama should just go ahead and name a running-mate.

    This is what happened, in the old system, when it got down to this!

17. It pays to know what’s going on behind the scenes in these Democratic primaries, particularly who’s manipulating them to achieve a certain outcome. What the mainstream press (and even the progressive media) isn’t reporting, you cna find out in an article I’ve posted at thecityedition.com. Naturally, Karl Rove figures into the picture, and we ignore his clever strategy at our own peril. Here’s a direct link to the piece:

    http://www.thecityedition.com/Pages/Archive/Winter08/2008Election.html

18. What a crock.

    The link above leads to an article that gives IT’S SPIN to a Time Magazine article. The Time Magazine article was all about Obama’s non-partisan appeal, and how many Republicans are finding themselves supportive of Obama on their own accord.

    On the “three financiers”:

    “One of them, James Canning, a Chicago financier, is openly supporting Obama after he grew tired of what he calls the G.O.P.’s “Neanderthal positions on things like stem cell research and global warming.” Mark McKinnon, Bush’s chief media consultant during both of his presidential campaigns, has warned his clients — including Senator John McCain — that if Obama wins the Democratic nomination McKinnon won’t work against him in the general election. And Matthew Dowd, Bush’s former top political strategist, told the New York Times that the only candidate that appeals to him this cycle in either party is Obama.

    It is the Questionable Shady Media article that links to the Time article that insists that KARL ROVE must be manipulating all those Independents and Republicans towards supporting Obama. Totally backwards.

    Just ask yourself: How does the above assertion square with the well-known fact that Rush Limbaugh is organizing his listeners in every state to switch registrations, vote Hillary, and “Rush the Vote”?

19. The evidence of the ‘FEALTY’ clinton party…as opposed to a democratic party could not be more substantive or persuasive.

    This ain’t government you are buying into it is fealty to them…any one not on board and it’s under the bus…just like with bush…these people think they are KINGS…this is not the british empire…this is not some jew socialist entity…
    THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A REPUBLIC…any one out there get that?!!? bush clinton bush clinton…TREASON TREASON TREASON TREASON WACO OKLAHOMA 911

    If ANY Republican pulled the stunt shrillary pulled in South Carolina they would be VILIFIED…if it was an independent- their career in politics would be concluded.

    In real estate they say that location IS everything…well, Folks in politics it ain’t location…it IS timing:

    The racial ‘statements’ & ‘incidences’ ARE NOT co-incidental…they are timed to garner WHITE MALE voters in certain state primaries by preying upon the dark divisions of race that sad to say still exist…in large measure due to the callous and calculating who exploit such for political and economic gain.

    True leadership empowers people to act upon the BETTER ANGELS of their being rather than the dark demons that potentially dwell within ALL of humanity.

    Once again it IS demonstrated that as far as pillorary IS concerned it IS NOT the democrat party IT IS the FEALTY TO clinton PARTY.
    This IS not merely petty and mean spirited, it paves the way for more tragedy and does NOTHING to smooth over the tumultuous political landscape we find ourselves living within today.

    If there was ever a good argument as to Howard Dean being incompetent to lead…it IS his failure to pull the clinton party card after South Carolina and to continue to abide such obscene and base gestures upon the part of the clinton campaign.

    Whatever remains of the kkkk in America they certainly must be overjoyed at the line of argument the clintons have chosen to make in this otherwise historically idyllic primary.

    If everyone in the United States were true wintertime soldiers of the Republic instead of shrinking violet summertime pretenders…then they would recognize the clinton’s for what they are, and soundly reject them with a clear and unambiguous message….

    I will hope the people of this Great State of Pennsylvania where we first began, will recall the persecution of our founder William Penn which was the causation for his settling west of the original colonies…I hope we will re-affirm the TRUE foundational principles upon which this sometime goodly Republic was erected and which guided our founder so long ago.

    It IS time for a reckoning as far as the clinton’s go…it seems to me one long overdue. I hope in Pennsylvania the good people have the gumption to say: ” A Farewell to KINGS” (Source: awesome record by RUSH…the band…not the moron…)

    I leave you with this final thought:
    The true and rightful inheritor of the mantle of authority is not the one who will win at all costs…but he who is willing to bear ALL costs in support of a nobel and just cause…he who is willing to lose supporting that nobel and just cause rather than succeed in and triumphing in a rule with an ignoble and unjust cause…
    I’ll let your readers figure out who is who in that regard…unlike the clinton’s I do not presume them shallow, bigoted, imbeciles…after all they read the Tribune-Review, don’t they.

    The ACTUAL SERMON:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FqPUXjFYh38
    The ACTUAL SPEECH:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWe7wTVbLUU

    And Oh…shrillary caught in MORE LIES:

    Nafta lies hoodwinks Ohio people:
    SEE ALSO:
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20080306.NAFTA06/TPStory
    “Mr. Brodie, apparently seeking to play down the potential impact on Canada, told the reporters the threat was not serious, and that someone from Ms. Clinton’s campaign had even contacted Canadian diplomats to tell them not to worry because the NAFTA threats were mostly political posturing.”
    AND: “In a summary of the meeting written by Canadian diplomat Joseph de Mora, Mr. Goolsbee was described as indicating that Mr. Obama’s NAFTA stand “should be viewed as more about political positioning than a clear articulation of policy plans.” Mr. Goolsbee denied using those terms.”
    As you can see george bush junior keeps mentioning how he IS going to track down the LEAK and mentioning it was UNFAIR to Obama… (REPEAT: OH IT WAS SO UNFAIR TO OBAMA…WE FEEL SO BAD ABOUT HOW IT AFFECTED OBAMA…IT IS JUST SO TERRIBLE HOW WE HAVE BEEN UNFAIR TO OBAMA….)-
    as if he IS being kind to Obama when he is just screwing him with what the clinton’s ACTUALLY DID directly to him….
    note the sources:
    1) Source 1: THE Prime Minister’s AIDE say’s the clinton campaign called him and spoke with him directly in making the comments! MS. CLINTON
    2) Source 2: the LEAKED memo IS A SUMMARY from a dude who INTERPRETED Obama’s AIDE and did so out of context….
    REAL GENIUS….oh yeah WHO was it exactly that signed NAFTA into law and STILL SUPPORTS GLOBAL FREE TRADE WORLD WIDE….except when submarining the opposition and HONEST agent of CHANGE in Ohio….WHO IS IT THAT BELIEVES IN THE ONE WORLD GLOBAL ECONOMY-World bank/ world economy…paid off by same corporations that support bush- Carlyle Group ect. Look at donors to Library…see how the Superdelegates stand against the vote of the people whose government this IS supposed to be…
    bush clinton bush clinton LIE LIE LIE…and then AFTER everyone gets screwed…everyone crawls right back to them for more like ohio…pathetic

    http://www.hillaryproject.com/index.php?/en/story-details/report_questions_clinton_nafta_position/

    The journalist gives this one a FOUR PINOCCHIO RATING…
    http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/03/hillarys_balkan_adventures_par.html
    March 17, 2008 IRAQ: Hillary’s Remarks at The George Washington University

    “I certainly do remember that trip to Bosnia, and as Togo said, there was a saying around the White House that if a place was too small, too poor, or too dangerous, the president couldn’t go, so send the First Lady. That’s where we went.
    I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base.”

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOsGo_HWP-c

    http://weblogs.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/politics/blog/2008/03/picture_clintons_dangerous_mis.html

20. As a morally scrupulous and well-behaved Barack Obama supporter, let me just say that I CONDEMN and REPUDIATE the abhorrent statements offered by the above commenter. Such ad-homminum insults like ‘Shrillary’, to say nothing of ‘jew socialist’, have no place in an otherwise civil, respectful democratic campaign.

    Harumph.

21. Hillary’s Foreign Policy Experience: Interesting that Hillary is fond of claiming to have been a key player in the formulation of Clinton Foreign Policy: 9/11 was a direct result of the Clinton Administration’s feckless responses to the numerous Al-Qaida provocations and terrorist assaults against our national interests; as well as, Clinton’s inexplicable temerity in refusing to take Osama bin Laden into captivity when offered several times by the Sudanese. Clinton then exercised little more than his jawbone as bin Laden trained literally thousands of terrorists in his Afghan camps. All of which, convinced bin Laden that he could strike our homeland with relative impunity. The potential for success in bin Laden’s planned assault on our homeland was significantly enhanced by the infamous Gorelick memo which the Clinton Administration promulgated to prohibit any terrorist information exchange between our FBI and CIA intelligence operatives. Further, in the Dec. 4, 1998 Presidential Daily Intelligence Brief , Clinton was advised that Bin Laden was preparing to hijack US aircraft to employ in terrorist attacks. He was apparently more interested in his pursuit of Monica to take follow-up action. A private matter? Hardly. With the KGB monitoring Clinton/Monica phone calls, Boris Yeltsin used the leverage to get Clinton to sponsor full Russian debt forgiveness by the World Bank. Yes, BLACKMAIL that the American taxpayers paid for dearly. Or, perhaps Slick was too preoccupied with his invasion of WACO to confront al-Qaida. However, history will record the most heinous assault on America’s national security interests by a U.S. president as Clinton’s transfer of our most advanced missile guidance technology to the CHICOM for a few campaign shekels. A CHICOM financial arrangement that Hillary continued thru her Chinese bagman, Norman Hsu; and, her ChinaTown dishwasher scam. Does any rational person really want to return the Clinton cabal/scandals to the White House?

    Greg Neubeck

Comments are closed.