Comments on: McGovern reveals real reason for Obama endorsement switch

By: Tony

Tony — Sun, 18 May 2008 22:57:10 +0000

Wanda said, “She is an odd combination of octopus and leech and somehow feels entitled to be President.”

Possibly the good word for it would be “delusional”. You have to admire tenacity, but at what point does it become irrational?

There are numerous examples and quotes that seem to reveal the attitude that she can say anything she wants in the short term because she is heir to the throne, and no one will dare contradict her after her coronation.

By: Wanda

Wanda — Sun, 18 May 2008 19:50:57 +0000

If Hillary Clinton had more delegates and no popular vote lead, her argument would be… the delegate vote rules, if she truly had the popular vote lead, cleanly and without skewing the numbers, she would be blaring this out too. She is an odd combination of octopus and leech and somehow feels entitled to be President.

Her main argument, and I may not be popular by saying this, but here goes: She got the red-neck vote in W. Va.. Now she wants to take this metric and broad brush apply it to the whole country and not call it prejudice. I find it to be an insult to the populace and crass as well.

Intelligent, informed persons will and do vote for Obama. For those of you pinning your hopes on a woman for POTUS, the reality is - not this time because, while it is a fine ideal, NOT JUST ANY WOMAN WILL DO.

By: Yvonne

Yvonne — Sun, 18 May 2008 00:58:10 +0000

ATTENTION: Clinton DOES NOT have more popular votes unless she is successful at including Michigan and Florida as-is AND excludes a few caucus states. But how can she include Michigan as-is when Obama WAS NOT on the ballot. At least both were on the ballot in Florida even if Obama did campaign there. If Clinton is so concerned about including ALL states, why does she want to exclude a few for her advantage?! She is so deparate and dependent upon her supporters to back her fuzzy math! Obama won fair and square. He won more popular votes, pledged and super delegates, and states.

By: Julian

Julian — Sat, 17 May 2008 23:44:47 +0000

Hmmm Obama not endorsed by a Democrat Presidential winner? Take a look at this Tommy Jong and all you other Obama haters: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/op inion/2004419867_borowitz17.html

By: Jack from Kansas

Jack from Kansas — Sat, 17 May 2008 21:37:17 +0000

I think if I were Bill and Hillary I’d tell Mr. McGovern to put his head in a place where the sun doesn’t shine as far as friendship is concerned. Go with the winners, that is what Italy did during the WWII, waited to see which side was winning before choosing sides.

By: Joe Parrot

Joe Parrot — Sat, 17 May 2008 17:45:16 +0000

[quote]
In the South, we call that, “having a chip on your shoulder,” and “wearing your feelings on your sleeve.”[/qoute]

..the same “South” that used the majority power to make life miserable for those who didn’t look like them?
Says in the Bible, does it not, “the sins of the father shall..”
Guess whose shoulder the chip is on?

By: Gerald Von Riesen

Gerald Von Riesen — Sat, 17 May 2008 15:51:39 +0000

Looks like the Hillary bots are still active, here I see two that post negative and untruthful information to every blog and news article they can find. Cant wait till June 3 when Hillary starts to support Obama. Well let me reconsider If Hillary’s support will be of any use after the negative campaign she has lead

By: Cricket Diane C "Sparky" Phillips

Cricket Diane C "Sparky" Phillips — Sat, 17 May 2008 14:26:40 +0000

After watching the comments of President Bush in Israel, there was no indication that he said or inferred “Obama” in his comments.

I’ve come to the conclusion that we don’t need a grand-standing, press-mongering team like the Obama camp anywhere near the White House. In the South, we call that, “having a chip on your shoulder,” and “wearing your feelings on your sleeve.”

To own a comment not even inferred to belong to him, the Obama group made it very clear that:

a.) they did it for air time and press coverage;

b.) it worked and now they will do it again whenever coverage is sparse;

c.) they are running a campaign and policy of reaction rather than action / decisions on issues and principles;

d.) people in America need to see the whole team / group that is “Obama” together in the same picture with his - that is who they are voting for in fact.

And also:
e.) people in America need to know where each of these team members and Obama have all stood on issues as Senators, etc. - how they’ve already used their power and position.

Because, once in the White House, that is the group of leaders we will actually have pursuing their own interests and agendas.

Written by Cricket Diane C “Sparky” Phillips, 2008
05/17/08 USA1 - Cricket House Studios, Atlanta

By: tommy jonq

tommy jonq — Sat, 17 May 2008 14:04:48 +0000

he has now been endorsed by every democratic presidential loser since william jennings bryan. you know who he hasn’t been endorsed by? winners. snicker.

By: Judy

Judy — Sat, 17 May 2008 13:22:17 +0000

ScottVA says, “Clinton now leads in Popular Vote”. It sounds like you’re buying into the Clinton spin hook, line, and sinker.

To reach her total, Hillary is including Michigan without giving Obama any of the votes. Her claim is that he didn’t receive any, since his name wasn’t on the ballet. Perhaps she should subtract all of the uncommitted votes from her total, since they were obviously votes against her. She’s also excluding several caucus states from her totals. Shouldn’t Iowa, Nevada, and Maine count? It seems to me that her claim that everybody’s vote should count only counts when it favors her.