The Next President of the USA will be?

[Pb Derigable]

That's fine, If the Dem's feel like thats the best way to beat McCain. I have no problem you doing that. The more you say McCain is like Bush, the less they will no about Obama polices which are basically farts in the wind. Yeah they are change, but as i pointed it out, does America like the idea of change or do they want the Obama changes. Because I have a feeling the just like the idea of it and rather say the course and hopefully get ourselves out of this mess. Sure health care would be nice, I'm sure people wont mind paying 10% more on their paycheck (or sales tax) in a system that would be filled with fraud. I don't think union members who have fought for their wage and benefits don't mind giving up their pay for other people who aren't union.

Raising the min. wage does not help. the more adn more you raise it, the higher of cost goes will be. another reason food is so high because the kid who bags my groceries makes 7.50hr. I'm almost embarrassed to say I make $42hr (plus 17.35 for wage benefits) because thats a high number, but our wage has only grown because everybody else's pay grew. it's not like were fighting for big time pay, in fact it probably cost us a bunch of jobs. But you have to keep the pay good or nobody would want to join a union.

If Obama and Hillary wants Univ. Health Care. Kick all the illegal immigrants out and protect our borders. Only then i will be willing to pay for it. in fact you kicked all those people out, we may save enough to pay for it self. Start investing in more nukes and start drilling in anwar. You can still do all the global warming shit too and america will start to turn green even if gas is back down to $1.50.

[Hermit]

.

The Reverend Wrong controversy "hurts Obama", some people say?

----------

DNC Chairman Under Bill Clinton: Unite Behind Obama

May 1, 2008

WASHINGTON — A leader of the Democratic Party under Bill Clinton switched his allegiance to Barack Obama on Thursday and urged fellow Democrats to end the bruising nomination fight.

"This has got to come to an end," former Democratic National Committee Chairman Joe Andrew told reporters in his hometown of Indianapolis just days before Tuesday's crucial state primary. He said he planned to call all the other superdelegates he knows and encourage them to back Obama.

Bill Clinton appointed Andrew chairman of the DNC in 1999, and he led the party through the disputed 2000 presidential race before stepping down in 2001. Andrew endorsed Hillary Rodham Clinton last year on the day she declared her candidacy for the White House.

In a lengthy letter explaining his decision, Andrew said he is switching his support because "a vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote to continue this process, and a vote to continue this process is a vote that assists (Republican) John McCain."

"The ship is taking on water right now," Andrew said at the news conference. "We need to patch those holes, heal the rift and go forward to beat John McCain."

Asked for a response to Andrew's decision, Clinton spokesman Phil Singer said, "We support that Democratic process and think that every American should be able to weigh in and support the candidate of his or her own choosing."

Andrew said the Obama campaign never asked him to switch his support, but he decided to do so after watching Obama's handling of two issues in recent days. He said Obama took the principled stand in opposing a summer gas tax holiday that both Clinton and McCain supported, even though it would have been easier politically to back it. And he said he was impressed with Obama's handling of the controversy surrounding his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

Wright's outspoken criticisms of the United States have threatened Obama's candidacy. Obama initially refused to denounce his former pastor, but he did so this week after Wright suggested that Obama secretly agrees with him.

"He has shown such mettle under fire," Andrew said in the interview. "The Jeremiah Wright controversy just reconfirmed for me, just as the gas tax controversy confirmed for me, that he is the right candidate for our party."

Andrew's decision puts Obama closer to closing Clinton's superdelegate lead. Clinton had a big advantage among superdelegates, many of whom like Andrew have ties to the Clintons and backed her candidacy early on. But most of the superdelegates taking sides recently have gone for Obama, who has won more state contests.

That includes DNC member John Patrick, vice president of the Texas AFL/CIO, who announced his support for Obama Thursday as well.

Obama now trails her by just 15 superdelegates, 248-263. This week, he picked up 12 superdelegates,..

*source*

---------

Pow.

The floodgates are slowly opening..

[cryingbluerain]

.

The Reverend Wrong controversy "hurts Obama", some people say?

----------

Yepper

Wright Remains a Concern for Some Democrats

By JOHN SULLIVAN and CARL HULSE

Published: May 1, 2008

Senator Barack Obama picked up several endorsements by Democratic superdelegates on Wednesday in his presidential campaign, as some party leaders tried to assess the damage done to his candidacy by the controversy over his former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr.

With a lead in elected delegates and popular vote, Mr. Obama has been closing the gap in superdelegates with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, who has been ahead in endorsements from the party leaders and elected officials who could eventually cast the critical votes that select the party’s nominee.

But some party leaders and superdelegates said the Wright controversy has given them pause, raising questions about Mr. Obama’s electability in the general election next fall.

“From what I am seeing out there, it is creating a backlash,” said Bill George, the head of the A.F.L.-C.I.O. in Pennsylvania, who announced his endorsement of Mrs. Clinton on Wednesday. “It’s unfortunate. If more of that happens going into the fall, it could create a problem.”

Other delegates interviewed Wednesday seemed split over the candidate’s efforts at damage control. Some who are Obama supporters praised him for his comments on Tuesday, which to them indicated a full break from Reverend Wright and his incendiary beliefs on race and other issues. Others said Mr. Obama needs to take steps to ensure the issue does not continue to shadow his campaign.

Chris Redfern, the chairman of the Ohio Democratic Party, who is uncommitted, said Mr. Obama’s delay in responding to Mr. Wright may have hurt the senator’s standing with many voters — in particular, the so-called Reagan Democrats who live in places like Toledo.

“Now is not a time to parse statements, now is not a time to worry about what happened 10 or 15 years ago or whether Reverend Wright was a great pastor or spiritual adviser,” he said. “Now is the time to turn your back on Reverend Wright.”

Mr. Redfern said that while many people understand that Mr. Wright and Senator Obama do not share views on many things, the “pragmatic realities of campaigns” could lead to guilt by association.

But Steve Achelpohl, the Nebraska Democratic chairman who recently endorsed Mr. Obama, called the controversy over Mr. Wright “a bump in the road” for the candidate. Mr. Achelpohl said he thought — or hoped — that Mr. Obama’s denunciation of Mr. Wright on Tuesday would move the campaign beyond the problem.

“I think it’s been blown way out of proportion, and people will realize that,” he said. “This is a media-driven thing and a presidential candidate shouldn’t have to vet every person that he has had a relationship with in his life.”

The Obama campaign has announced six endorsements in the past week, a crucial time for him coming off his loss in Pennsylvania on April 22 and the coming primaries in North Carolina and Indiana on May 6. With electability questions in the air, support from the party’s leaders could signal to voters that he was not damaged by Mr. Wright’s remarks.

Mrs. Clinton has picked up four superdelegates and still leads in those endorsements, but now by only about 15, with many of the delegates still undeclared.

One who came out Wednesday for Senator Obama was Representative Baron Hill, an Indiana Democrat. In announcing his support, Mr. Hill said he was satisfied with how Mr. Obama had “clearly and unequivocally denounced Reverend Wright’s remarks.” Mr. Hill said he planned to attend a rally for Mr. Obama in Bloomington, Ind., on Wednesday night.

“His comments regarding statements made by Reverend Wright showed me another aspect of Senator Obama’s leadership — a strength of character and commitment to our nation that transcends the personal,” Mr. Hill said in a statement. “One of the tests of a true leader is his ability and willingness to come to a new conclusion based on new events. Senator Obama did just that yesterday.”

Mr. Hill’s endorsement could be particularly potent because his district is relatively conservative and potentially a swing area in the general election. But before the presidential campaign gets to that stage, it is widely believed that Mr. Obama needs to make a good showing in Indiana, particularly among working-class Democrats who might vote Republican, to stop Mrs. Clinton’s momentum in this late stage of the nominating race.

Because of his influence, Mr. Hill immediately found himself under fire by Republicans, with Ken Spain, a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee, calling the endorsement mind-boggling.

“Baron Hill’s decision to side with the most liberal member of the United States Senate, who recently claimed that people ‘cling’ to their religion and the Second Amendment because they are ‘bitter’ is an affront to Indiana voters,” Mr. Spain said. “In a district that will undoubtedly vote for John McCain in November, Baron Hill has just latched his political fortune to a far-left liberal extremist who opposes the ban on partial birth abortion and supports a radical government-run health care system.”

Senator Bill Nelson, a Florida Democrat and backer of Mrs. Clinton, was among those who said it was impossible at this point to judge the impact of the Reverend Wright episode. “We will just have to see how it plays out,” Mr. Nelson said. “I think the first indication will be the two states next Tuesday.”

Some Democrats said they believed that Reverend Wright’s more extreme statements in recent days may have actually helped Mr. Obama, allowing him make a decisive break with a former mentor.

“I thought he handled it very well,” said Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, who backs Mr. Obama. “If Wright keeps on talking, Obama can say, ‘he is enjoying the limelight, I am not going to add to it.’ “

Senator Christopher J. Dodd, a former rival of Mr. Obama who is now backing him, said that since it remained early in the election calendar for most voters, Mr. Obama has a chance to minimize the issue.

“It’s April,” Mr. Dodd said. “This could actually help. I think he was strong yesterday and will continue to be, to reject that kind of language. I think he could turn this into asset. Time will tell, though it is certainly not a welcome addition.”

Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, who campaigned hard for Mr. Obama in a losing effort in his home state, said he believed the senator doing was doing as well as he could with a difficult matter.

“There is no way to prognosticate, but I think time and again when he has been under fire, I think he has shown leadership skills that have been uncommon,” Mr. Casey said. “I think people are seeing more of his heart lately and getting to know him better and I think he is going to be just fine.”

Adam Nagourney contributed reporting.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/01/us/polit...-delegates.html

[Pb Derigable]

Cryingbluerain you just killed hermits mood. Don't you know that former leaders are more important than the current leaders. Who cares what Howard Dean, Nancy pelosi, Al Gore, and John Edwards think.

[Uncle Bill]

According to latest poll data, the repubs probably will be glad to have nobama as the opponent.

Here are the key details from the release:

"HEAD-TO-HEAD WITH MCCAIN: In a hypothetical general election match-up with McCain, Clinton wins handily (50-41) while Obama is virtually tied with McCain (46-44), according to the AP-Ipsos poll released Monday. A new poll from CBS/NYT show Clinton beating McCain by five points (48-43), while Obama ties McCain (45-45). The new Fox poll has Clinton beating McCain by one point (45-44), while Obama trails McCain by three points (43-46). And in Gallup's daily tracking poll, Clinton leads McCain by one point (46-45) while Obama trails McCain by two points (44-46).

"SWING STATES: New Quinnipiac polls out today show Clinton dramatically outperforms Obama in the critical swing states of Ohio in Florida. In Ohio, Clinton beats McCain by ten points (48-38), while Obama loses to him by one point (43-44). In Florida, Clinton beats McCain by 8 (49-41), while Obama loses to him by one point (42-43). Hillary also tops McCain by 14 points in Pennsylvania (51-37), while Obama's lead over McCain is in single digits.

"CLINTON BEATS MCCAIN AMONG INDEPENDENT VOTERS; OBAMA TIES HIM: The new AP poll has Clinton leading McCain among independents (50-34) while Obama is tied with him (42-42). The NBC/WSJ poll notes that Obama’s negative ratings among independents are they highest they have ever been."

source

[Pb Derigable]

If Hillary wasn't so Hillary, I wouldn't care that much if she was president over McCain.

[Hermit]

Cryingbluerain you just killed hermits mood.

CBR's article didn't kill my mood at all, muh-man.

Go Obama!!

[see? ]

Don't you know that former leaders are more important than the current leaders.

Who cares what Howard Dean, Nancy pelosi, Al Gore, and John Edwards think.

First of all, Howard Dean, Nancy pelosi, Al Gore, and John Edwards

are "current leaders" in the democratic party,.. you goofball.

Secondly, I didn't miss em, but apparently you did miss the

comments by a few other "current leaders" of the party, eh?

-->

"Some Democrats said they believed that Reverend Wright’s more extreme statements in recent days may have actually helped Mr. Obama, allowing him make a decisive break with a former mentor.

“I thought he handled it very well,” said Senator Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, who backs Mr. Obama. “If Wright keeps on talking, Obama can say, ‘he is enjoying the limelight, I am not going to add to it.’ “

Senator Christopher J. Dodd, a former rival of Mr. Obama who is now backing him, said that since it remained early in the election calendar for most voters, Mr. Obama has a chance to minimize the issue.

“It’s April,” Mr. Dodd said. “This could actually help. I think he was strong yesterday and will continue to be, to reject that kind of language. I think he could turn this into asset. Time will tell, though it is certainly not a welcome addition.”

Senator Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, who campaigned hard for Mr. Obama in a losing effort in his home state, said he believed the senator doing was doing as well as he could with a difficult matter.

“There is no way to prognosticate, but I think time and again when he has been under fire, I think he has shown leadership skills that have been uncommon,” Mr. Casey said. “I think people are seeing more of his heart lately and getting to know him better and I think he is going to be just fine.”

Despite the article header, the net result from the

Rev Wrong controversy seems to a plus for Obama.

My point is validated, it seems, by the fact that superdelegates are continuing

to come out in support of Obama at a much faster rate than they are for Clinton.

Pow.

Smoke it, Pb.

[Absolutentonic]

CBR's article didn't kill my mood at all, muh-man.

Go Obama!!

[see? ]

First of all, Howard Dean, Nancy pelosi, Al Gore, and John Edwards

are "current leaders" in the democratic party,.. you goofball.

Secondly, I didn't miss em, but apparently you did miss the

comments by a few other "current leaders" of the party, eh?

-->

Despite the article header, the net result from the

Rev Wrong controversy seems to a plus for Obama.

My point is validated, it seems, by the fact that superdelegates are continuing

to come out in support of Obama at a much faster rate than they are for Clinton.

Pow.

Smoke it, Pb.

This sure looks like classic "spin". Not what is being reported on major networks. Perhaps you are experiencing tunnel vision??

[Pb Derigable]

Cryingbluerain you just killed hermits mood. Don't you know that former leaders are more important than the current leaders. Who cares what Howard Dean, Nancy pelosi, Al Gore, and John Edwards think.

First of all, Howard Dean, Nancy pelosi, Al Gore, and John Edwards

are "current leaders" in the democratic party,.. you goofball.

Secondly, I didn't miss em, but apparently you did miss the

comments by a few other "current leaders" of the party, eh?

-->

Despite the article header, the net result from the

Rev Wrong controversy seems to a plus for Obama.

My point is validated, it seems, by the fact that superdelegates are continuing

to come out in support of Obama at a much faster rate than they are for Clinton.

Pow.

Smoke it, Pb.

LOL, look at you just wrote hermit it's silly. You actually think i didn't know the leaders of the democratic party when anybody with any sense knows that i listed them as the current leaders as part of the joke. than you stated the Rev. Wright was a good thing. Obama is going to get his ass kicked if his supporters are like you. Hermit, go back a rewrite this before sombody eles see this. It's kinda of silly for bieng an obama supporter and writing silly things like that.

Of course hermit thinks any article that is pro Obama is great, but every nobama is in despite. Hermit, just jump on the Hillary wagon and nobody will make fun of you or your silly posts anymore.

Do you really believe in this crap. You better pick a new avatar now so you can still post around here after the election or even sooner if hillary gets her way.

[Hermit]

Hermit, just jump on the Hillary wagon and nobody will make fun of you or your silly posts anymore.

Dude,.. get a clue. The Hillary "wagon" is about to run off the edge of the cliff. Are you going down with it, or what? Isn't it about time you jump off the heading-toward-the-abyss Clinton wagon and onto the also-heading-toward-the-abyss McCain wagon? [McCain's wagon is gonna run off a cliff eventually too, of course,.. but at least the road before him has few more miles left in it. Not so for Hillary.]

Hillary's run for the White House has just about run out of road, muh-man.

Yes siree,.. you and Hllar E. (Coyote) are about to get a lesson in gravity.

Mmm..Beep-Beep!

Do you really believe in this crap. You better pick a new avatar now so you can still post around here after the election or even sooner if hillary gets her way.

Lemme guess,..

you think "Hillary has a good methematical chance of getting her way".

..right?

You're too much, Pb.

Btw,. how did Hillary's appearance on The Papa Felafel Show go yesterday?

How come you (and the mainstream media) haven't said anything about it?

Didn't her appearance on such a widely disrespected and disregarded show

as that change the dynamic of the campaign like..uh..you thought it would?

Go Obama!!

[redrum]

McCain in the membrane..........MC CAIN IN THE BRAIN!!

[Pb Derigable]

I still like how you're still trying to prove you won that debate. Yeah i guees there is no news on the No1 cable news show from other shows.

[Hermit]

I still like how you're still trying to prove you won that debate.

The "Hillary's mathematical chances of winning the nomination" debate is done, Pb.

You know,.. just like Hillary's mathematical chances of winning the nomination.

The mathematics speaks for itself, bub.

I've been having fun mocking the absurdity of your assertion in that debate.

Get it now?

[allthekingshorses]

I still like how you're still trying to prove you won that debate. Yeah i guees there is no news on the No1 cable news show from other shows.

cable news is all crap imo. It's current event gossip.

[Absolutentonic]

The "Hillary's mathematical chances of winning the nomination" debate is done, Pb.

You know,.. just like Hillary's mathematical chances of winning the nomination.

The mathematics speaks for itself, bub.

I've been having fun mocking the absurdity of your assertion in that debate.

Get it now?

Maybe he will get it when the chickens actually hatch?

[Dzldoc]

The "Hillary's mathematical chances of winning the nomination" debate is done, Pb.

You know,.. just like Hillary's mathematical chances of winning the nomination.

The mathematics speaks for itself, bub.

I've been having fun mocking the absurdity of your assertion in that debate.

Get it now?

You know Hermit I must admit you talk a good talk about nothing, you sure you're not Al Gore?

I posed the question a couple months back and again last night "What's the plan?"

Just what are these so called changes? Never a response.

All I hear is a lot of hot air. From all candidates.

So guide me to his plan in writing, I'm game Mu-Man!

[Pb Derigable]

cable news is all crap imo. It's current event gossip.

another name for current events gossip is the news. so yes you are right news is current events gossip.

Unless you get your news from non news places like blogs and forums. then what you are reading is gossip, because those places are not credible news sources, they are opinions written by opinionated people. News come from journalist. which are employed by Cable News channels and the Local newspaper. News Anchors are not Journalist they are talking heads that repeat the news from journalist.

So

Reporters-News

Columnist-Opinions

Commentator-Opinions

Bloggers-Opinions

[Hermit]

You know Hermit I must admit you talk a good talk about nothing, you sure you're not Al Gore?

I posed the question a couple months back and again last night "What's the plan?"

Just what are these so called changes? Never a response.

All I hear is a lot of hot air. From all candidates.

So guide me to his plan in writing, I'm game Mu-Man!

I've talked plenty in this thread about the differences between Obama and More Of The Same McCain; and I've talked about the similarities, and differences, between Obama and Clinton. Just because you haven't been paying attention, that doesn't mean I haven't addressed the issues, muh-man.

I have to say though,.. at this juncture in the political process if you still need it explained to you how Obama and McCain offer different visions for American, I'd say you're a bit out to lunch. The differences are not exactly few, minor, or subtle. Where ya been, bud?

If you genuinely wanna learn more about Obama's plan for America, I suggest you show a little personal initiative and do some research.. you know, rather than expecting me to spoon-feed the info specifically to you. Barack Obama has a website; maybe you oughta visit it. *BarackObama.com* If you do, you might be amazed to discover that you can find *"The Blueprint For Change: Barack Obama's Plan For America"* there. [Ok, I've done the hard part for you; now all you have to do is click, read, and assess. I leave that to you, bud. We'll see if you've got game. ]

Hurry up and go read that material. Seems you've got some catching up to do!

[Hermit]

So does that mean you're withdrawing your support for Obama who

wants more crimes to be deserving of the Death Penalty.

You just make stuff up, don't you. Pb?

Once again you highlight your own cluelessness, muh-man.

Why would Obama.. or any humanistic-based, progressive, "liberal"

democrat.. want "more crimes to be deserving of the death penalty"?

That's patently absurd.

Personally, I'm opposed to the death penalty. Afaic, Obama's death penalty position is pretty darn moderate. Its certainly respectable. He's not seeking to abolish the death penalty (nor though is seeking to stand in the way of death penalty abolishment efforts); and he's certainly not seeking to expand the death penalty. What he HAS DONE is help put into effect a law to help reduce the possibility of innocent people being executed.

-------------

Washington Post, Feb 2007:

Obama wrote in his recent memoir that he thinks the death penalty "does little to deter crime." But he supports capital punishment in cases "so heinous, so beyond the pale, that the community is justified in expressing the full measure of its outrage by meting out the ultimate punishment."

In proposing changes, Obama met repeatedly with officials and advocates on all sides. He nudged and cajoled colleagues fearful of being branded soft on crime, as well as death-penalty opponents worried that any reform would weaken efforts to abolish capital punishment.

Obama's signature effort was a push for mandatory taping of interrogations and confessions. It was opposed by prosecutors, police organizations and Ryan's successor, Democrat Rod Blagojevich, who said it would impede investigators.

Working under the belief that no innocent defendant should end up on death row and no guilty one should go free, Obama helped get the bill approved by the Senate on a 58 to 0 vote. When Blagojevich reversed his position and signed it, Illinois became the first state to require taping by statute.

"Obviously, we didn't agree all the time, but he would always take suggestions when they were logical, and he was willing to listen to our point of view. And he offered his opinions in a lawyerly way," said Carl Hawkinson, the retired Republican chairman of the Judiciary Committee. "When he spoke on the floor of the Senate, he spoke out of conviction. You knew that, whether you agreed with him or disagreed with him."

The Associated Press, November 12, 2007:

While an Illinois state senator, Obama was key in getting the state's notorious death penalty laws changed, including a requirement that in most cases police interrogations involving capital crimes must be recorded. ...

"Without Barack's energy, imagination and commitment I do not believe the very substantial and meaningful reforms that became law in Illinois would have taken place," said author Scott Turow, a member of the state commission that recommended many of the changes.

...Obama was at the center of the emotional debate.

Legislators and lobbyists who worked with him describe a lawmaker who was personally involved, refused to abandon some needed changes but also demanded compromises from both law enforcement and death penalty critics.

A proposal to require that police record interrogations of murder suspects was opposed by police, prosecutors and the Democratic governor and considered so touchy it was separated from other legislation. It also was the issue that garnered Obama's special interest.

"I thought the prosecutors and law enforcement would kill it," said Peter Baroni, who was then a Republican aide to the Illinois Senate's judiciary committee. "He (Obama) was the one who kept people at the table."

He kept them at the table, kept negotiating but he never abandoned his progressive principles:

The idea that people might be executed for crimes they did not commit also enraged him. "At minimum, we should agree that innocent people should not be put to death by the state. At minimum," Obama declared icily during one floor debate.

Obama saw the issue of police interrogations as key.

Among the men released from death row "a consistent pattern was the faulty confession," argued Obama. "It struck me that this was the hardest piece of the puzzle but the one that would ultimately make the most difference and have the most long-lasting effect."

Participants in the negotiations describe Obama as standing firm on some issues, but willing to compromise on others.

They cite his refusal to narrow the law so that only a suspect's confession had to be recorded, insisting that the entire interrogation be put on tape, so a suspect cannot be threatened or beaten off camera.

"That was a first point at which he could have taken the easy route. He said no, we're not doing it that way," recalled Kathryn Saltmarsh, who represented the Illinois Appellate Defender's office in the negotiations.

On other things he was willing to compromise.

He went along with allowing departments to make audio recordings if they couldn't afford video equipment and training, and for a judge to allow an unrecorded statement in some cases -- but then prosecutors would have to prove it had been obtained without coercion.

Barack Obama can honestly claim to have made a difference on a matter of life and death.

*source*

--------

You've said some really stupid things before, Pb,.. *cough*"Mathematically Hillary has a good chance of winning the nomination" comes immediately to mind*cough*.. but with this one.. "[Obama] wants more crimes to be deserving of the Death Penalty".. you plunged to new depths of stupidity.

You better pull your head outta your ass, bud. Clearly you need some

fresh air... you're showing the signs of oxygen deprivation.

[Pb Derigable]

You have stated that quotes in other threads should not be use in this thread as there you go.

explain this

While the evidence tells me that the death penalty does little to deter crime, I believe there are some crimes--mass murder, the rape and murder of a child--so heinous that the community is justified in expressing the full measure of its outrage by meting out the ultimate punishment. On the other hand, the way capital cases were tried in Illinois at the time was so rife with error, questionable police tactics, racial bias, and shoddy lawyering, that 13 death row inmates had been exonerated

Source: The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p. 58 Oct 1, 2006

Thank you come again.

So what is he saying he thinks some crimes need the death penalty, but yet is oppose to the Death penalty. Is that like his stance on Iraq that he will pull out the troops but yet will talk with his advisor's to do whats best for the country.

Once again Obama refuses to take a side. SO if he becomes POTUS is he going to pass a law saying rape can be a death penalty offense than just ban the death penalty. Will he allow gay marriages but just ban marriages in general.

I do like the quote you hilighted, the one that states," All politicains should agree that inoccent people should not be put to death". WOW. what a great idea. Don't kill inoccent people, what a great stance he took on that.

Well Hermit lets agree that who ever wins the election should become the president.

[Dzldoc]

I've talked plenty in this thread about the differences between Obama and More Of The Same McCain; and I've talked about the similarities, and differences, between Obama and Clinton. Just because you haven't been paying attention, that doesn't mean I haven't addressed the issues, muh-man.

I have to say though,.. at this juncture in the political process if you still need it explained to you how Obama and McCain offer different visions for American, I'd say you're a bit out to lunch. The differences are not exactly few, minor, or subtle. Where ya been, bud?

If you genuinely wanna learn more about Obama's plan for America, I suggest you show a little personal initiative and do some research.. you know, rather than expecting me to spoon-feed the info specifically to you. Barack Obama has a website; maybe you oughta visit it. *BarackObama.com* If you do, you might be amazed to discover that you can find *"The Blueprint For Change: Barack Obama's Plan For America"* there. [Ok, I've done the hard part for you; now all you have to do is click, read, and assess. I leave that to you, bud. We'll see if you've got game. ]

Hurry up and go read that material. Seems you've got some catching up to do!

Just so you don't think I've lost my sense of humor, I have nothing to say.

*"The Blueprint For Change: Barack Obama'sPlan For America"*

[Hermit]

You have stated that quotes in other threads should not be use in this thread as there you go. explain this

While the evidence tells me that the death penalty does little to deter crime, I believe there are some crimes--mass murder, the rape and murder of a child--so heinous that the community is justified in expressing the full measure of its outrage by meting out the ultimate punishment. On the other hand, the way capital cases were tried in Illinois at the time was so rife with error, questionable police tactics, racial bias, and shoddy lawyering, that 13 death row inmates had been exonerated

Source: The Audacity of Hope, by Barack Obama, p. 58 Oct 1, 2006

Thank you come again.

I already posted that Obama quote, Pb. Thanks for posting it again though. It does show that Obama has a very reasonable, moderate position on the capital punishment issue, doesn't it?

So what is he saying he thinks some crimes need the death penalty, but yet is oppose to the Death penalty.

No, goofball, he's saying that he supports the death penalty, but he wants

to make sure that innocent people don't wrongly or mistakenly get executed.

As Obama noted, in Illinois alone "13 death row inmates had been exonerated". [btw.. that means they were set free; their convictions were overturned; they were found to have been wrongly convicted; they were found to have actually been innocent rather than guilty of the crime for which they had accused, convicted, and sentenced to death]. Those 13 exonerations in Illinois (in addition to other similar exonerations in other states) suggests the very real possibility that innocent people have been executed throughout the history of capital punishment in America.. those who did not have the benefit of further evidentiary review.. or perhaps the lack DNA evidence gathering technology at the time of their trial/conviction,.. or perhaps due to coerced confessions (or witness statements) that were not allowed to be retracted,.. etc, etc.

Get it?

Is that like his stance on Iraq that he will pull out the troops but yet will talk with his advisor's to do whats best for the country.

Once again Obama refuses to take a side. SO if he becomes POTUS is he going to pass a law saying rape can be a death penalty offense than just ban the death penalty. Will he allow gay marriages but just ban marriages in general.

I do like the quote you hilighted, the one that states," All politicains should agree that inoccent people should not be put to death". WOW. what a great idea. Don't kill inoccent people, what a great stance he took on that.

Ah, I see,.. you're oblivious to the very real likelihood that innocent people have been put to death by state governments and by the federal government.. and that "the system" and those in power in the system.. (you know.. politicians and the like).. have stood idly by and watched those people.. whose guilt had come under serious question.. get executed.

Yes it would seem obvious that "all politicains should agree that innocent people should not be put to death", but in reality that's not the case. In reality, not all politicians do care whether or not innocent people are wrongly be put to death. As Texas governor, GWB certainly dint care if he executed people whose guilt had come under question/doubt,.. now did he?

Well Hermit lets agree that who ever wins the election should become the president.

I'll agree with that.. with one qualification: the election must be open, fair and legal.

If there's any evidence of fraud, that evidence must be evaluated and the outcome of the election scrutinized. You know,.. just like any evidence of a possible wrongful conviction should be investigated and the legitimacy of the conviction should be scrutinized. You do agree that no innocent people should be put to death, dont you? And you do agree that elections should be legal in order for the "winner" to be awarded the office for which he ran, don't you?

oh, btw..

But alas..

and finally...

[Hermit]

Just so you don't think I've lost my sense of humor, I have nothing to say.

*"The Blueprint For Change: Barack Obama'sPlan For America"*

I'm glad to see you haven't lost your sense of humor, Dz.

Laughter is good medicine, huh?

If you've read Obama's "Blueprint" [you're welcome for the

handy link, btw *wink*], and you still prefer John 'More Of The

Same' McCain,.. then by all means you should vote for him.

If MOTS McCain wins, check back with me in 2012.. and let me know how

your sense of humor is holding up after 4 more years of Bush policies..

Fwiw though.. MOTS aint gonna win.

cheers, bud.

[Dzldoc]

Too many social programs, I've already reached my bottom line. If you can't pay for it,

learn to do with out or bust your ass like I have and earn it. Too many lazy asses living off the dole now. Keep your pants on if you can't afford to support your own damn kids.

I'm on the inside and I can tell you the more that government is in your life the less control you'll have over it.

When the government stamp is on anything it becomes a matter of public record.

Everyone I know that applied for and recieved an SBA disaster loan, you can google their name and shablam! there it is for all the world to see when and how much money they recieved. Fuck that! I used my personal savings to make up the short fall from my insurance.

Oh yeah, thanks for the link

and God Bless America.

[Pb Derigable]

I wrote this

So does that mean you're withdrawing your support for Obama who wants more crimes to be deserving of the Death Penalty.

THen you wrote this make sure you read the bold

You just make stuff up, don't you. Pb?

Once again you highlight your own cluelessness, muh-man.

Why would Obama.. or any humanistic-based, progressive, "liberal"

democrat.. want "more crimes to be deserving of the death penalty"?

even though obama said "I believe there are some crimes--mass murder, the rape and murder of a child--so heinous that the community is justified in expressing the full measure of its outrage by meting out the ultimate punishment

That's patently absurd.

Personally, I'm opposed to the death penalty. Afaic, Obama's death penalty position is pretty darn moderate. Its certainly respectable. He's not seeking to abolish the death penalty (nor though is seeking to stand in the way of death penalty abolishment efforts); and he's certainly not seeking to expand the death penalty( even though obama said "I believe there are some crimes--mass murder, the rape and murder of a child--so heinous that the community is justified in expressing the full measure of its outrage by meting out the ultimate punishment). What he HAS DONE is help put into effect a law to help reduce the possibility of innocent people being executed.-------------

SO when i wrote asking you if you are withdrawing you're endorsement on Obama because you don't support the death penalty, you wrote claiming I was wrong about Obama, so your argument against me was Obama was for the death penalty and wants more crimes to fit the bill. Even though I said that Obama was for the death penalty and wanted more crimes be punished by the death penalty. SO hermit and your waste of a college education. Are you withdrawing your endorsement for Obama because he supports the Death penalty and wants more crimes be punished by death penalty

So once agian the college degrees of this nation is as usefull as toliet paper. Because they didn't teach hermit that you cant't use the other person argument agaist the other person. Hermit that means, If i say the sky is blue, you can't argue with me and say that the sky is blue. It just doesn't make any sense.