US Corporate Elite Fear Candidate Edwards
By Kevin Drawbaugh
Reuters
Check out the article over at TruthOut -
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/011108T.shtml

"Bought'n'paid for" and "Barack Obama" - Kinda rhymes doesn't it Doug?
It should, tis true!
And Hillary Too!
VOTE EDWARDS '08 for a WORLD OF CHANGE!

"Bought'n'paid for" and "Barack Obama" - Kinda rhymes doesn't it Doug.
It should, tis true!
And Hillary Too!
VOTE EDWARDS '08 FOR A WORLD OF CHANGE!

Hilary has the good economy on her side.
I could care less both insured a bunch of kids who "do not have a choice."
A lot of us do not have a choice if insurance is unaffordable.

Obama and Clinton HAVE ALREADY SOLD YOU OUT!!
Give your votes and support to someone who is really fighting for you, JOHN EDWARDS! John can win with your support. Send him some love for having the courage to speak the truth, and for forcing Obama and Clinton to start talking about the issues that matter to working people.
EDWARDS '08

And don't fall for Hillary's 'mandate' nonsense. I'm currently paying for mandated health insurance I can't afford to attend college. $1,500 a year on top of $9,000 a year. The issue is NOT MANDATES. ITS AFFORDABILITY.

Oh, and guess who I have to buy loans from. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18040824/

You think this doesn't happen with mandated health insurance?

As Obama says, "Cost is the number one reason that 47 million Americans do not have health insurance and thousands more are edging toward bankruptcy every day…What I have said repeatedly is that the reason people don't have health insurance is not because they don't want it, it's because they can't afford it." He has never ruled out a mandate, he has said we have to take on the health insurance corporations and address the underlying costs of healthcare first, before we can legislate an affordable mandate for ALL AMERICANS.

What good is an unaffordable health care mandate? What are we going to do, throw everyone in prison who doesn't have health insurance when they're caught speeding?

The Massachusetts Plan

"But the reluctance of so many to enroll, along with the possible exemption of 60,000 residents who cannot afford premiums, has raised questions about whether even a mandate can guarantee truly universal coverage.

Additional concerns have been generated by projections that the state's insurers plan to raise rates 10 percent to 12 percent next year, twice this year's national average. That would undercut the plan's secondary goal of slowing the increase in health costs."We're going to be very aggressive in trying to get those numbers down to single digits," said Jon M. Kingsdale, executive director of the Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector Authority, the agency that markets the subsidized insurance policies. "If we continue with double-digit inflation, I don't think health reform is sustainable."…

Senator Barack Obama of Illinois sees it a different way. He argues there is danger in mandating coverage before it is clear it can be affordable for those at the margins. While Mr. Obama does not rule out a mandate down the road, his emphasis is on reducing costs and providing generous government subsidies to those who need them. He would mandate coverage for children. " [Because children don't have a choice, they're not adults.]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/25/us/politics/25mass.html

It's between Obama and Clinton now. Obama is the real deal. Don't blow it by voting for Kucinich or Edwards. This is a zero sum race now. I wish it were single transferable voting, but it's not. Don't vote for the candidate who voted for the Iraq War in 2002 that continues to kill millions of Iraqis and thousands of Americans.

"Judge Him By His Laws"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/03/AR2008010303303.html

"Obama Forged Political Mettle In Illinois Capitol"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262_pf.html

"In Illinois, Obama Proved Pragmatic and Shrewd" (Graphic of Illinois Legislation)

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/us/politics/30obama.htm

Vera Gottlieb,

You're right on time! And they keep falling for it.

Prior to the Iowa, Kucinich was a modern Zeus to so many on Common Dreams. Look how quickly he's been discarded. MSM gets an A+ on their scorecard.

Corporate campaign money will dry up when Edwards kicks the lobbyists out of Washington.

Zee, Jim, I couldn't agree with you MORE!!
EDWARDS '08

What a sham is the US elections, all about money and propaganda. Disban campaign financing altogether.

Good Strategy Zee,

Edwards needs our support now as a critical candidate Obama can't do it on his own.

they are a great Team if they keep up the teamwork.

I think When Edwards said he is goin all the way to the convention... that means he is running for Prez or vice Prez and that is patriotism of the good ole' Kind.

"The imbeciles are now crediting Hillary's victory in NH to her fake tears.."

tetti tatti you got that part right. Hillary's "panic" or her "tears" is all the histrionic mass media want to talk about. But they, and you, are wrong on Hillary's support. It was real, it was strong, it completely had nothing to do with her tears. The fix is definitely in regarding the media narrative...the only time they even showed a blip of Edwards in NH it was to get his comment on how he'd do against Hillary. If they covered the issues instead of this asinine crap, maybe Edwards would get the support he deserves. But how can we complain when Common Dreams spreads the same mainstream manure?

I got this in my ebox and quit reading at "panicked." How pathetic is it that common dreams is publishing MSM crap narratives? And what is the source of this outrageous claim in the opening paragraph? So Common Dreams is giving space to the Washington Post shill who simply makes a wild speculation based on the false MSM narrative that Obama was going to be anointed and unstoppable? Whoops, since Hillary won in NH, I guess their set up for the "panicked Hillary" narrative was exposed for what it was. Sheer bullshit. Shame on Common Dreams. And for those who think the polls point to some shenanigans in the election outcome I was in NH for the last two days, canvassing for Edwards. It was pretty hard to get people to even tell you who they were leaning towards. Except for the older Dems, who were very upfront and strongly for Hillary. I saw strong support for her on the ground. Maybe instead of jumping on the MSM bandwagon by publishing pointless and histrionic rumors Common Dreams might consider publishing some serious articles on John Edwards, for instance...you know, give a serious look at a serious candidate who is being shut out of the mainstream media in favor of all this mudslinging crap.

The imbeciles are now crediting Hillary's victory in NH to her fake tears. The numbers are unverifiable, 81% of the vote was 'tabulated' on electronic machines, easily hacked and manipulated.

The fix is in. No one wins unless Republicans allow it, and they have a favorite: Hillary, the greatest corporate whore who ever walked the face of the earth.

And if Freedom needs to win, You might need me again, cause I'm an old voting machine.

I didn't need software from them wanting the leaders they bought... I was manually operated and what you punched was what you got.

And They Blamed it all on me , like you saw on your TV

Cause Im an OLD VOTING MACHINE

Every 4 years like clock work: the best democracy money can buy.

This was weird so I post it again:

I was surprised and disappointed that Hillary won and as I was beginning to realize that the Polls were all wrong, I got a call from the Kucinich campaign… Well I told them like I have before that Dennis should drop out now because he just does not appeal with the voters even though after 2 times.. so after saying that I wanted Obama or Edwards because Clintons are too tied to Bush and their marriage problems will take up all the media time if she gets in, the Kucinich caller said, "Oh no I am for Bill and Hillary they are great! " I SAID IF THAT IS SO I AM CONFUSED AS TO WHY YOU CALLED BUT IF IT IS FOR MONEY, FORGET IT AND SHE HUNG UP.
NOW WHY WOULD SOMEBODY WHO LIKES THE CLINTONS BE TRYING TO GET ME TO GIVE MONEY TO DENNIS?
I had to check my Phone ID and it was KUCINICH FOR PR.

My favorite is .... 'You work harder than a medieval peasant.'

Does anyone think its strange that as soon as we move from transparent caucuses into our voting machine and vote counting machine elections that suddenly all the polls are massively wrong and the two candidates the establishment wants suddenly do surprisingly well?

One book that speaks conceptually regarding the above statistics is:

Natural Capitalism (1999), by Paul Hawken, Amory Lovins, and L. Hunter Lovins

http://www.natcap.org/sitepages/pid5.php

"We can achieve current prosperity on 1/3 the labor, 1/10 the energy, and 1/500 the paper "capital". 90% of current labor is wasted."--rtdrury, 5:38 pm

Do you have a source or reference for this statement, rt? It's similar to a point made by JK Galbraith (maybe in "The Affluent Society"), but I haven't been able to track it down. And important as it is, it's a point that 99.9% of politicians and economists seem to be unaware of.

I too am for Edwards.

he may yet possibly emerge as the candidate who can win, who people want.

Kokuaguy,,,yuch,

For those of us not lost in THAT crazy little universe:

This article reeks of partisanship and Rovian tactics. Now that Mrs. Clinton has actually WON New Hampshire we can all use that, and kokuaguy's stupid and almost criminal insinuations, as birdcage liner.

It seems to me that Bill Clinton didnt win a damn primary until South Carolina...that turned out well for him, not so well for the nation unfortunately.

Those who flock to Obama, or Ron Paul for that matter, are symptomatic of the poor choices and even pooorer leadership available to this nation, as well as the lack of serious thought by an electorate educated to think in thirty second sound bytes and sell burgers. One should not choose the leader of the free world based upon emotional appeal, and empty appeal as well. Obama, with fifteen minutes on the national stage, simply hasnt the experience necesary to run such an overwhelmingly complex organisation. Of course he will get all the help he needs, as does every President unfortunately, from the corporations who really truly run this country.

This country needs a third party on the national stage, period.

kokuaguy, you obviously don't know much about the Black Panther Party for Self Defense and you're buying a line about Iran. Obama is a very smart campaigner and if elected will probably be much like Clinton though it's hard to say as he prefers to remain a mystery in a campaign that is sure to get ugly. Better to deny a clear target to the others. I wouldn't vote for either of them.

As for Hillary Clinton, she made me laugh last week when she accused Obama of "going negative." She is a cutthroat politician of the worst sort.

I guess they did go to bed; now we can get on with our discussion. I think Hillary's days are numbered once the nation realized that she and her power hungry husband are planning a divorce immediately after the election when the truth about the child molestation suffered by Chelsey all these years.
However, I hope she does survive the scandal. For that reason I sent the following message to Clinton headquarters today.
I'll be fine.
When we get this election over, a year from now, or when we get Hillary nominated and I have a more solid conviction that a Dem President will be in the White House, I'll be able to contemplate a life that's about me, and not about this war which my son may eventually be drafted to fight in—a war that altered my life more profoundly that VN ever did Bill Clinton's. Actually, by the time LBJ was gone I was one of those waiting for the McCarthyite's hero to save me by revealing the secret he'd promised to unveil for stopping the carnage overseas and the bloodletting in the streets of every major city in this nation. What a callow young fool I was!

I'm very emotional about the election at this point, having come to the realization (just in time?) that Obama has the potential to be every bit as dangerous as GWB or the leaders of the Black Panther Party for Self Defense ever were. I don't trust his finger on the nuclear button any more than I would my 6 year bi-polar son's. Someone who has the fate of the planet and the lives of my family in his family should have lived a real life, rather than living in privilege and-- He graduated from one of the most exclusive and expensive private prep schools in the of Hawaii. Dear Barak's just beginning to impose his plan for global domiation. Fools think he has made the dream of Martin Luther King a reality; I certainly do not want such a megalomanic having his finger on the nuclear button. Better Ahmed – mini – jihad any day.

Why don't you nitwits stfu?
Go to bed, idiots!
with sincere aloha,
your ever loving kokua boy in Maui.
Boy that Maui Wowie is heavy shit!
an Elizabeth lover!

The shame & sham of american style politics is watched daily worldwide in disgust & horror and I am certain hillary will take down and destroy the only thread the us can stand on from bill that we were somewhat civilized and dirty politics is no way to start, well Illuminati power couples like bill n hillary got me pondering are they cousins? since everyone who gets to the presidential seat is really related to all those who sat there

ITSJUSTKARMA

yeah, dalai lama for president.........

UNCOMMONDREAMS

your 'diner' scenario had me in fits of laughter............

KEM PATRCIK

of course i'm nearly always 'good', but when i'm 'bad' i'm better.........

Hi Pac, good to hear from you; how ya doin?

May be one and the same MIKE, the trolls use several code names. But it may just be another miserable nut case, attempting to disrupt the forum. They come and go, like crap in the toilet.

kokuaguy, are you dougnwagners partner?

Your faggy, ambulance chasing, cracker mama's boy can now go back to North Carolina and take care of his wife.
You should be very happy, Mike (trash) bin ladin (SC stands for South Carolina, I assume.)
with sincere aloha,
an Elizabeth lover,
PS - I'm truly sorry for your loss.

By the way, for those who didn't catch Ariana Huffington on Charlie Rose last night with various male talking heads, it's worth downloading. She's such a blatant suck up and fraud, it's hilarious. I'd request that she cancel my subscription to her Post, But like William F. Buckley, she's probably tell me to cancel my own goddamn subscription. I like her much better on Left, Right and Center--I don't have to look at her face.
peace,
your kokua boy in Wailuku

I'm amazed Hillary won that one. At 5 pst time, Obama was far ahead according to our newscasters. I believe the only one who can beat the repugs is John Edwards.

Gawd.

Four more years of war.

Are we using touch-screen voting in these primaries?

Pretty suspicious, 27 going on 31 years of Bush/Clinton dynasties in the top two slots.

As Clint Eastwood said in "Heartbreak Ridge": "There you have it, democracy in action."

I dont like Clinton but I am kind of glad she got a win because I felt sorry for her after the crying thing--and if it was an act it was good acting. The Iron our shirts moment seemed rather stagey.

McCain would probably beat Clinton. Especially if Bushie had a little incident or war footing right before the election. Or Osama came out to endorse her.

Both support the war after all.

The Simpsons portrayed Kucinich as a midget.

Ralph Wiggum for president!

bush never won an election. It was given to him through the supreme court first and then through massive voter fraud.
That guy in the dark house is an illegitimate impersonator of a president. Nothing more.

"I'm just glad we'll have a good Republican to lead the country for the next 8 years."

1) If another repug 'wins' the 'election' Kenya style I am convinced you will not be here in 8 years from now

2) Symptomatic is the obsession to complain without ever contributing a solution

We all know that WE have been sold to the 'company'. Now if you prefer to be a 21st century slave, vote 'right'.
Me myself I can only suggest to have a few Million people on the street chanting

WE WANT DENNIS! WE WANT DENNIS! WE WANT DENNIS!

Lets see what that does. There is too much at stake here. Don't gamble with our children's and grand children's
welfare, unless you don't care for them at all. In that case we should immediately drop the tax exemptions for
inherited wealth. If you don't care about the one's that will follow, might as well 'switch the light off' now.

Reaper, I know you're wrong when you say, "I'm just glad we'll have a good Republican to lead the country for the next 8 years."
Because, there is no such thing as a "GOOD" Republican! But, you are right to fear John Edwards, and he's not out of it by a long shot!
EDWARDS '08

I have no idea if any of what the author wrote is factual. It could indeed just be rumor of a rumor.
nothing more than spreading the seed that "Clinton plays dirty" --when actually,
that's what could be leveled against the author. rumor mill says, "some high ups are talking"... blah... blah.

One thing I do know., Clinton isn't on the top at the moment.

Come on people, let's be honest. One of the reasons Clinton has taken so much heat this last Fall
has to do with her being labeled "top candidate", and "most likely to be the democratic nomination".

American's love to see royalty get knocked off their throne and tossed to the dogs.
There are just too many reality shows based on this attraction of seeing people lose.
Martha Stewart took a nose dive, and people loved it. Okay, maybe this love to see
giants fall isn't just an American thing, but god does this country love to rub people's face in it.

Obama is no longer the underdog and he will become the next prey.
His message will be under the gun from here on out. I think the Obama campaign must have seen it coming
Many of his supporters have gone out of their way to label the Clinton campaign as the aggressor and Obama as "above that".
Well, Obama's campaign is going to be put to the test now that Clinton is on the ropes.

But it doesn't have to happen by way of negative campaigns. Swiftboats, as you might remember, was GOP in design.
And you might also remember, Obama is a mainstream democratic candidate and much of the "hope" and "change" speech
he goes on about is characteristically democratic. His message is an old message, a message most people are familiar with.
That is why it is successful. Indeed, he is not saying something new and refreshing, but something already known and believed--
and that is way his message is a success. Just like a good entertainer must know --know what your audience can handle.
If you go too far, they don't have a feel good moment, they walk out. That is also one of the criticisms that will be leveled against Obama,
that what he really promises is the equivalent of the democratic albatross: the never blooming rose garden.

The liberal paradox is having the most "hope" of all parties of being able to carry out a utopia of equality, but in the process
the liberal compromises the structure of the boat. Don't ask me, it just seems true. We twist our ankle every time.
And that is the crutch Obama doesn't want people to catch onto... because if people were to start asking how Obama is going to carry out all this change
-- his message would sound idealistic and ambiguous. Not because Obama is stupid and can't create plans, but because if "the message" is too defined,
it loses its luster. Luster appeals to our senses and hope is magical and inspiring, but too much realism will sink the boat.

Anyway, if I was going up against such a hope filled candidate I would agree with him. I would say, everything I just said.
I would say, the thing that makes the liberal ideal so appealing is exactly what Obama embraces -- the idealism that brings hope,
a call for change, for equality, it is all of our message. It could in fact be called the mantra of liberalism. And with that, Obama is not unique,
for he is just like me, and I like him. We stand for the same principles, we are aligned on many of the same issues, fight for equality,
for a brighter tomorrow, a healthy planet, a peaceful world. This is the message of the liberal's ideal of equality.This is your message,
Obama's message, and my message. This is what it means to be democratic. But it is not for one man to hold in his hand, it is for all of us.
"We are the world, we are the people"

Yes, my friends. Hope and change is on the way and it is called the democratic party.
Vote Republicans out of office

etc, etc....The only way to sail is to harness the wind....
am I a long-tongued dog or what?

later, rob
casual_jabber@yahoo.com

Hillary is just what America needs: a candidate willing to spend millions bashing a fellow candidate to win office; who refuses to address the issues of immediate concern to the majority of citizens; who works hard to prevent Edwards and Kucinich from having a real voice in the so-called debates (ha ha ha ha); a war monger who'll keep citizens hostage while fellow country men and women die for oil and keeping the rich warm and happy . . .; who will deny all citizens a single-payer health care system . . . so her insurance buddies can further swindle the hard working and the poor . . . and maybe even find a way to abandon social security. Oh, and I almost forgot, she has no plans to hold the criminals in office accountable for their crimes . . .

And wow is she aided by those news creeps . . . It doesn't seem America has a chance to survive under a Clinton or McCain . . .

I'll only vote for Edwards, Kucinich, and Obama if necessary . . . the others will just lead us to ruin . . . But NO HILLARY.

Well, the US lacks a good figurehead at the top of the Progressive Populist party.

celebrity January 8th, 2008 5:19 pm

"Congratulations. "Progressives". Looks like you've bought into the corporate shit also and are talking only of the "THREE"! (And this is only the first primary.)
You reap what you sew, Folks."

Celebrity is right. If you fall into the M$M corporate-control trap, this country will NEVER see the light of day.

On Feb 5th, Dennis Kucinich will be getting my vote. I refuse to continue on the path of voting for the "lesser of the evils". Choosing among one of the currently advertised top candidates, none of which is willing to make the necessary changes to return this country to "the people", will do nothing for my heart, mind or soul.

The primaries give us an opportunity to support the candidate WE want to see in the White House, not the one Iowa, NH or the media want us to vote for.

If we don't speak our truth through our vote, we can be certain it will not be heard or acknowledged.

Who is Giuliani if not one more disgusting republicon opportunist that knows more about 9-11
than he ever told US? No, no, no. That's a no brainer. Mr. Giuliani has to answer some pressing
questions before he takes back his nomination.

HerRoyalCountess is no fix to our problems. So separated from reality, or creating something
that is supposed to resemble a 'political expertise' that is based on being married to a President
that didn't know that You can't get blow jobs in the white house without having to do some
explaining to your First cheated on Lady or the public. I never approved of this cheap daily soap
style 'production'.

Mr. Hillary is as unfit as anybody else in the pack of wolves that is only waiting to come for some
more sheeples. He is as feminine as John Wayne and I say that without any sense of insult. I respect
her as much as I respect every human being on this planet. But I share a posters comment somewhat
earlier, that the best President we could ever get would be Vladimir Putin. Well actually not really,
of course. My dream candidate for that job is the Dalai Lama. Let's ask him if he would fancy to teach
Americans a little bit about loving kindness...

Somebody like Mr. Hillary would still impress me enormously by diving into the problems that we really
have instead of procrastinating the long overdue changes.

Then there is ';Dennis The No-Menace' Kucinich. This is the one. And because of that he will have his
difficulties to come par with the Hyenas.
We don't need elections, we need Dennis Kucinich for the most trusted President in a hundred years.
And he better not disappoint me, like all the others before him did, but I know that is not an option with
him.

We need a referendum on the abolishment of the electoral system and work on my version of Democracy,
where every citizen might become a parliamentarian through random selection (no diebold machines please).
Once the letter gets into Your mailbox, just like the invitation for 'Jury Duty', You will have some time for
arrangements and off You go to Washington. Almost like Jimmy Stewart (God I adore this man) in
'Mr. Smith Goes To Washington'.
I have more trust in the citizen of the United States than in any given 'politician', except Dennis Kucinich.
In Washington there will be accommodation for You and after getting used to the new environment You
will join the other 1000 citizen in their quest to find out what is best for our country and for our fellow
Americans. No more deceit, lies, or corruption, the President will no longer be like the commanding
moron in chief, but solely for representational purposes. Just like the queen of england.
That would be a good beginning for a world in which everybody from the ice free North Pole down to Antarctica
has a fair chance for equal opportunities.

Ponder this.

Looks like Clinton's "old guard" is gearing up to swift boat Obama. The politics of fear is the only thing Clinton can offer. And the only thing Obama can offer is lip service to change while offering none.

itsjustkarma,

I was going to congratulate you on the first post and by the time I finished reading all the other comments, you had another one which is also good. My hat off to you and two pats on the back.

celebrity,

I said the same thing the other night about "progressives" deserting Kucinich as MSM has influence their thinking. (after Iowa with it's record number18% voter turnout)

rtdrury,

I like those percentages!

indeepshitake,

That's a good reason to vote for Kucinich. Or Paul. I'm voting for Dennis in my state's primary next month.

I've noticed no one has been discussing Giuliani recently. Probably because he decided not to participate in Iowa and New Hampshire. I find it a bit pompous that Giuliani decided he doesn't need to attend Iowa and New Hampshire? You should check out this DVD "Giuliani Time". It'll tell you a lot about what Giuliani really is like.

You can get it here: http://www.cinemalibrestore.com

You're right Kem, there is no more inevitability anymore, it's going to be a smack-down! It's a wide open race after NH. Maybe, now that it's a horserace, we will actually get to hear some dueling rhetoric between the candidates regarding REAL change, the kind of change that John Edwards is talking about.

We don't need a woman, a black man, a white man, a uniter, a smooth talker or a negotiater as president, what WE NEED is a FIGHTER, and Edwards is a fighter. He has been knocking the chip off the shoulder of corporate America since he got out of law school, and they're afraid to get in the ring with him or even talk about it.

The only way to take power from these bastards is to beat it out of them, and that is what John Edwards is all about!
EDWARDS '08

REAPER MADNESS, CD does not ban anyone. They MAY at times delete a really obnoxius post which is racist, promotes illegal violence or is cruel and serves no useful purpose.

Well, looks as if we all better vote for Dennis then. That National Security Archiive info tells it all.

As much as I love Common Dreams for its 'progress', I really have to tell You that You are way too slow with Your info about what really happens.
This just arrived in my inbox from the National Security Archive. It is courtesy of the NSA and I believe those lovable people there deserve our full support. Check them out and subscribe to their mail.
Even if it seems to be off-topic it is of course not. Nowadays everything is part of a larger development.
But I do like to infuse my opinion about this election campaign.

Choosing a candidate that reflects the least danger or lesser evil will not work. The only thing that MIGHT work is to stand behind Dennis Kucinich as one man/woman. If I am not already completely deluded, I can only endorse Dennis.
Dennis would be a President whose name deserves a capital Letter. It is WE THE PEOPLE, not we the Clintons, or Barracks (that's kinda funny...), Edwards and of course not a single incapacitated repuglicon.

The amount of money that is wasted should drive the red in the face of those 'poli-trick-tions' . Knowing and observing what
is going on in this country 'right' now, makes any acceptance of this scheme impossible. I urge You to not consider anything
else than the best for us. When I was driving to Hilo earlier I had this realization popping up.
America is larger than those thugs that desperately try to destroy it. Be it subconscious like in the case of the Dim-o-crats, or outright and intended on behalf of the devolving part of the citizenry called repiglicons.

America has a soul that deserves to be protected from the repiglicon and corporate scum. America is supposed to be a beacon of hope. Instead mostly repug presidents have always turned that light into a light flash as in Hiroshima and Nagasaki
or illuminating Vietnam with napalm, and the last example was to brighten the nights over Baghdad.

Do not bargain for the next President. The next administration will have to reverse everything those criminals came up with in the last eight years. Feel for Yourself if You truly believe that there will be no voter fraud like in 2000 and 2004. That there will be a 'fair' election. Then pick somebody that has no friends in washington dc or rubber wall street...

Okay, here comes the promised piece.

Washington DC, January 8, 2008 - In an Order issued today, Magistrate Judge Facciola of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia ordered the White House to answer questions about over 5 million missing e-mails generated between 2003-2005. Noting that the need for information the missing e-mails is "time-sensitive" because of the risk that stored copied of the e-mails "are increasingly likely to be deleted or overridden with the passage of time," the Court demanded answers in a sworn declaration by January 13, 2008 about the location of the missing e-mails.

"To date, the White House has evaded answering questions about whether it permanently destroyed over 5 million e-mails about issues such as Hurricane Katrina, the firing of United States Attorneys, and the exposure of Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA agent," commented Meredith Fuchs, the Archive's General Counsel. "This Order will force the Executive Office of the President to tell the public whether it really erased key records of the nation's history or whether it has made any effort to preserve the information."

The order issued today come in National Security Archive v. Executive Office of the President (EOP), et al. Previously, Judge Kennedy ordered the preservation of EOP backup tapes and the consolidation of this case (filed September 5, 2007) with Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) v. Executive Office of the President, et al. (filed September 25, 2007).

From the National Security Archive

No, Hillary! Don't spend all that money on
impugning Obama. Use it instead on public speaking lessons and charcoal to smear all over your face. Because New York state needs a good senator. We need you to remain the senator from New York, a place where your lists and your scrappy toughness
may work.

I was born in 1939 . From then to now, the two best speakers have been John F.
Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr. If
one of the candidates combines traits from both, everybody else had better just give up. Hillary's commencement speech at Wellesley was pretty good but not in the same league.

You might think the electorate isn't about to value good speeches, but what what have we had for eight years? Don't underestimate the badness of W. Bush once again! He was so insistent with his droning, diffident, schoolboy monotone that we're ready and more than ready. Whether they know it yet, everybody is ready for Obama's voice.

It's easy to find other opposites between George Bush and Barack Obama, too. Is Hillary Clinton more opposite from George
Bush than Barack Obama? Of course not!

O thank you, W, for creating such a horrid imbalance in history. Your legacy, moron, already is known. And the pendulum has finally changed direction. It is coming back.

Never forget what James Baldwin said: "Some day white people are going to wake up and realize that there aren't enough black people to go around."

Our kivals writes: (@ 3:48 pm)
"Hillary is showing once again why no one outside of Wall Street should trust her. She is a scorched earth candidate who cares nothing about the Democratic Party, the integrity of the electoral process, or fair play…"
~ Yup!
Here's a snippet from a report out today:

"Clinton's campaign has already laid out a contingency plan for defeat. A source in her camp said she has privately accepted she is going to lose in New Hampshire. She is also resigned to the fact that she may not take South Carolina, which holds its primary on January 26, the source said.

"Visibly exhausted, Clinton choked back tears during a session at a diner yesterday when a voter asked her how she kept going. "It's not easy. It's not easy. I just don't want to see us fall backward. *This is very personal for me.* It's not just personal. It's not just public. I see what's happening. We have to reverse it."

~ It's real easy for her to shed tears for *herself*, but how many tears did she ever shed in compassion for all the millions of human beings murdered, maimed, raped, forcibly displaced, and psychologically wrecked by the USA's disgusting wars, – those wars which Mrs Hillary Clinton has supported all along?

The main article above states:
"The Clinton campaign has raised over $100 million, but has "only" $15 to $20 million left..."

~ Well I am so moved by that, I shall write and suggest they look down the cracks between the floorboards and see if there are a few lost nickels down there to help swell their funds.
And while they have the flooring up, they could maybe check and see if they can find all their lost Morals, Scruples, and Principles down there!

________________________________

From a less widely-circulated report:

"Mrs Hilary Clinton today lunched with Senator Obama at the Democratic HQ in Washington DC. As they worked their way through the $350 per-person luncheon, the two candidates appeared to have a disagreement over who was going to pick up the tab for their sumptuous meal.

"Mrs Clinton slyly remarked that seeing as Mr Obama's campaign was now gleaning more funds than hers, it ought to be him that paid for the meal. Mr Obama strongly disagreed, and called Mrs Clinton a name we dare not print here.

"Upon hearing this, Mrs Clinton threw a full tureen of fried lobster and duck's legs at the Illinois senator and poured a carafe of red wine on his head. Then, uttering loud snarling noises and frothing heavily at the mouth, she sprung from her chair and sunk her teeth deep into Mr Obama's neck and eventually bit his nose clean off.

"Seeing that her opponent was now down and out, she took full advantage of the situation and began hacking into him with a plastic fork, all the while screaming, "The election is mine, it's all MINE I say! -I am the REAL hocus-pocus bogus POTUS and I ain't gonna let you take it away from me now, you slimy rat !!"

All this occurred before the lobby security guards could haul her off and have her sectioned her under the Mental Health act..."
___________________

Okay, okay, I just made all that up, :) - but hey, I figure it may as well feature in the mess media, -it's as true as most of the other garbage they broadcast!

Methinks I feel the voices of a people yearning, longing to be free! Given the apparent desperation around this current election, can we, the kinder and gentler Progressives, at least resolve to really do better from now on? Abolish the evil of one, two, many lessers and work toward something--perhaps proportional representation, and/or a parliamentary democracy? A Constitutional Convention? Whatever, what have YOU-- before global warming, or, fill in your fav'rit catastrophe scenario, has us scrambling for survival or survivalism.

>Thanks for the link. Is this one of Hillary's support groups? Is this the 527 her campaign is planning for?<

Nah, it looks like a completely separate outfit, but no doubt they'd be just as welcome at a DLC fundraiser, seeing as how Hillary hangs out with Rupert Murdoch and all that.

Israel ranks the candidates:

Rudy Giuliani:8.37
Hillary Clinton:7.62
Michael Bloomberg:7.25
John McCain:7.12
Bill Richardson:6.75
Fred Thompson:6.5
Mitt Romney: 6.5
Mike Huckabee: 6
John Edwards:5.87
Joe Biden:5.62
Christopher Dodd:5.62
Barack Obama: 5

Dennis Kucinich:0
Ron Paul: 0
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/rosnerPage.jhtml

Lord Trigo

Thanks for the link. Is this one of Hillary's support groups? Is this the 527 her campaign is planning for?

Well, it's about time corporations had their britches pulled down. Let's hope Edwards can take 'em on. I suspect he can. It'll be interesting to see what Obama does when they're rolling down the track.

Gee, as if the forces opposed to real democracy in this country needed any more help:

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-chamber8jan08,0,4301350.story?coll=la-home-center>%20>>

If this anti-Obama plan gets off the ground, I'd like to know who's behind it, so I can boycott their businesses, refuse to donate to their organizations, cross their picket lines, etc. I'm no fan of Obama, but the election of Hillary will mean another four years of who-did-or-didn't-smoke-pot-at-Woodstock, should-we-or-should-we-not-have-been-in-Vietnam, and other rehashings of the 1960s. I know that the Baby Boomers are going to argue over the legacy of that decade until the last two members of that generation are laying side-by-side in a nursing home somewhere, but Jeez Louise, can we move on and try to do something about the problems we face today?

Even though I REALLY like the idea of a "person of color" becoming the POTUS and I also REALLY like the idea of a "woman" becoming POTUS, the reality of the candidates makes me know that I must support the "white guy". GO EDWARDS GO!

While I would hate to see the Democratic primary reduced to mudslinging, John Edwards and the sheeple of America would be the beneficiaries of a pissing contest between Hillary and Obama. It might actually force both of them to actually start voicing real ideas for change on the major issues instead of feel-good platitudes.

For your kids future, please vote - EDWARDS '08

scroller: All the money that is pouring into Obama's campaign does not necessarily reflect Obama being bought and paid for. There is another possibility

scroller, you are doing the audacity of hope dance nice and well but the over-arching truth is that successful social democracies thrive thanks only to the elites' fear of the rabble.

You are suggesting that one elite might overcome the entire establishment on behalf of a population of 300 million helpless, enslaved, obedient spectators. Ain't gonna happen. Instead, Obamarama will become an even more carefully choreographed establishment puppet, preserving the imperial machine for the next neocon rampage, 2012, 2016.

Im no Clinton fan but it seems to me that the Reichwing MSM and the Christianist(GOP)Regressives' plans are working out as well for them.

Is there a better way to insure a GOP victory in '08 than getting an unelectable(Obama) candidate on the Dem ticket?(other than stealing yet another election, that is).

Maybe it does not even matter who the Democrat nominee is. The election may be already fixed

I hope I'm wrong

Those who do not support or vote for John Edwards, either don't care, or don't realize, the mega corporations are in full control of our now Fascist government.

Kucinich supporter here, but I kinda know where that's going BUT I think I trust Barack more than I do Hillary.

Anyway, all three of them, Obama, Hillary and Edwards have taken big money from BIG corps, where's the fricken change?

If Hillary does this, it will be evil. Hillary, give it up and go give Bill a you know what before someone else does. Jasus, you're turning into a real Ann Coulter.

See you guys later.

itsjustkarma: without this stinking and unjust military machine, that deserves to go up in smoke, NOBODY, I repeat, NOBODY would have to work, everybody would have free 'global' health care, wouldn't have to pay taxes at all. Because the true costs of the american 'oppressor machine' are tenfold then what the bills in the house reflect.

You can say that again. We can achieve current prosperity on 1/3 the labor, 1/10 the energy, and 1/500 the paper "capital". 90% of current labor is wasted. So we cut out the wasted 45 of current 50 hour work weeks and add back 10 to yield 15 hours/week in useful production. We cut out 100% of the current fossil fuel consumption, and add back 10% in renewable energy.

The extra free time we can use to educate ourselves, help the family maintain food and shelter, enjoy life, etc. Transportation, education and healthcare are completely paid by a very modest 10% tax on the 15 hour work weeks.

The Demoks of course prefer the establishment of mass enslavement and reverse robin hood wealth re-distribution to perpetuate this grotesque second gilded age of capitalist plunder, squander and destruction.

deepa

Two good stories! A barking dog can't "influence" or or be "involved with" an elephant OR the moon. Only another dog!

Here is a list of the problems that Hillary has:

http://www.sonic.net/~taryfast/Hillary.html

As you go through there, you can take note of all the dirty, big money that will be coming after Obama.

jonno, wonder how many posts you just pull out of your ass

A 527 devoted to trashing Obama? That would unleash real war within the left of center folks upon whom the Democratic Party depends. But an unrelated comment: I read most of the comments by Common Dreams readers, and I was appalled! They sound like crazies, on the left instead of on the right. What kind of people read Common Dreams, which I consider a meritorious service to progressives. These semi-rational people don't sound like progressives; they sound like weird conspiracy-theory addicts. Poor Common Dreams staff; you must be disappointed reading so many slightly hysaterical comments!

Of course there is a big difference between attacks and telling the truth. It's a truth that Obama's stand, that he has always been against the war in Iraq is a myth and the press does not hit him on that very important issue. He has said he backed Bush 100% on his foreign policy in Iraq and the Mid East and Obama did vote yes to keep funding the war. What Bill Clinton is saying about that issue is 100% correct.

What I do like about it all, is a person of color is liked and can win in America. I just favor John Edwards over Obama or anyone else.

People dont like her.
Its that simple.

She cant do anything about that.

It was a unlikely scenario having a former first lady running for president anyway.

But the voters in red states will still be the determining factor. Dont think many of them want to vote for a man with the middle name Hussein.

I will bet fox news will be referring to Barack Hussein Obama in their post nomination coverage of him.

Perhaps Osama will give a pre election video praising Obama.

Osama Endorses Obama

lots of mileage in that one.

What kind of politics is this? Does tarnishing the image of the opponent reflects one's "better image", or in turn tarnishes his/her own image???

In my culture (in India) there are two "stories".

1. Every day a temple elephant used to pass by a house in which there was a dog. Every day whenever the dog sees the elephant it used to bark at the elephant. That "act" of the dog never got any reaction/response from the elephant nor did the "act" of the dog make the elephant something else. It remained an elephant and it continued to go by the same route.

2. Whenever there was a full moon and the the moon light was so bright a dog used to bark at the moon. This "act" of the dog never detered the moon to continue to shine.

One does not profit from "tarnishing" somebody else's name. It only reveals more of the person who is indulged in this act of tarnishing. Don't we see a parallel in the US and European imperial tactics. That is, labelling their enemy either as a communist, or a dictator, or a terrorist, or a sponsor of terrorism, or a threat to the "democracy", "freedom" and "security" of the world.

Could there also be the possibility that if Hillary engages in the swift-boating tactic, she will turn off many voters? Remember in the Iowa caucus when Huckabee retracted his negative ad on Romney (he really did not retract it because it actually played on more than three television stations) a number of voters approached him, thanking him for (supposedly) retracting the ad. So, if Hillary did the same thing, might she lose voters, in which case the swift-boating plan could backfire? I agree with SCROLLER that Edwards and Obama should run clean, non-negative campaigns to isolate Hillary. Wow, once again we are seeing Bush-lite (Hillary) in disgusting action. My other question is this, why would Karl Rove tell other candidates how to beat Hillary if she is the most electable Republican?

Tim

I agree that Hillary isn't likely to go away quietly. I just hope she doesn't decide to go ahead with a scorched earth policy. Reports a couple of days ago indicated she's taking over the running of the campaign herself and isn't going to put an advisor in place to determine the campaign direction and policy. And apparently she's bringing in new people tomorow, I suppose to do her bidding.

If she HAS taken over the campaign, we'll see who she really is in the coming months, how she plays politics to win. I suspect it's going to be vicious and she'll lose anyway.

Before she started attacking the frontrunners, I had some sense that they all had a chance at the nomination and it really depended on how well they were able to set forth their unique agendas. But something happened, and it SEEMS to be the Hillary attacks, too heated for the short length of the campaigns. Now I cannot imagine her winning either the Democratic nomination (at least honestly) or the presidency. It's almost as if there are two Hillarys, one is the smiling competent candidate with a chance that I first saw, and the other is a vicious politician who'll go to extreme lengths to win. The second one has gained ascendency in my consciousness, and this is BEFORE she's gotten underway with her new campaign direction, if indeed she intends to attack Obama.

The most crucial thing that I see, is John Edwards will fight to put an end to lobbying in DC. He knows how to win those types of fights.

The lobbying by the major corporations and big business have insured we have unjust wars, they profit from them. They have insured we do not have affordable medical care and prescription drugs. They have insured we don't have truly clean energy, they have insured we don't have dependable and affordable electric vehicles, etc. They have insured our Constitution is worthless now because we do not have a democracy.

Lobbying is the resaon we now have a Fascist form of government. That is why John Edwards being elected as OUR president is vital. He is the only candidate who will stop the lobbying. He saw first hand as a U>S> Senator what lobbying does and he didn't like it. None of us should like it, the corporations now rule us and as Roosevelt and Truman warned us, __ that's Fascism.

Hi COCO, you being good?

I'm not surprised that she'd hire goons to dig up any dirt on anyone she feels might be in her way. Obviously she has been squandering the millions she had pocketed from donors of all stripes and tenets . If she goes through with her vindictive scheme against Obama it may end being the best thing to happen to him and get him elected . The woman is vendetta-prone .

Unless Hillary personally denounces and puts a stop to this talk now, she is toast. Hillary's only positives are three: that she is not Bush, that she is a woman that could break the ultimate glass ceiling, and that she would try to get something done on health care. While none of these three is insubstantial, they are deeply inadequate (two of these three apply to any Democrat), and her war votes and right-wing imperial rhetoric are the turnoffs. Now it appears the idea is being floated by Hillary's handlers that if Hillary can't have it, she will take down the Democrats chances altogether, in a Democratic version of the Republican defeat in 1964 or the Democratic defeat in 1972. However it isn't likely going to work even if this crackpot plan is carried out, because the Obama phenomenon is bigger than something that can be stopped by backroom Party Boss strategists.

I hope Obama and Edwards supporters refrain from attacks on each others' candidates, because in the end both camps need to work together to defeat the Republican nominee. 90%-plus of present Clinton supporters, even if a few backroom financiers threaten to take their marbles and go home, can be won over to supporting an Obama candidacy in the general election, with or without Hillary's active help.

The larger context is depressing: that it is politically impossible for any candidate, of either party, to challenge the imperial enterprise of America and not be instantly marginalized and excluded. As Noam Chomsky has said, no one EVER hears of "the American invasion of South Vietnam" because that statement of truth is literally not on the radar screen of possibility in our discourse. In the same way it is literally unthinkable for any presidential candidate to question the imperial enterprise and not be instantly considered "unAmerican"--that is the sorry state of our empirical situation. The debate allowed is only between those who aspire to use empire benevolently and those whose dark hearts beat for fascism and raw power for its own sake.

But with Obama there is a glimmer of hope. There is a wild card here, a hope that his Wilsonian benevolent-empire rhetoric may go the way of much of other candidates' campaign rhetoric on other issues, and be altered post-election toward a less-imperial direction; a hope that an Obama administration might grow and learn; a possibility that the symbolic power of Obama's rhetoric and popular mandate might outstrip campaign rhetoric, in the way that Martin Luther King's voice grew over time until his voice stood down all the king's horses and all the king's men (until shots rang out). The fundamental paradox or contradiction is that one MUST be an imperialist to be in the American Presidential game, which means every serious Presidential candidacy is, by definition, born in sin (so to speak). With Hillary, and with all of the Republican candidates with a chance of winning there is zero prospect of a change from the imperial enterprise. With Obama, there is a small chance for real change on this, despite his present Wilsonian-imperial rhetoric (which, make no mistake, is a prerequisite for viability in America's presently constructed system—the shamefully marginalized Kucinich [to whom I remain a committed supporter and voter] being an example of what happens when one violates this prime first directive for American presidential viability).

All the money that is pouring into Obama's campaign does not necessarily reflect Obama being bought and paid for. There is another possibility, mixed in among the mercenary-motivated contributions: half of America's elite knows Bush and Company are screwed up, and have varying degrees of social conscience, and may be putting money and backing into these hopes. Obama is becoming the hope for an alternative possibility. An Obama presidency (if not stolen in the election or preempted by other means [i.e. assassination]) would open up a small glimmer of hope of possibility that does not exist with any of the Republican frontrunners, or Hillary. Under the existing circumstances Obama is America's best shot, and I hope his existing lead in the polls continues to grow to a win in November by a landslide. Then—the hard work will begin of working to make real change in reality.

If Hillary's handlers go through with this, every single other Democratic figure—from Edwards and Richardson to Jackson and McGovern, and especially Gore in a big way—should instantly surround Hillary rhetorically and cut this one off right at the knees. Swift-boating the most exciting Democratic nominee since the Kennedys, one raising the hopes of young people in America, is about as reprehensible as it gets from the Hillary camp. All Democrats should ensure that if Hillary's handlers go this route, it is not allowed to stand.

Anney,

You are certainly right about unintended consequences. The Clinton war against Obama *may* backfire enormously, destroying both of their reputations and relegating the DLC to obscurity. But it will largely depend on how Obama responds and handles the situation. I'm not a big fan of Obama by any means, but I do hope he and his handlers are well prepared for what's coming. And I do hope that Obama's supporters, most who are (understandably), quite anti-Hillary, realize that she is not going to go away quietly and let her grip on the party slip away without one hell of a fight.

Obscene amounts of money cannot buy you love, but it can buy Rupert Murdoch. Better off donating it to charity, rather than multimedia conglomerations. A candidate doesn't even get on a televised debate without a few hundred million or so. Money votes.

This is the reason I wouldn't vote for Hillary Clinton at any time. She's a dishonest, angry and greedy woman who would (not to my surprise at all) stoop to this level to win. Barack Obama obviously the better presidential candidate and will be a better President than Clinton and certainly a heck of a lot better than Bush.

timkidd

But don't forget the law of unintended consequences. If Hillary does go on the attack against Obama, his chances depend a lot on how he responds. And by that I mean, will the "battle" overwhelm the message? They could both lose votes if it's tit-for-tat because voters don't like to see nasty campaigning, not between party candidates. And I think those votes would shift to Edwards or perhaps even a Republican, heaven forbid!

I just don't think it's Hillary's time. Maybe it never was for the presidency.

TimKidd (4:27 pm),

That is such a dark portrait of the Clintons and the future that it has the ring of truth.

I agree with the view that Edwards is the great variable in the war the Clintons are about to unleash against Obama. If they are successful in beating down Obama, scaring off potential supporters and turning the media against him, there will be a window, albeit a brief one, for Edwards to seize the the opportunity created by all this chaos. While the Clintons are very powerful, I don't think they could successfully destroy TWO opponents. So Edwards *could* emerge from the Obama rubble.

*Could* but not likely. Most likely, Obama will either collapse under the sleaze orgy or survive but be brutally weakened as he limps out of Denver; fresh meat for the GOP vultures.

It's about to get really ugly, folks. The Clintons are down but not out, not by a damn long shot. And do not doubt that if they go down, they are going to do EVERYTHING possible to take Obama down with them. They may or may not have the power and momentum to resurrect Hillary and force her nomination, but they do have plenty of money and institutional support to beat the living daylights out of Obama. Oh sure, he might get the nomination in the end, but he'll be battered, bruised and tarnished. The Clinton juggernaut will have done half the work for the GOP sleaze masters, making Obama hopelessly (yes HOPElessly) weak in the general election.

Which suits Hillary just fine. Can anyone say "Hillary '12?" Don't forget, the Clintons care about one thing and one thing only: themselves. Their power, their influence, their status. Dividing the Democratic party, generating HUGE animosity amongst the progressive community, demoralizing well meaning (if naive) Obama supporters and destroying the Democrats chances of victory in November are a small price to pay if it means they remain the pre-eminent couple of the American "left".

The comment at a Hillary rally comparing Obama to JFK and noting he was assassinated is just the beginning. Anyone who believes Hillary did not know and approve of that comment (people chosen to introduce candidates are carefully vetted and prepped) probably also believed Bill when he said "I did not have sexual relations..." And if you think that such a tactic is petty, slimey and mean spirited, oh just wait! By February 5, that little incident will seem whimsical.

The basic strategy is simple: swift-boat the hell out of Obama from now until the convention, then Hillary will give him a half hearted endorsement and sit on her hands (along with her fat cat donors and the DLC elite) throughout the fall. The bruised Obama and his demoralized supporters will then limp through another round of endless berating at the hands of the GOP. Republicans retain the White House (probably with President McCain) and the Clintons along with the DLC blame Obama, his Deaniac supporters and the progressive blogosphere for the loss. The progressive wing of the Democrats will become demoralized, frustrated and disgusted by the spectacle. Many of them once again give up on the Democrats and electoral politics. And, the DLC will regain the thorough dominance over the party it had in the '90's. In time, Hillary will emerge as a frontrunner for 2012, campaigning on the theme that we tried it the Obama-Dean progressive way last time and "we" failed.

Brilliant. Sick, but brilliant. And, it will most likely succeed.

jonno , wonder how many twinkies , you gleaned off the top of the grocery shelf ?

liberal with an attitude,

I always appreciate kind words. Thanks. And I agree that Hillary should have run in 2004 if she were going to run. I doubt that I would have supported her, but I may have been less adamantly opposed. There is something a bit too cozy about the relationship between the Bushes and the Clintons that has developed over the years, which makes me trust the Clintons even less than before, which was not much to begin with.

How about Edwards/Richardson?

Kivals,
that is without a doubt one of the most insightful and intelligent and thoughtful posts I have read on here in quite awhile. I agree with your spin on the situation.

Hillary is showing once again why no one outside of Wall Street should trust her. She is a scorched earth candidate who cares nothing about the Democratic Party, the integrity of the electoral process, or fair play, much less about the common people of the US. She feels she is entitled to the presidency, and has patiently waited her turn, and she is willing to do anything to get her due.

She has been dreaming for years of becoming immortalized as the first female President of the US and the first female "most powerful person in the world" since Queen Victoria. And with the help Bush and Cheney have provided in empowering the modern US president, she could quite reasonably imagine herself as having an opportunity to become the most powerful person in human history. And knowing all that and seeing it slip away was what prompted the tears and the breaking voice yesterday in that diner.

I am not much of an Obama fan (I would prefer a socialist, then Kucinich, then Edwards), but because of his background (educational, life experience, past political actions as a state senator and community organizer, and racial) a rational person may hope (yes, hope) that he may not turn out all that bad after all, despite all of his connections and donations from business interests and his stated policy positions. And a little racial healing, which the US desperately needs, could be a bonus.

Published on Tuesday, January 8, 2008 by the Chicago Sun-Times
Obama's Success Is Making Us All Winners
by Jesse Jackson
Barack Obama's stunning victory in Iowa lifts our hearts, no matter whom we support. You can't help but be touched by a brilliant, passionate African American with a message of hope winning the vote of Iowa's presidential caucuses. Although it's only a first step in a long race for Obama, it is surely a giant step for America.