Obama Press Conference Call: To discuss the Clinton campaign’s pattern of misleading voters.

4 Responses to “Obama Press Conference Call: To discuss the Clinton campaign’s pattern of misleading voters.”

1. Brooke McGillis on March 21st, 2008 1:47 pm

   To Whom It May Concern,
   Today while reading the New York Times story on Richardson’s endorsement of Sen. Obama I realized that there could be a looming challenge. The Obama campaign has talked a lot about having the ability to work across party lines, meanwhile, dividing its own party with its success. I do not think that it is beyond Clinton to use this as a way to tug our sympathies or sentimentalities toward the Clinton political machine. So beware it could be a last ditch effort on her part and it could hurt.
   I really hope you all win because it does actually seem like we will all win.
   Peace
   Brooke McGillis

2. Stanley Carter on March 24th, 2008 12:59 pm

   It is time that we as a Nation become more United. The media continues to mention “White” votes and “Black” votes and “Latino” votes, and so on. Now this type of language signifies division which is truly contrary to Obama’s movement.

   After following the political process over the past months, if many of the Clinton supporters can not see clearly the character flaws by now, perhaps they are downing in emotions obscuring the truth. Personally, I use to have some respect for Clinton, but now it is clear to me more than ever, if Obama does not get nominated for the democratic party, I can not and will not support Clinton sadly.

   And sadly, the democratic party will be divided against itself to a degree that the house will fall and the republican party’s McCain might win. Clinton should be humble enough to think about the party unselfishly and let Obama be nominated.
   No matter how much Obama might say we must support Clinton if Obama is NOT nominated, it will not change the minds of many Americans NOT to vote for Clinton.

3. randy jackson on March 25th, 2008 3:24 am

   It concerns me that one of Senator Clinton’s aides is comparing New Mexico’s Govenor’s support of Senator Obama as an act of dissertion. In this country are all men or women who have a change in their political pursuasion to be considered as traitors?

   I thought the constitution that was frame by our fore fathers allowed for political dissent without being called a communist or traitor. We are living in a time where a Republican run polictical machine has allowed the Vice President ’s prior company Halley Burton preferential treatment in the awarding of a non bid billion dollar contract over four years ago to provide services for food and other items in Iraq that was publically denounced for over-billing and fraud in reported expenditures.

   This is not a time for the division in the democrat camp and I would prefer to see Senator Clinton stick to the real issues facing this county such as:

   1. Loss of jobs for our american workers
   2. Affordable health care for all american especially the elderly.
   3. A sistematic removal of our american boys from a war that we never should have been involved. There were no weapons of mass distruction in Iraq.
   4. Realization, that this is a religious sectarian war that cannot be won by the constant deployment of american militaty men.
   5. Realization, that the previous dictator in Iraq maintain control of the religious oppossing group by mass killings. There were no car bombing going on in Bagdag when the previous dictator was in control. I am not suggesting that the previous ruler in Bagdag was polictically correct , but we need to abandom the” Big Stick ” mentality that was representitive of our political position with third word countries during the 50-60 years.
   6. Realization, that the previous Democrat Presidential candidate lost the election because he did not recognize the importance of the “christian vote” relative to gay marriages. In contrast, President Bush embraced the christian doctrine concerning gay marriages. I am suggesting that although one may personnaly be in favor of gay marriages, it is not expedient to publically take that position. In order to be elected President of the United States, one must be in touch with the pulse of nation, whether they be Christian or Jew, male or female, black, white, asian, hispanic or any other ethnicity that makes up this great nation.
   On the other hand if one was running for the Mayor of San Francisco, it would be political sucide not to embrace gay marriages.

   I applaud Senator Obama’s message to reach out across party lines and attempt to restore hope of the common man in this great nation to provide for the needs of our diverse population. The rich have gotten richer under President Bush and the poor in contrast have become poorer. This is due in part to the lack of opportunity of the poor in the attainment of a college education, that will transmute them from at state of non productivity to a state of productivity. Also, this disparity exist because of special interest groups have lobbied for the passing of laws there were in their best interest.. Who are the lobbyist for the poor?

   I have looked in retrospect at challenges of World war 1, 2 and the Korean war as well as live through the Vietnam era. I witness the growth of the steel mills in the 1940 era and saw our economy flourish industrially and technologically.

   Now, I see America from a 360 degree perspective and I would encourage Senator Clinton to do likewise and if Senator Obama is more in touch with the pulse of the Nation, then support him as his vice presidential running mate. We do not need another four years of Republican domination, catering to special interest groups that have contributed to the high gas prices.

   I remember the day when gas was 25cents per gallon and most men or women on a common job could afford a house with the “white picket fence” That was reflective of the “American Dream”

4. Ralph Davis on April 29th, 2008 1:51 pm

   I am over in Italy, trying to support Sen Obama from afar. I love the guy, but that press conference was really sad. The senator was not prepared to make a bold break with the lunatic pastor. Did he not stay up all night with associates and work on his approach and delivery? I am so disappointed. He now must debate Billory, but with a moderator, and with the gloves off (presidential pardons, campaign contributions, etc.on the agenda). Come on Obama; pull yourself together and be a lion.

   With respect and affection, Ralph Davis

Got something to say?