Yes, we can.

[Morrigoon]

Fair enough It's kind of pointless for him to have added that, as it adds little to his argument (after all, Hillary didn't have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky... then again, neither did Bill )

Special for you, I have trimmed out the opening paragraphs wherein the author of that quote laid out his argument that Hillary had very little responsibility during the Clinton years. And that nasty little bit about sodomy

[wendybeth]

Richardson committed to Obama, even though his voters (by the slimmest of margins) went for Hillary. He indicated that he was turned off by the type of campaign Hillary is running, and her reaction to his decision probably made him feel like he made the right choice. (She wasn't a happy camper).

Her negative campaign is going to do her in- I just hope it doesn't cause the Dems to lose the Presidency.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Richardson's a super delegate for whom it's much more common practice for them to vote against their constituents.

Unless Hillary has a huge win in Pennsylvania, I expect we'll start to see more super delegates crossing over to support Obama, likely due to pressure from party leaders. While Clinton's still got a mathematical chance to keep things close, they probably aren't going to do much, but the longer this battle goes on, the less chance the eventual candidate is going to have to mount a campaign against McCain. They're already being hurt by the fact that McCain's repeated "slip ups" regarding the difference between Al Qaeda vs. Shia is second page news behind the non-issue of Obama's pastor. That should have been an important campaign point for a democratic nominee to go after him on, seeing as foreign policy is supposedly McCain's strong point, but by the time this settles out it'll be questionable whether the average voter/media will consider it relevant anymore.

[Alex]

Notice that in the list he listed the bills authored by Clinton that were passed into law but for Obama listed bills sponsored or co-sponsored. Apples are being compared to oranges. I did my own searching and the numbers are somewhat different but don't paint so divergent a picture.

Since 2000, Clinton has been primary sponsor of 159 bills and primary or co-sponsor of 705 total. 4 of those have made it to the president's desk: one on independence of US Attorneys, one on awarding a Congressional Gold Medal, one on breast cancer stamps, and one on subpoena power related the 9/11 Victims Fund.

Since 2000 (obviously, he wasn't actually in office since 2000 I just didn't change the search term since it should have no impact), Obama has been primary sponsor of 120 bills and primary or co-sponsor of 527 total. 4 of those have made it to the president's desk: one on stem cell research, one on breast cancer stamps, one on naming a post office, one on the Freedom of Information Act.

Further, of all those bills Obama and Clinton were both co-sponsors of 269 of them.

I'd tie this in to the discussion in another thread about statistics and their use. Statistics were sorely misused there. And of course it is all meaningless without the context of knowing how many meaningful bills a senator can expect to push in a year, how many meaningful bills get passed every year, and the power structure involved in two junior senators trying to get their names prominently attached to meaningful bills.

My concern wasn't with the use of the word "sodomized" but rather the suspicion that a person who was working so hard to give a hard bias to a blowjob probably wasn't working too hard to be even keeled in the other parts of the post.

[innerSpaceman]

Yeah, Alex beat me to it. I demand that list be removed. I call shenanigans.

I'm gonna post the people I had the hots for vs. the people Cadaverous Pallor actually slept with.

[BarTopDancer]

So Hillary, was it sniper fire or not?

If it was discussed elsewhere, I can't find it. But I have no issue with the post being moved.

[Alex]

Post 576 above has some of it.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

I'm gonna post the people I had the hots for vs. the people Cadaverous Pallor actually slept with.

Cadaverous Pallor's camp has refused the request to publish said list. You may want to file a Freedom of Information Act request...

Going back to my post earlier - yes, it is within the rules for her to sway previously pledged delegates. I still find it offensive. The message she is sending me, the voter, is "your vote doesn't matter." Even though I am not a Dem and couldn't vote for either, I am horrified by her disregard of the average citizen's opinion.

[Cadaverous Pallor]

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?...obama_doctrine

I have to admit, I skimmed this. But it's preaching to my choir. If you still think Barack's people say "CHANGE" over and over and nothing else, you may want to read it.

[BarTopDancer]

Originally Posted by Cadaverous Pallor

Going back to my post earlier - yes, it is within the rules for her to sway previously pledged delegates. I still find it offensive. The message she is sending me, the voter, is "your vote doesn't matter." Even though I am not a Dem and couldn't vote for either, I am horrified by her disregard of the average citizen's opinion.

I also agree with you.

I'm having visions of an episode of West Wing when they called the various senators asking, begging and trying to convince them to change their vote.