So where is this Candidate of CHANGE, if your explanation is the simple answer Larkin?
When did I say he was a candidate of change?
I know nothing on this particular issue...and was not speaking on this particular issue, but you do have my interest!
So, maybe you can tell me how NOT voting yes or no on a Planned parenhood bill somehow was taking a "stance" on it, for the "record"?
It wasn't "taking a stance" on it. He voted present so other senators would vote present, instead of no. Hence Hillary attacking him as not pro-choice on that issue is idiotic.
This is NOT cherry picking, I just did not "write off" jsander's link that he gave that went over each and every vote taken in the Senate and how each senator voted on each Bill....this is one of the only ways to get to know ones candidate's positions compared to their own positions on these bills and issues.
Actually thats NOT what his link gave. Unless you think that Clinton never cast a vote until Obama reached the Senate?
Really? I think you are wayyyyyyy wrong on this....I know you are....the only position that could seoarate Obama from the other candidates was his stance that he would not have voted for the war and he would bring the troops home right away....? This is why he was SUPPOSEDLY, the candidate of "change"....not the Insider candidate.... what a crock of shit! hahahahaha...lmao.
Or maybe that he is a young, black, eloquent politician who gave an amazing speech on race, and is running against an opponent who has played a dirty campaign?
Or maybe some of us aren't too fond of having dynasties in the white house?
If thats the only reason you can think of anyone to vote for Obama, you are the one wearing blinders, not me.
Why haven't you asked for an answer on it as a supprter...tooo mezmorized with His CHANGE that he brings? The war and bringing troops home was a key issue......why couldn't he take a stance on it? Was he just NOT PRESENT AGAIN or was he there and did not want to commit in fear of republican backlash in his presidential bid? WHO KNOWS....but I bet ya, the Mccain group will certainly press to find out.when and IF he does EVER get enough votes to secure his nomination.
By the way, I don't support pulling out of Iraq. And if you think that McCain is going to push Obama on not pulling out soon enough, your a fool.
I was very clear that I could understand Obama's blunder on 57 states and on some other blunders he has made....and even have voiced i did not buy in to hillary being too tired on her bosnia gaf......but youuuuuuuuu.....?
My point was that Obama has screwed up, and so has Hillary. Neither are indiciative of anything more than verbal mistakes. Well Obamas isn't, Hillary's Bosnia gaffe might be considering it was repeated several times afterwards, but I don't think she purposefully lied.
I don't see what I am saying as insulting Obama....you take it as an insult while you do INSULT Hilliary with useless garbage and expect me to sit back and take it "like a woman should" I suppose....?
Ah, now it comes out. I never said you insulted Obama. And considering how much you whined, bitched, and moaned about cries of racism against you, I really think you should reconsider leveling the charge of sexism against me, especially considering I have done NOTHING that is even remotely sexist.
All I am pointing out is that your candidate IS NOT a God, and is not sinless
No shit sherlock. But despite that fact, he is not the ball of evil you seem to think he is. Soon are you going to follow in the Republicans shoes and start emphasizing his middle name, and maybe call him a Muslim as well?
and will not bring any kind of change that any of the Democratic candidates would not have brought after the Bush Administration's reign.
I disagree. He isn't the same as Hillary.
He is a politician as Clinton and Mccain are politicians, as John F Kennedy was a Politician and as Nixon was a politician and as Roosevelt was a politician
and don't want you to het your hopes up that Obama is the Candidate of Change that Washington needs, because he is no more less a Politician than the Best of Politicians, that is why he is where he is...due to his connections and insider position.
He isn't going to single handedly fix washington, but he is significantly more of an outsider than Clinton is. And guess what? The establishment candidate lost. The candidate pushed by the party lost.
No, he isn't there only because of his connections. Does he have them? Yes. Were they anywhere good enough to overcome Hillary's? No. Why did he win? Because the people voted him in.
And really, don't call me blinded when your praying for Hillary Clinton. I'm praying for a nominee. I would prefer Obama, but I'd be alright with Clinton. Who are you going to vote for in the general Care...Obama or McCain?
