Barack Hussein Obama wants voters to decide the nomination based on who can coolly and competently run the country. He had better hope they don’t study his recent campaign too closely for the answer. Obama has overseen major staff shake-ups in two months. He has left a trail of judgement issues that the Republicans will more than happy bring up in the general election, and unhappy voters that had to listen to his own campaign accepting of the Racist and Anti-American advisersto they keep close by. His campaign badly underestimated his main adversary, Senator Hillary Clinton, miscalculated the importance of organizing swing states and was caught flat-footed after failing to lock up the nomination on Super Tuesday. The Obama [...] campaign has been marked by strategic missteps, confused uncertainty and personnel drama.

And recently his negative ads are saturating our airways...so don't even say he doesn't run a negative campaign. But the Obamanites will find a way to accept this as a way to respond to the ads of truth that Senator Clinton is running.
We will turn back the arrogance and down-speaking mumbo jumbo from this snakeoil salesman.
GO PA!!!

poor Obama...can't say he isn't like Clinton anymore...same ole politics as usual

And Hilary didn't run under sniper fire in Bosnia. So what ?

so it's okay for him to lie?????
whatever

too funny

I hope he's not bitter about us finding out about this

this lie will catch up to him, I'm certain

Poor Poor Obamanites

That is Kenneth E Lamb on google.com,very interesting..

did anyone check out Kenneth E Lamd genealogy on Obama on google.com??????He has the background on the Obama father.I do not think they would like ths out.......

Boo Hoo Hoo

Quit acting like a child and read the facts !!!!

Bitter Betty table for 3 ready...
Hope you enjoy tonight's special...CROW Under Glass.

Maybe it can be a weekly special for the Obamanites.

VOTE FOR THE FORMER WALMART UNION BUSTER
It's amusing how the racists among us research far and wide to try to find negatives about Obama himself and find little or nothing. So they try guilt by association. Any black man with his background (raised by white grandparents) would need to read widely among black authors in order to understand how he really fitted into this society. He would have to read the bitter and the moderate. That is how intelligent people inform themselves. Having read these people, listened to Rev. Wright, his grandparents, his professors, he found his own life view. Are some of you guys simply not intelligent enough to understand this, or are you simply so partisan you pretend not to.
David Brooks the Conservative columnists wrote in the New York Times that he and others had investigated Obama intensively and found (I quote):
"Obama did not respond to his fatherlessness or his racial predicament with anger and rage, but as questions for investigation, conversation and synthesis. He approaches politics the same way. In her outstanding New Yorker profile, Larissa MacFarquhar notes that Obama does not perceive politics as a series of battles but as a series of systemic problems to be addressed. He pursues liberal ends in gradualist, temperamentally conservative ways".
Again
"Like most of the rival campaigns, I’ve been poring over press clippings from Obama’s past, looking for inconsistencies and flip-flops. There are virtually none. The unity speech he gives on the stump today is essentially the same speech that he gave at the Democratic convention in 2004, and it’s the same sort of speech he gave to Illinois legislators and Harvard Law students in the decades before that. He has a core, and was able to maintain his equipoise, for example, even as his campaign stagnated through the summer and fall."
This is a Leader to be proud of. Here is a highly qualified lawyer, an honor graduate of Harvard who elected to spend early years after graduation on the streets of Chicago helping displaced factory workers like many of you. Just think that 425,000 of us contributed $40 million dollars to his campaign last month. He is the only candidate who does not owe anything to the people who outsource your jobs and foreclose on your homes. Some experienced Senators have braved the wrath of the Clintons to tell you so.

Hillary on the other hand has a checkered past.
She started out as a Goldwater girl, a supporter of the most conservative man to run for president in living memory.
She served on the board of Walmart for six years during which time Walmart ruthlessly fought any attempt at unionization, paid low wages and provided no healthcare. Did this show the heartfelt solidarity with labor she now claims. She is still the favorite of the rich. Twenty wealthy rich donors recently ganged up on Nancy Pelosi on her behalf. What do do you think they expect in return. How can any right thinking union member vote for this darling of the out sourcers.
She served on the team that investigated President Nixon but her Supervisor refused to give her an "honorable discharge" when the project was finished. He says she lied, was unethical and unjust.
Recently she lied about her visit to Bosnia. I for one would not have employed any manager who told that kind of rediculous lie and would not even admit he lied. If she really believed her story when she told it, as she claimed, then she is a nut case.
It seems to me any reasonable person must see there is no comparison in personal qualities. That I think is the reason why your Senator who had planned to stay neutral felt compelled to take a stand.

NEWSWEEK ON HILLARY and WATERGATE
Posted by Anonymous on April 1, 2008 - 11:30pm.
April 1, 2008
Hillary Clinton Fired for Lies, Unethical Behavior

So says her boss on the House Judiciary Committee during the Watergate hearings, Jerry Zeifman. I haven't had time to digest it all, but Ed Morrissey reports on a column by Dan Calabrese that is based on Zeifman's account, supported by his own contemporaneous notes:

When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.
Why?

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

The allegations are explosive, and they come from the one person in the best position to know that they are true, Hillary's then-boss.

‹ okay, let's get this train wreck over with... Hillary Clinton Lies Again ›

yup

tooooooooooooo funy

Barack Hussein Obama wants voters to decide the nomination based on who can coolly and competently run the country. He had better hope they don’t study her recent campaign too closely for the answer. Obama has overseen major staff shake-ups in two months. He has left a trail of judgement issues that the Republicans will more than happy bring up in the general election, and unhappy voters that had to listen to his own campaign accepting of the Racist and Anti-American advisersto they keep close by. His campaign badly underestimated his main adversary, Senator Hillary Clinton, miscalculated the importance of organizing swing states and was caught flat-footed after failing to lock up the nomination on Super Tuesday. The Obama [...] campaign has been marked by strategic missteps, confused uncertainty and personnel drama.

my my my
Isn't this interesting...Campaign of Hope huh? More like Campaign Of Hope They Don't Find Anythingelse...hehehe

OOPS
Insert foot
Poor Obamanites...eatin crow again.
Apples my pretty????

Kennedy's achievements in the US senate do not count, apparently.

Give me a break. How many family stories have you or people you know found to have factual errors. My family has several stories that I was told as a child and believed and retold only to find out things were left out or misremembered by the storytellers. Who cares about this kind of such stuff from any candidate.