Donkeys and Elephants and Delegates,oh my!
Check out the most popular
Clinton Defections Should Raise Eyebrows
huffingtonpost.com — This week, former Democratic National Committee Chair and superdelegate, Joe Andrew switched his support from Clinton to Obama. On the heels of the Indiana primary, Andrew, who lives in Indianapolis, also stated he planned to call the other superdelegates he knows, lobbying them to back Obama. Bill Clinton appointed Andrew chair of the DNC in 1999
iMatthew- 1314 diggs
- digg it
- aliengoods, on 05/05/2008, -5/+56Does anyone even realize the two points which make her stand out from Obama are her hysterical gas tax break for the summer and wanting to attack Iran? I can see why Rush is telling people to vote for her.
- lolbotomy, on 05/05/2008, -7/+11Don't forget mandatory health-care for all, even for those who don't need or want it. Under Clinton's plan would an American citizen who's touring the world and not even in America still have to pay for it? What about people who go their whole lives without visiting an emergency room, should they be forced to pay too? I like Obama's plan a lot better, mandatory for children because they aren't educated and experienced enough yet to make a decision on their own, and optional for adults. If you're smart enough to go through life without getting seriously injured you shouldn't be punished for it.
I see her plan a lot like how I see social security, they'll force everyone to pay in and then come up with excuses of why not to pay-out, then when billions or even trillions of dollars have been stockpiled the government can just loot the fund whenever they want to cover their own asses in some future war or other funding crisis.- defska42, on 05/05/2008, -0/+6I think that the ultimate goal for both democratic candidates, and many (most?) Americans, is a single-payer health care system. The point is that we aren't going to get there any time soon thanks to the underground work done by Hilary in the early 90's. Her intentions were pure, and I commend her for that, but the bottom line is that not only did she fail, she failed miserably. So now, we have to work towards that, and Obama's plan is the most reasonable given our current circumstances. I think that all Americans should have health care; but to start by mandating it for just children (something that will be easier to get bipartisan support for), is a smart first step.
This is why I support Obama, he isn't as divisive in his actions as Hilary is. He can get things done.
Your statement: "If you're smart enough to go through life without getting seriously injured you shouldn't be punished for it." is laughable. "Smart", I guess, is living your life in an underground bunker with a magical unlimited supply of food, water, and (as you get older) medicine. ***** happens; they call them "accidents" for a reason.- lolbotomy, on 05/05/2008, -3/+1Major injuries aren't impossible to avoid, just be more cautious. Don't do stuff that's likely to injure you and pay attention or don't participate when there's situations where others could cause you harm. If you enjoy living a reckless life, sign up. If you like to ride around on a motorbike popping wheelies and doing jumps then yes get coverage. If you go rock-climbing or do any other dangerous activity then it would absolutely be worth it. I know here's still the chance of accidents, even if you avoid all other dangerous activities, if you live in an area where there's a high accident rate then yes it would probably be worth paying for, but not everyone should be forced into it. Some people go their whole lives without being in an accident, and can avoid bad situations, they shouldn't have to pay for the carelessness of others.
- alittleroy101, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3Your position is laughable. As defska said, they're called accidents for a reason. Also, illness can happen at any time to anyone. It's not only people who 'ride around on a motorbike popping wheelies and doing jumps' who need health care.
- lolbotomy, on 05/06/2008, -1/+1missreply
- lolbotomy, on 05/05/2008, -3/+1Major injuries aren't impossible to avoid, just be more cautious. Don't do stuff that's likely to injure you and pay attention or don't participate when there's situations where others could cause you harm. If you enjoy living a reckless life, sign up. If you like to ride around on a motorbike popping wheelies and doing jumps then yes get coverage. If you go rock-climbing or do any other dangerous activity then it would absolutely be worth it. I know here's still the chance of accidents, even if you avoid all other dangerous activities, if you live in an area where there's a high accident rate then yes it would probably be worth paying for, but not everyone should be forced into it. Some people go their whole lives without being in an accident, and can avoid bad situations, they shouldn't have to pay for the carelessness of others.
- defska42, on 05/05/2008, -0/+6I think that the ultimate goal for both democratic candidates, and many (most?) Americans, is a single-payer health care system. The point is that we aren't going to get there any time soon thanks to the underground work done by Hilary in the early 90's. Her intentions were pure, and I commend her for that, but the bottom line is that not only did she fail, she failed miserably. So now, we have to work towards that, and Obama's plan is the most reasonable given our current circumstances. I think that all Americans should have health care; but to start by mandating it for just children (something that will be easier to get bipartisan support for), is a smart first step.
- cranium, on 05/05/2008, -3/+4She voted for gun confiscation, Obama voted against it.
- defska42, on 05/05/2008, -0/+10But...but...when she's in Pennsylvania she LOVES guns.
- VAXcat, on 05/05/2008, -1/+6 Only guns that have passed through a 4th dimenional rift in space, and have been reversed left-for-right...not too many of those around...
- Spottswood, on 05/05/2008, -0/+4You're thinking of the fabled gucci-wearing latte-drinking guns
- defska42, on 05/05/2008, -0/+10But...but...when she's in Pennsylvania she LOVES guns.
- lolbotomy, on 05/05/2008, -7/+11Don't forget mandatory health-care for all, even for those who don't need or want it. Under Clinton's plan would an American citizen who's touring the world and not even in America still have to pay for it? What about people who go their whole lives without visiting an emergency room, should they be forced to pay too? I like Obama's plan a lot better, mandatory for children because they aren't educated and experienced enough yet to make a decision on their own, and optional for adults. If you're smart enough to go through life without getting seriously injured you shouldn't be punished for it.
- digjam, on 05/05/2008, -6/+15She knows she cant win, shes setting her stage for 2012!
- mrloco, on 05/05/2008, -3/+21You know the world is meant to end in 2012? I wonder if it's related.
- Michael9636, on 08/04/2008, -0/+1What a surprise. I was thinking the same thing. But my understanding is that the Mayan calendar, which has been in existence for thousands of years, ends in December, 2012. What that means is not clear, or is it?
- TheThirdLevel, on 05/05/2008, -2/+4She's WRECKING her stage for 2012.
- countthevotes, on 05/05/2008, -13/+2She will win when we count ALL the votes, including Michigan and Florida. Why should the voters be disenfranchised?
- CatsAreGods, on 05/05/2008, -1/+13Er, because Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan and because everyone in the Democratic Party had agreed in advance that those states wouldn't be counted?
- ender7074, on 05/05/2008, -2/+3No, you are wrong. Those two states violated the primary rules about when they were supposed to be holding their elections. Thats why those states were discounted. The idiots in charge of the Democrat party in those two states screwed the pooch.
- iainc, on 05/05/2008, -1/+3Yes, why should the voters who never cast a ballot because they were told it wouldn't count be disenfranchised? Yes, why should the voters who want to vote for the guy who wasn't even on the ballot be disenfranchised?
You make me sick. Clinton agreed to the rules, so STFU.
- CatsAreGods, on 05/05/2008, -1/+13Er, because Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan and because everyone in the Democratic Party had agreed in advance that those states wouldn't be counted?
- Shuukyoku, on 05/05/2008, -1/+4Of course, this puts her contending with an incumbent who she couldn't beat as a rookie...yeah, I don't see it happening. Maybe 2016...assuming the snipers haven't gotten her by then.
- Cybermaul, on 05/05/2008, -2/+3I miss her, but my aim is getting better.
- Infidelcastr0, on 05/05/2008, -2/+32012.... something about that seems familiar, can't think what it was... probably nothing.
- Michael9636, on 08/04/2008, -0/+1On December 21, 2012, the ancient Mayan calendar ends. This could be a big deal. Google "2012 mayan calendar"
- Lyk4n, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1pah! Superstitious nonsense..
- Michael9636, on 08/04/2008, -0/+1On December 21, 2012, the ancient Mayan calendar ends. This could be a big deal. Google "2012 mayan calendar"
- Azulita360, on 05/05/2008, -1/+2Of course she's running for 2012...she hasn't had a shot for months now but the efforts of Rush Limbaugh and Stanley Blumenthal have kept media lie going. I'm just angry that MSNBC and others said that was just a rumor in the black community...wow...are they out of touch!
- SpinningHead, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Or she wants McCain to win simply because his policies will definitely benefit the uber-rich such as herself.
- mrloco, on 05/05/2008, -3/+21You know the world is meant to end in 2012? I wonder if it's related.
- Shiftgood, on 05/05/2008, -19/+14Republicans: People are inherently bad
Democrats: People are inherently good
is that the root of it? ive been trying to figure out where the divide starts and done lots of arguing, but this theory just popped in my head.. does it make sense? is this this root?- Acewrap, on 05/05/2008, -7/+6No.
- Shiftgood, on 05/05/2008, -6/+5great counter, i can tell you really thought about it.
- dbizzell, on 05/05/2008, -5/+3I agree with this, but republicans won't. You could also put it this way.
Republicans are inherently bad
Democrats are inherently good- lordno, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1It's true. I'm a republican and I agree with it. If someone found $100k in a parking lot, how many people do you think would try and return it, honestly? Most people, myself included, would pocket it.
- xenuxenuts, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2I'm not sure I'd call that good vs evil. Some better tests would be, if you and your other managers could make an additional $20M each in bonuses, would you lay off 1000 workers? Would you as a head of an insurance company push to deny diabetic supplies to your customers because it's a pre-existing condition? Would you arrange for the delay of a prisoner release so it could help you politically?
- lordno, on 05/06/2008, -0/+2I meant I agreed with Shiftgood's comment. Republican's do not intentionally act bad, but just believe that people themselves are inherently bad. As a society, people act selfishly - not that Republicans agree that everyone should act evil and without morals.
- xenuxenuts, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2I'm not sure I'd call that good vs evil. Some better tests would be, if you and your other managers could make an additional $20M each in bonuses, would you lay off 1000 workers? Would you as a head of an insurance company push to deny diabetic supplies to your customers because it's a pre-existing condition? Would you arrange for the delay of a prisoner release so it could help you politically?
- lordno, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1It's true. I'm a republican and I agree with it. If someone found $100k in a parking lot, how many people do you think would try and return it, honestly? Most people, myself included, would pocket it.
- ender7074, on 05/05/2008, -6/+2Thats about the stupidest thing I've ever read. Gratz!
- Shiftgood, on 05/05/2008, -5/+5I'm gonna wait this one out... there is bound to be someone else on digg that likes having a debate/conversation rather than just telling nom nom jokes and pressing vote buttons..
hold on.. im gonna get a snickers. - malex, on 05/05/2008, -2/+8It's probably an oversimplification, but I've come to more or less the same conclusion.
It might be more accurate to say that Republicans believe that people's _desires_ are inherently destructive, and they need to conform to cultural traditions or authority figures to keep them from becoming "uncivilized."- Shiftgood, on 05/05/2008, -1/+4And they can validate their "good" or "civility" (per your argument) through a number of means.
1. Church
2. Government
3. "Patriotism"
and dont take away my guns because i need to protect myself from the "rest"
"i dont want my taxes spent on people i dont know, they're just gonna waste them"
vs.
"everyone needs a fair chance, those who have should help the have nots, so we can all grow together"
100 bucks says you can apply the root dichotomy in other issues and derive the appropriate answer.
p.s. thanks for not being an idiot.
- Shiftgood, on 05/05/2008, -1/+4And they can validate their "good" or "civility" (per your argument) through a number of means.
- HangerBaby, on 05/05/2008, -3/+2Theres enough douchebags for both parties, move along
- Acewrap, on 05/05/2008, -7/+6No.
- Jan33, on 05/05/2008, -11/+6@ shiftgood : Naw , its just a sweeping generalization (illusion) naturally brought about by duality. Yin Yang rips itself apart eventually. Duality sucks.
"You mean theres more than 2 sides to an issue?"- Shiftgood, on 05/05/2008, -3/+71. Reply button.
2. You mean that this point of view is already well known? Im not name calling and yes, like just about every statment anyone can make, it is a generalization. but now that we both agree that it is (and i really dont see a problem with generalizations... ie: if i put a dollar in that coke machine, ill get a coke... its not applicable to ALL coke machines some are broken, but you make them so that life goes on.).. how applicable is the statement? Can you derive judgments on either side from that core mentality? i think you might be able to.
3. what issue did you think i was talking about? or... "what issue?"- Jan33, on 05/06/2008, -0/+11. roger that
2. I know youre not namecalling, niether am i.
3. http://www.general-semantics.org/
- Jan33, on 05/06/2008, -0/+11. roger that
- Shiftgood, on 05/05/2008, -3/+71. Reply button.
- lhbaker, on 05/05/2008, -8/+10A better headline: Clinton Defecations Should Raise Eyebrows
- BillehBob, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5Why is that ?
She, pretty much like any other politician, is completely and utterly full of ***** and everyone knows it ;-) - LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -7/+2A better headline:Guy nobody has heard of defects. Who cares?
- lhbaker, on 05/06/2008, -1/+1It's a better point than mine (not to mention a better joke), but welcome the burial ceremony.
- BillehBob, on 05/05/2008, -1/+5Why is that ?
- LomasLou, on 05/05/2008, -13/+6Is Obama White enough?
- Mejari, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3Is Hillary man enough?
- Lyk4n, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Can't Obama just be a human? Why do people have always have to resort to race.. It means nothing!
- TheThirdLevel, on 05/05/2008, -5/+31This race should have been over ages ago. She is a lying bitch. Cmon Indiana, just end it.
- ender7074, on 05/05/2008, -10/+2No more that Obama is a lying ass. No difference between the two.
- EnderMB, on 05/05/2008, -14/+6Buried as Huffington Post. Get a real news source.
- AJQuick, on 05/05/2008, -3/+5It's not like it didn't happen.
- EnderMB, on 05/05/2008, -6/+2It may have, but the Huff would've blown it out of all proportion and somehow makeit as a campaign for Obama. The simple fact that this is being dugg down just shows the amount of extreme bias Diggtards have.
- malex, on 05/05/2008, -2/+4So, when Hillary's biggest supporters are leaving her and joining with Obama... you think 'the Huff' is misconstruing events if it suggest that Obama is gaining support?
Maybe the reason you're being dugg down is because what you're saying is dumb.
- malex, on 05/05/2008, -2/+4So, when Hillary's biggest supporters are leaving her and joining with Obama... you think 'the Huff' is misconstruing events if it suggest that Obama is gaining support?
- ender7074, on 05/05/2008, -5/+2You libs complain about Fox News then have the audacity to defend the Huffington Post? Jesus talk about having blinders on.
- kipmartin, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3you dont understand reporting, obviously. typical of right wingers. one is a news source which claims to be unbiased as per the conventions of the NAB, while the other is a blog with no claims of neutrality--in fact the claim to be left wing. the difference is, TV is held accountable to be unbbiased as it is licensed by the government and occupies federally monitored radio frequencies, while the other is not held in the public trust nor regulated by the federal government. TV is required to be neutral. print and blogs are not. you need a civics course before you speak in public. all you right wingers with your substandard IQs, reactionary logic, and pedestrian educations are your own worst enemies.
- EnderMB, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1By what you're saying my first comment is completely valid. The Huffington Post is strongly pro-Obama and is probably the most common source of news on Digg. Hell, there was even a submission to Digg recently detailing this!
Why is this a bad thing? Because Obama cannot be doing that well. You Diggtards paint this picture that Obama is our next saviour by using blatant lies, probably disenchanting many of his and Clinton's supporters. By posting all these pathetic stories it makes Obama fans vote less and Clinton fans vote more.
The previous argument still stands. I don't care if the 'huff is a Blog, because on Digg it's treated as news, and we all know what happened with Ron Paul and how true all those stories on how he was going to win the GOP nomination.
- EnderMB, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1By what you're saying my first comment is completely valid. The Huffington Post is strongly pro-Obama and is probably the most common source of news on Digg. Hell, there was even a submission to Digg recently detailing this!
- kipmartin, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3you dont understand reporting, obviously. typical of right wingers. one is a news source which claims to be unbiased as per the conventions of the NAB, while the other is a blog with no claims of neutrality--in fact the claim to be left wing. the difference is, TV is held accountable to be unbbiased as it is licensed by the government and occupies federally monitored radio frequencies, while the other is not held in the public trust nor regulated by the federal government. TV is required to be neutral. print and blogs are not. you need a civics course before you speak in public. all you right wingers with your substandard IQs, reactionary logic, and pedestrian educations are your own worst enemies.
- EnderMB, on 05/05/2008, -6/+2It may have, but the Huff would've blown it out of all proportion and somehow makeit as a campaign for Obama. The simple fact that this is being dugg down just shows the amount of extreme bias Diggtards have.
- pianomahnn, on 05/05/2008, -2/+3You mean like...CNN, MSNBC, FOX? Seriously, what real news source do you know that is NOT biased?
- EnderMB, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Every single story on Fox isn't just dedicated to one candidate though. On a good day Digg is ten times more biased than Fox, yet many of you have the nerve to insult Fox as a credible news source.
- pianomahnn, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1I'm not saying Huffington is better than FOX. I'm equating them as biased while trying to find out what non-biased news source to which you may be referring. You think FOX is any more credible than Huffington?
- EnderMB, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Every single story on Fox isn't just dedicated to one candidate though. On a good day Digg is ten times more biased than Fox, yet many of you have the nerve to insult Fox as a credible news source.
- poopdigger, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2At least the big networks report the news. Everything on the Huffington Post is either an editorial or an analysis of a story from the mainstream media. It's just a giant blog catering to liberals and Obama supporters, not a news source.
- kipmartin, on 05/05/2008, -1/+1huffington post is excellent because we lefties get to see how moronic you nazi right wingers can be. you guys make us laugh.
- EnderMB, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Classic American Democracy. If we don't support you we're nazi's.
- AJQuick, on 05/05/2008, -3/+5It's not like it didn't happen.
- Beowulf2112, on 05/05/2008, -13/+3[url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JdnF6HUo5s[/url]
I promise you its not Rick Roll- TheThirdLevel, on 05/05/2008, -7/+2http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JdnF6HUo5s
There.
DAMN that is some badass *****.
- TheThirdLevel, on 05/05/2008, -7/+2http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JdnF6HUo5s
- Shuukyoku, on 05/05/2008, -6/+3Umm...why does this matter? I mean, superdelegates get to be superdelegates because they're politicians. Shouldn't Americans be more concerned with what they think personally, rather than who the other kids on the block are voting for? I mean, its not like we're officially going to have a candidate till the convention in June (?), when the superdelegates actually vote. I don't like the long floor fight anymore than the next guy, but begging for them to pick one isn't going to get it done any faster, is it?
- Mejari, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1If we're going to be choosing our nominee based on the people who the candidate associates with, shouldn't we care about the people who associated with them for years and now dislike them enough to want someone else to be president?
- fsjenkins2000, on 05/05/2008, -8/+4Clinton Defecation? I bet that would raise some eyebrows.
- ender7074, on 05/05/2008, -9/+1Why should it raise any eyebrows now? She and her idiot husband have not changed one iota since taking the national stage. How is anything this bitch says suprising. Also, why are there not more eyebrows being raised about Obama and his past and associations. You libs swooned over the Clintons and they turned out to be scum. Can't wait to see how people react to the real Obama. Sad part is it will probably be just like the Clintons: Worship then shock whey they turn out to be the crooks the rest of us knew they were.
- VAXcat, on 05/05/2008, -4/+2Yah, Obama will be a terrible president....only thing is, he will be a better one than Hilary or McCain...we haven't had a decent president since Kennedy, and I'm starting to wonder of the system is so flawed that it is not capable of producing one.
- Albear89, on 05/05/2008, -4/+1I call Shenanigans!
- FelixdaaHack, on 05/05/2008, -10/+5These inane huffingtonpost articles Should Raise Eyebrows
- LukasSmith, on 05/05/2008, -6/+3Andrew who?
- malex, on 05/05/2008, -2/+4Joe Andrew. Former Democratic National Committee Chair and superdelegate from Indiana.
You know, if you click those big blue words at the top of the page, you can actually READ the article people are talking about here.
- malex, on 05/05/2008, -2/+4Joe Andrew. Former Democratic National Committee Chair and superdelegate from Indiana.
- topgigmedia, on 05/05/2008, -3/+11Does anyone else think that the Clintons have something up their sleeve and she is actually going to pull out a victory?
I think Rev. Wright may have also been coaxed (either via $ or threats of some sort) for his latest media circus. Ask yourself... why would a so-called caucasian hating man want to spoil a black man's chance at getting to the White House? Why...? Think about it, it doesn't suit even his personal interests not to have Obama in. He could potentially have direct access and influence to the president. I smell Clinton/Neo-con stench here.
Please Indiana and NC - do the right thing... pass the deodorizer and let's end this thing!- calipan, on 05/05/2008, -1/+7Rev Wright was also the Clinton's religious marriage counselor when they were having "martial issues" after the cigar incident.
- 2Bnor2B, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1They do. Check out their nuclear option.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/04/clinton-c ...- topgigmedia, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1it will never work. Florida and Michigan were already declared dead before the primary started because they broke the rules. I think they will stand by this. Besides going back on this wil create chaos in the party. I think they are willing to piss of a couple of states rather than the whole party.
- Mejari, on 05/05/2008, -0/+3Not to rain on your conspiracy parade, but it's pretty obvious why Wright would want such a media frenzy. 1) Gets him a lot of attention for his new book and his ex church. 2) How can he keep complaining about America's institutional racism if we have a black man as a president? Just remember that a vote for Obama isn't a vote for Wright, but a vote for Clinton is most definitely a vote for the same crappy politics we've had the past 8 years.
- topgigmedia, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1You make a good point. Hard to say either way for sure, in the end tho I suppose.
- koft, on 05/05/2008, -3/+4Duhhh, Hillary won't get any Republican votes when the polls open. Obama is our only choice, and he's a good choice too. With Obama we'll get most of the independents, most of the Democrats and a good chunk of Republicans. I'm not against voting Republican but McCain ***** sucks. He's just the "most electable" Republican. Hell, Romney would have been a better choice for the job than him, but that didn't play out. Bottom line, of Obama loses the primaries, we loose the election to McCain.
- koft, on 05/05/2008, -0/+2Hey, why the digg down? I honestly don't see many Republicans voting for Hill. Whoever is going to wind up the next president needs some Republican votes. Hill can't pull it off.
- Mejari, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Obama + Edwards = winning team. Apparently there's some epidemic of white males giving up on Obama (according to the media) but Edwards would wrap that up nicely.
- koft, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1I like Edwards too but a lot of folks here in NC are pissed he dropped out of NC congress to run with Kerry and gave up his seat to a Republican.
- Eganj, on 05/06/2008, -0/+1Obama + Colbert = epic win
- poopdigger, on 05/05/2008, -3/+3Sorry, this didn't raise my eyebrow. Obama is still going to win. Clinton supporters don't care. Clinton is going to keep fighting up until the convention, its going to suck, and then everybody can start thinking again.
- WilliamDavis, on 05/05/2008, -0/+1Clinton supporters care. They've been caring for and supoporting Mrs. Clinton for years. It;s nothing like these crazy Obama people.
- Plantagenet, on 05/05/2008, -2/+1What should make people's eyebrows raise more is the fact that all the unelected superdelegates haven't already selected Obama, in spite of the fact that its already impossible for Hillary to catch him with the delegates she may win in the few remaining primary elections. Why do several hundred of the unelected superdelegates want the race to continue? Why are
they afraid to select Obama and end the race now? Why do these superdelegates want
Hillary to continue her attacks on Obama, when they could end the unfair attacks tomorrow just by selecting Senator Obama? - GrodyChamp, on 05/05/2008, -8/+4Diggers will eat up ANYTHING huffingtonpost craps out. Enough already. Just go read it and circle jerk over aim about it. Leave Digg alone already. There doesn't need to be a Digg front page story for every super biased editorial on huffingtonpost.
- beauley, on 05/05/2008, -2/+3The BIG question...Do we want a person who knows NOTHING about economics to run our nation? She changes her policies from one day to the next only to capture more vote, not for the citizens, not for the people..
Let us the voters study the congressional records and past history of each of the candidates running for presidential office.
"Beware of Wolve's in Sheeps clothing". Hillary Clinton will tell you what pleases your ego and put her arms around your children...but see what she tried to do more than a decade ago, but was "stopped". Yes, she WILL garnish our paychecks with her Mandatory Healthcare plan. No Freedom of choice.
Just check the 1996 bill submitted to congress by Hillary Clinton and look who saved all America's butts, which includes all our children. Please learn the truth:
http://www.eagleforum.org/psr/1998/dec98/psrdec98. ...
http://www.ronpaul2008.com/discover-and-imagine-ro ... - Cyberdactyl, on 05/05/2008, -2/+2Exactly . . . here's some balance.
http://www.eyeblast.tv/Public/Video.aspx?rsrcID=20 ... - RRJackson, on 05/06/2008, -6/+2Clinton will be the nominee soon and the Clinton-bashing can turn into McCain-bashing until November.
- papipablo, on 05/06/2008, -2/+1Not likely fatboy.
- RRJackson, on 05/06/2008, -3/+1Said my stalker.
- papipablo, on 05/06/2008, -1/+1Have you called the FBI today? "Someone's making fun of me on the internets!"
- RRJackson, on 05/06/2008, -3/+1Actually, it had nothing to do with you making fun of me. It had to do with defamation. One of your insane posts was offensive enough that Digg deleted it.
- papipablo, on 05/06/2008, -1/+1Have you called the FBI today? "Someone's making fun of me on the internets!"
- RRJackson, on 05/06/2008, -3/+1Said my stalker.
- papipablo, on 05/06/2008, -2/+1Not likely fatboy.
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by