digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Hillary's "white Americans" comment causing quick firestorm

dailykos.com — In another bad sign for Hillary Clinton's sinking campaign, the blogosphere is all over her racially divisive comments to USA Today about her white support, & the verdict is not good. The broad consensus is that Hillary's comments are clearly deepening rifts in the Democratic party & hurting the party's chances in the fall. Are ya listening supers?

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • neognostic, on 05/09/2008, -17/+301As a working class white American, I'm offended by her comments and demand that she drop out of the race before the sun goes down!
    • Barackalypse, on 05/09/2008, -37/+14As an American I demand that she not only drop out of the race, but that she also resign her Senate seat. And I implore the equally divisive Barack Obama to do the same. And I request John McCain check himself back into whatever prison camp he was held in until such time as he votes to take a stance against torture.
      • Conspiracy20, on 05/09/2008, -15/+11perfect. Ron Paul for change
        • hmmmok, on 05/09/2008, -3/+3Hil's comment sounds like something from RP's newsletter
          • republicker, on 05/09/2008, -3/+8Big Government Responsible for High Gas Prices
            "Basic economics says that when government restricts the supply of a good, the price will increase. Yet Congress continues to reject simple measures that could increase the supply of oil. For example, Congress refuses to allow reasonable, environmentally sensitive, offshore drilling. Congress also refuses to remove the numerous regulatory hurdles that add to the prohibitively expensive task of constructing new refineries. Building a new refinery requires billions of dollars in capital investment. It can take several years just to obtain the necessary federal permits. Even after the permits are obtained, construction of a refinery may still be delayed or even halted by frivolous lawsuits. It is no wonder that there has not been a new refinery constructed in the United States since 1976." - Ron Paul
            Click here for the full article: http://www.house.gov/paul/tst/tst2008/tst050408.ht ...

            You wont hear that coming out of Obama or Mccains mouth.

          • DavidBGie, on 05/10/2008, -1/+1I just love this! I have always said that liberals hate facts. She was just saying that there was a story by the AP that says that Obama is losing the white blue collar vote. IT IS A FACT THAT THE AP PUBLISHED A STORY THAT SAID THAT!!!!!! Libtards hate facts! They think with their emotions instead of logic. Why do they always claim to be smarter?? It's called denial.
      • Flamancot, on 05/09/2008, -8/+33"the equally divisive Barack Obama"
        u on crack, son?
        • Barackalypse, on 05/09/2008, -22/+5Well, I admit the equally part was sensationalist, but for all Obama talks about unity, every Sunday he goes and sits in his black church to hear about black liberation theology and how his people are being oppressed and how the government created AIDS to target black people. The fact is, race matters to Obama, I don't think it really does to Hillary. Please don't think I'm criticizing Obama for it, based on how I've seen black people act I fully admit to being a bit prejudiced, and I'm sure growing up black in America you probably see that in how people react to you and that it makes you racially aware. So, I'm not faulting Obama for it as much as I'm faulting his cultlike following who seem to be blind to his transgressions and hypersensitive to anything that Hillary does.
          • petrodollar, on 05/09/2008, -2/+19"Please don't think I'm criticizing Obama for it"

            Says "Barackalypse"
          • flashback99, on 05/09/2008, -1/+4SHUT THE ***** UP LUKASSMITH. JUST BECAUSE YOU CHANGE USERNAME DOES NOT MEAN DIGG CAN"T RECOGNISE THE SAME OLD ANTI-OBAMA BS.
          • hittnrun, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1What a minute, Barry is a racist. His preacher told us so.

            Please go to drudge ans see what I see.

            http://apnews.myway.com/image/20080509/APTOPIX_Oba ...

            LOL

            It will get worse.
          • DavidBGie, on 05/10/2008, -1/+2There is a bright side to this ... If Obama is elected then it will be a stake in the heart to the NAACP, Sharpton, Jessie Jackson, Rev. Wright, and all the other black racist that the "Racist" United States elected a black man. Even for the right wing there is some good to a Obama win.
          • chaosium, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1"If Obama is elected then it will be a stake in the heart to the NAACP, Sharpton, Jessie Jackson, Rev. Wright, and all the other black racist that the "Racist" United States elected a black man"

            YEAH ***** THOSE UPPITY N

            There is really something wrong with your brain, DavidBGie. While I'm not fond of the approaches of self-proclaimed "champions" such as Sharpton and Jackson, including the NAACP as something that "doesn't have to exist" after a black president seems very odd.

            We're not "throwing them a bone" by voting for Obama.

        • shmatt, on 05/09/2008, -3/+10once again, his pastor's "transgressions" are NOT his-- plus he is NO LONGER a member of the church. Way to drink the kool-aid.
          • Drahkar, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4He's drinking something. And I don't think its Kool-aid.
          • ThE0eNiGmA, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1Must be the yuengling.
    • fluoro, on 05/09/2008, -6/+14I'm a white working class American, but I'm not -offended- by her comments. I don't demand that she drops out of the race by the time the sun goes down. I'd like her to drop out, but not for the kind of reasons everyone else seems to.

      Everyone goes on about how divisive she is for the party. I don't think divisiveness is really that bad of a thing. But what I do think is not good for the party during this election is how they both seem to be frittering away their campaign money fighting one another while McCain basically gets to relax now. I think it's pretty clear that Clinton can't win the nomination without doing something really sneaky and underhanded. If she does that, she's moving on to McCain without much money. If she doesn't do that and loses, then Obama moves on to McCain without as much money as he would otherwise have.
      • DephexTwin, on 05/10/2008, -0/+3I'm not offended by her comments either, per se. What is awful about her comments is her calculated purpose for saying them, which was to ignite further racist undertones that she cynically believes will be beneficial to her in the coming contests. It shows that the sick caricature that her campaign has become is still going to continue, even now. And that is upsetting.
    • lolinyerface, on 05/09/2008, -3/+24echo "I'm a ".$race. $gender ."from". $location." and I ".$preference." her. She should ". $decision".";
      echo "And also, " . $additional_unnecessary_comment;
      • Jwoey, on 05/09/2008, -6/+36i didn't understand any part of that except you have $.
        Elitist.
        • iofthestorm, on 05/09/2008, -15/+4I hope that was sarcasm, he's just a PHP (or other scripting language that uses the same syntax) developer.
          • Jwoey, on 05/09/2008, -2/+19it was. I don't actually believe people who have money are elitists, and I understood his post... I was just trying to be funny =(
        • Phyltre, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2I hope you see what THAT gets you!
        • xevidentx, on 05/09/2008, -2/+4perl developer
      • evilgeorgew, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2Parse error: syntax error, unexpected T_CONSTANT_ENCAPSED_STRING

        DAMN CONCATENATORS
      • morninglorii, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3You were using double quotes, so there was definitely no reason to concatenate.
        • lolinyerface, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Damn! Thats what happens when you throw down a comment during heavy boss foot traffic.
      • peterhunt, on 05/10/2008, -0/+0PHP sucks. Python!!!!!!
    • Herostratos, on 05/09/2008, -13/+16As a digg user, I demand that you stop the Obamaspam.
      (preparing for epic burying).
      • TheWorm, on 05/09/2008, -2/+13As an Obama fan, I would like to see less Obamaspam.
        • pcghost, on 05/09/2008, -1/+4As a Obama supporter, I would like to see a larger variety in the topics that hit the front page.

          How hard is it to say that without ridiculous catch-phrases like Obamaspam?
          • lolinyerface, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Damn! I read that as Osama Supporter, damn hillary and her anti-obamaspam! ;)
      • Bilabrin, on 05/09/2008, -0/+13Lemme know if that works.

        As a digg user. I demand to be fanned and fed grapes.
      • poxonyou, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2As a digg user, I demand the top 10 limits up to 2 top stories per category, or at least limit the election related stories.
    • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -4/+36Only Hillary could spin the fact that she wins the uneducated vote as a positive...
      • Bilabrin, on 05/09/2008, -0/+18Your elitist comments are making me bitter!
      • mydigga, on 05/09/2008, -0/+9I am winning the votes of the people who are too lazy to educate themselves about the candidates and believe things like Obama is a Muslim and if you don't wear a flag pin you hate America!
      • poxonyou, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2Haha. Exactly.
        Sadly, I think these voters can just as easily be fooled by Republicans.
        "Who loves America more, me, Grandpa McCain, war hero, or Ms. Sniper-dodger?"
        "I will lower your taxes and end taxes on gas!!! Poor people rejoice! [the lost tax revenue will be deducted from education and health care budgets to ensure you continue to be stupid and ill]"
    • xen0blue, on 05/09/2008, -6/+8there's no feigned horror like liberal feigned horror
      • SpinningHead, on 05/09/2008, -1/+5Except the feigned horror that leads to renaming French fries to freedom fries as a "statement".
    • Stormwern, on 05/09/2008, -3/+3To be fair, this is probably more on the level of bittergate. Hill has protruded every far fetched statistic she could get her hands on for months, think this is just a case of her being too zealous to realise what she's talking about.
      • Bilabrin, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2I was gonna digg you for use of the word "protruding" but then I decided not to because of the british spelling of the word "realize." Take it as a blessing and a sign of my merciful nature that I also did not bury you.
        • Stormwern, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3English is not my first language, so my spelling is all over the place I'm sure.
          • Bilabrin, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3Actually, you spell better than most people on digg and are even technically correct. I was just feeling precocious when I typed that. :)
          • Stormwern, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1I ment geographically :)
    • alphaterminus, on 05/09/2008, -1/+5Trailer Trash for Hillary!
      • shadygrove, on 05/10/2008, -1/+1i don't consider myself trailer trash and i'm not for hillary in this one (obama and ron paul have been the only candidates to show strong integrity) but i think your comment is funny to i give you a thumbs up!
    • DemsFTW, on 05/09/2008, -0/+5Well, her comment was just saying that Stupid White people support her more. I agree. It's the smart White folks that are supporting Obama.
  • bitfreak, on 05/09/2008, -12/+226I'm a white guy with a mediocre education and I hate her. Obama > McCain > Hillary. Shoo...please go away you racist fratricidal beotch.
    • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -3/+17Dugg for making me look up that word. Nice, it's brutal....
    • mywhitenoise, on 05/09/2008, -3/+15Who uses the word "beotch"?
      • dafragsta, on 05/09/2008, -3/+25S to the N to the double O-P-Y-D-O-double-G, you see?
        • pelayostyle, on 05/09/2008, -3/+1A winner is you
          • skinny01, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1No, it's the capital S oh yes I'm fresh N double O P, D O double G Y D O double G you see!
        • angito, on 05/09/2008, -0/+16his name is not Snoopy Dogg...
          • dafragsta, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2I'm pretty sure he tosses the Y in there one of the times he spells it. The background singer chick DEFINITELY calls him "Snoopy Dogg" on What's My Name at the end of the song.

            The other version is "Capital S so fresh N-double-O-P..."
      • natchiketa, on 05/09/2008, -0/+9i think everybody said it at least once in the nineties. except me of course, i, i... no.
      • ssn697, on 05/09/2008, -4/+3It helps even out the fratricide usage, making the phrase more palatable for the uneducated white folks...
      • Smaugrens, on 05/09/2008, -1/+1I do sometimes but I think proper spelling is "biatch."
      • shadygrove, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1my friend theotch calls himself "son of beotch"...
    • jabberwolf, on 05/09/2008, -5/+6Well then as being the single ***** white blue collar worker in the USA , that settles it!
    • Barackalypse, on 05/09/2008, -27/+6Your mediocre education is showing, I think you meant to say:
      Obama=Hillary since their voting records are nearly identical, as are their stances on many of the issues.
      • afx1, on 05/09/2008, -1/+6their attitudes and level of class are very different and one is clearly morally corrupt

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LHFREDHB-nQ
      • petrodollar, on 05/09/2008, -1/+3Please consult a civics manual. Presidents don't vote. They execute, administer, and delegate. Obama has radically different ideas about how that ought to be done than Shrillary.
      • MJDub, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Your user name cracks me up.
    • jabberwolf, on 05/09/2008, -10/+12megalomaniac!
      What she states was correct and factual. It may not be politically correct but its FACT!
      And even though the % of white voters that vote for Clinton is much lower, it's still acceptable that 90%+ of black voters vote for Obama. Even so, one is OK to admit to, but the other is not.

      More double standards? Biased by race = who are the real racists here ?
      • tomasII, on 05/09/2008, -8/+7Thank you! Is this not evident to all? 92 percent of blacks are voting for Obama and yet that is not about race.....Puuuuleeaase.
        • OralCavity, on 05/09/2008, -1/+10are all the white voters voting for McCain only doing it for his race?

          it seems to me that you are either being extremely offensive by discounting 92% of black people from having an actual opinion based on the candidate or you are just being incendiary for attention. either way it's childish. get over yourself.
          • tomasII, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1Are you suggesting that race only plays out here for white folks? If so, I think you should be sorry for your anti white views and get over yourself.
          • OralCavity, on 05/11/2008, -0/+2wtf are you talking about? anti-white views? you idiot, i am white. i am just not blinded by your moronic race-baiting statements.
      • Lhurgoyf, on 05/09/2008, -3/+15No, its not double standards, because it started off as pretty much 50-50, and its been Hillary and Bill who have been losing the black vote in droves, not Obama going out of his way to court it.

        If Obama said "Women are only voting for Hillary because she's a female candidate" wouldn't you expect to see his support among female voters plumet?
      • wendelgee2, on 05/09/2008, -2/+19Can you show me where Obama has made a racist plea for black votes?
        I don't think he did. Now, if the African-American community all the sudden says "holy crap, for the first time ever we have a candidate that understands our issues," and they decide to vote for him in huge chunks, that's very different from the experience of white folk (especially men), who have ALWAYS had a candidate that had their interests at heart.
        • Eezyville, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4Exactly thanks for making that clear. It looks like some people just doesn't understand what it means to be black or a woman during previous elections. You said exactly what I wanted to say. White males always had a candidate who knew or had a good idea of what white men wanted but the under represented rarely did. Now we have two candidates who do. We have a white woman and a black man as our candidates and as a minority I will vote democrat because I knew that there is someone there who knows what its like to be in the minority and under represented. Even if Clinton did win I would still, reluctantly, vote for her.
        • OralCavity, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3thank you for understanding this. you are one of the few. if i could digg you twice, i would.
          • wendelgee2, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2Try harder! Every time this comments gets dugg, an angel gets a donut.
            Happy Friday, Internets!
        • wendelgee2, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3On the other hand...I do think it's wrong to vote on the basis of race or sex but against your own political beliefs. For instance, I have no sympathy for the argument that blacks should support blacks because of race loyalty. It has to be because of shared values, or a shared policy agenda. Nor should women vote for Hillary just because it would be nice to have a woman in office. It has to be about shared values/agenda.
      • postalblowfish7, on 05/09/2008, -2/+3you're right man. poor white people...
      • keishax, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Obama didn't start receiving the AA vote until after Bill Clinton's comments, Hillary's statement downgrading MLK's contribution to civil rights as America was remembering his life and death. After Obama became cross over for Caucasian Americans that is when the AA population realized that Bill Clinton had his ghetto pass revoked, and Hillary was put out with the trash. In AA eyes, we supported them during their disgrace of the White House when other Americans wrote them off. And they failed to realize, fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me, fool me again, and we are going to initialize a massive boycott that brings back the civil rights that MLK reminded America that we deserve. It isn't about voting for Barack solely because he is black, but like Hillary, who if she was a woman, would shatter the glass ceiling, AA are voting for Obama, because he presents the opportunity to break the glass ceiling for minorities, class, and education can do if you work hard to over come the obstacles rather than planning the same old game. Barack never made and issue of his ethnicity, it was AA who felt he wasn't black enough and Caucasians who believe he suspicious because he is black.
      • shadygrove, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2another point... she said working americans... pause... white americans... the implication is quite clear: working americans are WHITE americans. non-working americans are lazy blacks, latinos, indians, whatever, but definitely not "white" americans... this, i think, is the far greater error than to state (whether accurately or falsely) "demographically i poll higher among white americans and think the party needs me in there to beat john mccain in november."
    • fluoro, on 05/09/2008, -3/+5Obama > McCain > Hillary? I definitely agree with the left side of that equation, but are you serious about the McCain > Hillary part? Do you mind if I at least ask WHY?
      • normalkid0615, on 05/09/2008, -3/+4it is a logical statement, hillary is doing more dumb ***** than mccain, so logically mccain > hillary. i totally agree
        • fluoro, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2She's doing more dumb ***** because she's trying to get ahead and she thinks that will work (it's always worked in the past, so she has evidence to support this tactic). McCain pretty much has the nomination already so he doesn't NEED to do stupid *****.

          This is not reflective of their actual policies, though. And in terms of real policy, I think you're wrong. I don't really want to say that Hillary > McCain, because something still feels wrong about that, but I feel better about saying McCain < Hillary. :)
      • JakobVirgil, on 05/09/2008, -5/+2I prefer McCain
      • petrodollar, on 05/10/2008, -1/+3McCain is dumb and will have to deal with Democratic congress, so at worst he'll be ineffectual. At best he'll go back to his old ways and vote alongside the dems, pick moderate judges, promote sensible immigration reform, etc. He seems truly concerned about environmental issues, which is nice. I don't buy the "100 years in Iraq" spin that liberals are running. That quote is taken out of context.

        Shrillary is a gangster. She can't be trusted. She's too secretive and too corrupt. That combined with her obviously high intellect is a recipe for eight years of dry anal rape.
      • scimitar91, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1I bet McCain gets us out of Iraq faster than either Democrat would. Seriously.
        • FrenchAnarchy, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1100 years sound good?
        • shadygrove, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1i don't have faith in the military-industrial-complex to pull us out of war. the economic elite / masters of war needed a "war without end" to replace the cold war and, voila, just when cheney took office, the project for a new american century found its "new pearl harbor" to justify its global expansion energy grab policy. halliburton and lockheed martin and blackwater won't LET the candidates leave the middle east. they want permanent bases. and many of them. what we will likely see is war in iran rather than withdrawl from iraq. why? because iran is crippling our dollar by selling oil on the euro rather than the dollar. no candidate (other than ron paul) would touch this aspect of U.S. imperialism.
    • lolinyerface, on 05/09/2008, -7/+1
      echo "I'm a ".$race. $gender ."from". $location." and I ".$preference." her. She should ". $decision".";
      echo "And also, " . $additional_unnecessary_comment;
      • kiedesu, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1You forget . after the $decision.
      • scimitar91, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1I'm a white male from Pennsylvania and I ***** hate her. She should kill herself.
        And also, Hillary Clinton sucks balls.
    • JakobVirgil, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1I did not say I prefer McCain that is a Weird Glitch and I untrue comment.
      -Jake
    • PunkRampant, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Hillary > McCain because even though she ran a ***** campaign, she would at least try to leave Iraq - which should be the #1 priority for this country.

      But it's a moot argument anyway because Barack Obama will be the next president.
  • gsxrjason, on 05/09/2008, -6/+110When a candidate starts referencing their own demographics while speaking it always appears desperate.
    • aliengoods, on 05/09/2008, -2/+25The part very few picked up on was the context. This was Hillary's answer to the question, "How do you win the nomination?" Basically she's saying, "White America is too racist to vote for Obama, so I'm your only shot." What a worthless meat-popsicle.
      • loudintl, on 05/09/2008, -2/+1I've got a meat-popsicle for her.
        • buba1243, on 05/09/2008, -1/+0you freeze yours? I like to keep mine warm :)
        • kemp34, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4You want to give Hillary your meat popsicle?
    • Barackalypse, on 05/09/2008, -17/+1How about when you're sitting in a church filled with only people of your race listening to how evil the country you pretend to serve is? How about when your race is the topic of your wife's college thesis? How about when you mention it over and over in a book you wrote?
      • xtinamo, on 05/09/2008, -1/+10Wow, did you join 2 days ago just so you could say something so ignorant and useless?
        • Barackalypse, on 05/09/2008, -12/+0What is ignorant about questioning the hypocrisy of condemning Hillary for saying her support is from white working class people and not applying the same scrutiny to a guy who sits in an unapologetically black church teaching black liberation theology married to a woman who also considers race to be quite important? Drawing conclusions using facts isn't ignorant simply because you don't like the facts or the conclusion. Feel free to drink the Kool-Aid if you like, but don't say you weren't warned that it was poison.
          • gsxrjason, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2I like how you just presume Obama is only pretending to serve his country. I would bet that you haven't actually read Obama's books or Michelle's thesis in full. If you have, and understood them, and still feel that way, then I feel bad for you.
          • brettmurf, on 05/10/2008, -1/+1I don't know, Barackalypse actually has a somewhat valid point.
            Our feigned attempts at being politically correct allow for some pretty huge double standards. People talk about the "African-American" vote, but when you phrase it for the "white" vote it is now racist.
            Hillary actually has a pretty good point, even though she is an idiot and it won't actually matter.

            Also, Kool-Aid references are racist.
          • bignerd, on 05/10/2008, -0/+3@brettmurf
            "People talk about the "African-American" vote"
            You are right, "people" can talk about the AA or white vote all they want, but when the candidate uses race as the reason why they should be elected they are race baiting. I don't believe HillDog is racist, but she continues to make me more comfortable every day that I voted for Obama. BTW, if Obama came out and said "I have the black vote and Hillary can't win without it", you know you would say he was racist!
        • shmatt, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3What is ignorant is in your post above you admitted to being prejudiced against blacks. Obviuosly you don't want Obama to be president, so your comments are clearly and truly biased and therefore worthless on digg. To quote:
          "based on how I've seen black people act I fully admit to being a bit prejudiced"
      • fluoro, on 05/09/2008, -0/+11What does his wife's college thesis have to do with anything? The guy shouldn't be elected because of a thesis that someone else wrote? Huh?

        Not that I agree with what you said about his church, but I want to respond anyway. Most Americans are incredibly ignorant of some of the evil ***** that happens in our country, and if Obama is actually aware of some of it then I think that's an extra reason to vote for him. How is being aware of your country's problems somehow anti-American? If anything it's as pro-American as you can get. What's anti-American are you ***** who ignore some of the evil ***** that goes on, or worse yet who try to rationalize it, and then try to pass this off as patriotism. Ignoring history doesn't make you a better American.
        • Barackalypse, on 05/09/2008, -8/+0First, thank you for an honest response. His wife's college thesis in and of itself means nothing, however taken along with his mentor Rev. Wright, and some observations regarding race in his book, and you begin to get a picture of a guy who feels his race has been a source of some conflict in his life, in other words someone who race really does matter too. I'm certainly not suggesting he looks down on non-blacks, just simply that he is racially aware.

          Since I'm libertarian, I am perfectly well aware of the evils government has inflicted on all parts of society (and yes, that includes medical testing on black servicemen). However, the problem is when you go far beyond the truth and start inventing conspiracy that doesn't exist, because then you've set up a scapegoat for all your failings and while you're off fighting an invisible enemy the real problems, your own personal failings, go un-addressed. This does a huge disservice to the community you are purporting to help. Do you not worry that a leader who has been hearing this message for 20 years is going to try and address problems that aren't real? The real irony in this is after hearing about all the evil things governments have done, Obama is still calling for expanding the size and power of that same government.
          • xtinamo, on 05/09/2008, -0/+6I think you've answered your own question. Despite Obama's exposure to extreme beliefs, he is able to remain centered and hopeful for America, as you incorrectly term as irony. Not everyone is so impressionable to follow every and any information their superiors teach them. So no, it does not worry me in the slightest. If anything, his ability to discern truth from passion is a comendable trait.
          • fluoro, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3I think xtinamo is right. But I also tend to believe Obama when he says that Jeremiah Wright was not constantly saying this stuff for 20 years. From what I've read, Wright generally talks about Christ and stuff that you'd expect a preacher to talk about. It seems that he's said some of these other things only occasionally.

            The other thing I want to point out is that while Wright supposedly has said some crazy ***** (like AIDS being targeted against blacks by the US government intentionally--people keep saying he said that, but I never saw any video clips of it or anything).. while Wright has said some stuff like that, look at the preachers who are associated with John McCain and tell me that you think Wright is worse. If you tell me that, I'll know you're totally insane. Wright may have said some crazy *****, but in general he seems to strive to make a better America that is more peaceful and stuff. I may not agree with the -way- he presents that message, but that seems to be what he's getting at. But look at these guys McCain who is associated with... is it Hagee or the other one who thinks the US should bomb Iran to ignite a third world war to bring on the apocalypse and the next coming of Jesus or some ***** up crazy *****.
        • angito, on 05/09/2008, -0/+5So your saying that its a bad thing to be racially aware? And have you ever been to his church or any church like his? If you actually did then you would know that its not the black panther rally you make it out to be... I'd rather have a president that is aware of what all Americans go through, then one that is not racially aware and only sees things from one perspective. You should really listen to what he says:
          http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-652804269 ...
      • normalkid0615, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3this IS Hillary Clinton HERSELF!!! Look at her IP address.. Good one Senator.
  • dBass, on 05/09/2008, -16/+100Howard Dean, Nancy Pelosi, and the rest of the Democratic Party "Leaders" need to immediately "reject" and "denounce" Shrillary's racist remarks. It is an offense to all Americans, no matter the race or ethnicity.
    • ProfessorSYM, on 05/09/2008, -4/+28That would require them to act like leaders, however, so...fat chance.
    • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -29/+5That's offensive, but Wright's BS isn't?...... okay, just give me the kool aide now.
      • orangefly, on 05/09/2008, -2/+32wright != obama
        hillary = hillary
      • iticu, on 05/09/2008, -0/+5Can someone from America please tell me what Kool Aide is? =s
        • rapunzell, on 05/09/2008, -0/+7kool aid is a drink mix.
          The reference is to Jonestown, where a cult leader had his entire following commit suicide by drinking a similar drink laced with cyanide back in the 70s. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kool-Aid#.22Drinking_ ...
        • fluoro, on 05/09/2008, -4/+2A sugary drink that kids enjoy. It's really bad for you, but it tastes really ***** good when you're like 6. It's kind of become a phrase that's used here now when you're buying into some ***** or propaganda.. "that guy is just drinking the Clinton Kool-Aide" or something.
      • MattB123, on 05/09/2008, -1/+13So don't vote for Wright. But don't confuse him for anyone actually running. That's what the people who keep dragging him back into this are hoping you will do. But surely you're not that dumb, right? Right?!?!
        • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -4/+2I'm not dumb enough to believe a person who continues listening to sensational racist crap for 20+ years is really completely disassociated with those kind of thoughts as claimed. Most people who claim to think a given ideaology is crazy, quit listening to it at least, and definitely stop donating to it.
          • ncurses, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2I dunno dude, reading your other comments you do seem like a pretty big retard.
    • spiritditch, on 05/09/2008, -0/+10It's not offensive to racist Americans.
    • Hockey13, on 05/10/2008, -0/+3Might I guide you to the “Blog” of “Unnecessary” Quotation Marks? "It's" a might fine "read."

      http://quotation-marks.blogspot.com/
      • NikoliV, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1"Leaders" shows his questioning of the term
        "reject" and "denounce" refers to Hillary's insistence that Obama do both to Farakkhan.
    • inkswamp, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Howard Dean and Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the Democratic leaders are doing what they should--sitting back and letting the democratic process work itself out. And it will. Hillary Clinton will get the message soon enough. I'm not sure why it's taking her so long to figure out what has been obvious for the rest of us for some time, but there is no call for any of the Democratic leadership to step in and interfere. If they do, there will be a perception that Hillary was treated unfairly and forced out and that will cause more trouble than simply letting this all run its course.
  • okokokok, on 05/09/2008, -15/+94I'm a white male with advanced degrees, and I do not support Hillary Clinton. Anyone but Hillary, but it so happens that Barack Obama is the person that I do indeed support above all the current candidates for POTUS. FU Hillary, and all the people that support you.
    • OffPiste, on 05/09/2008, -65/+5"I'm a white male with advanced degrees"

      Sure you have advanced degrees.

      A degree from ITT is NOT an advanced degree.
      • OralCavity, on 05/09/2008, -0/+28republican elitism ftw.
      • okokokok, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2Well, I do. What would I have to gain in lying? It would have been a stronger argument for me to lie and say I have a High School Level Education only and I support Obama, which would make me a rare case. Most whom support him have advanced degrees... So I'm told.
    • InfamousAtheist, on 05/09/2008, -2/+41You're outside of Hillary's target demographic; well-educated white dems are typically Obama supporters (which speaks volumes to me).

      OffPiste, you're a douchebag.
      • fluoro, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4Yeah, all the pretty well educated people I know (white or otherwise) seem to be supporters of Obama.. except for a few. And it happens that all of those well-educated people I know who support Hillary happen to be gay. I was kind of embarrassed to ask them "why do all the gay people I know support Hillary?" When I ask them why -they- support Hillary they just go on about her healthcare program and how superior it is to Obama's, they never mention anything about one being particularly pro- or anti-gay or anything. So maybe it's just coincidence. Does anyone happen to know if this is a general trend for any particular reason?
        • zombies187, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4My guess would be Bill Clinton's support for gays in the military. That won him everlasting love from the gay community. Political love! Not that other kind, you dirty diggers!
          • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -6/+1The reason Blill Clinton is the greatest politician in living political memory is simple. Once elected he ran from the left and focused on Good Governance. If it wasnt for the ultra-librals like the Daily Kos and MoveOn he never would have been impeached. The ultra-liberals are the central component in our society demonizing male sexuality, and Clinton oozed sexuality and they resented him for it. Liberal men are supposed to be asexual like Gore and Kerry Damnit!
          • petrodollar, on 05/09/2008, -0/+6"If it wasnt for the ultra-librals like the Daily Kos and MoveOn he never would have been impeached."

            That's an interesting way of looking at it. Really ***** stupid, but interesting.
    • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -13/+3Oh so you likely have a family income of greater than $100k. Ok then the typical family that makes 150k will see a $30,000 tax increase under Obamas tax plan. Do you still support Obama?
      • sodade, on 05/09/2008, -1/+9where's your proof?
        • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -10/+1Obamas tax plan.

          Oh, he also wants the IRS just to send you a bill at the end of the year, then you cut a check for the amount they want you to pay. And you thought Comcast was bad about their monthy $5-$10 dickering with he bill. LOL!!!!
          • petrodollar, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4That plan is optional. You can still do your taxes the old fashioned way if you like.

            This is another example of Obama's libertarian paternalistic view of good policy making, which I take up in the post below that got you so tweaked earlier. The government sometimes think it knows a better way of doing things, but governments are often wrong. Therefore, it's better not to present your new government program as a mandate (e.g. hillarycare, or your flawed conception of his tax simplification program), but to give people the option to opt out. From a public policy perspective, this limits the damage done by unforeseen consequences of a new program. From a political perspective, it's compatible with the public's desire for freedom of choice.
      • fluoro, on 05/09/2008, -1/+9I don't make quite that much.. I pull in around $90k, and I still support Obama. Do I want to pay higher taxes? No. Is that the most important thing in the world to me? Also, no.

        The problem is that we don't have any candidates left who really matter if monetary policy is what matters to you. Obama is likely going to raise your taxes. McCain won't lower them, but he won't raise them either. Hillary won't lower them, and she probably won't raise them as much as Obama will. But the biggest issue is that we have this enormous national deficit, and none of the three of them will even acknowledge this as an issue. When you have increased spending without taxes, you're simply shifting the responsibility to your kids. If you have high spending and high taxes, it sucks right now but it's not quite as much responsibility for your kids.

        The real solution, of course, is to dramatically reduce spending. Obama won't do that. Clinton won't do that. McCain -definitely- won't do that.
        • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -12/+1Well again, you are above the media income, and Obamas tax plan increases taxes on everyone making more than 50k. I was talking about my family income. As an individual filer you will probably be hit even harder by Obamas tax plans.
      • joeyjj, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1That's just not true -- Obama's plan includes a tax cut for the middle class and an increase if you make over about 150,000 a year. He is definitely not going to be raising taxes on families making 50,000 a year.
      • okokokok, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1A higher education (i.e., M.Ed, PhD) does not equate to more money, but I do enjoy what I chose to do for a living. I support someone that inspires. I would gladly pay higher taxes as long as I was confident the money was going to help people instead of killing them. War costs the average citizen more than the rich. Stop being a jerk and get your head out of your ass to have an original thought.
    • Barackalypse, on 05/09/2008, -17/+4Leave it to someone with an advanced degree to have all the information and still come to the wrong conclusion. The only real difference between Hillary and Obama, besides race, gender, and age, is that Barack is a better orator and a classier dude. Policy wise, which is all the really matters, its 6 of one, half dozen of another (hint: that means they're the same)
      • bicyclethief, on 05/09/2008, -1/+9No, you are ignoring another-- and the most important-- piece of information: how they're each running their own campaigns. In that sense, they are a ***** WORLD apart.
      • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -12/+1And he wants to raise taxes on the middle class much more than Hillary.
        • mickman17, on 05/09/2008, -0/+6Please either pull that reference out of Obama's Tax plan and post it for all to see or STFU!
          • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -4/+1Go ***** read obamas tax plan RIGHT ON HIS ***** WEBSITE. There, his tax plan is my reference.

            Obama plans to raise your taxes if you make more than 50k individually, or 100k filing jointly.

            Also, Obama wants to change the tax so that he just ***** sends you a bill and then you pay it. Wow, and when the IRS over bills what are you gonna do then? You gonna call the IRS and say, hey!!! you over billed me!!!

            ROFL!!!! worst idea ever, and once the realities of his tax plan go mainstream he is finished.
        • mickman17, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1From his Fiscal Plan on his website jackass "Reverse Bush Tax Cuts for the Wealthy: Obama will protect tax cuts for poor and middle class families, but he will reverse most of the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest taxpayers"

          So where do you get this number of 30K on 150K?

          From CNN: The tax relief plan he envisions for the middle class alone would mean $80 billion or more in tax cuts, he said. Obama, an Illinois Democrat who is a front-runner for his party's 2008 presidential nomination, said during a speech at the Tax Policy Center that the present tax code reflects the wrong priorities because it rewards wealth instead of work. "Instead of having all of us pay our fair share, we've got over $1 trillion worth of loopholes in the corporate tax code," he said. "This isn't the invisible hand of the market at work. It's the successful work of special interests." The result, according to Obama? "Gaps in wealth in this country grow wider, while the costs to working people are greater." His plan means billions in breaks by nixing income taxes for the 7 million senior citizens making less than $50,000 a year, establishing a universal credit for the 10 million homeowners who do not itemize their deductions -- most of whom make less than $50,000 annually -- and providing 150 million Americans with tax cuts of up to $1,000. I'd reward work by providing an income tax cut of up to $500 per person -- or $1,000 for each working family -- to offset the payroll tax that they're already paying," he said. "Because this credit would be greater than their income tax bill, my proposal would effectively eliminate all income taxes for 10 million working Americans." Obama also said he would repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans.

          From the tax Foundation:
          Obama's tax plan began with a "Making Work Pay" credit that would offset payroll taxes on the first $8,100 of earnings, generating up to $500 per person or $1,000 per family. The campaign said that would eliminate income taxes for 10 million low-income Americans.

          Obama said more Americans who own their homes should get relief from mortgage payments. The current mortgage interest deduction only goes to those who itemize their taxes, while Obama would create a universal mortgage credit of 10 percent of interest payments that the campaign says would benefit an additional 10 million homeowners.

          The campaign said Obama's plan to eliminate taxes on seniors making less than $50,000 annually would mean 22 million elderly Americans would no longer need to file an income tax return or hire a tax preparer.

          So Multiple sources - and none of them anywhere state this 30K on 150K..

          So to this end - STFU
      • petrodollar, on 05/09/2008, -1/+6You're a dumbass. I'm white, have advanced degrees, and can write ten pages on the differences between Obama and Hillary's approach to government. Read up on what Cass Sunstein has to say about him for a quick synopsis: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cass-r-sunstein/the- ...

        In short, Obama is a believer in libertarian paternalism. He understands concepts of behavioral economics like endowment effects and understands how they shape people's policy preferences. A prime example of this is the fact that he gives people the opportunity to opt out of the health care plan, meaning that the risk seeking can make a choice that reflects their preferences. His focus on transparency stems from his faith in information markets and his belief that the best decisions are informed decisions.

        Your moninker makes it obvious that you didn't come here to debate, "Barackalypse." No, you came here to preach.

        That's not your real problem though. Your real problem is that you're horribly uninformed and you have a very superficial understanding of how the executive branch operates. In other words, you're an idiot. Please do America a favor and drink a bottle of bleach and take a nap.
        • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -3/+1God, Digg must suck for you, to have to compete in an open foum like this, where the abosolute worst you can do to someone is digg them down. Its not like Daily Kos where the mods simply delete any posts that are not in shimmering adoration of Obama.

          To bad, because of your closed discussion standards over there, this election will be lost, and lost big, and you Kos and MoveOn ***** will be on the firing line this time. Maybe you guys can back Nader again before it too late and you lose all credibility?
          • petrodollar, on 05/09/2008, -1/+3lol, I must have really set you off.

            What was it about my post that got you so riled up? Was it the substance of what I wrote, or do I detect a sense of desperation in republican circles now that they realize that Obama is pulling even in the polls with McCain before he's even begun to campaign against him in earnest.

            "this election will be lost, and lost big"

            I wholeheartedly agree.
          • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -3/+1Well your first point is wrong, not a republican. Just a taxpayer.

            And don't flatter yourself, you haven't upset me. What is upsetting me is Obamas plans to double my taxes. (and raise taxes on everyone making more than 50k a year)
          • petrodollar, on 05/09/2008, -1/+3http://www.barackobama.com/issues/economy/#tax-rel ...

            Provide Middle Class Americans Tax Relief

            Obama will cut income taxes by $1,000 for working families to offset the payroll tax they pay.
            Provide a Tax Cut for Working Families: Obama will restore fairness to the tax code and provide 150 million workers the tax relief they need. Obama will create a new "Making Work Pay" tax credit of up to $500 per person, or $1,000 per working family. The "Making Work Pay" tax credit will completely eliminate income taxes for 10 million Americans.
            Simplify Tax Filings for Middle Class Americans: Obama will dramatically simplify tax filings so that millions of Americans will be able to do their taxes in less than five minutes. Obama will ensure that the IRS uses the information it already gets from banks and employers to give taxpayers the option of pre-filled tax forms to verify, sign and return. Experts estimate that the Obama proposal will save Americans up to 200 million total hours of work and aggravation and up to $2 billion in tax preparer fees.
          • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -2/+1So really, the worst kind of tax cut there is, the kind that goes away over time as inflation drives wages higher. BTW, Bush already tried this type of tax cut, so you could say this VERY MILD tax relief will have about the same type of impact that Bushs rebates had.

            So you could say, "Obama, using Bush logic on your taxes" No thanks we just had 8 years of that. I want change, as opposed to the kind of change that Obama wants (the change in your pocket)
          • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -3/+1Also, "simplify your tax filing" is spin for "send you a tax bill, then you cut a check and send it in"

            So you ever try to get your Comcast bill corrected? How do you suppose that will work out trying to get your pre filled out taxes fixed?
          • petrodollar, on 05/09/2008, -1/+3I looked around for your "he's gonna raise taxes on people making 50k" claim on his web site, like you said, and all I could come up with was what I posted. You seem to be changing your story on that point, or at least injecting it with some "fuzzy math" relating to capital gains taxes and claims about how inflation will eat into rebates. BLS shows inflation running at 4%, so pardon me for not exactly losing sleep over that issue.

            And, as I mention above, the simplified tax filing is OPTIONAL. That means you're perfectly free to keep doing your taxes the old fashioned way.

            In fact, one of the great things about making it optional is it will allow us to measure differences over time between people who use the simplified return and people who do their own taxes. I would think those numbers would be an extremely useful tool for analyzing in the accuracy/quality of the IRS' judgement.

            The plan would be an absolute disaster if it were mandatory, but it isn't, so it's not.
        • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -2/+1Hey since you are so smart, can you point me to the Daily Kos article that disputes my claims about Obamas massive tax increase on people making more than 50k a year?
          • petrodollar, on 05/09/2008, -0/+2http://www.govote.com/2008/Barack_Obama_Tax_Reform ...

            Q: Senator Obama, would you take the same pledge? No tax increases on people under $250,000?

            OBAMA: I not only have pledged not to raise their taxes, I've been the first candidate in this race to specifically say I would cut their taxes. We are going to offset the payroll tax, the most regressive of our taxes, so that families who are middle-income individuals making $75,000 a year or less, that they would get a tax break so that families would see up to $1,000 worth of relief.

            Q: You both have now just taken this pledge on people under $250,000 and $200,000.

            OBAMA: Well, it depends on how you calculate it. But it would be between $200,000 and $250,000.
            Source: 2008 Democratic primary debate in Philadelphia Apr 16, 2008

            ------------

            I have proposed specific tax relief now, immediately, so that we would offset some of the payroll tax, that we would immediately put some additional dollars in the pockets of American families, making $75,000 a year or less, to not only stimulate the economy, but also to balance out a tax code. I would pay for it specifically by closing tax loopholes & tax havens. What we've had is a top-down agenda that is skewed toward the wealthiest Americans. It is making worse some of the trends of globalization
            Source: 2008 Facebook/WMUR-NH Democratic primary debate Jan 6, 2006
          • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -2/+1100 Million Americans pay Capital Gains taxes. Obama wants to just about double those from 15% to 28%
          • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -3/+1Also it feels yucky using a republican source, but...

            http://www.ncgop.org/press/pr/031508-clinton-obama ...

            Obama has already raised taxes on the middle class more than he plans to cut them...
          • petrodollar, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2"Also it feels yucky using a republican source, but..."

            As well it should. As it stands your link is high on hyperbole and short on data and analysis. Can't you do better?

            "100 Million Americans pay Capital Gains taxes. Obama wants to just about double those from 15% to 28%"

            I happen to think that's bad policy. But not bad enough to make me want to vote for Shrillary or McCain. Higher taxes > endless war and sundry other ***** policies. Also, weren't you just praising Bill Clinton in one of your posts above? Bill Clinton taxed capital gains at 28% and as I recall the markets didn't exactly crash on his watch.

    • SasquatchBill, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3Dugg for your statment AND, in particular, calling out "all the people that support [Clinton]."
      FFS stop buying into her shady politics as commonplace and acceptable, you morons.
  • paigeinphilly, on 05/09/2008, -8/+23so desperate...

    so sad.
  • motogoat, on 05/09/2008, -7/+37Deeper, deeper, deeper the hole gets. Climb in, cover thyself up. Thine day is done.
    • getbusyliving, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2thy will be done on Earth as it is in Heaven
      • mentallyinhell, on 05/09/2008, -2/+2God I hope its not this ***** up there too.
    • Hangly, on 05/09/2008, -1/+3Thy day. Thine is an object noun.
      • DephexTwin, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1God doth detest the wicked Nazis of Grammar.
  • CouchTomato, on 05/09/2008, -8/+12It's a good sign to see that she is becoming history real fast. someone put her into a time machine and send her to mid-60's.
    • okokokok, on 05/09/2008, -4/+2Histerly
    • shadygrove, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2the sixties don't deserve her. they were much too hip a time. unless, of course, by sixties you mean "period in history when blacks had to struggle for some semblance of racial equality." in which case, yes, she's quite the outdated politician. at least bill had the good sense to disguise his arrogance with diplomacy and reaganesque teflon. hil-dog has all the bad clinton qualities and none of the good ones.
  • lhbaker, on 05/09/2008, -30/+6I am white, with a 4 year degree, working on a MBA. ***** Hillary. Let her be the VP, but strip her of power.
    • okokokok, on 05/09/2008, -2/+14Do not let her in the White House. Haven't you learned anything in your MBA? You surround yourself with Level 5 leaders, nothing less.
      • magician13134, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Letting her be VP is a good choice, no power, no say, no influence. Remember when the republican party wanted to get rid of TR, but he was too popular with the public? Where'd they put him?
    • kertong, on 05/09/2008, -2/+18If Hillary becomes VP, I would seriously worry for Obama's life. This woman will stop at nothing to be president.
    • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -14/+3MBA + Obama? Really? You must not be a very good student then. Obama is calling for a $30,000 tax increase for famlies that make $150k...

      I would say that makes you a ***** poor MBA candidate.
      • ronaldinho, on 05/09/2008, -3/+2Just because you are rich, doesn't mean you don't have to pay taxes. I'm tired of seeing more and more money going into these rich assholes yet seeing less and less out of them and helping those in need. Rich people getting richer, poor getting poorer, and the thinning of the middle class is part of what is making our economy decline. Increase everyone's spending power, and we will willingly fatten your pockets in no time.
      • mickman17, on 05/09/2008, -2/+2Are you one of Hillary's operatives? All you keep doing is pulling this 30K on 150K? Proof or STFU!
      • lhbaker, on 05/14/2008, -0/+1I'm not getting my MBA to become a rich asshole.
    • dinot, on 05/09/2008, -1/+8OK, let's get one thing straight here. We need to define Hillary's "white Americans". And by all exit polling data, I think she means rural, white, low-income, non-college graduate who go to church at least once a week.

      Cool, so she's winning the Republican vote. Glad she's not the Dem nominee then.
      • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -6/+1Wow, racist stereo types coming from the pc crowd. Bravo!!!
        • dinot, on 05/09/2008, -1/+5So you agree that Hillary is racist? Because that's basically what she said.
          • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -6/+1No, Hillary pointed out that WHITE PEOPLE didn't vote for Obama in South Carolina, which makes his win there irrelevant in the general election, because he can't win South Carolina in the general if no white people there will vote for him. South Carolina is one of Obamas must win states, because Obama cant win California or New York either.
    • polloconjamon, on 05/10/2008, -2/+1




      _,--''''''''---._
      ,/' _..`-.. ____
      _/_,=--ob ,/' '. `. ,-' `
      / | .' /| `.|:/'|| `. |
      ,' '._/8' "P""
      | _,....._ | |
      | ,/' `-. | _P...
      ____ `. ,' ./ / . :>.. | _/-":. `.`-...
      ' `. /,P. / `u' " ' |/' `.. ` ) `| `
      . | - || ' / | ,'| ' ____|_,|
      | `=----. " _ _ _. ,/ / |. /---' _/|
      .=' ``. / /'"' ,[-' `. /---' /
      + '. ' '/ = ..:........// `'''' '`-._,/
      /' .... . ,' '-..____,.-'
      '-._.....,Y |' P -.. `|
      | '. | `. .
      | | _ `| |
      | | `. ,' |
      ` `-........-' '


  • mochaman, on 05/09/2008, -18/+13Bitch, Please ...
    You stuck on stupid!!!
  • weeczar, on 05/09/2008, -6/+18She still has white privilege going for her....
    • shadygrove, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1until we're able to strip it from her by not getting her the votes she needs to clinch the nomination. and then not vote for her again here in new york. she's lost any semblance of respect / support i might have ever had for her.

      (disclosure: i voted for bill clinton in '92 and hillary once when she first ran for senate, just after bill's expensive and un-called-for $50 million impeachment investigation. i've never even considered voting republican in my life. i'll vote independent when the dems suck too much to bring myself to vote for them.)
  • NoDrama, on 05/09/2008, -5/+98As a white guy from the boomer generation I'm supposed to be FOR her based on us both being white? I'm insulted, and not that easily manipulated.
    • korvan504521, on 05/09/2008, -21/+2well, Obama is apparently succeeding with his demographics, why is it insulting for her to seek the same?
      • Railz, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3What his demographics? If it was any non-white voter, he'd be loosing by a landslide.
      • acroyear2, on 05/09/2008, -0/+5Obama isn't making the argument that he's the only candidate who can win the black vote. In fact, in the beginning he made it clear he's not taking that detail for granted. He has not suggested that the black demographic won't support Hillary. Hillary on the other hand is stating that lower class, white voters won't support Obama, and if you take her statement further, she suggests that white, lower class citizens are either racist or stupid.
  • OlivierNO, on 05/09/2008, -4/+28Whatever... it is really too bad to see her sink without honor. The people she is talking about are Democrats, and that's it! They vote according to what the candidates plan to do for the country, their ideas, values,... personalities....not for the color of their skin! Are there racists out there? Sure. Do they make up the majority? Hell, no! Anyway, if she has such a broader base, why isn't she winning this primary?? I am starting to hate these demographic analyses, suggesting that whites vote for whites, and blacks for blacks, instead of democrats vote for democrats! It is maybe slightly valid in a primary, among Democrats, but in the general election, with so many big differences between the candidates, you vote for a plan!
    • FecalHurler, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3Man I hope you're right. However it remains to be seen how much race and religious affiliation (Wright) have to do with the results. I was a cynic, but I would have never imagined a race between a black dude and a woman. Regardless of the outcome, this democratic race is a historic one.
    • darkcooger, on 05/09/2008, -0/+4"[...] that whites vote for whites, and blacks for blacks, instead of democrats vote for democrats!"

      Yeah, as if that's so much better. How about people vote for people, and none of the group classifications matter?
      • OlivierNO, on 05/11/2008, -1/+1True. However, an election is about ideas. I think we can admit that Democrats share the same ideas (roughly), at least more than with Republicans. That's what makes this classification more valid in a presidential election than whites and blacks... that's what I meant.
  • ElAssoWipo, on 05/09/2008, -61/+47This is ***** hillarious.

    "blacks" are a voting group: fine.
    "latinos" are a voting group: fine.
    "women" are a voting group: fine.
    "jews" are a voting group: fine.
    "Muslims" are a voting group: fine.

    "I get most of my support from white middle class people": OMG she's racist!
    • kc8ukw, on 05/09/2008, -9/+18Go to Obama's own website. Look under the "People" tab. We see "African Americans," "Latinos," and "Women." No "Whites" though. So there is some truth in what you say. Personally, though, I think different religions can be considered voting groups - your religion says a lot about what you think is important. But no one gets to pick their race, and I thought as a society we had decided that race shouldn't matter.
      • ElAssoWipo, on 05/09/2008, -20/+8"your religion says a lot about what you think is important."

        Unless you're half black with a racist pastor and are running for president.

        This whole election is becoming a ***** joke, again.
      • aliengoods, on 05/09/2008, -6/+10Your religion doesn't say a lot about what you think is important. Your religion says a lot about what religion your parents were. If religion represented peoples beliefs there would be little to no teenage pregnancies and the divorce rate would be equally insignificant. When push comes to shove, most people choose their own values/interests over the values/interests of a religion they were born into (I know, not everyone is born into their religion, but the vast majority of people are and you know it).
        • kc8ukw, on 05/09/2008, -3/+1I don't think you contradicted my point. Even if you share the same religion as your parents, that doesn't mean it isn't connected to what you think is important, it justs mean you also share that with your parents. As for teenage pregnancies and divorce, (still happening to religious people, I presume you mean) - you yourself must know that we don't always act in accordance with our own beliefs. We don't even always do what we think is right. And if we take the Bible as representative of religion, then even it agrees.

          "I am carnal, sold under sin. For what I am doing, I do not understand. For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that I do." -Paul, Romans 7:14-15, NKJV
      • acroyear2, on 05/09/2008, -1/+1whites are a part of the dominant society in America. It's assumed. If you become a minority, it'll be a different story.
    • shreyans, on 05/09/2008, -6/+9In THIS context you're wrong though... the way Hillary said it is completely retarded. Her intentions were not just to 'address' a voting group.

      But in some cases, I agree with you. Not in this case though.
    • h3smith, on 05/09/2008, -12/+14don't forget 9 of 10 blacks voting for Obama isn't racist either. That is perfectly fine.
      • ElAssoWipo, on 05/09/2008, -9/+11No that's ok, saying that people vote according to the color of their skin is ok as long as it's not white people. Because we all know white people think, unlike all the other "ethnics".

        Hell, I'm jewish, I guess I have to follow my jew brain and vote for whoever supports Israel the most, because that's what we do, us jews.

        This is insulting on so many levels, all of them having nothing to do with Hillary's comments.
        • acroyear2, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1Hillary has a valid point but she's making an unintelligent argument for herself. It gets very complicated when we start discussing demographics, class, race, etc. Let's understand though, that basing a nomination on a factor like whether or not someone can win the "white" vote isn't moving the party or the nation forward the least bit.
      • Gerz1219, on 05/09/2008, -3/+17Obama only had the support of about 50% of black people as recently as January, and a large majority of blacks claimed that America wasn't ready for a black president. A lot of pundits pointed to this as a major obstacle Obama would have to overcome, because the Clintons had such long-standing roots in the black community. Then the Clintons started dismissing the black vote, as a tactic to incite white people to vote against the black man, and they offended and insulted the entire black community. Obama is getting 90% of the black vote because the Clintons drove blacks towards Obama with their race-baiting. I submit that race would not have become a substantial issue in this primary -- and Obama would not have the near-unanimous support of the black community -- if the Clintons hadn't raised it and caused this racial polarization.
        • Lhurgoyf, on 05/09/2008, -2/+7Thank you! Billary lost the black vote, not black people voting for Obama just because he is black, or mixed race.
        • ZenMojo, on 05/09/2008, -1/+7It wasn't even 50% Hillary had around 60% of the black vote until January when Bill pulled that ***** in South Carolina at the end of January. Even THEN Barack only had half of the black vote.
          Maybe we should ask the obvious question, what did Hillary Clinton do to LOSE the black vote? Especially when Barack Obama never HAD the white vote more than half the time.
    • EvolutionTheory, on 05/09/2008, -2/+5How do we keep advocating equality but we keep calling people by their color of skin?
      Whites vote for me. Blacks vote for me. Browns vote for me. Greens vote for me.
      Why not "Humans vote for me"? or "Kentucky votes for me" or "Hard working Americans vote for me".
      • fluoro, on 05/09/2008, -3/+1You can identify people differently without necessarily being unequal. There's not necessarily a conflict of interest in this.
      • EvolutionTheory, on 05/09/2008, -3/+1You're right about that.. but by using that to identify people and "group" them you're then not treating everyone as an equal but different.
        That's the point I was attempting to convey.
    • MerryMortician, on 05/09/2008, -13/+7You getting buried just shows what REAL racists are on digg. Whites are quickly becoming a minority.
      • papipablo, on 05/09/2008, -7/+4Not quickly enough.
        • logosx1, on 05/10/2008, -1/+0Right, we need to become Venezuela as soon as possible.
    • jamesLankford, on 05/09/2008, -2/+7you miss the point entirely
    • pintomp3, on 05/09/2008, -2/+6in america, white and christian are the default settings.
    • ghostoftomjoad, on 05/09/2008, -2/+1usually i would disagree with the "well its okay when its other races" thing but this time your right. She stated an empirical fact and i think she's entitled to do that
    • bignerd, on 05/10/2008, -0/+2you guys can spin what she said any way you want, but in the context that she said it(please watch or listen to the video), she was being very divisive... Not necessarily racist but divisive!
  • frenchi, on 05/09/2008, -7/+21I get offended when she mention the "hard working blue collar middle class", what happened to the "hard working millionaires", or the "hard working upper middle-class"? I guess she's not hard working then, nor are all the people that work at a desk.
    • aliengoods, on 05/09/2008, -1/+15You say hard working because they like it. Working hard seems to be a compliment for quite a few people. I prefer working smart, and getting twice as much done in half the time, but I guess that's difficult for blue collar people when the only job they can get is on an assembly line.

      Also, to the blue collar people who may take offense to my post, my mother worked in a cheese factory and my dad was a construction worker. I put myself in debt $60K to get a college degree because I didn't want that life.
    • tomasII, on 05/09/2008, -4/+5Of course she and the entire democratic party villanize those who work hard and become rich...they then want to take all of their money away and give it to people who don't work hard and think the government owes them a living.
      • schneidafunk, on 05/09/2008, -1/+6No, she's just saying it to get votes. I doubt she believes in half the crap that spews from her lying mouth.
    • ZenMojo, on 05/09/2008, -1/+11What about the hardworking poor? Last time I checked, most poor people are some hard-working *****.
      • DephexTwin, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1There are also many poor folks who are lazy and millionaires who work 100+ hours a week. Hillary's generalization makes no sense, except that it is basically condescending... like telling the fat girl that she has a pretty face.
    • dorsey47, on 05/09/2008, -0/+0I think we need a different word here. how about physically laboring?
    • infectaphibian, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1I have to work hard to pay taxes....
  • TonyStark, on 05/09/2008, -4/+27Comments and insinuations like these are why people are calling for her to bow out gracefully. She is counting on his failure, rather than her own success. She is riding the coat tails of her husband's presidency. She is counting on division rather than unity, pitting Whites, Blacks and Hispanics against one another. I am an American of Puerto Rican descent and my great regret is that the Puerto Rican people will vote for her out of allegiance to her husband. Why should she bow out? Look at the mindset that she is pandering to - divide and conquer, win at all costs, nothing else matters. Dirty up the other guy, wait for him to misstep and pounce. We need a change - that message seems naive to some, but I am a 41 year old father of two sons and I want better for them. Hope is not a dirty word. Obama '08
    • nazbot, on 05/09/2008, -0/+1Couldn't have put it better myself. Obama is not the greatest thing since sliced bread, but at least he doesn't seem to fall into the politics of 'win at any cost'.
    • bubbameister33, on 05/09/2008, -2/+1Stop repeating yourself Tony.
  • seraph582, on 05/09/2008, -49/+52***** WHITEY! SERIOUSLY ***** WHITEY! OMG THE WHITE MALE IS THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL. ***** WHITEY SO ***** BAD OMG.

    now take that sentence and replace it with any other ethnic slur besides whitey, and you have an INSTANT RACIST *****.

    Ironic, no?
    • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -15/+10And you're dugg down, WTF?? I'm used to it on digg, but it still shocks me now and again. It's fact.

    • mentallyinhell, on 05/09/2008, -4/+14It's like saying "black power" and or "brown power" then replacing those words with white. Pretty funny even if it is messed up.
      • ZenMojo, on 05/09/2008, -2/+5Well, white people already have power. They have the voting power and when black and brown power were created as references, they also had the freedom to vote in many areas of the country. What would more white power mean for everybody else? Likewise, who the ***** even says black power anymore? What did you have for breakfast, ovaltine while watching the Scooby Doo family hour with guest stars Batman and Robin?
        • thecatcantalk, on 05/10/2008, -1/+1In the present day, however: 2 out of 3 Americans living in poverty are white. They make up 70% of the population. There is therefore a 4% divergence between whites as a percentage of population, and whites as a percentage of the poor and exploited working class.

          So much for all those jerkoff hypotheses about "white exploitation" of other ethnic groups. It's class warfare, not race struggle.

          And besides "racist" gets misused and abused so badly, that it doesn't mean anything, really, it's just a dirty name to call someone.

          A "racist" is any white person who refuses to kiss your ass.
    • TheZorch, on 05/09/2008, -6/+34Racism is a two way street but somebody obviously forgot to tell most of America this. There ARE Black Americans who discriminate against Whites, yet if you try to point that fact out you are suddenly a Racist. I don't like Discrimination and think its ***** stupid but this double standard ***** really needs to end.
      • ZenMojo, on 05/09/2008, -4/+4And yet you are on Digg, which is predominantly white, and anyone who disagrees with you can be quickly dugg down. Sucks to be a disadvantaged majority, doesn't it?
      • widman, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1Most US people, including minorities, are racist. Also discriminate on base of religion and financial status. It's wrong both ways, don't justify your prejudices.
    • Chassit, on 05/09/2008, -2/+12It is a racist comment already.
    • sonstone, on 05/09/2008, -1/+16How is this relevant to the current topic? This isn't a double standard case. You don't see Obama bragging about his "black" vote and how the party can't win without his "black" vote.
      • Wormfather, on 05/09/2008, -1/+3This, this right here.
      • PunkRampant, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1The world of politics would explode if he said that.
    • Tenhundfeld, on 05/09/2008, -10/+17now take that sentence and replace it with any other ethnic slur besides whitey, and you have an INSTANT RACIST *****.Ironic, no?

      No, it's not "ironic." Your logic completely separates current attitudes on racism from the historical context in which they exist. It's a naive way of viewing the world.

      This is wrong to me:
      Two men are equally appropriate for a job. One is white. One is black. The black men gets the job due to affirmative action.

      This is right to me:
      White society oppresses black society for 200+ years. White child is born to middle class family. Black child is born to family barely above the poverty line.
      Two men are equally appropriate for a job. One is white. One is black. The black men gets the job due to affirmative action.

      If you want to argue that race is a very poor determinant for this type of scenario and really we should be using socioeconomic factors, then I think we have a valid debate. Otherwise, please stop peddling your ideas that exist outside of the reality we live in.
      • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -12/+10That's such horse *****. I was born in 1979, into a white middle class family.... a white middle class family because my dad joined the airforce and got a master's degree when he was young completely on his own as his parents barely could take care of themselves. No one told him to do homework, or that he should pay attention.... so please take your racist social engineering nonsense and shove it. Race either matters or it doesn't, and I'm tired of liberals trying to play both sides. Most of the gaps today are not due to oppression 200+ years ago, it's due to culture, and the value of education.... and as long as people believe they can't make it on their own like liberalism tells them.... they won't.
        • ZenMojo, on 05/09/2008, -7/+6Thanks for solving all of our social ills by managing to, at the same time, reinforce them.
        • socialismEVIL, on 05/09/2008, -4/+6They like relativism. "What is true for you.... not for me" BS. They're not permanently damaged; they need to be deprogrammed AND educated.

          Obama IS a racist.. pandering to " black 'america' "

          FTR black men captured other black men in africa. Those black men sold/traded their captured black men. Those black men sold the captured black men into slavery. Some white people were purchasers of black slaves. Slavery predates America -- obviously.

          Here's the jab: all great societies built up infrastructure with slaves. I'm not condoning slavery.

        • shmatt, on 05/09/2008, -4/+2o rly? OK if you want political steroetypes, then liberals are much more highly educated, meaning a) they don't need education, and b) they are hard to "program."
          What is true for you is not for me? Did George Bush serve in the military in a time of war? Cheney? no? thoughtnot.
        • MrShinra, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2The reason I think, you think that "Race either matters or it doesn't, and I'm tired of liberals trying to play both sides", is because its a COMPLEX issue. Its a deep fault of the current lack of attention span of America today along with the lightning fast media blitz put on by, well, the media. There ARE circumstances where Affirmative action does promote economic improvement, but its a case-by-case basis and without adequate background information on both the issue and the people involved, jumping-the-gun assumptions such as yours take place. They are not, at least I optimistically believe, playing both sides, but that there's a very long stretch of shades of grey to both sides of the argument.

          Anyone who thinks that the world remains in Black and White terms probably voted for Bush in 2004, and that's dammed saddening. So why DO people take the simplistic, dumbed-down version of the 'facts'? Because they are intellectually lazy, that's why.

          Your comment perfectly shows why Hilary still thinks she has a chance, by playing on the common man (Race is not a factor but to her)'s fears, like loss of work and stability and safety, she can promote herself as a solution, when in fact all she is doing is using the problem as a scapegoat and a tool for her own gains. =

          "and as long as people believe they can't make it on their own like liberalism tells them.... they won't."
          Umm.... what?

          Liberalism, if anything, OPPOSES the Welfare state, the thinking goes that state intervention in the economy works as a coercive power that restricts the economic freedom of individuals. Yes, there ARE liberals who think there should be welfare, and it is optimistically for the reason of improving the lives of the those who are in unfortunate situations, such as a sudden loss of a job or injury or something. The problem comes in where people who are on welfare continue to be on welfare and basically take advantage of the situation. SOLVE THAT, because that is the REAL problem, not the ideology of a section of american politics.
          • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/10/2008, -2/+1Liberalism opposes the welfare state by preventing it through state intervention..... okay, I'll give you that one for the sake of the arguement.... but then why do they never care about the results or rampant fraud?

            Solve taking advantage of entitlements?? That's easy, take them away.
          • skinny01, on 05/10/2008, -0/+3Sorry, comment system failing. "Most of the gaps today are not due to oppression 200+ years ago, it's due to culture". The problem is, american blacks culture comes mostly from the 200+ years of oppression. When that's the basis, it's a lot harder to know how to get out of certain life situations when that's all you and your family have ever known or dealt with. I'm an educated black man with 2 college degrees and I'm only just starting to learn about real estate, stocks, investing, etc...because that's something that's never come up in my upbringing. None of my folks and none of their friends have ever owned anything and the only definition they had for gaining wealth was putting your money in the bank. With no knowledge of anything other than that, it's hard to do things like randomly look for something you don't know exists. The only reason I found out was because there are mostly whites in my workplaces and I would overhear them talking about things like that which they took for granted as common knowledge. But here I was in my 30's just hearing about it for the first time as something that regular people can actually do and not just people who are already rich, etc.... The lessons and patterns that those years of oppression drilled into our culture does still hinder us, and when that's the only base you have, it's hard to just "change it" with no idea of how to change it or where to even look without help or luck.
      • shmatt, on 05/09/2008, -2/+5I'm proudly liberal, but I don't believe in affirmative action
      • akamurph, on 05/09/2008, -2/+3That's *****... I was born into a white middle class family - although both my parents were poor and decided to go to school and make their lives better, so that means I should suffer?!

        This is wrong to me: Two people applying for a job, the 'white' one is more than qualified for the job, the 'black' one is not qualified for the job but the 'black' one gets the job because of affirmative action.
        Look at many gov't jobs (i.e. cops, fireman, etc. and you'll see this a lot).
      • PunkRampant, on 05/10/2008, -0/+1This is right to me:
        Two men are equally appropriate for a job. One is white. One is black. The employer makes the decision based on a coin toss.
      • vivaobama, on 05/11/2008, -0/+1that's true, the history of discrimination against blacks cannot be ignored in such and argument and is a reason why discrimination against blacks causes greater uproar than that against whites. But having said that seraph582's original line is indeed racist too! it is insulting to whites so it is racist absolutely!

        Why do we forget that we are not our bodies? The body is not our real identity. Our body changes over time but we are still the same person so how could we be the body itself? Peace all :)
    • oldgal, on 05/09/2008, -1/+3What happened with the Jeremiah Wright clips pretty much negates your argument.
    • tylerkuite, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2how about some cultural diplomacy, jeez...were all the same, it just the cultures that people dont like, "ethnocentrism" if your white, go get some black friends, if your black, get some white friends
      • ToastedZergling, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2uh, dude, getting a friend of another race, solely for the reason of having a friend that's another race, isn't the right way to go about bridging equality.
    • fani, on 05/09/2008, -1/+2I'm sick of this. I want to paint everyone on Earth the same Green color.
    • JakobVirgil, on 05/09/2008, -1/+4In the wee hours of the morning on May 31st, 1930, a dubious accusation of rape gave lynch law yet another victim-a 19 year old Negro, Henry Argo. The murder took place inside the Chickasha, Oklahoma courthouse after Argo was accused of rape by a white sharecropper's wife. People of both races in the town questioned her claim. Argo was thought of as a half-wit by the black community. As night fell, a mob gathered outside demanding that Argo be turned over to them. The National Guard was called to Chickasha to disperse the near-frenzied crowd, but the lynching was guaranteed once people realized that the Guardsmen were armed only with blanks. The mob began to use violence against the Guardsmen for interfering in the punishment of this black rapist. They threw sticks and stones, fracturing the skull of one Guardsman, and burned a National Guard truck after forcing the collected Guardsmen into a retreat. Around 3 am, one of the members of the mob climbed up the courthouse wall, leaned through a second-story window and shot Argo in the top of the head. As the accused rapist lay there bloodied, the sheriff arrived and dismissed the Guardsmen. At 6 am, the sheriff permitted a group to come in and see Argo's body. George Skinner, husband of the woman who had accused Argo, soon stabbed the dying boy in the chest. Seven hours later, Argo died-after being refused at the local hospital. A witness later remarked, "Stickin' that boy was just like stickin' a hog. He only had to stick him once." No one-including Skinner who committed murder right before the eyes of the local sheriff-was ever convicted on any charges.
      ---- Change all the Blacks to Whites and Whites to Black and what you end up with is an event that never happened.---
      ---- I am sorry all you all have be threatened with Lynching by black folk I my self haven't--
      The black student union is a place to get coffee the White student union is a SkinHead Group don't be simple.
      -Jake
      • thecatcantalk, on 05/10/2008, -1/+3And I'll bet my next paycheck, that every single one of the real-life characters in your story has been in a coffin for a long time, now. Punishing the living for what a dead man did is called "scapegoating". For example, if a black man beats me up, and I, in turn, beat up the next black man I see, I have then scapegoated an innocent man...and also committed a hate crime.

        But if a black man, or a Chicano, or whomever, does the same thing, it's OK, and can be rationalized away: that's racist. If I do it, it's a crime, if you do it, it's Whitey's fault, you have PTSD, society is sick, you're not responsible for your actions.

        And the reason why a white kid beating up a black kid because of his skin color makes the front page coast-to-coast, is because it's a RARE and shocking event. Whereas minority hate crimes against whites DON'T make the news, because they're so common that no one thinks hate crimes against Whitey are unusual or shocking. Or wrong.
        • JakobVirgil, on 05/12/2008, -0/+1 I am not a moral relativist like you apparently are. I am not saying that what angry blacks say and do is right I am saying it as a context and a history. What angry White folks say and do also has a history and that history is slavery, Lynching, Jim Crow and white hoods. So yeah it is different when Black folks have a problem with white America then when White racists whine. Take 10 and think about it.
          -Jake
    • acroyear2, on 05/09/2008, -1/+1No one wants to ***** whitey. I feel bad for white guilt. I'm sorry. It was never my intention to make you feel guilty for anything so try not to act out on it.

      Now ***** whitey women on the other hand...
  • brutusx, on 05/09/2008, -6/+39"Good, hard working, white Americans...." You stupid bitch! How the ***** could you think that is an acceptable thing to say?
    • form3hide, on 05/09/2008, -7/+5Because it's acceptable to say such and such is relying on the black vote?
    • iticu, on 05/09/2008, -2/+6You really expect black Americans to vote for her?
    • gamefreak3128, on 05/09/2008, -0/+3Sadly some people do vote for her, my parents are a good example of this since i have no clue why they are voting for her
  • papipablo, on 05/09/2008, -4/+31I've lost all respect I had for Hillary. Now I wouldn't even let her iron my shirt.
    • zacharytelschow, on 05/09/2008, -2/+16She is still a woman. You might consider letting her iron your shirt.
      • papipablo, on 05/09/2008, -1/+10I think she'd iron my hard-working white shirts alright, but I worry about the rest of my shirts.
    • CaviMike, on 05/09/2008, -2/+2You had respect for her?
    • warispeace21, on 05/09/2008, -0/+11Now that's irony.
  • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -27/+12This is nonsense, she's describing who votes for her, big ***** deal. How the hell is she supposed to describe her supporters? You are all sheep, you don't know what racist even means anymore, you associate political inconvenience for yourself with racism to rationalize it. Man, for how much I'm enjoying watching her burn in hell overall, this is just sensational garbage that needs to go away. More white people will vote for her, get used to it, it's a fact, facts shouldn't be shunned.
    • dinot, on 05/09/2008, -4/+6So black people voting for Obama = they're racist, and white people voting for Hillary = fact. Nice double standard.
      • TRScheel, on 05/09/2008, -2/+3You got it backwards
      • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -3/+3Yeah, lets see how that works in the general. Obama gets 100% of a 20% minority of the US. McCain gets everyone else.

        But its racist to point out that is exactly how it went down in South Carolina.
        • dinot, on 05/09/2008, -2/+4huh?
          • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -5/+2Are you the Daily Kos Blogger that said

            "I would rather lose with Obama than win with Hillary?"

            If so, that was perhaps the dumbest thing ever uttered on the internet. Enjoy your defeat this fall.
          • B1663r, on 05/09/2008, -5/+1Coward, changed your comment you douch bag.
        • zombies187, on 05/09/2008, -1/+4McCain and Obama have not faced off anywhere.
          Obama is getting about 90% of the black vote.
          Obama has actually gotten slightly more white votes than Clinton.
      • NonLeftistDiggr, on 05/09/2008, -5/+2Well I never said anything of the sort, but ke