digg

Join DiggAbout

The Digg Crew wants to hear your thoughts!
Please take our short survey about Digg and potential feature ideas.

New Obama Ad: People are Rejecting Hillary Clinton's Attacks

cbsnews.com — Barack Obama's campaign has released a new ad: "There's a reason people are rejecting Hillary Clinton's attacks," an announcer says. "Because the same old Washington politics won't lower the price of gas, or help our struggling economy. Barack Obama will represent all Americans. He offers a new approach." Watch it here.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • RansomHoldiay, on 04/16/2008, -7/+99i think the obama campaign should start a fund raising drive and buy boxes of straws for the clinton campaign to cling onto.
    • bluevillage, on 04/16/2008, -1/+9LOL -- and pass them out with containers of lemonade
      • jaznova, on 04/16/2008, -0/+10He could give her some lessons on how to make said lemonade from the rotten lemons she's throwing at him
        • bluevillage, on 04/16/2008, -0/+5Ooh! That's bitter! (Maybe "that's bitter" is the new "that's bad!")
      • OwdenBowden, on 04/16/2008, -4/+1Don't count your Clinton's until they hatch. They are not out of this race by far.

        Just Say "NO to O '08"
    • Reaper2806, on 04/16/2008, -3/+62There's an aspect of the ad that is being hugely overlooked. The ad doesn't really attack Hillary, instead it dismisses the attacks and tells how Obama will bring change to Washington and American People.
      The majority of Hillary's ads are negative: "Don't vote for Obama, he doesn't have what it takes" and "Is he really the guy you want making decisions", where as Obama's are more focused on the positives of voting for him, and investing in change.
      Just my take on the differences seeing as Hillary is so keen that everyone "compares and contrasts" the two candidates.
      • jameshighmore, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2It's like the "Get a Mac" ads all over again. Well, maybe if Obama, y'know, didn't say anything at all and was quietly running the country already.
      • otayyo, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1well said.
    • mnky9800n, on 04/16/2008, -3/+1Or how about Obama loans money to Clinton, saying, "I know you've been hurting but I am here to help the common man so here is some help from the elitist."
    • deanlowe, on 04/16/2008, -10/+3Old politics is calling Obama elitist.
      New politics is calling Clinton Annie Oakley.

      Interesting.
      • thesonofdarwin, on 04/16/2008, -1/+10In the first, it's hypocrisy because if Obama is an elitist, she is Queen Elite. In the second, it's a witty interpretation of the truth.
    • Malevolant, on 04/16/2008, -11/+1Inaccurate. The article should be named, New Obama Ad: OBAMA supporters are rejecting Hilary Clinton Attacks". Many polls prove that in the general election arena, voters are rejecting obama's spin and b.s.
      • clubby, on 04/16/2008, -0/+15Many polls, huh? How come I haven't seen one? Name one poll that supports your argument.
        • qwerter, on 04/16/2008, -0/+9Don't expect a reply.
        • petrodollar, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1A poll of the posters on freerepublic.com, no doubt.
      • cjshamrock, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3She was booed in the middle of her own speech. Her supporters are all disbanding to Obama Camp. Even I used to like her, but now she's just playing dirty and people don't want another liar in the White House. She's dugg her own grave.
  • sunsi, on 04/16/2008, -4/+20The contrast between the two canidates isn't complimenary to Clinton, she appears quite pathetic in a grasping, flailing "dance of the dirge".
  • tcbishop12, on 04/16/2008, -35/+63For a candidate sometimes mocked for being too soft to win a political fistfight, Sen. Obama has shown an uncanny ability to take a punch, and then rear back and deliver a knock-out in return. He'll win Pennsylvania, and you heard it here, first.
    • theYevvin, on 04/16/2008, -2/+45Your comment is copied and pasted directly from this article.

      http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/14/politics ...

      Bad form
      • SwampyUK, on 04/16/2008, -0/+13"Hey! This Guy is a great fat phony!"
      • trigon77, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2kinda reminds me of the bar scene from Good Will Hunting...
        well played Yevvin, well played
      • bmonet, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3I think he just misinterpreted the rules.
      • tcbishop12, on 04/16/2008, -6/+1I humbly apologize for any infraction, but respectfully, I disagree: The comment is not copied and pasted. While the substance of the comments roughly share the opinion of the noted CBS article, that article says nothing about a knockout punch. I did, and that is precisely what will occur when PA votes next Tuesday.
    • apraxia, on 04/16/2008, -0/+13Wow. Way to be a complete phony.
    • kublerross, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4its called rope-a-dope
      hes taking it back to Ali
    • andburn1, on 04/16/2008, -0/+15That was definitely a digg-foul. Red card, jackass.
    • GhostyBoy, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6It was an alright comment, but hardly worth plagiarizing. Kudos Yevvin, for calling out this thief.
    • petervenkman, on 04/16/2008, -0/+10Actually, I guess we heard it here, second?
    • x0rcist, on 04/16/2008, -4/+1He's black, you really think he'd lose in a fight to some whitey? Let's be real now...

      Oh, and you are far from the first person to say Obama will win PA but you are correct.
  • 7Mystery, on 04/16/2008, -18/+3I'm going what of Hillary's gathering and throw coke at her!
    • kublerross, on 04/16/2008, -0/+10Hillary gathering coke what go throw and I'm!
    • n3demonic, on 04/16/2008, -0/+8It's like you took words from the English language, put it on paper, cut it to pieces, ate the paper, regurgitated the paper, and wrote whatever came out.
    • kiubo, on 04/16/2008, -0/+47Mystery,

      Spell check only checks spelling.
    • darksideownedu, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2English. Please, do yourself and us all a favor, stop butchering it.
    • iPenis, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1Are you a LOL cat?
  • Stonecipher26, on 04/16/2008, -5/+33Very effective ad for Barack. It's all over, Hillary is done.
    • sandsailor, on 04/16/2008, -6/+1i wish all three candidates were just a bad dream and they would fade away and take dick and bush with them. We are the ones who are done
    • tillerman00, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1Wait a second now: we all thought the T-1000 was done when Arnold blew it into a million nitro glycerin fragments, but the ***** came back again didn't it? In much the same way, what we need in this case is another vat of molten iron.
  • partner500, on 04/16/2008, -19/+2http://www.earthhourblog.blogspot.com obama all the way
  • MindyB, on 04/16/2008, -5/+77Barack Obama certainly knows how to make sweet lemonade! I still can't understand the critics who say that he can't take a punch because he is too 'fresh'. He can take a punch better and more gracefully than any other political figure I know! The self control is amazing! Just imagine him in the international front! He will rock!
    Go Obama! Pennsylvania will chose for Obama on April 22nd
  • cubbiesx, on 04/16/2008, -7/+101I simply do not understand how a reasonable person can be against Obama being our next president.
    • Brss45, on 04/16/2008, -2/+28As the ignorant people I know say "He's a Muslim!!".
      Not that they pay me mind when I try to explain: 1. How can he be Muslim and have a 'racist' preacher, 2. What difference would it make if he were? Religion and Politics (not just gov't) should be as separate as possible.
      Also my dad is always trying to tell me he has Al Qaeda friends, and will make our entire country like the middle east. ...um, what?
      • MrTito, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2No offense to your dad, but I'd have to point out to anyone making that last point that not everyone believes America is as weak-willed as they do. We can't be "taken over" that easily.
    • kaptainsteve, on 04/16/2008, -35/+0You're dad is right:
      He is a member (20 years and counting) of a Black Separtist Church (tucc) who hates and disavows his white ancestory and
      he is a terrorist sympathizer:
      http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/11/opinion/ ...
      • andburn1, on 04/16/2008, -1/+28Loved the /opinion part of that link, but the icing was really when it led to an error page. Fail, moron.
      • jsebrech, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6This article completely disproves yours:
        http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/889/ ...

        Who on earth would type three dots after fake link to make it seem like the link was mangled by digg? How far gone do you have to be to proclaim opinions that you can't even find a story for to back them up?
      • darksideownedu, on 04/16/2008, -0/+9You sir, are retarded.
      • iPenis, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1Another full time anti-Obama digg account. http://digg.com/users/kaptainsteve
        Give it up guys. It doesn't work on here. L2 Social-Network
    • fratdaddy, on 04/16/2008, -5/+14Republicans are, by default, not reasonable
      • antipoet, on 04/16/2008, -3/+1You know, usually I am against such a blanket statement but I could almost agree with this one. I have a friend who is a totally reasonable guy but when it comes to politics, it all goes out the window. I know it's just one case, but it's so extreme it has me wondering about more than just him. He sent me an email blaming the housing market collapse (and a whole slew of other things) on the Dem's Elected class of '06. I told him it was the most biased piece of political propaganda I had ever seen and he said, "Kinda makes you think though." I thought, yeah, makes me think they've got you brainwashed into believing whatever they'll feed you.
      • OneLess, on 04/16/2008, -1/+1That's complete and utter *****, and I hope with that attitude that you're a Clinton supporter. Obama, of all the candidates, realizes that his opponents, whether they be in the party or on the other side of the aisle, are not morons for disagreeing with him. Completely reasonable people _can_ have completely differing points of view on how to solve a problem. Don't dismiss the other 50% of Americans as idiots because they don't agree with you.
      • moush, on 04/16/2008, -2/+2Reasonable enough to become rich.
        • petrodollar, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2"Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision he makes and should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens."

          --Britney Spears, multimillionaire
      • corneliusJones, on 04/16/2008, -2/+1Don't be an idiot. Though Republicanism has been tarnished by the neo-cons, fiscal conservatism is the way to go. I used to be a liberal. Then I grew up and realized government is not the answer to all of societies ills.
        • petrodollar, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2How long did it take you to figure out that Republicans aren't fiscal conservatives?
    • GhostyBoy, on 04/16/2008, -0/+5I'm not against him specifically, but I'm not so quick to jump on the bandwagon either. Politicians tell lies, and I'm not about to trust one just cause they are outrageously charismatic and clearly intelligent.
    • pigtown, on 04/16/2008, -2/+2I simply do not understand how a reasonable person can be a cubs fan! (Yes, I'm a white sox fan, and yes, I could be misinterpreting your name). This century's' the century, I can feel it!
    • roystgnr, on 04/16/2008, -0/+8I'm against Obama being out next president because he's been talking favorably about protectionism at a time when erecting more international trade barriers could do a great deal of damage to our already troubled economy. Reacting to an economic bubble with sudden new restrictions on free trade didn't help in 1930 and it's not going to help today.

      With that said, I voted for Obama in the primary, I'll be advising everyone I know in swing states to vote for him, and if there are no good third party candidates I'll be voting for him in the general election too. "Makes honest suggestions that may cause some economic damage" is still a big improvement over "Says whatever dishonest things might help her polls" or "Makes senile jokes about starting more unprovoked wars".
    • jerwin, on 04/16/2008, -11/+3How about because he is a ***** socialist that thinks the government is the only solution to every problem and income redistribution is somehow OK. Control CEO salaries??? What happened to free enterprise and free markets?

      This man, and Hillary, will do major damage to the very fabric of what makes our economy work. Once you start trying to manipulate the free markets for specific effect, the unintended consequences will bury you. Go read Ann Rand, those of you that still have a brain that works. She got it right.
      • TitoJackson, on 04/16/2008, -0/+5I completely agree. One or two terms of Obama may be all it takes to completely erase what Bush has worked so hard to do to our economy....

        ... er, wait.
      • Buddhaismybuddy, on 04/16/2008, -0/+8Are you seriously worried about CEO salaries?

      • tehmacuser, on 04/16/2008, -1/+6Have you ever heard of a "free market"? It's called "Laissez-faire", and it's also the cause of monopolies. No restrictions means a business can have any standards it wants, and a lot of the times you get pretty nasty results (see: China)
        "GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF MY BUSINESS!"

        The truth is, truly free enterprise would be a disaster, just like it was before labor reforms in the United States just after the Industrial Revolution. But hey, keep shouting about how evil the government is, and enjoy having no guaranteed pay or any rights as a worker! Long live the free [unemployed]!

      • Rolmeister, on 04/16/2008, -0/+8You mean AYN Rand? The elitist objectivist who thinks you should cast the helpless and the poor off the to side, just so that you don't have to deal with the 'burden' of them?

        Compassion and Understanding. That's where our political future lies, not in big business and money.
      • petrodollar, on 04/16/2008, -0/+5OH NOES WHAT ABOUT THE CEOS!?!?!
    • chesbo, on 04/16/2008, -10/+1HOPE...CHANGE...HOPE...CHANGE... Obama must win this election and may he be worshipped by all of us. He is for hope...he is for change. We need more government in our lives! MORE! MORE MORE!!! More HOPE AND MORE CHANGE!

      HOPE, CHANGE, HOPE, CHANGE, INSPIRATION.... A NEW AGE.
      • iruber1337, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1Too many buzz words in this post...
    • AriaStar, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3The majority of voters also voted in the last two elections, and look where that got us.
    • moush, on 04/16/2008, -3/+3He's black.
      • oscenester, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1and this is an issue because...?

        Yeah. Def need this to be changed...racism is a major road block in our nation.
      • Bomborr, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1good thing you noticed.....
    • oldhick, on 04/16/2008, -1/+3Really, I'm not trying to rain on anyones parade. But you can be reasonable and still prefer another candidate. I'd much rather vote for Ron Paul or Mike Gravel. I'm not sure why I'm being so unreasonable.
      I think Obama is a positive and energizing speaker. That is commendable. Other than the war in Iraq (or the war on Terror for that matter), I don't agree with many of the positions he's taken.
    • unearth, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1I simply do not understand how a reasonable person can be against Obama being our next president.

      Rephrase that to:

      I simply do not understand how a reasonable Democrat can be against Obama being our next president.

      Fixed. It is completely reasonable for Republicans, libertarians, and certain independents to oppose Obama's presidency on policy differences.
  • Jovensdesciple, on 04/16/2008, -40/+5Go Obama!!! Nah just kidding, I only wanted to feel the thrill of saying it... Obama sucks a hard one.
    • Acewrap, on 04/16/2008, -0/+24You're just being lazy. You can troll better than that. I have faith in you.
    • kiubo, on 04/16/2008, -2/+9Oh my God so controversial! And funny too! How do you do it?
  • Trails123, on 04/16/2008, -11/+0People who live in glass houses...

    http://klintons.com

  • Sinudeity, on 04/16/2008, -13/+5Jacob Zuma for President!
    • nonsapiens, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4I hope you're joking - the man will wreck our economy (our being South Africa, where I assume you're posting from too)
    • Sinudeity, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2Greetings fellow South African.
      Yeah! Of course, JZ is a criminal. Unfortunately he doesn't get treated like one.
  • HUSTLER101, on 04/16/2008, -13/+8WoW this ad made me feel strong about Obama .
    • eigenweasel, on 04/16/2008, -16/+1Funny you should say that, because that's exactly what the team of professional manipulators who designed it wanted you to feel.
      • MidgardMurda, on 04/16/2008, -0/+19Manipulate? He took a video of her being boo'd after talking trash about him and tossed it back into her sad sad face. Where is the manipulation in that?
  • koft, on 04/16/2008, -33/+14RON PAUL 2008
    • andburn1, on 04/16/2008, -2/+14... really? I thought we were past this.
      • mlirblur, on 04/16/2008, -3/+3Are you implying Diggers "moved on" from Ron Paul to Obama?

        I don't think so. Completely different sets of people. People who make that change must not be researching their ***** enough.

        Ron Paul supporters are moving to Bob Barr!!! Bob Barr '08!!!! Dismantle the two party state!!!
        • andburn1, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2No, I was always Obama. I meant moved on in the sense of given up on a lost cause. I said from the very beginning that Paul wouldn't go anywhere, and laughed that I'd be vindicated and you'd all shut up. I guess I was wrong about the last bit.
    • darksideownedu, on 04/16/2008, -0/+3As I've said before: You sir, are retarded.
    • CokeEatsYummy, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2AL GORE 2000
    • tmslak, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1More like Wrong Paul, amirite?
  • Dystisis, on 04/16/2008, -21/+5George W. Bush Four More Years!
    • zzzpoohzzz, on 04/16/2008, -1/+3no thanks, i've had enough of this ***** era... the era that made other countries hate us more than they already did... the era that is making some of my best friends risk their lives in places we have no right being...

      even though you're probably kidding (we all know he can't run again, and that theres only a few people that still support him) if he was our president any longer we would definitely be screwed for a long, long time
    • jackalsclaw, on 04/16/2008, -0/+8to quote Colbert "why should he start following the Constitution now?"
    • Bomborr, on 04/16/2008, -1/+1dugg, only because I thought you were being sarcastic.
      • jackalsclaw, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1don't try to use sarcasum with bush supports they don't understand it and take it as support
  • smacksaw, on 04/16/2008, -3/+23I can't believe Clinton thought that this "Vote for me because I deserve it, to hell with my platform" ***** she's tried since day 1 was good idea. All I know about Hillary these days is that she thinks she's entitled to the job and will say/do anything to make sure she gets it. I know a lot about Obama, however, because for whatever reason he keeps discussing the issues. He doesn't always say it perfectly, but at least he's saying it.
    • jackalsclaw, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6it really is a battle between old school politics of trying to build and cater to your base, and a politics of trying to appeal to everyone with reasonable polices that are for moderates of all groups, hard to disagree with. yes they are both liberals, but one will try to win a war with Republicans, the other will try to move people together to what is right for this contry as a whole, not just for their base. One will try to win 10 states, One will try to win 50.
  • nickcozy, on 04/16/2008, -12/+7Nah i think despite all this Hillary will win in Pennsylvania
    • andburn1, on 04/16/2008, -0/+7I agree it's a possibility.
    • zzzpoohzzz, on 04/16/2008, -0/+9obama is getting my vote!
    • Anonchrist, on 04/16/2008, -0/+6You have no faith in America, but the fact that Hillary even has a chance gives you a decent reason not to have any
    • jackalsclaw, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1it depends on how close people pay attention what is going on. if poeple vote on soundbites then it's a toss-up. if people pay attention to messages and actions, then obama wins.
    • calon9, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4Unfortunate but true. Digg opinion does not include all the people in PA who are die-hard unswayable Clintonistas.The overall trend is towards Obama, but in PA it may not move far enough in his direction by primary day. However, Clinton will definitely not win by double digits like were saying a little as a month ago.

      People need to still get out and vote for him instead of getting complacent and thinking he will just win.
  • RubineBoy, on 04/16/2008, -6/+21I don't know what you americans are up to. I sometimes feel so sad and helpless. I live in the tiny country Belgium so we don't have a lot of political influence in the world. And you guys, you live in a country that can move mountains but you don't, you break them down.
    Last summer I was in America for two weeks, beautiful country really, but some many homeless people! So sad! It's like your gouvernement is focussing on the outside and not on the inside.
    Anyway I would vote for Oboma if I could. Not because he has a georgeous website but because it is the only one who looks sincere to me ... I don't know ...
    • coffee200am, on 04/16/2008, -2/+2What did you do when you saw the homeless...that only are in America...give them food or money...or just look at them?
      • RubineBoy, on 04/16/2008, -2/+5"That only live in Amerca"

        You don't see them overhere. I can honestly take you on a road trip trough our country without you seeing one and that means not avoiding the big cities. I talk about social security for everyone and so on.
        • theNEOone, on 04/16/2008, -0/+8Out of all of our flaws, you pick on our homeless issue? Everyone deserves a second chance....and maybe a third. But not a fourth, fifth, sixth...etc. Our country has very strong programs for the homeless, but sometimes people ***** up way beyond any remedy that can be reasonably provided by a cause-effect thinking society. There's a point at which we stop giving free handouts and that's the way I think it should be.

          But to your broader point where you say that we're not focusing enough on ourselves, I'd say that I would have to agree with you.
        • jackalsclaw, on 04/16/2008, -0/+4the 2 main reasons for homeless are. 1) a failed mental health system. their are so many problems with it, people that need help can't get or the system fails to give them support they need to go from a hospital to a normal life. 2) drugs. they fail in to a cycle of addiction and poverty. We don't need to give people more money we need to give them doctors and bed and treatment and education on how bad drugs are (and maybe legalize pot so that when we say illegal drugs are bad kids will believe it)
        • coffee200am, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2You got em...

          The figures are (De Decker, 2001):
          - for the Brussels Capital Region: Rea et al. estimate that there are at least 1,200
          permanent homeless persons in the capital region;
          - for Wallonia: in 1999 5,003 persons were taken care of in residential care for
          homeless persons;
          - for Flanders: in 1998 some 12,680 persons got support in residential care for
          homeless persons. Of these, 10,754 were new dossiers.
          So, if we assume that there are no big annual differences, we can estimate that at the end
          of the 1990s Belgium has at least 17,000 homeless persons

          http://www.terradaily.com/2005/051127193547.r9vwez ...
          In Belgium, a homeless man in his 40s was found dead outside a church Saturday in Brussels, and another died in hospital after being found suffering from hypothermia in a bus shelter. They were believed to have frozen to death as temperatures plunged and 12 centimetres (four inches) of snow fell.
      • Wholekernalcorn, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2A guy from Belgium just got owned.
    • amightywind, on 04/16/2008, -1/+1I hope you tossed the poor fellow a beer.
    • morninglorii, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1I voted for Obama because he has a gorgeous website...
      • brad3378, on 04/17/2008, -1/+1Cut him some slack - English is likely his 2nd language.
  • coffee200am, on 04/16/2008, -10/+2http://i31.tinypic.com/okadqr.jpg
    • jackalsclaw, on 04/16/2008, -1/+1he he, that isn't what he but it's still funny. Also how many atheists have been elected from/in Pennsylvania?
  • kaptainsteve, on 04/16/2008, -26/+0Do you Obama Supporters know who Bill Ayres is (a terrorist who admittedly bombed the Pentagon) or what his relationship (friend and supporter) to Obama is???

    If you don't , you should!.
    • m4532v, on 04/16/2008, -0/+10GEEZ! how many "Sean Hannity" "Rush Limbaugh" HACKS are on this site anyway? Ever heard of independent thought?
    • neognostic, on 04/16/2008, -0/+10Yes I know who he is, a distinguished professor at a major University in Chicago who was never convicted of a crime. Any more stupid questions?
      • jackalsclaw, on 04/16/2008, -1/+3dude your kinda glossing over a lot of history there http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Ayers . I support Obama, every one who is smart and active socially is going to end up with a connection to a few people who are going to look bad out of context. hiding that is the wrong approach
    • pigtown, on 04/16/2008, -0/+5He is a weather underground member. That was nearly 40 years ago, and he's gone on to be a fairly respected professor at UIC. All of the weather underground bombings were deliberately planned not to kill a soul. He, as previously mentioned, was never convicted (largely because the FBI's surveilance tactics were inadmissible in court). The comment is not only decades out of context, it's a very loose use of the word terrorist, especially in a modern context. The man has gone on to be something of a respected member of his community in spite of his past. Furthermore, I'd imagine the connection is not all that strong. Half of the Chicago higher education or law community is probably a "friend and supporter" of Barrack Obama at this point. To extrapolate that into him being Obama's terrorist buddy is a bit much. Also, you misspelled Ayers.
    • vade79, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2OH NOES! I'M AFRAIDZ.

      ...If i've lived through Bush's real homeland terrorism (so far), I think it's too late for this kind of ***** propaganda to scare me now.

    • alk509, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1John McCain spent five and a half years with the North Vietnamese, while this country was at war against them! When will John McCain answer to his anti-American terrorist ties?

      Reality-distortion is such a fun game to play!
  • amightywind, on 04/16/2008, -29/+1You Obama spin meisters wish that rural whites are rejecting the ads. Obama is turning into the most liberal and controversial democrat candidate of all time. He has a long list of bizarre gaffs and bad personal associations. Yesterday I heard he marched with Louis Farrakan at the Million (400K really) Man March. Obama's chances of defeating Hillary are much reduced by his insulting remarks in San Francisco. In 1 day he basically lost the rural white vote.
    • kiubo, on 04/16/2008, -1/+11Of all tiime! Ever and ever!
      The mighty wind you are is the one coming out of your ass.
    • pigtown, on 04/16/2008, -1/+7Him and 399,998 other people.
    • DreKor, on 04/16/2008, -1/+5We could also say that he marched with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. But that wouldn't make him sound bad, so we won't say that.
    • banderwocky, on 04/16/2008, -1/+4I love the "I heard..." gossipy rumor mill you're passing. A mighty wind indeed. His comments carry no more weight than McCains doughnut solution to health care. Or his "Bomb bomb Iran" song. The gaffs will continue I'm sure.
      • amightywind, on 04/16/2008, -4/+1I am sorry for not citing a reference. Here: http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OWY ...
        There is blood in the water! Opinion makers like myself want to assure maximum damage;)
        • banderwocky, on 04/17/2008, -0/+2You link is dead.
          I'd say after last nights laughable debate and the increasing of damaging campaigning Hillary is doing, things are not looking good for her.
          Regardless; "He has a long list of bizarre gaffs and bad personal associations...." Please point to the candidate on either side who does not fall into this "category". You maximum damage is....well, not so good. You may have to try another tactic. Like sitting in a corner quietly crying yourself to sleep. That may be more effective.
  • kaptainsteve, on 04/16/2008, -26/+0BILL AYERS AND BERNADINE DOHRN
    With this as background, is it really all that startling that Sen. Obama enjoys a friendly relationship with Bill Ayers and his wife, Bernadine Dohrn, a pair of terrorists?

    I want to be clear here: Not terrorist sympathizers. Terrorists.

    The mainstream media, in their zeal to elect a Democrat, are assiduously airbrushing Ayers: “an aging lefty with a foolish past,” as the Chicago Sun-Times has so delicately put it. In fact, it is the press that is rife with foolish, aging lefties. Ayers, by contrast, is an unapologetic terrorist with a savage past -- one who beat the system he so reviles when, after his years of fugitivity, terrorism charges were dropped due to government surveillance violations. He’s “guilty as sin,” by his own concession, but “free as a bird.”

    Ayers didn’t just carry a sign outside the Pentagon on May 19, 1972. He bombed it. As his memoir gleefully recalled, “Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon. The sky was blue. The birds were singing. And the bastards were finally going to get what was coming to them.”

    Whether Pentagon bombing day was more or less ideal than other days, when he, Dohrn and their Weathermen comrades bombed the U.S. Capitol, the State Department, and sundry banks, police stations and courthouses, Ayers does not say. But on each occasion, there was surely optimism that the bastards were finally going to get what was coming to them.

    There were lots of bombs. There is no remorse. “I don’t regret setting bombs,” he told the New York Times in 2001, sorry only that he and the others “didn’t do enough.” Like what? We can’t be sure, though National Review Online’s Jonah Goldberg recounts Ayers’s sentiments back in the day: “Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that’s where it’s really at.”

    Ayers and Dohrn have done the actual dirty work of terror, while Jeremiah Wright draws the line at waving pom-poms. But the prism through which they assay the dirty work is precisely the same: America has it coming.

    For them, that makes all the difference. It’s not terror, just chickens coming home to roost. “Terrorists destroy randomly,” Ayers rationalizes with nauseating arrogance, “while our actions bore ... the precise stamp of a cut diamond. Terrorists intimidate, while we aimed only to educate.” Right. As her companion Discover the Networks profile illustrates, Dohrn now goes even further: insisting their bombings weren’t terrorist acts at all: “We rejected terrorism. We were careful not to hurt anybody.”

    Maybe she’s forgotten the “bastards getting what was coming to them” part. Or maybe she’s just lying. She was, we can be confident, something less than a model of compassion back then -- like at the Weathermen “War Council” meeting in 1969, when she famously gushed over the barbaric Manson Family murders of the pregnant actress Sharon Tate, coffee heiress Abigail Folger, and three others: “Dig it! First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them. They even shoved a fork into the victim’s stomach! Wild!”

    Charming. The “War Council,” it should be noted, concluded by first condemning the United States for -- what else? -- its pervasive racism, then formally declaring war against what the Weathermen called “AmeriKKKa.” Rev. Wright would have understood.

    It was at the Chicago home of Ayers and Dohrn that Obama, then an up-and-coming “community organizer,” had his political coming out party in 1995. Not content with this rite of passage in Lefty World -- where unrepentant terrorists are regarded as progressive luminaries, still working “only to educate” -- both Obamas tended to the relationship with the Ayers.

    Barack Obama made a joint appearance with Bill Ayers in 1997 at a University of Chicago panel on the outrage of treating juvenile criminals as if they were, well, criminals. Obama apologists say, “So what? People appear with other people all the time.” Nice try. This panel was orchestrated by none other than Michelle Obama, then an Associate Dean of Student Services. Ayers didn’t happen to be there -- he was invited by the Obamas to educate students on the question before the house: “Should a Child Ever Be Called a ‘Super Predator?’”

    And here’s how the University’s press release chose to describe this would-be super predator:
    William Ayers, author of A Kind and Just Parent: The Children of Juvenile Court (Beacon Press, 1997), says “We should call a child a child. A 13-year-old who picks up a gun isn’t suddenly an adult. We have to ask other questions: How did he get the gun? Where did it come from?”

    Ayers, who spent a year observing the Cook County Temporary Juvenile Detention Center in Chicago, is one of four panelists who will speak on juvenile justice[.]
    The other panelists included “Illinois State Sen. Barack Obama … who is working to block proposed legislation that would throw more juvenile offenders into the adult system.” The goal was to promote change, to actuate the vision of “Chicago reformer” Jane Addams, who’d sought “the establishment of a separate court system for children which would act like a ‘kind and just parent’ for children in crisis.” Never mind the crises they’d caused the victims of their wanton murders and mayhem -- the fault for those, surely, was our downright mean society.

    The Ayers and Obama, meantime, kept up. There was yet another panel in 2002, Obama and Ayers waxing on “Intellectuals in Times of Crisis.” Dohrn, too, was asked to weigh in, on a panel addressing the question, “Why Do Ideas Matter?” I’m sure it was, er, wild.


    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/04/11/opinion/ ...
    • pigtown, on 04/16/2008, -0/+7How many people did those terrorists kill? Did you research it that far? Far enough to realize that the only people ever killed by a Weather Underground bomb were underground members? and at which point every attack was painstakingly planned not to kill anyone? and that they succeeded? have you looked at any of his work in the past 30 years? I'm not trying to justify their form of political expression. Regardless, it's property destruction, and someone could very well have been hurt. But the whole point your missing here is that people can be forgiven and reformed. As nice as it is to think we should lock up the baddies for ever, starting at age 13 if you wish, that's just not a real possibility. They will get out at some point, and we' should do what we can to make recidivism less likely. People can change their ways, and Ayers and Dohrn are proof. This is similar to the idea of meeting with foreign leaders who've already done bad things. If you want to make positive change happen, sometimes you have to meet with people with questionable attributes. Those people have since become something of respected members in their community. They're both college professors, after all. You really shouldn't just slap the label "terrorist" on a person and lock them up forever.
    • moonlessrat, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2Didn't even read your *****....this is Digg, not an essay writing competition. Keep it short and to the point (and preferrably researched). You wanna preach go stand on a pulpit somewhere.
  • m4532v, on 04/16/2008, -8/+1Desperate people do Desperate things! Nuff Said!
  • reaper527, on 04/16/2008, -13/+2"Because the same old Washington politics won't lower the price of gas"

    lowering the gas tax might help though, and obama sure as hell wouldn't push for that

    http://digg.com/business_finance/The_Percentage_of ...
    • troub, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2Nice try. "Low tax states are close to 40%". No, they're not. 30-something cents is closer to 10% in most places. The numbers on the map are cents per gallon, not cents per dollar. It's been a while since gas was a dollar per gallon.
      • reaper527, on 04/16/2008, -1/+1i misread and thought it was percent, not cents, but that doesn't change the fact that it is still fairly high.
  • IphtashuFitz, on 04/16/2008, -3/+9Whether or not Obama wins this fight and/or the Presidential race, I can only hope that other politicians around the country see how the American public is responding to his character. "Politics as usual" has got to go, and Obama is proving that Americans really and truly want that, and are willing to vote in new fresh blood to make that change.
  • MrFurious2k, on 04/16/2008, -14/+1Obama? Yawn.
  • ralph12c41, on 04/16/2008, -12/+2He can't win...unfortunately he is "politics as usual"
  • Rwned, on 04/16/2008, -7/+2I think that was the Ron Paul voiceover guy.
    • Bilabrin, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2No that guy sounded a little older.
  • Debmood, on 04/16/2008, -2/+11Anytime honesty is injected into a political contest, the opponent, like Hillary, will try anything to demean, divide, scare and put fear into the minds of the people. I know a lot of people from all walks of life. I have yet to meet a person who trust Hillary. I think Hillary forgot one major thing. People liked Bill not Hill. Although Bill left office in disgrace, being impeached by the U. S. House of Representatives for his lies to a Grand Jury and his love affair with a young girl.
    Hillary is a big liar. She makes up dark stories of people and herself that she knows is not true. She's too negative and divisive and she's counting on the voters of PA to remain ignorant of the facts.
    Every time Hillary starts to tell a story, I get a very bad chill because I know in my heart that Hillary is a pathological liar. She has no integrity or shame. When Hillary said she has felt the Holy Ghost with her sometimes, I bet God even jumped. Right after that, she went on the attack of Obama with more lies. I'm no genius, but I have sense enough to know that the Holy Ghost is not with her when she's lyin. That's Satan.
    • antipoet, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1Could it beeeeeeeeee....
    • cjshamrock, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1What the hell is Bill still doing with her? Now it's obvious why he slipped with Lewinsky, he's been married to an ambitious lying bitch all these years. And now we know why she endured all the humiliation back then... LOL... If I were him I'd be filling my mansion with hot girls and doing all kinds of mind-altering substances instead.
    • noahgelman, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1God to Hillary - "Hey, dont drag me down with you"
  • godfather2729, on 04/16/2008, -2/+1Does anyone else hate when they describe the video in full before the video itself without adding anything new?! And I still read through it in case I miss some crucial comment lol!
  • skeeterbug84, on 04/16/2008, -9/+2Obama is not a bad guy, but Democrats almost always raise taxes. How is raising taxes going to lower gas prices or help the economy?
    • Sirlolalot, on 04/16/2008, -1/+9How is not raising taxes & forever paying off debts with added interest going to help america?
      taxes are a pain, but they pay for some pretty important things
      • skeeterbug84, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1They also pay for a lot of not important things. I don't mind paying my share in taxes, but we are already being taxed extremely high as it is. We don't need more government programs and more taxes. While my question got buried by Obama fan boys, it was very serious. I would consider myself an independent. Also, you can't consider Bush a true conservative. He cut taxes and spent out our ass, the complete opposite of what needs to be done. We need to cut taxes AND cut spending. I also don't want the government to provide me with health care. It will be another government program our great grandchildren will have to fix.
    • bruce86, on 04/16/2008, -1/+9increase the value of our dollar? So we can reduce of a ridiculous amount of debt? Last time i checked paying for our bills is good policy
    • tehmacuser, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2how the hell else are we supposed to bring money back into our economy and pay off the 9.4 trillion dollars of debt?
    • tatinthehat, on 04/16/2008, -1/+4hay guys, let's just print more monies to pay off our debts

      [/sarcasm]
    • alk509, on 04/16/2008, -1/+1"How is raising taxes going to lower gas prices or help the economy?"

      By helping pay off the massive amounts of debt that we've accumulated in the last 8 years, perhaps? Are you really stupid, or did I just not get the sarcasm in your question?
      • skeeterbug84, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1Oh, you mean with his healthcare plan? Please give me an example of when raising taxes helped out a struggling economy. It was a serious question.
    • skeeterbug84, on 04/17/2008, -0/+1http://www.heritage.org/research/taxes/bg2001.cfm

      Read #6
  • randy1711, on 04/16/2008, -6/+1I don't expect this to make a difference but the "trusted" polls show Hillarys' lead growing in the rest of the primary. I know you guys will cling to your hope. I can't blame ya too much, you've invested a lot. The results will be my facts what will yours be? Pennsylvanians racist? Hillarys' evil attacks? ignorance? Maybe it should be the truth, we see this guy for what he his, an empty suit.
  • Ryopan, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1But remember, the polls have been consistently wrong on almost every primary. At this point it's safe to bet against them.
  • AvidPreatorian, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2all the comments above will more than ten negative diggs are a fine example of exactly what's wrong with America. those citizens give power to the fear machine. personally, i can't wait until that generation goes away, dies off. then, humanity as a whole can move on and with it, the empire of north America.

    They do not represent the America i fell in love when i immigrated here, that is not the America the world looked up to with hope.
  • Unearthly, on 04/16/2008, -5/+0So now Obama is attacking Hillary? Sounds like it to me.
    He should just be ignoring her like everyone.
    • vade79, on 04/16/2008, -0/+2Kerry ignored his attackers, remember how that turned out?
  • jerwin, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1OPERATION CHAOS!!!

    Seems to be working.
  • nomad3d, on 04/16/2008, -6/+0screw obama...
  • moush, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1The money he's raised really has shown though, he has excellent campaign strategists.
  • ruzg, on 04/16/2008, -3/+25 Reasons why Obama may NOT win the general election - even though he may be the better candidate
    1. He's fair, honest, and practical , However We The People seem to prefer ideology and fundamentalism
    2. McCain is aggressive and and temperamental - which will be perceived as "strength" by middle/swing states
    3. McCain is a war-hero - he claims to "know" what to do about Iraq
    4. Obama can't win Jewish Florida
    5. The saddest one of all - his name, childhood, and ethnicity - here in Texas I hear people cite all of these as justifiable reasons to support McCain - mostly in ignorance.
    • flossdaily, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1#1 - The fundamentalists aren't really that fond of McCain, I don't know if he can get them out and voting in record numbers the way that Bush did.

      #2 - I don't think that McCain's irritability is going to play that well. Cranky Old Man for president doesn't work well against Youthful And Charismatic. (See Kennedy v. Nixon)

      #3 - McCain has no problem with 100 more years in Iraq. That quote shows that he is out of touch even with most of the folks that are pro-war.

      #4 - Jews do not have any problem voting for a black man. I'll remind you that Jews were marching side by side with blacks during the civil rights movement.

      #5 - I used to worry that Obama's name would hurt him- but the more often we hear it, the more familiar it becomes. By the end of the general election campaign it won't sound foreign anymore. And anyone who is still so phobic of a foreign sounding name wasn't going to vote for the democratic candidate anyway.
      I think we've seen that the name "Clinton" has been more of a liability than the name "Obama".
  • dilpil1, on 04/16/2008, -3/+2Isn't this essentially an attack ad?
  • AvangionQ, on 04/16/2008, -1/+2"When we get past the politics of division and distraction and we start actually focusing on what we have in common, there's nothing we can't accomplish" Barack Obama ... anyone that brings the people together and removes degrees of artificial separation is worth the effort to support ...
  • ironpirate, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1Because the same old Washington politics won't lower the price of gas, or help our struggling economy and...... Neither can Obama. Saying change and new all the time doesnt "Change" things.
  • masterwalls69, on 04/16/2008, -0/+1Ron Paul makes Obama look like a typical politician. Obama is still owned and operated by the CFR. So it doesnt matter who wins..the same things will happen..NOTHING
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.