Clinton Obama
The Associated Press

The race is getting sharper in tone.

Featured Topic | Posted 32 weeks 4 hours ago

With Pennsylvania primary a day away, which candidate is most negative?

Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama swapped some of the most negative attacks of the campaign on Sunday, each unleashing television ads on Sunday that accused the other of maintaining ties to special interests they both claim to reject.

Clinton's ad: "In the last 10 years Barack Obama has taken almost $2 million from lobbyists, corporations and PACs. The head of his New Hampshire campaign is a drug company lobbyist, in Indiana an energy lobbyist, a casino lobbyist in Nevada."

Barack's ad: He "doesn't take money from special interest PACs or Washington lobbyists — not one dime." Clinton does, it added, and accused her of "eleventh-hour smears paid for by lobbyist money ...."

Which candidate is more negative? And does it make a difference?

Read More

Ben likes: After this, how much more do we need to know about Obama?

Jim Geraghty/The Campaign Spot

Do you, personally, know anyone who has ever tried to blow up the Pentagon? Do you know of anyone who actually brags that they did, successfully, plant and detonate a bomb at the Pentagon?

Do you, personally, know anyone who has gotten someone killed in an explosion because of their actions?

Even if these bombings and attempted bombings occurred forty years ago, is that the sort of thing you could forgive, and/or dismiss? Could you shake hands with this person? Go to a party at their house? Accept a donation from them? If you knew this about a person, could you look at them and forget that they gathered the explosives, assembled the wires and the parts, scoped out their target, planted it, and watched it detonate with excitement?

Do you relate to having people like that in your social circle?

No, I don't, either.

Read More

Joel likes: The road map to defeat

Bob Herbert/New York Times

The Democrats are doing everything they can to blow this presidential election. This is a skill that comes naturally to the party. There is no such thing as a can’t-miss year for the Democrats. They are truly gifted at finding ways to lose.

So what are the Democrats doing? The Clintons are running around with flamethrowers, gleefully trying to incinerate the prospects of the party’s leading candidate, Barack Obama. As Bill Clinton put it last month: “If a politician doesn’t want to get beat up, he shouldn’t run for office

The issues still favor the Democrats. More and more Americans are losing their jobs, and many of those still employed are working fewer hours and cashing smaller paychecks. Vacation plans are being curtailed because of declining family income and sky-high gasoline prices. The value of the family home is eroding.

Instead of capitalizing on the political advantages presented by these issues, the Democrats, with their increasingly small-minded approach to this election, are squandering them.

Read More

Where do you stand on this issue?

Click on the graph to cast your vote.
average
vote
your vote
  • Delicious
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • Propeller
  • Reddit
  • Magnoliacom
  • Newsvine
  • Furl
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Yahoo
  • Technorati
  • Icerocket

Thoughts

too many red flags

Submitted on April 22nd, 2008 by Phantasia

I just wanted to mention how ironic the statement "too many RED flags" about Obama is.

Seriously people, don't believe everything you hear and read. Do your own research, then you become really truly empowered when someone asks you how you know something. Rather than having to say, oh some person posted it on this site I go on. Or having to lie and pretend you got it from a reputable source. Get it from a reputable source, or a few sources, and speak what you know is the truth.

Too many red flags!

Submitted on April 22nd, 2008 by koolmom21

He knows to many people who are terrorist and allot of his lies are adding up.

People are still wondering. We have heard to many times from the terrorist themselves that they will sneak into our country and destroy her from within. Some people do not trust Sen. Obama because of this.. People are wondering if he spent 20 years at Trinity church to use as a cover because he has a hidden agenda. He felt right at home with the negative talk (I.E. hate for America's ways, hate for the White race ect..) and was happy there. Some even wonder if the leaders of his church are apart of his hidden agenda.
History taught us something. That the terrorist plan ahead and they are patient like a loin who is about to jump on his prey.

There are many terrorist in this world and not all of them are Muslim.

I am not voting for him.
Too many red flags!

I like more negative?

Submitted on April 21st, 2008 by chief28.ret

Which candidate is more negative? And does it make a difference?

I'm not sure it makes a difference, but I think Hillary has been a bit more negative than Obama. T

The interesting thing to me is that normally, negative opponent-bashing disenfranchises voters and thus affects voter turnout. But in this election, it seems to be creating more interest? Are we so accustomed to dirt that it now intrigues us to the point where we actually need it to help us decide who the least objectionable person is? as opposed to the most qualified?

Hillary's campaign is in debt

Submitted on April 21st, 2008 by kevinkind

Why should we trust Hillary to save our nations economy when she can't even prevent her own campaign finances from going into the red?

If it'sTuesday

Submitted on April 21st, 2008 by John 2000

This Must be Thank God!

Join the Debate

Start your own blog, comment on topics, and let your voice be heard. Start your free account now!

User login

login

Ads by Google