I surported Brother Barck from the beginning. I did not surport Jackson or Sharpton because I knew they would only lead us into the clutches of the paltform writers who would ignore our interests. Now, that the primary is all but over, we find ourselves unable to protect Brother Barck from the embrass of Miss Hilary. That is a problem.

All I can say is I am going to watch them very, very closely. If they compromise Brother Barack too much, I promise you, I will not surport that platform. I could surport a Romney ticket. But, I do not like a ticket led by McCain. I like Huchabee. But, I do not trust him. But, before I will vote to oppress the Palestinians anymore, I will just boycott the election. There are some things, like peace, that we can no longer afford to play games with.

Barack Obama for Democratic nominee

Endorsements for president 2008

February 3, 2008

Democrats preparing to vote in Tuesday's California primary can mark their ballots with confidence, knowing that either candidate would make a strong nominee and, if elected, a groundbreaking leader and capable president. But just because the ballot features two strong candidates does not mean that it is difficult to choose between them. We urge voters to make the most of this historic moment by choosing the Democrat most focused on steering the nation toward constructive change: We strongly endorse Barack Obama.

The U.S. senator from Illinois distinguishes himself as an inspiring leader who cuts through typical internecine campaign bickering and appeals to Americans long weary of divisive and destructive politics. He electrifies young voters, not because he is young but because he embodies the desire to move to the next chapter of the American story. He brings with him deep knowledge on foreign relations and on this nation's particular struggles with identity and opportunity. His flair for expression, both in print and on the stump, too easily leads observers to forget that Obama is a man not just of style but of substance. He's a thoughtful student of the Constitution and an experienced lawmaker in his home state and, for the last three years, in the Senate.

On policy, Obama and his rival Democratic candidate, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, are a hairsbreadth apart. Both vow to pull troops from Iraq. Both are committed to healthcare reform. Both offer candid critiques of the failed George W. Bush presidency, its blustering adventurism, its alienating stance toward other countries and its cavalier disregard for sacred American values such as individual liberty and due process of law.

With two candidates so closely aligned on the issues, we look to their abilities and potential as leaders, and their record of action in service of their stated ideals. Clinton is an accomplished public servant whose election would provide familiarity and, most important, competence in the White House, when for seven years it has been lacking. But experience has value only if it is accompanied by courage and leads to judgment.

Nowhere was that judgment more needed than in 2003, when Congress was called upon to accept or reject the disastrous Iraq invasion. Clinton faced a test and failed, joining the stampede as Congress voted to authorize war. At last week's debate and in previous such sessions, Clinton blamed Bush for abusing the authority she helped to give him, and she has made much of the fact that Obama was not yet in the Senate and didn't face the same test. But Obama was in public life, saw the danger of the invasion and the consequences of occupation, and he said so. He was right.

Obama demonstrates as well that he is open-eyed about the terrorist threat posed to the nation, and would not shrink from military action where it is warranted. He does not oppose all wars, he has famously stated, but rather "dumb wars." He also has the edge in economic policy, less because of particular planks in his platform than because of his understanding that some liberal orthodoxies developed during the last 40 years have been overtaken by history. He offers leadership on education, technology policy and environmental protection unfettered by the positions of previous administrations.

By contrast, Clinton's return to the White House that she occupied for eight years as first lady would resurrect some of the triumph and argument of that era. Yes, Bill Clinton's presidency was a period of growth and opportunity, and Democrats are justly nostalgic for it. But it also was a time of withering political fire, as the former president's recent comments on the campaign trail reminded the nation. Hillary Clinton's election also would drag into a third decade the post-Reagan political duel between two families, the Bushes and the Clintons. Obama is correct: It is time to turn the page.

An Obama presidency would present, as a distinctly American face, a man of African descent, born in the nation's youngest state, with a childhood spent partly in Asia, among Muslims. No public relations campaign could do more than Obama's mere presence in the White House to defuse anti-American passion around the world, nor could any political experience surpass Obama's life story in preparing a president to understand the American character. His candidacy offers Democrats the best hope of leading America into the future, and gives Californians the opportunity to cast their most exciting and consequential ballot in a generation.

In the language of metaphor, Clinton is an essay, solid and reasoned; Obama is a poem, lyric and filled with possibility. Clinton would be a valuable and competent executive, but Obama matches her in substance and adds something that the nation has been missing far too long -- a sense of aspiration.

Barack Obama for Democratic nominee - Los Angeles Times
--------------------


Nig endorsement there. I'd be surprosed if he doesnt win Californa. 3% down in the polls at the moment. He has been getting crazy amount of endorsements from important organisations. I know endorsement s sometimes arent worth the airtime( e.g An Coulter endorsing Clinton) but I feel these will have an effect

Yep. My gut tells me that if he had been a Senator at the time, he may not have voted against the resolution that gave Bush authority to go to war. I think he would have not voted that way for the same reason Hillary didn't vote that way. What my girl from SC stated in that quote I mentioined earlier, about "Black and female, "first", candidates feeling the need to be more white male than a white male, which is why she has no use for them,(and why i see her point).

When Hillary was elected to the Senate, everybody said she wouldn't get anything done, she's too divisive, she won't work with Republicans, she's a knee jerk liberal. WHat did she do when she got in there? Work with a number of Republican congressmen on various bills and projects, and become FRIENDS with them;even, like John McCain. She felt compelled to prove that she wasn't what everybody thought she was, so she bent over backwards to prove them wrong. instead of going with her gut instinct and common sense that Bush was full of sh*t about WMD's intelligence and his real agenda, she went along with it, "gave him the benefit of the doubt". Even her conservative detractors were astonished and stopped dead in their tracks for a while.

It's the same reason Obama felt compelled to kinda/sorta praise Ronald Reagan, or not demonize him(like he should be demonized). He's trying to show that he can get along with Republicans, and bring them over to the Dem side, show that he's not some raging liberal who hates all conservatives on sight, like Hillary is viewed as doing.

Well I"m sorry, I don't want to coalesce/hold hands with people who dont' think Ronald Reagan was "so bad". Their interests and mine ARE diametrically opposed. I"m good with that. Conservatives were able to effect their agenda without trying to buddy up with people whose interests were not the same as theirs. They may have used fear and divisiveness to get it done, but they got it done, and they didn't have to compromise any of their "conservative principles" to do so. I wish Democrats would grow a pair, already.........

I disagree with the premise that Hillary can't claim to have experience because she was wife to a President,or that she's claiming to have experience JUST because she was First Lady. First of all, much of her experience PREDATES her time in the White House. 2nd of all, There is no way you can compare her to traditional first ladies, ones that preceded her or the one who came after. While in the White House, her husband appointed her to take on certain projects like healthcare. That's why when it failed, SHE got the blame, not him. THroughout his 2 terms, there were people who were concerned about her being CO-PRESIDENT, because she was so active in policy and decision making and EVERYONE knew it.

Plenty of people didn't like it, "I voted for him, not HER", was the prevailing attitude of many people, so this idea that she was just sitting around coming up with decor and dinner party ideas for the White House like traditioinal first ladies has no basis in reality. Her knowledge of policy and substance in these debates let's you know that. It's clear she's no lightweight in those matters. Obama does well to hang with her, truth be told. Now if you wanna say well the stuff she presided over failed, that argument can be made, but the argument of "she was JUST his wife", can't be made. It wasn't made when THEY were in office,lol, so it doesn't hold water now in revisionist history land,imo.

JFK appointed his brother Robert Kennedy attorney general. Robert Kennedy would not have been appointed to that position were it not for good ol nepotism. That's one of the reasons that people like J Edgar Hoover and LBJ hated his guts and never fully respected him. Does that mean that Robert Kennedy wasn't a REAL attorney general, who could claim experience in that role, when he later ran for president?(ask the Mafia types he made it his business to hound, or the people who dealt with him on a lot of the Civil Rights movement struggles, he seemed and felt like a real attorney general to them).

I think we have to understand, Barack can only help us as much as he is able. He can't be a Malcolm X President.

Mr. Obama Church is five minutes away from my house.

Trinity United Church of Christ

We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian... Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain "true to our native land," the mother continent, the cradle of civilization. God has superintended our pilgrimage through the days of slavery, the days of segregation, and the long night of racism. It is God who gives us the strength and courage to continuously address injustice as a people, and as a congregation. We constantly affirm our trust in God through cultural expression of a Black worship service and ministries which address the Black Community.

Whatever. All that public stuff won't matter worth a squat when it comes times for the election. Arnold the Guvernator publically said he would not endorse anyone. So did Ted Kennedy. What happens is the party leadership picks the eventual nominee. And right now, Barack has a 50-50 chance. If he is within 100 delegates on SuperTuesday, he will end up being the nominee. Because every primary after that will be an uphill battle for her. Hillary has to beat him badly. She can't just eek it out.

Barack's argument is just too compelling. Hillary voted for the war, becaue she felt it was the way to go at the time based on the politics. He did not sway, period. Now she wants to go up against McCain. It ain't gonna work.

And that is the argument he is repeatily making behind closed doors.

This won't be about gender or race. It will be about the Iraq War. Because in order for the Democrats to win, they must run a candidate who opposed it from the start. Any thing short of that just opens the door for McCain.

And don't even get me started on Hillary as a polarizing figure. She had that baggage for years already.

If Huckerbee drops out( which he would be stupid too) Hilary/Obama will be up against Romney

Looking at the polls huckerbee is splitting the vote everywhere