Is this the "OBAMA Buckeye State Blog"?

It would be redundant to say "Pamphleteers of the Obama Revolution".   Obama's campaign is the revolution.

If this blog were a pro-Hillary shill, we'd have to rename it "Pamphleteers of the same old thing that never changes and the same old people that brought us vice presidential nominee Leiberman and the same old partisan sniping and the same old politics as usual and the same old nineteensixties us against them mentality and the same old thing in general non-revolution".

We'd have to get a larger masthead.

loser

What's that sound? Oh yeah. The wheels coming off the Obama-Rama Carnival Wagon.

"...1960's us against them mentality..." - you ignorant azz. Youth is  not a class, so get over your navel-gazing self already.

In case the Obama-Rama Carnival Show failed to break it down for you kool-aid drinker, many of the battles being waged today have had to be defended against the right wing nut machine for the last 40 years!  The lesson that only history - and age - would teach a smart person is that every generation will have to defend them - or forfeit them!

Afirmative action, choice, protecting our Constitutional Rights, equal pay for equal work, child care, right to organize, union busting, GOP corruption - just to name a few of the battles that you impatient children don't seem to think are important I guess.

 Your problem - AND OBAMA'S TOO - is the intellectually dishonest way you have propped up your candidate with straw dog arguments about "turning pages" and other platitude crap lines.  NO WAY ARE DEMOCRATS GOING TO TURN THIS COUNTRY OVER TO THE IMMATURE JUDGMENT OF A BUNCH OF NARCISSISTIC 20-SOMETHINGS AND MEDDLING INDEPENDENT VOTER INTERLOPERS.

Usually I'm more polite than that, but you are ranting and if we met in person I'm confident that you wouldn't have the nerve to talk to people like that.

It's typical of someone like you to blindly support a candidate without regard to that person's ability to win in November just because of your own pride and inability to recognize naked ambition and sense of entitlement.

You're so petty and lazy that you cannot acknowledge that the long track record of Hillary and Bill Clinton stand in exact contrast to everything you listed above as important issues to fight about.

I won't list all the problems with the potential Mrs. Clinton campaign against John McCain, I'll leave that to the people who've been paying attention for the last 16 years that they've been on the national scene. 

Hillary Clinton is a good worker and blah blah blah, but the fact is that she's a REPUBLICAN in democrat's clothes. 

Did she learn about union bashing while she was on the board of Walmart?  Or is that where she learned that free trading with communist China would be a good way to undercut American manufacturers and screw American workers and flood our nation with crap?

If you want to nominate a pro-war Senator why not get behind John McCain?  Afterall, he has LOTS of experience.  In fact, Hillary Clinton has a lot of nerve comparing herself as FIRST LADY to a guy who was a pilot, was captured, refused early release even under years of solitary and brutal torture, and later has spent a couple decades in the Congress. 

What was Hillary's big challenge?  Oh yeah, HER HUSBAND!  She's so experienced that her own husband let her go on national TV and support him in his stupid, childish, selfish lies, and she couldn't see that coming.  But I'm sure that would never happen again, after all, if the First Husband disagreed with Mrs. President, I'm sure that he'd go ahead and defer to her and would never try to undermine her or lie to her to get his way.

Oh, I forgot the big challenge of finding her billing records from when she was in the Rose Law Firm while her and her husband were being investigated for the Whitewater real estate deal.  Where were those records again? 

Oh, and she did battle with all those special interests that were ruining health insurance for Americans 16 years ago.  That worked out real well, I'm glad we let Hillary be in charge of that great revolution in health care that happened 16 years ago....

She's down in delegates.  She won enough for you to gloat today like a jerkoff, but let us remember that it isn't about you and me expressing our views here in this blog. 

I hope you'll get a clue and learn how to talk to people,

in the meantime, Fuck off.

Thank you.

Jean...I wonder...if WE were to meet in person...would you talk non-stop for 12 minutes and make random points while using profanity?

Would you kiss me on the lips if I tipped you extra?

This is somewhat off topic, but since this blog seems to attract a lot of young voters and Obama seems to have motivated a lot of youth and there are lots of Obama fans here, it seems to fit (if you hold your head sideways). It is not intended to be pro- or anti- any candidate.

In almost every election, young voters seems to turn out in record numbers during the primaries and at political rallies. Then it seems that they DON'T turn out at the general election.  I'd have to go back and dig to find statistics, but this is based on my (admittedly an old man's) recollection.

My question to you, the young voters, is why is this so? My guess is that it doesn't apply to most of the ones that post here, but I'm hoping to gain some insight in general.

The same thing held true when I was a young voter and I never understood it.

It is easy to go to a rally. Everyone is excited, wants to get a chance to see the candidate (someone more famous than their parents) maybe you go with some friends, maybe you go with a date.

Its exciting.

The election....not so exciting.

There are NO candidates present, no "brushes with greatness", you don't go with friends, you don't take a date, there is no drunken party festivities  afterwards. (for most people) There is no social approval or dissaproval. 

No one sees you vote except the old lady working the poll and no one gives you a high five when your done or lets you take a body-shot off their breasts. (just a sticker that says, "I voted.")

"Where is my polling place anyways? Oh shit! I am registered at my Mom & Dad's address back home, I have to vote provisional?" "That means my vote doesn't count unless there is a tie, right?

"I can't take off time from school to drive back to my parents, I HAVE CLASS! If I vote here my vote will only be provisional anyways."

"Plus I have to get up early and find the place, go there stand in line....and awe...It provisional anyways."   

I used to register people to vote on campuses all across Ohio and SOME of the kids are so dumb when they tell you "I'm registered back home." It gets so frustrating when you know DAMNED WELL they aren't going to drive all the way home just to vote on election day.

Most kids go home home in a few weeks for Thanksgiving to see their families so why go home for election. Election is on Tuesday, which means they have to leave vote and drive home to be in class on Wednesday. What is the point for a provisional vote? THAT's for the kids that are responsible enough to want to vote.

That is why I believe younger kids don't come out to vote, being inexperienced, uninformed, unprepared and basically "young."

Who can fault youth for being youth?

At least with most of your ideas. The question is, with Obama gathering the majority of the youth vote, will 2008 be any different than previous years? Can Obama win without the youth?

I wouldn't put it past Hillary to appeal all the way to the supreme court, past the credentialing committee, if necessary.

It disappoints me when people see a hopeful candidate like Obama and forget THIS IS AMERICAN POLITICS, the gloves are off. (even if you keep yours on) Negative information an an opponent is the fastest way to gain a huge point lead in the polls.

Obama is no doubt a good candidate, he offers lots of things that the American public wants in a politician. New faces, new ideas and a willingness to bring those things to Washington. What people forget is the adage, "Most politicians go to Washington thinking it is a cesspool, and return thinking it is a hot tub."

The problem with Obama is that he offers very limited experience and sometimes speaks in generalities that are too broad and make him sound naive about foreign and domestic policy.

He could very well do a fantastic job...but he underestimates HOW BAD HILLARY CLINTON wants the nomination, how bad Bill wants to get back in the White House OR his wish to be Secretary General of the U.N. which a Hillary win would assist him with.

Just the FACT that Obama thinks Hillary is going to play fair and not pull out all the stops and take this fight, to the convention, AND TO the Supreme Court if necessary makes Obama the less qualified candidate. If he cannot battle Hillary, how could he take on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad?

Which leads me to the next issue for Obama which would be a George W. Bush "October surprise" strike against Iran.

A new conflict, before August, in the name of stopping Iran's nuclear program would effectively neuter Obama. Nothing scares the American psyche more than nuclear war and Obama would be end up defending his foreign policy (or lack thereof).

Obama makes a terrible mistake of pronouncing Pak-es-staan. Most Americans don't pronounce it that way (correctly) and it causes a disconnect with many regular Joes..."He's not like me "syndrome. Since he is not like me, he must be different. Obama makes respectful gestures to forgiven cultures and nations and his expression of a wiliness to enter conversations with groups hostile to America. Larry the Cable Guy, doesn't understand WHY anyone would do that. Just a few reasons why Blue Collar America prefers Hillary.

Hillary relies (as many politicians and campaign managers) on what I call the X-Factor. There is always SOME unknown piece of information or circumstance, floating around that can diminish a candidates ability to be elected and win the election for an opponent. Good campaign managers have learned to depend on 11th hour, 11:59:59 reprieve.

The Republicans and Hillary are sitting on information that could create an X-Factor event. Information is dependent on timing, when those tidbits are released, to maximize their destructive effect. Every competent campaign stockpiles opposition research in advance and there is no doubt a 3-ring binder on Obama (The Republican's have a 1,000 page dossier on Obama) floating around that is loaded with embarrassing information that the American public is oblivious to.

White America is disgusted by the display of the congregation response to Father Michael Pfleger's ridicule of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton at Trinity United Church of Christ, on Sunday. It is not about the Father's comments, it is about the overwhelming positive response of the congregation. This is Obama's church? How could Obama not know his church is more that black progressive advancing the cause of African Americans but hateful toward white America? (There is also a rumor of a video of Michelle Obama in the pulpit railing against "Whitey." Matt Drudge has been asked point blank if he has the video and refused to deny the videos existence or his possession of it....the Hillary Campaign may have it in their possession)

Obama doesn't have one of those binders on Hillary because, Hillary has the benefit of all her laundry being aired already. New information on Obama is "news" to us, so it can be more damaging than if Obama mention "White Water." Mention of "White Water" causes the American public to tune out because of most people have reached "media overload" on the subject.

I get so frustrated that people don't pay enough attention to politics and then think they know everything by what they read in the news. A news paper is the LAST place people should be getting an education.

With Hillary, voters know what they might be getting, more BJ's in the Oval Office, but a better economy and a face saving end to the war. With Obama there is only the prospect of "hope". Hope won't fly with blue collar America. (That is what the Church Channel is for) They need JOBS, better education, lower fuel prices....etc.

Everyone knows Obama will end the war...but will he do it in a way that doesn't embarrass John Q. Public or get more of lower and middle class Americans CHILDREN (that joined for college benefits) killed. Or bring violence back to American soil. These are the issues discussed in coffee and barber shops all over America. There is NO doubt about Hillary and the war, no one doubts that Hillary will fire a nuke at anyone (including Bill)
She is Hill the Shrill!

Would Obama use a nuke if a situation called for it?
I think the answer is, no.

Here is an example of what I mean, Watergate. Why do people forget the circumstances of Watergate? I believe THAT is not even the lowest level Hillary will stoop to win the nomination, and maybe that is why she deserves it, IT IS AMERICAN POLITICS...It is like Obama and bowling...if you can't bowl...don't play.

Hillary handpicked James Carville and George Stephanopoulos to run Bill's campaign and she hasn't picked anyone less qualified than them for her own.

Currently, Hillary is looking like a conservative and Obama looks like the elite liberal. Hillary's campaign has effectively moved Hillary to the center making her appear more conservative than Obama.

McCain is looking like a soft republican and he isn't getting good response in his own party.

If it comes down to a white old dude and a young black man, the old white dude will win. There are too many closet racist to elect an African American President right now.

If the race comes down to old white dude against a lady, the history making lady will win. (Even though the African American would also be history making, white blue collar people will support Hillary because McCain is to conservative-light, "Less filling and....doesn't taste so great")

If Obama wins this nomination and loses the election, Hillary will have the biggest "See I told you so" in history, and win the White House in 2012. And Hillary will either not throw her support behind Obama, or do so begrudgingly and drive white female voters to McCain.

I meant this as a response to the post above:

Speaking of getting to know candidates

I assume you are referring to the lastest smear tactics regarding a memo that supposedly makes Barrack look like a liar. Well, you can believe what you like, but for the record: Those comments were misinterpreted by Joseph DeMora (the guy that wrote the memo). Go to: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=4375665

Barrack and this NAFTA subject came up once before and it was dealt with properly. Go to: http://www.cnsnews.com/viewPolitics.asp?Page=/Politics/archive/200802/POL200802286b.html

Fact is that Obama cannot possible secure the nomination before the convention, either, so I don't see why you blame this solely on Clinton.

McCain's three month "head start" isn't going to matter much since all the oxygen in the racxe will be consumed on the Democratic side.  McCain cannot fundraise as well as either Clinton or Obama.

Hillary can pick up Ohio and Florida.  Two states that neither Kerry or Gore won.

According to the latest poll from Rasmussen, Obama has a whopping +2 on the favorability rating and trails Clinton on national Democratic voters preference for the nomination by 48-43.  According to Gallup's latest daily tracking, their tied.  And that's BEFORE yesterday's results.

Obama may have been the front runner, but he hasn't put the nomination away.  Clinton has every reason to stay in the race.

Ted will deliver SEO for Clinton (or Obama) in November.  That will negate the typical Republican advantage in SWO.  The Democratic nominee will take central and NEO.

It's not that hard to see how Clinton can win the general.  You just don't want to try.

I didn't KNOW John Kerry was going to win in '04, and was actually deeply concerned with how poorly an effort he ran in Ohio.

McCain doesn't have the funds to staff Ohio for eight months and he's still presently tied to FEC primary spending limits.

I understand the concern, but I don't share the panic, yet.