-----I mean a female president could be the most powerful change we have had in a long time. An inpirational president could lead to a new democratic coalition------

There are four women heads of state who came to power, only because they were daughters or widows of powerful men holding the same office. Indira Gandhi of India, Benazir Bhutto of Pakistan, Bandarnaika of Sri Lanka and Corizan Aquino of the Phillipines. None of these women would have had a donkey's chance in hell if they had somehow managed to come to power in their own steam. And such is the case with Hillary Clinton. Dynastic power it seems is now taking a stronghold in American Presidential politics. George W Bush and if Hillary Clinton will give us a total of 28 years of dynastic rule.

none of these women made any lasting change or any improvements in the lives of people in terms of healthcare, education and housing.

So I suppose we women will reach equality in the famous words of the great Bella Abzug

"Our struggle today is not to have a female Einstein get appointed as an assistant professor. It is for a woman schlemiel to get as quickly promoted as a male schlemiel."

how could Americans even cast a vote for George W Bush, a visibly inarticulate, coke addled son of a former CIA oprative and one term President of the United States? That Gore, a seemingly talented pol with lots more experience lost an election to dirty politics and media collaboration. OK the first time around could have been a colossal mistake, but winning a second term left the rest of the world convinced that Americans are moving toward a fascist state.

The world outside the United States is waiting with baited breath to see if the promise of America is indeed viable in which an African American is judged not by the color of his skin but by the content of his character. They see in Obama a freshness and inclusiveness that does not bang the drums of imperialism that has left the world wary of the United States of America.

Hillary is not the answer. She represents an old kind of politics, a politics of exclusive right to govern (arrogant dynastic rule), lobbyists writing legislation in the senate and with their surrogate Israel, keeping the Middle East in a constant state of turmoil.

The biggest mistake that Hillary and her supporters are perpetrating on Obama and his supporters is the ridicule and mockery of hope. This kind of blatant snarkery is coming from the top, Hillary herself.

An Obama mailer uses dubious, disputed statistics about how much the trade deal hurt Ohio workers.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/118228

_____I mean how many failures = give up? Guiliani is done and he had far fewer defeats than this old hag...er I mean this previous First Lady.______

I am an Obama supporter and I find this reference to Hillary as an old hag, quite offensive.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/118240/output/print

Forget tonight. She could win 16 straight and still lose.

By Jonathan Alter

Newsweek Web Exclusive

Updated: 11:23 AM ET Mar 4, 2008

I think I heard that on MSNBC from their exit polling. I hope I am wrong. I would hate to think that racism was a factor in determining who to vote for in Ohio. Somebody, please let me know that I misheard.

I asked for verification. Would I have done that if I wanted to start a rumor?

You need to get over your hatred of me.

In a way, Hillary going negative and winning by foul means, is but training grounds for Obama who everyone has been saying, is a quick learner. So now, he will have to learn to counterpunch, counter her claims and raise her own inadequacies to become President of the United States. It is sad that in this country, attack ads do the work in place of good sound debates and position papers. George the first became President virtually on attack ads, the famous video of Dukakis in the tank and Willie Horton. George the second became President by attacking Gore on intellectualism and promoted his own brand of anti-intellectual rhetoric. The second time around he swift boated John Kerry and the same Onians were critical in electing George the second time around.

Hillary has to win at any cost and that for me has become the main reason to switch to Obama. She knows the value of dirty tricks and is adept at it and has no compunction. But is this kind of win, really a victory? I am confident that she will continue to punch below the belt and Obama has sworn that he will not play dirty. It is a shame that Hillary had to resort to fearmongering and name calling to garner wins. But win she did and we will all have to live with this kind of politics as a staple in our democracy.

http://action.credomobile.com/sirota/2008/03/the_clintonlieberman_connectio.html

Confusion and misinformation are two of the most powerful weapons in a desperate politician's arsenal. They were used by Joe Lieberman in the 2006 general election against Ned Lamont, and exit polls suggest that they helped Hillary Clinton blast her way through yesterday's primary in Ohio.

Both Obama and Hillary had agreed to the rules. Now that MI and FL could potentially benefit Hillary is no reason to change the game. Should Hillary prevail on this, she can most definitely kiss Obama supporters goodbye in the general elections. This will most certainly pave the way for a third Bush term.