Although I wasn't tuned in to all the debate, based on what I heard Hillary did only a little, if any, better than Obama in last night's debate.

Perhaps Hillary's biggest challenge in relation to Obama is this: neither the media, candidates, nor campaign consultants are going to really go after a black candidate, nor most women, for that matter (excepting Hillary Clinton, apparently).

They handle them with kid gloves. Even when there is criticism, it is muted, indirect, and delivered with an apologetic mien. Look what happened when Bill and Hillary ventured a statement or two in that direction. They were effectively silenced, and even apologized.

Barack Obama has a manufactured persona of the first water, and the personality and program it masks is most certainly one most Americans will not buy if they become aware of it.

The only way to defeat Barack Obama is to expose him, his associations with the likes of Saul Alinsky, the 1950s radical bombers in Chicago, his record of radicalism and inconsistency (flip-flopping on questins), lifestyle vs. political positions (an elitist life while organizing and championing "the poor") tough questions on affirmative action, compulsory national service (so dear to many liberal hearts as a way to mobilize and socialize the young), immigration, supreme court appointees, the cultural revolution (Mr. Obama, will you champion the culturan revolution, as I suspect, or will you call for this divisive and destructive hysteria to end?), what he intends to do in Iraq--get out now, get out slowly, or like McCain stay there a hundred years? The list is long.

Barack has had not only a free ride, but a lot of media support in creating his political persona, and it will take awhile to expose the truth behind the smile, especially since the media will be an obstacle to illumination.

In fact, it is too late for Hillary to expose Obama, even if she had the maans and desire to do so. If the Republicans expect to win the election, they will have to go where none of them want to tread. And they will have to start now and keep at it, to unmask Obama, whom I consider a political descendant of Vladimir Lenin.

I mean, my God, this guy Barrack Obama claims he was a southsider activist but quit after 3 months and took a safe office job.

Then instead of helping the poor who voted for him, he gave a no-bid contract to a big Muslim slumlord who ran with the money, abandoned the project, and cut off the heat of the tenants living there in the dead of winter in Chicago.

Then instead of protecting their water, he changes a key nuclear bill that would prohibit dumping into a mere "suggestive" legilature.

Then there's the big fat mysterious salary increases his public attorney wife got.

The one other noteable thing he did was bribe the indicted slumlord into co-signing for his 2.5 million dollar house.

Seems to me the only one Hussein-Obama knows how to take care of is himself.

I notice not ONE of you can cite a state that Kerry/Gore lost that Obama can win. And since he's going to LOSE New Jersey, California

Let me get this straight, you're actually claiming Obama's gonna lose in the general in California? To John McCain?

In the primary, Obama got 1,901,405 votes in California to Hillary's 2,318,001. That's a 43-52% split. McCain only got 1,097,856 votes to Romney's 901,922. Obama got almost exactly as many votes in the primary as McCain and Romney combined. Unless every single person who voted for Hillary stays home on election day, which seems unlikely, Obama stands of good chance of whipping McCain like a rented mule in the general election, at least in California.

But please, please don't let any facts get in the way of yet another ill-tempered, irrational Anonymous screed.

I agree that Hussein-Obama has gotten away with a teflon charade for this long by the press. None of his shady charlatan background from slumlord connections to fancy houses and handing out taxpayer funded contracts to crooks (Cheney and Halliburton got NUTHING on Hussein-Obama) and associations with domestic terrorists.

But the point is it's been deliberate by the press. They do not go easy on women; especially Hillary Clinton. They did all they could to take her down and to prop up this .... crooked lightweight, knowing he'd be effortless to take down once she was out of the way.

And he will be. He won't get a free ride. He's a total crook.

So, to recap, we've established Barrack Hussein-Obama as

1. A crook
2. A thief
3. A fraud
4. anti-semite
5. A traitor. Willing to bribe indicated friends and associates and to turn on elected officials who helped him.
6. self-entitled
7. willing to waste taxpayer dollars for his own benefits
8. historical associations with domestic terrorists.
9. a liar
10. A shitty representative to the poor

That's okay. People make spelling mistakes.

Take the Anonymous below who spells plagiarized as "plagurized." My point is not that many Obama supporters are ignorant in all things but just that they are ignorant on the issue of plagiarism. What can one do? One wants to educate people. I would even like you to understand why what Obama did with Deval Patrick's speech was indeed plagiarism. It is sad to see someone as intelligent as you obviously choose to remain willfully ignorant.

Below is an example of NOT plagiarism. It is very close to what ignorant Obama supporters like that Anonymous are accusing Hillary of having done in her closing remarks in the debate. Now perhaps they can tell me, is it or is it not plagiarism:

From http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/

Tonight, Sen. Obama said: “In Youngstown, Ohio, I talked to workers who have seen their plants shipped overseas due to consequences of poor deals it's like NAFTA that have literally seen equipment unbolted from the floors of factories and shipped to China.” [CNN Univision Debate, 2/21/08]

John Kerry in 2004: “What does it mean in America today when Dave McCune, a steel worker I met in Canton, Ohio, saw his job sent overseas and the equipment in his factory literally unbolted, crated up, and shipped thousands of miles away along with that job?” [Kerry Remarks, Democratic Convention, 7/29/04]

So is that plagiarism? Or is it not? Did Obama plagiarize again? Not in the above, but he did plagiarize when he used the words of Deval Patrick without attribution.