...doesn't suggest that he's drinking kool aid, I'd say he's been droppin' acid.

I just read it and from what I can tell, there is a lot of speculation and innuendo but no evidence of any wrong doing by Obama. He has already said his involvement with Rezko was a "bone-headed mistake." I have no reason yet to not take him at his word.

I guess I'm just not seeing how this fishing expedition is any different than the way that they went after the Clintons for Whitewater, for the Arkansas State Troopers, and for Monica Lewinsky. Maybe, if there is anything to be made of this, Obama will emerge stronger, just like the Clintons.

This Democratic race is not Obama's because of a great ground campaign or even because of stated promises delivered in sermon invoking style.

Here is why an unknown only months ago is a serious contender for the most powerful position available to any human being....

http://pacificgatepost.blogspot.com/2008/02/obama-social-phenomenon.html

There is something disconcerting about so little experience, track record and opaque motives being another notch in the legacy of the outgoing President.

Most voters won't even notice this article. Bush was so extremely sleazy when he ran in 2000, it didn't matter. Most Americans don't read anyway. The article was actually kind of favorable to Obama...a "cut above." I don't think it shows any "smoking gun." Hillary has WAY more baggage than Obama, simply because she has been in the game longer.

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/03/01/7397/

Whether a metaphor or dogged defiance, she is clinging by tooth and nail. She is a grinding politician who has no where but to go up at this point. Her wrong headed miscalculation of Obama was based on sheer pragmatism...Obama has caught our imagination, this issue of experience is moot in the light of hope. Ms. Clinton is a politician, and this is just another fight, she will live to fight another battle, but will probably lose this one March 4.

I have yet to see anyone raise the question of how loaning yourself money to go to job interviews implies confidence rather than desperation.

Spending your own money would imply confidence to me.

Loaning yourself money with the implication that you would be paid back out of spending that others were willing to do implies to me that you had confidence that you could talk people into giving you money but not that you could get the job.

I also remember seeing a vid of the senator's husband in South Carolina saying that he would spend every dime that he has to get his wife elected. Yet, it appears that he has yet to spend a dime of his own money while he is clearly spending plenty of other people's money.

It would be nice to see someone dig that video up and ask the question now.

You say: "I just read it and from what I can tell, there is a lot of speculation and innuendo but no evidence of any wrong doing by Obama. He has already said his involvement with Rezko was a "bone-headed mistake." I have no reason yet to not take him at his word."

Tell me this: how can Obama possibly pass himself off as a break from the sordid political past he loves to preach about in ringing phrases, when his whole political career sprang from that past and he benefited hugely from it? His whole flipping campaign has been BASED on his being the candidate who represents a complete departure from that past. Meanwhile, Obama hasn't even come close to admitting where and how he came from politically, and few have seemed to care - something which I've found utterly depressing.

Also, how can Obama be allowed to pass off 13 YEARS of a close relation with Rezko as a 'bone-headed mistake'? I seem to remember Obama, not two weeks ago, characterizing the sum of his relationship with Rezko as 'five hours of legal work' or something equally as paltry. I'm sorry, but doesn't this fall in the category of flat out lying?

I read through chhabili posts and did not see what you saw - a staunch Hillary supporter who somehow mysteriously converted to Obama. No, if you read through her letters they are pretty equal opportunity - unflattering things to say about Obama and unflattering things to say about Clinton. And she comes across as your basic undecided voter - one day its Clinton, one day its Obama, one day its Edwards. This isn't even a conversion story, it is the story of an undecided voter picking a candidate, simple as that. But it seems she has now made up her mind and is committed to Obama. It seems her journey started with the article she cites in her 1/30 post. Her 2/28 provides a lot of detail about why she now supports Obama. It is not rocket science to read her letters and see how she got from point A to point B. I just don't know what your agenda is - you seem obsessed with chhabili's story.

As for the gratuitous advice you mention from my first post, here it is folks: "Gratuitous advice alert (which, unfortunately, applies only to those who have access to quality child care, see, above): when I meet mother's with young kids or women who are contemplating motherhood I tell them to find good quality child care and continue to work full-time while the kids are young. So, you've paid your dues and when the time comes when (I believe) your kids really need you around (from middle school on) hopefully, you'll have the clout to negotiate a more flexible work schedule because those years you put in have made you a valued employee.Before you respond to a post read it carefully and analytically - make sure you understand the other's POV. If you do not fully understand all or some points, maybe in your post you can ask for clarification."

Or maybe this is what you were thinking of:

Before you respond to a post read it carefully and analytically - make sure you understand the other's POV. If you do not fully understand all or some points, maybe in your post you can ask for clarification.