Buying Philly Votes

Seeing that he's from Chicago, it would seem that positioning himself above the patronage fray would be even more important.

Now this is important information. Thank you for reporting this, Jay.

Heh. Now watch Obama's campaign claim that Clinton has to buy votes in order to compete in Pennsylvania.

Smart.

It's not buying votes. It's oiling the machine.

I'm not aware of any quid quo pro to it.

In SC Hillary paid out the street money where Obama refused. It didn't tip the scales in her favor one bit.

From my undertstanding of her campaign finances, Hillary will have to give them "Street IOUs". I wish them luck in collecting.

Actually, I think this is the most important part of the article:

"A neutral observer, state Rep. Dwight Evans, whose district is in northwest Philadelphia, said there might be a racial subtext to the dispute. Ward leaders, he said, see Obama airing millions of dollars worth of television ads in the city -- money that benefits largely white station owners, feeding resentment. People wonder why Obama isn't sharing the largesse with the largely African American field workers trying to get him elected, Evans said.

"They view it that the white people are getting all the money for TV," said Evans, an African American and former ward leader. "And they're the ones who are the foot soldiers on the street. They're predominantly African Americans, and they're not the ones who are getting that TV money."

Hardscrabble neighborhoods across the city have come to depend on street money as a welcome payday for knocking on doors, handing out leaflets and speaking to voters as they arrive at polling places.

Peter Wilson, a ward leader from West Philadelphia, said: "Most of the ward leaders, we live in a very poor area, and people look forward to election days. . . . People are astute. They know the Obama campaign has raised millions of dollars."

If the situations were reversed I bet you dollars to donuts Jay or Ana or Michael would be castigating HRC and her team for dissing African-Americans and praising Obama for understanding the "nuances" of the system.

Jay's interpretation of this piece makes my case that the MSM will use any bit of news to the advantage or disadvantage of the candidate they personally support.

Since Michael and Ana adore McCain, they chose to put a positive spin on McCain's to-torture-or-not-to-torture stance. Because Jay doesn't like HRC, she makes the decision to take a sideswipe at her.

I read that piece this am and actually thought it was an example of Obama's tone deaf approach to blue-collar politics.

I remember seeing all this stuff on 'The Wire'.

Southern Bell: I read that piece this am and actually thought it was an example of Obama's tone deaf approach to blue-collar politics.

Well, that's a shocker...And if Obama's campaign was handing out cash before a primary in these 'hardscrabble neighborhoods', you'd have no issue with that, right? Or would you say that Obama bought votes in the poorer areas of Philadelphia?

Just curious, Southern.

I liked this one: "Campbell said she could not in good conscience ask people to work for Obama for free."

I'll remember that one next time I volunteer at the local food bank, or cleaning up the beach or neighborhood, or even helping my elderly neighbor. Forget just doing something because it is something you believe in.

grape_crush, I would have no problem with Obama doing the usual things in party politics.

Obama did the same thing in South Carolina.

http://crackersquire.blogspot.com/2008/01/new-machine-in-south-democrats-tactics.html

It also reminds me of this:

"Refusing to narrowcast

My colleague Carrie Budoff Brown has a good story on the gay press's dissatisfaction with Obama's refusal to grant them interviews, and he responded to the controversy in an interview in the Advocate in which he made explicit a central aspect of his candidacy:

"I don’t think it’s fair to say silence on gay issues. The gay press may feel like I’m not giving them enough love. But basically, all press feels that way at all times. Obviously, when you’ve got limited amount of time, you’ve got so many outlets. We tend not to do a whole bunch of specialized press. We try to do general press for a general readership."

Obama goes on to say that the Spanish-language and African-American press have the same gripe, and makes this central point:

"But I haven’t been silent on gay issues. What’s happened is, I speak oftentimes to gay issues to a public general audience. When I spoke at Ebenezer Church for King Day, I talked about the need to get over the homophobia in the African-American community, when I deliver my stump speeches routinely I talk about the way that antigay sentiment is used to divide the country and distract us from issues that we need to be working on, and I include gay constituencies as people that should be treated with full honor and respect as part of the American family.

So I actually have been much more vocal on gay issues to general audiences than any other presidential candidate probably in history. What I probably haven’t done as much as the press would like is to put out as many specialized interviews. But that has more to do with our focus on general press than it does on … I promise you the African-American press says the same thing. "

But Obama's disinclination to narrowcast, and to target small groups, is an area where his campaign matches his message, and it extends beyond specialty press. He got very few labor endorsements in the first stage of the campaign, for instance, because he didn't pander or focus on narrow issues when he talked to labor groups. Hillary would talk to labor groups about their specific contract conditions, or on a battle over tips, and get roaring applause. Obama would give his stump speech, and receive a tepid response. They came to him, in the end, giving them less leverage over him.

He's also lagged on the fundraising organized by ethnicity: Clinton has been successful in raising millions from specific Asian communities -- Fujianese, Indians; Obama (with the exception of the surge in big African-American money) less so. This applies to electioneering as well: Hillary occasionally sends out press releases to please the Polish, say, or Greek communities, honoring holidays or anniversaries; Obama does much less frequently.

The result, in this case, is that the communities have had to come to him. I spoke with a prominent gay leader about this recently, and he expressed mixed feelings: He likes Obama's message and his promises; but he feels that the organized community -- and the leader himself -- can't call Obama on the phone, remind him of past favors, and demand allegiance, if he wavers once in the White House.

Still, on balance, Obama's promises to be a different White House when it comes to the relationship to the traditional power brokers. He's made fewer promises, and owes less, to labor, and to the organized civil rights communities. And he owes much less, of course -- and most important of all -- to the people who give many of those communities their clout: large donors.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0408/Refusing_to_narrowcast.html

I think this attitude comes from Obama's time working as a community organizer in Chicago. According to his book, he would go to some local officials with a way to help their constituents and the response was - what do I get out of it? How will it benefit me personally? I wont help get it done unless I personally get something out of it - that system is a big part of the problem re why things aren't done which actually help the people who need it instead of just helping the power brokers retain their power.

Obama's allegiance will be to the people, not the special interests. That doesn't just seem like just campaign rhetoric anymore. Nobody owns this guy. That must be scary to a lot of people.

I read that piece this am and actually thought it was an example of Obama's tone deaf approach to blue-collar politics.

That's one way to look at it. atrios says as much today--that what you're doing is paying people to GOTV on election day. Paying people to run volunteer phone banks by check is no different, in practice, than paying well-connected people in neighborhoods to GOTV. And, of course, paying a young college student on leave to work on the campaign using a voter ID database is okay, while not paying a church deacon who knows the neighborhood and is a trusted third party carries some complicated ramifications.

My way of looking at it is that Obama is trying to affect the political sclerosis that is choking the nation. We'll see.

Southern Bell-
This must mean you're firmly in HRC's camp then. She's politics as usual. People are pocketing the big money and handing out 5's and 10's to the poor folks. Are you sure you're on the right side of this?

I remember seeing all this stuff on 'The Wire'.

I thought the same thing. Shades of Clay Davis.

I admit as a supporter of HRC I'm not in the best position to judge Obama's motives, but I have to say that that this practice of paying the foot soldiers is not a sign of something wrong with politics.

It's a bad call on Obama's part, imo, and is a sign of his arrogance.

Obviously Obama has many good qualities but being a human being means he has flaws, too, and a tendency to think of himself as "above it all" is not one of his stirling characteristics.

Could you post a link to atrios? I never read him/her.

Here's a job for a reporter.

I'm confident that the street-money tradition is alive and well in Chicago. When running for State office, was Obama an active participant in the tradition or did he put effort into avoiding it?

I'm asking because I don't know. I'd think its worth of phone call or two eh JNS?

It would certainly shed more light that is currently included in the linked story.....

Southern Belle,
Sen. Obama has continually said it was an objective to leave the politicaal process better than he found it. Perhaps someone should inform HRC that his words are coupled with actions. I apologize for being cranky I am just damn tired of the Clinton moral flexibilty. If they want to act like Republicans, they only have to declare themselves as such to become Republicans.

KRE, those people in Philly who looked forward to little extra cash ARE the people. They're hardly on the same scale as a huge corporation.

Obama is accepting donations from big business, not just "the people". Why didn't he decide to forgo taking cash from Wall Street and just take in contributions from individuals if he was so set in changing the system? Why start at the lowest level in the system?

By the way, I think it's a very smart move for Obama to not accept public financing and rake in the moolah any way he can legally. He's going to need it on hand for any swiftboating crap the Repugs will try.

Southern Bell: I would have no problem with Obama doing the usual things in party politics.

You have no worries about this being a little thing that can start to add up if the press decides to imply Obama is not who he represents himself to be? I can imagine that 'doing the usual things in party politics' would kinda go against the different-kind-of-politics image he's pushing and open him up to charges of hypocrisy, yes?

Paul Dirks, Good point,one I will follow up on. JNS

grape_crush, Obama's accepting Big Business money will be more of a problem than his giving the usual handout to poorer party workers.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if the Repugs use this example of Obama's "hypocrisy", making a much of Obama's taking from the rich but not giving to the poor.

Obama's taking from the rich but not giving to the poor

I'm not sure how to break this to you, but in most many Republican circles 'not giving to the poor' is considered a virtue.

Sure, but they would aim that message to moderates and independents. It would be all about undermining Obama as an agent for change.

Maybe it's just my Chicago-suburban upbringing but I never regarded greasing precinct workers as a virtuous activity.

Southern Bell: ..a tendency to think of himself as "above it all" is not one of his stirling characteristics.

Oh, Obama actually thinks that? Can you provide anything to back that up besides your own opinion, Southern?

Obama is accepting donations from big business, not just "the people".

It's against federal law for 'big business to contribute to campaigns for federal offices, Southern. 'Big Business' can set up PACs which individuals can contribute to...this applies to labor orgs as well. Of course, accepting donations from PACs does does fall under your 'doing the usual things in party politics' statement from before, so you should have no problem with it...Right?

Why start at the lowest level in the system?

Obama's average contribution is $96 dollars, Southern, with 1.3 million individual donors...Maybe that qualifies as low level.

Funny thing is, aside from mention of the Elton John fundraiser, I can't find much about Clinton's donor base, or average contribution. Got anything, Southern?

Southern Bell ..wouldn't be surprised if the Repugs use this example of Obama's "hypocrisy", making a much of Obama's taking from the rich but not giving to the poor.

You're riding this horse until it drops, aren't you Southern?

One: With an average contribution of $96 dollars, I don't see how you can honestly state that Obama's contributors are 'the rich'.

Two: You can't base your support for a Dem candidate on who you think the Repubs are gonna attack...they're gonna do it regardless of who it is, and you can't let them choose your candidates by bullying you.

grape_crush, I should have said it was my impression that Obama is arrogant. I'm sure you have you own list of weaknesses that might not include that quality.

Yes, Obama has raised lots of money by taking small donations. But he *is* also taking Wall Street money. And McCain once again blasted Obama for "not keeping his word". Now, you might think McCain is talking hooey and I might think McCain is taling hooey but I bet it resonates with some independents.

Southern - excuse me if I doubt the idea that there is much of a trickle down of the street money to the people. I think most stays with the bosses.

If anyone wants to know more about Obama from when he first ran for office - read this article from the Chicago Reader in 1995 - it is quite lengthy.

"What Makes Obama Run?

Lawyer, teacher, philanthropist, and author Barack Obama doesn't need another career. But he's entering politics to get back to his true passion--community organization.

By Hank De Zutter
December 8, 1995

When Barack Obama returned to Chicago in 1991 after three brilliant years at Harvard Law School, he didn't like what he saw. The former community activist, then 30, had come fresh from a term as president of the prestigious Harvard Law Review, a position he was the first African-American to hold. Now he was ready to continue his battle to organize Chicago's black neighborhoods. But the state of the city muted his exuberance.

-snip-
Today, after three years of law practice and civic activism, Obama has decided to dive into electoral politics. He is running for the Illinois Senate, he says, because he wants to help create jobs and a decent future for those embittered youth. But when he met with some veteran politicians to tell them of his plans, the only jobs he says they wanted to talk about were theirs and his. Obama got all sorts of advice. Some of it perplexed him; most of it annoyed him. One African-American elected official suggested that Obama change his name, which he'd inherited from his late Kenyan father. Another told him to put a picture of his light-bronze, boyish face on all his campaign materials, "so people don't see your name and think you're some big dark guy."

Obama, running to be the Democratic candidate for the 13th District on the south side, was also told--even by fellow progressives--that he might be too independent, that he should strike a few deals to assure his election.

-snip-
What makes Obama different from other progressive politicians is that he doesn't just want to create and support progressive programs; he wants to mobilize the people to create their own. He wants to stand politics on its head, empowering citizens by bringing together the churches and businesses and banks, scornful grandmothers and angry young. Mostly he's running to fill a political and moral vacuum. He says he's tired of seeing the moral fervor of black folks whipped up--at the speaker's rostrum and from the pulpit--and then allowed to dissipate because there's no agenda, no concrete program for change.

-snip-
"Three major doubts have been raised," he said. The first is whether in today's political environment--with its emphasis on media and money--a grass-roots movement can even be created. Will people still answer the call of participatory politics?

"Second," Obama said, "many believe that the country is too racially polarized to build the kind of multiracial coalitions necessary to bring about massive economic change.

"Third, is it possible for those of us working through the Democratic Party to figure out ways to use the political process to create jobs for our communities?"

http://www.chicagoreader.com/features/stories/archive/barackobama/

That was from 1995.

The view from Will Bunch of the Phila Daily News and an Obama supporter.

"Seems like a risk here for Obama -- especially since he has the money -- but if he doesn't pay up, I really don't think it hurts him that much. To the extent that "street money" makes a difference in Philly, it tends to be the races that no one's paying atttention to, like municipal judgeships, when a voters shows up at the polling place in blank-slate mode. I think most rank-and-file voters already know who they want for president. And I think the biggest fear of the Philly machine is this: That they get don't get paid and Obama wins anyway -- sending the "wrong" signal to future payers of street money."

http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/attytood/Obama_brings_campaign_to_corrupt_underdeveloped_nation.html

Southern Bell -- the link to Atrios. Always worth a read.
http://atrios.blogspot.com/

My opinion is that it is interesting that he chose to draw his line in the sand here, while he paid twice as much money early on to super delegates than Hillary did.

A comment from Dick Polman's blog in the Philadelphia Inquirer. The commenter is exactly right about Michael Nutter's win and the way people felt about him. With a multi-millionaire, one Congressman (endorsed by Obama), and another Congressman among those running against him, Nutter came from the bottom to win the majority of the white and the black vote.

"The link to the LA Times story about Obama unlikely to shell out "street money" in Philadelphia is worth the 5 minutes to read it. It illustrates a classic "reform vs. the machine" clash. Being involved in Philly politics for years, my analysis is that such street money is losing its clout. Michael Nutter won as the reform candidate for mayor with the machine lined up against him and with little street money out there in his name. You could tell which people at the polls were volunteers and which were getting paid. The paid workers were completely lack luster, couldn't talk about their candidate and ineffectually handed out pamphlets that most people trashed within seconds. The volunteers engaged people in conversations and went the extra mile to knock on doors. Two paid poll workers wearing "Brady for Mayor" t-shirts confided in us that they were actually voting for Nutter personally but were approached by the Brady people and needed the $50. Further, another reform candidate for city council here played the game and paid ward leaders to get out the vote for him, all to no effect. He had no evidence that anyone who got paid with his money actually did any work for him that day. This is all to say I doubt this will hurt Obama much if he doesn't play the "street money" game in Philadelphia."

I can understand what Southern Bell is saying, that his actions might be construed as giving money to rich folk and no money to the working classes.
But I'm still glad that he's not flat out greasing palms. I don't know if 'staying above it' is the right term, but I don't know how else to describe it.

"I thought the same thing. Shades of Clay Davis."

Clay was found not guilty! (Best part of the last season)

That's one way to look at it. atrios says as much today--that what you're doing is paying people to GOTV on election day. Paying people to run volunteer phone banks by check is no different, in practice, than paying well-connected people in neighborhoods to GOTV.

The fact is that the campaign has built their own, internal, volunteer GOTV model.

They don't need to pay anyone.

I always hated that "walking around money" bullcrap.

As for examples of Obama appearing elitist and condescending, I suggest you check out what he said last weekend in San Francisco. I found his comments about his VP choice to be a bit arrogant but his description of the working class in PA hurts his case with blue collars.

And it's interesting that CNN did everything in their power to not judge Obama harshly. One does wonder if HRC had made those remarks what their reaction would have been.

Again, the refusal to give out the street money just seems to be another example of Obama's being arrogant.

The problem with "street money" is the skim. He would be giving money to ward heelers who would disburse some of the money for GOTV, but would pocket some -- or most -- of it for themselves.

That's why Obama has consistently refused to pay it. It's really a bribe to the ward heelers, disguised as payment for volunteers.

It sure as heck looks and sounds like a bribe to me.

Southern Bell I suggest you check out what he said last weekend in San Francisco.

I did, Southern. It would help if you read more than a sentence or two out of the entire transcript. Here's the link; just scroll to the bottom. I'll even provide most of it, so you have no good excuse for not reading it.

...Here's how it is: in a lot of these communities in big industrial states like Ohio and Pennsylvania, people have been beaten down so long, and they feel so betrayed by government, and when they hear a pitch that is premised on not being cynical about government, then a part of them just doesn't buy it. And when it's delivered by -- it's true that when it's delivered by a 46-year-old black man named Barack Obama (laugher), then that adds another layer of skepticism (laughter).

But -- so the questions you're most likely to get about me, 'Well, what is this guy going to do for me? What's the concrete thing?' What they wanna hear is -- so, we'll give you talking points about what we're proposing -- close tax loopholes, roll back, you know, the tax cuts for the top 1 percent. Obama's gonna give tax breaks to middle-class folks and we're gonna provide health care for every American. So we'll go down a series of talking points.

But the truth is, is that, our challenge is to get people persuaded that we can make progress when there's not evidence of that in their daily lives. You go into some of these small towns in Pennsylvania, and like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not. So it's not surprising then that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Um, now these are in some communities, you know. I think what you'll find is, is that people of every background -- there are gonna be a mix of people, you can go in the toughest neighborhoods, you know working-class lunch-pail folks, you'll find Obama enthusiasts. And you can go into places where you think I'd be very strong and people will just be skeptical. The important thing is that you show up and you're doing what you're doing.

...but his description of the working class in PA hurts his case with blue collars.

Yes, I understand that you would, Southern.

And it's interesting that CNN did everything in their power to not judge Obama harshly.

That wouldn't have anything to do with reading the the Obama quote in context, would it? I mean, really, Southern...if you're capable of reading the excerpt shown above objectively, can you really have that much of a problem with what Obama said?

'scuse, should read: understand that you would think that, Southern.

grape_crush, Well we can't possibly have any problem with it because the ever impartial Jack Cafferty and Chris Mathews told us it wasn't what it sounded like, that he was dissing PA voters that they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations. But that he was really showing how he felt their pain.

Ick

No, grape_crush, hearing and reading it in context does not make it sound better.

The "cling to religion and guns" will probably insult some voters. It suggests that religion and the right to bear arms have no intrinsic value in themselves to some people.

Obama, like HRC and a lot of other Dems, has completely dropped the concept of gun control from his list of important policy points. The problem for Obama is that in Illinois he was very much a gun control advocate who has now been campaigning in PA as someone who believes in the Second Amendment.

Hearing him pretty much compare religion and guns as the opiate of the masses is not going to sit well with some people.

It IS called Walking Around Money, IS a democrat party hallmark, and IS a democrat party exclusive (not done by the GOP), not unlike their bussing poor Black voters to the polls after church on Sunday down Pine Bluff way, never mind that separation of church and state stuff.

Obama would have played, but he was in Cali dissing the Lebanon valley rednecks in front of the Soros crowd.

Oh, hush, QH. You're up way past your bedtime. Take your evening meds and toddle off to your room.

Southern Bell: Hearing him pretty much compare religion and guns as the opiate of the masses is not going to sit well with some people.

So? Would you prefer someone who panders like McCain or triangulates like Clinton? All Obama is saying is that when people are frustrated - and they have plenty to be frustrated about - they lash out, lay blame, and cling to whatever offers them hope...and really, that's happening everywhere.

Nothing exactly new, granted, but an honest assessment of what's going on in America.

Now, Southern: where are you going to move your goalposts next?

Grape, I think you're either ignoring my point or not getting it.

Being religious and owning a gun have nothing to do with economic hardship. These traits are constant in communities across America, good times, bad times.

It was Obama's trying to categorize rural PA citizens that will be used against him.

I think McCain would be a horrible president. Truth be told, I don't think I could ever vote for a Republican. If Obama is the Dem nominee, he's my guy.

But, the man is flawed. And all of these people who are all "OMG, I touched his suit jacket and my hair got all shiny and my acne was cured" are pretty irritating. And not helpful. Ignoring the fact that Obama has some issues that the Repugs can exploit does him no favors.

And for the record, I do believe HRC would make a better president.

Not to be too nit-picky, but it's actually the South Side of Des Moines (not the East Side).

For more on "La Macchina" check out this story on the 2004 caucuses: http://www-origin.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/040719/19point.1_print.htm

Here is my take on it all. Barak better dig REAL deep into his campaign pockets and spread the love. His most recent "blunder" of calling all Pennsylvania, white middle class folks as "gun toting, bible thumping, TYPICAL WHITE PEOPLE" again is going cost him big time!!

How STUPID is STUPID???

Making generalized statements like he did in San Francisco is the epitome of how politicians attempt to grasp at more FAR LEFT EXTREMIST VOTES from his "pals" who ARE the ones out of touch with the average American.

Angry?? Hell yes I am angry. I am angry that this country is being torn apart by a group of so-called "elitists" hell bent on destroying this county. Trying to split us apart at the seams, attempting to make us look EVIL in the worlds eyes. Using racist remarks to stir the pot more and make mountains out of mole hills. MOVE ON people, its not 1960 anymore.

Barak HUSSEIN Obama’s agenda is very clear now. He wants to take America down for the wrongs he believes have been done to him, his mother and his father. He is rebelling against a country that did not accept his family nearly 20 years ago. He stereo-typifies white America in a way that he believes is true, when in fact it is totally wrong. He is a sick, psychologically damaged man from years as a child and adolescent suffering from abandonment by his Mother and Father.

“You go into these small towns in Pennsylvania and, like a lot of small towns in the Midwest, the jobs have been gone now for 25 years and nothing's replaced them. And they fell through the Clinton administration, and the Bush administration, and each successive administration has said that somehow these communities are gonna regenerate and they have not”. And it's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Newsflash: I LIVE in the middle of Pennsylvania in a small town. We have recovered from years of change to our base industries. The great people of Pennsylvania are primarily from solid, Pennsylvania Dutch heritage. The EXACT type of people that built and defended this great nation for over 230 years. I lived in the great cities that Barak so loves, and I hated every minute of the self absorbed, “its all about me” society that you find in cities. Aggressive drivers who would run you over rather than wave you through an intersection. People who live in our cities, have one thing and one thing only to cling to and that is all of their personal possessions crammed into tiny small apartments surrounding them like a treasure trove. People who would gun down one another for a parking space at the mall. Drug dealers on every corner. Rap artists and black thugs who denigrate women making them “prostitutes” to their sick and perverted life-style.

No its really not surprising at all.

Southern Bell: I think you're either ignoring my point or not getting it.

Neither; it's just that your bias is blinding you to the larger idea being presented. If all you choose to see are the words, "bitter people clinging to religion and guns", I'd have to say it's you who's missing the point, Southern...Which is that when times are hard, people lean more heavily on their faith, their patriotism, their xenophobia; whatever gets them through the night. It's those strong feelings that are being exploited by the right wing; a vote for Obama means terrorists will be dancing in the streets, a vote for Clinton means that babies will get murdered, et cetera...

I think McCain would be a horrible president.

Hey! We agree on something!

But, [Obama] is flawed.

Yup, just like most people are...and I can't find where Obama has claimed otherwise. Only a feeble strawman (Obama thinks he's the Messiah) to beat on (well, he's not, gorshdarnit!).

And all of these people who are all "OMG, I touched his suit jacket...

Funny; I get around the Internets a bit and I don't see that happening as much as Hillary supporters claim it does. What I do see is a lot of people ripping on their favorite candidate's opponent.

Ignoring the fact that Obama has some issues that the Repugs can exploit does him no favors.

Who has been ignoring Obama's issues (or non-issues, for that matter)? Besides, Clinton isn't exactly issue-free...If you are so afraid of the Repubs' reaction to Obama, you have to be terrified about what they'll pull out against Clinton...which is why we can't use fear of the Republican noise machine as a criteria in the selection of our candidates.

Hey, this guy's from Chicago. He had to make these kind of decisions early on in his political career. And he decided against it because it was dirty. That's why all this Rezko nonsense is exactly that. Seriously, the guy is squeaky.

inurl:http://www.time-blog.com/

M4V Converter free download center- ALL M4V conversion tools which help you feel free to convert M4V to MP3, AVI, WMV, MPEG, FLV, 3GP, WMA. And useful Guide on How to Deal with M4V files.
m4v converter
convert m4v
Ultra Quicktime M4V converter currently is the best M4V converter which can convert Quicktime movie M4V to AVI, MPEG, MP4, MPG, WMV, ASF and Vob. As we know Quicktime movie usually has the video formats of M4V, MOV, QT, MP4, and M4V, With this M4V Converter, you can feel free to Convert them all with fast speed and high output quality.
m4v to avi
m4v to wmv
With the fast and powerful QuickTime video decoder inside, Ultra QuickTime M4V Converter supports almost all MOV, QT, MP4, M4V files, even QuickTime Player has not been installed. Integrated High-speed MPEG-2 encoder which let you convert M4V to DVD-Video files(VIDEO_TS, AUDIO_TS) and VCD/SVCD image(*.bin,*.cue), so you can burn VCD/SVCD/DVD disc easily from QuickTime files by using third-party buring tools. It is a software program for converting video formats at fast speeds and high quality. Very user-friendly interface and Quality Profiles.
m4v to mpeg
m4v to mp4