I think his "former" pastor just took Obama out of the race. Whether you agree with Wright or not, it was a distraction at a time when Obama needed it least. I'd be willing to bet that along with his "typical white person" and "God and guns" remarks are going to derail him. Young people won't be terribly affected, but remarks like that along with Wright's antics piss off a lot of older folks. Personally, as an older man, I think that's a shame. Clinton is bright, etc., but neither her nor Bill have much of a moral compass, particularly when it comes to money and self indulgence.

Ret may be right about Wright pissing off older folks, but I think rational minds (young and old) will prevail and recognize that Obama had done everything conceivably appropriate to distance himself from somebody he once was friendly with. I think it's outrageous that John McCain can accept the endorsement of an anti-Catholic, anti-Muslim, anti-gay, pro-apocalypse pastor like John Hagee and then the greater media hardly blinks. The absurdist efforts by some to keep linking Obama to Wright is misleading, unfair, and just plain mean.

Jason,

Hagee isn't trying to grab the limelight like Wright is. Besides, the Republican primaries are over for all intent and purposes. That stuff will be raised in the general election. But with Obama and Clinton still fighting, everything is fair game right now. And realistically, the media has been pretty kind to Obama.

And unfortunately, rational minds aren't the only ones voting. My experience over the years is that although every candidate has some enthusiastic supporters, a lot of voters tend to vote against various candidates rather than for them.... Rarely is there anyone running who inspires a majority and most voters go for the person that annoys them the least.

Frankly, none of the three bring that much to the table. Obama talks about change, but rarely offers specifics on anything. People are drawn to that rhetoric without knowing what he plans to do. Granted, at this point he looks to be the least harmful.

You said what I'd been saying my friends privately. It is the character that Obama brings when decked against the Clintons. The Clintons have perfected the dirty art of politics and they are the epitome of win-at-all-costs with below-the-belt blows typical of the Wahington beltway. Now Obama is framed within the Wright lens. So, those of you who count on experience are perhaps looking through this glass.

After all, isn't Jimmy Carter trashed for talking with Syria and Hamas? Obama represents that kind of change that Washington and frankly the people who are "believers" in the business-as-usual policies and politics abhor to think of.

Perhaps America is decades behind electing change from the norm and only ready to send the mafia who will lay out time-tested-and-failed-policies in refurbished bills and vetoes.

I agree with Jason; I don't trust the Clintons (yes, I know Hillary is the one running. I will vote for Obama and i really don't think the preacher's words were to be taken seriously. i think the media is latching on to that and blowing it up unneccsarily(sorry can't spell today).

I just had a epiphany about the gut wrenchingly and entirely illogical response of many of the strong, smart and relatively well informed women I know toward Hillary Clinton. She just hits too close to home. If we throw our weight, and our energy and our hope behind her, and she doesn't win, that means that even being one of the most poised, competent and seasoned politicians out there isn't enough. It will be confirmation of the nagging fear we carry with us everyday that somehow, we, no matter how hard we work, how much we know, and how well we play the game, will never be able to overcome the fact that being a woman may always be a liability. It will confirm the bitter pill that sits at the back our throats every day, as less qualified, less motivated and less impassioned men pass us by on our career paths.

If Hillary doesn't win, it means that no matter how hard we try, we will always still just be women, and that's not enough. I have been contemplating this visceral reaction I have to her for some time now and trying to puzzle through it. Today it has a name, my deepest, darkest fear. The fear that I will never be allowed to realized my full potential for lack of one single piece of equipment. The fear that no matter how hard I work, how much better I prepare, how much more I know, it will never be enough. If we support Hillary, and she loses, every woman who has ever been passed up for a promotion she deserves, a raise she has earned, an opportunity that should be hers, will receive a stinging slap of confirmation that women have not made the advances we are purported to. It will mean that my years of school, and work experience and dedication and drive, are not enough. It will be a blatant confirmation of the stranglehold that the good old boys have on our political and economic systems.

Strong women hate Hillary because she is reaching for something that until now, was not even a consideration before for members of our sex. In challenging the patriarchy, Hillary challenges each of us to take a stand and face our deepest fear, that being a woman is a liability, and not an asset. We need a strong, experienced and capable democrat in the white house. The stakes are too great, and the costs of failure too high. We need to stand behind Hillary, as feminists, as professionals, as women, and in doing so, allow her to stand for all of us.

Hilary is not a competent politician. By all accounts shes ran an awful, incompetent campaign. Much of that has been her staff, but then again, who hired that staff? If you want to vote for Hilary because shes a woman, thats great. My Fiancee and I are voting for Barack Obama because A. We think hes the most likely to win and B. We think he would do the best job. I know, what a shocking metric on which to base a decision on.

It bothers me a great deal that so many woman are willing to vote for Hillary solely because of her gender and being blind to her obvious character defects.

For one thing, the clash between the Clintons and Republicans is personal. No matter what side you're on, it can't be denied that the rift is deep and will never be healed. The problem that will cause in her administration is that there will not only ever be any cooperation between the parties, but the Republicans will be watching her and Bill through a microscope to expose any lapse of judgement. And given both their histories during his tenure, that will be often. Ergo, her administration will be a continuous battle that will get little accomplished. I strongly suspect she, like Bill will alienate enough voters that she will lose the Democratic Congress after two years insuring even more rancor. I don't know about anyone else, but I'm sick of the hyper-partisan politics and would like to see Democrats and Republicans look for common ground and compromise.

I am not voting for Hillary because she is a woman but I do know there is no way there would still be a contest if she weren't. Her quick wit, intelligence, wisdom (the real kind that comes with age!), and long-proven morality all shine above Obama's. He is a dreary little sad sack of a man but everyone is so desparate that they overlook his flaws and believe he will "change the world" because he says so. I am so dissapointed in the Willy Week for endorsing someone who will have no foundation for the position if he even can win against McCain. Hillary knows how to play the game. This is a time when we need a strong leader and not a time to dissolve the political system as we know it (which isn't going to happen anytime soon by the way). You people are fools and, if he wins, I shudder to think the harm it will do to our country.

Hillary does not represent strong, successful women. To me, she represent a climber willing to play dirty to get what she wants. Yes, we are behind the times as is the whole world when it comes to issues of sex, gender, race, and religion. I think that that this presidential race is going to set the tone for the coming years, but if Hillary loses, it not set us back a hundred years. I think if she wins, it will actually be a negative reflection on our society and not because she's a woman but because it says that once again we are willing to elect a lying, pandering politician. She uses Bush tactics and does not apologize. I really do believe that her running for the nomination has been planned, probably before Bill even became president. Does anyone think she would of stayed with Bill after what he put her through unless he could be useful now.

The whole point is to look past race and sex and look at the person. It would be wrong to nominate someone because they were a woman just as it would wrong not to. I look at Hillary and I just can't respect her as a person or a canidate.

PS - Obama supporters: why is your guy not willing to debate Hillary on Oregon-specific issues? Since Barack is such a gosh darn good "listener" (essentially regurgitating your hopes and dreams in a manipulative move to win the presidency), why don't all you fervent supporters ask him to agree to an open exchange (no moderators) as Hillary has suggested?

Come on--like she wouldn't turn the debate into a tiresome rehash of bitter black pastor-gate.

If it's really that easy for Hillary to "turn the debate" against Barack (not that that arguement has any rational basis that I'm aware of) and he can't hold his own in an open exchange, how do you think he will be able to handle the presidency, which, in case you didn't know, requires high-level negotiation skills and a vast knowledge of world affairs, which only Hillary has.

I appreciate the Willy Week's endorsement of Senator Obama. I share their very sober assessment of his qualities as a candidate.

I have to question, though, your decision to portray him on your cover as a soul (well, R&B) brother on a white horse. Senator Obama has been characterized by the media as not black enough, too black, Muslim, associated with a religious fanatic... If you really support the guy, how about backing off of the ridiculous mischaracterizations. I'm sure some of your hipster, 'fresh-thinking' staff thought it'd be a lark, but do you have any idea how tired people of color (and queer people, etc.) get with 'fresh,' ironic mischaracterizations like this? I don't mean to be a PC nazi here, but puhleez. Ironically off-color humor was a lot easier to stomach before the Bush administration set human rights back 50 years.

Anyone who would believe that the Clintons are about anything more than money has not investigated HER CAMPAIGN STAFF. McCauliffe, Wolfson, Ickes and Penn are interested in one thing and one thing only: MONEY;

just as she is. If you are truly interested in determining the difference in the character of the candidates then investigate the people who work for them. The answer is exceedingly clear.

Laura,

It's her long proven morality that turns me off. One example was the Bosnia-sniper story. It was an outright lie and she knew it. And she should have been smart enough to know the press would easily disprove it. And Bill compounded it by stating she said it at an 11:00pm speech when in fact she first said it in a morning presentation and went on to repeat it several times. Was it important that she wasn't shot at? Of course not, but the fact she outright lied about it should be troubling. Having been shot at several times in my life, I can tell you that you remember the details quite clearly. What else will she lie about to gain ground?

Starr may have been too zealous in his Whitewater prosecution, but a lot of people went to prison behind that fraudulent scheme, including her law partner and Bill's Lt. Gov. You have to be pretty naive to believe the Clintons were squeaky clean on that even though they were never indicted. Bill's philandering distracted the press and a lot of dirty money stories were one day events. Including the sale of missile and satellite technology to China for donations to the DNC by the Chinese army. That was a lot worse than lying about a BJ, in my opinion, but it got only one day of news coverage.

And as far as debates, they've had, what, 31 or so? Her debating style is to attack, not confront actual issues a president will face. Attacking is definitely her forte, but not necessarily what I want in a president.

It’s supposed to be a romance novel cover. You know, because we love him. And it’s all for the love of politics.

I just would like to point out that Obama, though he has done a brilliant job of "dream washing" his campaign, is every bit the politician that Clinton is. He takes money from the oil industry, while saying he doesn't. Check out the story here:

www.newsweek.com/id/129895

Obama has also taken large sums of money from Exelon, the largest nuclear fleet owner in the United States.

www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/polit...

And he is pro "clean" coal, voting for massive government subsidies for uncertain (and misguided)technologies. From the perspective of the environment, Obama is a little too close for comfort to the regressive, and destructive industries that dominate his home state (coal, nuclear and the auto industry) for me.

I appreciate that there are no easy answers to America's energy crisis, but Senator Clinton walks her talk when it comes to the environment and has come out strongly opposed to new nuclear subsidies, a position on which (to my knowledge) Obama is silent.

Both candidates have strong energy and environment plans, but I can assure you that coal and nuclear will be the two biggest energy issues facing the US in the next presidency. I believe Hillary has the stronger plan and the ability and connections to make her vision for a new energy economy a reality. I encourage anyone supporting Obama to do a little research regarding the disparity between his rhetoric and his action.

Politics is the last refuge of scoundrels. Of scoundrels, Hillary and Bill combo is proving to be top-notch.

With regard to debates, this is no longer needed with so many debates that have taken place. There are perhaps minor differences with regard to the issues between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. I'm sorry to say. What sets them apart is their character where Hillary does not show.

Hillary has amply proved that she is tough, belligerent & willing to lie by painting that the country is unsafe with Obama and by proclaiming to obliterate Iran from the podium of the white-house. Bullying and lies are not synonymous with resolve but a weakness guided by responses to poll-pulses.

I would go one step further on the selection of candidates. McCain is not too far behind to close the gap on issues. That is soon likely to happen. I'm not voting for Hillary if she grabs the nomination. McCain or an independent will have my vote. Hillary - not now and not ever.

Hillary - Never.

Why is Wright choosing now to continue his own PR agenda, at the obvious expense of Obama? Does anyone else think he might be getting paid?

"Why is Wright choosing now to continue his own PR agenda, at the obvious expense of Obama? Does anyone else think he might be getting paid?"

Probably not. He's just enjoying the attention, I suspect. Without being so controversal, how could be be invited to speak to the NAACP and the Washington Press Club. I think he was just getting his ego fed.

I really agree with Mouli. Obama is no prize by any means and neither is McCain, but I'd rather see just about anyone than Hillary. If she's elected, we're in for nothing but at least four years of scandals. The Clintons just can't help themselves.

Just exactly who does Wright upset and why does the media continue to tell us that his garbage matters??? Maybe strong H.C. & J.M. supporters...Wake up people...We all need to take a stand against the politics of old and their tool the main stream media...in addition, why on earth would Clinton go on Bill "the fascist" O'reilly's show??? If you think Hillary isn't a republican by now you're lost...

Obama can help us change for the better...the time is now...

At a time when this country needs a change, I believe you are right in endorsing Obama. Although I might vote for Clinton if she does when the democratic ticket, we'll just see an economic that will not change much from the Reagonomics we've all grown to hate. Bill might have balanced the budget, but he also gave us NAFTA and GATT which set us up for Bush Jr.

It's time for a change. Our country was never meant to be a dynasty, which another 8 years of a Clinton will be. Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush Jr., Bush Jr., now another eight years of another Clinton?

I find it quite astonishing that after 20 years Obama is now saying he doesn't agree with Rev Wright's views. Are we to believe that after all this time, and right before some of the most important elections of his political life, that he has just found out what his pastors beliefs are? I don't believe it. Then again I'm not blindly following Obama as it appears so many other people are. The guy's speeches are excellent but I wonder about him, I really do. I may yet vote for him but people should be very cautious in believing he is a truly honest and moral man. I just cannot accept he didn't know about Rev Wright's opinions prior to the last couple of weeks.

Obama has stated that he will model his foreign policy after Reagan, Bush's father (Bush 41) and JFK. That's scary.

Obama also looks to Reagan for inspiration as to how to set policy for the economy. That's scary.

A look at Obama's record as a legislator at the state and federal levels show that he is a reliably right leaning politician speaking left leaning rhetoric while serving the mainstream, corporate agenda. We don't want that and we cannot afford any more of that even if we did.

Unfortunately, McCain and Clinton are even deeper into the military, corporate welfare, and reduction in rights and benefits of common people scheme than Obama. When we consider that the corporate owned and serving media gave a green light to all three while largely blacking out coverage of, say, Kucinich or Edwards, this is not a surprising state of affairs.

None of the corporate approved candidates deserve the vote of the people. In preparation for the likely stalemate that will be decided by super delegates, I think it would be best to write in the name of the Democrat we really want and contact local super delegates in support of a brokered convention that results in a nominee who can represent the interests of the people ahead of those of the corporations that have been running the show for the past several decades. That is the sort of change we need and we won't get it from a darling of the corporatocracy.

Come to think of it, the US election is a mockery of people's will. Campaigns are funded by individuals,lobbyists/special interests, corporate donors and such. The candidates have established organizations that constantly poll, fine-tune their messages and posture. Ads, attacks and auto-biographies are scripted to fill the air and net waves. We, the people, are the insatiable consumers in this chain.

Honesty is not necessarily the best policy and honesty is tweaked in gradations as polls demand.

The day when there is a multi-party system, the US democracy will look more like a democracy. But until then, it is stage-managed.

When Rev. Wright's opinion stirs so much emotion and denouncing even in a free-speech-touting culture that also celebrates the right to bear arms, when there are other inflammatory pastors of the white-kind with their noted political disciples, when Jimmy Carter is being rebuked for trying the unthinkable, alternative view point is just that. Yet another alternative - not mainstream and marginalized.

It is a shame that the press (and the Clintons) have been so successful in painting Obama as someone without concrete plans or experience when he has a whole lot of both. (See MSNBC page on candidates economic plans - Hillary still doesn't have one, yet. What's that?) Obama has more legislative experience than Clinton and has worked with more Republicans to pass tough legislation in Illinois - AND Washington (think Ethics reform and nuclear disarmament). Please check the records yourself. Look at the Clinton health care plan from the 1990s - some say we lost Dem seats in congress because of that. Research the facts, please. This election is far too important to base your vote on gender, race or associations. Obama walks the walk, has integrity and is honest. He also has some excellent highly respected advisers (Sam Nunn anyone?). Finally, we should also look at the longer view. The world is watching and hopeful that Barack Obama will be the next president. That is important.

"Obama has stated that he will model his foreign policy after Reagan, Bush's father (Bush 41) and JFK. That's scary.

Obama also looks to Reagan for inspiration as to how to set policy for the economy."

Where did you get this info from?

Dear Thoughtful,

Speak for yourself. Many other strong women beg to differ.

According to you:

"If we throw our weight, and our energy and our hope behind her, and she doesn't win, that means that even being one of the most poised, competent and seasoned politicians out there isn't enough."

NO, it simply means that truth prevails and that the greater American public sees Hillary for what she is. A liar who panders falsities to whomever will give her their vote. Her loss will have nothing to do with her gender and everything to do with her character.

"If we support Hillary, and she loses, every woman who has ever been passed up for a promotion she deserves, a raise she has earned, an opportunity that should be hers, will receive a stinging slap of confirmation that women have not made the advances we are purported to."

ACTUALLY, speak for yourself. I certainly won't feel that way. I will only feel a sincere gratification that finally this country is on the right path.

"Strong women hate Hillary because she is reaching for something that until now, was not even a consideration before for members of our sex"

EHHEMM, EXCUSE ME?! Strong women hate Hillary because they were raised to stand up for what they believe in, look past gender and race and concentrate on character and ability. Strong women hate Hillary because she is ensuing every quality that we HATE in power hungry men.

Thoughtful,

Are you serious? I am a man in my 30's and I would without a doubt vote for a woman to be President. However, I will not vote for a woman just because she is one and would never let that be the focus of my choice. Show me a woman that can effectively run a campaign and run with class, and I'll show you a swarm of voters waiting to make her the President.

This is a ridiculous argument. If this is true then you need to admit that black voters are only voting for Obama because he is black.

I certainly didn't expect any different kind of endorsement from WW. Hopefully people will wise up that indeed this is a race of President of the United States, not some popularity and likability contest. This country faces tremendous problems and we need a fixer to do the job. I think Obama is a good man and yes, he is inspirational, but I still have not seen one bit of experience that gives me the confidence that he can really promote change. In fact, if you look at legistlative accomplishment, Hillary Clinton has reached across the aisle to move important, productive legistlation forward more times than Obama and McCain combined. And I have to admire her drive and determination to continue this fight. We are seeing now that Obama's support is softening, especially as he is vetted fairly. And anything in politics is fair. When did democrats because such whiny pussies when it comes to elections. This race is nothing compared to what will transpire in the fall. I want a candidate who will buckle in and fight it out. Not some man who thinks he's above it all and won't even debate...of course the reason he won't debate is because everytime he goes one on one Clinton cleans his clock. Sucks to be beaten by a girl.

Hillary has my vote. Obama has a long way to go to earn it if he stalls it out and ends up with the nomination.

Thank you. Fair or unfair, if he cannot put the concerns about his pastor, etc, to rest, then he is not ready for the general election. Personally I don't care if he doesn't wear a flag pin on his lapel and I believe his comments about middle America to be true. But you don't win an election without understanding how to say something and how to deflect nonsense. And he simply is not sophisticated enough to do this.

PDXEric, quick, name me one piece of substantive legislation that Hillary has AUTHORED and passed as a senator. Just one. I'll name you two for Obama that had Republicans as co-authors: Obama-Lugar nuclear non-proliferation act funds grousp to track down loose nukes far and wide; Obama-Coburn ethics and transparency act that forces senators to say no to free plane rides, etc. and makes the people's work in Washington traceable via the Internet so citizens can see the process of legislation. Now, as challenged, name me one piece of legislation that Hillary has AUTHORED or co-authored that's as substantive as those two. You are either just ignorant about Obama's huge elected legislative experience edge over Clinton (12 years to eight) or just lying, er, misspeaking. Which is it? The people of Oregon deserve to know. Vetted fairly? You think the Rev. Wright issue was fair? Does Hillary really want to start a guilt by association fight? Sophisticated? Please Eric, what else can he do about Rev. Wright, how else can he "deflect" the nonsense? Kill him? You sock puppets are a trip. Iraq, foreclosures, gas prices, jobs and Hillary sock puppets and the Repugnantcans are transfixed on Rev. Wright...unbelievable and further evidence that this country is on a precipice. We can create HOPE, ACTION And CHANGE with Obama and turn it around or we can just keep right on driving, right over the cliff, while we fight the battles of the 1990s. Our choice. I choose change I can believe in.

Why do people assume that Rev. Wright has been this way for 20 years? Have they seen a video from 1988 that shows his same BS that he's displaying now? Nope. Have you seen anymore inflammatory video from Sean "Slanthead" Hannity? Nope. Why? Could it be tapes like that don't exist? You don't build an 8,000-member congregation by preaching the same crap like Wright has been lately every Sunday for 40 years. You just don't. Like Obama said, the Wright we see today is not the same Wright Obama grew to know 20 years ago and helped bring him to Christ. So stop with the ASSUMPTION that Obama sat there for 20 years while Wright whipped out the "Kill Whitey" rhetoric Sunday after Sunday. I'd sure like to ask Hillary about her worshipping with members of The Family in D.C.

Barack Obama has America all wrong.

Barack and Michelle Obama may think that average Americans are "bitter" and may themselves be "bitter" because they did not get free Harvard Law degrees so they could just pocket 4.2 million dollars a year, but Americans are not a "bitter" people.

Religious faith and involvement in shooting sports are traditional values unrelated to bitterness. Using Obama's rationale, Michelle Obama and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's 8,500 other parishioners should be armed to the teeth.

But, then again, the 1996 Obama campaign responded that Obama supported legislation to "ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns."

In 2004, why did the supposedly anti-war Obama say "There's not much of a difference between my position on Iraq and George Bush's position at this stage."?

If John McCain and Hillary Clinton sat for 20 years in a church that called for singing "God Damn America," they would be run out of town.

Unreimbursed health care for the uninsured causes hospitals to become insolvent and close. The Obama health plan leaves 15 million people uninsured. Leaving people uninsured will not stop continued hospital closings and disproportionate loss of health care for the economically disadvantaged.

If Michelle Obama thinks America is "just downright mean" and was not "proud" of America until she had the White House in her sights, where does that leave the rest of us? Why did Hamas adviser Ahmed Yousef endorse Obama? When will Obama throw Hamas and Michelle under the bus?

*A look at Obama's record as a legislator at the state and federal levels show that he is a reliably right leaning politician speaking left leaning rhetoric while serving the mainstream, corporate agenda.* Rune, I'm astonished by this assertion. He has been widely criticized by right-wing members and media for having what the National Journal characterizes as the current Senate's most liberal voting record. Most liberal of all senators! While I question the accuracy of this assessment--"liberal" being a subjective term--still I fail to see evidence in his record of what you point to as "serving the mainstream, corporate agenda". Can you provide specific examples of this?

WHY would ANYONE with an IQ above kelp believe that voting for a president should be based on race or gender? This is 2008, not 1954. If people don't care more about the qualities of the person (like intelligence, ability, honesty and courage to think and act outside the bribery of Big Business) than they do about race or gender, then this country will continue to fall and fail. Clinton does NOT represent the qualities I admire in a woman. More than that, she does not embody the qualities I admire in a leader. She embarrasses and angers me. I want my granddaughters to embody the qualities I see in Obama. It's not gender or race that provide examples, it is who the candidate is as a person and as a leader. Clinton is all over the place emotionally, her campaign has had one mismanagement problem after another due to her choices in staff, and she has exhibited a severe lack of honor and class. Obama's behavior and campaign has been just the opposite. As they act and choose now, they would act and choose as president. I can be proud of President Obama and he will be a role model for my granddaughters - not because of his gender or race, but because of his actions and choices. We are no longer limited to role models of only our own gender or race. Those that are stuck in that old thinking can open their eyes and bring our country up a notch, or stay stuck in the past of their limited thinking. I just hope they do not represent a large enough number of voters to keep the rest of stuck in their limitations.

The Clintons are GREEDY, CROOKED, POWER HUNGRY, EGOMANIACAL LIARS and have used their Rovian tactics to "DIVIDE AND CONQUER" the Dem Party. But they have thought only about the "DIVIDE" and not the "CONQUER" aspect of their failed Rovian campaign tactics because they will be UNABLE to "CONQUER (in the GE) with the DIVISION" they created. "WIN AT ALL COSTS" - may apply in some circumstances, but fail miserably in this instance since Obama supporters will NOT vote for HRC in the GE [if she manages to STEAL this nomination]! I believe she is now in a "Catch 22"!

Mark,

I'm happy to respond to your requests, but will do so with a level head and not the vitriolic antics of your post.

First, I did not even mention Reverend Wright and I even noted that the flag lapel question was ridiculous. But the fact is, many voters who are essential to a democratic victory this fall aren't as "enlightened" as you. Whether we like it or not, these do become major issues in the general election, and Obama has failed thus far to put an end to the speculation and the nonsense. He failed to meet these head on at the beginning and now looks weak because of his early inaction. That was my point. I don't put personal stock into those nonsensical issues, but as a realist I understand that they will carry weight in November.

What I find so funny and why I have been turned off on Obama is the cultish aspect of his campaign. Even adds that he is currently running in Oregon show no substance, only snippets from his speeches. Hillary Clinton has put forth a very clear platform of what she will do as President. She understands much more about the economy, especially how universal healthcare effects its well-being. Barack Obama does not support universal healthcare because he does not mandate healthcare, leaving the insured paying higher health costs and higher premiums. Hillary Clinton also does not shy away from the gay and lesbian community. Obama has only had one major interview whereas Clinton has worn her support on her sleeve. She is the only presidential candidate pre-office to have marched in a gay pride parade. Actions speak louder than words.

Senator Clinton is on four Senate Committees - Armed Services, Environmental and Public Works, Health, Education & Labor, and a Committee on Aging. What is clear about her career is that she works to get things done. She worked with Newt Gingrich of all people a few years back to and also with Bill Frist to modernize medical records (this may be of no importance to you, but modernizing medical record systems is huge to improving the quality and accuracy of patient care while also streamlining major budget issues within the federal government). She recently cosponsored a bill with Lindsay Graham (something in the nature of US or American Manufacturing Trade Coalition...I could look the title up completely) to reward companies for keeping their manufacturing bases in the states. She was an instrumental force with Edward Kennedy in passing the CHIP (Childrens Health Insurance Program), due in a lot of respects to her intricate research and knowledge of the health care system, and her work during the Clinton administration. And how about the Help America Vote Act? I can go on and on about her dedication and hard work but you will more than likely find fault with anything I have to say.

Finally, Hillary Clinton is a fighter. In a general election, there is nothing new to launch her way. It's been tried again and again and she is able to deflect and stay on the issues. Unfair attacks will happen...and she has proven beyond a doubt that she can handle this in a general. Barack has not.

I find it very interesting that because I disagree or do not support Obama that I am somehow a "hater" of him. I even prefaced my remarks saying he was a good man who in the future would make a good president. So please don't try to put me in a box of stereotype me because my opinion is different than yours. Obviously I can reply without a rant of disrespect.

For more about Hillary's partnership with and support of the LGBT community on specific critical issues, see Just Out Magazine's Q & A: www.justout.com/news_nw_hillary.asp...

Can anyone tell me what BO's stance on these issues is?

I CANNOT BELIEVE all of you are willing to support a man that has definite ties to terrorists, biggots, and racists.

Is this what you really want for your country??? Do you REALLY know what he is about?? Because I don't think he does.

All of you will be sorely sorry when the Anti-Christ is elected. This man is the worst possible person to be commander and chief of this country. Half of the ill minded people on this site are better suited to be president than this man.

Waitasec--did we accidentally endorse George W. Bush for a third term??

No, I doublechecked: Obama's our guy. Phew.

No one said I was endorsing George Bush.........None of the candidates are right for this country--including your beloved Obama. I encourage all of you to look past your infactuation for this man and see what is at stake if an ill equipped, ignorant, arrogant, and deceitful person ends up in teh White House. This country needs to take a stance against the typical politician and take back what this country was founded on..... Good Will Toward Man. I don't see any of this happening if Obama, Clinton or McCain take the White House. we need to rise above the same old rhetoric of change, experience and all of the other bs that has sucked all of you into what is called Campaign 2008.

Perhaps the person who said, "Hillary, iron my shirt!" said it best. That's exactly what she can do. Iron out the problems that have been heaped up like a pile of dirty laundry in our nation for the past 8 years. She has dreams of progress too. But what the next president is faced with is a huge deficit, a flailing war effort, unaddressed problems in New Orleans, and a tarnished image in the world.

She will come to the Oval Office on the first day with a mindset for cleaning up. Not a "Wow, I'm president!" attitude. Being in the Whitehouse is not a novelty for Hillary. It will be coming home and straight back to work. Give her 4 years to do what she is very prepared for.

Please read the following commentary. I think it will shed some light on many things:

www.thecityedition.com/Pages/Archiv...

I'm a gay guy who's been closely following this race for months now and, just as closely, following the gay press, the HRC and The Advocate for the insight among our community leaders. I must humbly disagree with your endorsement for Obama.

Why have we - as a community – been so silent about our support for Hillary? Where are our leaders right now? Where is our voice or even voices stating our preference for the nominee? Why are we standing by and merely watching the first woman president slip pass us as if the anti-woman sentiments sure to follow (and have, in fact, been going on all along) won't possibly affect us too? We - the gay men and certainly our strong lesbian sisters - know that sexism (and its equally powerful bedmate, homophobia) is running rampant right now! Why aren't we asking why we've spent months listening to people accuse each other of using the 'race card' but little to no mention of the 'gender card?" I thought this was a historical race for TWO reasons! Why are we letting Hillary be called a bitch, a whore, and all these other incredibly sexist things? (for more check out the fascinating article entitled "Clinton Campaign Brought Sexism Out of Hiding" at www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/...) It includes a shocking list of the way Hillary has received blatant sexist attacks!

We should be outraged right now!!! This affects us all!!! Speak out my sisters and brothers! Let's find our voice again!!!! Bring on the “Dykes on Bikes for Hillary,” “The Divas for Hillary,” the “Circuit Boys for Hillary,” and “Bears for Hillary.” Feminism and the woman’s movement has always paved our way for us….no one can dispute that fact! Don't abandon our sisters nor the symbolism of the first woman (even with her imperfections – we all got ‘em!) running for president right NOW.

God Bless you all!

Gaypastor

Oh ye with such gullible minds. Do you all make your decisions on the crap newspapers feed you, or do you all make your decision on your own intellect? What does change mean to you? Change from what to what? One needs to know the specifics on how Obama is going to change Washington, and heal the world.

A doctor makes a diagnosis and a prognosis when someone is sick, then he determines a treatment plan.

Obama has diagnosed that Washington needs a change, but yet he can't find a prognosis. I wonder in which of the "57" states that he has visited he is going to find a treatment plan!

"It is about character . . " The kind of character that allows him to sit in a Racist church for 20 years and not hear the vile Anti-American rants being given by the minister.

". . the ability to motivate . . " And for what purpose? Bi-partisanship? No. He voted strict party line in the Senate. To make a difference? No. He voted "Present" 130 times in the Illinois State Legislature.

" . . the skill to restore our position overseas . . " So he will speak to Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah without pre-condition. And then lie that he never made such a statement - even though it is front & center on his website.

" . . and the wisdom to speak to us as adults about the challenges we face as, well, adults." So he can defend his former minister and then five weeks later throw him under the bus when his continued support for that same minister becomes problematic.

"Obama has demonstrated all of these talents during the campaign, and we are throwing our lot in with him." There is an old Irish prayer: Lord, Grant us what we want. And if that is too difficult, then please grant us what we need. But, whatever you do Lord, do not grant us what we deserve. Vote for Obama and you will get what you trully deserve.

Hillary Clinton is not the first woman to have run for president. She will not be the last. Win or lose, her major showing this year has made a female president possible now. It could be her in this cycle or another, or someone else. Equal rights is not a lottery: "win it all or lose everything." Don't tie the hopes of all women for all time to Clinton's 2008 campaign. She isn't the Women's Messiah. Obama isn't the Black Messiah. We can say they're two candidates in a long, tough, winning campaign for justice. As a feminist, I believe Hillary Clinton deserves nothing less.

Obama appears to be a very intelligent person and I feel that SOMEDAY he would make avery good president,but as for NOW, I see him as being "NOT quite READY YET" !! Republicans are ready to give enough reasons to cause him to lose to John McCain, and then we all will be sorry be sorry as John McCain is a clone of George W. Bush and we do NOT need that!

So whether you like Hillary or not, I suggest voting for her for her many years of experience and knowledge on many things,because I see Obama as simply being the wrong person at the wrong time!

Obviously Clinton is not the only candidate lacking a functioning moral compass. Obama claims to want to unit us. How can anyone who claims to want to unit all Americans, all races and creeds, sit in a church for 20 years that spews such falsehoods that are designed to divide us? This wasn’t just one wacky preacher. The congregation cheered their approval of the hate flowing from a man whose job is to proclaim the love of God. I guarantee my church would be empty if my pastor said anything like that once. Sorry Obama, I don’t buy it.

I'm in the happy position (in Detroit) of having voted for Clinton in the symbolic primary and will vote for Obama in November. All this other chit chat is irrelevant. McCain is a dork.

I attended Sunday's big Obama-rama in Waterfront Park. Had a fine time.

However - I was competely offended when I saw several different men in line wearing t-shirts that said "Bros before Hoes" with photos of B & H.

Dude - way to lose my vote !

"Bros before Hoes"

See that Hoes it's the Bros we all be votin for! Clinton's the Hoes who can't defeat the Bro!

OMG this is the best primary evah!

Love the free entertainment.