The Toledo Blade is endorsing Obama for the primary race!!!!!!
They finally are doing something right!!!!! Tell your Mama Vote Obama!!!!!!
We are not yet ready to say who we will endorse in November. But we wholeheartedly agree with something our editorial board heard on Sunday: 'We have to have a government that works for ordinary people. We've got to be able to bring the country together so we have a working majority for change. We have to break down some of the ideologically driven polarization that prevents us from taking practical steps to make the country more competitive and to get opportunity to people.'
We urge Ohio Democrats to vote on Tuesday for the man who spoke those words, U.S. Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois. It has become clear during the year-long primary campaign that he eclipses Sen. Hillary Clinton as the strongest possible candidate to run in the general election against the presumptive Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain.
Read more here:
http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080228/NEWS09/525973...
That's about what you'll end up with -- POCKET CHANGE -- when Obama's top donors:
http://opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.asp?id=N00009638&cycle=2008
... get through with their destruction of the middle class. The investment banks have the Dem side of the election completely sewn up.
Everybody should just stop paying their mortgage. I mean, why not? The Congress (led by people like Clinton, Dodd and Obama) thinks that those who do that should be given special consideration. Obviously, if Big Daddy Government will cover for such losers, then we should all line up for that sweet bailout action. Heck, let's just go all the way and nationalize housing in the USA. Obama can then determine who gets which house, condo and apartment. (Make mine 4000 square feet, Mr Obama! I really need it. Honest!)
I know this is an old post... but I have to comment here.
When you donate to a candidate, as part of the FEC Data Collection Mandate, the candidate is required to ask your Employer and Title.
That link is misleading. Obama did not take a DIME from any of those corporations.
He took money from EMPLOYEES of those corporations.
The only thing you could do to stop this would be to prevent employed persons from donating!
Sure, some companies have CEO's that nudge their employees to donate to a specific candidate. Most of us have probably heard of this. But my common-sense guess is that it's really not all that common.
GZ, if you knew this, shame on you for misleading people. If you didn't, you can dig deeper and verify that I'm not blowing smoke.
if they nationalize housing they might as well nationalize debt. doesn't the average American have $8,000 in credit card debt? of course the ones without all the credit card debt, we would then want out hand out too, and the list goes on.......
Looking at GuestZero's link...
BARACK OBAMA (D)
Top Contributors
Goldman Sachs $474,428
Ubs Ag $298,180
JP Morgan Chase & Co $282,387
Lehman Brothers $274,147
National Amusements Inc $265,750
Sidley Austin LLP $251,657
Citigroup Inc $247,436
University of California $239,944
Skadden, Arps et al $228,520
Exelon Corp $226,661
Harvard University $225,891
University of California and Harvard University? Are public institutions allowed to donate to campaigns? Isn't that essentially using taxpayer money for a campaign? Isn't that a conflict of interest?
The list aggregates total donations by individuals affiliated with the organizations -- it's not a list of donations made by the institutions from institutional funds.
from the site:
"This chart lists the top donors to this candidate in the 2008 election cycle. The organizations themselves did not donate , rather the money came from the organization's PAC, its individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate families. Organization totals include subsidiaries and affiliates"
And, WHY do you feel Obama is the best choise, bishop? As far as I can tell, he has the least experience (2 yrs in the Senate, a position he barely squeeked into), and..............????? He avoided about 140 legislature decisions, did he not? Obama talks a good talk, but he isn't saying anything solid - it's all feel good platitudes. His inexperience frightens me. Hillary perhaps frightens me more. McCain has a temper & he flip flops & I don't trust him. So I am at a loss who to support. But it won't be Obama.
I agree starling. I want to like Obama. But the more I listen to him and read about him, the more I feel like its all just a bunch of smoke and mirrors.
Why do you keep saying this about Obama's Senate seat--
"a position he barely squeeked into"
He won his Senate seat in a LANDSLIDE victory. He won 70% of the vote. Where do you get your info, WSPD?
How many US Senators have been elected President?
And let's not overlook his victory in the democratic primary to get into the Senate. A tough, tough 7 way race against some of the most well connected insiders in a state known for insiders running the show. Winning that primary was a big deal, with that many candidates obviously the race is gonna be tight.
Starling, I encourage you to look into those "Present" votes.
A few months ago NPR interviewed the (Republican, Female) Illinois Speaker of the House. She said, and this is not a direct quote but it is a correct meaning: "Anbody who criticizes Obama for voting Present just doesn't understand the way our legislature works in Illinois."
She went on to explain how many "Present" votes are cast, and for some of the many reasons.
The biggest reason is usually to protect Legislators that are "at risk" in the next election.
It's a parlimentary strategy that is planned well in advance. The house whip organizes a bloc of people to vote Present that have VERY safe seats (like Obama's) to protect those that aren't safe when THEY vote "present."
In fact, the Present votes Clinton whacked Obama the hardest for were his votes that involved a womans right to choose.
What she did NOT include on those New Hampshire smear mailings is that EMILYs List, NOW, Planned Parenthood, and others ENCOURAGED Obama to vote "Present" on many of those bills.
It doesn't show cowardice. It shows strategy. It shows a dedication to the party platform that is greater than the dedication to his own personal ambition.
The Blade endorses someone. So What. It just mean that some dipshit behind a desk thinks you should vote the way he thinks or wants. F'em! I have my own mind!