I saw an absolutely intelligent piece on Rasmussen about how the Clinton's might use reverse psychology and playing the victim to win the nomination. It was by Dick Morris and by far the most well-thought out that i have read in a while. He suggested the Clinton's may be fighting hard to lose in South Carolina. That their goal may be to use a loss at South Carolina to win the eventual nomination.
The Clintons have, gradually and increasingly, been making race an issue in this primary season. This might seem unreasonable going into S.C. But wait a second South Carolina is just a single state, and Politicko 101 says -- always concentrate on the big picture. The truth is in S.C Hillary can't win because the overwhelming majority of voters are blacks, and they support Obama, according to Rasmussen, by a 4 to 1 ratio against Hillary.
Morris suggested that they might be trying to lose South Carolina and make the debate essentially about race. Blacks may be the majority in SC but whites are of course still the majority in the United States. If Clinton can prove to the nation that blacks in SC voted for Obama on the bases of his race, then she might just be able to spur the whites all over the nation into action against Barack. All without saying a word about it. Thus the recent fuzz about race and racial issues.
So as not to scar Hillary, Bill has been the main player in bringing the issue to the forefront. He has said he would go door to door and compare his record with blacks side by side with Obama's record. Morris says by doing this; Bill "emphasizes the pivotal role the black vote will play in the contest.
And by openly matching his record on race with that of the black
candidate, he invites more and more scrutiny focused on the race issue." 
Obama on the other hand who has been doing rather well at avoiding their trap might have been dacing to their tune in the last few days. They formerly were unable to get his attention, but the Clinton machine has gone after him with other issues like his statment about Ronald Regan. Bill Clinton is too smart to use such an obvious negative tactic, but at least he has Obama's attention, and can now draw him into the mud. However Obama has kept trying to keep race out of this campaign.
Some say it's because America has come a long way that a black man can run for President and say it's not because he's black. No doubt, we have come a long way, but if he doesn't keep race out of the elections; i say he doesn't stand a chance. Blacks are not even as many as hispanics anymore. By the way all these are speculations and predictions.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/political_commen...
They, and by they I mean Bill Clinton, is smarter than that. Of course hillary was going to lose SC. She knows it, Bill knows it, apparently Obama doesn't.
Swear to god here is their plan. Bill gives the speeches, Bill lays out the bait in SC while Hillary is running off to Florida and California to get the delegates that matter. Meanwhile Obama can't let Bill trash him so now he's fighting one of the most popular presidents we've ever had when his opponent is that guy's wife. Hillary isn't spending campaign money for Bill to travel around, he's doing it at his own lesiure with a truck full of secret service agents. Obama is getting played, in the debates and on the campaign trail.
"They lie about marijuana. Tell you pot-smoking makes you unmotivated. Lie! When you're high, you can do everything you normally do, just as well. You just realize that it's not worth the fucking effort. There is a difference." Bill Hicks
Hillary has everyone BUT her saying nasty things about Obama (I think she just calls him 'inexperienced,' but I didn't see monday's CNN debate). . .. that way she is free and clear from blame.
Then, if HE addresses it in any debate, she looks like the victim. If he even calls attention to it, she looks like the victim of his attacks on her regarding things she didn't even say.
It is an old, but efficient, trick.
Many of my coworkers are liberals, and they HATE hillary. Most say that she is too arrogant, one even said that she thinks she's 'entitled' to be the President.
One calls her 'Queen Hillary" (and they're registered Democrats. Big Obama supporters... They're also big Oprah fans and so I rib them that they'll just do ANYTHING Oprah says... lol)
I hate Hillary, and I'm also a registered democrat. She has no values, no morals, only power-seeking goals. She says anything that gets her to the next step.
I like Obama more for his position as a uniter than anything else. He's not been in washington long enough to have anyone hate him, which I think as a good thing...now of course Hillary hates him, which will go away once the primaries are over.
As far as Oprah....well I'm more of an Ellen fan sooooo, ya know.
"They lie about marijuana. Tell you pot-smoking makes you unmotivated. Lie! When you're high, you can do everything you normally do, just as well. You just realize that it's not worth the fucking effort. There is a difference." Bill Hicks
"She has no values, no morals, only power-seeking goals. She says anything that gets her to the next step."
I wouldn't go as far to say that she has no values or morals. After all, she has made very many contributions to health care and women's issues. She may not be the best Senator in Washington but none of the candidates are. Right now, she is going to say anything to get to the next step, but Sen. Obama does the exact same thing. He's no better than her.
"He's not been in washington long enough to have anyone hate him, which I think as a good thing...now of course Hillary hates him, which will go away once the primaries are over."
He's been there long enough for a lot of people to dislike him very strongly. I think he has a very arrogant glow that turns some people off . Facing the facts, Sen. Obama has no experience compared to the other candidates. Hillary doesn't hate him though, she is merely using him to win the election.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I just want to tell them all to stick it in the freaking juice box and suck it."- (Fallon)
The thing I noticed about Sen. Obama in the last debate was that when he did mention the remarks made about him, he always brought him Bill. The two of them ( Hillary and Barrack), however; did not argue about this. They argued about past records. Mainly the 130 something present votes made by Sen. Obama in the IL state legislature.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I just want to tell them all to stick it in the freaking juice box and suck it."- (Fallon)
That's the stupidest argument Hillary has ever brought up. There are literally hundreds of reasons why senators vote present. Sometimes, I can think of an abortion bill, when senators were instructed to vote present. Hillary used that move as a cheap shot that she knew Obama could never defend in the 15 second response time.
Although Obama wasn't innocent in the debate either. They both blew it in my opinion.
If you are really caught up on the present votes how about this one...Hillary has missed more votes than Obama voted present for....she just didn't show up, for her job. That's the only thing she has to do, vote, and she can't do it over 130 times. Is this shocking too me? No b/c it is what virtually every senator does. But Obama didn't attack Hillary for it, so I say cheap shot Clinon.
"They lie about marijuana. Tell you pot-smoking makes you unmotivated. Lie! When you're high, you can do everything you normally do, just as well. You just realize that it's not worth the fucking effort. There is a difference." Bill Hicks
I'm not personally caught up with the present votes. I do agree with this one in question thought. Sen. Obama did support this bill. He even Co-Sponsored it. I don't understand why he wouldn't vote for it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I just want to tell them all to stick it in the freaking juice box and suck it."- (Fallon)
Without a bill number or explanation I can't know for sure what your talking about.
However shouldn't that tell you something right there. If he co-sponsored it, supported it, wouldn't he vote for it? Unless congress is constantly playing little battles. My guess is it went something like this, "Bill A, presented by a republican, supports w/e. Obama wants to be part of the bill that Republican is putting forth AND wants his vote on a bill he(Obama) is putting forth. Republican says no until Obama says that he'll vote present on ANOTHER bill that he co-sponsored. Republican agrees, Barack now co-sponsors 2 bill one republican based, one democratic based, and has a republican voting yes on his bill.
Congress is one of the most complicated parts of the gov't and is usually why we don't have senators as presidents. During campaigns people want to see good or bad, black or white...well congress doesn't work like that, it is all intermixed together.
"They lie about marijuana. Tell you pot-smoking makes you unmotivated. Lie! When you're high, you can do everything you normally do, just as well. You just realize that it's not worth the fucking effort. There is a difference." Bill Hicks
I don't know the bill number but I will look it up, and as far as I can remember the vote was 58-0 for this bill. Neither Edwards or Clinton gave a number for the bill though. I'll look it up and get back to you.
-----
"I just want to tell them all to stick it in the freaking juice box and suck it."- (Fallon)
In 1999, Obama voted "present" on SB 759, a bill that required mandatory adult prosecution for firing a gun on or near school grounds. The bill passed the state Senate 52-1. Also in 1999, Obama voted "present" on HB 854 that protected the privacy of sex-abuse victims by allowing petitions to have the trial records sealed. He was the only member to not support the bill.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/02/the_everpresent_obama....
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I just want to tell them all to stick it in the freaking juice box and suck it."- (Fallon)
Doesn't change my intial comment on how congress(at state and federal levels) works. It's a complicated process and if you want to know WHY he did those things it will take time. Clinton knew this when she said it in the debate, that Obama wouldn't have time to explain himself, mainly b/c it is too complicated.
Again this is why senators don't become president.
"They lie about marijuana. Tell you pot-smoking makes you unmotivated. Lie! When you're high, you can do everything you normally do, just as well. You just realize that it's not worth the fucking effort. There is a difference." Bill Hicks
The fact of the matter is, neither of them are ever going to come clean on anything decision they've made. I'm fully aware that the process is complicated. I'm harder on Sen. Obama simply because I don't like, but I do realize that Sen. Clinton is not an angel. I realize that her record isn't spotless.
I think it's come to the point where both of them are nervous. They both have to go for low blows just to try and win a debate. This, however; just makes John Edwards look good. I won't say that he'll win the SC primary but I can almost guarantee that his polling numbers will go up.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I just want to tell them all to stick it in the freaking juice box and suck it."- (Fallon)