when she said...

that he was the candidate of lofty promises —“the skies will open, the light will come down, celestial choirs will be singing and everyone will know we should do the right thing and the world will be perfect” — and not the candidate of real leadership?...she warned voters that Obama would let them down. She warned them that when the going got tough, he would fold up...She said it was not just a matter of Obama lacking experience — that was the least of it — but that he lacked the strength, the toughness, the will to get the job done....“I applaud his incredible ability to make a speech that really leaves people inspired. My point is that when the cameras disappear and you’re there in the Oval Office having to make tough decisions, I believe I am better prepared and ready to lead our country.”....“You campaign in poetry, but you govern in prose.”

She said what she thought was necessary for her to win the vote. That's how I look at it. She was competing against him.

Btw, I voted for her.

Yes and no. He is no different than any other politician, Hillary included. He said what he needed to say in order to swoon the masses into voting for him. Politicians are professional liars, their jobs depend on it...

That's the problem with politics - no candidates stick to promises that get them elected. As I go back and read Obama's mulititude of "change we can believe in" speeches I don't see how the man could face the public with a straight face. He even abandoned the most basic of all his promises - openess, transparecny, and ethics.

Very true.

meh

I voted for Nader

McCain was not able to swoon anyone, instead he and Palin turned too many people off. Politicians say what they need to say to win, period. Clinton, whom I voted for in the primaries did and said what she thought she needed to to win. It's all about winning.

me too...again

yeeeaaaaahhhhhhh......

I new there would be no point but I did it anyway. The demographics of where I am meant that my vote would have no effect on the outcome.


It felt nice to vote for who I thought was the best candidate instead of the lesser of two evils.

I agree on the openness, and transparency. Ethics is a grey area to me. He's only been in office 8 months, time will tell. So far he has one month for every year the predecessor had. He gave a great speech or speeches. Hillary has promised to support him since joining his team. What she said before contradicts what she says now...jmo

SHE WAS RIGHT BUT IT DOESN,T MATTER SHE LOSS . BUT AND THATS A BIG BUT OBAMA is and was better than MCCAIN . MCCAIN did n,t even hide the fact he wasn,t going to do any thing to help the middle class because it was the conservative that was sitting the screws to us .
She didn,t start her campaign soon enough .. and her friends that owed her big time for all the things bill and her did for them . the best way to describe her campaign would be ....sit up and sold out .. by her friends . thats what happens when you make bad choices .. say hello to to Bill Richardson in new mexico i use to like him . i,m was surprised when he turned old on us Janet Neapalatono is doing the same thing ... hey Janet is it hard to speak out of the proper face or do you get confused sometimes

I miss Bush

you didnt have all this controversy and hate speech and hard feelings when he was President

LOL

Bush really did mean to take this country down the toilet. Obama does want to help so there is a difference.,

The country seems to be more divided now.

I don't think so. I think that the people complaining now are just louder and more radical. The people that were upset with Bush were mostly crying.

Both had good intentions based on their own point of view. It's all in perception. i do not think Obama wants to help, I think he wants to force his ideals on how America should be on everyone else.

EDIT
and don't take that to believe I'm defending Bush... he wanted to take away liberties (and largely did) much like Obama is doing now in a different arena. they're all crooks.