That.was.awesome.

So glad that Obama's campaign is about substance.

Voters who are worried about losing their job or how they'll get their kids in to see a doctor will undoubtedly be swayed by this "new" type of campaign you guys are running.

John

gosh, i must have accidently googled "sesame street"

Elitist? Juvenile? - nah, just plain good. As usual the best creativity runs true.

There are many people like me

If Hillary quits, you are going to want our support.

So why in the hell are you insulting us by ridiculing our candidate?

ah, its recess, let the kids have some fun, or they will call us racist for spoiling it for them. and REALLY they are not capturing any voters with this-they are just turning them off.

So why in the hell are you insulting us by ridiculing our candidate?

Hillary is insulting the intelligence of many voters with her bullshit about sniper fire in Tuzla and her pandering proposal for a temporary cut in the federal gasoline tax that has been ridiculed by independent economists. The fact that she still has supporters proves other analysts got their demographic studies right. She gets the less well-educated voters and Obama gets those with a better education. That, of course, doesn't include those educated supporters who believe they can get bigger helpings at the White House trough if Bill and Hillary get back in the White House.

As for Obama's past association with the Reverend Wright that Hillary makes so much of, it is nothing compared with Slick Willy's friends, such as Nursultan Nazarbayev and Ron Burkle.

apparently Obama has "educated" voters who aren't smart enough to form a sentance without using foul language and vicious slurs-doesn't say much for our educational system-apparently-some children WERE left behind. From what I've read on the internet blogs, this is not going to be a civil society if he is elected, it will be all out caos

Pretty silly stuff. Now let's get Hillary nominated so we can move to universal health care within 2 years, begin the orderly withdrawal from Iraq while improving engagement within Afghanistan, and get the U.S. economy turned around for the middle class.

Mr. Bodden: By dismissing everybody who supports Hillary Clinton as either "uneducated" or simply seeking political favors, are you not bringing yourself down into the style of politics that Sen. Obama decries on a daily basis?

Your post was probably the most offensive thing that an Obama supporter has said about me as a Clinton supporter thus far. It reeks of hypocrisy that you would debase a group of people for their political beliefs while supporting a candidate who preaches the opposite in the same breath.

(What the heck is that bizarre post above?)

Anyway.. our guy Obama can handle the kitchen sink and all the other rot that Clinton is throwing his way. New poll, he's leading Clinton by 12 pts nationally- 50-38, and McCain by 11pts- 51-40. 68% of Dem. primary voters approve of his handling of the Wright matter. So Hillary can do the George Wallace routine but it just doesn't work.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/5/4/18413/23745/522/509005

its better to look at individual state polls and then applying them to a electoral college map if you want truly useful methods to measure which candidate can do better. A national poll means jack shit in regards to what voters in the states that have yet to vote. Do the samples used for those polls include voters in Oregon and North Carlonia?

This is what we have come to expect from Obama supporters. Mean-spirited, nasty, demeaning know-it-alls who hate Hillary and anybody who supports her or dares to question their new messiah. Hillary's not perfect, but she'll be a tough advocate for all of our progressive ideals and values. That's what we need in the White House. You mean Obama backers -- mean, that is to anybody that doesn't get in line with you and your savior -- please stop. Have a little respect, and tolerate a little dissent and political discourse.

I am wondering about this Messiah-like spectacle with Barack Obama. Folks, he is just another human being. He does not walk on water. Should Mr. Obama become the Democratic nominee he and his supporters will need the rest of the Democrats to vote for him. That means, he will have to have the Hillary supporters...unless of course he has a few miracles up his sleeve...you know, sort of like the fishes and the loaves, where he can produce multiple votes from only the few. This fellow is not God or the Messiah and his "disciples" will soon learn that, either at the Denver Democratic Convention or in the General Election. And by the way, I DO take offense to the black and white views of his followers. They remind me of the same kind of people who blindly followed George W. Bush as he made his way into the White House and beyond.

Hello!!! That production was someone goofing around and posting their "masterpiece" to YouTube. For all the offense being taken, you'd think it had come from Obama's campaign itself. Go ahead and make your own video lampooning Obama. WTF, I'll laugh at it, too.

Joel: I don't think most of the offense is being directed solely at the video, but more in comments like those of Mr. Boddens'.

Hillary sold her soul.

Sandra said "this is not going to be a civil society if he is elected, it will be all out caos"

A little overboard.

Let's not forget it's obviously user added content, not from Obama.

I feel, all this vetting isn't too terribly bad.

I'm ready for Edwards to be the compromise candidate during a contestable delagate count!

This YouTube clip is not part of Obama's ad campaign as some of you seem to think, and there is no disclaimer by Obama that he approves this message. Someone just made it for fun, and it's clever. You whining Clinton supporters are paranoid about her being ridiculed? How about all the savage personal attacks she has made against Obama? How do you expect us Obama supporters to vote for her should she win? Obama, BTW, has the character not to respond in kind.

Oregon is apparently an iffy state for the Democrats this fall. That the clip is on YouTube is neither here nor there. My anger is at Charlie, who posted it HERE. It was a foolish stunt.

If Obama wins the nomination, he will need the support of Hillary's followers to carry Oregon. For some, but not all of the Obama commentators my question is would you rather have fun at Hillary's expense now while calling her followers names, or would you rather win in the fall? If it's the latter, I would suggest a little more dignified approach as you support your candidate.

Now, I think you should support who you think is best. That is what democracy is all about. But please give me the same freedom of thought without calling me names.

Your post was probably the most offensive thing that an Obama supporter has said about me as a Clinton supporter thus far. It reeks of hypocrisy that you would debase a group of people for their political beliefs while supporting a candidate who preaches the opposite in the same breath.

The comment I made that inspired the above quote came from frustration and impatience with Hillary supporters who are locked into their positions and denial. Many of them, including Josh Kardon, Hillary's Oregon point man, have been challenged by several commentators about negatives related to Hillary and, as far as I have noticed none has responded with a valid defense. That's why I'm frustrated. It is not with anyone's political beliefs. And these negatives were serious issues - not the kind of crap that Chris Matthews and his ilk come up with. For example, there was her vote for the war on Iraq, her betrayal of her oath to uphold the Constitution when she cast that vote, and fudging her explanations for that vote. If anything this last item was an insult to the intelligence of many of the American people. I made a charge above about Bill Clinton's associations that make Obama's association with Jeremiah Wright appear insignificant, and no Hillary supporter has responded to that challenge.

For Hillary supporters who haven't been paying attention, I have noted on several occasions that I have reservations about Obama and have been critical of him. I am supporting him, however, because he is the least problematic of the three viable candidates. So, contrary to what Hillary-ites might want to believe I am not one of the starry-eyed fans thinking Obama can walk on water. In fact, I was cynical enough to ask on a thread after Obama's visit to Portland if he walked across the Willamette instead of using a bridge.

As an independent I'm not yet sure what I'll do if Hillary (obliterate Iran) Clinton gets the nomination and runs against John (bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran) McCain. Not much difference there, is there?

There, that was better.

Yup, we agree; neither of these candidates is perfect. I even agree with several of your sentiments about Hillary and also feel Obama is a pretty good guy.

However, after applying my MSEE education, extensive historical reading and almost 50 years of experience in closely watching politics, I have decided that she is the least-worst of the two candidates. I know how frail and full of error that judgment could well be so I am more than a little interested in everyone having a say. My biggest goal is to get a Democrat elected in the fall, thus my ire when the debate goes after the debaters.

FYI Ya'll: Hillary Clinton's comment about obliterating Iran should they launch a nuclear attack on Israel (our 51st state) is simply an extension of our policy of MAD (mutually assurred descruction) we had with regards to the USSR. If the Soviet Union had launched a nuclear attack on any of our allies, we would have responded in kind. But she then states that we must do all we can to prevent Iran from ever getting nuclear weapons. So her statement seems to be a political statement of reassurance for the Jewish lobby since Israel has their own nuclear weapons. Its our nuclear umbrella that allowed Germany, Italy, and Japan to develop their democracies and markets after their defeat after WWII without having to spend much of their own money on defense. So Obama's saying that Hillary sounds like Bush in this regard may not be very productive in that it may raise the distraction of "Would Obama move to defend Israel if it was under attack and needed help?" The answer of course is 'yes', but why raise the question? Bad move.

I think the video mash-up based on Star Wars is very funny. I sure got some good giggles out of it, though I could understand that someone who is supporting Clinton might not find it so humorous.

The mash-up by Matt had me snapping my fingers and dancing in my seat. Nice work.

Thanks for posting the vids.

I did enjoy the acknowledgment of Jay-Z when Obama "brushed the dirt off his shoulders."

No, that was actually Obama flipping the bird to some Clinton supporter. The video footage has been "analyzed" by various folks in the blogosphere. I think these may be the same folks who've identified the Face on Mars and Elvis on the dark side of the Moon.

To Kristin

No, she's like Harry Truman who developed the policy of containment of the USSR in 1950. All presidents have supported the policy since then. Its bipartisan. But there were some right wing nut jobs (led by Robert Taft of Ohio) in the 1950's who were so stricken with fear that they actually wanted to launch a 'pre-emptive nuclear strike' against the USSR before they could launch a first strike. So Bush's idiotic 'pre-emptive strike' idea against Iraq has a long pedigree in right wing Republican lore, and wasn't just to do what 'they should have done in the first Gulf War'.

If it's the latter, I would suggest a little more dignified approach as you support your candidate.

It's funny. Quit the bitching. This wasn't inspired from either candidate but it's funny and it's hilarious. I'd laugh the same if someone in the Clinton camp had come up with it (I actually don't think anyone in the Clinton camp could come up with something as inventive as this).

So her statement seems to be a political statement of reassurance for the Jewish lobby since Israel has their own nuclear weapons.

Don't you get it? We don't acknowledge that Israel broke every rule in the book when it comes to nukes because they were our ally against the Soviets in the Middle East? Why would that be aimed at the Jewish lobby? (this is sarcastic by the way).

As an independent I'm not yet sure what I'll do if Hillary (obliterate Iran) Clinton gets the nomination and runs against John (bomb, bomb, bomb, Iran) McCain. Not much difference there, is there?

Actually yes. Obama and Clinton are very similar and if you've actually followed the campaign you'd know that. I don't like Clinton's campaign tactics because they remind me of the right wing and I think she's so obsessed with winning she'll cut anyone that gets in her way. I don't like that because her sense of entitlement is way out of control but all that being said...compared to John McCain she is my shining light. Don't let that cloud your judgement and if she wins or loses the Dem nomination and you think you couldn't vote for him/her you're an idiot. Compared to John McCain either is a better pick hands down no questions asked.

I still think Chewey should have been Ted Kennedy.

I just watched the Matt Blevins video twice. I love it!

I don't really understand all the angry posts from Clinton supporters in this thread. It's not an attack on her.

Gobama!

Oh dear...much conflict and contention here. Seems like there is a split in the blueoregon party. Seriously, let's not take this too seriously. It's so unlikely that either of these clips will sway anyone's vote, so let's just keep a sense of humor. We sort of have to laugh at ourselves...trying to view the Democratic Party objectively, how we look to the rest of the world. Bickering at every level. Let's suck it up and aim for unity. Don't pet the sweaty stuff.

I don't like that because her sense of entitlement is way out of control but all that being said...compared to John McCain she is my shining light.

Garrett: What you seem to have overlooked or forgotten is that Hillary approved of hubby Bill's maintenance of the U.S.-inspired United Nations sanctions on Iraq that cost, according to some estimates, over two million Iraqis their lives, including half a million children. Madeleine Albright, Clinton's secretary of state, when challenged on "60 Minutes" on this issue said, "We thought it was worth it." "We" must have included Bill and, most likely, Hillary. If she didn't think it was worth it and objected, then why did she stay with Bill? His role was much worse than anything Reverend Wright could ever be accused of. This and her politically-based decision to vote for war (that is, more slaughter) on Iraq and her capacity for even thinking about obliterating Iran suggests that she doesn't place much value on human lives other than her own and those of close associates.

The problem with this issue as far as voters are concerned is that the magnitude of millions of human beings being slaughtered is beyond their comprehension, and they will give Hillary and McCain a pass. It's in line with a comment in a book written by C. Northcote Parkinson (Parkinson's Law) when he said that people will give a lot of consideration to the purchase of a bicycle but less to a multi-million pound (British currency) enterprise because the former is within their range of comprehension while the latter is not.

As for "Obama and Clinton are very similar" they are also very dissimilar in many important respects. Obama has adopted a theme of unity; Hillary has gone for continued divisiveness.

This post from TPM gets at what a lot of folks are feeling about Clinton, unfortunately:

"I want to make a totally separate point. I agree with your posts from about a month ago about how irrational it is for a Democratic voter supporting the losing primary candidate to defect to McCain in November, since Clinton and Obama are so close on the issues compared to McCain. But I have to say, as someone who was marching in New Hampshire in 1991 for Bill Clinton, who ran the campus Democrats for his '92 campaign, who interned in his White House, who argued against impeachment at every turn, who even defended the pardons, who has been an enormous and unwavering admirer, and who has been disgusted with his own parents for their seemingly irrational hatred of Hillary Clinton, there is something about the way she has run this campaign. From having people on her campaign raise Obama's drug use, to her jumping on the bandwagon for every right-wing cheap shot, to her new populist, "got no truck with economists" stance, its been craven. More craven than I could possibly imagine.

If somehow against all odds she got nominated, I'd vote for her, but I'd do so utterly unconvinced that the quality of her leadership wouldn't bring about disastrous results no less than the disastrous results that McCain's wrongheaded policies and own cravenness would bring about. Yes, her policy positions would be much better than McCain's. But if she's this divisive, this self-preserving, this craven, I think the results can still be horrible, even with policy positions that are much closer to mine. At this point I feel like it would be the hardest vote for a Democrat I'd ever cast.

Now, I'm a Democratic fundraiser. And as detailed above, a very long time Clinton supporter. If I'm this repulsed, if it seems this craven to me, and I'm this pessimistic about her leadership, can I be alone? That doesn't even factor in the breach with younger voters, netroots activists, and African-American voters a Clinton nomination would bring about at this point.

Had to get that off my chest."

Hillary has been a supporter of Bush's criminal war right until her campaign started. She also supported the "free trade" economic policies that have just about killed off our middle class up to that point. She would make a much more credible Republican. She has the support of the big corporates and guys like Rupert Murdoch... and even the Philly Enquirer guy (I forgot his name) who helped to bankroll trying to bring husband Bill down. I, for one do not believe she will support ANY progressive agendas if she gets in except, perhaps R vs Wade.

I don't think you will find Barak supporters who who will say he's perfect, or "walks on water", but I believe he is actually more concerned about helping our country get back on the right path than he is about money and power.

I thought it was a great spoof that exaggerated all the truths a little (OK maybe more than a little).

Hillary has been a supporter of Bush's criminal war right until her campaign started. She also supported the "free trade" economic policies that have just about killed off our middle class up to that point. She would make a much more credible Republican. She has the support of the big corporates and guys like Rupert Murdoch... and even the Philly Enquirer guy (I forgot his name) who helped to bankroll trying to bring husband Bill down. I, for one do not believe she will support ANY progressive agendas if she gets in except, perhaps R vs Wade.

I don't think you will find Barak supporters who who will say he's perfect, or "walks on water", but I believe he is actually more concerned about helping our country get back on the right path than he is about money and power.

I thought it was a great spoof that exaggerated all the truths a little (OK maybe more than a little).

She has the support of...the Philly Enquirer guy (I forgot his name) who helped to bankroll trying to bring husband Bill down.

Actually, you're thinking of Richard Mellon Scaife, and he's from Pittsburgh, not Philadelphia.

This thread was supposed to be about a screwball, funny video clip on YouTube, a spoof, but has deteriorated into more fingerpointing and "I'm never going to vote for YOUR candidate" spitefulness.

It seems to be true that nobody has produced a comparable YouTube Clinton poking fun at Obama. I've searched and found nothing. Surely not every "creative class" technogeek is an Obama supporter, so get going! I'm in favor of poking fun at everyone. Good Gawd, if you can't laugh at yourself, you're in trouble.

Oh, and by the way, Obama Girl isn't funny, it's an exhibition of cleavage. Considering all the misogynistic garbage that's been thrown at Hillary Clinton, I wish Obama Girl would go away and remove one more excuse for accusing Obama supporters of being woman-haters.

That was Wow. Thanks Matt. We miss you.

The "educated voters" label simply means that many people who were able to attend college vote for Obama. As far as being wise, smart, savvy, that's another matter. Neither of my parents attended college, but they're level of social, political and international knowledge far surpasses mine.

I have found it rather humorous that many Obama supporters I know are college educated, unemployed, and living at home with their Hillary-supporting blue collar parents.

The comment I made that inspired the above quote came from frustration and impatience with Hillary supporters who are locked into their positions and denial. Many of them, including Josh Kardon, Hillary's Oregon point man, have been challenged by several commentators about negatives related to Hillary and, as far as I have noticed none has responded with a valid defense.

Still no response with a valid defense to charges against the Clintons.

The "educated voters" label simply means that many people who were able to attend college vote for Obama. As far as being wise, smart, savvy, that's another matter. Neither of my parents attended college, but they're level of social, political and international knowledge far surpasses mine.

Educated and attending college or a university are not necessarily the same thing. Some people who never graduated from high school can be considered well-educated. John Steinbeck dropped out of Stanford University and went on to win the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1962. On the other hand there are people who have graduated from the supposedly most prestigious universities in the United States and are considered dumb as a door post; e.g., Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and others who got us into this disaster in Iraq and whose every prediction proved to be a crock of @#$%.

sandra writes:

"apparently Obama has "educated" voters who aren't smart enough to form a sentance without using foul language and vicious slurs-doesn't say much for our educational system-apparently-some children WERE left behind. From what I've read on the internet blogs, this is not going to be a civil society if he is elected, it will be all out caos"

Sandra, were you left behind? Apparently the caos (actually spelled chaos) has already begun and sentances (actually spelled sentences) are being destroyed. The blogs also say that I'm superman, I think I'll go try and stop a moving train.