Obama Couldn’t Get the Catholic Vote in Pennsylvania

The Pew Research released their findings of Catholic voters and candidate choice during the Pennsylvania Presidential Primary.

It shouldn’t be by anyone’s surprise that the exit polls showed Clinton winning the Catholic vote while Obama did well with the African American vote.

According to the Pew Research:

( in the exit polls), Clinton did very well with white Catholics, winning 72% of their vote. She also did well with white Protestants and Jews, winning 59% and 61% of their votes, respectively.

As in the past, Obama did very well with African Americans, most of whom are Protestants, winning 90% of their vote. He also won 62% of the religiously unaffiliated vote. Obama generally did well with non-whites and with religious minorities as well.

Were there any big surprises in the results?

The big surprise was how little change there was in the support for the candidates among religious groups despite the fierce campaigning in the state, which included extensive outreach to the Catholic community. Obama, for example, received strong support from Sen. Bob Casey, a popular Catholic politician. Some analysts expected the “Casey Democrats” to shift toward Obama and help him break into the white Catholic vote, but this didn’t really happen.

This result is reminiscent of the inability of Ted Kennedy to deliver white Catholics to Obama in the Massachusetts primary. All told, Clinton’s outreach to Catholics appears to have been more effective than Obama’s — but the same could also be said about her outreach to other faith groups.

Do we know why white Catholic voters have been choosing Clinton over Obama?

Not exactly. But the exit polls and other data reveal that the economy was the most important issue to Pennsylvania Democrats. We know that Catholic organizations, such as Catholics United, Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good and Catholics for the Common Good, have been emphasizing the theme of “the common good” in Pennsylvania and elsewhere. Clinton’s speeches on the economy, which include long lists of specific policy proposals, may well have boosted her standing among the state’s Catholics who share these concerns. She also likely benefited from memories of the more prosperous economy during her husband’s administration.

So does Obama have a serious problem attracting Catholic voters nationally?

From the point of view of the primaries, it appears that he does. The Obama campaign has made a strong effort to deal with this problem but has had only limited success so far.

Could this problem persist in the general election if Obama is the Democratic nominee? It might, and, if so, it would pose a challenge for Obama in battleground states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan. We should keep in mind, however, that many of the Democratic Catholics who did not vote for Obama in the primaries might well support him in the fall against John McCain. But on the other hand, not all white Catholics are Democrats — many are independents or Republicans. If nothing else, this means that white Catholics are a key group to watch.

To be fair, one might also ask if Clinton has an “African American problem” or an “unaffiliated problem.” After all, she has not done well with these groups in the primaries, and she will need strong support from these voters in the fall if she is her party’s nominee. One substantial difference, however, is that black Protestants and unaffiliated voters tend to be more strongly Democratic in their partisanship than white Catholics, so it might be easier for Clinton to rally them.

Read the full report about Obama’s Catholic Vote Problem here.

Roger Waters for Obama

From the AP:

Roger Waters brought Coachella to a close with an epic two-set performance that included playing all of “Dark Side of the Moon” and unleashing a giant inflated pig into the night sky.

The 64-year-old Waters, the third headliner of the three-day music festival following Prince and Jack Johnson, performed an elaborate, almost retrospective concert Sunday featuring music from throughout Pink Floyd’s catalog.

Old photographs of the band often flashed across the screen behind Waters and his current band, which played songs from “The Wall,” “Wish You Were Here” and “Animals,” among other Floyd albums. They also played “Dark Side” in its entirety, culminating with the album’s iconic triangle prism rising above the stage.

But Waters’ biggest prop was an inflatable pig the size of a school bus that emerged while he played a version of “Pigs” from 1977’s capitalism critique, “Animals.”

The pig, which was led above the crowd from lines held on the ground, displayed the words “Don’t be led to the slaughter” and a cartoon of Uncle Sam wielding two bloody cleavers. The other side read “Fear builds walls.”

The underside of the pig simply read “Obama” with a checked ballot box alongside.

As Waters drew the song to a close, flame bursts exploded on the sides of the stage and the swine floated into the night sky. Waters said sadly and comically, “That’s my pig.”

The performance also included speaker towers placed around the outside of the crowd. Smoke machines funneled across the stage and over the audience, thickening the atmosphere.

Post Penn Primary Commentary: Red State Update

Oh dear God…If you have not seen these guys before, be prepared.

These guys have been posting YouTube videos for quite some time. They’re rude, crude, and claim to be residents of a heavy red state. Their website is like a train wreck – you can’t help but look around.

Whether you’re a Dem or Republican, you can’t help but laugh.

From their website:

Red State Update with Jackie Broyles and Dunlap, coming to you from a bunker underneath Jackie’s Market in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. Y’all feel free to look at our latest videos, buy stuff with our face on it, hell, stay all night with us if you like– we’ll make y’all a pallet on the floor.

WARNING: explicit language

Sen. Clinton Victory in Pennsylvania

As of this posting (10:19pm CST), CNN is reporting Sen. Hillary Clinton the victor in the Pennsylvania primary, 10 points ahead of Sen. Barack Obama and 88% of the precincts reporting.

The exit polls were already showing a sharp division per CNN:

Exit polls indicated that Philadelphia and its suburbs made up more than 30 percent of the vote, and those boxes were tilted heavily toward Obama. But Clinton supporters turned out heavily in Pittsburgh and the counties of western Pennsylvania, and she was racking up similarly lopsided margins in the state’s industrial northeast, those surveys found.

Clinton was expected to clench the blue collar workers while Obama drew in the college vote. The Democratic electorate in Pennsylvania includes more college-educated voters — a voting bloc that has reliably supported Obama.

The exit polls (2,217 respondents) also showed 59% of voters were women and 41% men. 52% of the males were for Obama and 57% of the females were for Sen. Clinton. Looks like in Pennsylvania the men stuck with the male candidate and the women stayed with the female candidate.

Voters under 40 years old were for Obama; over 40 for Clinton.

David Paul Kuhn of The Politico gives his explanation for how Clinton pulled off Pennsylvania.

Bill Clinton and the Voodoo Doll vs. “Race Card” Defense on Radio

Listen to Bill Clinton defending past remarks about Sen. Obama playing the race card, not himself. Be sure to listen to the very end…former President Clinton thought he had hung up the phone. You can hear him saying, “I don’t think I should take any sh** from anybody on that, do you?” obviously speaking to someone in the car or room where he was calling from.

After hearing Bill Clinton on the radio today (taped radio interview from the 21st) I needed some humor. Sooo…

This is from 2006 but still fun to watch! Enjoy

I wonder if Hillary is planning on using one of these…

S. Carolina High School Student Arrested For Bomb Plot

It still amazes me how easy it is for anyone – especially a high school student – to get the materials to make a bomb.

From ABC News:

The alleged plotter, Ryan Schallenberger, 18, was due in court Monday afternoon for a bond hearing. He was arrested Saturday after his parents called police because 10 pounds of ammonium nitrate was delivered to their home in Chesterfield. Police also said they discovered a disturbing journal.

“He seemed to hate the world. He hated people different from him — the rich boys with good-looking girlfriends,” said the town’s police chief, Randall Lear.

Schallenberger was one of the top students at the high school of about 580 students and had not caused any serious problems before his arrest, principal Scott Radkin said.

The teen was in the Chesterfield County jail Sunday night, charged with possessing materials to make bombs, the police chief said. Other than the bomb-making material, no other weapons were found at his home, Lear said.

Schallenberger kept a journal for more than a year that detailed his plans for a suicide attack and included maps of the school, police said. The writings did not include a specific time for the attack or the intended targets.

The teen planned to make several bombs and had all the supplies needed to kill dozens, depending on where the devices were placed and whether they included shrapnel, Lear said. Ammonium nitrate was used in the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995 that killed 168 people.

The 13th anniversary of the Oklahoma City Bombing was yesterday, Sunday the 20th.

Civil Rights Act 1871 aka Ku Klux Klan Act: Political History for Thought

The Civil Rights Museum

137 years ago today:

April 20, 1871

Congress passes the Civil Rights Act of 1871, a.k.a. the Ku Klux Klan Act. The Klan had formed in the immediate aftermath of the Civil War to keep the freed slaves down, and many of the recently repatriated Southern states had governments that were sympathetic to the Klan’s campaign of terror and violence. When, in 1870, the Republican governor of North Carolina, William Woods Holden, tried to call out the state militia to fight the Klan, he was impeached. The Klan Act made it possible to use federal troops to enforce the law and to prosecute Klansmen in federal courts. And it worked. Many Klansmen were imprisoned, and the Klan was effectively neutralized, not re-emerging as a major force until 1915. However, the civil rights gains of the former slaves were short-lived. Within a few years Southern Democrats had regained control of their states, and in 1877 President Rutherford Hayes withdrew federal troops from the former Confederacy, ending Reconstruction and leaving the freedmen on their own.

Be sure to click on the picture above to visit the museum and learn more about the various civil rights acts.

From Today in Political History on Newsweek.com

Obama and Clinton Debate: Who Came Out Ahead?

Democratic Debate Between Sen. Obama and Sen. Clinton Sponsored by ABC News and Facebook

Did you watch the Democratic debate on ABC Wednesday night? While Sen. Obama seemed to struggle the first part of the debate, Sen. Clinton really offered nothing in the way of a “take charge” kind of campaign. Well, I guess if you call her attacks on Obama taking charge. She really needed to stand out at tonight’s debate but I’m left scratching my head and wondering who really came out ahead. I tend to lean more toward Obama, mostly because he had to answer questions about Rev. Wright’s remarks and defend his own “bitter” comments.

Sen. Clinton stood tall and well versed but seemed to stammer and never really come to a clear answer when she was questioned about her misstatements regarding sniper fire in Bosnia.

And what about the comment to Sen. Obama about his patriotism and not wearing the American flag pin? To the person that asked him about the pin – Where in the hell have you been? This is so old news and he must have answered this type of question at least a dozen times last year. You couldn’t ask him something about taxes or something more important?

Neither one of them would really comment on agreeing to a “dream ticket” however, Clinton did say that she has confidence that Democrats will go to the polls for either her or Obama come November. She said that there may be differences between the two of them, but the differences are much closer in comparison than to those of McCain. In other words, she was making a point to tell Democrats to support the blue ticket and that McCain is not an option come November. AMEN.

According to an ABC poll, viewers seem to think that Obama came out ahead in the debate.

I’m not so sure. I do think that both candidates need to be answering more questions about taxes and the economy. Anyway, I’m a little disappointed by the whole thing.

What do you think?

From Facebook:

Will Hillary Get The Colbert Bump?

I have a political science professor that gave me this paper to read this past weekend. The paper, which will be presented in the upcoming July issue of PS: Political Science and Politics, explains the pattern of success or lack of, when a congressional or presidential candidate appears on The Colbert Report and in turn, receives a “Colbert Bump” in financial support. He compares the “Hall of Heroes” (those who are brave enough to go on the show) and the “Hall of Cowards” (speaks for itself!). I had to chuckle yesterday as I was reading it, wondering how long and even if Sen. Hillary Clinton was going to make the big step and appear on the show just for the possibility that it might help her campaign. Low and behold, I read last night that she will indeed make her appearance on the Comedy Central political news show this Thursday.

James Fowler, author of the academic paper, “The Colbert Bump in Campaign Donations:
More Truthful than Truthy,” discusses Stephen Colbert’s own presidential run and popularity.

These graphs show that Democrats who appear on The Colbert Report enjoy a significant
increase in the number and total amount of donations they receive in the next 30-40 days, compared to similar candidates who do not appear on the show.

Fowler also states that some politicians are leary of going on the show:

Nancy Pelosi recommended that members of her own party avoid the show—she might have been projecting her expectations about her own performance if she were to appear.

You’ll have to read Fowler’s paper to understand just how this plays in. I suggest you print it out (it’s not as dull as you think), pour a cup of coffee and enjoy what political scientists really get to study. I guess I wasn’t too far off when I decided to do Political Blogs as a thesis. In any case, I’ll be watching Thursday night and we’ll just have to see if Clinton gets the bump or not.

McCain is Banking on Obama’s “Bitter” Remark

 

Wow. If thisisn’t flooding the blogs and new media this afternoon. McCain’s campaign jumped right on the heels of Sen. Obama’s “elitist” comment last week to head a new campaign strategy.

From an email sent to Sen. McCain’s supporters entilited, “A bitter America?”:

If Barack Obama is the Democrat nominee in the general election, the American people will have a clear choice between two different visions – Senator Obama’s liberal, elitist philosophy and John McCain’s faith in the small town values that continue to make America great. John McCain will not forget them or write them off. Neither should Barack Obama.

We are up against a large fundraising hurdle if Barack Obama is the nominee and we need your help now. Even before the general election begins, the differences are clear, we must do everything we can to make sure these beliefs don’t make it into the White House.

The fundraising email was sent out to encourage America to keep such an “elitist” out of the White House. What about Hillary’s whiskey “chugging” (that’s not how you take a whiskey shot!) and beer chaser antics at an Indiana bar on Saturday? Next McCain’s campaign will be attacking that alcoholics don’t belong in the White House either.

Don’t you just love dirty politics???

President Bush to Reduce Troop Size and Time in Middle East

President Bush will announce today his plan to decrease troop size and tour of duty lengths per the Washington Post. General Petraeus’ testimony on Capitol Hill this week seems to have left an impression with Bush.

I will honestly believe this when I see it happening with my own two eyes.

From the Washington Post (free registration required):

President Bush plans to announce today that he will cut Army combat tours in Iraq from 15 months to 12 months, returning rotations to where they were before last year’s troop buildup in an effort to alleviate the tremendous stress on the military, administration officials said.

The move is in response to intense pressure from service commanders who have expressed anxiety about the toll of long deployments on their soldiers and, more broadly, about the U.S. military’s ability to confront unanticipated threats. Bush will announce the decision during a national speech, in which aides said he will also embrace Army Gen. David H. Petraeus’s plan to indefinitely suspend a drawdown of forces.

The bottom line seems to be that after pulling out the extra forces Bush sent last year, the United States will keep about 140,000 troops in Iraq at least through the November presidential election. In the short term, the debate in Washington instead will focus more intently on trade-offs at home, including the strain on the armed forces and the Treasury.

The elimination of 15-month tours will restore deployments to an equal balance of one year in the war zone followed by one year at home. Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates extended the tours almost exactly a year ago to provide enough forces for Bush’s “surge” of 20,000 additional combat troops and 8,000 support troops. But Army leaders have complained about the strain.

Gen. Richard A. Cody, the Army’s outgoing vice chief of staff, told the House Armed Services Committee yesterday that the Army is “out of balance” and that the current demand for forces in Iraq and Afghanistan “exceeds the sustainable supply.” He added that “soldiers, families, support systems and equipment are stretched and stressed by the demands of lengthy and repeated deployments, with insufficient recovery time.”

“Stretched” to say the least. Where do you see this most notably? How about when there is a natural disaster such as flooding or tornado clean-up and there is little of the National Guard left to go around. It’s the same scenario with boarder duty right now. A lot of land to keep an eye on, little troops to assign down south.

Being around the military for as long as I have, I just never count on anything until it actually happens. I never understood the whole 15 month tour. It’s bad enough to have to stay focused on your mission for a year, but 15 months? I only hope that Bush’s plan is true and followed through as promised.

Please, please stop by America Supports You and send a message to the troops.

Obama’s Gonna Take Away My Second Admendment Rights!

Ummm.. No he isn’t. Living in Texas, I have to hear crap like this all the time and not just about Sen. Obama but also about Sen. Clinton.

This posting today is in response to a comment that was left on my previous post but I need to address it because I had to endure comments like this at the senate convention and occasionally when people try to put their “knowledge” in about which candidate will really being screwing society. I’ll be putting my own two cents in (because I’m a blogger and I can!) at the end of this post so be sure to read through.

First of all:

The comment posted was:

“Obama isn’t telling how he stands on issues, such as he is for the banning of guns. Obama will not be able to be wishy washy in the general election. The American people have a right to know where he stands on issues! Hunters should be flopping to Hillary Clinton now and to McCain later!”

Okay, first of all, as I put in my response, whether you vote Obama or Hillary, just be sure you vote for either!

PROTECTING GUN RIGHTS
Respect the Second Amendment: Millions of hunters own and use guns each year. Millions more participate
in a variety of shooting sports such as sporting clays, skeet, target and trap shooting that may not necessarily involve hunting. As a former constitutional law professor, Barack Obama believes the Second Amendment creates an individual right, and he greatly respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms. He will protect the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport, and use guns for the purposes of hunting and target shooting. He also believes that the right is subject to reasonable and commonsense regulation.

Secondly, I almost wanted to reach over and strangle the man sitting close by me at the convention when he said if Hillary didn’t win, he was voting for McCain. Are you kidding? He said that Obama is going to get rid of all of our nuclear weapons and that Russia will just be waiting to wipe us off the planet. I have no idea where he pulled this little tidbit from because I have never heard like this. As usual, he may have only heard a blip of something Sen. Obama has said or something that was taken out of context, but here is Obama’s stand on the issues of nuclear weapons and foreign policy. I must be blind because I don’t see where his plan is to get rid of our nuclear weapons. Keep in mind, when this man at the convention made his declaration for Hillary and then McCain, it was before Sen. Obama’s recent statement,

I think it would be a profound mistake for us to use nuclear weapons in any circumstance” in Afghanistan or Pakistan, Obama said. He then added that he would not use such weapons in situations “involving civilians.”

“Let me scratch that,” he said. “There’s been no discussion of nuclear weapons. That’s not on the table.”

Now I’m not sure if this was taken out of context or exactly how it was meant, but I know that he did make a statement about not using nuclear weapons against Osama bin Laden. Why would you anyway? All it would take to get rid of bin Laden is to actually FIND HIM, maybe include a grenade, mortar round, and throw in a few shots from an M-16. But go nuclear? Good grief. If a top advisor on foreign policy has endorsed Sen. Obama, than that’s good enough for me.

I’m so blasted disgusted with hearing people who call themselves Democrats making statements such as “If ’so an so candidate’ doesn’t win, I’m voting for McCain!” MCCAIN? Seriously people, that is not a statement you should be proud to make if you are truly are a democrat. Just sit back and think about.

You may not like certain things Clinton says or certain things Obama states, or whether or not you “think” you know how they stand on issues that liberals believe in. BUT and I stress a big BUT here, who would McCain appoint to the Supreme Court? How much longer is your husband, son, brother, loved one or even your children (AS THEY GROW OLDER ) going to be in Iraq or Afghanistan? We are only in 2008 and my husband has been slated for a 2010 deployment.

Yes…reality is that the military IS planning that far ahead. Before you think of going red and leaving your blue morals at home, what are the long term effects? I’m stressing longer term in the case of a president coming and going but members of the Supreme Court AND their decisions hanging around. On one hand McCain says that he doesn’t believe that a woman’s right to choose should be a judicial issue but then he goes on to state that the Pro-Life movement has made tremendous strides and that adoption might be a better path. Furthermore, he even has the statement, “At its core, abortion is a human tragedy. To effect meaningful change, we must engage the debate at a human level.” right on his website! Before you get into a tiffy, see what he has to say about the issues directly from his website.

Is this a choice for Democrats? NO.

Shame on any “democrat” that says he/she won’t support the candidate that they didn’t vote for in the primaries.

Whether it’s Sen. Clinton or Sen. Obama on our ticket this November, I’ll be there in my BLUE shirt, BLUE jeans, and BLUE vote.

There’s my two cents.

Have You Flip-Flopped Your Choice For the Democratic Nomination?

You’re not the only one. I went back and forth, only deciding the month before we went to the polls. Gallup released their findings today stating that 1 in 4 Democrats have switched candidate choice at least once. The report also shows that support for Sen. Obama has increased since the start of the primary season in January. 19% of all Democrats and Democratic leaners — have moved out of Clinton’s ranks and into Obama’s, while 7% have taken the reverse path, switching from Obama to Clinton per their report.

Despite the cumulative amount of change in the Democratic race since January, only 26% of Democrats indicate they have changed their preference from one of the top two candidates to the other. Most appear to be steadfast in their support for either Clinton or Obama.

Obama has been in front, with his lead over Clinton reaching 10 points (52% vs. 42%) in late March.

Should be interesting to watch is these numbers tighten again after the debate on the 16th.

Blogger Protection Act of 2008

So I’m a week late and a dollar short. I was doing research tonight for my thesis “Political Blogs: Are they an influence in the political realm?” that I’m presenting this week (don’t worry, just the final touches for any last minute breaking news) and I stumbled upon this. I was aware of talks about the bill last month but I’ve been so up to my eyeballs in thesis work that I’d forgotten all about it.

On April 3rd, the “Blogger Protection Act of 2008” was introduced by Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX). The bill would protect bloggers from strict campaign finance regulations.

What does this mean? Bloggers and their blogs would have the same protections granted to other forms of media under federal campaign finance laws. Additionally, they would have the same First Amendment rights as those in traditional media. (Just don’t get paid by their campaign to blog!)

The legislation also protects bloggers from ever being considered to have made a contribution or expenditure on behalf of, or in opposition to, a candidate by simply linking to campaign websites or writing about the positions of federal candidates.

Another advancement for recognizing bloggers as the “citizen journalists” they (we?) are! You may recall the decision in favor of DailyKos last September. The ruling stated that the elite Liberal Political Blog did not violate the Federal Election Campaign Act and any campaign finance law.

Woohoo!

From Rep. Jeb Hensarling’s website:

Two years ago, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) issued regulations that protected bloggers from being hampered by certain campaign finance laws. Under these regulations, bloggers cannot be considered to have made a contribution or expenditure on behalf of (or in opposition to) a candidate simply because they link to campaign websites or write about the positions of federal candidates. Additionally, blogs are treated as any other publication under the general media exemption from most campaign finance restrictions. Without such protections, bloggers could be subject to various limitations and reporting requirements under campaign finance law.

But these blogger protections are just regulatory—they are not in statute. As you may know, regulations can be changed without congressional action, and there’s no telling what a future FEC might decide to do. Furthermore, the FEC is currently defunct because of vacancies and a lack of quorum. Therefore, we shouldn’t put the freedom of bloggers in the regulatory hands of the FEC. Congress should protect them in law.

That’s why next week I’m introducing the Blogger Protection Act of 2008—to put the FEC’s regulatory protections of the freedom of bloggers into law.

If you want to support the bill, you can download this pdf file from Comparative Politics and send it to Congress. HURRY!

Blogging is Hazardous to Your Health

Seriously…weight loss or gain, sleep disorders, exhaustion from blogging? Sheesh. I’m glad that I’m just a nobody who doesn’t get paid to do this…

As for blogging being the cause of stress and even death in these individual’s lives, substitute blogging for any other job like let’s say, a surgeon, air traffic controller, or even a mother of three year old twins and this story wouldn’t even be making the news rounds.

Here’s a piece from the full story at the NY Times:

They work long hours, often to exhaustion. Many are paid by the piece — not garments, but blog posts. This is the digital-era sweatshop. You may know it by a different name: home.

A growing work force of home-office laborers and entrepreneurs, armed with computers and smartphones and wired to the hilt, are toiling under great physical and emotional stress created by the around-the-clock Internet economy that demands a constant stream of news and comment.

Of course, the bloggers can work elsewhere, and they profess a love of the nonstop action and perhaps the chance to create a global media outlet without a major up-front investment. At the same time, some are starting to wonder if something has gone very wrong. In the last few months, two among their ranks have died suddenly.

Two weeks ago in North Lauderdale, Fla., funeral services were held for Russell Shaw, a prolific blogger on technology subjects who died at 60 of a heart attack. In December, another tech blogger, Marc Orchant, died at 50 of a massive coronary. A third, Om Malik, 41, survived a heart attack in December.

To be sure, there is no official diagnosis of death by blogging, and the premature demise of two people obviously does not qualify as an epidemic. There is also no certainty that the stress of the work contributed to their deaths. But friends and family of the deceased, and fellow information workers, say those deaths have them thinking about the dangers of their work style.

The pressure even gets to those who work for themselves — and are being well-compensated for it.

“I haven’t died yet,” said Michael Arrington, the founder and co-editor of TechCrunch, a popular technology blog. The site has brought in millions in advertising revenue, but there has been a hefty cost. Mr. Arrington says he has gained 30 pounds in the last three years, developed a severe sleeping disorder and turned his home into an office for him and four employees. “At some point, I’ll have a nervous breakdown and be admitted to the hospital, or something else will happen.”

Some advise for the “working” bloggers of the world, take a vacation and destress. It’s just a job like everyone else’s. At least you are getting paid to do so. Would you rather be broke and without work?

Obama Girl’s Video to Hillary Clinton

Obama Girl to Hillary Clinton: Stop the Attacks!

Chris Matthews has a crush on Obama?

Just a note: If you watch the commercial at the end, there is language that some may find offensive.