HuskyCaucasian

Just saw on MSNBC that the Clinton campaign is trying to start a movement to count the Florida delegates. This is in direct opposition to the rules layed out by the DNC and a pledge she herself made. Now she is trying to pin Edwards and Obama into support the movement. Why does she want them to count? Well, no one has campaigned there... she is winning by a lot... so she wants the delegates! What a sleaze bag!

A group of elite hackers known as "Anonymous" has announced a war on Scientology. Last week they announced their intentions via a YouTube video (shown below) and last weekend took the Scientology website down for the entire weekend! More information is available in this Wired.com article.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jan 25, 2008 -> 10:39 AM) Check out the lower right hand corner of the webpage. That was what I meant when i said there was just a small little icon. At least Obama posted it on his own website (hasnt been updated in a while).

QUOTE(Reddy @ Jan 25, 2008 -> 10:38 AM) as usual, Edwards making a late surge (up to 19.2% RCP Average) but it's not gonna be enough to grab 2nd. why do people wait so god damned long to realize their best option? lol actually, last I saw there is about 15% undecided. Edwards can make this close. I kinda hope he does. Wouldnt mind Hillary in 3rd. but also as we were just discussing, a strong representation by Edwards could help Obama at convention time.

QUOTE(southsideirish71 @ Jan 25, 2008 -> 10:22 AM) How 2 grown men are attacking a poor defenseless woman, vote for bill( I mean me). She doesnt even have the NUTS to put this on her webpage. Need to put it at a separate URL with a small little thing in the corner that says "Paid for by Hillary Clinton for President".

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Jan 25, 2008 -> 10:10 AM) Obama on Letterman (Top 10 List) I saw it last night. Not as funny as I had hoped. Letterman's Top 10 often fall flat or make no sense. I think Obama could have done better if he had written them himself.

QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jan 25, 2008 -> 09:06 AM) So who would he go with? The "secret meeting" between Clinton and Edwards last weekend now looms larger, doesn't it? I have to say, he'd be pretty hypocritical if he chose Clinton. When I hear him speak, he is always trumpeting very similar values as Obama and they were closely tied at the beginning of the primaries. He is trying in more recent days to be more "forceful" about his contrasts with Obama and Clinton because he needs to stand out. While his supporters might flock to Clinton if he dropped out, I really see him endorsing Obama in the end.

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 24, 2008 -> 09:18 PM) Notice a few things? For one, the average is a double digit lead. For another, the polls with the lowest totals are the ones with smaller numbers of respondants. And one of them, the Clemson +7, has numbers that are nowhere near the other polls for all 3 candidates, including a near-50% undecided number. Note this... ReutersC-Span/Zogby.... 01/22 - 01/24.... (811 LV).... 38-Obama.... 25-Clinton.... 21 -Edwards.... 16-Undecided/Other....... Obama +13.0 Large samples show a larger lead. Larger samples are ALWAYS more reliable.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 25, 2008 -> 08:22 AM) I think you would have to go back to the Civil War to get a race with 4 major candidates, correct? Well, kinda. Here are the elections that had major "third party" involvement since 1850... 1856 1860 (probably the most divided year ever) 1872 1912 1948 So, if it goes Clinton / Romney... there could be a rac unlike anything we have seen before with a third party. It could easily go 40%-30%-30%.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 25, 2008 -> 07:54 AM) For those who are interested, the pic is front and center on Drudge. I'll be honest, I laughed my ass of when I saw it. Politicians pose with people all the time. More research will have to be done, but it is a distinct possibility that it is a fluke.

Why a Lifelong Democrat Will NEVER Vote for Clinton This is so well writen. Much better and well thought out than my rant a few pages back. Well done whoever you are...

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 24, 2008 -> 09:53 PM) Not a chance. He's young enough that he'll have a strong chance against President McCain in 2012 if he loses this race. And he's basically already the front runner for that. hmmm.... interesting point. If McCain wins, I bet he wears thin on America in the first 2 years. I just cant get the Bloomburg / Obama meeting out of my head. It might have been something so minor (looking for an endorsement), but it just stands out to me.

Ok, COMPLETELY random idea / question here. Do you think Obama would have the nuts to run for president even IF he lost the Democratic bid? Maybe team up with a strong independent like Bloomburg (just an example, not a proposal) and run under a new party or as independent? If it's Romney / Clinton... i see a HUGE opening for an independent and with Obama's desire to find the middle and unite America... seems like a nice angle.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 24, 2008 -> 08:50 PM) NY Times with the Hillary endorsement Ya know, I am starting to really believe newspaper endorsements are largely pointless. They might move the polls a few points, but largely dont matter. I would have said differently a few months ago, but now I really dont think they matter. Especially this one where hillary is far a head in NY. It's like if the Trib endorsed Obama when in the last poll he had 50% support in Illinois.

QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jan 24, 2008 -> 04:33 PM) Both the Obama and Clinton campaigns have agreed to pull their negative ads against each other in SC. Good for both of them.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 24, 2008 -> 03:09 PM) I just received an email from Obama's campaign and one line stood out. He talks about a former President campaigning for Hillary. I was thinking, knowing at least the public history between the Clintons and Carters if Jimmy Carter will be campaigning for Obama at some point. I also wonder if it would be of any help. Here is the quote for those who didnt get that e-mail. i HIGHLY doubt Carter would campaign.

QUOTE(BigSqwert @ Jan 24, 2008 -> 02:41 PM) This person does a good job of summarizing my thoughts. In the fairness department, it is my understanding that Bill has been working on poverty at least the last few years and he was fairly active after Katrina (remember those Clinton / Bush 41 things?)

A GOP ace in the hole?

Clinton's Pull Obama attack ad.

Interesting note for you LOST fans out there... there are apparently a few "cross overs" or "easter eggs" in the movie with connections to LOST. I dont think this is spoilerish so, i wont tag it, but... 1) Beth's last name... McIntyre. As in Hugh McIntyre, Communications Director of the Hanso Foundation 2) Lily's Last name.. Ford. As in James "Sawyer" Ford. 3) There is a screen shot of the lower right hand corner of the screen at the beginning. Apparently a Dharma logo flashes for less than a second. Apparently Abrams did an interview and said he put Lost easter eggs into the movie, but they have no connection to Lost whatsoever

QUOTE(KipWellsFan @ Jan 22, 2008 -> 01:19 PM) Kind of off topic but I saw this brought up in the imdb message boards. http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/06/13/bloop/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloop wierd!!!

QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Jan 24, 2008 -> 11:18 AM) I believe she said that he "never takes responsibility" for his votes and actions. Again, the Rovian method of projection. Obama has been much more clear as to the reasons why he did or did not vote for the things he did, than Hillary has been. Agreed. Sometimes you need to step back and research a statement made by a candidate. When she said that in the debate I immediately thought "wait a second, he always stands by his records and doesn't deflect. You are the one who brushes off the hard 'personal' question." And by personal I mean anything negative about her.

QUOTE(Texsox @ Jan 24, 2008 -> 10:35 AM) It's also sad that bloggers are held to a lower standard than big media. oh that is very true. I have said for a while some of the best research is done by motivated bloggers, but they are over shadowed by those that are two bit hacks or spammers that dont do any research.

QUOTE(Athomeboy_2000 @ Jan 24, 2008 -> 10:33 AM) oh it's total BS, that's why I dont like her. But she'll get away with it. All she needs to do is keep secrets hidden until Feb 6th. Yes Feb 5th isnt everything, but it'll give her momentum. The media seems so afraid to actually do work. It's sad the some of the best research is done by bloggers and major media largely ignores it. I should note, I really believe that this "smear" campaign by the Clintons is a direct attempt to get people to not talk about her record or her past. they want a diversion.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jan 24, 2008 -> 10:31 AM) It doesn't work both way. She can claim experience for working on the good things in the White House, but not on the dirty underhanded stuff that was going on at the sametime. Its one way or the other. Either she was a part of what went on, or she wasn't. She doesn't get to pick and choose what benefits her. That's BS. oh it's total BS, that's why I dont like her. But she'll get away with it. All she needs to do is keep secrets hidden until Feb 6th. Yes Feb 5th isnt everything, but it'll give her momentum. The media seems so afraid to actually do work. It's sad the some of the best research is done by bloggers and major media largely ignores it.