Santa Barbara Politics, Media & Culture

Friday, January 04, 2008

The Obama Connection to Santa Barbara

Community Post by David Pritchett

Now that Barack Obama really has our attention now, his speech and campaign rally at Santa Barbara City College last September, and recent inspired interviews with the local campaign organizers, are featured in the latest episode of Off-Leash Public Affairs, a video show about local politics and community events.

The crowd at SBCC was later estimated at 6000 to 8000, or about 3% of the total Democratic voters participating in the Iowa Caucus last Thursday night.

This one-hour video is now playing on community-access cable TV-17 and forever on the Internets. Look up Episode 013 at or see the show on cable channel 17 per this schedule:

Friday, 04 January, 1100 hrs. (11 am)
Sunday, 06 January, 2100 hrs. (9 pm)
Monday, 07 January, 2100 hrs. (9 pm)

Additional TV-17 replay times should be added up through the California Primary election on Super-Duper Tuesday, 5th February.

California voting by mail ("permanent absentee") starts next week, and so will the saturation advertising!!

Labels: ,


Anonymous Anonymous said...

The Obama public event here was long on hype and exceedingly short on substance.

Don't forget the public rally was hastily cobbled together after rank criticism of his rich folks Oprah only presence in our town.

He was forced to meet the little people for his image sake; not because this was his first intention.

I personally never want a two pack a day smoker to be elected to anything. That level of misjudgment violating his own personal space as well as those around him should never be rewarded with national trust.

He is skinny and scary and his prior evangelical training leaks out in his stump style. Americans appear to want to be preached to in our increasingly secular society. And we know all to well where unfettered religious fervor has let us to - hypocracy and betrayal.

Just say no to the Obama machine.

1/04/2008 9:41 AM  
Anonymous Obama Girl in SB said...

The video is cool. Like the host said at the beginning, the speeches by Obama have become far more detailed since this one in early September, four months ago.

That comment above is so bizarre in many ways, like claiming a former smoker is now ineligible to be elected to higher office?

And a speaker with uplifting cadence and pronunciation in his speaking style somehow makes the content become religious?

This video about Obama in Santa Barbara seems like a real service to the public.

1/04/2008 5:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Ever consider whether to "jump" your posts to the inside comments page to preserve more front page space for your headlines? You could start a post, then finish it as the first comment of the comments section. This would free up topic headlines to "hang around" more on the front and allow you to control how long they remain, with some limitations, of course, that mainly being a fixed chronology.

1/04/2008 6:16 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

NOTICE: I will not accept any comment that is racist in nature. Do not even try as I will not tolerate it -- it is a waste of your time. I can't believe that this happens in this day and age.

1/04/2008 6:42 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

6:16 PM -- not a bad idea except that blogger doesn't work as a regular web page. I'll take a look and maybe we can test it as it may illicit more comments. Thanks so much for the input.

1/04/2008 7:06 PM  
Anonymous Change is more than a buzzword said...

The SB Hillary Caucus-watching party had over 100 people there. Good to remind ourselves that there are people who actually have voted in the past and HAVE some life experience who ALSO believe in "change"....not just change for change's sake as the Obama spin seems to promote.....but real, substantive, policy change with a depth and intelligence that will have lasting impact.
Not too late for those of you who are more interested in substance than spin to make the switch to Hillary!

1/04/2008 7:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the Democratic party selects Obama as its candidate it will result in a very easy and sure victory for a Republican president

1/04/2008 7:58 PM  
Anonymous Check out this analysis said...

Why not watch that video first and then comment?

The video is at the link to that web site.

1/04/2008 8:32 PM  
Blogger Bill Carson said...

If the Democratic party selects Hillary as its candidate it will result in a very easy and sure victory for a Republican president.

1/04/2008 9:00 PM  
Anonymous eight santa barbara said...

Hilary is to Dems as Romney is to Reps: both big on money, both very polished, both big on spin, both come across as not having a shred of conviction (you know, following the polls and changing with the office and the political winds).

That is unfortunate. Folks actually want to be able to like their candidate. With the demeanor and manner in which Obama and Huckabee speak, they are the ones who get people to like them. They are uplifting with their speeches. Sometimes light on substance, but both capture that 'head of state' aspect of the job very well.

Obama has a ways to go in making sure folks also like him for the 'head of government' part-- the one that truly matters, but the one folks consider second (whether they realize it or not).

I saw a poll the other day that showed folks think Hilary would be a better executive. But she didn't capture the hearts, the confidence, and provide that uplifting spirit that Obama could.

Edwards comes across as more believable than Hilary. She needs to take some lessons from Bill. Darrell Hammond, doing his best Bill impersonation, said at the White House Correspondents dinner years ago that Bill Clinton is so charismatic, only he could get away with saying to a woman "If you'd only let me see you naked, there would be no more racism."

1/04/2008 10:03 PM  
Anonymous Anyone but Pantsuit said...

Obama is the ONLY one to keep Bill and Hill from the insanity of 93-2001. We don't need "90's re-visited."

1/04/2008 10:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wish men could articulate why they are so afraid of Hillary Clinton. I don't see anything scary about her at all.

This seems to be a uniquely American male problem with alpha females in power positions. A deep visceral fear that is never articulated. This also drove the plot of the Davinci Code - the suppression of the independent female role.

C'mon Bill C., what is it deeply that you fear about Hillary that is exclusive to her and not any other political candidate?

Hillary fear is Bible Belt code for continued female suppression in the US. Why are they so afraid of women? Men are the violent ones, the substance abusers, the domestic violence perpetrators by a long shot. So why are men afraid when they still call most of the shots?

1/04/2008 11:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

11:02 pm -- it's about the face of change.

As a lifelong Democrat -- I don't see her as any more than the status quo. There will always be the hanging question as well as to why she didn't leave Bill when she should have. Also, Republicans hate her (Bill Carson reminds us of that).

Obama gave an awesome speech last night and looks like change because he is new, charismatic and not what we expect. Yes, race has a bit to do with that but can we not talk about it without sounding racist? He won Iowa from their urban districts -- can he do that nationwide?

Straight Talk Express? We want to be able to go beyond a white man as President but are not comfortable with Hilary and are not sure Obama will fly in the rest of the country. In a way -- I hope he does.

Still, Edwards is who the Republicans are scared of because he would affect the most change. He also would appeal to the most Republicans like McCain would to the Democrats (if the Reps were smart they would nominate him!).

Ironically, the trial lawyer that looks like The Man would be the best candidate for November and do the most for our country...I don't think most of us can be comfortable with that because he is NOT the face of change. Too bad as he is a great candidate and would beat any of the Republicans easily.

1/04/2008 11:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

something tells me that the ill-informed person who wrote "insanity of 1993-2001" either has a very poor memory and/or was underage at the time........those years were good ones---No Iraq war, great economy---- WTF are you talking about? More Obama mantras and spin......yawn

1/04/2008 11:21 PM  
Anonymous Anyone but Pantsuit said...

I am so female! I am a successful business woman with even more experience than the Pantsuit. I'm married, children, and I have that perfect woman life. I have a female network of business women and friends throughout the country and I am telling you it is not just 'men' who are afraid of the Pantsuit becoming prez. More women, if they would admit it, are equally fearful of another Clinton era. Pantsuit would be worse than the husband was. During caucus in Iowa last night young women admitted to being Republicans but were caucusing for Obama to defeat Pantsuit. They said it on radio and TV.

We have the best country in the world and we do not need a woman screwing it up. Ask your grandmother, great grandmother, etc. You need to learn from your elders. I cannot 'stand' many of my gender like Pantsuit who are a total embarrassment. That group really needs to go home and just bake cookies and let the real business/career working woman like myself and others like me decide who gets to run this beautiful country.

1/04/2008 11:44 PM  
Anonymous Anyone but Pantsuit said...

Did you ask wtf 11:21? Is that World Trade Center spelled incorrectly?

I could probably be your mother.

How many lost zillions of dollars on the fake stock market of that era? How about that NASDAQ Bubble? If you had an economic clue, you would not make the statements you did.

Greenspan ran that dog and pony show and Bill was thrilled to let him do it because he admittedly could not do that job himself and the Pantsuit had those cattle future problems so she could not do it either. Just remember, everyone's savings in IRAS, 401Ks and other investment plans were affected. No one escaped unless on welfare or some other social program that the left loves so well. (Yes, I know what I'm talking about as I'm in finance. AND the market crashed before Bill and Pantsuit were out of WH. Look it up.)

Meantime, the greed factor of Clintons in all areas, but particularly where DOLLARS are concerned, spilled to the corporations such as ENRON, as they soon learned to steal with the same "stroke of the pen, law of the land" that Stephanopolous bragged about when Bill signed all those Executive Orders.

You were obviously blinded by the charisma of himself and the delicious scandals. And the Pantsuit did not know a thing, right?

Obama, as I said, is only a means to keep Pantsuit down or make it harder for her to get to DC which, I believe, is inevitable because of people like yourself.

So, if you are yawning, go to bed!

(you may not have seen my second post mentioning last paragraph above yet but I used same handle.)

1/05/2008 12:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well it sure looks like an easy Republican victory in 08' with these hilarious loser Democratic candidates.

Obama -----I'm sure!

Hilary ------Yeah , right!


1/05/2008 6:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I like Obama. I fear the crazies in this country will flip out when they find out his middle name is Hussein. I hope not, but I fear the worst.

If he was ever alone in the same room with a young white woman, there will be charges of sexual misconduct. Simply a matter of enough money offered to the young woman. And a paper trail will be jinned up to make it look conclusive; law enforcement is in the pocket of the other party.

I liked Hillary too. She is too cynical for me now. Huckabee sounds better at the moment, but I'm sure the other side will come up with photos of him at a Klan meeting.

Hillary needs to make a turn to the idealistic. Stealing some of Hukabees lines glorifying the little guy might help.

1/05/2008 7:25 AM  
Anonymous stickler said...

Sara, with all due respect, to enhance the credibility of presumed literacy on this site, please work on your word choices and spelling in the new year. The word "illicit" has a completely different meaning than "elicit," the word you presumably meant to use in your 7:06 post.
Editors may be deemed unnecessary these days, but it does make a difference in perception--at least to some of us. Thanks for all you do.

1/05/2008 7:30 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ABP [anyone but pantsuit] seems to be copying and pasting the RNC/GOP talking points.......and feigning support for OBAMA......cause they know he is their great hope to retain the White House....

1/05/2008 8:20 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Now that... now." You lost me with the first sentence of this post.

1/05/2008 8:43 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I distrust any candidate whose supporters, as 11:16, go on about the "face of change" and charisma. It's always "morning in America!" for those Reaganauts, of whatever party, but the world is more complicated than that.

I don't think this country- and the world - can afford another learn-on-the-job candidate. Obama has not had even one full term in federal office. True, both he and his wife are lawyers (as both Clintons are - Harvard versus the Clinton Yale) and the nuts and bolts of government are run by who are in the administration. So far his appeal, as the Santa Barbara one, is based on platitudes and personality.

As for how well Obama did in the Iowa primarily, where approximately 10% of the electorate voted, I don't think it was "the defining moment in history" that Obama claimed, but a well-run get-out-the first time voter effort. Kudos, indeed, for that!

Clinton has been seriously hurt by the press trumpeting her "inevitability" and press-described front-runner status even as the reporters themselves got bored and apparently began to dislike her.

Elections in this country are popularity, likeability contests. GW Bush versus Kerry showed that. The Oprahesque hype for Obama does also.

Too bad that even here it gets personal and nasty namecalling, as the "anyone but pantsuit". Too bad that what one wears still is determinate; younger people can see beyond that sexism.

1/05/2008 8:53 AM  
Anonymous Earth to Hillary: said...

See how the Dems greeted Hillary at a dinner event last night, where the tickets were sold out a month ago, meaning that the room was not stacked abruptly with Obama fans.

Link on the commenter name here to see the video and the description links there.

The local video that actually started this blog commenting also is quite creative for a local nexus here to Santa Barbara.

1/05/2008 9:07 AM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

stickler -- thanks. Of course you are right and a spelling error/typo slips by at times. I always do my best and appreciate your understanding.

1/05/2008 9:38 AM  
Blogger Vigilante said...

Sara, with respect to the 3rd comment on this thread: do not sell Google short. Check out my pages, and you can see how the effects suggested by "Anonymous" can be attained within this software.

1/05/2008 10:46 AM  
Blogger Vigilante said...

Back on topic, here's the way I see it:

The GOP is irrelevant. Except for Ron Paul, the entire Republican field is made up of the 'Usual Suspects'.

On the other side, that of restoring constitutional law and order to our polity:

HRC's the old cop; JRE's the bad cop; BHO's the good cop. The old cop shouldn't win. the bad cop can't win.

I'm going with the good cop. Obama can set America Barack on its tracks.

1/05/2008 10:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama represents change alright.

Change for the worse!

1/05/2008 1:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

MAD TV (Fox network -Sat night at 11pm) did a great spoof months ago of the crowd sucking nature of Obama's presence and Hilary trying to get oxygen when he is around.

They nailed what is happening now so what we are seeing is nothing different. Overidealization of a new face beyond all reason means frustrated people are merely pining their hopes on a blank slate that has yet to become all to real for them. (shades of John Dean and Colorado's Gary Hart if one cares to remember similar ardor early on for unknowns).

Same thing when Gray Davis was running against that charismatic whatshisname a while back.

Whatshisname lit up a room and left uncharimatic Davis looking like cold potatoes, but he still went on to win and whatshisname drifted quickly back to obscurity. (Second act of Davis recall also noted).

This is the seasoning time for both Hillary and Barrack: what is their second act and that is what really matters to voters. They want to see sustaining and staying power.

America would not be best served handing the nomination to Hillary without her earning it and reaching out to win it. And Barrack has to show he is more than an empty suit.

Last night learned he is not well liked in the Senate; while surprise to probably many her Hillary is well liked and well regarded by her Senate colleagues.

This election is going to have more comebacks than Ahmed Chalabi who is now back in US employ and directed to save Iraq for Bush Inc. by handing out money to the locals from his well-guarded limousine.

It ain't over until it is over. Just ask John Dean and Gary Hart. Just ask John McCain. Just ask John Kerry.

Can there be any worse swift-boating by the Republicans than smearing Obama? Lousy reason to reject him now, but having already been vetted to death by the Republicans there are few things left to accuse Hilary of that she has not already faced down: murder of Vince Foster, being a lesbian; looking old; not leaving Bill; Whitewater; Rose law firm; etc, etc. None of them stuck. What is still left - that she hates puppies and kittens? That she is a double agent for Osama binLadin?

1/05/2008 1:40 PM  
Anonymous Anyone but Pantsuit said...

To Earth to Hillary:

You did not mention the BOOS for Pantsuit.....
Tell the whole story, please.

1/05/2008 4:04 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Senator Obama unfortunately offers nothing new. He strongly supports racial preferences and open borders, yet after 40 years of both policies the socioeconomic and educational status of Blacks and Latinos has only worsened.
For example, despite massive racial preferences in college admissions in Michigan (which Obama supported), the graduation rate of Black students in Detroit is only 25%. He also apparently rejects assimilation, given his stated opposition to English as a national language during a debate.

We need somone with the courage to stop using white racism as an excuse for social disparities. The ideal presidential candidate, regardless of his or her race would address the internal failings of family structure (high illegitimacy rates) and external failings of multicultural education that are harming Blacks and Latinos.

Or is any criticism of racial preferences and multiculturalism considered racist on this blog?

1/05/2008 4:54 PM  
Anonymous good Spelar said...

Just how much credibility is a this lame pundit supposed to have if he cannot even spell the name HILLARY correctly?

The comments here at Blogabarbara so rarely are on point or based in facts any more.

How about actually following the original intent of this post and watch that video noted in the post, and then comment on something locally relevant?

1/05/2008 5:43 PM  
Blogger Vigilante said...

The same lame pundit is also confusing Howard Dean with John Dean. He/she is beset with too many demons?

1/05/2008 6:43 PM  
Anonymous eight santa barbara said...

Anon @ 4:54pm,

I don't think the socioeconomic status of Black and Latino folk are simply caused by Affirmative Action and immigration policy.

The college admissions process at the University of Michigan is designed to promote opportunity in college and in graduate school.

Thus, such a policy will only affect Black folk at that level, and necessarily cannot change the K-12 educational system in Detroit, or the economic picture in the entire state of Michigan (collapse of the auto industry and other forms of manufacturing). That responsibility belongs to other elected officials to 1) improve the educational system, and 2) to force CEOs to pull their heads out of their asses to innovate and stop moving their plants or getting beat by foreign auto-makers.

Besides, not all Black folk live in Detroit or in Michigan. You'd have to bring more than the policies of one university in one state to talk about Affirmative Action as a policy and the nation-wide socioeconomic status of Black folk.

If you are going to put immigration policy and Latinos as a group, you should ask about the change in socioeconomic status of non-immigrant Latinos, then compare the socioeconimic status of immigrants after years in the U.S. versus their position in their country of origin.

Naturalized and assimilated Latinos have actually increased their standing, and it's fairly obvious that Latino immigrants are better off after several years in the U.S. than they would have been in Mexico/El Salvador/Guatemala/Honduras/etc.

About illegitimate births: the Nordic countries (crazy Vikings) have very high birth rates out of wedlock. But education, crime rates, etc are less in those countries. Fact is, there is more to it than simply being married. Being married with no jobs, little education, and surrounded by crime will not change the likely outcome simply because there are wedding rings (for the parents or the children).

I would also like to point out that yours is the first post to entirely focus on race and issues of race. The rest of us in this blog were trying to discuss issues that had nothing to do with race-baiting or playing the race card.

It's not that these kinds of posts are considered racist, per se. Rather, I think they are just seen as too simple and altogether beside the point.

Just remember: there's always more to it.

1/05/2008 7:07 PM  
Anonymous Anyone but Pantsuit said...


Did you lose my 3:55 pm post today?

1/05/2008 7:44 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

I'm no fan of Hill-ary either but there were some Hill-acious comments at one point during the day and a few that were a bit over the top on Obama. Yours may have been one of them that weren't published....

1/05/2008 8:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The american public are simply not going to elect a person who smokes 2 1/2 packs a day as our president.

It just ain't going to happen!!
What a bad example. What the hell is he thinking.
It proves extremely poor judgement.

My father died a very painful death from lung cancer. It was not pretty sight and I would not wish that on my worst enemy.
At one point the doctor removed 2/3 of each lung ( the tissue was completely black) and he has to pull around a little oxygen bottle on wheels with him everywhere he want.

1/05/2008 8:11 PM  
Anonymous Anyone but Pantsuit said...

'twas not me, Sara at your 8:02. I was replying to the challenger of prior post. Will send again tomorrow.

1/05/2008 10:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The best thing that could happen for the Republicans is for the Democrats to choose Obama as their candidate ads that will assure a republican president. almost nobody in the red states would vote for him. And we all know that the red states have a majority.

1/06/2008 11:52 AM  
Blogger Vigilante said...

Okay, if we go with Obama, will you agree to go with Fred Thompson? Great! We're agreed!

1/06/2008 1:11 PM  
Anonymous indygirl said...

Anyone but Pantsuit said...
" That group really needs to go home and just bake cookies and let the real business/career working woman like myself and others like me decide who gets to run this beautiful country."

Eww. Fortunately you are not the only one who gets to vote. As a working woman & mother I would be considered one of the elders you say should be listened to.

So listen up. Our 'beautiful country' is such because each person, no matter who they are or what they believe in or what they do for a living, has an equal opportunity (theoretically) to vote for his or her choice based on his or her point of view.

BTW I'm leaning towards Obama right now but would be okay with Edwards too.

1/06/2008 2:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama looked like the What, me worry? kid Alfred E. Newman of Mad Magazine last night during the debates. He also sounded chilling and scary and not at all as jovial as Alfred E.

He needs to stop playing President because it shows how much he is not ready for this position yet.

1/06/2008 2:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Somebody said obama is a Muslim.

is that true?

If so, 'You've got to be kidding" as far as his chances.
the proverbial "snowball in hell"

1/06/2008 3:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hillary had to overcome huge odds when she went to law school at the dawn on the age of feminism. She excelled and helped open the door for other women to pass through without the horrendous initial struggle she had to face at that time.

Interesting to hear the very women who benefited from this glass ceiling crashing who don't even know how very different America was just a few decades ago, now sneer at her efforts and claim their are the true disciples of truth and enlightenment without ever having to fight for anything.

Go Hillary - you have a lot of our votes and we know you will do a great job.

1/06/2008 3:36 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

3:14 PM -- I think you know the answer to this he is not. Please don't play dumb to make a political point!

1/06/2008 5:54 PM  
Anonymous an independent said...

Is Obama the best that you can do? I gave the Democratic party more credit than that!

1/06/2008 6:11 PM  
Blogger Vigilante said...

Any one of the top three Democrats can whup all of the tope ten GOP-ers.

1/06/2008 7:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Somebody said Hillary was a Lesbian.

is that true?

If so, 'You've got to be kidding" as far as his chances.
the proverbial "snowball in hell"

The original subject of this blog posting is about a local video about Obama that shows on TV channel 17 at 9 tonite and also Monday nite at 9.
Try watching that video and be an informed blogger here instead!

1/06/2008 8:12 PM  
Anonymous Don Jose de la Guerra y Noreiga said...


The Democrat's Biden obviously has the talent necessary to run the country.

Where are the Democrats taking us?

There IS something nice about OBAMA. SO???

Do you trust Hillary??? Why should we have another term of Clinton years? The Constitution says 8 years is it. Who does she think she is, Lois Capps? And are we just like Argentina?

Edwards is a sharp talking ambulance chaser who knows what to say to a high paying jury.

Democrats have not brought their best horses out of the the barn.

Santa Barbara gets the hots for Obama and Kucinich. What's wrong with this picture?

I'm waiting for the USS Reagan to get into town. Not long now.

1/06/2008 9:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Too bad you don't care for Hillary (your words, not mine). I guess from what has appeared on this blog that you support Edwards (aka the "Pretty Populist") who would guarantee a landslide for the Republicans in November.

As for Obamamania here locally some of us who have been around for awhile are just standing by, waiting for the inevitable 2nd thoughts. Obama may be the Media Darling at the moment but the media has this funny habit of eventually examining the records of it's favorite candidates.

Seeing as Obama hasn't done anything to create change in his limited political experience eventually the second guessing will set in. From the few articles written that examine the Obama record of supporting the Cheney Energy Bill as well as offshore oil drilling I can assure you that his fall will be quick and painful.

1/06/2008 10:22 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

Sorry -- I can't support a woman who let's her man cheat on her for the purpose of running for President.

I'm not pro or anti-Obama -- although your pretty populist is very dedicated to his wife considering her recent bout with cancer.

See Edwards' "underdog" ad in New Hamsphire. He's my candidate.

1/06/2008 10:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama is cheating on his wife and his kids too. He smokes and that is a worse daily crime than Bill Clinton's sexual peccadillos.

1/07/2008 12:23 AM  
Anonymous hiram johnson said...

Well Hilary is the easiest for us to beat. She is just no fun, and she won't even get the joke when we reduce her to Mondale/Dukakis/Gore/Kerry infamy.

Now Obama, isn't he something? He's lucky he is so homely, or there would be a trail of young ladies with lost dignity behind him. Can't wait to see the photoshop workup of him in a dishiki with Fred Hampton, Huey Newton, a few M2's and lots of belts of ammunition. Old Donald Segretti showed me the story board sketches.

That Edwards, he blinks so much, and he's so pretty. I'd love to invite him out for a special evening up in the City. He could borrow some nice evening wear from Mrs. Johnson.

Being a Republican, I must say, isn't that Huckabee a card? Playing a bass guitar, would love to see him funk out with some slaps. You bet there are some sweet young things who are waiting to tell their story about this second man from Hope, though. Now they'll really know if he is pro-choice or pro-life. If he really is pro-life, all the little ones will eventually storm the stage, a la Running for Governor, one of Sam Clemens' best.

Sam Brannan was the greatest of California's founders I ever met, but you know, he quit tithing to Brigham Young. Told old Brig, you want my gold for the lord, get me a receipt signed by the lord. That Sam outfoxed the Mormon assassins. He was really something. Now Romney's ancestors loved America so much they fled to Mexico to be continue polygamy (gee, I wonder if they were legal or illegal immigrants to Mexico), and I'll bet Romney has tithed $50 million without a receipt from the lord. On the other hand, those Mormon assassins would get Bin Laden, `cause they speak Pashtun from their missions and they'll die their beards black and where dark contact lenses. They'll just have to make sure that Mormon underwear beneath their Afghan robe doesn't give them away.

I lean toward Guiliani cause once you realize you need a liar, why not go for the super-premium version? And he wants free-market healthcare. If you can't afford it, don't get sick! Let the poor die to eliminate the excess population, and improve the herd! What a friggin' genius.

No, but I can't walk away from McCain. Tortured by the Cong, how can anyone doubt the man?

1/07/2008 4:56 AM  
Anonymous Don Jose de la Guerra y Noreiga said...

My dear Sara:

Regarding your Presidential choices: You seem to be putting an awful lot of weight on the wife/husband interpersonal equation!!!

Huckabee seems to get along with his wife! Romney too! And McCain is nice to his 95 year old mother!

The Edwards' message is awfully populist for a rich, savvy, sharp (forked?) tongued lawyer. Maybe you're thinking she'll be able to run after his eight years in the White House????

1/07/2008 7:02 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

"Sorry -- I can't support a woman who let's (sic) her man cheat on her for the purpose of running for President."

Low blow!!!!! How do you know what went on in the Clinton household? Any more than knowing what went on in the JFK household (but, no, Jackie did not run for president, but Jackie was not from youth a political science junkie, as was Hillary. She certainly stayed with him as president with the reflected glory - but "for" it, I doubt it.) JFK's cheating was not so publicized at the time, but undoubtedly known by Jackie.

Hillary, apparently believed in the then outrageous idea (if you were black or female) that any US citizen meeting the consititutional standards had a fair chance for being president.

So, she ran for and was twice elected a Senator from New York state! Maybe she thought then that would be a good stepping stone, as Obama probably thought for his first term run. As McCain. As all the other senators who've run for president.

It's amazing and disgusting that she is being criticised for her husband's affairs -- and being held to higher standard. Proves the old saying, damned if you do and damned if you don't.

Please rethink and see what a double standard you're promulgating. I'll eat my proverbial hat if you can come up with any proof. (The only proof would be statements by HC that she "let" her husband cheat for "the purpose of running for president." She's said and written a lot over a long career in public life....

1/07/2008 7:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great ad. I voted for Kerry in part because of Edwards; probably will vote for him in our primary.

(Btw, anyone know why do the ads end with the stupid statement, "I am xxx and I approve this message"?)

1/07/2008 7:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hillary brought out the tears today, and any lingering amount of respect I may have had for her has now vanished forever.

1/07/2008 4:50 PM  
Anonymous Can I just say YIKES said...

WOW, Sara de la G, I had no idea you had such a sexist streak in you.......judging a candidate based upon her personal response to [what should have been a] private marital matter????? and reducing her lifetime of progressive advocacy, going back over 30 yrs to the actions of her husband??????

1/07/2008 5:55 PM  
Anonymous eight santa barbara said...

Anon @ 7:37am,

Do you mean xxx as in the horrible movie of a few years back?

Or xxx as in the porn star who ran for governor during the recall?

Seriously, that message is attached because it is required. When the last campaign finance law went into affect, candidates were required to put that on things their own campaign had financed.

This was meant to allow folks to differentiate between commercials and messages made by outside organizations and those made by the candidate. Thus, we would know whether candidate XXX was giving a message, or whether it was some oddball group with a bone to pick.

And sorry for using "XXX" and "bone" in the same sentence. Bygones, please.

1/07/2008 6:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

wives don't 'let' their husbands cheat on them anymore than they 'let' their husbands become addicted to (name your addiction)

i don't think i would have hung in there with bill but then again i don't think i'd have married him in the first place

1/07/2008 6:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

4:50pm, you need to see the actual video clip of Hillary's moment today that is being misrepresented in much of the press.

It was a very tender, deep and effective statement of purpose and motivation. One would hope the magnitude of her commitment would generate such genuine feelings. I would not want to see less and anything less would be a wooden and hollow statement.

There was nothing wrong with her reaction and her comments at all and those who sees it walk away with renewed or new found respect.

It will be the defining and turning point for her campaign. It was very impressive. Hillary found her voice today and there will be no stopping her now.

Iowa and New Hampshire are peanuts. Hillary now has her fire to carry her with candor, confidence and conviction to the final nomination.

And it is going to take just those kind of qualities to take on the Republican nasty machine. Obama has yet to show his grit without a sneer.

1/07/2008 10:16 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lets stick with la raza,

1/07/2008 10:19 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

Perhaps I made a poor word choice -- she did, however, "let" it happen and chose not to leave him. Agreed, it's a private marital matter (that was very public) that most of us don't understand.

I wouldn't say I reduced her years of experience...but you can tell a lot about a person by the choices one makes.

1/07/2008 10:34 PM  
Anonymous Off-Leash Public Affairs said...

And... back to the point.

New replays of the video Obama at SBCC are now scheduled for the next 2 weeks, per this reverse-sequence listing:

Thursday, 17 January,
2100 hrs. (9 pm)

Thursday, 17 January,
1400 hrs. (2 pm)

Tuesday, 15 January,
0500 hrs. (5 am)

Sunday, 13 January,
2200 hrs. (10 pm, shortly after the usual OLPA episode at 8 pm!!)

Friday, 11 January, 0200 hrs.
(2 am, great to see after late-night partying!!)

Thursday, 10 January,
0600 hrs. (6 am)

1/07/2008 11:19 PM  
Anonymous Still a fan of Sara's, but.... said...

Sara-- your comments at 10:34 just dug your sexist hole deeper. Perhaps some consciousness raising in store? Not that you have to change your vote for Pres.- just apply some consistent expectations to the candidates and the relevance of the types of "choices" they have made in life.

1/08/2008 6:33 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I didnt know public access was the place to have free commercials for political candidates, hap should be more careful...

1/08/2008 12:01 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

sara, yes you can tell a lot about a person about the choices they make if you know that person & all that went into making that choice... like i suggested, bill's was a sexual addiction & many stand by their loved ones who have an addiction & help them to accept help

i'm more upset at her pro war record than her standing by bill

anon 6:54

1/08/2008 9:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You can punish Hillary as much as you want for her initial flawed Iraq "war" vote.

But you are talking about not just a Democratic candidate, you are talking about a candidate that has to oppose a Republican campaign that remains pro-war.

Think in terms of who would be the best national interest candidate and no longer who would be the best solely Democratic candidate.

It is far too narrow to punish Hillary for this one vote difference between herself and Obama, when she has far more credentials to go against the eventual Republican candidate.

I hope narrow self-interest from pouting Democrats do not shoot themselves in the foot again, aka the two lost Democratic election Ralph Nader debacle.

Times are too critical now, and a Republican vicotry must always be respected because we learned Democrats could not even get rid of someone like George Bush once they got pissy among themselves.

It is not Obama's time this time. Put your energies behind Clinton who can take on the Republicans and don't trash her from within. Thanks.

1/09/2008 8:13 AM  
Anonymous a sign of poor judgement said...

It is a well known fact that Obama smokes 2 1/2 packs of cigarets a day.

Anyone with such poor judgement as to do that has no business being president.


1/09/2008 1:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

for someone who is so opposed to cigarettes as to make that their basis for voting should learn how to spell the word, and if thats how you would base a vote well I cant say what you are or sarah would flag this post

1/09/2008 8:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

8:13- it may be clinto's time or it may be obama's time- either one will be fine by me... however, the voters will decide

1:19- smoking is not a judgement call, it is an addiction; kudos to obama for trying to quit

1/09/2008 9:25 PM  
Anonymous smokers have poor judgement said...


You miss the point, The point is that anyone who smokes 2 1/2 packs of cigarettes a day shows that they have extremely poor judgement by doing that.
or else they would not do it if they had good judgement.

Having good judgement is the single most important quality for a president to have.

Yes I would not vote for any candidate because they have poor judgement.

and just what does the fact that I can't spell the word cigarette have to do with it.

And for you to call me a name that Sara can't post, just because I won't vote for any candidate that has poor judgement like Obama, proves that you, my friend, are also a person of questionable judgement. Just what are you anyway a smoker.

As far as I am concerned smokers have no class and are trash!

1/09/2008 9:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Cigarettes or no cigarettes, that is not the question.

For an insightful analysis as to why Clinton won in New Hampshire, read this in tomorrow's Wall Street Journal by Karl Rove . What Rove does not point out was how all the press ganged up on Hillary and attempted to create the news, rather than report it. (That's something our very own SB off-leashed types sometimes do as well, but they don't pretend to be reporters so much as op-editors.)

For another insightful piece read this by Gloria Steinem, Women Are Never Front-runners. Never thought I'd be citing Rove and Steinem in the same post!

1/09/2008 10:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama supporters remind me of the local take no prisoner progressives. That is the last thing the Democratic Party needs - faux Dems who sit out the election and pout if their candidate does not win.

Thanks ahead of time. Four more years of war and destruction.

1/09/2008 10:40 PM  
Anonymous eight santa barbara said...

Jay walkers. Jay walkers have very bad judgment. Instant death.

Wonder if he ever did that? SOB should drop out now if he has.







1/09/2008 10:42 PM  
Anonymous Don Jose de la Guerra y Noreiga said...

I note this morning that the Democratic standard bearer of the last election, better known as Kerry, as endorsed OBAMA...

The floodtide of Hillary has arrived and is now receding. No blue line needed.

1/10/2008 7:08 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

10:40- what a strange thing to say about everyone who is an Obama supporter. He is my top choice, however I'd be very happy to support either of the other top Dem candidates if they win the primary.

1/10/2008 8:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

to Eight Santa Barbara

J-walking is a crime. if Obama cannot follow the law and jay-walks then, yes, he should drop out as we don't need a president that can't follow the law. A president must set a good example. and not an example of smoking 2 1/2 packs a day or breaking the law by jay-walking.

Has our fine country stooped so low that we would elect a person who is a poor example as our president? lets strive for a little higher.

1/10/2008 12:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Daily Sound (Thurs) has a good column about how mad women had gotten over the press treatment of Hillary and came out in droves to show support as much for her as for women in general who are just plain tired of being battered by the "double standard".

The Republican s got in trouble with their own women constituents when they arrogantly bashed women for aging in general, and not bashing men in the same way.

And now this perfectly appropriate emotional catch in Hillary's voice getting battered as a fatal emotional breakdown tipped the rest of them over the edge and you can just about call it lost for Obama or any other male candidate because when women see plain and clear what barriers they have long been asked to overcome and constantly have felt like failures for having to try twice as hard, and see the one woman who has legitimately earned her credentials get bashed over trivialities, it is time to pull the plug on the entire media establishment.

(Anyone else still not see how much bias is allowed to corrupt the "profession" of journalism? This is textbook case in point. Vipers - all they wanted was blood.)

The press treatment was the defining moment; as much as it was for Hillary for many of the same reasons.

Bottomline was a lot of women of all political persuasions saying: We are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore!

It is a nice time in one's personal and professional growth when one realizes damned if you do; damned if you dont and now ...full speed ahead.

Hillary's got her game back. Yippee!!! She is untouchable. And it feels sooooooooo good!

1/10/2008 2:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Keep in mine deeply cynical Karl Rove wants to go against Hillary Clinton this fall. He will stop at nothing to rehabilitate Hillary, though his points about Obama were well taken.

Yup, there was something wrong with his Iowa victory speech everyone was lauding that I could not put my finger on: it was a speech he was reading written by someone else.

Of course and that is why while the words were there, the man was not. And that is what was scary about him.

We don't need another Talking Head like Bushette doing on the job training with the free world.

1/10/2008 2:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

well i'm mad as hell at how females have been treated but smart enough to realize that obama is the better choice

1/10/2008 10:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

2:17- they all have speech writers

1/10/2008 10:17 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

10:17, true, they all have speechwriters, but they don't all stand and give a seemingly-impromptu, from the heart on the night of the primary speech ...that they read and probably was written by someone else.

True, Rove's interests are Republican victory and he is undoubtedly searching for weak points in both candidates, as are the Dem. campaign consultants. If what he wrote about Obama is correct, that he has not been an effective senator or leader in the senate, just imagine the 'swift boat' type ads that are ahead. Kerry was sunk by ads showing his weakness - and he had many years in the senate. Obama's boat is already leaking badly and he showed himself less than graceless at the NH debate.

At least with Clinton, there is little nasty to be said/written/trumpeted that's new. Not a great recommendation, to be sure, but something to keep in mind.

1/11/2008 7:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Should be an interesting broadcast:

From Bill Moyers Newsletter:
Friday, January 11, 2008

„Our blackness is our power, we think. I don't think it is. That's the delusion, I think.
I think our power is the same as it is for anybody, any other group - the collective energies, imagination of the individuals within the group. We're no better than what our individuals achieve.
The identity should be the result of effort and achievement. "
- Shelby Steele
„We have a problem in politics in the United States.
The problem is that we tend to talk with people who already agree with us.‰
- Kathleen Hall Jamieson


Why does race matter in politics today? Bill Moyers talks with Shelby Steele, who has written widely on race in American society and is author of the recent book A BOUND MAN: WHY WE ARE EXCITED ABOUT OBAMA AND WHY HE CAN'T WIN. Steele is the Robert J. and Marion E. Oster Fellow at the Hoover Institution. He specializes in the study of race relations, multiculturalism, and affirmative action.

And, leading expert on media and politics Kathleen Hall Jamieson sorts spin from reality after the primary.

1/11/2008 7:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gloria Steinem, et al, nailed it on the head when they wrote columns switched genders describing some chick with a few years in the US Senate getting up there and claiming she was the new conscience of the nation and the enlightened leader of the free world.

She would have been laughed out of the hall. Yet, on this same fraud, Obama is bringing in millions.

Go figure.

1/11/2008 8:16 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

10:09 p.m.

If you think Obama is the better choice then you are not as smart as you think you are.

Can anyone in their wildest dreams imagine how Obama would manage our foreign policy and our war against terror? Very scary, Obama is!

He would be 0.k. for the mayor of some city but certainly is not qualified to be President of the united states. Give me a break! Get real!

1/11/2008 5:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama does not have the judgement that god gave a goose.

He is very smug, arrogant, cocky, and a know it all.

Did anyone see him 'smirk' when he was bad mouthing Hillary on T.V.

When I saw that I realized that I just cant' stand him.

1/11/2008 5:54 PM  
Blogger Vigilante said...

Anon ol' boy, you're one to talk, having voted twice to put some one not qualified to be dog catcher in the White House. As a result, what we got in the USA is the biggest American train wreck in history. Obama is the man to put America Barack on the tracks. Get used to it. Go vote for Fred Thompson and get out of the way.

1/11/2008 9:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama needs to go back to community organizing.... somevery small community. Or back to being an evangelical preacher, which suits him better.

It is ludicrous such a simple man is actually running for US President. But then with family aura and connections, so did G.W. Bush. We have sunk so low.

1/11/2008 11:54 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama is unlikable and unelectable. He is another John Kerry. Surely we can do better.

1/11/2008 11:55 PM  
Anonymous eight santa barbara said...

5:54pm is on the verge of calling Obama 'uppity'.

I like this though. Republicans win elections going after figureheads.

But we Dems and Libs and... what, Progs (croak ?), always want the scholar and elder statesman, the academic and diplomat.

Clinton didn't win because he let everyone know he was the smarted guy in the room. He understood the power of rhetoric and oration, and understood the effectiveness of symbolism in speech and in action. Yeah, they called it charisma.

No other leading Dem since has had charisma, and the smartest person in the room won't win unless he or she has it. Gore was smarter than Bush, and Kerry had more... well, he wasn't Bush.

So, let's Dems vote for the person that can go deep into policy discussions, has decades of experience-- but can't find a way to relate with Wal Mart folks and the symbols they hold high. And we'll lose again.

The smartest person in the room is the best thing for the country. But without that little bit of charisma, the smartest person will never win.

So, do we want the smartest person? Or do we want to win an election? I do indeed see this as a dichotomy. Republicans know which they would rather have, and they've been winning more often than not over the past 40 years.

That's why I haven't made up my mind. I can't decide whether to try for a winner, or the better choice.

Another 'lesser of who cares' election, I think.

1/12/2008 12:01 AM  
Blogger Vigilante said...

It comes down to this: Republicans don't like government. So what they hate most is electing smart guys/girls into office. Their track record is clear on this.

1/12/2008 7:54 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting commentary about the Bradley Effect (Wikipedia) on Huffington post attempting to explain the disconnect between NH polling and actual votes when those polled were in the privacy of their election boothes.

Necessary to understand when one is looking at electable.

At least Hillary is outwardly (and shallowly) hated and issues about her are all on the table.

No stealth campaign under the table about her. AND the growing fact that to know her is to sort of start loving her.

Just the opposite with Obama. The more we see the less there is and the more reason to not like him.

1/12/2008 8:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

12:01: "So, let's Dems vote for the person that can go deep into policy discussions, has decades of experience-- but can't find a way to relate with Wal Mart folks and the symbols they hold high. And we'll lose again."

The thing about Bill Clinton was that he could go deep into policy discussions and appealed to the WalMart folks, too.

What is interesting about Hillary Clinton in NH was that her votes came from the beer-swilling population while those for Obama came from the white wine folk. Apparently, a similar pattern was so in Iowa.

SB voters are probably more white wine, while California as a whole, beer folk.

Very interesting program last night on Bill Moyers, the interview with Shelby Steele .

1/12/2008 10:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If Obama could run for president then any boy can run for president.

1/12/2008 10:37 AM  
Anonymous editrix said...

I've been reading Obama's "Dreams from my Father," and find his perspective one of a bi-racial man who wasn't raised with money, and who lived in many unusually tolerant places, who doesn't exactly fit in anywhere who has the sensitivity to relate to virtually anyone. This is such a change from the wealthy "white guy" point-of-view that he inspires hope for a great leap forward for this country (and the world) that has been so terribly abused during the Bush years. I was similarly impressed with his compassion and his willingness to "meet the people" just before the glitzy Oprah event.

1/12/2008 1:35 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama showed no willingness to "meet the people" when he came here for the Oprah event.

He was forced into the public rally because of growing resentment over the elitism of his only scheduled pricy time with Oprah. This "meet the people" was hastily arranged at the last minute and we all know this. Why lie about it?

Let's not start making up stories about this kid.

He never even thought of the little people during his visit here and it showed in his canned, demogogic rally playing to the lowest common denominators when he did show up.

1/13/2008 11:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If any of you wart to know who the socialists and communists are in our community just take not of the names of the Obama supporters.

1/13/2008 11:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just can't imagine Obama being the leader of the free world.

What a scary thought!

1/13/2008 4:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Since Obama smokes 2 1/2 packs of cigarets a day he has extremely poor judgement and sets a poor role model.

We need a leader with good judgement and who sets a good example.

Obama is not such a man. He appears to have not quite matured and grown up yet.

1/13/2008 4:27 PM  
Blogger Vigilante said...

Anon, just chill your silly blather, go vote for Fred Thompson, and get out of the way.

1/13/2008 5:49 PM  
Anonymous Off-Leash Public Affairs said...

All the socialist communist 2.5-pack smokers who think an age-46 Presidential candidate is a "kid" can view the Obama rally at SBBC yurselves on cable TV-17 or whenever desired on the Internets.

Thursday, 17 Jan., 2100 hrs. (9 pm)
Thursday, 17 Jan., 1400 hrs. (2 pm)
Tuesday, 15 Jan., 0500 hrs. (5 am)

More replays to be scheduled next week.

1/14/2008 5:37 AM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

I won't accept anymore 2.5 pack judgement comments -- the point has been made AND please give me more than a one line zinger on how Obama is this or that -- otherwise you won't see it here. Tell me why in a reasonable way and it will get published.

1/14/2008 10:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Publish this or not, but no one smoking 2.5 packs of cigarettes a day should be in charge of reforming America's health care system.

1/14/2008 10:58 PM  
Blogger Sara De la Guerra said...

At least a better point was made this time!

1/15/2008 7:26 AM  
Blogger Vigilante said...

I'm not sure it was better, but it was briefer.

1/15/2008 10:13 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

O.k. Sara here goes:

Obama smokes 2 1/2 packs of cigarets a day.

Most of us would agree that one is making very poor judgement to decide to smoke 2 1/2 packs a day.
This means that most of us believe that Obama has poor judgement as part of his basic personality and his basic character. Most of would agree that we need a President that has good judgement, as evidenced by their own personal choices.

Also their is the issue of leadership and of being a good role model. The youth of America needs good role models in not only their parents but also in their teachers and in the celebrities that they look up to. Anyone, such as Obama, who smokes 2 1/2 packs a day is simply not a good role model for the youth of america. In fact Obama would be a role model for encouraging the youth of america to smoke. They will say to themselves: "Hell, if its good for the President of America, and the leader of our country, it must be good for me too?

A leader like that we can do without. As one leads by example. Obama is a bad example.

Sara, this very poor choice (and character trait) by Obama to be a heavy smoker is a very significant "issue" in this election. Please don't try to cover it up for Obama. It's an issue worthy of further discussion, not coverup.

1/15/2008 11:11 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama is exceedingly short on substance.

This skinny boy still has a lot of growing up to do before he can be president of ANYTHING let alone president of the most powerful country on earth and the head of the free world.

1/16/2008 10:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Can we expect to see off leash public affairs out at UCSB to cover the Hillary Town Hall?

1/16/2008 5:34 PM  
Anonymous the real story on Obama said...

Obama was raised by two Muslim fathers. Obama attended radical Islamic classes in Indonesia as a youth.

In 1991 Obama joined the Trinity United church of christ in Chicago.
This Afrocentric Church preaches Black Socialism and Black Nativism!

At the core of Obama's belief is something called the Black Value System which is a code of non-biblical ethics written by blacks for blacks!

it encourages blacks to group together and separate from the larger american society by pooling their money, patronizing black only businesses and backing black leaders. This is racial separatism and therefore Obama is not a uniter who reaches across races!
This code that Obama believes in warns blacks to avoid the white "entrapment of black middle-classness" suggesting that settling for that kind of ' competitive" success will rob blacks of their african identity and keeping them "captive" to white culture.

Obama believes in black nationalism!
Obama's preacher and personals spiritual advisor, Rev Jeremiah Wright who married him and his wife, is militantly Afrocentric. Rev Wright recently said and I quote: "We are an african people and remain true to our native land, the mother continent."

Obama's personal spiritual advisor, Rev Wright traveled to Libya with black supremist Louis Farrakhan,( who regularly calls whites " blue eyed devils"), and met with terrorist leader Muammar Qaddafi.

Obama's personal spiritual leader Wright says that israel is a 'racist' occupier of palestine and he describes the 9;11 attacks as, quote: a "wake up call to white America for ignoring the concerns of people of color".

Obama chose Rev Wright to babtize his daughters and obama has chosen Rev Wright to act as his ' sounding board' during his presidential run and later if he is elected president.

Obama has close personal ties to kenya where the ' Senator Obama School is named after him. the bloody conflict in kenya has already claimed over 700 lives and Obama has sided with the opposition leader Raila Odinga, head of the tribe that Obama's late Muslim father belonged to. Odinga is a marxist who has made a pact with a hard line radical islamic group in kenya to establish "Shariah' courts throughout Kenya, and to establish muslim dress codes for women.

Obama's older brother, Abongo "Roy" Obama still lives there, is a Luo activist and a militant muslim and preaches that ( quote): "the black man must liberate himself from the poisoning influences of european culture". He urges his brother Obaama to embrace his african heritage, which Obama seems to be doing.

These ties of Obama's have huge foreign policy implications. al -Qaida is strenghtening it's beachheads in Africa. The last thing we need is for pro west Kenya to fall into the hands of Obama's friends the Muslim extremists!

Obama would put african tribal and family interests ahead of U.S. interests.

Obama has said, and I quote: " I believe in the power of the African-american religious tradition to sour social change".

Obama has said, and I quote; " I question the idolatry of the free market".

Obama's foreign and domestic policy will be based on his afrocentric doctrine that he has pledged to uphold. All americans, especially middle class blacks, will pay a hefty "price" if Obama is elected. president.

1/16/2008 5:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Plausible scenario:

1. Hillary and Obama agree to split the ticket with Obama taking VP.

2. 8 years of Hilary, because she will be a fine President

3. Obama runs as sitting incumbent VP after 8 years, having finally gotten some experience and substance watching and waiting.

4. Obama gets 8 years

5. Democrats get 16 years to turn this country around and undo the decades of Republican damage.

6. If Obama is smart he will accept this, take the time to raise his kids in the do-nothing VP job and step up to the plate in 8 years ready to serve.

7. Hillary skunked Obama in the Nevada debate and he needs to quit while this offer might still be on the table.

1/16/2008 7:13 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hilary Clinton is coming to Santa Barbara UCSB tomorrow - Jan 17th -6:45pm - Campus Recreation Center.

Contact local Clinton campaign or website to RSVP.

1/16/2008 7:49 PM  
Anonymous the real story on Obama said...

regarding 5;55 p.m.
sorry folks I made a typo in the following quote attributed to Obama:

Obama has said, and I quote: " I believe in the power of the African-american religious tradition to sour social change".

The word "sour "above was supposed to say "spur".

1/16/2008 9:11 PM  
Anonymous Off-Leash Public Affairs said...

To prepare (or whatever) for the Hillary mini-rally, voters can prepare either before or after the event today by watching the Obama rally and interviews at SBCC from 4 months ago.

For today, Thursday, see this TV replay schedule for cable channel 17, per this reverse-sequence listing:

Thursday, 17 January,
2100 hrs. (9 pm)

Thursday, 17 January,
1400 hrs. (2 pm)

Video also can be viewed whenever at the website, link as the OLPA name of the commenter here.

1/17/2008 11:27 AM  
Anonymous fact-checker said...

The real story on Obama is that he was raised primarily by his white mother and his white grandparents. His brillant Kenyan father left when he was a young child, and while he lived for a few years with his Indonesian stepfather, his mother sent him back to Hawaii (where he lived with his white grandparents) to get a better education at a prestigious private schoool. Check the facts--not the propaganda.

1/17/2008 2:22 PM  
Blogger Vigilante said...

Gloria Steinem may have the right idea. Elect the Clinton-Obama ticket. That gives the USA 8 years of Clinton and 8 years of Obama in the White House. We need 16 years to clean up the swamp left by 8 years of Busheney.

1/17/2008 6:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is the best blog yet. it's very timely and very informative.

Would you please keep it up on the main page for comments for one more week?

You can remove instead that one in front of it about
Greka energy that got 0 comments and thus no interest.
thank you very much!

1/17/2008 7:07 PM  
Anonymous the real story on Obama said...

reply to fact -checker.

Everything that you said it true. But none of what you said conflicts in the slightest with anything that I said at 5:55 above which is also all true.

I never said that he was primarily raided by his black father and step father, only that he was raised by them for some of his life, which is also true !

I challenge you to find one thing that I said that is not fact. Go back and read it carefully.

What is it about the facts that you are trying to cover up or 'spin'.

1/17/2008 7:13 PM  
Anonymous you decide said...

Hilary has class and character. . hillary is competent and mainstream.

Obama is lacking in class and character. Obama is radical left wing, and even though not a muslim, is pro Muslim and supports Palestine over Israel.

Obama will cut off all military and economic aid to Israel. and that will be the beginning of the end for Israel, and that is a good thing. ( the only good thing about him)

1/18/2008 6:32 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home