Hillary Clinton represents the people of New York and does so quite well. What has she done? I'm not the one making accusations and, I have yet to hear or read of anything substantial.

The "Barack the Magic Negro" is not Rush Limbaugh's, it is a song written by Paul Shanklin, a republican satirist. Limbaugh just played it on his show several times with commentary because he thought it was funny. He does this often.

Well:

A. She's one of those lovely flip-floppers who fully supported Iraq in the beginning, and only come election time starts to bitch and moan about it.

B. She's one of the people complaining about comments made by Don Imus and rap artists, but, meanwhile is taking thousands of dollars for her campaign from the same people producing those artists.

C. She's only ever attempted to pander to public opinion rather than stand her ground and maintain one position on any topic, ever.

In addition to the stuff BB pointed out earlier, Hillary also loves to pull the "Think of the Children!" crap. I'm fairly sure she was against violent video games when it was politically expedient for her to be, and so forth.

Also:
Hillary Clinton on the Issues

Voted no on flag-burning to build centrist credential. (May 2006)

a) What she has said is completely reasonable, regardless of what the extreme left wants us to believe.

b)And nobody else is? The fact is, money makes politics go round. BTW, the assertions made about David Gephen recording gangsta rap were proven incorrect....

c)And where did you get this from? This is politics we are talking about. There is only one criteria, in my view, to judgeing a politician, and that is, are they endeavoring to represent, to the best of their ability, all the people they represent and not just their party. That is a very difficult line to walk in today's political climate and I submit she does it about as well as anyone.

Does she sound too much like a mother when she say's that? I have news for anyone who is interested. In my opinion, it all boils down to our childrens, childrens, children. Anything other than that is scarey....

I stand tall in our right to burn the american flag and I served in the military.

No; not really.

Well, Obama, for one, has returned numerous checks to people he feels it would be immoral to take money from.

Notice how I said "attempted"; because she has generally failed to pander to public opinion, and instead, she panders to her own imaginary world.

Nice to see some people are in favor of freedom of symbolic speech here...

Censoring stuff "for the children" is ridiculous. I oppose censorship regardless of which party is doing the censoring.

No, it isn't. Perhaps we should explore the definition of censorship. I blieve it to be an action which prohibits certain incoming information from getting in. Children need censorship which is provided by the parents. If children are being brought up without censorship in their lives, i submit that that is merely neglect on the part of the parents. That is only my view. Children can become exposed to the censored material or language as they grow and are stable in their being. The fact is Hillary Clinton is speaking from a female viewpoint on some issues and many male americans hate it when a woman asserts authority. I am weary of it as well, but, I am aware that that feeling is part of me being a product of my culture....

Government censorship != parental censorship. The government has no business fining CBS for showing a woman's breast on TV, nor does it have any business telling stores they can't sell certain video games to children based on the content.

As of now, Obama is an empty suit into which many in the Democratic party are pouring their hopes. He is terribly inexperienced, and, like it or not, being a minority is still relevant here. I predict he will become exposed as time goes on and we have more debates. Remember the Howard Dean experience.

Well, we disagree then. That's ok with me, and I hope it's ok with you. Is it ok for Hillary Clinton to disagree with you without her being considered a illegitimate candidate for the presidency? The fact is this issue is a local issue which presidential candidates should not even have to answer. Values are bullcrap when selecting a president. Knowledge of the law and a commitment to public service is what is importantas well as a willingness to engage others in dialogue.

How is it local when Congress is trying to pass laws banning things, or the FCC is fining CBS stations?
Nonsense. You are basically disregarding issues altogether and choosing a candidate based on a projected image of 'knowledge" and "public service".

As far as anyone pandering to public opinon... I thought politicians were supposed to do what the public wanted them to? Isn't that why Bush is in such a mess now? He's not doing what the public wants.

There's a difference between pandering to your party's base and doing what the majority of the public actually wants you to do.

congress is made up people representing more local constituants. I am not disregarding issues...The fact is that a president is commander and chief. Other than that a president is part of the system of checks and balances. All this silliness of these other issues is dogma.

You think that a presidential candidate's position on gay marriage, the separation of church and state, health insurance reform, campaign finance reform, abortion, etc is "dogma"?

Don't take this the wrong way, but I really hope you don't plan on voting while ignoring the issues like this.

These are all personal opinions. It should not and would not matter if we elected a president based on my criteria because you would not get a far left or far right president that way. If you choose a canidate based on his/her knowledge of the law and their track record of representing all their constituants, you are permitting dialogue of real substance to advance rather than gotch ya politics.

From day one meaning he got into the U.S. Senate AFTER the Iraq Authorization Bill passed...