So NC evens out Clinton's win in Pennsylvania and Indiana is basically tied. In fact, Obama was expected to win by 10% more in both states while spending 4 to 1! Unelectable.

Of course, nothing changes so THE BITCH MUST QUIT! It is not like she wants everyone to be heard, to swing Obama from moderate/closet conservative to liberal. NOPE! Its all a conspiracy to get her to win.

Grow some balls Alternet, and show both sides.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Can someone on Alternet do an article regarding the Congressional races that are up for grabs? The Democrats must also gain significant control of Congress to push forward any kind of semi-progressive legistlation from the White House.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well, some might think it a tad unsettling to follow the thread of Clinton's "I can win the blue collar white vote" because it leads you to the implicit notion that black voters are chumps and they will vote for anyone who carries the Democratic banner - and if they don't? Well we didn't nedd em anyways. The most damaging thing about the Clinton campaign since Ohio is the way it has built up her new found affection for folks who would sooner poke themselves in the eye with a stick than vote for a black man for president. All that beer swiling and NASCAR pandering and gun toting. If you don't get the meaning you just don't know about the folks.

Way to go Hillary...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Clinton will stay in until the end because she has nothing to lose, except money. I imagine that her money supply will all but disappear. She will run a token campaign with what money she has, and hope that lightening strikes Obama. I do not believe she could beat McCain, since she has been running against Obama as if she were McCain. She may have blue-collar demons but she has no independent support. All McCain has to do is run her own TV spots and say, approved by John McCain. The 3 o’clock ad is a loser against McCain. Experience is a loser against McCain. I was against NAFTA except when I was making those ads being for NAFTA. What about Obama’s experience he does not have any? Of course not, no one has any; we are going where no man has gone before.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If the super delegates overturn the will of the voters, where has the democracy gone from the Democratic party?

I've always liked Hillary, but it's time for her to go. If she somehow manages to get the nomination against the will of the voters of her party, I will never vote for a Democrat again.

I guess it's about time to see who the Green's have running and see if Ron Paul is going to jump in as an Independent. This protracted battle is killing the Dems, contrary to what both candidates may say.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But will she do anything to get elected? Things have just begun to get interesting. Be prepared.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Instead of focusing on the upcoming election and calling out John McCain and campaigning against him, we're stuck with this slug out between Clinton and Obama. I respect Hillary Clinton and would have voted for her had she won enough primaries to win the nomination. Being that it is not a mathematical certainty that she won't, does she really think she can win a presidential race she forced herself into?? Why won't she cede gracefully and ask all those "blue-collar" voters to go for Obama because we need a Democrat in the White House this fall?? Is she really so short-sighted and power hungry that she doesn't see the damage she will do the party and the country if she continues on this belligerent quest? I like her, but damn, I have no respect for this!

Why can't they just run together?

And because she won't drop out and throw support to Obama and the Democratic Party, McCain is getting a free pass and not having to defend anything or even really worry about campaigning. He can just sit back and watch. It makes me freakin' crazy!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

BRING IT ON HILLARY!! THAT WAY WE WON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT CHELSEA SHOWING UP IN THE NEXT 20 YEARS. "WORKING CLASS" REALLY MEANS WHITE VOTERS; I'D ALMOST HAVE MORE RESPECT FOR HER IF SHE JUST CAME OUT AND SAID 'THIS BLACK MAN' CAN'T BE PRESIDENT OF AMERICA!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

But when a reporter on the campaign's morning conference call, asked Howard Wolfson, Clinton's communications director, if there had been "any discussions about not going forward," he said, "No discussions." And he seemed to mean it.

Why should we think Wolfson is any more honest than Hillary is?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Last Night

Popular Vote
Obama: 1,514,017

Clinton: 1, 299,731

Delegates Won
Obama: 95

Clinton: 83

States
Obama: 1

Clinton: 1

It’s a tie! Go Clinton!

(Don't make me explain that this is sarcasm).

Tex Shelters

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When Ralph Nader runs a genuine left-wing challenge to Democrats (and Republicans), he's villified. I'm at a loss to understand why when Hillary runs to the right of Obama, she doesn't invite the same animosity, and in fact is still celebrated by many among the liberal left. The rationale for insisting that Nader not run is that he's not electable. Well, it seems that Hillary can't be nominated by democratic means, but a lot of Democrats are still willing to vote for her in both the primaries and the general election. It looks to me like America's commitment to democracy is fizzling out.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm an ardent Obama supporter who viscerally dislikes the former First Lady.

However, starting today, if she stops attacking Barack and focuses instead on the REAL enemies of freedom-loving Americans -- the rightwing Republican Party and their new leader, maverick patriot turned Bush-loving politician, John McCain -- I'm willing to forgive Hillary's dirty campaign tactics against Senator Obama.

Conversely, if she continues her baseless argument that Barack can't beat McCain in November, I will do everything I can to disgrace Mrs. Sniper Fire -- such as commenting on Alternet, Politico and other important blogs, writing letters to editors, and calling the DNC.

That's a promise, not a threat.

-------------------------------------

Hugh E. Scott, Vietnam veteran, lifelong registered Republican, former McCain supporter (in 2000) and the editor of www.FreedomCentralUSA.com -- a nonprofit investigative website that exposes Bill Kristol's rightwing extremist organization, Project for a New American Century (PNAC), as the primary and profit-motivated instigator of Gulf War 2.

For visitors who want to keep track of the treasonous weasels, FreedomCentralUSA presents a list of 225 PNAC members (called "signatories"), including John McCain, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz and Scooter Libby.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's time for a write in campaign for edwards and kucinich

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ethyl Mertz comes running in with a newspaper. "Here it is, Hillary, just like you said. You won by 15 points in the South Carolina primary -- wait a minute, this is upside down". Ethyl flips the paper over, they look.

Hillary's mouth goes wide open in horror.

"Waaahhh!"

"What's wrong, Hillary?"

Hillary is crying, "I took 6 million dollars out of Bill's sock drawer and spent it on the election. I thought I could put it back tonight!"

Bill comes in from the Copacabana. "Hey Hillary, did you see the new showgirls I hired? Hillary?"

"Wahhh! I need five million more dollars next week for the election!"

"No problem, honey, I keep a secret stash in my sock drawer."

"Wahhh! I already took that!" Bill does a double take.

"Well, I can make that up with an extra eight lectures. Don't cry, honey, I'll go down to the bank tomorrow and get some more money."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Frank, if you don't think Hillary gets vilified you must not be reading our posts! I am ashamed to admit that back in the 90s I used to defend her against the Limbaugh listeners. The more I see of her, the more right I think they were; I just don't use the same language to denounce her. Not in public anyway.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So now Clinton, who passionately insists that democracy demands that the Florida and Michigan contest be counted and that voters in the last few states be granted the opportunity to state their preferences, is left with nothing but the most elitist of strategies: she must convince party insiders -- the 300 or so not-yet-committed superdelegates -- to vote against the popular will of the voters who participated in the Democratic primaries and caucuses.

There are two things I hate about Hillary Clinton - her face.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

nomeansno

That was entertaining. And I should have had more coffee before I was so "entertained!" ;-}

Waif

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So focused and blinkered is she that she thinks she can get elected without the young, idealistic new voters being registered by Obama, and without the robot army fans who will vote for McCain. I used to admire Hillary when she was a woman. Now she's a typical male power-grubber.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

" THROW MAMA FROM THE TRAIN ! "

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The real question these days concerning Senator Clinton's continuation in the primary process really hinges on whether she can show some statesmanship and act diplomatically.

And, I think, so far, anyway, that she is showing an inability to do so.

Yes, the entire process should play out. The remaining primaries are scheduled. In some cases people have already voted! There are some encouraging signs that the folks in Michigan are forging a compromise package that could provide a diplomatic end to their dilemma. Who knows, perhaps Florida will be able to do the same.

So, can Senator Clinton demonstrate the same sort of diplomacy, statesmanship, even "sportsmanship" that football players do in the last minute or so of the 4th Quarter of a game where even a "Hail Mary" won't bring victory to the losing team?

Can she congratulate Senator Obama, give him a hug, and pat him on his backside?

Can we all finish our beverages and head to the parking lot?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Barrak will have to pay off Hilarys campaign debt so she can get her 11 million back.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Who cares? If Senator Clinton stays in the race, okay; if she leaves, fine. I'm an Obama supporter and he's a better, stronger, more ready candidate thanks to Senator Clinton, her campaign and the rigors of this contest. He, and we, owe her a huge debt. If a few things had gone her way, she would be the nominee. Starting with Bill in SC (funny he seems to be the anchor on a lot of these boats), they did not.

And Senator Clinton will eventually leave and support the nominee when she decides to exit. Just as Obama would have done. And the vast majority of us, regardless of who our candidate is, will support the nominee because, regardless of the unparalleled heroism of John McCain, we will not accept and can no longer tolerate the criminality of the leader of the republican party and most of us will, at the very least, penalize this party of big business, so detached from reality by voting for the nominee of a party that by every matrix leads America out the abyss anytime we have started down that path.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

to steal this election...I'd say you'll see rioting in this country that has not been seen since the 60's. She knows it's over. She is trying to buy the White House. After a total of 20 friggin' years of Clintons' and bushes' it is more than time for a change. Obama is the obvious choice...not to mention the majority of this country's preference!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We all know that Hillary, like Bush, is a liar who will say anything and pander to any voter to get elected. Now she is adding Bushian stubborness and disconnection from reality.
The only way she can get the nomination is by stealing it, and I wouldn't put that beyond her any more than Bush.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I posted something earlier in response to a post (it's a sub-sub post) that I sort of liked so I thought I'd post it in full view.

I'm a republican. My friends tell me I've gone to the "dark side," but it seems pretty light and refreshing over here and I just might stay.

When I go to a republican convention we go in and pray, say the Pledge of Allegiance, pray some more, do some other patriotic bullshit, pray some more and then nominate the old white guy.

We have an African American or a woman who will be our next president, if we simply figure out how to play together. Both are breathtaking in their own right. Both are incredibly well qualified. Both are far superior to any of the gerbils the republicans trotted out on stage during those "I am Reagan" "No me" "No me" debates.

Both, simply by being elected, allow us to more fully realize the dream that is the vision of our Declaration of Independence and perfect our union. JESUS CHRIST (that's my republican side praying) let's not screw this up simply because we can't figure out how to play togehter. That would be a disgusting, inexcusable legacy to leave from this journey.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The popular vote doesn't elect the president so why should it select the candidates.

The whole American election system is screwy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Pillsbury Doughboy a/k/a Tim Russert implied last week that the Obama campaign should put settling some of Clinton's debt on the table in the "reconciliation" talks.

What reconciliation talks?

For about five minutes after her disasters in Indiana and North Carolina, people actually thought she was going to withdraw. If she intends to hang around until the Convention, hoping she can do something that will make Obama unelectable, there won't be any reconciliation talks.

And if Obama agrees to settle any of her debt, I'd get a receipt if I were him.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Someone calling himself/herself Longdream, is truly dreaming. When he wakes from his dream, he may realize that Obama was the one that had a disastrous night in Indiana and NC. Hillary should not have come anywhere near a win in Indiana. This was a natural win for Obama, with Indiana Counties, close to Chicago. With media from Chicago coming in, with a pro-Obama spin. With Obama refusing to debate Hillary, thereby concealing what a fake and imposter he is. With Obama outspending Hillary by over 2 to 1. With a deceptive win in NC, by 14 points, which shuold have created the expectation, that he would have won Indiana by at least 7 or 8 points, and with all the media pro-Obama blabber about him being the front runner.

....he still lost Indiana.

Why? He should have won NC by 30 points. NC has one of the largest Black populations in all the States of the Union. Indiana has a typical Black population. That's why he won NC, and lost Indiana.


by Pam Martens
The candidate that claims to be the only presidential contender who doesn't take money from lobbyists is in fact the biggest recipient of lobby-related contributions. Barack Obama rakes in millions from law firms serving the interests of Wall Street, including the financial institutions that gave us the subprime lending crisis. Lawyers that work for firms that earn hundreds of millions of dollars for lobbying may technically not be lobbyists, but they share in their colleagues' earnings as influencers of Congress - a legal loophole that allows Obama to claim his hands are clean of lobby loot. "The top contributors to the Obama campaign are the very Wall Street firms whose shady mortgage lenders buried the elderly and the poor and minority under predatory loans."
Obama's Money Cartel: How Barack Obama Fronted for the Most Vicious Predators on Wall Street

by Pam Martens
This article is the result of a special investigation undertaken by Counterpunch.

"The top contributors to the Obama campaign are the very Wall Street firms whose shady mortgage lenders buried the elderly and the poor and minority under predatory loans."
Wall Street, known variously as a barren wasteland for diversity or the last plantation in America, has defied courts and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) for decades in its failure to hire blacks as stockbrokers. Now it's marshalling its money machine to elect a black man to the highest office in the land. Why isn't the press curious about this?

Walk into any of the largest Wall Street brokerage firms today and you'll see a self-portrait of upper management racism and sexism: women sitting at secretarial desks outside fancy offices occupied by predominantly white males. According to the EEOC as well as the recent racial discrimination class actions filed against UBS and Merrill Lynch, blacks make up between 1 per cent to 3.5 per cent of stockbrokers - this after 30 years of litigation, settlements and empty promises to do better by the largest Wall Street firms.

The first clue to an entrenched white male bastion seeking a black male occupant in the oval office (having placed only five blacks in the U.S. Senate in the last two centuries) appeared in February on a chart at the Center for Responsive Politics website. It was a list of the 20 top contributors to the Barack Obama campaign, and it looked like one of those comprehension tests where you match up things that go together and eliminate those that don't. Of the 20 top contributors, I eliminated six that didn't compute. I was now looking at a sight only slightly less frightening to democracy than a Diebold voting machine. It was a Wall Street cartel of financial firms, their registered lobbyists, and go-to law firms that have a death grip on our federal government.

Why is the "yes, we can" candidate in bed with this cartel?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

(Obama's scam, cont'd)

How can "we," the people, make change if Obama's money backers block our ability to be heard?

Seven of the Obama campaign's top 14 donors consisted of officers and employees of the same Wall Street firms charged time and again with looting the public and newly implicated in originating and/or bundling fraudulently made mortgages. These latest frauds have left thousands of children in some of our largest minority communities coming home from school to see eviction notices and foreclosure signs nailed to their front doors. Those scars will last a lifetime.
"How can ‘we,' the people, make change if Obama's money backers block our ability to be heard?"

These seven Wall Street firms are (in order of money given): Goldman Sachs, UBS AG, Lehman Brothers, JP Morgan Chase, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley and Credit Suisse. There is also a large hedge fund, Citadel Investment Group, which is a major source of fee income to Wall Street. There are five large corporate law firms that are also registered lobbyists; and one is a corporate law firm that is no longer a registered lobbyist but does legal work for Wall Street. The cumulative total of these 14 contributors through February 1, 2008, was $2,872,128, and we're still in the primary season.

But hasn't Senator Obama repeatedly told us in ads and speeches and debates that he wasn't taking money from registered lobbyists? Hasn't the press given him a free pass on this statement?

Barack Obama, speaking in Greenville, South Carolina on January 22, 2008:

"Washington lobbyists haven't funded my campaign, they won't run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of working Americans when I am president."

Barack Obama, in an email to supporters on June 25, 2007, as reported by the Boston Globe:
"Candidates typically spend a week like this - right before the critical June 30th financial reporting deadline - on the phone, day and night, begging Washington lobbyists and special interest PACs to write huge checks. Not me. Our campaign has rejected the money-for-influence game and refused to accept funds from registered federal lobbyists and political action committees."

The Center for Responsive Politics website allows one to pull up the filings made by lobbyists, registering under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 with the clerk of the U.S. House of Representatives and secretary of the U.S. Senate. These top five contributors to the Obama campaign have filed as registered lobbyists: Sidley Austin LLP; Skadden, Arps, et al; Jenner & Block; Kirkland & Ellis; Wilmerhale, aka Wilmer Cutler Pickering.

Is it possible that Senator Obama does not know that corporate law firms are also frequently registered lobbyists? Or is he making a distinction that because these funds are coming from the employees of these firms, he's not really taking money directly from registered lobbyists? That thesis seems disingenuous when many of these individual donors own these law firms as equity partners or shareholders and share in the profits generated from lobbying.

Far from keeping his distance from lobbyists, Senator Obama and his campaign seems to be brainstorming with them.

The political publication, The Hill, reported on December 20, 2007, that three salaried aides on the Obama campaign were registered lobbyists for dozens of corporations. (The Obama campaign said they had stopped lobbying since joining the campaign.) Bob Bauer, counsel to the Obama campaign, is an attorney with Perkins Coie. That law firm is also a registered lobbyist.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What might account for this persistent (but non-reality based) theme of distancing the Obama campaign from lobbyists? Odds are it traces back to one of the largest corporate lobbyist spending sprees in the history of Washington whose details would cast an unwholesome pall on the Obama campaign, unless our cognitive abilities are regularly bombarded with abstract vacuities of hope and change and sentimental homages to Dr. King and President Kennedy.
"Many of these individual donors share in the profits generated from lobbying."

On February 10, 2005, Senator Obama voted in favor of the passage of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005. Senators Biden, Boxer, Byrd, Clinton, Corzine, Durbin, Feingold, Kerry, Leahy, Reid and 16 other Democrats voted against it. It passed the Senate 72-26 and was signed into law on February 18, 2005. Here is an excerpt of remarks Senator Obama made on the Senate floor on February 14, 2005, concerning the passage of this legislation:

"Every American deserves their day in court. This bill, while not perfect, gives people that day while still providing the reasonable reforms necessary to safeguard against the most blatant abuses of the system. I also hope that the federal judiciary takes seriously their expanded role in class action litigation, and upholds their responsibility to fairly certify class actions so that they may protect our civil and consumer rights...."

Three days before Senator Obama expressed that fateful yea vote, 14 state attorneys general, including Lisa Madigan of Senator Obama's home state of Illinois, filed a letter with the Senate and House, pleading to stop the passage of this corporate giveaway: The AGs wrote: "State attorneys general frequently investigate and bring actions against defendants who have caused harm to our citizens... In some instances, such actions have been brought with the attorney general acting as the class representative for the consumers of the state. We are concerned that certain provisions of S.5 might be misinterpreted to impede the ability of the attorneys general to bring such actions...."

The Senate also received a desperate plea from more than 40 civil rights and labor organizations, including the NAACP, Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Human Rights Campaign, American Civil Liberties Union, Center for Justice and Democracy, Legal Momentum (formerly NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund), and Alliance for Justice. They wrote as follows:

"Under the [Class Action Fairness Act of 2005], citizens are denied the right to use their own state courts to bring class actions against corporations that violate these state wage and hour and state civil rights laws, even where that corporation has hundreds of employees in that state. Moving these state law cases into federal court will delay and likely deny justice for working men and women and victims of discrimination. The federal courts are already overburdened. Additionally, federal courts are less likely to certify classes or provide relief for violations of state law."

This legislation, which dramatically impaired labor rights, consumer rights and civil rights, involved five years of pressure from 100 corporations, 475 lobbyists, tens of millions of corporate dollars buying influence in our government, and the active participation of the Wall Street firms now funding the Obama campaign. "The Civil Justice Reform Group, a business alliance comprising general counsels from Fortune 100 firms, was instrumental in drafting the class-action bill," says Public Citizen.

One of the hardest working registered lobbyists to push this corporate giveaway was the law firm Mayer-Brown, hired by the leading business lobby group, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the Chamber of Commerce spent $16 million in just 2003, lobbying the government on various business issues, including class action reform.

According to a 2003 report from Public Citizen, Mayer-Brown's class action lobbyists included "Mark Gitenstein, former chief counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee and a leading architect of the Senate strategy in support of class-action legislation; John Schmitz, who was deputy counsel to President George H.W. Bush; David McIntosh, former Republican congressman from Indiana; and Jeffrey Lewis, who was on the staffs of both Sen. John Breaux (D-La) and Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-La)".

While not on the Center for Responsive Politics list of the top 20 contributors to the Obama presidential campaign, Mayer-Brown's partners and employees are in rarefied company, giving a total of $92,817 through December 31, 2007, to the Obama campaign. (The firm is also defending Merrill Lynch in court against charges of racial discrimination.)

Senator Obama graduated Harvard Law magna cum laude and was the first black president of the Harvard Law Review. Given those credentials, one assumes that he understood the ramifications to the poor and middle class in this country as he helped gut one of the few weapons left to seek justice against giant corporations and their legions of giant law firms. The class-action vehicle confers upon each citizen one of the most powerful rights in our society: the ability to function as a private attorney general and seek redress for wrongs inflicted on ourselves as well as for those similarly injured that might not otherwise have a voice.
"Obama helped gut one of the few weapons left to seek justice against giant corporations and their legions of giant law firms."


Those rights should have been strengthened, not restricted, at this dangerous time in our nation's history. According to a comprehensive report from the nonprofit group, United for a Fair Economy, over the past eight years the total loss of wealth for people of color is between $164 billion and $213 billion for subprime loans which is the greatest loss of wealth for people of color in modern history:

"According to federal data, people of color are more than three times more likely to have subprime loans: high-cost loans account for 55 per cent of loans to blacks, but only 17 per cent of loans to whites."
If there had been equitable distribution of subprime loans, losses for white people would be 44.5 per cent higher and losses for people of color would be about 24 per cent lower. "This is evidence of systemic prejudice and institutional racism."
Before the current crisis, based on improvements in median household net worth, it would take 594 more years for blacks to achieve parity with whites. The current crisis is likely to stretch this even further.

So, how should we react when we learn that the top contributors to the Obama campaign are the very Wall Street firms whose shady mortgage lenders buried the elderly and the poor and minority under predatory loans? How should we react when we learn that on the big donor list is Citigroup, whose former employee at CitiFinancial testified to the Federal Trade Commission that it was standard practice to target people based on race and educational level, with the sales force winning bonuses called "Rocopoly Money" (like a sick board game), after "blitz" nights of soliciting loans by phone? How should we react when we learn that these very same firms, arm in arm with their corporate lawyers and registered lobbyists, have weakened our ability to fight back with the class-action vehicle?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Should there be any doubt left as to who owns our government? The very same cast of characters making the Obama hit parade of campaign loot are the clever creators of the industry solutions to the wave of foreclosures gripping this nation's poor and middle class, effectively putting the solution in the hands of the robbers. The names of these programs (that have failed to make a dent in the problem) have the same vacuous ring: Hope Now; Project Lifeline.

Senator Obama has become the inspiration and role model to millions of children and young people in this country. He has only two paths now: to be a dream maker or a dream killer. But be assured of one thing: this country will not countenance any more grand illusions.
Pam Martens worked on Wall Street for 21 years; she has no securities position, long or short, in any company mentioned in this article. She writes on public interest issues from New Hampshire. She can be reached at pamk741@aol.com This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Quantity in inverse proportion to quality.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There are reporters who are work on the Rezko/Obana connection and trial that think that the court may have evidence of wrong-doing by Obama or that Rezka will really start talking to get a lighter sentence. The trial is in its final days. Some say that $625,000 purchase of land next door is a pay-off. Wait and see. Interesting.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]