Well, the race in Pennsylvania has been ‘called’ for Clinton, (as has been expected). But, it will be interesting to see how the numbers fall, especially in light of this..

And, I still say if I was a Pennsylvanian, I’d be concerned about the ‘no paper trail’ machines.

Thousands in Pennsylvania Switch Parties, Many to Vote for Obama.

By David Lightman
McClatchy Newspapers
Monday 21 April 2008

~Williamsport, Pa. - David Butler voted for Richard Nixon in 1972, then kept voting for GOP candidates through Watergate, Reaganomics and the Bill Clinton years.

This year, though, the 59-year-old teacher switched his registration to Democrat, and he said he plans to vote Tuesday for Illinois Sen. Barack Obama.

Since Jan. 1, more than 178,000 people in Pennsylvania have changed their party affiliations, and 92 percent of them have gone from Republican or independent to Democrat.

Some 4.2 million Democrats are eligible to vote in Tuesday’s presidential primary, and the Pennsylvania Department of State predicted Monday that turnout could be as high as 50 percent.

If a big chunk of the party-switchers side with Obama, they could give him a decided edge.

That edge is hard to quantify, however. “While the switch is being driven by a number of factors, it’s clear Obama’s creating excitement,” said Brad Coker, managing partner of Mason-Dixon Polling & Research.~

(continued at the link)

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/042208L.shtml

“..At the time prior to invading Iraq, our intelligence reports stated that Iraq had WMD”..

Sorry Lee, these were lies then, and not everybody was fooled, including the UN Security Council, which is why they would not authorize a resolution.

You really should do your homework. Yes, Hillary WAS most anxious to get rid of Saddam, and she made that very clear in her vote to support the destruction of Iraq.

To paraphrase, she said “Saddam never does anything without being forced” (as in military force and threats). That’s why she was gung-ho for the war, even though anybody with a minimal amount of sense knew that Saddam had no WMD, and that the entire country was debilitated as a result of 11 years of sanctions and Saddams 8 year war against Iran.

So, let’s just call it what it is, because it’s NOT ‘hindsight’. It wasn’t ‘hindsight’ when Obama denounced it before it was launched, and it wasn’t ‘hindsight’ when several million people in hundreds of locations throughout the world, demonstrated and protested against this destruction of Iraq on Feb. 15, 2002, BEFORE it was launched with Hillary’s approval and encouragement, even though it was clearly in violation of all international laws.

So no, Obama wasn’t the ONLY one who was against it THEN, and it wasn’t ‘hindsight’. It was because we knew that Saddam had no WMD, just as we know that Iran isn’t building any nuclear weapons. We also know that the only ‘problem’ Hillary has ever had with the war on Iraq, is that we didn’t destroy the whole place sooner.

Her complaint has never been the decision to use military force against another sovereign state, but only that Dick Bush hasn’t used ENOUGH! THAT is Hillary the war hawk’s ONLY complaint about the war on Iraq. And if she gets a chance to do the same thing to Iran, she’ll do this again, and she’ll make sure that enough force is on tap this time, to wipe ‘em out on the spot.

All three in my family voted at different times today and the turnout here in Berks Co. has been light at my poll. what gives with that? Is american idol special on tonight or something?

That’s one thing in her favor. She can use it as a secret weapon if she becomes pres.

Sorry, but no matter if Hillary wins or loses the primary tonight, she will still be lacking in votes, states won and pledged delegates. Seeing how Pennsylvania is still a Machine State, it isn’t difficult to see how Clinton would have an edge anyway. Any spin about how much Obama spent is ridiculous hype with scant merit.

Hillary, you’re going down.

speaking from PA..

An if the machines don’t break down or aren’t tampered with (no paper trail), it might just be more of an upset.

We warned them about those machines--but it was like they didn’t want to hear--here in the Democratic party machine state of PA.

It was clearly a fraud from the start. That was obvious to all whose eyes don’t glaze over as soon as someone claims to speak for the flag.
A point to consider--what we are indoctrinated to call “terrorists” as the evil incarnate might be considered by others to be fighting to defend their own flag.Ask the Irish. If the US wasn’t such an accomplice in the crimes of Israel--where one can harly utter the truth in this country, I’d wager we wouldn’t have to come up wath such lame lines as “they hate us for our freedoms” Man, if that isn’t the biggest load of malarky.

The democratic left has been trying to push the concept of fear mongering by their opponents so hard, that we have been led to believe that there is no longer a terrorist threat to America ... and, that we no longer need a strong military. This is a false and dangerous illusion! Obama, and the left are also always making a point of how Obama was against the war in Iraq, while Hillary endorsed it. That’s called 20/20 hindsight. At the time prior to invading Iraq, our intelligence reports stated that Iraq had WMD’S. This is why so many politicians and citizens came to the conclusion that Sadam was such a dangerous threat to the U.S.A.. It is rather disingenuous to now use Hillary’s decision at that time, as the center piece of Obama’s campaign.