not asking the right questions

Much of Obama's support is derived from claims that his record as a STATE legistlator. Many of his supporters take his claim at face value that he can work in NATIONAL political arena even though he barely served for 1 year before deciding to run for president. First of all, do we really believe that he truely understand the deep interests at work on the national level such that he can work to bridge that deep divide created by the Bush's bully pulpit administration? We can only look at his prior experiences in the state level to see what actually happened on contentious issues. Obama boasts of his bipartisan work on two issues - and the NYT written articles about what actually happened.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/19/interesting-obama-history/?s...

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/03/us/politics/03exelon.html?_r=2&hp=&ore...

We see that his bipartisanship leadership is just very poor comprosmise to the special interest. How is that better? People who think that he can make politics work differently don't understand how negotiations actually work in politics. Perhaps he doesn't even know how it works in National politics because he hadn't the experiences yet. So why is it that we just accept his claims without scrutiny? I agree that when a candidate has never been tested, he can speak to his ideals much more truthefully. If I were a politician, I can speak to my hopes and ideals with a lot of passion too, but I know that once I am placed in the reality of world, these special interest will require skills that deal with politics as usual.

Obama has a better record about not saying things directly that could damage himself. He is not willing to stand up for any issue strongly and take heat for them. On contentious issues, he votes present. He doesn't have a record on abortion because he voted Present on every abortion legislation in the Illinois legislature. He voted present on the Kyle Liberman admendment but then come back and say he *would have* voted against it. That is NOT what we want from our leaders. We need leaders that can demostrate strong convictions and be able to stand up for people that need strong advocates and make americans make difficult decisions about reality without engaging them in false hope based on rhetoric and no track record.

On the national town hall Hillary hosted on Feb 5, she talked about LGBT issues. That is a lot of visibility for an issue that does not need to be for many people. This is why I support Hillary. Watch it here:

http://townhall.hillaryclinton.com/

Obama is just another politician like everyone else, he is flawed like everyone else.
http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=438
http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=436
http://www.hillaryis44.org/?p=449

Obama is more of the same - not different. He is trying to get elected by talking up his personality and avoid the issues. That's the way Bush got elected. Change is when the American voters looking deeper into a candidate and make decisions about the issues. Only you can change politics by focusing on the issues.