Three Publictions Contrasted

The New York Tiems

The Washington Post

Party Fears Racial Divide

The Washington Post reported

The Los Angles Times

Clinton fund raiser defects to Obama Campaign

The Los Angeles Times reported

The New York Times

G.O.P. Now Sees Obama as Liability for Ticket

The New York Times reported

Three Publictions Contrasted

New York Times

The Washington Post

McCain offers tax policies he once opposed

The Washington Post reported

The Los Angles Times

GOP adds Target Obama

The Los Angeles Times reported

The New York Times

Obama to appear on Fox News

The New York Times reported

Three Publictions Contrasted

The New York Times

The New York Times focused the story on Senator Clinton and her ability to win key swing states. Sen. Clinton made a powerful argument that the states that she won are necessary for a democratic victory in November.

Senator Obama countered by saying that he still is in the best position to win the democratic race and that the little damage Sen. Clinton did was in vain.

The Times ended the article by touching on fund raising and campaign spending a reoccurring topic of debate since the start of the primaries.

The Los Angeles Times

Contrary to both other publications, the LA Times reported on Clinton's and Obama's hastily return to Capital Hill, to vote on a discrimination bill, following a brief stay in Indiana- the next stop in the race for president.

The attention then turned to Sen. Clinton's focus on superdelegates. She pleaded to the party for support stating that if Michigan and Florida were given the opportunity to vote, she would significantly close the gap in popular vote.

The Obama campaign countered the argument saying that Obama will be the great unifier. arguing that he will be the president that will close bipartisan conflict.

The Washington Post

Contrary to both other publications, the Post focused the entire article on the potential implications the democratic race is creating inside the party.

The Washington Post

Continuing Battle Divides Democrats

The Washington Post reported that although the race for the democratic nomination may be harming its long term goals, the party will reunite once the primary session has ended.

Senator Clinton's advisers were optimistic about her newfound momentum in her bid for the White House but party leaders were split about the potential consequences of six more weeks of tough campaigning.

Tennessee Gov. Phil Bredesen commented on the enduring battle between the presidential hopefuls by saying that, "there is no clear solution...there standing there slugging it out. Everybody's getting bloody but there's no knockout."

Party leaders expressed their concerns that as Obama and Clinton continue to battle for votes, Senator McCain is flying under the radar as he tours the country laying the foundation for the general election.

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean quieted some concern when he made the argument that he is "less concerned than a lot of Democrats" about the consequences of the nominating contest. Acknowledging that the primaries are attracting hundreds of thousands of new voters to the party, and that in November, that will be more important than the battle between Obama and Clinton now.

The Los Angeles Times

Clinton, Obama dash to Washington after Indiana stumping

The Los Angles Times reported that the Senate has adjourned until later today to give both democratic nominees time to return to Washington to vote on a pay discrimination bill.

Following the announcement late last night of Senator Clinton's win in Pennsylvania, the two candidates rushed to Indiana, promptly made their opening speeches, then rushed to Capital Hill to vote on a bill that would give workers the right to sue employers for past pay discrimination.

The article then switched its focus back to the democratic nomination where it outlined Sen. Clinton's attempted to grab attention from the superdelegates. She stated that her Pennsylvania victory should give a lot of fresh information to the superdelegates and said that if Florida and Michigan were included in the count, then the popular vote would be very close.

The Obama campaign responded with a statement by Oklahoma Gov. Brad Henery who recently endorsed the Illinois Senator. He said that Obama is uniquley positioned to unite the nation and move beyond the divisiveness and partisan skirmishes that too often characterize politics as usual in poititics.

The New York Times

Seizing on Her Primary Win, Clinton Says Tide Is Turning

The New York Times reported that Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton clinched the win in the Pennsylvania primary today be a substantial 10 point margin.

The Sen. from New York proclaimed that she has proven to be the best candidate to run against republican rival Senator John McCain because of her ability to carry key swing states.

"I won the states we have to win- Ohio, now Pennsylvania," she said. "It's very hard to imagine a Democrat getting to the white house without winning those states."

The Obama campaign, under pressure to explain why the Illinois senator was once again unable to overcome his opponent in key states, pointed out that Mr. Obama still possesses a lead in pledged delegates that is almost impossible for Mrs. Clinton to overcome.

As both candidates now focus on Indiana and North Carolina, the attention now turns to fundraising and spending. The Clinton campaign, who has been outspent nearly 3 to 1 throughout the race for the nominee, got a huge boost in domantions following the announcement of her victory. In her speech, Sen. Clinton annnounced that her campaign had brought in $3 million online over night.

Three Publictions Contrasted

The New York Times

The New York Times kept there focus on Senator Clinton and placed most of the emphasis on how important this primary win is for her survival in the race for the democratic nomination.

The Times next spoke of the importance of Indiana and North Carolina- the two following primaries. They predicted that Sen. Clinton would loose both Indiana and North Carolina and be pressured by high ranking members of the party to drop out of the campaign.

The report ended with a huge section dedicated to the amount of money spent by each candidate. It was said repeatedly that Sen. Obama outspent 3 to 1 in Pennsylvania- almost to the point where it seemed the story was writing in favor of Sen. Clinton.

The Los Angles Times

The Los Angels Times concentrated primarily on three different issues of the Pennsylvania Primary: demographics, campaign spending, and negative advertising.

The article stated that the Pennsylvania demographic was strongly favorable towards Sen. Clinton. It emphasized how women made up 60% of the vote, the turn out was overwhelmingly white and that half the electorate came out from families earning $50,000 or less.

Like the two other publications, the LA Times focused on both candidates disparate attempts to win over last-second votes.

The Washington Post

The Washington Post focused on Senator Clinton's Pennsylvania win. One of the advantages of publishing on the internet is that new stories can be posted as they unfold. Enough time had passed as a result of this being my last blog and the majority of precincts had been counted to announce Sen. Clinton as the victor.

In an attempted to gain momentum, the Clinton campaign made a number of statements boasting about the victory coming despite a large financial deficit in spending.

Sen. Obama countered by pointing out the margin of support Clinton had entering Pennsylvania, compared to the final day.

Like the Los Angels Times, the Post ended the story by examining the demographics of the voters and concluded that the state heavily favored Sen. Clinton.

The Washington Post

Clinton Tops Obama in Pennsylvania Primary

The Washington Post reported a victory for Sen. Clinton in Pennsylvania tonight over Sen. Obama. This is Clinton's fourth victory in the last five contests in the Democratic presidential race.

With more than 80 percent of precincts reporting, Clinton held a 10-point lead over Obama; a margin of victory large enough to keep her in the race. Prior to this result, Clinton's closest aids said that if Sen. Clinton had not won by double-digits, they would advise her to drop out of the race.

"It's a long road to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and it runs right through the heart of Pennsylvania," Clinton said at a victory rally in Philadelphia tonight.

Sen. Obama responded to the loss by stating that, "There were a lot of folks who didn't think we could make this a close race when it started," he said. "But we worked hard, and we traveled across the state to big cities and small towns, to factory floors and VFW halls. And now, six weeks later, we closed the gap."

The demographic of Pennsylvania proved largely in favor of Clinton. Much of her success was accredited to this. Women comprised nearly six in ten voters and Clinton won that group, 56 percent to 44 percent, according to updated exit polling. Obama claimed the male vote by a slightly smaller margin of seven.

As has been the case almost since the beginning of the primary season, the vote was divided starkly along racial lines. Clinton won the white vote, 60 percent to 40 percent, while Obama claimed the black vote by a massive 92 percent to eight percent margin. White voters made up more than 80 percent of today's electorate while black voters comprised 13 percent.

With the race so close now and the democratic nomination on the line, the number of, and intensity of, nasty adds are increasing. Clinton questioned Obama's readiness to handle a crisis as the commander-in-chief and Obama answered back with an add touting his own judgment in opposing the Iraq war from the start and condemning Clinton's tactics. "Who made the right judgment about opposing the war and had the courage and character to speak honestly about it?" he said.

The Los Angles Times

As Pa. Polls Close, it's Too Close to Call

The Los Angeles Times reported that the polls closed today at 5 p.m. Pacific time too close to call.

Pennsylvania may be Senator Clinton's last best chance to appeal to her most loyal demographic: large populations of older, Catholic and blue-collar voters; the same sort that assisted in significant victories like Ohio.

Early exit polls reveled favorable statistics for Mrs. Clinton showing that women made up 60% of Tuesday's voters and about three in 10 were 65 or older. The turn-out was overwhelmingly white with nearly half of the electorate coming from families earning $50,000 a year or less.

Clinton used her popularity in the state attempting to disrupted her rivals, Senator Obama, lead by attacking his monetary spending advantage. "I think maybe the question ought to be, why can't he close the deal with his extraordinary financial advantage?" she said.

The Illinois senator outspent Clinton nearly 2 to 1 on television advertising but Obama insisted Tuesday that he entered Pennsylvania a huge underdog. Polls had Obama as much as 20 points behind Hillary when they began.

The importance of this primary also was the motivating factor behind some of the most negative campaigning seen thus far in the democrats race for the White House. Clinton characterized Obama as an elitist, seizing on his suggestion that some Americans, bitter at their financial struggles, find themselves clinging to guns and religion.

Obama countered with an ad that suggested Clinton was preying on people's fears, and painted her as a Washington insider caught up in the Beltway's "gotcha" mentality.

The New York Times

Clinton Camp Vows to Go On, But Sees Need to Win 2 States

The New York Times reported in order for Senator Clinton to remain in the race for the White House in November, she must secure a victory in Tuesday's Democratic primary in Pennsylvania. Though by a small margin, Clinton advisers predict the win over Democratic rival Barack Obama.

“She has to win Pennsylvania and Indiana — pretty much everyone in the campaign agrees on that,” said one senior Clinton adviser, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss the campaign’s electoral expectations.

As a result of her deficit in both the popular vote and competition for delegates however, several Clinton advisers said they would urge her to drop out if Mrs. Clinton were to loose Indiana.

Clinton advisers said that a win in Pennsylvania would also assist in fund-raising efforts- an area where Senator Obama is outspending her 3 to 1. According to new campaign finance filings, the spending gap between the two senators continues to increase as Mrs. Clinton spends more money than she is taking in. Mrs. Clinton is spending $1.10 for every dollar she is taking in; Mr. Obama is spending 75 cents.

In response to spending questions, Senator Clinton said, “My opponent is outspending me 3 to 1, maybe 4 to 1. I think a win under these circumstances is a terrific accomplishment."

Washington Post

The Washington Post covered that while Clinton campaigned this morning, Obama toured the locker rooms, players' lounge and football stadium at the University of Texas, posing for pictures with Texas head football coach Mack Brown -- who has not endorsed Obama and says he never votes in primaries -- and hoisting a Heisman Trophy.

When the Associated Press's pool reporter, Nedra Pickler, shouted out a question about Sen. John McCain's relationship with a lobbyist, she was scolded by the coach.

"Do you know it's inappropriate while we have his time to ask him these
inappropriate questions?" Brown asked.

Obama grinned. "Coach solved that one, didn't he? Shame on you Nedra."

I thought this article was particularly interesting because it's smart of Obama to go after the coach of a football team that probably has a lot of impact on people.

The poor journalist sure got slapped on the wrist by both of them! Maybe after all of this Obama might make a believer out of Mack Brown. Brown says he has never voted in a primary, but there could be a first time for everything.

N.Y. Times- Obama Talks About Rumors

The N.Y. Times explains that on the eve of the Pennsylvania primary, Senator Barack Obama was asked about two challenges that have dogged his candidacy for months: What could he do to dispel rumors circulating on the Internet – and beyond – that he is neither a Christian nor a patriotic American?

It is a question that Mr. Obama has been asked again and again, at campaign events and in televised debates. But his answer here tonight was sharper – and more critical – of those who have perpetuated the misinformation campaign.

Mr. Obama began with a story about the flag presented to his family at the funeral of his grandfather, a World War II veteran. Generations of Americans, he said, made it “possible for me to stand here today.”

“It frustrates me,” he continued, “that people would even have a question about something like that because they don’t ask the same questions of some of the other candidates and that concerns me.”

The Washington Post covers how Mr. Obama has spent months explaining why he does not typically wear a flag pin on his lapel and combating the myth that he is Muslim. Both matters, his advisers believe, have caused him electoral troubles in his presidential campaign.

“It’s not just that I’m a Christian and some of these e-mails are misinforming people. They’re also feeding on anti-Muslim sentiment and that’s also wrong,” Mr. Obama said. “We don’t have a religious test in this country. I want to make sure that nobody gets hoodwinked and if anybody gets that information, make sure to correct it.”

“If they don’t vote for me, it should be because they think Senator Clinton or Senator McCain have better ideas,” he added, speaking to a crowd gymnasium in southwestern Pennsylvania. “It shouldn’t be because they think that I am less patriotic or because they question what my religious faith is – all right?

Until reading this story I was actually unaware that Obama was being criticized for not wearing the America Flag Pin.

Rumors about him being a muslim and not a Christian are out and about and making people question his right to become the next U.S. president under these pretenses. What I don't understand is, why are people still not believing him when he tries to overcome the rumors?

He is right though... We have a freedom of religion under the U.S. Constitution so if people look at him as being less credible for this than it is they who may be forgetting what the U.S. stands for.

L.A. Times- Where People Know the Meaning of the Word ‘Smackdown’

Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton are taking full advantage of television one day ahead of the Democratic Pennsylvania primary, appearing on shows as disparate as “Larry King Live” and “The Daily Show.” But their most interesting appearance will likely come on the cable channel USA’s wrestling program “WWE Raw.”

In videotaped messages, the candidates will stump for votes on one of cable’s most popular programs, albeit one that is usually more interested in professional wrestling than professional vote-wrangling. John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, will also appear on the program. Even in an election season that has seen the candidates appear on “Saturday Night Live” and “American Idol,” Mrs. Clinton seemed to up the ante by telling wrestling fans that they could “call me ‘Hill-Rod.’”

“This election is stating to feel a lot like ‘king of the ring,’” Mrs. Clinton remarked. “The only difference? The last man standing may just be a woman.”

In his message, Mr. Obama adapted two frequent themes of his campaign, saying: “To the special interests who’ve been setting the agenda in Washington for too long, and to all the forces of division and distraction that have stopped us from making progress for the American people, I’ve got one question: do you smell what Barack is cooking?”

World Wrestling Entertainment, always up for a promotional ploy, stated in a press release that the organization had invited Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama to “settle the Democratic nomination process in the wrestling ring.”

The organization will use the candidate appearances to promote “Smackdown Your Vote,” a wrestling-themed voter registration effort that debuted during the 2000 election cycle.

The Times’s John Broder sends the full text along from Mrs. Clinton’s appearance:

“Hi, I’m Hillary Clinton. But tonight, in honor of the WWE, you can call me Hill-Rod.

“This election is starting to feel a lot like King of the Ring. The only difference? The last man standing may just be a woman.

“The truth is, this election is so important. The next president will face a stack full of difficult challenges right from the opening bell… to fix the economy, bring our troops home from Iraq, and make college more affordable. You need a president who will go to the mat for you. And that’s exactly what I’ll do.

“I’ve been knocked down, but I’ve always gotten back up. And I know how to take a hit for the American people. And if things get a little tough, I may even have to deliver the people’s elbow. Because this country is worth fighting for.”

“Now, I promise to stick to the political arena. So don’t worry, Randy Orton. You’re safe… for now.

“When it comes to standing up for the American people though, I am ready to rumble. “

This was by far my favorite post of them all! Watching this WWE video helped to lighten all of the negativity with the candidates at this point.

It gave people a reason to laugh for a minute and it was hilarious. I'm so glad the L.A. Times covered the footage!

Washington Post- Clinton Says McCain No Better Than Bush

The Washington Post tells us that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton criticized Sen. Barack Obama on Sunday for praising Sen. John McCain on the campaign trail.

"Senator Obama said today that John McCain would be better for the country than George Bush," Clinton said. "We need a nominee who will take on John McCain, not cheer on John McCain."

The Clinton-Obama-McCain triangle has been a source of intrigue throughout the three senators' run for the presidency, with Clinton and McCain once enjoying a friendship and McCain at times seeming to root for Clinton to get the nomination. Clinton has been careful to praise McCain as an "American patriot," but she and Obama began to take him on once he emerged as the Republican nominee.

Clinton was referring in Johnstown to a speech Obama gave in Reading, Pa. The Associated Press reported that he said, "You have a real choice in this election. Either Democrat would be better than John McCain. And all three of us would be better than George Bush."

Clinton said that McCain would be no better than President Bush. "Senator McCain would follow the same failed policies that have been so wrong for our country the last seven years," she said.

McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds said Clinton's line of attack has "been repudiated by nonpartisan Factcheck.org" which "says more about Senator Clinton than anyone else."

Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor objected for different reasons. "For someone who agreed with John McCain on voting for war in Iraq, agreed with him on supporting trade agreements like NAFTA and special trade privileges for China, and agrees with him on taking money from Washington lobbyists, Hillary Clinton's latest attack is ridiculous even for her standards, and we're confident the people of Pennsylvania will see right through it," Vietor said.

The Democratic National Committee is airing an ad against McCain entitled "Better Off?", questioning a claim the Arizona senator made that people are generally better off now than they were at the start of the Bush administration.

It was nice for me to see the focus taken of just the Clinton-Obama tirade! Now they are going after McCain... Poor guy, I bet he thought if he just waited long enough and stood outside the line of fire that Clinton and Obama would just ed up killing eachother, leaving him president by default!

N.Y. Times- Obama’s Pennsylvania War Chest

The N.Y. Times tells us that Senator Barack Obama started in April with more than $42 million in the bank available for his primary showdown with her, according to its most recent campaign finance report filed with the Federal Election Commission tonight.

Mr. Obama collected just over $41 million, almost all of it for the primary, in March, slightly more than the campaign had estimated in earlier reports. Although that was down from the $55 million he raised in February, it still left him with $51 million in cash on hand at the end of March, including money earmarked for the general election.

In a month mostly devoid of primaries and caucuses other than a series of contests on March 4, Mr. Obama spent just over $30 million in March, down from the $43 million he spent in February.

His large bankroll has allowed him to significantly outspend Mrs. Clinton in television advertising in Pennsylvania, which votes on Tuesday, more than doubling how much she has spent, according to the most recent figures available from Campaign Media Analysis Group.

I think it's great that Obama has acquired such a large amount of money for his campaign. However, I don't think he really needs it! Just listening to him talk in my opinion is far more influential than some silly television ad. Anyone who has been following this campaign will know that there have been several ads going back and forth between Obama and Clinton. They are sometimes amusing but do you think they are doing their purpose and changing your mind about the candidates? All you have to do is read the newspaper to know what's really going on!

L.A Times

The L.A Times is covering the vicious campaigning going on between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. The Democratic candidates for president spent Sunday making 11th-hour appeals to Pennsylvania voters in anticipation of Tuesday's primary, and renewing their attacks against each other.

Making what he called his "closing argument," Sen. Barack Obama described rival Hillary Rodham Clinton as disingenuous, saying she revised her positions to suit the tastes of voters.

New York Sen. Clinton, meanwhile, suggested that Obama, and not she, had been clouding the last days of campaigning with negativity, then launched a series of attacks against the Illinois senator.

A strong showing in Pennsylvania's primary by Obama -- victory or a narrow defeat -- could put added pressure on Clinton to drop out of the race.

Polls show Clinton is leading in Pennsylvania by about 5 percentage points.

Obama called his Democratic rival a "tenacious" candidate Sunday, but said she was a product of a flawed political system that she had no ability to change.

"Her basic view about this election is that the 'say anything, do anything' special-interest-driven politics in Washington is how it's got to be," Obama said. "That's how the game is played. And so you should elect her to be the nominee because she has been in Washington longer and she knows how to play the game better. . . . That's the argument."

In a similar vein, Obama said that Clinton initially supported the Iraq war, but changed her stance when it began to go sour.

He added: "You can't say that you're for the war when it's politically popular to be for the war, and then when it becomes unpopular suddenly you say, 'I didn't really vote for the war; I voted for diplomacy.'

"The point is if we're going to bring about real change, we have to be honest with the American people about how that change comes about."


Clinton, in a whirlwind charge across Pennsylvania on Sunday, spoke to a crowd of about 1,000 people packed into the Liberty High School gym in Bethlehem.

"This week we had a debate, and it showed you the choice you have," she said. "No wonder that my opponent has been so negative in these last days, because I think you saw a big difference between us."

She said that she offered leadership and experience, and repeated her charges that Obama "says one thing, but his campaign does another."

The New York senator then made a couple of quick jabs at President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney, saying "we just haven't had leadership in these past seven years," before quickly returning to criticism of her Democratic rival.

"It's important to me that this campaign not just be about speeches, the cameras and the lights," she said, "but about what we can be together."

"I was raised by family to say what I mean, and mean what I say," Clinton said. She charged Obama with funding misleading mailers and television ads, specifically regarding healthcare.

"We need to try to achieve universal healthcare, not create political opposition to universal healthcare. That's what the Republicans do -- not what Democrats do."

She also lambasted Obama for saying that Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive Republican nominee, would make a better president than Bush.

"We need a nominee who will take on John McCain, not cheer on John McCain," she said, before outlining her policy plans to change the tax code, renegotiate trade agreements and "get tough on China because they're not following the rules."

At the rally, Obama accused Clinton, in turn, of accepting substantial campaign donations from Washington lobbyists whose interests run counter to her stated policy goals. The crowd cheered Obama as he laid out his argument, shouting that Clinton was a "liar."

It is amusing to read the various attacks that the two democratic candidates are making on each other. I guess it is what campaiging is all about but with it being such a close race the claws seem to come out even sharper!

This article just touched on how the two candidates are working to out do one another for the Pennsylvania primary and provided us with quotes from each.

I can't wait to see who wins Pennsylvania!

Washington Post- From Scripted to Spontaneous on the Obama Train- 4/19/2008

The Washington Post tells us how Barack Obama wrapped up his whistle-stop train tour with a final rally here tonight, ending a day of striking visuals and stark rhetoric in advance of Tuesday's primary.

Obama is a bona fide political celebrity, and tickets to his events are often snapped up days in advance. Hundreds of people typically show up outside anyway, eager to catch a glimpse. Small towns have been off limits because the venues they offer are too small. But high school and college gymnasiums? Obama has seen quite a few.

The five rallies Obama held today, in contrast, took place outside rail stations along the route from Philadelphia to Harrisburg, and they had an unusually spontaneous feel. In Paoli, Obama's speech could be heard from two blocks away, and people running Saturday errands wandered over to the station to listen. In Downington, some showed up with their dogs, or in jogging clothes. People who lived nearby sat on their front porches and watched from upstairs windows.

Obama was clearly enjoying himself. He grinned like a kid all day, calling out "all aboard" to his staff and press corps and describing the "toot-toot" sound of the horn to the Harrisburg crowd. "It was incredible fun," Obama exclaimed.

But he was a candidate on a mission: to shut down Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton's candidacy as quickly as possible, starting with a strong showing in Pennsylvania on Tuesday.

"The fact is, she has a different idea about what is at stake in this election than I do," Obama said in Lancaster, part of a 10-minute riff that drew a sharp contrast with his Democratic rival. The nomination is within Obama's reach, and he was leaving no margin for error. "She is comfortable with the way Washington works," Obama continued. "She just wants to change political parties. I want to change how politics is done in Washington."

In Harrisburg, he added this line, "Sen. Clinton would be vastly better than George Bush would be, but that's a very low bar."

This article in the Washington Post was similar to that of the N.Y. Times, but I liked it because it focused more on what Obama was speaking about on his tour through Pennsylvania.

It refers to Sen. Obama as a political celebrity and tells us about his large fan base that is always so eager to here him speak. I would have to say that Obama is an incredible orator and I am sure he is doing his campaign a large amount of good with this train tour.

It also made Obama seem human instead of just a political phenomenon for once.

N.Y Times- Obama Takes Campaign to the Rails in Pennsylvania- 04/19/2008

The N.Y Times covered Senator Barack Obama train car tour through Wynnewood, PA. They say Obama boarded a train car at Philadelphia’s 30th Street Station and opened a four-city rail tour, arriving at his first stop here to hundreds of cheering supporters.

As he stepped off the back of a blue Georgia 300 Club Car, festooned with red, white and blue bunting, the crowd erupted in applause. Strains of Bruce Springsteen’s “The Rising” filled the air as Mr. Obama made his way to a stage built alongside the tracks.

“Now it is our turn, Pennsylvania,” Mr. Obama said. “This is a defining moment in our history. All of you are here because you can feel it.”

For more than a year, the field of presidential candidates have campaigned across America by plane and by bus. The trip across Southeastern Pennsylvania today was the first run on a train of the 2008 race, with Mr. Obama slowly making his way from Philadelphia to Harrisburg.

It is the final weekend push before the Pennsylvania primary on Tuesday, where Mr. Obama is locked in a fierce battle with Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Today, as he delivered his closing argument to the voters of this state, Mr. Obama focused on the Democratic side of the contest and drew sharp distinctions with Mrs. Clinton. To a burst of applause, he declared: “You do have a choice in this primary.”

This Pennsylvania Primary is getting tense. It's good of Obama to be making these positive appearances after offending many with his "bitter" comments.

Hillary Clinton may have another thing coming to her, I think Obama has a good chance. It will be interesting to see considering they have continually been neck and neck throughout this race.

I enjoyed this article because a very vivid picture was painted of his trip and it was enjoyable to read.

L.A. Times- McCain releases his tax returns 4/19/2008

The L.A. Times continues to to tell us that Sen. John McCain reported income of $405,409 last year, but the money he spent on charitable contributions, wages to household staff, alimony and taxes ate up most of that -- showing how his wife, Cindy, helped support a wealthy lifestyle.
Bottom of Form

McCain, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, has never before released his tax returns. Outside groups estimate the McCains' combined wealth to be between $28 million and $100 million.

"John McCain's lack of transparency is troubling and raises questions about what he's hiding," Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said in a statement Friday.

Asked whether his wife was supporting him, McCain's campaign staff offered a separate income calculation for 2007 showing that the senator's surplus income after expenses amounted to about $64,000 and suggested that he was providing for himself.

The 2007 tax return shows that McCain gave $105,467 to charity, most of it to a family foundation that supports surgery for disfigured children and clears mines abroad. The contribution included all of McCain's earnings from his books.

McCain paid about 29% of his total income and 31% of his adjusted gross income in taxes to the federal government, avoiding tax shelters and even avoiding taking deductions for routine expenses for his business as an author of books. He also paid $34,000 in Social Security and Medicare taxes for his staff.

McCain paid $5,413 in alternative minimum tax, an assessment hitting more and more middle-class Americans and one that the senator wants to eliminate. The return also shows McCain paid $17,700 in alimony to his first wife, Carol, whom he divorced in 1980.

McCain earned a total of $257,000 from book royalties in 2006 and 2007, donating all of it and additional contributions to charity, with half showing up on his return and half on his wife's.

It seems that the press is heavily focused on the tax return situation of the McCain's... I am still trying to figure out if this story is meant to damage the respect level of the Sen. for trying to make it seem as if Candy McCain is the one wearing the "financial pants" in their marriage or if the press is more so trying to focus on whether John McCain may be doing something shady with his income.

To me, I don't think it should be a factor in any marriage who is making more money and I definitely don't think that we have to be so daft as to let something like this hurt a mans reputation.

If there is shiestyness going on with Sen. McCain's income then I say make it public! But I think it's pathetic that people are trying to make him appear inadequate because Cindy McCain may be making larger financial contributions than he is.

John McCain's Tax Returns- Washington Post

Photo Credits: Google.com images

The Washington Post also released Sen. John McCain’s tax returns showing that, while he is among the wealthiest members of the United States Senate, most of his wealth comes from his wife who stems from a family fortune. Her father, James Hensley, founded Hensley & Co. in 1955, an Arizona company that grew to become one of the largest beer distributors in the country.

McCain took in $420,000 in income last year, and $320,000 in 2006 -- far less than the earnings posted by his Democratic rivals,

The campaign opted to release only the senator's returns, which show his income from his Senate salary, his various book deals, his military pension and Social Security. Cindy McCain files separately.

"Since the beginning of their marriage, Senator McCain and Mrs. McCain have always maintained separate finances," the campaign said in a statement accompanying copies of the returns. "As required by federal law and Senate rules, Mrs. McCain has released significant and extensive financial information through Senate and Presidential disclosure forms. In the interest of protecting the privacy of her children, Mrs. McCain will not be releasing her personal tax returns."

Beginning in 1991, the campaign said, McCain has "also donated the increase in his Senate salary for that year and each subsequent year to charity because he opposed the Congressional pay increase at that time and pledged not to accept the pay raises." That has amounted to over $450,000 in donations.

The Washington Post was similar to the other articles by giving the number figures of Sen. McCain’s tax information. This newspaper played a little heavier into Mrs. McCain being worth more than her husband. It’s almost like he is being ridiculed for it which it ridiculous…

A piece of information given by the Washington Post that was not mentioned in the other articles is how when he received a pay increase in 1991 he opposed to the increase and pledged not to accept the pay raise and that he would in turn contribute all of his extra earnings to charitable organizations. I thought this was incredible! Go Sen. McCain!

John McCain's Tax Returns- L.A. Times

The L.A.Times also tells us how Sen. John McCain released his tax returns this morning, in an individual filing that did not include Cindy McCain’s earnings.

The McCain’s have filed separate returns throughout their 27-year marriage.

Cindy McCain, is an heiress to a Phoenix-based beer distributing company. Her worth is estimated at more than $100 million.

According to the campaign, McCain in 2007 reported about $418,000 in actual, not communal, income.

In 2007, McCain also earned $161,708 from his Senate salary representing Arizona. He received $23,157 in Social Security income and $58,358 from his Navy pension, which is non-taxable.

According to the campaign, McCain paid $84,460 in federal taxes on a taxable income of $258,800, a rate of 32.6%, in 2007. The previous year, he paid $72,771 in federal taxes on a taxable income of $215,304.

According to the forms, McCain gave $105,000 to charity and also donated $177,000 in royalties from five of his books, including the biographical "Faith of My Fathers" and "Worth the Fighting For."

Cindy McCain's income from the beer distributorship, Hensley & Company, was $432,991 in 2007.

Earlier this week, Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, reported making $4.2 million last year, also a sharp increase as royalties from his books, "Dreams From My Father" and "The Audacity of Hope" climbed.

The Obamas paid federal taxes of $1.4 million and donated $240,370 to charity.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and former president Bill Clinton reported $20.4 million in income for 2007 but have asked for an extension on filing their returns. Almost half the former first couple's money came from Bill Clinton's speeches.

In a statement from the Clinton campaign, the Clintons said they have earned nearly $109 million since Bill left the White House in 2001, mainly through speaking engagements.

Well although the McCain's, Obama's and Clinton's all make desirable incomes, I am sure glad that I am not paying their taxes! YIKES!

I liked the L.A. Times article because it squeezed all of the candidates information into one article which really made it easy to compare them side by side.

It looks like the Clinton's annual is kicking the other guys butts! Good ol' Bill.. Can you believe it has almost all come from the two of them being involved in speaking engagements? Wow...

Thank you to the L.A. Times for making the couple hundred I paid in taxes this year look like chump change compared to Barrack Obama's $1.4 million!

McCain releases tax returns- N.Y.Times

The New York Times article on 4/18/08 released Senator John McCain’s income tax returns for the past two years showing that he received over $740,000 during 2006 and 2007 from his Senate salary, book royalty payments, his military pension and Social Security. But yesterday’s release did not shed new light on the extent of the presumptive Republican presidential candidate’s wealth which comes from his wife, Cindy McCain.



Mrs. McCain holds a significant stake in a Phoenix-based beer distributorship, Hensley & Co. that her late father helped found. To date, she has not disclosed the size of her stake in the privately-held concern. But published estimates have speculated that it could be worth up to $100 million or more. Senator McCain’s campaign stated that it was not releasing Mrs. McCain’s personal taxes “in the interest of protecting the privacy of her children”. According to filings, Mrs. McCain received an annual salary of over $430,000 for serving as chairwoman of the company. The McCain’s have a prenump keeping Cindy McCain’s assets are separate from her husband’s. According to Senator McCain’s tax filing, he paid a total $157,231 in taxes on taxable income during the two-year period.


The New York Times reports that most of Senator McCain’s contributions were made to the John and Cindy McCain Family Foundation. It contributes to a number of groups including Operation Smile, an organization that provide reconstructive facial surgery to poor children and others, and The Halo Trust, an organization involved in mine-clearing.


Over the past two years, Senator and Mrs. McCain donated about $340,320 from their community assets to charity, the campaign said.

You have to give Cindy McCain credit here! It is so nice to see a successful woman alongside her husband who may possibly have more assets than he does! I bet that if God forbid there was ever a scandal in this marriage she wouldn’t be one of those women that stands by her man… Hopefully that is…


It is cool to see the New York Times reporting all of the various charities the McCain’s contribute to and the fact that they are giving $340,320 a year to these organizations.

My Opinion 4/17/08 - JB

The debate last night was featured by the three news outlets and all summarized the debate similarly, that Sen. Barack Obama was under pressure from the moderators and Sen. Hillary Clinton.

The Los Angeles Times was fair in the way it portrayed the debate, noting the key points, and saying that important items such as the economy and Iraq weren’t brought up until almost an hour into the debate to focus in on such “important” factors like Obama’s choice to not sport a flag pin, yes hard hitting issues.

The New York Times, published in Clinton’s senatorial home state, clearly was of the opinion that Obama was cracking under the pressure. Perhaps the NY Times may be showing some favoritism for its senator as not only were most of the questions ridiculous, but pointless as well, the facts of which would have no bearing on the politics at hand.

The Washington Post, like the LA Times explained the night clearly and succinctly seemingly without any bias. It was interesting to see that The Post went into more of the specifics of some of the questioning of Clinton and her trip to Bosnia twelve years ago in which she claimed to be under sniper fire, only later to be shown at the very least embellishments.

The best and fair summaries of last night’s debate came on The Post’s website and the LA Times website. While The NY Times did explain the debate, it positioned the report in a way to favor Clinton, even exclaiming that it was a weak showing for Obama.

My biggest concern with the debate, and most that are conducted nowadays, is that these aren’t true debates. The issues brought up do not really reveal much of anything the candidate has to offer as president and after over twenty debates it wouldn’t surprise to have a tough time finding many people who could give a clear look at any candidates’ stances on major political issues.

And if that isn’t enough, the moderators were completely out of line most of the night. And my lowlight of the debate: questioning Obama about not wearing a flag pin. SERIOUSLY? Please tell me America is not that politically haywire that anyone would read into that at all.

A Similar Debate - The Washington Post 4/17/08 - JB

On washingtonpost.com today, it also reviewed last night’s Democratic debate in Philadelphia and summarized it in similar fashion as the nytimes.com and latimes.com did: Sen. Hillary Clinton was the aggressor and the line of questions was mostly directed at Sen. Barack Obama and how he conducts himself.

Aside from a similar analysis of the debate that said it was questioning Obama, one such point in The Washington Post article that keyed in on Clinton was her remarks about her false account of what happened in a trip to Bosnia during her husband’s administration.

A question submitted by a Pittsburgh voter said that she had lost his vote over the account and a Washington Post-ABC news poll showed that about six in 10 Americans do not find her honest or trustworthy.

Clinton responded to the statement saying, “I can tell you that I may be a lot of things. But I’m not dumb. I’m embarrassed by it. I have apologized for it. I’ve said it was a mistake. And it is, I hope, something that you can look over, because clearly I am proud that I went to Bosnia.”

The rest of the debate summary was like the other two articles, Obama’s readiness, and talk about taxes and Iraq.

Clinton Digs At Obama - The New York Times 4/17/08 - JB

On nytimes.com today, a report about the Democratic debate from last night explained that Sen. Barack Obama was put on the defense most of the night as Sen. Hillary Clinton questioned and criticized issues that have many inquiring about the Illinois senator.

The first debate between the two in seven weeks comes six days before the Pennsylvania primary and could decide if Clinton can continue her campaign.

Moderated by Charles Gibson and George Stephanopoulos of ABC news, the debate focused on Obama’s questionable relationships, his not wearing a flag lapel and his controversial comment about small-town Americans.

Obama gave one of his weakest performances as Clinton pushed him on the issues.

Clinton attacked his relationship with his former pastor, a 1960s radical he is now acquainted with and also his comments about “bitter” Pennsylvanians.

Obama responded and defended himself in each instance.

In regards to his “bitter” comment, Obama related it to a comment in 1992 that Clinton made.

“You know, I recall when back in 1992, when she made a statement about how, ‘what do you expect, should I be at home baking cookies?’” Obama said. “And people attacked her for being elitist and this and that. And I remember watching that on TV and saying, well, that’s not who she is; that’s not what she believes; that’s not what she meant. And I’m sure that that’s how she felt as well.”

As the debate moved to political issues, Clinton and Obama separately explained the slight differences in their Iraq war and economic policies.

Both candidates said that they would begin to pull troops out of Iraq, even if military commanders recommended against it.

Clinton was positioning herself as the more prepared candidate but did acknowledge that she believed Obama could win in November, but that she was “better able and better prepared.”

Click here for complete video and transcript of debate.

Obama's Past, Hasn't Passed - Los Angeles Times 4/17/08 - JB

On latimes.com today, a summary of last night’s Democratic presidential debate reported that the main concern of the debate was Sen. Barack Obama’s past associations.

Obama was pressed much of the time from his acquaintances with his former pastor and a long-ago member of the Weather Underground group, to not wearing an American flag pin on his lapel, and also was questioned about his comments regarding “bitter” small-town Pennsylvanians.

Sen. Hillary Clinton was on the attack, and pushed the debate on such issues, when moderators would bring them up.

Obama’s former pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., who made controversial comments about America, had Obama on the defensive again, saying that Wright’s recent remarks overshadowed the good he had done in Chicago.

Obama acknowledged he knows William Ayers, a 1960s radical that of the Weather Underground, and the details of their relationship was called into question. Obama responded by saying that, “somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago when I was 8 years old,” had nothing to do with him.

As for the pin-less lapel on Obama’s jacket, it should be noted nobody on stage was wearing an American flag.

The comments Obama made about “bitter” Pennsylvanians was a strong topic, and Obama responded to the line of questions and defended them by saying they were “mangled up.”

“The problem that we have in our politics, which is fairly typical, is that you take one person’s statement, if it’s not properly phrased, and you just beat it to death. And that’s what Sen. Clinton’s been doing over the last four days,” Obama said.

In response to Obama’s “bitter” statement, Clinton had aimed herself at looking like the more everyday American’s choice, saying the role of faith and the importance of gun ownership in many American’s lives.

Obama said Clinton’s tactics were politics as usual, and exactly what he wanted changed about Washington.

Underlying all the squabbling, is the importance of Tuesday’s Pennsylvania primary for Clinton. With time running out, and delegates she must make up surmounting, a large margin win in Pennsylvania is important.

While Obama attempted to stay political in his responses, keying in on McCain’s politics, Clinton seemed to be appealing to super delegates by saying that Obama would not be a strong candidate against McCain.

It was nearly 50 minutes before an Iraq war issue was brought up and about an hour before an economic question was posed.

Obama said he would lower taxes on the middle class but may increase capital gains taxes.

Clinton said his proposal to raise the threshold for Social Security payroll taxes would hit, “educators in the Philadelphia area, or in the suburbs, police officers, firefighters and the like.”

Obama questioned the logic by saying that the current threshold of $97,000 a year and that only those making more would be affected by such a hike. “Most firefighters, most teachers, you know, they’re not making over $100,000 a year,” he said.

As for a joint ticket in November, neither would say more than that they are for party unity.

My Opinion 4/16/08 - JB

Today, the three news outlets websites covered Sen. John McCain’s economic proposal in three separate ways.

The Washington Post was the most aggressive in its distinction that McCain’s plans are just a continuation of Bush economic policies and only help the rich, stating that McCain wanted to increase the amount of money that comes out of the seniors' pockets for Medicare.

The Los Angeles Times critiqued the plan less harshly than the Post did, but still seemed to explain the economic principles of McCain’s plan as Bush cronyisms.

The New York Times appeared to take the fairest approach, while explaining the facts behind McCain’s tax cuts and decreased spending, but not framing them in an unfair way. As opposed to the Post, The NY Times, actually explained who would have some of their Medicare drug benefits cut, only singles who make more than $80,000 per year or couples who make upwards of $160,000 per year.

It is clear that a contrarian Republican angle had been chosen by those writing on the Post’s website today.

As for The NY Times story about Sen. Clinton running for governor of New York, should she lose out on the presidency, the other news outlets did not cover such speculation. The idea of such a scenario isn’t what is important. The reason this article was printed is to further the idea that her run at the Democratic presidential nomination is hopeless with the deficit she has.

In all, The Post did a poor job of fairly explaining McCain’s economic plan, which was probably the paper’s goal in the first place. Kudos go out to The NY Times and to a lesser extent the LA Times.

Here is a link to the article that appeared on nytimes.com regarding McCain’s proposal.