Just surfed an AOL forum and the Shrillary vs Hussein supporters are ripping each other throats out, or maybe their ba**s off. Its comical to read their rants accusing the other of being the biggest liar. Hey, put both of them in a liars sack, shake it up you never know which would fall out first. I got shot at or I slept for 20 years in church and never heard a thing....One thing for sure you don't have to accuse those two of being liars, they prove it on an hourly basis.

Hillary certainly needs a double-digit win in PA to keep her chances alive. She can't overtake Obama's "lead in delegates," but it is not impossible she could end up the primary season in a dead heat or even ahead in the popular votes cast, which would be enough "cover" for super delegates to choose her over him.

If she falters in PA, she has only herself to blame to disrupting her own momentum with the ridiculous lie about the Bosnia landing. A big enough win there gives Obama more time to screw up some more.

"Pennsylvania is repeating a pattern that we've seen elsewhere where Obama can close the gap almost anywhere if he has the opportunity to campaign there and press the flesh."

Apparently it's convenient to ignore that Obama is outspending Clinton 5-1 in Pennsylvania. Of course, he outspent by huge amounts in Ohio and Texas also, and still couldn't beat her there, and probably won't be able to beat her here either.

And once you ignore that he's in essence buying votes in Pennsylvania, you can also ignore that he won't be able to outspend McCain 5-1.

Ahhh, experience the ObamaBliss (tm) that comes from ignoring basic facts.

Hilarious that Lee thinks Obama's outspending Clinton is a negative for him. His fundraising is vastly superior to hers, and her campaign can't even pay its bills, so of course he's going to outspend her.

While that part is just funny, it's monumentally stupid of Lee to claim that running advertisements is "stealing votes." What a moron.

It wasn't that Clinton didn't have enough money but they spent it so foolishy and wastefully. Hillary's first campaign manager Solis Doyle and her oft-repeated line: "When I'm speaking, Hillary is speaking. She (Solis) was infamous among her colleagues for referring to herself as "the queen bee" burned through over 175 million on dollars on parking fees, big hotel suites, huge salaries to partimers like Mark Penn..The basic facts of mismangement, incompetence and arrogance of both the candidate and her campaign staff are not Obama's fault..I know it may seem unfair for Obama to think of raising money from the American little guy and the internet. 90% of Obama's fund rasing comes from the internet, 190 dollars the average donation, from over one million donors rather than the much fewer in number cynical Clinton donors who rely more on those who are looking for ambassadorships or foreign billionaries looking to buy access in the White House.

Bill Clinton has raised well over 400 miilion for his library, and has a huge nest egg he has accumulated from his speech making..If a another Billary presidency means so much to him why doesn't he do as Romney and put some his own money into the campaign?

"Hilarious that Lee thinks Obama's outspending Clinton is a negative for him."

Is Obambi going to be able to outspend McCain 5-1?

Get your finger out of your nose, mantis, having to spend $5 for every $1 your opponent spends is not a good sign. In fact, it's pretty damn sad.

Damn, you must have fallen off your bicycle recently. You used to be relatively bright, now your just a foul-mouthed little putz.

It's also hilarious that Obama is using lies in his PA TV ads. Apparently he's desperate for an upset, and is willing to lie even more than usual to get it.

Your desperation is showing, Lee Tard.

Is Obambi going to be able to outspend McCain 5-1?

I doubt it, but your focus on one week's advertising is just another example of your repeated tactic of narrowly obsessing about one detail you find useful, nevermind how little it actually supports your point to anyone with a brain (or how true it is, for that matter). You can't see the forest for the trees...hell, you can't even see the trees there's so much shit in your eyes.

The fact that a candidate who until recently had zero national name-recognition can raise the funds to outspend the extremely well-known previous First Lady is quite remarkable. And, throughout the campaign, as voters from each state get to know Obama, they turn away from Clinton. It's happening in Pennsylvania now.

You used to be relatively bright, now your just a foul-mouthed little putz.

Well, you've always been stupid. At least you're consistent.

"Until recently had zero-name recognition" - gufaw!

There have been dozens of debates, and Obama has been in the headlines for months. Lol!!

Every time the guy sneezes it's front page news, and mantis wants people to believe that Obama is having to spend 3-4-5 times the amount Clinton is spending because people don't know who he is? GUFAW!

Typing GUFAW doesn't make you look like a moron at all, Lee. Keep doing it.

Although it may be hard to believe, the vast majority of people in this country pay substantially less attention to politics than your average blog-reader. At this point your average person has probably heard Obama's name, and knows he's black, but that's about it. The debates have been watched by less than 10% of the population, possibly less than 5%.

The ads he's running in Pennsylvania have been largely biographical. As the Pennsylvania voters get to know him, as in so many other states, they are turning away from Clinton.

Or, if you like, it's because of Clinton's getting caught in repeated lies about her experience. Or both.

GUFAW!!1!

And while you're spreading your idiocy beyond your pen, Lee, do tell us how running political ads is "stealing votes."

I assume it is so much in the same way not buying a Dixie Chicks album is "censorship."

I figured that would be your response. Tool.

When you finish wiping the spittle from your chin, mantis, show me where I said Obama was "stealing votes".

Oops, I meant "buying votes".

Apparently it's convenient to ignore that Obama is outspending Clinton 5-1 in Pennsylvania.

As Mitt Romney proved money isn't everything. You can take millions of dollars to put lipstick on a pig and it's still a pig. Money helps but it's clearly not everything.

Hillary's problem is that voters have no real idea why she wants to be president other than she feels like she is owed it for some reason.

Of course, he outspent by huge amounts in Ohio and Texas also, and still couldn't beat her there...

Lee
Go back and count the delegates. Obama won Texas handily.