No your right. I was confused. I have been smoking too much stuff lately. Nothing more from Me. Obama is a moderate. I have been mindlessly blowing smoke. I apologize. Barak Obama is the man with the plan. I do not know what I was talking about.

BO is a good man and he should be the nominee for the democratic party. Ill go now. No more from me.

Rather than simply explain yourself you decided to carry on with the ad hominem.

I'm not claiming it's semantics because you haven't even got to that point. Apparently you feel the word Progressive is really bad. Good for you. Is John Halpin on the Obama staff? Is there a reason that I should what he has to say? I realize you are trying some sort of odd smear by association but I don't even know what the association is.

If you think I'm blowing smoke, so be it. I still haven't figured out how this ties to this diary. You still haven't actually bothered to explain. Instead you go further down the rabbit hole of “Obama is bad because he is a Liberal, Progressive, Radical, etc”

Once again the smoke and mirrors card is being played. As light is shined on the movement the proponents start with the song and dance, smoke and mirrors.

I have explained myself. For those moderate enough to read what I posted it is quite clear.

The progressives just keep claiming over and over that its semantics. Playing with labels. Using words out of context. And of course progressives dont believe in letting states define values and morals………thats because ““At its core,” John Halpin, senior advisor on the staff of the Center for American Progress writes, “progressivism is a non-ideological, pragmatic system of thought grounded in solving problems and maintaining strong values within society.

Blow more smoke. It is what Obama's campaign is excelling at.

You're playing with labels. Hillary is very liberal but Obama is uber-liberal? What does that mean?

I'm not following your logic because I don't see how it is relevant to this discussion, or particularly insightful for that matter.

What other kind o f morality is there other than values morality?

If you wish to push for the Democrats to embrace Federalism, go for it. Good luck with that.

Personally I don't think I care much for giving state's the reins on social issues. They have shown themselves to be utterly untrustworthy on the matter. But that's just me.

A point in which the Far Left is attempting to take over the Democratic party just as the GOP allowed the RR to take over theirs.

This is my logic. BO is far left……the most liberal in the senate. It is the progressives who have latched onto his coattails and are using his as their poster boy in a power grab within the Democratic party.

Hillary Clinton is very liberal herself but she is mainstream, status quo, party affiliated and party endorsed. The progressives under this false guise of moderation are trying to simply force their way into the door, take over the party and run it with their own set of values and morals.

“At its core,” John Halpin, senior advisor on the staff of the Center for American Progress writes, “progressivism is a non-ideological, pragmatic system of thought grounded in solving problems and maintaining strong values within society.

He continues.

Progressivism is practical and driven by the values that define America morality.

The very thing the Left screams at the right about……..Values Morality. We dont want your stinking Values and Morality but now THEY want to instill their own version of the very things they DETEST from the right. I agree. I have said.

The US government is about governing all people, not running our social lives. VAlues and morality should be more of a states right issue then a national party issue.

I don't understand your argument here. This diary is about a notable Clinton supporter using Obama's drug use as a reason not to vote him and then weakly denying he did.

What does this nebulous far left creature you refer to, have to do with this? Why are you referring to Obama's alleged political beliefs in a thread about Bob Johnson and Hillary Clinton. You wouldn't be attempting a little deflection, would you?

I realize that to many Americans the word liberal is most certainly of the 4 letter variety. But it doesn't bother me in the least. Conservatives measure their candidates by how Conservative they are. Yet being Liberal is some contagion that should be quarantined. I don't get that.

I wished that people would look at his record. He is a 100 percent yes man when it comes to the vote. He has been established by the NYT as the most liberal member of congress. His voting record is adored by the liberal watchdog groups that keep tabs of Senators and how they vote. He has a 96 percent rating. The highest of any Senator or Congressman.

Obama's record when in the state senate was one of extreme left policies. He formed alliances with the “Hyde Park Intellectuals” his policies on the website or the progressives dream agenda. Even CNN announced the night of the NH primary “Obama is considerably farther left then is Hillary and he is going to have to explain himself.”

I don't know what else to say. If we all want to pretend Huckabee is liberal I guess we can see what we want to see.

So are you also saying that Obama is a “far leftist”? I don't see it. But I do agree that folks on the far left do like Obama and his “Change” angle. That being said, IF Obama is elected president (a big IF in my book still), I can't see him trying to further the agenda of the far left and all of their “ways”. I just don't feel he would be that stupid to be the far left George Bush Jr.

There is a movement in this country called progressivism. As Cosmo so eloquently debated with me for days…….its a moderate movement by definition. However their is really nothing at all moderate in their movement at all.

They have chosen Obama as their Dawg. This movement wants to establish the morals and the values that are important today to Americans according to them. This movement is nothing more then a far left version of the religious right that is vying for control of the democratic party.

The thirst for power by the right led to the RR taking over the GOP. The thirst for power is leading to the Democrats about to be taken over by the far left progressives. This is what I see as the danger. We are going to have two parties run by fringe lunatics. The GOP at least is showing some signs of easing their dependence upon the RR. The DNC is in fear of selling their souls to this smear machine of radicals.

This is a good thing? Obama is not a danger? This movement is way bigger the Barrak Obama. He simply is putting his name on the poster. Give me a break.

Bob Johnson is part of the BDE (Black Democratic Establishment) that ADORES the Clintons no matter what they say or do. Here in the Detroit Metro area, local black radio hosts are being attacked hard for even thinking about supporting Obama by black “Clintonites”. Just blind adoration and loyalty to the Clintons for nothing but scraps. The Clintons have talked a GREAT GAME about helping the black community yet have done NOTHING. That's why it's funny watching Hillary Clinton attack Barack Obama about not doing anything/lack of experience. Guess it takes one to know one, eh?

Who do you think that support is mostly coming from?

Its the far left who is vehemently antiwar, antichristian, anti just about everything. His numbers nationwide are 36 percent. That is roughly about where Im putting the far left antiwar progressives in numbers. It is this attack machine that has destroyed Bush's presidency and if left unaccountable will Destroy Hillary and then whoever runs against them.

It is this attack machine that they blame on the GOP and yet they are every bit as powerful and as effective as anything the right can throw out there. This lying attack machine destroyed the GOP in this country in the 2006 elections. This time they are just using it on their own. Because their own is not BAT SHIT crazy left.

I find nothing funny about it at all. They have not skipped a beat to get their favorite son nominated. By June Bill Clinton will be Osama Bin Laden himself.

Dont you see the irony of this. Try to look past your detestation of Hillary for a moment.

It depends on to what extent the establishmentarian Left (Hillary Clinton) treats the farther left (mainly “progressives”) even worse than the GOP treats the Religious Right. (Just shut your asses up and vote for our party.)

I'm not a starry-eyed dupe or dewy- or doe-eyed kid faithful to Obama, but this guy really isn't threatening (and I don't see him as a radical Trojan horse) and he really has a large amount of support. (Here in Iowa I got a good chuckle today from one car I saw with an Obama sticker — I wanted to leave the owner a note, “Don't give up!” — next to another car with a sticker that said “BUSH ES UN PENEDJO.” Did you think Iowa is totally conservative?)

By this time next month we still WILL NOT have a clue what Obama stands for but Hillary Clinton will be in prision for pissing on the constitution, refusing Habeas Corpus, Joinning the American Taliban, helping the Iranians buy guns to give to Osama Bin Laden, calling every black in America names, insulting every citizen of America, Threatening to make all women wear Burkas and giving nuclear secrets to China.

And thats only February's worth of progressive lies. I wonder what March will bring?

YOUR A PATHETIC ATTENTION GETTER!

The slop on his network speaks for itself and him.

I find it satisfying to make many small donations that give me the experience of speaking up whenever something happens that moves me.

So far it seems to me that Obama is running a more honorable and civil campaign than Senator Clinton.