Clinton raises $4 million after wins

I can't stand Clinton. She is a phony and so childish. The way she said "Thank you" after she won, reminds me of how Sally Field said, "You like me, you really like me." I pray that she loses this primary. No wonder the Kennedy's jump ship. Clinton has no class.

Release your TAX RECORDS Clinton. What are you afraid of ?

Gee, this is so last year's news!

Remember Ron Paul? You know, that other GOP candidate that the media perpetually blacks out of Presidential coverage? That other GOP candidate who never did drop out of the race and has all that money to spend ($6M!) now? Well, if you recall correctly, he did those numbers TWICE in 2007.

If you want this to be Chicago 1968 again, then so be it.

If you want to open Pandora's Box, then you'll see the results.

But I point a finger at Hillary Humphrey Clinton for all this, not Barack McGovern Obama.

This was a race that began with higher ideals, greater aspirations, boundless hopes, but now, now my fellow Obamaniacs, we have fallen into the trap of negativity, and we knew where it was, it had always existed in the shadows beckoning, awaiting our arrival, hoping we would choose false steps. Who will lead the flock now that we are lost? Obama is "the one" but remember, it was Oprah that coroneted him, and we need her more than ever to help us win this fight so that we may join the ranks of the righteous.

How dare we declare a winner of the Democratic Texas primacaucus without first counting the caucus votes??!! The Texas election had two components - a primary and a caucus. The votes for the primary came in first, and they are stil counting the votes at the caucuses. Shouldn't we wait for all the results before declaring a winner, especially since the primary outcome was so close? We know the caucuses account for one-third of the delegates. But I am not even talking about the delegate allocation. I am simply referring to the actual voting results. We behave as if these caucus-goers never voted!!! What we should have done is wait for all the results, from both components of the election, and THEN declare a winner based by weighting the two results according to the Texas rules (2/3 for the primary and 1/3 for the caucuses). Then, and only then may we truly and fairly say who won the Texas election for the Democratic nominee!!! If Obama wins the caucuses by 55% or more, there is a sincere case that can be made, with integrity and conviction, that Obama won Texas or at least that the win was split... especially considering that Clinton only won the primary portion of the Texas election by such a slim margin. Would someone in the national forums and media please discuss this dynamic? We talked so much about the "Texas two-step" and yet we treat the election as if it was done just like the other three states!! Seems patently unfair to dismiss the work and votes of all those voters who went back to caucus that night. I know the big "comeback" story loses its lustre... but this is about fundamental honesty and justice for the voters and the candidates.