While watching news on television this morning, they ran a video of President Bush at the Olympics holding up the American flag, but it was backwards. It occurred to me that we're paying for that idiot to be in China for vacation.

However, Obama is on his second vacation in 5 months. How many of you, who work for a living, can afford to jet off to the US Virgin Islands, like Obama and family did in March, and take another week in Hawaii five months later? Let's not forget that people are still losing their homes in this country at record numbers, unemployment is rising, energy costs are skyrocketing.

President Bush is famous for his frequent vacations, but is Obama set to continue the practice as President?

It's an ominous thought, but that's not the only thing on my mind regarding Obama. I just caught another of his political ads on CNN. This one was a brief lesson on the economy, and three-quarters of it painted McCain as just another Bush (rightfully so). However, the rest of the ad pointed out Obama's "plan" to fix the economy:

1. End the war in Iraq responsibly
2. Better schools
3. No more tax breaks for oil companies

What does he mean by ending a war responsibly? It sounds good, but what does it mean? What exactly does he mean by "better schools?" Finally, the ad didn't exactly say he would abolish the existing tax breaks. Regardless, are we supposed to believe that no additional tax breaks or abolishing those that already exist will help our economy? Is he serious?

I've already looked at Obama's website for answers to my questions, but they just don't exist. As far as I'm concerned, this ad is just another attempt to manipulate The People, who are sorely uninformed.

Someone earlier wrote a diary announcing Obama's response to McCain's "celebrity" ads. As a Democrat, Obama's ad does nothing for me. Are we, The People, that stupid to believe that presidential candidates being too much of a celebrity is an issue? I hope not, but I suspect it's true. I'm just disappointed that Obama is continuing to feed the fire. Personally, I'd rather see and hear Obama ads with him actually saying something real. After every Obama speech or ad I've ever seen, I'm left feeling empty. It's the same feeling I get after I've consumed a calorie-free food or beverage.

Obama should be showcasing his achievements. He should be telling us about the bills he's authored while in the Senate. By the way, I don't care about bills he has simply endorsed. I want to know what he's created. He could tell us about some of his votes, like how he voted time and again for Iraq war funding, and let's not forget FISA.

He says he wants to change the way things are done in Washington, yet he hasn't even completed a full term. Unfortunately, Obama's limited experience disqualifies him for advocating that kind of change. Every candidate makes this kind of promise, and we've seen them do nothing once elected.

Whatever he says or does, enough with the celebrity issue. We need substance. I am a Clinton supporter, but I am now an Obama supporter who sees his flaws. So, here's a challenge for all the long-term Obama supporters. Instead of slamming me, calling me names, or otherwise insulting me, tell us all exactly what is that Obama has done.

Last Saturday's results with the Rules and Bylaws Committee rulings are a victory for the people of Florida who will have a voice in selecting our Party's nominee. It will see its delegates seated at our Party's convention. The decision by the RBC honors the votes that were cast by the people of Florida and allocates the delegates accordingly.

However, the RBC's decision on Michigan was more in line with what that state's Democratic Party leaders wanted. What matters is the Committee's decision undercut its own rules in seating Michigan's delegates--the decision does not reflect the votes of the people of Michigan. The Committee awarded to Senator Obama not only the delegates won by Uncommitted, but four of the delegates won by Senator Clinton. This decision violates the bedrock principles of our democracy and our Party.

I fully support any future decision Hillary Clinton might make regarding challenging this decision before the Credentials Committee and appealing for a fair allocation of Michigan's delegates that actually reflects the votes as they were cast.

I believe Hillary Clinton has earned more votes than anyone in the history of the Democratic primaries (more than 17 million).  I also believe that, when the primaries conclude on Tuesday, Hillary will maintain her popular vote advantage.

In the coming days, super delegates will have a clear choice: who is ready to serve as President on day one and who is best able to beat John McCain in November? When you look at her wins in the important swing states and her strength against McCain in head-to-head match ups, there's no question that Hillary is the strongest candidate. Clinton reminded us and the super delegates, who have publicly endorsed Obama, can change their minds, again.

Regardless of the outcome, our Party will unify behind the nominee and do everything in our power to elect them the next President of the United States.

There is no excuse for the way this primary process has been covered by the media and manipulated by the DNC. The DNC allowed certain states to move their primary up; those states were the states in which they believed Obama would do well.

Obama is the most negative candidate I can remember; he inspires hatred and animosity. Just read the comments on this site. His "strategy" is insidious hatred. First, he makes a derogatory comment about one of the Clintons' benign statements. Then, he magnanimously states that he believes their explanation while his campaign continues to ensure negative press about the matter.

The Michigan and Florida mess is certainly not his fault alone. The DNC screwed it up. Obama ensured there'd be no re-vote by bringing in his lawyers. Then, he magnanimously stays above the fray and lets his staff and supporters ensure the hatred and animosity are continued. There is no excuse.

Certainly, Obama did not do this alone. The media, and the DNC have assisted, but Hillary Clinton is less to blame for this mess than anyone else. Strangely, she suffers the most fallout. All the people she has helped during her career have not just turned against her, they have attacked with unprecedented viciousness.

The Democratic party is being destroyed, but the destruction is not caused by Clinton. Obama and the DNC are destroying it, and they have ensured McCain will be our next President.

Barack Obama thinks Iowans are ingrown, Pennsylvanians are bitter, and rural Americans are simply too ignorant or busy to worry their little brains over matters such as Burma.

One of his closest spiritual advisers, Jeremiah Wright, thinks white Americans are just plain greedy and wasteful, America deserved 9/11, and we should just sing "God Damn America" instead of "God Bless America." Another of Obama's spiritual advisors, Reverend James T. Meeks, an llinois state senator and pastor of the Salem Baptist Church in Chicago, was voted one of the top 10 black religious voices in the anti-gay movement. His church sponsored a "Halloween Fright Night" that depicted two homosexual men being sent to hell because of their sexuality. Both Reverend Wright and Meeks are very important to Obama. One can't help but wonder which of their despicable values Obama secretly covets.

Obama's grandmother, a typical white person according to Obama, is afraid of "strange looking people" walking down the street. Now that he's running for President, Obama's wife, Michelle, is proud of America for the first time in her adult life. Of course, we must remember it was Michelle Obama who said she'd love to scratch Bill Clinton's eyes out

Samatha Power, a former campaign advisor called Hillary Clinton a monster. Randi Rhodes, a spirited Obama supporter and former Air America talk radio host, recently called Clinton a whore. I'm sure I've left out many other Obama revelations. And, I'm sure I've missed a few other tidbits from Obama's other close friends, family and/or supporters, who so horribly demonstrate how they live by Obama's stated message of unity and hope.

Do you see a pattern here? I do and it's a huge factor in my decision to support Hillary Clinton for President. Obama's true mesage is one I cannot live with or bear in a President.

From TPM Election Central:

"I thought the controversy over Rev. Wright was remarkable," Dick Cheney said. "I thought some of the things he said were absolutely appalling. And, you know, I haven't gotten into the business of trying to judge how Sen. Obama dealt with it, or didn't deal with it, but I really, I think -- like most Americans -- I was stunned at what the Reverend was preaching in his church and then putting up on his website."

I think Cheney's remarks are just another clear indication or foreshadowing of how instrumental Reverend Wright's sermons will be in Barack Obama's defeat should he be the Democratic nominee.

This diary examines how Obama's crusade for "change" really means changing his stated position on public campaign financing. Barack Obama declared this week that he has created a "parallel public financing system." What, you say? He explains that, under parallel public financing, "the American people decide if they want to support a campaign, they can get on the Internet and finance it."

Let me translate. In November, Mr. Obama said he would accept public financing for the general campaign if John McCain committed to public funds. Now he doesn't want to be tied down by the spending limits attached to public funds. This is embarrassing. What's his solution? He calls his Internet contributors a "parallel public financing" system.

Mr. Obama is unmistakably talking about abandoning the virtuous world that campaign finance reformers have in mind. The reformers' agenda has always been to limit "the influence of money" in politics, and do so by capping the amount candidates can spend. This naturally appealed to Mr. Obama when he was the underdog. But now that he's top dog, standing on principle isn't as appealing as the prospect of a colossal war chest.

Mr. Obama once said he would "aggressively pursue an agreement with the Republican nominee to preserve a publicly financed general election." Mr. McCain has already taken steps toward public financing in the general election. So now Mr. Obama wants to preserve his reputation as a reformer while exploiting his new financial advantage. We are all beginning to learn how expansive the meaning of "change" is.

Obama says small donors "will have as much access and influence over the course and direction of our campaign that has traditionally been reserved for the wealthy and the powerful." However, the millionaires and billionaires in America are playing a much greater role in his financing than he wants us small fry to know. About half of the $240 million raised by Obama's campaign has come from people giving more than $200. Some of Obama's big donors:

• Kenneth Griffin, a famously private 39-year-old billionaire who threw his support behind Obama's presidential campaign just as he hired a team of lobbyists to urge Congress to preserve a lucrative tax loophole.

• Billionaire casino developer who plans to put a slot parlor in Philadelphia; Obama has decried gambling for its steep "moral and social cost."

• Director of General Dynamics, the military supplier that has seen profits soar since the onset of the Iraq war and that has benefited from at least one Obama earmark.

Read more about how Obama's record-breaking fundraising machine isn't entirely grassroots.