Final thoughts

Got the photos up. First is Uncle Sam outside the Haskins Center. It looked like he may have shaken hands with Hillary later when she was giving autographs. The other two photos are of the two-man six-media Obama rally.

Later tonight, or at least by early tomorrow morning, if you go to elpasotimes.com there will be photo galleries from the visit, videos, plus audio from the Times' exclusive interview with Hillary Clinton. So check back for that.

Final thoughts: It was a cool night. Lots of El Paso politicians out. I saw Mayor John Cook, candidate Anna Perez, District Attorney Jamie Esparza, as mentioned Eliot Shapleigh and Silvestre Reyes, radio host Paul Strelzin, and many more.

I hope as many of you as possible were able to go, or at least followed along on the blog. Thanks to those who commented. Good night!

Comments

[Knot A. Hillaryfan]

The wicked witch of the east came and finally left. Go Mc Cain!

[HILLARY VOTER]

Knothead posts a hateful comment appropriate for a right-wing nut case, since the only emotion they feel is hate.

With so much pent-up hate at GOP disposal, is it any surprise that prostitutes and other sex workers prefer the GOP convention to the competitor's. Sex workers get so much more business and make so much more money when these right-wing nut jobs are out on the town.

[ElPaso4Obama]

We had 17 of 25 people who signed up. Most people came after your reporter left. We had a great turn out and were glad to see that we helped to get Obama's message of change and hope out to more people in El Paso. Many people had nice things to say to us as they walked by and we saw many thumbs up and heard many horns honk at us as cars drove by.

According to the Field Organizer from the days before Super Tuesday, Justo Robles, "Rachel Sigman will be coordinating field operations. All interested in volunteering should contact her at rsigman@barackobama.com."

Positive Comments Regarding Tonight's Event:

In addition to the many positive comments we received during our event we received numerous positive comments by email. Some of the comments are as follows:

MAJ Kenny: I saw you comment in Today's paper, and you are right we need to show our support as well, Maybe Barak can come to the Sun-Bowl, Don Haskins might be too small :) Thanks. So, look forward to coming out.

Hortencia: I was looking forward to UTEP event for Obama! Not a problem. I'll just go to Barnes & Noble to purchase his latest book today. I'm just rather distressed by comments on today's local newspaper regarding Hispanics and their support for Clinton. I'm definitely not one of them! I'm a strong supporter of Obama! I'm an educated female and definitely disagree with everything Clinton has said. I'm rather dismayed that Obama won't be here. It's alright. I'll just continue to support Obama and vote for him! Thanks for your notice on today's event Rick! God bless Barrack &his family (& you)!! Please take good care!

Alwin: Dear supporters of Barack Obama. I'm German international student here in El Paso at EPCC. Sure I want to come to show my support for Mr. Obama. I will cancel my class at this time and will show up because I want to see a "Change" here in the US and in my opinion Obama is the right one.

Gabriel: Please bring Obama in 08 signs. I can't wait.

Helen: I grew up in Switzerland, excited about JFK. Since I have lived here (40 yrs) never been as hopeful for my new country as now with Senator Obama's candidacy,

[titisChrist]

"Uncle Sam" is a great professor at EPCC. Teaches sociology, or did a few years back before I transferred out. Great professor. Many good things to say about Hillary, I will be happy with any candidate out of the Dems side. Even an Independent would be ready to side with the Democrats. Obama needs to hit El Paso. He still has my vote.

[titisChrist]

sorry, I believe "Uncle Sam" taught US Government courses. Brain fart. Go get em Sir!

[Greg Neubeck]

Reviewing Hillary's methodical playing of the "Race card", and "The Perpetual Victim" against Obama; and, her recent commentary on Iraq; Pakistan; Energy Policy; the need for her to control the 14 Trillion $ American Economy from her White House Politburo (this from a woman who hasn't managed so much as a corner vegetable stand, or for that matter her own marriage; but, of course you could count Whitewater, and her tenure as "Madam" for Bill's White House Brothel); her Marxist statement in San Francisco: "We're going to have to take more from you, and give it to others for the common good."; Illegal Immigration; Taxes; Infanticide; Massive new Government spending; Multi million $ Senate earmarks for supporters of Hillary's Presidential campaign; Garnishing of your wages to fund her coveted Socialized medicine program; and, the Clinton's history of emasculating the military, verifies that this grievously flawed woman would be the female version of the Jimmy Carter debacle that gave us the Ayatollah Khomeini who ushered in rampant Islamic radicalism; block-long lines at our gasoline stations; a severely hollow military; and, a record Misery Index. Only much worse. Considering all of her recent gaffes, e.g. "I voted FOR IT (referring to the Bankruptcy Bill); but, I was glad to see that it didn't pass."; and, her increasingly frequent crying jags, one has to wonder if excessive use of Botox has affected her mental stability. It's no wonder that her campaign staff is shielding her from reporter and audience unscripted questions. The prospect of Madam Hillary as President; in a word: TERRIFYING. Greg Neubeck

[Hillary Rocks]

Greg Neubeck as Citizen (in several words):

Right-Wing Nut Job who, by voting for Bush, did his fascist best to flush this country down the drain.

[Jesus B Ochoa]

Those who long for another Clinton in the White House might well ponder:

1. NAFTA, which decimated the Mexican middle class and farmers, causing the spile in undocumented immigration and the devastation of many cities, EP among them.
2. The so-called welfare "reform", which plunged thousands of poor black and brown people into what can only be called the pit of despair.
3. The death penalty/terrorism/immigration law which gutted habeas corpus, the fourth amendmnent. and which led to the patriot and fisa laws.
4. Hillary's massive failure at "reforming" the health industry robbers.
5. Her votes enabling the war, continued funding for the war, and continued dependence on corrupt lobyists,

What is there to like? And really, what have the Clintons done for the Latinos except to screw them?

[Jesus B Ochoa]

Those who long for another Clinton in the White House might well ponder:

1. NAFTA, which decimated the Mexican middle class and farmers, causing the spile in undocumented immigration and the devastation of many cities, EP among them.
2. The so-called welfare "reform", which plunged thousands of poor black and brown people into what can only be called the pit of despair.
3. The death penalty/terrorism/immigration law which gutted habeas corpus, the fourth amendmnent. and which led to the patriot and fisa laws.
4. Hillary's massive failure at "reforming" the health industry robbers.
5. Her votes enabling the war, continued funding for the war, and continued dependence on corrupt lobyists,

What is there to like? And really, what have the Clintons done for the Latinos except to screw them?

[Terry Rose]

One of many reasons why you should not vote for Obama!

Joseph C. Wilson
Battle-Tested
With the emergence of Sen. John McCain as the presumptive Republican nominee, the choice for the Democrats in the 2008 presidential election now shifts to who is best positioned to beat him, in what promises to be a more hard-fought campaign -- and perhaps a nastier one -- than Democrats anticipated.

Sen. Barack Obama's promise of transformation and an end of partisan politics has its seductive appeal. The Bush-Cheney era, after all, has been punctuated by smear campaigns, character assassinations and ideological fervor.

Nobody dislikes such poisonous partisanship, especially in foreign policy, more than I do. I am one of very few Foreign Service officers who have served as ambassador in the administrations of both George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton, yet I have spent the past four years fighting a concerted character assassination campaign orchestrated by the George W. Bush White House.

Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton is one of the few who fully understood the stakes in that battle. Time and again, she reached out to my wife -- outed CIA officer Valerie Plame Wilson -- and me to remind us that as painful as the attacks were, we simply could not allow ourselves to be driven from the public square by bullying. To do so would validate the radical right's thesis that the way to win debates is to demonize opponents, taking full advantage of the natural desire to avoid confrontation, even if it means yielding on substantive issues. Hillary knew this from experience, having spent the better part of the past 20 years fighting the Republican attack machine. She is a fighter.

But will Mr. Obama fight? His brief time on the national scene gives little comfort. Consider a February 2006 exchange of letters with Mr. McCain on the subject of ethics reform. The wrathful Mr. McCain accused Mr. Obama of being "disingenuous," to which Mr. Obama meekly replied, "The fact that you have now questioned my sincerity and my desire to put aside politics for the public interest is regrettable but does not in any way diminish my deep respect for you." Then one of McCain's aides said of Obama, "Obama wouldn't know the difference between an RPG and a bong."

Mr. McCain was insultingly dismissive but successful in intimidating his inexperienced colleague. Thus, in his one face-to-face encounter with Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama failed to stand his ground.

What gives us confidence Mr. Obama will be stronger the next time he faces Mr. McCain, a seasoned political fighter with extensive national security credentials? Even more important, what special disadvantages does Mr. Obama carry into this contest on questions of national security?

How will Mr. Obama answer Mr. McCain about his careless remark about unilaterally bombing Pakistan -- perhaps blowing up an already difficult relationship with a nuclear state threatened by Islamic extremists? How will Mr. Obama respond to charges made by the Kenyan government that his campaigning activities in Kenya in support of his distant cousin running for president there made him "a stooge" and constituted interference in the politics of an important and besieged ally in the war on terror?

How will he answer charges that his desire for unstructured personal summits without preconditions with a host of America's adversaries, from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Kim Jong Il, would be little more than premature capitulation?

Senator Obama claims superior judgment on the war in Iraq based on one speech given as a state legislator representing the most liberal district in Illinois at an anti-war rally in Chicago, and in so doing impugns the integrity of those who were part of the debate on the national scene. In mischaracterizing the debate on the Authorization for the Use of Military Force as a declaration of war, he implicitly blames Democrats for George Bush's war of choice. Obama's negative attack line does not conform to the facts. Nothing could be farther from the truth. I should know. I was among the most prominent anti-war voices at the time -- and never heard about or from then Illinois State Senator Obama.
George Bush made it clear publicly when lobbying for the bill that he wanted it not to go to war but to give him the leverage he needed to go to the United Nations and secure intrusive inspections of Saddam's suspected Weapons of Mass Destruction sites. Who could argue with that goal? Colin Powell made the same case individually to Senators in the run up to the vote, including to Senator Clinton. It is not credible that Senator Obama would not have succumbed to Secretary Powell's arguments had he been in Washington at the time. Why not? Obama himself suggested so in 2004. "I'm not privy to Senate intelligence reports,' Obama said. 'What would I have done? I don't know." He also told the Chicago Tribune in 2004: "There's not much of a difference between my position and George Bush's position at this stage." According to press reports, Powell is now an informal adviser to Mr. Obama.
In his tendentious attack, Obama never mentions that Hans Blix, the chief United Nations weapons inspectors, declared that without the congressional Authorization for the Use of Military Force the inspectors would never have been allowed into Iraq. Hillary's approach -- and that of the majority of Democrats in the Senate -- was to let the inspectors complete their work while building an international coalition. Hillary's was the road untaken. The betrayal of the American people, and of the Congress, came when President Bush refused to allow the inspections to succeed, and that betrayal is his and his party's, not the Democrats.

Contrary to the myth of his campaign, 2008 is not the year for transcendental transformation. The task for the next administration will be to repair the damage done by eight years of radical rule. And the choice for Americans is clear: four more years of corrupt Republican rule, senseless wars, evisceration of the Constitution, emptying of the national treasury -- or rebuilding our government and our national reputation, piece by piece. Obama's overtures to Republicans, or "Obamacans" as the Senator calls them, is a substitute for true national unity based on a substantive program. His marginal appeals have marginally helped him in caucuses in Republican states that Democrats won't win in the general election. But his vapid rhetoric will not withstand the winds of November. His efforts will be correctly seen by the Republican leadership as a sign of weakness to be exploited. While disaffected Democrats may long for comity in our politics after years of being harangued and belittled by the right wing echo chamber, the Rovians currently promoting Obama are looking to destroy him should he become the nominee. Obama's claim to float uniquely above the fray and avoid polarization will be short-lived. He is no less mortal than any other Democrat -- Michael Dukakis, Al Gore, John Kerry -- all untouched at the beginning of their campaigns and all mauled by the end. We should never forget recent history.

In order to effect practical change against a determined adversary, we do not need a would-be philosopher-king but a seasoned gladiator who understands the fight Democrats will face in the fall campaign and in governing.

Theodore Roosevelt once commented, "It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly."

If he were around today, TR might be speaking of the woman in the arena. Hillary Clinton has been in that arena for a generation. She is one of the few to have defeated the attack machine that is today's Republican Party and to have emerged stronger. She is deeply knowledgeable about governing; she made herself into a power in the Senate; she is respected by our military; and she never flinches. She has never been intimidated, not by any Republican -- not even John McCain.

Barack Obama claims to represent the future, but it should be increasingly evident that he is not the man for this moment, especially with Mr. McCain's arrival. We've seen a preview of that contest already. It was a TKO.
This article is adapted from a piece published in the Baltimore Sun on February 12, 2008
please vote for Hillary for all of our sakes!

[m_arriaga_UTEP2007]

I don't think anyone can really say they are fully satisfied with the candidates on either party.

McCain isn't that bad, it could've been worse. I think if McCain chooses Huckabee as his running mate, watch out because Huckabee can win the South due to all the religious nuts in that region.

Hillary. Well, she's alright. I don't agree with all of her ideals or policies, but I do agree with other important ones too.

Obama. Talk about inspiring, but talk about inexperienced. His drug use, just as Clinton's Watergate involvement, will be pointed out time and time again by the GOP. He's so smooth with his words, but there is something about him that I can't trust - most likely his inexperience.

I'm not satisfied with either party's candidates, and I really don't know whom I'm voting for on March 4th, much less in November.

There is no new JFK and there will never be any more Abe Lincolns. JFK was really inspiring too, but in the grand scheme of things, he really didn't do too much during his tenure anyways. He wasn't an LBJ, FDR, or Lincoln - none of these candidates are.

Hopefully one day there will be a candidate who not only inspires, but who has experience and can transform things from day 1. One day... maybe