Obama and bowling: Spare us

ALTOONA, Pa. — While Democrats increasingly worry about winning ugly, Barack Obama was losing gracefully at a bowling lane in Altoona.
“My economic plan is better than my bowling,” Obama told fellow bowlers Saturday.
“It has to be,” a man called out.
Obama let everyone know he hadn’t bowled since Jimmy Carter was president — and finished with a score of 37. A perfect game is 300.
On Sunday, the Illinois senator visited a dairy farm run by Pennsylvania State University and held a campaign rally.
Pennsylvania’s April 22 primary is the next contest between Obama and Hillary Clinton in their fight for the Democratic presidential nomination. Pennsylvania is the biggest single delegate prize remaining in the Democratic primaries.
Clinton and the presumptive Republican nominee, Sen. John McCain, took Sunday off.
Clinton’s camp spent the weekend courting crucial superdelegates and blasting calls for her to drop out of the race.
McCain launched his first TV ad of the general election Friday, portraying himself as a leader with the experience to keep the country safe as a wartime commander in chief.
By the Associated Press

freep.com

Tags: bowling, obama

11 Responses to “Obama and bowling: Spare us”

on 31 Mar 2008 at 3:38 pm Stirling

Consider me among them. I’ve voted Republican my entire adult life. Not this time around. Sorry about Bush, America.
on 31 Mar 2008 at 4:28 pm Satchel

Yeah, Joe Lieberman looks like a sellout supporting McCain. The Republicans might think the same of whoever supports Obama. But considering they have a reason to (the disaster of Bush), It might be understandable.
on 31 Mar 2008 at 5:19 pm Rickey

Its all smoke and mirrors. The takeaway message is that highly placed members of the Republican establishment like him.
on 31 Mar 2008 at 6:09 pm Perry

You’re not considering heartfelt essays like this from Pat Buchanan protege Justin Raimondo, the right-libertarian editor of Antiwar.com.Clinton-supporters on the right like Rush Limbaugh make no secret of their cynical aims.
on 31 Mar 2008 at 7:00 pm Hammond

Well, I really don’t blame all Republicans in 2000. If he actually kept his word about small government and staying out of nation-building then his approval ratings would be a tad higher now. The only reason he beat McCain in the primaries was because he outspent him with his endless money supply from daddy’s friends. There’s no way he could have won in a fair match.You saw through his bullshit in 2004, so I know you aren’t a mindless zealot. Don’t feel bad about your choices.
on 31 Mar 2008 at 7:50 pm Lilith

throw them all in jail!
on 31 Mar 2008 at 8:41 pm Bertrand

wait a minute… i thought he was “too liberal” to get both parties working together. What’s going on here? did Hillary say something wrong?
on 31 Mar 2008 at 9:32 pm Harve

I don’t think people should be considering the party lines so hard and fast. When rich white people start backing a candidate, I don’t see how being a democrat or a republican makes much of a difference.When I saw Kennedy endorsing Obama, I knew immediately that he was a member of the old boys club (i.e. The Establishment)
on 31 Mar 2008 at 10:22 pm Valentine

I’ve noticed that neoconservatives and neoliberals have lots in common. They’re both stupid.
on 31 Mar 2008 at 11:13 pm Iona

This should answer your question. In short, Obama had most of the republican crossovers before McCain clinched it. Now that McCain has been chosen by republicans, crossover voting is actually giving Hillary as boost, not because they actually believe in her, but because they think it will help them in November.

on 31 Mar 2008 at 3:38 pm Stirling

Consider me among them. I’ve voted Republican my entire adult life. Not this time around. Sorry about Bush, America.

on 31 Mar 2008 at 4:28 pm Satchel

Yeah, Joe Lieberman looks like a sellout supporting McCain. The Republicans might think the same of whoever supports Obama. But considering they have a reason to (the disaster of Bush), It might be understandable.

on 31 Mar 2008 at 5:19 pm Rickey

Its all smoke and mirrors. The takeaway message is that highly placed members of the Republican establishment like him.

on 31 Mar 2008 at 6:09 pm Perry

You’re not considering heartfelt essays like this from Pat Buchanan protege Justin Raimondo, the right-libertarian editor of Antiwar.com.Clinton-supporters on the right like Rush Limbaugh make no secret of their cynical aims.

on 31 Mar 2008 at 7:00 pm Hammond

Well, I really don’t blame all Republicans in 2000. If he actually kept his word about small government and staying out of nation-building then his approval ratings would be a tad higher now. The only reason he beat McCain in the primaries was because he outspent him with his endless money supply from daddy’s friends. There’s no way he could have won in a fair match.You saw through his bullshit in 2004, so I know you aren’t a mindless zealot. Don’t feel bad about your choices.

on 31 Mar 2008 at 7:50 pm Lilith

throw them all in jail!

on 31 Mar 2008 at 8:41 pm Bertrand

wait a minute… i thought he was “too liberal” to get both parties working together. What’s going on here? did Hillary say something wrong?

on 31 Mar 2008 at 9:32 pm Harve

I don’t think people should be considering the party lines so hard and fast. When rich white people start backing a candidate, I don’t see how being a democrat or a republican makes much of a difference.When I saw Kennedy endorsing Obama, I knew immediately that he was a member of the old boys club (i.e. The Establishment)

on 31 Mar 2008 at 10:22 pm Valentine

I’ve noticed that neoconservatives and neoliberals have lots in common. They’re both stupid.

on 31 Mar 2008 at 11:13 pm Iona

This should answer your question. In short, Obama had most of the republican crossovers before McCain clinched it. Now that McCain has been chosen by republicans, crossover voting is actually giving Hillary as boost, not because they actually believe in her, but because they think it will help them in November.

kimblr.com