I ask, 'Why?'

One headline on ABC news website reads, 'Clinton, McCain win big -- Chase After Momentum To Go All The Way.' But when I clicked to read the story, it led me to a page titled 'The note waiting for Mo' with a little caption 'McCain, Clinton may be front runners, momentum hides again.' Okay, which is it? As I read I discover that Clinton did not won the big number of Delegates as they so proudly claimed. Clinton's' speech of "This is how the west was won" would have one believe that she did win big in Nevada. But did she? So what are they talking about. Well, let me try to understand. Obama got more delegates in Nevada than Clinton. So what win are they talking about. Oh, someone on the TV news stated that Clinton won the popular vote. But there is something that is very bothersome to me. At the end of the ABC news website article, on page 4, there is a mention that is disturbing. It is 'A trashy robocall from out in Nevada uses Obama's middle name. "In fact, Barack Hussein Obama has taken millions of dollars from federal lobbying firms . . . Wall Street . . . big oil, pharmaceutical companies."' There is even a link but when I clicked up came a no page exist message, proof that this is no more than someones way of mud slinging. It states on page 3 that a donation Obama received was everything but legal. Then on page 4 the writer admits that Obama did not know, that he never knew. So far the links that are suppose to lead the reader to some facts in the story, none of those links work at all. Let's just stick to the facts. Obama won the delegate vote, while Clinton won the popular vote. Am I shock by the way the story was put together? Not in the least.