QUOTE (claypigeonb @ Jun 27 2008, 04:57 PM) 
I knew what Hillary was, so I was willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt. Now he is the candidate. He has erased the doubt. McKinney, anyone?
Um..........NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Full Version: OBAMA DIVIDED US NOT HILLARY
Um..........NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
QUOTE (claypigeonb @ Jun 27 2008, 01:57 PM)
I knew what Hillary was, so I was willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt. Now he is the candidate. He has erased the doubt. McKinney, anyone?
you are not voting for obama? (i.e. giving a vote to mccain)
how is that possible? how could anyone, knowing full well the shitstorm we are ALREADY in with a right wing court, act or not act in such a manner that would assist in electing someone who would make that horrible situation, even worse?
I really have to ask...
QUOTE (Randys @ Jun 27 2008, 02:08 PM)
you are not voting for obama? (i.e. giving a vote to mccain)
how is that possible? how could anyone, knowing full well the shitstorm we are ALREADY in with a right wing court, act or not act in such a manner that would assist in electing someone who would make that horrible situation, even worse?
I really have to ask...
how is that possible? how could anyone, knowing full well the shitstorm we are ALREADY in with a right wing court, act or not act in such a manner that would assist in electing someone who would make that horrible situation, even worse?
I really have to ask...
You don't understand, it's about morals.
What could be more moral than letting an entire country suffer so that a few people can sleep easy knowing the did the 'right thing.'
QUOTE (znarfk @ Jun 26 2008, 07:30 AM)
FRANK TALK AND TRUST IN THE MOTIVES OF THOSE WHO TELL YOU THEY ARE COMMITTED IN THE IDEALS OF THE NEW DEAL IS THE START OF OUR ABILITY TO PREVENT THE RIGHT FROM SEPERATING US FROM OUR INTEREST
You are a moron. Do you get McSame points for all this drivel?
QUOTE (znarfk @ Jun 6 2008, 03:03 PM)
FOR YEARS HILLARY HAS HAD BEEN THE UNITY CANDIDATE. CORONATED IS ONE DESCRIPTION, OBAMA PEOPLE SAY LIKE SHE WAS ENTITLED, NO MATTER IT IS THE SAME, SHE WAS THE FIRST CORENATED DEMOCRAT IN MY LIFETIME. SHE HAD 90 PLUS% OF BLACKS, UNION PEOPLE, WHITE LIBERALS, HISPANICS, OR PRETTY MUCH ALL OF US UNDIVIDED. ALONG COMES OBAMA. TO WIN, HE MUST CARVE OUT CONSITUENCIES. BLACKS, WHO FORMERLY WENT FOR CLINTONS FOR 16 YEARS TURNED ON A DIME, 90% FOR TO 90% AGAINST OVERNIGHT. RANDI WOULD SAY DON'T LOOK TO RACE FOR THE ANSWER. THAT IS RACISM IF I DARE! WELL, STILL TRYING TO CONVINCE MYSELF A WHITE FRESHMAN SENATOR COULD DIVEST THE CLINTONS OF 95% OF THE BLACK VOTE IN A FEW MONTHS TIME AND I JUST CAN'T. OBAMA AND HIS CRACK TEAM KNEW ONE THING, IF HE WON, BLACKS WOULD NEED TO BE HIS AND SO TO OTHER CONSTITUENCIES. BY DEFINITION HE TOOK WHAT WAS UNDIVIDED AND CHOSE TO DIVIDE TO WIN. NOT SAYING HE DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT. BUT WE HILLARY SUPPORTERS, ACCORDING TO RANDI WILL BE TO BLAME IF WE DO NOT REUNITE. WE WHO FOR 8 YEARS STEADFASTLY SUPPORTED THE UNIFYING CORENATED CANDIDATE TO MINIMIZE DISUNITY. WE WHO NEVER WAVERED FROM THAT. WE WHO DID IT FOR 8 YEARS ONLY TO HAVE IT FALL APART IN 8 MONTHS. STILL NEVER WAVERING, BECAUSE WINNING WAS FIRST, AND UNITY WAS KEY, NOW WE HAVE A PARTY NOT UNIFIED. AND RANDI SAYS WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR IT AND TO FIX IT. I FIND THAT HARD TO LISTEN TO.
Election Day is the one day where "We the People" have some sliver of leadership. It is this day we go into the voting booths and decide whom we would to lead us for the next four years. It is not a lottery ticket where you hope you pick the winner. Vote your beliefs, vote your values. Jello Biafra says, "It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it."
The candidates demonstrate their leadership skills into manipulating mass groups of people to vote for them, or have votes counted in their favor. The one who makes the most persuasive deals with the people, corporations, politicians, etc. by Election Day becomes the next President. The primaries showed that Obama was the best manipulator for the Democrats, and McCain was the best manipulator for the Republicans, Cynthia McKinney was the best one for the Greens, Bob Barr for the Libertarians, and Gene Amondson for the Prohibition Party. (There are other candidates; just look them up, like on Wikipedia.com)
The candidates demonstrate their leadership skills into manipulating mass groups of people to vote for them, or have votes counted in their favor. The one who makes the most persuasive deals with the people, corporations, politicians, etc. by Election Day becomes the next President. The primaries showed that Obama was the best manipulator for the Democrats,
[/quote]
you take yourself a bit too seriously
QUOTE (Koa @ Jun 30 2008, 05:51 PM)
Election Day is the one day where "We the People" have some sliver of leadership. It is this day we go into the voting booths and decide whom we would to lead us for the next four years. It is not a lottery ticket where you hope you pick the winner. Vote your beliefs, vote your values. Jello Biafra says, "It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it."
I'm pretty sure that my state (California) will vote for Obama! It will be a proud day!
QUOTE (BigWorm @ Jun 26 2008, 04:38 PM)
Sorry but your rant was nearly incoherent. But I think I understand your point. My point however is that I have no interest in seeing 2 families rule this country for 28 years. 20 has been enough for me.
Clinton was a decent president, certainly the budgets were in much better shape and worlds above Bush, too bad his penis put democrats in the penalty box for 10 years.
There is a big difference between the ties that someone wears and whether they are part of the immediate family of a former president. The cycle was a joke, seriously though Hillary Clinton would have been a big mistake for this country IMHO. She is probably the most divisive public figure in the entire Democratic party. That in my opinion is not what the country needs. I'm glad just enough of my fellow Dems agreed
That's also not to say that I hate Clinton supporters or even Hillary, I just don't think she would have been a good president.
Clinton was a decent president, certainly the budgets were in much better shape and worlds above Bush, too bad his penis put democrats in the penalty box for 10 years.
There is a big difference between the ties that someone wears and whether they are part of the immediate family of a former president. The cycle was a joke, seriously though Hillary Clinton would have been a big mistake for this country IMHO. She is probably the most divisive public figure in the entire Democratic party. That in my opinion is not what the country needs. I'm glad just enough of my fellow Dems agreed
That's also not to say that I hate Clinton supporters or even Hillary, I just don't think she would have been a good president.
I think I was very fair in describing what you said as making fungible the clinton presidency and bush presidency.That is what you think, so be it. thank god we had many who didn't think to prevent an fdr presidency, or adams presidency, simply based on having a so called dynasty.When you say she would be bad I understand you think that, but it remains a fact, no democrat in modern america, but a clinton has had a successful message acceeptable to the american people.AND HERE IS THE DEMOCRATIC ERROR OF THE MILENIUM THIS ELECTION WAS TAKEN OVER BY THE FAR LEFT. THERE IS AN ARROGANT AND TOTALLY INCORRECT BELIEF, BY THE FAR LEFT IN OUR PARTY THAT THIS IS A CYCLE OF AMERICA EMBRACING LEFT WING POLITICS. SO THEY NOMINATED THE LEFTEST CANDIDATE WE OFFERED THIS TIME SAVE FOR DENNIS.THERE IS NO LEFT WING SHIFT IN AMERICA!THERE IS A REJECTION OF THE BUSH NEO CONS! SHE WAS READY TO RUN FROM THE CENTER WHERE AMERICA IS. SHE HAD A CHANCE TO GAIN TWO TERMS LIKE BILL WITH THAT MESSAGE SO RARE, IT MIGHT BE ONLY THE CLINTONS EXIST IN OUR PARTY WHO POSSES SUCH A MESSAGE.MY ONLY EVIDENCE FOR THIS IS OF COURSE. THE LAST 50 YEARS AND EVERY SCRAP OF EVEDIENCE IN IT. THE EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY IS OF COURSE IN THE ABSENCE OF A SECOND SUCCESS THERE MAY BE ONE OUT THERE AND OBAMA MIGHT BE IT. IN HIS FAVOR IS ONLY, THAT IN A PINCH HE HAS A HISTORY OF WHAT ONCE WORKED FOR US. BILL! OTHER THAN THAT, HE HAS ONLY A LONG LINE OF DEMOCRATIC LEFT WING FAILURES TOTALLY 100% OF THE NON CLINTON PARTY. BUT IF HE THINKS HE WILL BE THE FIRST MAN EVER TO COME FROM THE FAR LEFT, OUTSIDE OF WAR TIME AND A GREAT DEPRESSION TO DEAL WITH, LIKEK FDR, OUR HISTORY SHOWS THERE HAS NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER BEEN ONE.MY BELIEF IS WE MADE A TERRIBLE MISTAKE WITH THE ARROGANCE OF THE FAR LEFT TAKING OVER OUR PARTY THIS TIME ON THE HEELS OF BUSH DISASTER. AT THIS TIME, WE WILL ADD TO THE OUSE, BUT OUR CONGRESS IS AT A LOW IN APPROVAL.AGAIN, BUSH FAILURE DOES NOT EQUATE TO LEFT WING EMBRACE. AND WHAT IS WORSE, IF OBAMA IS SUCCESSFUL, LEFT WING FALLS FURTHUR OUT OF FAVOR. BILL DID NOT HAVE GORE FOLLOW BECAUSE PROSPARITY MAKES MORE GOPERS AS MUCH AS ANY OTHER REASON.
QUOTE (freedomring @ Jun 26 2008, 05:47 PM)
A) I was also not ok with Kerry for voting for the war- Russ Feingold was my dream candidate for '04
As I stated, in spite of her vote on the war, Hillary still would have been my candidate this time had she become so DIVISIVE within our party
C) I am not voting for the less qualified candidate- I already told at what point I felt she became unqualified to represent me
D)She should not have run even a mildly negative campaign against a fellow democrat at this time; it DID cost her the election in my view
E) How does cowtowing to this administartion qualify her to run this nation effectively?
F) "enjoyed a status having never had anything negative brought up about him" what are you smoking'? He has been attacked since the day he entered politics
G) No one says it's gonna be easy but hello- if we want the person with the easiest politcal path, that would seem to be McCain, or for that mattr, why don't we let these yahoos just remain in power forwever, since you know, he has friendships that are standard in every election by which I can only assume you mean lobbyists and cronies
H) for those of us who have been paying attention these last years, Obama is not a moment in time- this moment has been building for me for the past 5 years from when he was running for senate
H) Pay attention to what people are actually saying instead of latching on to a talking point (ie my statement about thinking Hillary was more qualified at a certain point) and just keep repeating it instead of actually addressing the point that you said Obama was responsible for dividing the party and most of seem to agree that Hillary was more responsible than Obama and as I said before, she is the one in the best position to unite us, even though she is certainly under no obligation to do so- are you able to cede that point or not?
As I stated, in spite of her vote on the war, Hillary still would have been my candidate this time had she become so DIVISIVE within our partyC) I am not voting for the less qualified candidate- I already told at what point I felt she became unqualified to represent me
D)She should not have run even a mildly negative campaign against a fellow democrat at this time; it DID cost her the election in my view
E) How does cowtowing to this administartion qualify her to run this nation effectively?
F) "enjoyed a status having never had anything negative brought up about him" what are you smoking'? He has been attacked since the day he entered politics
G) No one says it's gonna be easy but hello- if we want the person with the easiest politcal path, that would seem to be McCain, or for that mattr, why don't we let these yahoos just remain in power forwever, since you know, he has friendships that are standard in every election by which I can only assume you mean lobbyists and cronies
H) for those of us who have been paying attention these last years, Obama is not a moment in time- this moment has been building for me for the past 5 years from when he was running for senate
H) Pay attention to what people are actually saying instead of latching on to a talking point (ie my statement about thinking Hillary was more qualified at a certain point) and just keep repeating it instead of actually addressing the point that you said Obama was responsible for dividing the party and most of seem to agree that Hillary was more responsible than Obama and as I said before, she is the one in the best position to unite us, even though she is certainly under no obligation to do so- are you able to cede that point or not?
SORRY I DO NOT AGREE WITH MOST OF YOU. I see our party drink with ambition because of bushs fall and his bringing down of our opponent as referendum of our far left members. Nothing has shifted us to the far left. I once saw newt shift america right of center, but that was totally different than what is going on now. the democratic controlled congress is as hated as bush. that is not a contract with america type situation.we had one person ever who managed to bring in the south and north and middle and that was frankly by triangulating the far left in our party. THIS LIBERAL, OR SO I AM CALLED AND CERTAINLY A DEMOCRAT, IN EVERY WAY, FEARS THERE IS NO FORMULA OUTSIDE OF A CATIASTROPHY LIKE FDR had where far left policy will be embraced. what is worse, the better we make it the more leave the left and move center and then right.there is an old saying and true saying," as Democrats are successful, they create, as a biproduct of that success, republicans." Bill Clintons third term, via gore was a victim of this.THAT MEANS YOUR POLITICS HAS A CHANCE THIS CYCLE, BUT I DOUBT TWO. THIS WAS A LOST CHANCE. SORRY, OUTSIDE OF OBAMA BEING SMART ENOUGH TO GET IN AND TRIANGULATE THOSE LIKE YOU, HE WILL NOTMAKE IT. FORTUNATELY, HE HAS A SINGLE SUCCESSFUL MODEL TO WORK WITH NOW. SO TAKE YOUR ADVISE, PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THE VIEIWS OF JUST THE FAR LEFT, IT MEANS THE GENERAL ELECTORATE.
QUOTE (znarfk @ Jul 6 2008, 09:24 AM)
AND HERE IS THE DEMOCRATIC ERROR OF THE MILENIUM THIS ELECTION WAS TAKEN OVER BY THE FAR LEFT. THERE IS AN ARROGANT AND TOTALLY INCORRECT BELIEF, BY THE FAR LEFT IN OUR PARTY THAT THIS IS A CYCLE OF AMERICA EMBRACING LEFT WING POLITICS. SO THEY NOMINATED THE LEFTEST CANDIDATE WE OFFERED THIS TIME SAVE FOR DENNIS.THERE IS NO LEFT WING SHIFT IN AMERICA!THERE IS A REJECTION OF THE BUSH NEO CONS! SHE WAS READY TO RUN FROM THE CENTER WHERE AMERICA IS. SHE HAD A CHANCE TO GAIN TWO TERMS LIKE BILL WITH THAT MESSAGE SO RARE, IT MIGHT BE ONLY THE CLINTONS EXIST IN OUR PARTY WHO POSSES SUCH A MESSAGE.MY ONLY EVIDENCE FOR THIS IS OF COURSE. THE LAST 50 YEARS AND EVERY SCRAP OF EVEDIENCE IN IT. THE EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY IS OF COURSE IN THE ABSENCE OF A SECOND SUCCESS THERE MAY BE ONE OUT THERE AND OBAMA MIGHT BE IT. IN HIS FAVOR IS ONLY, THAT IN A PINCH HE HAS A HISTORY OF WHAT ONCE WORKED FOR US. BILL! OTHER THAN THAT, HE HAS ONLY A LONG LINE OF DEMOCRATIC LEFT WING FAILURES TOTALLY 100% OF THE NON CLINTON PARTY. BUT IF HE THINKS HE WILL BE THE FIRST MAN EVER TO COME FROM THE FAR LEFT, OUTSIDE OF WAR TIME AND A GREAT DEPRESSION TO DEAL WITH, LIKEK FDR, OUR HISTORY SHOWS THERE HAS NEVER EVER EVER EVER EVER BEEN ONE.MY BELIEF IS WE MADE A TERRIBLE MISTAKE WITH THE ARROGANCE OF THE FAR LEFT TAKING OVER OUR PARTY THIS TIME ON THE HEELS OF BUSH DISASTER. AT THIS TIME, WE WILL ADD TO THE OUSE, BUT OUR CONGRESS IS AT A LOW IN APPROVAL.AGAIN, BUSH FAILURE DOES NOT EQUATE TO LEFT WING EMBRACE. AND WHAT IS WORSE, IF OBAMA IS SUCCESSFUL, LEFT WING FALLS FURTHUR OUT OF FAVOR. BILL DID NOT HAVE GORE FOLLOW BECAUSE PROSPARITY MAKES MORE GOPERS AS MUCH AS ANY OTHER REASON.
Your candidate lost.
Get over it and move on.
Beware of people posting in all caps!
TC
TC
QUOTE (znarfk @ Jun 6 2008, 02:03 PM)
FOR YEARS HILLARY HAS HAD BEEN THE UNITY CANDIDATE. CORONATED IS ONE DESCRIPTION, OBAMA PEOPLE SAY LIKE SHE WAS ENTITLED, NO MATTER IT IS THE SAME, SHE WAS THE FIRST CORENATED DEMOCRAT IN MY LIFETIME. SHE HAD 90 PLUS% OF BLACKS, UNION PEOPLE, WHITE LIBERALS, HISPANICS, OR PRETTY MUCH ALL OF US UNDIVIDED. ALONG COMES OBAMA. TO WIN, HE MUST CARVE OUT CONSITUENCIES. BLACKS, WHO FORMERLY WENT FOR CLINTONS FOR 16 YEARS TURNED ON A DIME, 90% FOR TO 90% AGAINST OVERNIGHT. RANDI WOULD SAY DON'T LOOK TO RACE FOR THE ANSWER. THAT IS RACISM IF I DARE! WELL, STILL TRYING TO CONVINCE MYSELF A WHITE FRESHMAN SENATOR COULD DIVEST THE CLINTONS OF 95% OF THE BLACK VOTE IN A FEW MONTHS TIME AND I JUST CAN'T. OBAMA AND HIS CRACK TEAM KNEW ONE THING, IF HE WON, BLACKS WOULD NEED TO BE HIS AND SO TO OTHER CONSTITUENCIES. BY DEFINITION HE TOOK WHAT WAS UNDIVIDED AND CHOSE TO DIVIDE TO WIN. NOT SAYING HE DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT. BUT WE HILLARY SUPPORTERS, ACCORDING TO RANDI WILL BE TO BLAME IF WE DO NOT REUNITE. WE WHO FOR 8 YEARS STEADFASTLY SUPPORTED THE UNIFYING CORENATED CANDIDATE TO MINIMIZE DISUNITY. WE WHO NEVER WAVERED FROM THAT. WE WHO DID IT FOR 8 YEARS ONLY TO HAVE IT FALL APART IN 8 MONTHS. STILL NEVER WAVERING, BECAUSE WINNING WAS FIRST, AND UNITY WAS KEY, NOW WE HAVE A PARTY NOT UNIFIED. AND RANDI SAYS WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR IT AND TO FIX IT. I FIND THAT HARD TO LISTEN TO.
QUOTE (ShastaTodd @ Jul 6 2008, 05:25 PM)
Beware of people posting in all caps!
TC
TC
I don't even read the all caps post anymore. They have been told that it is rude and they see no reason to change, so I just pass them by.
QUOTE (claypigeonb @ Jun 27 2008, 02:57 PM)
I knew what Hillary was, so I was willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt. Now he is the candidate. He has erased the doubt. McKinney, anyone?
Sure! I could go for a complete right wing takeover of The Supreme Court, more laws that are devastating to our lives, liberties and the environment...and war! Yes! I have always dreamed my grandchildren could fight for the fatherland all over the world while their families slave away at home to pay for it.
Clay, are you kidding?!!!!!
QUOTE (Christine @ Jul 7 2008, 08:18 AM)
Sure! I could go for a complete right wing takeover of The Supreme Court, more laws that are devastating to our lives, liberties and the environment...and war! Yes! I have always dreamed my grandchildren could fight for the fatherland all over the world while their families slave away at home to pay for it.
Clay, are you kidding?!!!!!
Clay, are you kidding?!!!!!
What do you think the odds are that BO's National Service will morph into a reinstituted draft (as in Selective Service)?
anyone worrying about a right wing take over of our court does not select Obama when they have Hillary as an option. Maybe in the far left of our party, that is not true, but in a general election, where the hispanic vote, is the new giant on the block, and she is loved there and he has no inroads and it gets larger every day, and there is the unspoken issue of race and how that plays out, you decided to roll the diice in this year of bush hatred. So we play fast and looseo going for the gusuto and take the chance. But make no mistake this is a GENERAL ELECTION NOW not one with left furthur left and far left voting. And the triangulation candidate, who comes with the banner of having had the only democratic message to win oveor the generla electorate in modern american history aste on the garbage heap, you didnt do what would keep the court safe so dont act now like it is the most important thing
QUOTE (ShastaTodd @ Jul 6 2008, 05:25 PM)
Beware of people posting in all caps!
TC
TC
If one has to caps-lock to make a point, the point was never worth making.
QUOTE (georgene @ Jul 7 2008, 08:47 AM)
What do you think the odds are that BO's National Service will morph into a reinstituted draft (as in Selective Service)?
Good, bring back the draft, the great equalizer, just do it right. No deferments for anyone, no exceptions except physical ability or mental health like the Swiss.
QUOTE (jkun17 @ Jul 8 2008, 12:47 AM)
Good, bring back the draft, the great equalizer, just do it right. No deferments for anyone, no exceptions except physical ability or mental health like the Swiss.
Barring our turning into a small central European neutral power, the draft would probably be like it always was. Would you think that would be good for the people?
QUOTE (znarfk @ Jun 26 2008, 12:32 PM)
crowned is an act, the ceremony is as stated
Crowned and coronated are the same word form, both are a past tense of a verb and both are an adjective as a state of being; neither works here.
Gee, what a surprise. znarfk resuscitated his own thread yet again on 07/06/08 after 4 & 1/2 days.
QUOTE (znarfk @ Jul 6 2008, 12:36 PM)
SORRY I DO NOT AGREE WITH MOST OF YOU. I see our party drink with ambition because of bushs fall and his bringing down of our opponent as referendum of our far left members. Nothing has shifted us to the far left. I once saw newt shift america right of center, but that was totally different than what is going on now. the democratic controlled congress is as hated as bush. that is not a contract with america type situation.we had one person ever who managed to bring in the south and north and middle and that was frankly by triangulating the far left in our party. THIS LIBERAL, OR SO I AM CALLED AND CERTAINLY A DEMOCRAT, IN EVERY WAY, FEARS THERE IS NO FORMULA OUTSIDE OF A CATIASTROPHY LIKE FDR had where far left policy will be embraced. what is worse, the better we make it the more leave the left and move center and then right.there is an old saying and true saying," as Democrats are successful, they create, as a biproduct of that success, republicans." Bill Clintons third term, via gore was a victim of this.THAT MEANS YOUR POLITICS HAS A CHANCE THIS CYCLE, BUT I DOUBT TWO. THIS WAS A LOST CHANCE. SORRY, OUTSIDE OF OBAMA BEING SMART ENOUGH TO GET IN AND TRIANGULATE THOSE LIKE YOU, HE WILL NOTMAKE IT. FORTUNATELY, HE HAS A SINGLE SUCCESSFUL MODEL TO WORK WITH NOW. SO TAKE YOUR ADVISE, PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THE VIEIWS OF JUST THE FAR LEFT, IT MEANS THE GENERAL ELECTORATE.
How does your response addresses my post? I do pay attention and that's why I will adress what you said:
I agree that nothing has shifted us to the far left. I don't think Barak is further left than Hillary, although he might be more honest and more willing to stand up for his consituents if that's what you mean. I also agree the democartic controlled congress is as hated as Bush (more or less). I also agree that Obama and America (because he will need our support to succeed, which Carter never had) are in for a very hard road and we may not be able to hold on to the office. I for one will not vote for somebody simply because they look like they have a better chance of winning (which I already addressed but you ignored?) You bet on the Pats didn't you?
None of this has anything to do with your original point, at least as I understood it, which was you were mad at Randi for saying it is up to Hillary to reunite the party. My point is that being as how Barak won, he doesn't really need to rally his supporters around the nominee. Hillary lost so she does need to rally her supporters around the nominee. You still seem to refuse to acknowledge this. Furthermore, there is no evidence to support your claim that Hillary would have been able to acheive so much like Bill did. If the only way she could win and function in a way that the neocons and Ken Starr types that you keep referring to will allow is to appease them and the corproate interests pulling the strings what good is she anyway? I want someone who will at least try to do the right thing, even if it kills him....
Another thing I have found rather problematic about alot of your posts here is how you keep saying Barak went after the black vote (thereby creating division within the party). That really doesn't wash with me. The so-called black vote did not win him the nomination. I don't have the exact numbers to back this up but my understanding is that less than 15% of the entire US population is "black" so he needed at least twice as many "non-blacks" as "blacks" to win the nomination. Hillary did not lose this nomination because she isn't black and I didn't vote for Barak because he is black.
I don't know what you mean about being a democrat in every way- I've never met anyone that simple-minded that wasn't a republican before LOL- but if you mean you are strictly a Party person, I would disagree as we would not be having this discussion if that were the case. I am not a Party person and I am glad we are having this discussion because I think it is really important to exchange ideas, thoughts and opinions, especially where we disagree. You keep referrencing Carter's underwhelming Presidency but you fail to realize, it is exactly the type of attitude that you are displaying that created the environment for him to fail in. It wasn't the republicans who kept Carter from succeding; it was the dems and the public. If you don't want a repeat of Carter with Obama, then demand more from yourself and your representatives this time out. Don't expect him to be perfect, don't expect him to work miracles; if he offers up good policy, support him even if it looks like no one else is going to. This is the only way anything ever gets better; it has to start somewhere with someone. Vote your interests, not the presumptive "winner".
QUOTE (znarfk @ Jul 7 2008, 01:40 PM)
anyone worrying about a right wing take over of our court does not select Obama when they have Hillary as an option. Maybe in the far left of our party, that is not true, but in a general election, where the hispanic vote, is the new giant on the block, and she is loved there and he has no inroads and it gets larger every day, and there is the unspoken issue of race and how that plays out, you decided to roll the diice in this year of bush hatred. So we play fast and looseo going for the gusuto and take the chance. But make no mistake this is a GENERAL ELECTION NOW not one with left furthur left and far left voting. And the triangulation candidate, who comes with the banner of having had the only democratic message to win oveor the generla electorate in modern american history aste on the garbage heap, you didnt do what would keep the court safe so dont act now like it is the most important thing
I live in South Florida, every Hispanic person I have discussed this with except 3 (out of about a 100) say they are voting for Obama and said so prior to the primaries.
As far as the courts go, Hillary did nothing to hinder this administration. Why do you say she was the best chance to get different results? If her whole thing is about how to win and retain office, what is stop her from choosing more right wingers because they have the best chance of gaining approval????
QUOTE (georgene @ Jul 8 2008, 06:22 AM)
Barring our turning into a small central European neutral power, the draft would probably be like it always was. Would you think that would be good for the people?
Yes.
QUOTE (znarfk @ Jul 7 2008, 12:40 PM)
anyone worrying about a right wing take over of our court does not select Obama when they have Hillary as an option. Maybe in the far left of our party, that is not true, but in a general election, where the hispanic vote, is the new giant on the block, and she is loved there and he has no inroads and it gets larger every day, and there is the unspoken issue of race and how that plays out, you decided to roll the diice in this year of bush hatred. So we play fast and looseo going for the gusuto and take the chance. But make no mistake this is a GENERAL ELECTION NOW not one with left furthur left and far left voting. And the triangulation candidate, who comes with the banner of having had the only democratic message to win oveor the generla electorate in modern american history aste on the garbage heap, you didnt do what would keep the court safe so dont act now like it is the most important thing
Are you okay?
This makes no sense.
you may want to cut back on your drug intake.
QUOTE (Grannus)
I don't even read the all caps post anymore. They have been told that it is rude and they see no reason to change, so I just pass them by.
REALLY???? This thread is still alive??? We are STILL talking about HRC???? REALLY???? Disappointing.... News flash... Primary is over.... Obama is our candidate. Deal with it.
QUOTE (KaydensMommy @ Jul 8 2008, 06:33 PM)
REALLY???? This thread is still alive??? We are STILL talking about HRC???? REALLY???? Disappointing.... News flash... Primary is over.... Obama is our candidate. Deal with it.
BRAVO! HOW'S THAT FOR ALL CAPS?
QUOTE (KaydensMommy @ Jul 8 2008, 02:33 PM)
REALLY???? This thread is still alive??? We are STILL talking about HRC???? REALLY???? Disappointing.... News flash... Primary is over.... Obama is our candidate. Deal with it.
Yeah, Lynn Samuels keeps saying Hillary still has a chance
But I actually love me some Lynn. That is one crazy-ass, uninhibited girl.
QUOTE (carmenjonze @ Jul 9 2008, 12:11 AM)
Yeah, Lynn Samuels keeps saying Hillary still has a chance
But I actually love me some Lynn. That is one crazy-ass, uninhibited girl.
But I actually love me some Lynn. That is one crazy-ass, uninhibited girl.
Who?
QUOTE (Stoon @ Jul 9 2008, 12:47 AM)
Who?
Lynn Samuels, on Sirius Left. She makes you laugh to keep from cryin'. She's a nut but she's pretty hilarious.
QUOTE (carmenjonze @ Jul 9 2008, 12:55 AM)
Lynn Samuels, on Sirius Left. She makes you laugh to keep from cryin'. She's a nut but she's pretty hilarious.
have enjoyed her for years
QUOTE (freedomring @ Jul 8 2008, 11:50 AM)
Crowned and coronated are the same word form, both are a past tense of a verb and both are an adjective as a state of being; neither works here.
generally you are right b ut preciely your not. there is a distinction crowning being the act of putting the crown on the head corenating subsuming the first term crowning, but beyond, making a life
QUOTE (Randys @ Jul 9 2008, 11:17 AM)
have enjoyed her for years
she once called HRC a miserable c&^t
QUOTE (gutterballz @ Jul 9 2008, 12:51 PM)
she once called HRC a miserable c&^t
Really!
Well, she has certainly changed her tune on that. Now, Hillary can do no wrong, and still has a chance at the convention because, well, you nevah kno...
QUOTE (carmenjonze @ Jul 10 2008, 04:33 AM)
Really!
Well, she has certainly changed her tune on that. Now, Hillary can do no wrong, and still has a chance at the convention because, well, you nevah kno...
Obamas position on language may temporarily engraciate with the hispanicc community he has such a problem with, but the rest of america 88% think he is wrong. and 75% of hispanics think he is wrong. It is the type of thing that can sink a candidate easily. For God sake it runs in the face of E P UNUM or at least it can be successfuly argued such forcing an answer like I voted for it before I voted against it to explain
Well, she has certainly changed her tune on that. Now, Hillary can do no wrong, and still has a chance at the convention because, well, you nevah kno...
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.