Letters to the Editor
-
It's Deep, but it Ain't Truth
Hillary organized and led a campaign that has blown the same 20 point lead you cite Mondale (and that sweetie pie Geraldine the bigot-crone) for losing. As far as the faces of the candidates, the most consistent was Edwards, but he didn't have the novelty factor, so the press froze him out. He would have had the best of both remaining candidates, but that's water over the levee. If Obama has two faces (one for each race, or what?), Hillary has too many to count: stern Mommy Hillary, scolding schoolboy Obama; weepy Hillary, her heart full of love for her fellow Americans (and a growing fear of losing); wonk Hillary, spouting meaningless stats and talking points; sarcastic Hillary, mocking hope and vision and words. The republikans cross over to vote for her in droves when they have the chance 'cause she's the target they've been practicing on. No one knows exactly what to think about the Obama phenomenon. No one expected it, certainly not Rodham. She has consistently the highest negatives by far of any candidate in the race. Karl the Rover is licking his plump chops at the chance to gut another clinton and send her to the taxidermist. Sure, Obama is going to see even more lies and fearmongering ads than Hillary's thrown at him, but McLame ain't exactly free of baggage. The war is worsening, the economy is in a death spiral, and all Honest Johnny can do is ape Bush, only with his 40 year old POW story, and his trophy former mistress, now current wife, to back him. I personally think either Clinton or Obama can beat him; we differ on who has the better shot of the two. the voters and the delegates to date corroborate my version.
-
Michelle...
I would suggest at this time Axelrod promptly forget pissing off the entire white and hispanic community and instead start thinking about damage control for all of Obama's affairs and his fights with his wife about it. . It's starting to get uncovered. Finally!
-
@factcheck
As a Democrat, Mondale was 20 percentage points ahead of Bush Sr. for months, and he lost badly. Republican campaign strategists are very good at what they do. Frankly they've done it all to Hillary before
Of course. That was the whole point of the Republican efforts to enthrone Hussein-Obama, of two Muslim fathers, connections to domestic terorists (albeit remotely but that won't stop them) and loud-mouthed racially charged black church leaders, indicted Syrian slumlords, etc.
They KNOW they can take him down effortlessly once she's out of the way. Always did.
We can only pray that HRC blows him out decisively in Penn. If the 'bama crowd has any sense they'll thank her for it.
-
Word Choices
If I were a Hillbot, I'd circumspect about "blow" in your lexicon. If Rodham wins Pennsylvania, it'll be by five points or less. It won't mean squat. Obama will win more states from here on in, and more delegates. He does particularly well in Western states where there are high concentrations of darkies, like Montana. There are as many as four or five per county. They're taking over, them and the frito banditos who are stealing our jobs. Live in your gated communities and your dream world, Clintonistas. There is no easter bunny for widdle Hillary. She's gonna lose the same way she's run her campaign: slowly and dully. Apparently, stamping her foot and pouting didn't make Dean and the DNC seat "her" delegates from Florida and Michigan. If she's going to lose, and she is, at least she could do it with a little style, like Big Bill taking phone calls during a knob job. Now, that's concentration. Hill's not gonna "blow" anything or anyone in Pennsylvania. She might "win". Of course, her blind adherents say she "won" Texas even though she received fewer delegates than Obama did. That's Clinton logic. Now, we'll get six weeks of whining about the sexist media, more fearmongering ad campaigns, and more thinly veiled race cards. Not racism- no sane person thinks the Clintons are actually racist. But they'll use anything- any thing- to win. It's what they do. It's the Wall Mart way. Ask former long-time board member Rodham. Hey, it's "experience", like being in the same building as Bill when he made decisions. That's like saying watching basketball makes you tall. Buh bye, Hillster. Slow fade to, yes, black.
-
Surprise
Hi Tom,
I know that your writing is very entertaining for you, but I must admit, it's not an enjoyable task for me, having to try and decipher your lingo to figure out what you are actually trying to say.
I believe in free speech, and freedom of expression - and I wish you the best. But please know in the future if I don't respond - that is probably the reason.
Hillary and Barack were sitting next to each other in the Senate today, and speaking much amongst themselves, almost looking a bit cozy. I think we may be able to have more of a compromise after all.
Nonetheless, even if there isn't a more direct compromise between those two, I think you will be surprised, Tom.
I agree with Shaun. I saw what he is talking about on the TV tonight. I have been saying it for some time, but contrary to what has been the conventional wisdom of late, Barack is not at all more electable in the general. If you just watch what was on "The Insider," tonight - there was enough there that ould make him lose with a lot of swing voters.
Hillary is much stronger than both of them on the economy. The Republicans will portray Barack as an 'inexperienced anti-war liberal', there will be 527 ads not condoned by McCain, there will be leaks and rumours, and scare tactics of all kinds. The will instill fear about Barack the unknown candidate who has no proof he can do what he says or what he will really do - like no tomorrow.
I have to go Tom - I think Barack will have his time later. But I think Pennsylvania and the rest will start to realize the
reality we face against the Republicans - and Hillary being smarter on defense, and smarter on the economy, is in a much better position to beat McCain. Her husband's administration was one of the most socio-economically successful in history.
If Ann Coulter could even say that she would vote for Hillary, that means something. They might love to dis, her - but on another level - they know better. If they really want help for the economy - Hillary is our best candidate.
You and me, we can place a bet on reality - and see who wins.
Goodnight ~