Letters to the Editor
-
And I'm not calling Obama unelectable because I'm a Clinton supporter
I'm calling him unelectable because he WILL get creamed against McCain. HIs resume is pretty much blank - at least compared to anyone else who has run for office.
Not only does he have no foreign policy experience, no military experience, no executive experience, no large policy experience, no federal government experience (after all he's hardly even bothered to show up for his half term in the Senate)He's been branded the "most liberal" senator of all, has the Kennedy's and moveon endorsements , something then that doesn't exactly help him win over those states Gore and Kerry lost - at least if history has any weight.
But then if you're routing for Rove you already know this and have been giggling away gleefully.
-
Oh, please.
If Bill Richardson does not endorse Barack Obama before the New Mexico primary -- it means he did not seriously mean it when he ran as the "Anti-War" candidate.
Comical.
You're not going to be able to intimidate Richardson. He's not dependent on the nut roots for anything. And unlike the fruits, he's smart enough to know that there's a little more to foreign policy than the nut roots obessions with Iraq, and most specifically blaming it all on a woman who pretty much had nothing to do with it and heroizing a guy who wasn't there to vote for or against it (but somehow elected to vote to fund every penny of it once he was).
-
@K
I don't know if he's an ex-drug dealer or not but the GOP will certainly say he was. He's certainly run with some pretty shady characters and has admitted to doing drugs in an area overrun with drugdealing. They'll also go afer his "super liberal" status, Kennedy endorsements, moveon endorsements, weak on defense, Rezzo, no-show for votes in the Senate and a host of other things both real and enhanced as they always do.
The people who have watched what the GOP and it's deep pocketed sympathizers have done to Clintons, Kerry, Gore, Edwards etc who maintain that Obama , the weakest of all these candidates, will somehow get a free pass are just OUT OF THEIR MINDS.
What IS clear as I see it is when he had the opportunity to serve his poor constituents or to align with a sleaze like Rizzo and get him a big fancy house out of it, he chose the latter.
When he was elected to the Senate he was more concerned about campaigning for Presidency than showing up and voting and taking care of business. And the fact is he had a job to do - perhaps that fact omits Oprah who truly can afford private sector services for all her luxuries.
When he had the chance to remain true to the values he claims he has (but doesn't demonstrate), he chose to take Karl Rove's help, to split the vote, to start a racist war, to lie about HRC, and to all but ensure a McCain victory.
Just seems to me Obama's ambition has an ugly history of overriding the values he says are important to him.
Small matter really, McCain is going to cream him. And then say good-bye to your employer provided health insurance the same way Reagan dismantled the pension plan system with 401k's. IOW, millions more will ultimately yet do without.
-
Hillary's experience?
Every time I hear someone say that they support Clinton because of her 'experience', I cringe. Listen, support who you want, but be honest about it. She is no more forthcoming about policy details than Obama and, frankly, has a less impressive legislative record too. We don't even have to mention the biggies (though the authorization vote was the most important decision she will make in her life, presidency or no) to say that Clinton's voting record and experience are average given the rest of the field.
Stop buying into her campaign's message that she's 'substance' and Obama is 'style': it's ridiculous and idiotic. If you are a right-leaning Democrat, I can't blame you for wanting to vote Clinton. She's the status quo candidate who won't particularly alter our trajectory in Iraq but might bring a little more sense to the table. Plus, she's a woman -- maybe she'll mobilize the ladies and generate a landslide against McCain.
But 'experience'? Come on. Seriously. Her experience isn't much different than George W's was: it mostly stems from her having swam in the power circles for 20 years.
-
Weekend Post - Tenuously On Topic...
While we debate the former First Lady's presidential prospects, please note that our current First Lady appears on the cover of the Feb 1-3 USA Weekend Sunday supplement magazine, and that she appears to be giving us the finger.
Take a look. And maybe draw a mustache, and black out one of her teeth, and put in a comical arrow through her hairdoo. I did. An true American would.
-
Repugs vs. Hillary
Every time I hear someone say that they support Clinton because of her 'experience', I cringe. Listen, support who you want, but be honest about it.
Honest doesn't seem to be in the anti-Hillary loons. When she was in Office with Bill (and truly was) involved with all kinds of policy and decision making she was a feminazi, a lesbian, "Billary" , ad obnoxi.
Now that that's inconvenient than we're supposed to let the loons tell us she spent those 8 years baking cookies.
Happily the truth is one only has to listen to her (she actually takes ALL questions from the audiences and press conferences unlike Saint Obama) to know she's very knowledgeable and her experience is real.
-
Anonymous
Anonymous you jump from article to article insulting every Democratic candidate. Didn’t your mother teach you that if you didn’t have anything nice to say, then SHUT THE HELL UP!! Gesh, you are sickening. You are worse then any of the Presidential nominees. Get a life!!!
-
Yes, we can!
Please, watch this. It is awesome.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=uHA_ZTvOgUM
-
Weekend Post - Hillary's Tactics
[I'm not interested in these trolls, but I keep having ideas.]
Any Democratic candidate should be able to capitalize by calling W. Bush a liar, saying this over and over, and giving examples. However, if Hillary says it, opponents can say, "Oh, as opposed to your husband???"
Now, rational people know that Bill's lies involved blow jobs with no victims other than Hillary herself, as opposed to W. Bush's lies involving thousands of dead human beings, and an era of suffering.
Still, Hill cannot take this approach. Maybe Barack can. Maybe we should.