Letters to the Editor
-
Indeed. Fester is the master of none
We'll have to catch up on this later. Not like there's much coverage of it.
-
Number6
I'll bet if you called their bluff, they wouldn't be so tough.
-
That shifting bar
I think it's interesting that it's about the pledged delegates when there may be some delegates to be had. It's interesting that it's the supers when there seem to be supers to be had. ...and big states, and popular vote, and the electoral vote, and anything else that could possibly be used to make the argument that Obama doesn't deserve to win.
I've seen Clinton backers cry foul against literally everything that they, at one time, supported. Supers? Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid have no right to try to influence supers, and if they do (for Obama that is), then it's all unfair and against the rules. These same people were defending the super strategy weeks ago. Big states? Illinois doesn't count, but Florida and Michigan do somehow. Before Super Tuesday is was pledged delegates, but we've seen how that turned out. And the New Mexico caucus victory was the best, before caucuses didn't count either.
This is preposterous. If the supers unite, and tell Hillary to jump in a creek (which I sincerely doubt they will do anytime before the second week of June), then those ARE INDEED the rules. I understand either side being pissed about something like that happening to their candidate, but Hillary's strategy is ALL ABOUT the supers; it is highly unlikely that she will catch Obama on any other meaningful metric. At that point, why should a super (any super) stick with Hillary? Now that we're getting a sense that the majority won't stick with her, and that the bar Hillary must clear may be insurmountably high, we're being lectured about the RULES!? ...and Nancy Pelosi is being threatened!?
-
Setting Richardson, Pelosi, Kennedy & Kerry Straight
So...since you all propound that superdelegates should vote as their constituents voted, may we expect that each of you will vote as your constituents voted? New Mexico, California and Massachusetts all went for Hillary Clinton.
Now...are you men and women of your collective words..or, as I suspect, simply blowhards and bloviators who plan to vote for Barack Obama...in contravention of the wishes of the majorities in your respective states.
I'm starting to tire of the machinations and bullshit rampant in my political party of which the assorted nutballs and fruitcakes listed above are a part...
-
Hillary the Hag Just Won't Stop
Geesh,
Admonishing PELOSI for suggesting something that is totally obvious?
I suppose Hillary is upset that Pelosi even opened her mouth. But wait, Hillary is talking out of both sides of her mouth. Hillary claims that supers can make their own informed choice and vote for whomever they want, and that's all Pelosi is doing, exercising her judgment. I don't see anything wrong with that because the primaries are not officially over.
Hillary might as well just strap some dynamite to her back and blow herself up. After screaming that the FL and MI voters are disenfranchised, she now stresses that pledged delegates can switch THEIR votes from Obama to her, to hell with the voters. Talk about hypocrisy!
She'll do whatever it takes to win! I wrote this weeks ago and got blasted for it but it turns out I was correct (unfortunately).
-
To see ourselves....
"The very rich are different than you and I," F. Scott Fitzgerald once told Ernest Hemmingway, who gruffly replied, "Yes, they have more money."
Fitzgerald was right. There is something so nineteenth century about these people who seek to black mail Pelosi, and so out of touch with who they really are, that there is only one word: pathetic. They are beyond arrogance.
The Internet has changed the rules and they don't get it. All these people have done is turn themselves into laughingstocks. I wonder how many of them got to sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom during the Clinton White house years. I wonder how many of thm got to sleep with [stupid comment self-censored.
Oh well, I expect they will be sleeping with Lincoln, before they sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom again.
johnklotz.blogspot.com
-
I must live in an alternate reality
The more I read these threads lately, the more I'm convinced that the majority of posts are being made by plants claiming to represent one of the Democratic candidates, but in reality are nothing more than Republican operatives whose sole purpose is to rip the Democratic party apart. They're complicit in stooping to childish name-calling (repulsive, morons, clowns, etc.), hoping to draw rational and thoughtful people into their cross-fire and sowing chaos.
Yes, Florida and Michigan are a mess. Yes, the question of how superdelegates should vote is legitimate and vexing. Yes, both candidates have made inaccurate statements and been tainted by association with certain individuals.
But in my reality outside the blogosphere, people generally have rational conversations on these topics, can respectfully disagree, and make good-faith efforts to try to put everything into context and focus on the larger issue of putting a Democrat in the White House. The people I know may have a strong preference as to which (D) they prefer, but they recognize that either (D) is better than continuing the policies of the Bush regime for another four years. I simply don't see the vicious and petty attacks occurring out here in the real world. And I happen to live in one of the reddest of red states, where even what I hear from Republicans about Clinton or Obama isn't nearly as nasty as what I see their supposed supporters saying about each other in these threads. So what I read here simply isn't matching up to reality.
The bottom line is I just can't see why any purported Democrat could be so hateful towards another when so much is at stake this year. Does it really make sense that any Democrat truly believes that electing Clinton/Obama would make the Bush years look like the Golden Era? It's preposterous to buy into that line of reasoning and any such statement should probably clue to rational reader into the fact that the author probably isn't who they claim to be.
Well, back to reality now. For my own sanity, I doubt I'll be clicking to read any more threads on Salon where the subject is the Democratic nomination. I'm getting kind of tired of wading through all the white noise to find the occasional cogent posts (which are becoming less and less common with each passing day).