Letters to the Editor
-
Here Trolly, Trolly, Trolly
Obama's attempt to steal the nomination isn't tough politics as usual, it's scumbaggery and it earned McCain 4 votes in my household.
-- lolcait
Proving you’re a GOP troll and not really a Hillary supporter as I long suspected, along with the other more shrill “Hillary supporters” on this here site.
Find me an Obamabot that doesn't pretend he only wants to exclude millions of voters because of "DNC rules" who isn't either braindead (doesn't believe his messiah could do such a thing) or a liar (scum who knows Obama is doing it and likes it), and I'll retract my comment.
-- lolcait
I’ll speak slowly, troll, so you might be able to understand. I’m OK with Michigan and Florida being whacked because the DNC ruled long before that first vote was tabulated that Michigan and Florida would not count and EVERY CANDIDATE, including your allged fave, Hillary, agreed to those terms. If all agree to the rules beforehand, and the rules are clearly stated to all and agreed to by all ahead of the game, then I don’t see why adhering to the rules suddenly becomes a problem later.
Pretty clear rationale, no? Proving that besides being a GOP troll, you’re also an idiot, but then, those two terms are typically interchangeable.
-
@ lolcait
Find me an Obamabot that doesn't pretend he only wants to exclude millions of voters because of "DNC rules" who isn't either braindead (doesn't believe his messiah could do such a thing) or a liar (scum who knows Obama is doing it and likes it), and I'll retract my comment.
Otherwise it remains an empirical observation, not an attack.
Allow me to answer your challenge with a challenge of my own:
Show me evidence that the Clinton campaign made it a priority to resolve the dispute between Florida/Michigan and the DNC at any point prior to those primaries. If you do, I'll retract every claim I've ever made that Hillary is cynically manipulating the concept of "disenfranchising" voters solely because her slim hopes of having anything approaching a chance at getting the nomination depend entirely on those results being counted as-is.
Otherwise, it remains an empirical observation that can and should be used to attack her character.
-
@ethics_professor
Once again, before you start assuming that we're NOT getting along, you should pay more attention to the people with the bile problem. They are not Democrats.
You asked about Obama-supporting trolls earlier, and one of the old ones is back; he used to call himself Thrasher, and now he is GThrasher. He pretends to be a black dude and says inflammatory things about white people. Plenty of people are critical of both candidates, but anyone who sounds totally over the top and appears to be completely irrational and ignoring the issues and not actually responding to logic with logic - they are trolls. I don't care whose "side" they pretend to be on; I don't WANT to get along with them. It would be better if everyone acted as though they weren't contributing to the conversation. Because they aren't.
-
@johncp
John CP, you're wrong that the media is selling Obama. They've had Hillary Clinton on shows all along -- Saturday Night Live, Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, The View, and any other show that would have her. The media has pushed stories that were negatives for Obama whenever they could, including the ongoing Rev. Jeremiah Wright situation. There is simply no truth that the media is pro-Obama across the board. Some individual broadcaster and entertainers are, sure, but that's their choice.
johncp: "Why isn't Salon helping Hillary? She's the one being pummeled and savaged in media."
You aren't paying attention. Salon has been very pro-Clinton, though without explicitly voicing a Clinton bias. All you have to do is go to the home page of Salon, click the left navigation rail where it says "Joan Walsh," and scan through the archives of her columns. She is the editor of Salon and you will quickly find that she has a tendency to downplay Clinton's gaffes and give extra emphasis to things that reflect poorly on Obama. Rebecca Traister also writes a lot about the women's perspective in supporting Clinton, though again without explicitly stating her support. There has also been a sense that Koppelman shares the bias, though like everybody else he won't discuss his own preferences. Another writer at Salon who seems to lean toward Clinton is Walter Shapiro. I'm not sure where Mike Madden's sympathies lie. I'm guessing that Gary Kamiya is an Obama supporter, but he hasn't written much about politics (or anything else, if memory serves) in a while.
-
Kantor, and the media-wide attack on Hillary
It's as obvious as the nose on your face. Media, from far left to far right, from underground to overground from Letterman to Randi Rhodes, are being instructed to sell Obama to us. This attempt to publish a phony slur against Kantor, is more proof of the fix that's been forced on media journalists and talk show hosts, to "sell" Obama to us, at all costs. They're trying so hard to keep Indiana in the Obama column, they're willing to tell any lie, no matter how big, no matter how disgusting to force Obama on us.
Got to SavagePolitics.com to see what what media are "not" telling us:
The Truth VS. Barack Obama
-
Carville won
The problem with many Clinton supporters is that they just can't see a diiference between the using the tactics that they had to use in the 90's against a group of right wind lunatcs who were constantly inventing lies to spread about the Clintons and using those tactics against a fellow democrat in a primary race in which the Republican candidate has already been decided.
Obama began this race by calling Reagan's presidency a success and Clinton's presidency a failure.
Obama began this race by saying the Clinton presidency was "divisive" and we need Barack Obama to be a "uniter not a divider."
Clinton's presidency was divisive because Clinton was a Democrat who won. Obama didn't stand up to those right wing lunatics you write about like Carville, he JOINED them and rewrote history by pointing the finger of blame at Clinton. He lived through the years in question so it was just another Obama lie.
She can't get the nomination without turning off huge voter blocs that the democrats can't win without.
If you think it's not easier for Clinton to win back black voters than for Obama to win back elderly voters who think Obama is a dangerous countercultural Trojan horse, white working class voters who know Obama lied to them about saying they go to church and hunt because they're stupid and confused, middle class whites who think Obama is too weak to be commander in chief, or working women voters I don't know what to tell you.
None of the groups Obama has alienated think he's suitable for the presidency and they don't think it's in their self interest to elect him. They think McCain is much more acceptable and he can never win them back.
A Democratic loss in November will be Barack Obama's legacy, an embarrassment and education for his supporters, and hopefully the end of his political career.