http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3274182.ece
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3274182.ece
Wow, they sure did pick a good photo of her, didn't they? She's all crazy and bloodthirsty and megalomaniacal and ready to eat babies whole.
It's a relief to know that the Times Online is in the nonpartisan hands of our Mr. Murdoch.
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3274182.ece
Wow, they sure did pick a good photo of her, didn't they? She's all crazy and bloodthirsty and megalomaniacal and ready to eat babies whole.
It's a relief to know that the Times Online is in the nonpartisan hands of our Mr. Murdoch.
I'll go along with everything but eating babies. That's too extreme....let's not get into eating Bill's ex flings.
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
quote:
Originally posted by we vs us
quote:
Originally posted by Breadburner
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3274182.ece
Wow, they sure did pick a good photo of her, didn't they? She's all crazy and bloodthirsty and megalomaniacal and ready to eat babies whole.
It's a relief to know that the Times Online is in the nonpartisan hands of our Mr. Murdoch.
I'll go along with everything but eating babies. That's too extreme....let's not get into eating Bill's ex flings.
Uh, that's gross.
I was being sorta sardonic up there. I don't think she's crazy, bloodthirsty, or megalomaniacal. But I think Mr. Murdoch's paper is pandering to people who do. That's really all I was saying up there.
Obama got his donkey handed to him.
What the hell was Rudy thinking? He burned out pretty quick in the race. It's like he got tired of it three months ago and quit fighting.
Anyone else listen to Mel "well at the end of the day" Marinez chiming in on his endorsement of McCain tonight? What a dolt and poor public speaker he is.
Florida doesn't mean much for the Democrats. No delegates are at stake. And you need delegates to win the nomination. That's why no Dems campaigned in that state.
And, yes, the Giuliani campaign has to be considered one of the biggest flame-outs in history. He led all summer and fall, then collapsed.
So she won a state with no votes and declared victory?
That kinda spin would knock Oreilly over.
She won 54% of the Florida vote and she is working to get their delegates' votes admitted. Even if their votes are not admitted at the Democrat Convention, her strategy of giving Florida a lot of attention should play well in the general election. Florida has many retired New Yorkers.
I like the way she sticks to her game plan and Kennedy's endorsement of Obama is a plus for hard core Democrats but will probably help Ms. Clinton in the general election.
I loved the way Bill blasted the media recently about their coverage of the race issue. He was on target when he said -- "this is what you live for." Guess what, the media didn't like it. But the media will crawl into Ms. Clinton's lap once she is in the White House.
It really is amazing how many votes Hillary gets when people don't have a chance to get to know her. Maybe NOT campaigning would be a better strategy for her.
Clinton won 50/33, about half the margin Obama beat her by in Game Cock country. The amazing difference is: this one doesn't count. Michigan nor Florida delegates will be seated if it remains a contested election. Simply no way unless they want to see the party split into the Democratic Party and the Clinton Party (we're not counting it so no campaigning. Hey look at that, Hillary won - lets count it). There will be no court challenge as this is party politics and the party has already ruled.
Thus far I have seen nothing but vindication of my view that Hillary is out for Hillary and will do anything to get elected. Anyone who has doubted this since she sat in the Whitehouse was fooling themselves. For most candidates I can see at least some positive, but none for the Hildog.
- - -
For the Republicans:
Rudy is official done, as is the career of his campaign manager. A week ago I thought he had a shot at Florida, but that's why I'm not paid to make presidents.
Paul - well Paul will go to the convention with delegates. Maybe he can push the party a little more libertarian.
Huckabee - looks like a flash pan Iowa winner. He has a shot in a few smaller states (Arkansas, Mississippi, Oklahoma) and maybe a showing in Texas - but otherwise it looks like he's done. He will not win California, New York, Ohio or any other major delegates but could get on the ticket WITH McCain (Huckabee/Mitt doesnt make sense).
Romney - Spent nearly 10 times the money McCain did and still lost. Serious blow. He should do well in Western states being from Utah (and Mormon won't hurt), and his business experience could help him in the East.
McCain - It could be banned wagon time. With Rudy out the East is open for him. The West coast is probably his just on platform. The funding issues might clear themselves up, but no matter he has become the front runner. The question remains: is he conservative enough? I bet we see him turn up the juice in this regard heading into Tuesday.
- - -
Last night they were calling McCain California's "third Senator". I'd be looking for a hefty sweep for him on Super Tues.
Honestly, I did not see this coming. Everyone had said McCain was toast after Fred Thompson got in the race. Wait, let me rephrase: after Fred announced he was running. Fred never really got into the race.
The conservative pundits have been pretty harsh on McCain. I think the primary results thus far show that is a sign that the GOP is starting to become more moderate, either that or more of the moderate GOP's are participating in the elections this year.
I think McCain has a great shot if he's running against Hillary. He has enough liberal tendencies to please moderate Dems, but the war will be a whole other issue.
Romney has been urging people to not send the same people back to Washington. McCain is doing a pretty good job of pointing out he's been there and he knows how to navigate "the system" to get things done.
I still wouldn't be terribly excited about voting for McCain come November. I'd hate to think my vote isn't for a presidential candidate, but rather a vote against Hillary or Obama.
McCaint will have a melt down during the general election. Obama must deliver big upsets next week.....It will be curious what Edwards does from here. His timing makes me curious if he will endorse Obama.
And this article will appear nowhere in a somewhere town....("dissed woman mode"....great terminology!)
Op-Ed Columnist
Seeing Red Over Hillary
By MAUREEN DOWD
Published: January 30, 2008
WASHINGTON
Even newly armored by the spirit of Camelot, Barack Obama is still distressed by the sight of a certain damsel.
It's already famous as The Snub, the moment before the State of the Union when Obama turned away to talk to Claire McCaskill instead of trying to join Teddy Kennedy in shaking hands with Hillary.
Nobody cared about W., whose presidency had crumpled into a belated concern about earmarks.
The only union that fascinated was Obama and Hillary, once more creeping around each other.
It would have been the natural thing for the Illinois senator, only hours after his emotional embrace by the Kennedys and an arena full of deliriously shrieking students, to follow the lead of Uncle Teddy and greet the rebuffed Hillary.
She was impossible to miss in the sea of dark suits and Supreme Court dark robes. Like Scarlett O'Hara after a public humiliation, Hillary showed up at the gathering wearing a defiant shade of red.
But the fact that he didn't do so shows that Obama cannot hide how much the Clintons rattle him, and that he is still taking the race very personally.
On a flight to Kansas yesterday to collect another big endorsement, this one from Gov. Kathleen Sebelius, Obama said he was "surprised" by reports of The Snub.
"I was turning away because Claire asked me a question as Senator Kennedy was reaching forward," he said. "Senator Clinton and I have had very cordial relations off the floor and on the floor. I waved at her as I was coming into the Senate chamber before we walked over last night. I think there is just a lot more tea leaf reading going on here than I think people are suggesting."
But that answer is disingenuous. Their relations have been frosty and fraught ever since the young Chicago prince challenged Queen Hillary's royal proclamation that it was her turn to rule.
Last winter, after news broke that he was thinking of running, he winked at her and took her elbow on the Senate floor to say hi, in his customary languid, friendly way, and she coldly brushed him off.
It bothered him, and he called a friend to say: You would not believe what just happened with Hillary.
Again and again at debates, he looked eager to greet her or be friendly during the evening and she iced him. She might have frozen him out once more Monday night had he actually tried to reach out.
But now Obama is like that cat Mark Twain wrote about who wouldn't jump on the stove again for fear of being burned.
It was only after the distortions of the Clintons in South Carolina that he changed his tone and took on Hillary in a tough way in the debate there. Afterward, one of his advisers said that it was as though a dam had broken and Obama finally began using all the sharp lines against Hillary that strategists had been suggesting for months.
Why had it taken so long for Obama to push back against Hillary? "He respected her as a senator," the adviser replied. "He even defended her privately when she cried, saying that no one knows how hard these campaigns are."
But Obama's outrage makes him seem a little jejune. He is surely the only person in the country who was surprised when the Clintons teamed up to dissemble and smear when confronted with an impediment to their ambitions.
Knowing that it helped her when Obama seemed to be surly with her during the New Hampshire debate, telling her without looking up from his notes that she was "likable enough" — another instance of Obama not being able to hide his bruised feelings — Hillary went on ABC News last night to insinuate that he was rude Monday.
"Well, I reached my hand out in friendship and unity and my hand is still reaching out," she said, lapsing back into the dissed-woman mode. "And I look forward to shaking his hand sometime soon."
Something's being stretched here, but it's not her hand. She wasn't reaching out to him at all.
The New York State chapter of NOW issued an absurd statement on Monday calling Teddy Kennedy's endorsement of Obama "the ultimate betrayal": "He's picked the new guy over us."
But Obama is the more emotionally delicate candidate, and the one who has the more feminine consensus management style, and the not-blinded-by-testosterone ability to object to a phony war.
As first lady, Alpha Hillary's abrasive and secretive management of health care doomed it. She voted to enable W. on Iraq so she could run as someone tough enough to command armies.
Given her brazen quote to ABC News, Obama is right to be scared of Hillary. He just needs to learn that Uncle Teddy can't fight all his fights, and that a little chivalry goes a long way.
I think McCain would stomp Hildog too. He might not truely motivate the conservative base, but so many people would vote against Hillary the vote would be there. Couple that with a strong attraction of independents and it would be hard to overcome.
McCain - Obama would be a tight race. Obama is not "evil" enough to motivate many people to vote against him and McCain is not conservative enough to really get the hard core right wingers out in droves.
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
I think McCain would stomp Hildog too. He might not truely motivate the conservative base, but so many people would vote against Hillary the vote would be there. Couple that with a strong attraction of independents and it would be hard to overcome.
McCain - Obama would be a tight race. Obama is not "evil" enough to motivate many people to vote against him and McCain is not conservative enough to really get the hard core right wingers out in droves.
"stomp"? Too many women voters exist to stomp Billary. However, he might escape from her shackles (cankles?) with the help of some of us liberals. Unless of course, the repugs alienate us bad enough which would be no surprise. Without the liberal split, your man would become a prisoner of women. So lighten up. OK?
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
I think McCain would stomp Hildog too. He might not truely motivate the conservative base, but so many people would vote against Hillary the vote would be there. Couple that with a strong attraction of independents and it would be hard to overcome.
McCain - Obama would be a tight race. Obama is not "evil" enough to motivate many people to vote against him and McCain is not conservative enough to really get the hard core right wingers out in droves.
"stomp"? Too many women voters exist to stomp Billary. However, he might escape from her shackles (cankles?) with the help of some of us liberals. Unless of course, the repugs alienate us bad enough which would be no surprise. Without the liberal split, your man would become a prisoner of women. So lighten up. OK?
I know, I know, polls suck and its way early, but here is one with McCain beating both Clinton and Obama:
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/john_mccain_match_ups/election_2008_mccain_vs_clinton_and_obama
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
I think McCain would stomp Hildog too. He might not truely motivate the conservative base, but so many people would vote against Hillary the vote would be there. Couple that with a strong attraction of independents and it would be hard to overcome.
McCain - Obama would be a tight race. Obama is not "evil" enough to motivate many people to vote against him and McCain is not conservative enough to really get the hard core right wingers out in droves.
"stomp"? Too many women voters exist to stomp Billary. However, he might escape from her shackles (cankles?) with the help of some of us liberals. Unless of course, the repugs alienate us bad enough which would be no surprise. Without the liberal split, your man would become a prisoner of women. So lighten up. OK?
The recurring nightmare I have is along the lines of Hillary goose-stepping to her inauguration and loudly proclaiming with glee: "I'm zee fuhrher
now!"
Ms. Clinton is a Scorpio and my wish is that she will be an avenging angel that will show Republicans there is a price to pay for the damage they have done to our way of life. I say deport Republicans and then close the border.
Whoever said she will do anything to get elected got it right.
quote:
Originally posted by Hometown
Ms. Clinton is a Scorpio and my wish is that she will be an avenging angel that will show Republicans there is a price to pay for the damage they have done to our way of life. I say deport Republicans and then close the border.
Whoever said she will do anything to get elected got it right.
All heil Hometown!
(http://img.timeinc.net/Life/lifebooks/olympics/gallery/4.jpg)
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
I think McCain would stomp Hildog too. He might not truely motivate the conservative base, but so many people would vote against Hillary the vote would be there. Couple that with a strong attraction of independents and it would be hard to overcome.
McCain - Obama would be a tight race. Obama is not "evil" enough to motivate many people to vote against him and McCain is not conservative enough to really get the hard core right wingers out in droves.
"stomp"? Too many women voters exist to stomp Billary. However, he might escape from her shackles (cankles?) with the help of some of us liberals. Unless of course, the repugs alienate us bad enough which would be no surprise. Without the liberal split, your man would become a prisoner of women. So lighten up. OK?
The recurring nightmare I have is along the lines of Hillary goose-stepping to her inauguration and loudly proclaiming with glee: "I'm zee fuhrher now!"
This year will go down in history. For the first time, a civilized nation has full gun registration. Our streets will be safer, our police more efficient, and the world will follow our lead into the future! – Adolph Hitler [1935] The Weapons Act of Nazi Germany.
BTW Hometown, I don't really think you're a Nazi. Just thought it would be funny since your statement was obviously meant to be over the top (too). Feel free to call Godwin on me.
quote:
Originally posted by Hometown
Ms. Clinton is a Scorpio and my wish is that she will be an avenging angel that will show Republicans there is a price to pay for the damage they have done to our way of life. I say deport Republicans and then close the border.
Whoever said she will do anything to get elected got it right.
Hometown that is just HATEFUL and SPITEFUL!! I cannot believe you of all people would engage in political party profiling. You would separate us Republican parents from our minor children who are as yet too young to register to vote. I can just see baby Republicans being torn from their mother's breasts. You would have us deported to our Caribbean hide-aways to tend our off-shore bank accounts. You are just so mean-spirited!
And what do you mean about "our" way of life? Is that some sort of San Francisco liberal code-speak?
quote:
Originally posted by Hometown
Ms. Clinton is a Scorpio and my wish is that she will be an avenging angel that will show Republicans there is a price to pay for the damage they have done to our way of life. I say deport Republicans and then close the border.
Whoever said she will do anything to get elected got it right.
If you do that, who will support you?
Who will build the businesses where you will go to work?
Where will the tax money for your programs come from?
Who will take care of you?
There is no hope and ambition behind democratic philosophy, only the constant droning of the liberal mantra
that's not fair, that's not fair.
You and your new Lord of the Flies, Hillary, will soon burn out in a fit of emotion and new programs, or even worse, democrats will start to turn to capitalism.
Horrible things will start to take place like reduced taxes, free trade agreements, and market freedom.
THEN someone will want to choose their own doctor. When this happens a new revolution will have to take place so that you can expel these infidels too! But this time you will have learned. Instead of sending them to live in their beach houses in Belize or Costa Rica, you will put them in work camps where they can use their evil free-market ideas to build and maintain your society.
But. . . I don't see any of it happening, cuz we have the guns.
quote:
Originally posted by Hometown
Ms. Clinton is a Scorpio and my wish is that she will be an avenging angel that will show Republicans there is a price to pay for the damage they have done to our way of life. I say deport Republicans and then close the border.
Whoever said she will do anything to get elected got it right.
Gheyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Spoon Bill, you got it all wrong. Democrats are happy to sell their services to the highest bidder.
For instance, the tens of millions Bill got for his causes by convincing a autocratic government to endorse his friend's desire to mine Uranium in the middle east. While Bill was having a meal at his palace, Hillary was denouncing his human rights record.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/31/us/politics/31donor.html?ei=5065&en=6a843530898e147a&ex=1202446800&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print
Oh those crazy Clintons. I really don't think it's that big of a deal. He used his clout as an ex-president to broker a Uranium deal with a shady state, just business really because someone was going to mine it. But if Bush were to broker such a deal in a few years from now there be crying and moaning all over the place.
One might think this type of behavior would irritate the left, dealings with autocrats for uranium - but not if Bill does it. But oh boy, if a company someone in the administration used to work for does something or other... heads! Heads damn it!
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
quote:
Originally posted by Hometown
Ms. Clinton is a Scorpio and my wish is that she will be an avenging angel that will show Republicans there is a price to pay for the damage they have done to our way of life. I say deport Republicans and then close the border.
Whoever said she will do anything to get elected got it right.
Hometown that is just HATEFUL and SPITEFUL!! I cannot believe you of all people would engage in political party profiling. You would separate us Republican parents from our minor children who are as yet too young to register to vote. I can just see baby Republicans being torn from their mother's breasts. You would have us deported to our Caribbean hide-aways to tend our off-shore bank accounts. You are just so mean-spirited!
And what do you mean about "our" way of life? Is that some sort of San Francisco liberal code-speak?
Conan, you got this much right, the Republican Party is the party of folks with Caribbean hide-aways and off-shore bank accounts.
Do you have either? Why are you carrying the slop bucket for a party that does not represent your best interests?
To answer your question. Our way of life is like our common values. Your party has violated our way of life. I mean if you are the Daddy party, you are a sick abusive Daddy that needs counseling. Daddy you are in debt big time and you torture.
Reagan's ghost and his resonance with common people are gone. You are a bunch of nuts advocating things life abolishing the IRS and rewriting the Constitution to comport with official state religion. Your party is at its nadir.
quote:
Originally posted by Hometown
Conan, you got this much right, the Republican Party is the party of folks with Caribbean hide-aways and off-shore bank accounts.
I'm sorry, you seem to be forgetting the Algores, Edwards, Kennedys and Heinz/Kerrys of your party. The list goes on and on and on and on...
quote:
Do you have either? Why are you carrying the slop bucket for a party that does not represent your best interests?
Lower taxes and smaller government (ostensibly). Sounds like my best interests being represented to me.
quote:
To answer your question. Our way of life is like our common values. Your party has violated our way of life. I mean if you are the Daddy party, you are a sick abusive Daddy that needs counseling. Daddy you are in debt big time and you torture.
You make funny analogies...did your daddy beat you or something? Is that why you turned to the dark side?
quote:
Reagan's ghost and his resonance with common people are gone. You are a bunch of nuts advocating things life abolishing the IRS and rewriting the Constitution to comport with official state religion. Your party is at its nadir.
What the hell are you talking about? What is our "official state religion?"
Also, you may want to take notice that even your beloved candidates are comparing themselves to Reagan to score points with moderates and sane people.
Hate to get into the middle of a good fight, but the Dem debate in LA last night was disappointing. I thought if Barack said the Witch was on his short list of two or three people for VP he could have gained enormous advantage.
Warren Buffet has a few dollars. Many of the Walton's throw money the Democrat way. Most of the millionaires in Hollywood are Democrats. The Rockefellers have a few bucks left. Heck, even in Congress the richest members are democrats:
(http://tommcmahon.blogspot.com/images/2003senatewealth.gif)
(2003 was the last year I could find a pretty graphic, doubt it has changed much as most dems were reelected).
Additional statistics are interesting too:
http://people-press.org/commentary/display.php3?AnalysisID=95
Most college educated people are republicans.
The vast majority of people without a high school diploma are democrats.
Poor are democrats (43%)
Lower middle class is split
Most middle class are republican
Most rich are republicans (39&)
Here is the list of richest senators:
John Kerry, D-Massachusetts: $163,626,399
Herb Kohl, D-Wisconsin: $111,015,016
John Rockefeller, D -West Virginia: $81,648,018
Jon Corzine, D-New Jersey: $71,035,025
Dianne Feinstein, D-California: $26,377,109
Notice anything?
For that matter the Clinton's are worth $60 million + (and growing by ~15 million a year).
I'd have to say the democrats are well represented among the super wealthy in the "island owning" class.
Thanks. Can you draw similar analogies using corporations and lobbyists?
Good point FOTD.
Hey, not all rich folks are selfish. Some of them see a connection between their own well being and their communities. But you keep typing Cannon. You put so much into your posts. The difference between you and Iplaw and Conan is that you are not cynical and you at least seem to believe what you say. But all three of you are trying to hold onto something that is long gone.
I like what Oberman said about last night's Democrat Debate. "It looked like a ticket."
Well, I appreciate that (I think).
I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm not ideologue. I have fathomed my own ideas and try to find politics that match them. That path has lead me to Libertarianism but politics as it is my party is not one of the blessed 2 that gets government support (insert rant on 2 party systems here).
There are plenty of rich Republicans, plenty of rich Democrats. There are more poor democrats and more wealthy Republicans - but I still think at the "island" level of wealth the disparity seems to dwindle.
But in any event - most politicians of any party suck. I'm not holding on to anything (I was not even speaking in sentencing when Reagan took office) and will not cheer for a party as if it's the home team. If a Democrat seems to uphold my beliefs they get my vote (Steve Gallo, Oklahoma house!).
and I am not aware of any dubious relationship between lobbyists and Republicans over Democrats. In fact, the studies I have seen indicate Democrats take more money - which might make sense considering they are often against big business... so said business would be more apt to "persuade" them. But in any event, I don't think I share the same natural angst towards lobbyists as many people - at the end of the term they are still responsible for voters (I'd like to think the politicians could rise above... I said I'd like to think).
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
. . . and I am not aware of any dubious relationship between lobbyists and Republicans over Democrats.
This (//%22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K_Street_Project%22) might be worth your time. Because it led directly to things like this. (//%22http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Abramoff%22)
Wevus, I'm well aware of incidents. I was speaking in general terms and actually had your exact response in mind when I phrased t "over Democrats." We all know that for every dirty politician of one flavor we can find a politician of the other (I'll see your dirty lobbyist and raise you a freezer full of cash).
I'm about as anti-corruption as I can get, there should be no sympathy if they are truely caught doing wrong. A few well placed oustings from Congress could do well for the organization I'm sure.
quote:
Originally posted by Hometown
I like what Oberman said..."
Speaks volumes as to your credibility.
quote:
Originally posted by guido911
quote:
Originally posted by Hometown
I like what Oberman said..."
Speaks volumes as to your credibility.
Yours too....it's Olberman.
quote:
Originally posted by FOTD
quote:
Originally posted by guido911
quote:
Originally posted by Hometown
I like what Oberman said..."
Speaks volumes as to your credibility.
Yours too....it's Olberman.
Nicht. Olbermann.
We stand corrected. Isn't he like the best in the media on news or what?
http://youtube.com/watch?v=0ay_ykrMJL0
Watch it.
"The bitter irony, it's Mr. Bush who is soft on terrorists."
Facism defined.