Political Apocalypse — The Perfect Storm in 2012
Posted by WLS:
In reading some columns the last couple days, it suddenly dawned on me the very real possibility of a coming political Apocalypse in the Presidential Election of 2012.
First was this National Journal article yesterday by Ronald Brownstein, which had this interesting observation:
But cumulatively through the primaries, exit polls found that Obama won only 35 percent of the Latino vote, 35 percent of the Catholic vote, 30 percent among whites without college degrees, and 28 percent among white seniors—groups that the party typically relies upon. He also faces doubts among Jews, a small bloc that might nevertheless tip the scales in Florida and Pennsylvania…. But his struggles with such groups as Latinos and working-class whites increase the odds that he will need to assemble a new coalition to win, probably one tilted more upscale than usual for Democrats.
The common theme here is that Clinton’s potential route to the White House was one that Democrats have followed successfully before. For Obama to win, he probably will need to blaze new paths.
That second paragraph points out that Clinton could have assembled the same electoral equation that led to victory for her husband twice, Jimmy Carter, and a photo finish for Al Gore. The path that Obama must take is the one that has failed the Dems with McGovern, Mondale, Dukakis, and Kerry. The point simply is that the hand the Dems are playing from is historically a loser — not saying that they will lose this year, but only that it hasn’t been a combination that has prevailed in the past.
Next I was reading this column by George Will, in which I noted this observation:
…. many Democrats do not fathom the gratitude that less-blinkered Americans feel for Obama because he has closed the Clinton parenthesis in our presidential history.
Finally, I was taken by this observation in Peggy Noonan’s column today in the WSJ:
May I rise in a toast to the Democratic Party.
They had a great and roaring fight, a state-by-state struggle unprecedented in the history of presidential primaries….
All of this is impressive, but more than that, they threw off Clintonism…. They threw off the idea that dynasticism was an unstoppable dynamic in modern politics, that Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton could, would, go on forever. They said: “No, that is not the way we do it.”
They threw off the idea of inevitability…. She lost because enough Democrats looked at her and thought: I don’t like that, I don’t like the way she does it, I’m not going there. Most candidates lose over things, not over their essential nature. But that is what happened here. For all her accomplishments and success, it was her sketchy character that in the end did her in….
May this mark the beginning of the remoralization of a great party.
And, after cogitating on these thoughts for a few hours, it suddenly struck me that Noonan is completely wrong. Here’s the scenario:
1) It proves true that Obama comes into the general election season a greatly diminished candidate compared to what he was a year ago when he was a blank slate upon which the left wing and the media could project all their “If MLK/RFK could have had a baby together” fantasies. Combine his electoral performance among DEMOCRAT voters over the last 10 weeks with the political beating he is about to experience for the first time in his career, and I think its quite possible he will prove to be another losing hand for the Dems trying to build a winning general election coalition that relies primarily on the young, the white affluent liberal, and the African-American voters in large blocks.
2) Following a win achieved practically by default in a less-than-inspiring campaign, McCain is faced with an extremely hostile and even more liberal Democrat Congressional majority which feels cheated out of the WH by a bunch of bigoted rednecks in the flyover states. True to his colors, McCain agrees to pursue largely the liberal’s agenda in Congress, on which he manages to gain some concessions around the edges in order to pick up a smattering of GOP votes here and there, declaring himself a bipartisan success as President even if those policies wreck the country. His term would clearly represent a disappointment to the GOP base.
3) A health scare mid-way through the third year of his presidency — following another disappointing round of Congressional elections for the GOP in 2010 — and with horrendous approval ratings from both the GOP base and the left wing that continues to feel cheated out of the WH, McCain pulls an LBJ, and announces that he won’t run for a second term.
4) Hillary, who began running for President the day of McCain’s inaugural on the “I Told You So” platform, and having reseized the levers of power in the DNC, uses the strength of her 17+ million primary votes in 2008, and the threat from every liberal Dem. woman to withhold certain pleasures from their Dem. male sig. others unless they too pledged unqualified fealty to Hillary 2012, to strong-arm every other challenger out of the primary contest before the first vote is cast in Iowa.
5) Social and evangelical conservatives, having drilled an empty hole in 2008 in trying to find a true conservative candidate — not a fake like Romney or an unelectable nutjob like Huckabee — coalesce very early around the one true conservative standard bearer who would draw no objection from the economic conservatives or national security conservatives, and who has always been viewed as the true political talent in his family….
And there you have it — the Political Apocalypse of 2012: Hillary Clinton v. Jeb Bush.
Clinton v. Bush — to the death, winner take all.
We can dream, can’t we?
I
agree withhopefervently pray for for the first half of your post.The second half I don’t know. For two reasons: Four years is a long time in politics — like the Hodja said, “In that time I could die, the Caliph could die, and the damn horse might even learn to sing”. Second, “who can measure the limits of night or the moods of a woman”? Hillary may no longer be interested in the job.
(Yes, I am a sexist. But in a nice way.)
nk (be56c0) — 6/6/2008 @ 12:45 pmDamn, WLS, you have come up with some great posts the last couple of weeks. I can think offhand of dozens of newspaper columnists whom you should replace.
I had to laugh aloud at part 4 of your scenario above. Back in 1992 I knew a young progressive college couple (from Brown, naturally) who lived for awhile at the flophouse me and some buddies shared. The young lady in question, a Bill Clinton supporter, told the young man, a Jerry Brown supporter who nevertheless admired Paul Tsongas, that she would be withholding sex from him unless he showed up up at the local Clinton headquarters and helped her stuff envelopes. Needless to say, he meekly complied.
JVW (78155f) — 6/6/2008 @ 12:46 pmI don’t see Jeb Bush getting past the starting gate. The Bush brand has taken even more of a beating than the GOP brand.
I’m thinking Bobby Jindal in 2012.
BC (abe920) — 6/6/2008 @ 12:57 pmGreat post, and the Will column referenced is a good read as well. From there I particularly liked,
“Selecting vice presidential candidates has recently become more serious than it was when Richard Johnson became Martin Van Buren’s running mate in 1836 partly on the strength of the slogan “rumpsey dumpsey, rumpsey dumpsey, Colonel Johnson killed Tecumseh,”
It appears to be all over again the same coalition of supporters as left leaning candidates always cobble together going all gung ho for Obama. The higher pitch of the mania for the idol doesn’t appear to be synonymous with more votes outside the club. And you need them to win.
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/6/2008 @ 1:12 pmJudging here in Austin, you’d think he’s going to win by a larger margin that Saddam often would. You’d get the same sense in my hometown Philly which is 43% black and about 90% Democrat. But there aren’t that many liberal college towns and one-party blue collar cities out there.
Jindal would be Jeb’s VP pick.
WLS (68fd1f) — 6/6/2008 @ 1:13 pmJVW – I remember when Jerry Brown came to U of Penn in 92. I got hit in the head with a frisbee that some fratboy meatheads were throwing right over the heads of the large gathered crowd in front of the peace sign statue on the campus.
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/6/2008 @ 1:16 pmJack, I’m in South Austin, and yeah, by the yard signs in my neighborhood, Obama’s got it made. Same was true of Kerry, though.
Missy (939906) — 6/6/2008 @ 1:18 pmAh cool. I’m in the South Congres area.
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/6/2008 @ 1:32 pmI’m just west of you in Zilker, but my BIL lives right by Fran’s. You can hear him every First Thursday cussing at tourists from his front porch.
Missy (939906) — 6/6/2008 @ 1:41 pmThe problem is that McCain provides cover for the democrats, and his nomination means that the GOP bigshots will think that the McCain way is the winning way. The GOP will become like the Democratic party of the 80’s, and the Democratic party IS like the International Socialist Worker’s party of the 90’s.
martin (cd5d90) — 6/6/2008 @ 1:43 pmOnly if in that dream you shoot me in the head on election day…
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 6/6/2008 @ 1:48 pmIn your dreams it’s a losing hand.
David Ehrenstein (fc61c1) — 6/6/2008 @ 2:04 pmThe problem for the McCain Presidency is that Milton Friedman is dead, and McCain is going to need the advice of a top economist to right the ship-of-state, and there doesn’t appear to be anyone on-scene with the creds to penetrate his thick skull.
Another vote for the lessor of two evils.
Another Drew (8018ee) — 6/6/2008 @ 2:19 pmHere’s someone whose minions we’ll doubtless be hearing from as the election process progresses.
David Ehrenstein (fc61c1) — 6/6/2008 @ 2:31 pmI’m couldn’t be more sick of Peggy Noonan and her rolling pieties. But you go wrong off the bat. Obama wins in November. I only know that this zeitgeist can’t be stopped.
rrpjr (fb0748) — 6/6/2008 @ 2:34 pm#13 — yep, that zeitgeist really propelled him ove the finish line in Ohio, Penn., WVa, Kent, SD, etc.
Frankly, after he won 11 caucuses/primaries in a row if February, Clinton drubbed him among Dem. voters. Once it became a two candidate race for the nomination, he lost all but one closed primary — NC. And he lost some of them HUGE.
Don’t be fooled by his press coverage. Millions of DEM voters went into voting booths and decided they couldn’t vote for him.
You expect him to have more strength with independants and weak-kneed Republicans?
WLS (68fd1f) — 6/6/2008 @ 2:51 pm“Independents” are a mirage.
David Ehrenstein (fc61c1) — 6/6/2008 @ 3:05 pmPeggy Noonan apparently lost it when Reagan left the White House. Four years ago, she gushed over Howard Dean; now she is gushing over Obama (to the point that she is now an apologist for Jeremiah Wright).
JEC (c36902) — 6/6/2008 @ 3:23 pm“the threat from every liberal Dem. woman to withhold certain pleasures from their Dem. male sig. others”
It never ends with you people, does it?
stef (394243) — 6/6/2008 @ 3:38 pmpeggy noonan makes more sense to me than you do. you seem almost fawning as you hurry to anoint the brother of a disastrous president.
assistant devil's advocate (b1152f) — 6/6/2008 @ 3:50 pmAh, the sins of the brother…
Another Drew (8018ee) — 6/6/2008 @ 4:29 pmI’m telling you people… Zombie Reagan…
Optimism
Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec) — 6/6/2008 @ 4:35 pmConservatism
Braaaaiiiiinnnnsssssss
Where to start
We have Obama partly due to the way the Dems chose to allocate their delegates via the rules committee.
The loaded them up in congressional districts loyal in the past for voting dem and stripped them in districts that were weak dem or voted republican.
Obama has the new Dukakis Caucus. Blacks/Elitist-eggheads/College kids.
All of them are same located urban groups which just happen to be in the very same congressional districts the Dem formulas overloaded.
Look at even the states Obama lost to Hillary and you will see he picked up the urban areas and got more delegates than his voter proportion would justify.
Think of it like picking just the heavy electoral vote states to win in the general but do the same thing at the state level for the primary. Win 2 or 3 counties and you get a truck load of delegates even if you lose the state.
Lots of them came from Red states he will never deliver in the general, but they count in the primary.
Punish counties in blue states for not being blue enough, but give Obama candy because he carried urban areas in Red states he will surely lose.
If they scaled them on state impact they might have had a working model, but what they ended up with is a geek in Obama’s camp figured out the seam to play and they rolled with it.
SlimGuy (ea6549) — 6/6/2008 @ 4:54 pmI find it interesting to see that even conservatives speak about Bush being so stubborn. So the Democrats make it nearly impossible for him to change the tactics on the war (among other things) and then they say it is because Bush is stubborn. They have a good thing going. They make it impossible to drill and refine oil and then blame Bush (and all Republicans) because the price goes up.
Peter (d671ab) — 6/6/2008 @ 5:06 pmMy two year old grandson will be an old man and they’ll still be blaming Bush.
Other points
The combined turnout of the primaries was high due to the food fight in progress. It was over a high percentage of what Kerry turned out in the General.
Kerry was anointed way early that year and the rest of the primaries where ghost towns due to lack of interest and comparing turnout then to now makes today look like a smash hit.
Now look at who was able to sit out for Hillary. She won the big states with higher turnout than average primaries but still way below the general levels. It was mostly her senior voters sitting home based on registration numbers, since they usually pass up primaries and let others do the early win for the dem of their choice. You usually don’t see them till the general.
Obama…he has little or nowhere to gain support from his base. All the Blacks that could likely voted, college kids won’t surge many more and the eggheads and academics already showed up.
What he has left to work for really don’t like him.
His ethnic numbers weren’t only low but in many states Hispanics for example sat out the race. Many of the exit polls had their size at less than 1% of the voters where they actually have higher numbers registered.
Hispanics and Blacks have issues (see south LA) , Hill owned the orientals/Indian/Pak/Chinese/Vietnam vote (and has the scandles to prove it along with the LBGT vote.
So Obama has to think he can get by on just his base and not the religious, gun hugging, bible clasping rest of the Dems and independents.
Oh really…we will see.
SlimGuy (ea6549) — 6/6/2008 @ 5:11 pmBeware of the False Prophet…Senator Barack Hussein Obama.
Sam (b9f663) — 6/6/2008 @ 5:28 pmThe problem with forecasting based on primary demographics is that they’re automatically distorted. Neither McCain nor any other Republican was on the ballot in those primaries. Those people in the primaries were voting for Hillary; it’s not possible to forecast how they’ll vote in November when the choice is Obama and McCain (or forecast if they will vote) based on their votes for Hillary.
I think, however, that if McCain does win, the remainder of your scenario is highly probable.
kishnevi (e4fabe) — 6/6/2008 @ 5:29 pmMaybe Margaret Sanger was thinking about the Clintons and the Bushes and not the underclass when she endorsed birth control and eugenics
Pat Patterson (f44efe) — 6/6/2008 @ 9:12 pmStupid dems party is going to lose again this time in November. BIG TIME. HA HA HA
pure stars (b85c14) — 6/6/2008 @ 11:22 pmAll clinton supportors should vote for McCain, because this is the best way to punish the stupid and heavily short-sighted superdelegates in dems party. We are waiting to see Hillary run again in 2012 and she will be our president. NO DOUBT ABOUT IT.
In a democracy, why should Senator Clinton’s loyalties to the democratic party transcend her loyalties to the 18 million Americans who voted for her? In a democracy, why should the self interest of a few hundred party delegates transcend 18 million popular votes? Although Senator Clinton is being made out to be the spoiler, I see the DNC as the spoiler of democracy … that’s why I’m a democrat of 40 years, who will be voting for McCain in November.
Howard (0c14d8) — 6/7/2008 @ 6:37 amI am worried about Obama’s safety! Hillary has an evil eye, heart, soul & mind! Like so many have stated, “she will do anything to gain praise & glory of the White House!!!! It is frightening to think about, but oh so true! May God watch over Obama, his wife, children & his staff! Dot Ramsey
Dot Ramsey (718e45) — 6/7/2008 @ 7:02 amThat’s some of the dumbest shit I’ve ever read.
Levi (76ef55) — 6/7/2008 @ 7:43 amIt occurs to me that Obama will have to offer Clinton an opportunity to be his VP running mate before looking elsewhere. It would be very awkward, and perhaps politically unpalatable among democrats for him to offer the VP slot to a different woman if Clinton wants the VP slot. If he decides to offer it to a man, however worthy, McCain could easily trump him by selecting a woman to be his VP candidate. Consider the political equations for Democrats if they have an all-male ticket, and McCain has a woman as his VP choice.
Outsider (97c5a5) — 6/7/2008 @ 7:43 amMccain’s greatest disadvantage will be his age. It’s very difficult to win a popularity contest with the likes of Barack Obama. History has shown that while Americans like to say they vote on the issues at stake, they also vote based on who is better looking. Who they like. Even if he is an empty suit without visible experience and qualifications. They vote by sight. It happened between JFK and Nixon, once they were both placed on the same platform to debate, Nixon lost out to Kennedy. We are in a media, visual, celebrity and trend driven era. People will make their jugdment based on packaging. On that score, McCain loses. Or why do you think obama was able to trash Hillary even though everyone knows that she was more experienced and qualified. He beat her becos people compared him to her and prefered him. Youth, charm, charisma, eloquence, are talents that should never be underestimated. Obama also has the unnerving ability to present a calm, controlled, gentle disposition. No one disagrees that he is a gentleman. He does not have temper tantrums like mcCain is said to have. He is fresh, young, good looking, eloquent and smart. Compare that with john McCain and you will see the difference. If Obama wins the election in nov, it will be largely because of this seemingly shallow factor. people vote based on sight. Dont get me wrong, they also vote based on issues. But deep down, they are driven by the personality of the candidate. Just consider the excitement that happens in Obama’s meetings: the youthfullness, the liveliness, the exurberance, the ecstacy and the candidate. Contrast that with John mcCains, sometimes bland and colourless meetings and you will see what i am pointing at. If obama wins, it will not be because people thought he was the better candidate as in experience, qualifications and competence, it will be because of his personality. This does not however suggest that I believe he will do a bad job as President. Just pointing out an aspect of this political process.
love2008 (6e616b) — 6/7/2008 @ 8:04 amScott Jacobs #18,
Heh.
And for good measure: Heh.
Leviticus (8634bf) — 6/7/2008 @ 8:04 amI think that’s a very possible scenario except I don’t think Jeb would be the GOP candidate necessarily.
As long as McCain could secure a victory in Iraq ,continue to pursue the war on terror effectively, and manage to get some kind of reasonably conservative Supreme Court nominee through the Senate, it’s worth it to have him in there instead of Obama. The problem is the heavily Democratic congress may stop him from doing any of that. Meanwhile Republicans continue to get blamed for everything that goes wrong, like ever higher energy. Since McCain doesn’t even favor drilling in ANWR and other places, he couldn’t even take them on on that issue. Then there’s the global warming cap and trade disaster.
Gerald A (b9214e) — 6/7/2008 @ 8:11 amFrom dean, a great commenter at pajamas media, one of my favorites…comes this gem:
There is nothing more frightening than ignorance in action.
Who, besides the ignorant, would even consider voting for this lying, conniving, candidate?
Obama’s “NOT EXACTLY’S”: This person is more dangerous than any candidate in recent years….
1.) ‘Selma Got Me Born ‘ – NOT EXACTLY, your parents felt safe
enough to have you in 1961 – Selma had no effect on your birth, as
Selma was in 1965. (Google’Obama Selma’ for his full March 4,
2007 speech and articles about its various untruths.)
2.) Father Was A Goat Herder – NOT EXACTLY, he was a
privileged, well educated youth, who went on to work with the Kenyan
Government.
3.) Father Was A Proud Freedom Fighter – NOT EXACTLY, he
was part of one of the most corrupt and violent governments Kenya has
Ever had.
4.) “My Family Has Strong Ties To African Freedom” – NOT EXACTLY,
your cousin Raila Odinga has created mass violence in attempting
to overturn a legitimate election in 2007, in Kenya. It is the first
widespread violence in decades. The current government is pro-American
but Odinga wants to overthrow it and establish Muslim Sharia law. Your
half-brother, Abongo Obama, is Odinga’s follower. You interrupted your
New Hampshire campaigning to speak to Odinga on the phone. Check out
the following link for verification of that….and for more.
Obama’s cousin Odinga in Kenya ran for president and
tried to get Sharia Muslim law in place there. When Odinga lost the
elections, his followers have burned Christians’ homes and then burned
men, women and children alive in a Christian church where they took
shelter.. Obama SUPPORTED his cousin before the election process here
started. Google Obama and Odinga and see what you get. No one wants to know the truth.
5.) “My Grandmother Has Always Been A Christian” – NOT EXACTLY,
she does her daily Salat prayers at 5am according to her own
interviews. Not to mention, Christianity wouldn’t allow her to have been
one of 14 wives to 1 man.
6.) “My Name is African Swahili” – NOT EXACTLY, your name is
Arabic and ‘Baraka’ (from which Barack came) means
‘blessed’ in that language. Hussein is also Arabic and so is Obama.
Barack Hussein Obama is not half black. If elected, he
would be the first Arab-American President, not the first black
President. Barack Hussein Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother’s side and 43.75% Arabic and 6.25% African Negro from his father’s side. While Barack Hussein Obama’s father was from Kenya, his father’s family
was mainly Arabs.. Barack Hussein Obama’s father was only 12.5% African
Negro and 87.5% Arab (his father’s birth certificate even states
he’s Arab, not African Negro). From….and for more….go to…..
http://www.arcadeathome.com/newsboy.phtml?Barack_Hussein_Obama_-_Arab-Americ
7.) “I Never Practiced Islam” – NOT EXACTLY, you practiced it
daily at school, where you were registered as a Muslim and kept that
faith for 31 years, until your wife made you change, so you could run
for office. 4-3-08 Article “Obama was! ‘quite religious in Islam”
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=60559
8.) “My School In Indonesia Was Christian” – NOT EXACTLY, you
were registered as Muslim there and got in trouble in Koranic
wtudies for making faces (check your own book).
February 28, 2008. Kristoff from the New York Times a
year ago: Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to
prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed
delightfully uncalculated (it’ll give Alabama voters heart attacks),
Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as “one of the prettiest
sounds on Earth at sunset.” This is just one example of what Pamela
is talking about when she says “Obama’s narrative is being altered,
enhanced and manipulated to whitewash troubling facts.”
9.) “I Was fluent In Indonesian” – NOT EXACTLY, not one
teacher says you could speak the language.
10.) “Because I Lived In Indonesia, I Have More Foreign
Experience” – NOT EXACTLY, you were there from the ages of 6 to 10, and
couldn’t even speak the language. What did you learn, how to study the
Koran and watch cartoons.
11.) “I Am Stronger On Foreign Affairs” – NOT EXACTLY, except
for Africa (surprise) and the Middle East (bigger surprise), you have
never been anywhere else on the planet and thus have NO experience
with our closest allies.
12.) “I Blame My Early Drug Use On Ethnic Confusion” – NOT EXACTLY,
you were quite content in high school to be Barry Obama, no
mention of Kenya and no mention of struggle to identify – your
classmates said you were just fine.
13.) “An Ebony Article Moved Me To Run For Office” – NOT EXACTLY,
Ebony has yet to find the article you mention in your book. It
doesn’t, and never did, exist.
14.) “A Life Magazine Article Changed My Outlook On Life” –
NOT EXACTLY, Life has yet to find the article you mention in your
book. It doesn’t, and never did, exist.
15.) “I Won’t Run On A National Ticket In ‘08″ – NOT EXACTLY,
here you are, despite saying, live on TV, that you would not have
enough experience by then, and you are all about having experience first.
16.) Voting “Present” is Common In Illinois
Senate – NOT EXACTLY, they are common for YOU,
but not many others have 130 NO VOTES.
17.) Oops, I Misvoted – NOT EXACTLY, only when caught by
church groups and Democrats, did you beg to change your misvote.
18.) “I Was A Professor Of Law” – NOT EXACTLY, you were a
senior lecturer ON LEAVE.
19.) “I Was A Constitutional Lawyer” – NOT EXACTLY, you were
a senior lecturer ON LEAVE.
20.) “Without Me, There Would Be No Ethics Bill” – NOT EXACTLY,
you didn’t write it, introduce it, change it, or create it.
21.) “The Ethics Bill Was Hard To Pass” – NOT EXACTLY, it
took just 14 days from start to finish.
22.) “I Wrote A Tough Nuclear Bill” – NOT EXACTLY, your bill
was rejected by your own party for its pandering and lack of all
regulation – mainly because of your Nuclear donor, Exelon, from which
David Axelrod came.
23.) “I Have Released My State Records” – NOT EXACTLY, as of
March, 2008, state bills you sponsored or voted for have yet to be
released, exposing all the special interests pork hidden within.
24.) “I Took On The Asbestos Altgeld Gardens Mess” – NOT EXACTLY,
you were part of a large group of people who remedied Altgeld
Gardens. You failed to mention anyone else but yourself, in your books.
25.) “My Economics Bill Will Help America” – NOT EXACTLY,
your 111 economic policies were just combined into a proposal which
lost 99-0, and even YOU voted against your own bill.
26.) “I Have Been A Bold Leader In Illinois” – NOT EXACTLY,
even your own supporters claim to have not seen BOLD action on your part.
27.) “I Passed 26 Of My Own Bills In One Year” – NOT EXACTLY,
they were not YOUR bills, but rather handed to you, after their
creation by a fellow Senator, to assist you in a future bid for higher
office.
28.) “No One on my campaign contacted Canada about NAFTA” –
cfbleachers (4040c7) — 6/7/2008 @ 8:48 amNOT EXACTLY, the Canadian Government issued the names and a memo of the conversation your campaign had with them
#30 yeah, and there’s those visuals of McCain’s.
One of your fellow moonbats told me his shoulders and arms were disgusting looking and he looked like a puppet on a string. Then there are also those bad looking teeth. Of course all that was due to Vietnamese torture.
Sorry, charlie..urkel doesn’t make me question my sexuality or give me a tingle. So I wonder do his obamtons want to fellate him literally and figuratively or just take it up the derrierre? And I mention that because I recall the legions of women, some I knew personally, who had the hots for BJ Clinton back in ’92. The feminaziswrote about billy being so deserving of sexual satisfaction because “great” men have “great” appetites. One Now bigwig said she was ready to do her part with the oral gratification.
madmax333 (9e16eb) — 6/7/2008 @ 8:54 amIn any case an Urkel in the WH means the rest of us will be getting sodomized. I’m looking forward to the $450 barrel oil some have predicted in the next ten years. We will look back fondly on the Jimmy Carter I WH years of malaise and pain index as heavenly in comparison to the 1/16 black/half white/7/16 A-rab marxist messiah and his scumbag terrorist/black power/arab worshipping minions whom the media wants the world to remain oblivious to.
I’m starting to get my feelings hurt…I get caught up in the spam filter a large percentage of the time now for some reason….
cfbleachers (4040c7) — 6/7/2008 @ 9:08 am#34
love2008 (6e616b) — 6/7/2008 @ 9:08 amIn any case an Urkel in the WH means the rest of us will be getting sodomized
But Maddy, do you really believe that Obama is a sodomite?
“Youth, charm, charisma, eloquence, are talents that should never be underestimated.”
Nor should the inability of the electorate to weigh side-by-side the candidates positions on substantive issues and make informed decisions on whether what the candidate says they’re going to do will actually work and if it will if it’s actually good for the country.
I agree with your assessment of what makes people choose a candidate and yes it could put Obama over the top in votes. I would find it hard to believe that the screaming, fawning, and fainting that you see in the crowds at Obama rallies are in such a tizzy because they just read his health care plan and “like wow oh my god wow like what a plan!!”
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/7/2008 @ 9:24 amI think because McCain has a reputation for having a fiery temper, which people have in noticeably low class ways tried and failed to elicit, that he is going for the more avuncular, droll style in his delivery. Could work as well. Overall the numbers consistently show that seniors vote more than anyone and the “youth vote” seem to forget to do something important – actually vote.
#35 No, according to Mark Morford (likely on leave from a nuthouse)your idol is a “Lightworker”. Urkel has “High Vibration INTEGRITY”. What a crock of spit. Rick Moran takes that BS apart over at http://www.rightwingnuthouse.com today under “I Can’t Wait For An Obama Presidency.” The rest of us can shake our heads in wonder at the utter stupidity of Obama worshippers. Jesus H. Chr*st- where the effin’ integrity. As various close friends are revealed for the scumwads they truly are all Urkel can say is that’s not the man I knew?
madmax333 (9e16eb) — 6/7/2008 @ 9:40 amAre people that blind they cannot fathom that this creep is a product of corrupt chicago machine politics? Historic black figure? Haha- cretins of the world unite.
And yes, Obama and the far left would have our arses aching from their taxes, regulations, pain index, long waits for health care, etc. Why is it soooo damn hard for liberals admit marxism and socialism suck BIG TIME? Why don’t all the corksuckers who worship despots move to said paradises? Yeah, I know Bush is wiping his ass with the constitution, except you moonbats can’t point just what you’ve lost. You worry about bS AGW and worship the Goracle, are concerned about how the USA looks in eyes of the vaunted UN and your beloved euroweenies. We saw how a great black leader recently did a great job managing the UN with a little help from his son on the Iraqi oil theft side. Oh, we are “torturing” the poor terrorists. Boo friggin’ hoo. How about another Abu Grahib story on front page of NY Times? Fifty-some were not enough. Don’t bother reporting anything good as it doesn’t help your political ambitions. Thank god we have those great dem leaders Pelosi and Reid to actually get the people’s work done and with the most ethical Congress in history.
Eff Urkel Obamalamadingdong and his legion of apologists. I would not be unhappy if there were a little divine intervention at this point. Of course that would be an excuse for rioting and more liberal gnashing of teeth about how they wuz robbed again. I think today’s liberals must have some form of insanity and death wish.
I would not be unhappy if there were a little divine intervention at this point. Of course that would be an excuse for rioting and more liberal gnashing of teeth about how they wuz robbed again
love2008 (6e616b) — 6/7/2008 @ 9:59 amBy that do you something like an assassination of Obama? or some kind of “accident”?
I think he’s refering to how, if McCain wins, the response from Obama’s cult, will be harsh, swift, and entirely predictable.
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/7/2008 @ 10:12 am#39
love2008 (6e616b) — 6/7/2008 @ 10:21 amSo Jack, you mean McCain needs a divine intervention to win at this point?
#40 – That’s what I’d guess… Always the way when you deal with Satan… 🙂
#38 – I’m more hoping for the world to end… God knows that’ll happen anyways regardless of who wins the election…
Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec) — 6/7/2008 @ 10:41 amIt would so grand if the “cool, suave” mulatto blew a gasket during a debate with McCain. We saw how he puts his foot in his mouth in unscripted moments. Of course the media will cover for him and throw softball questions or urkel himself is allowed to define what is appropriate to ask and what takes away from his plan for america’s future and/or makes it more difficult to provide fresh fruit and arugula for his family.
One notices that it has been the great “high vibration integrity” man who has appeared the most fatigued on the campaign trial despite Hill and McCain being considerably more mature. No, it his darling wife who talks the assassination BS, such as it is dangerous for Urkel to go to the gas station…meaning some typical cracker would try to off him. I’m a racist for even rasiing questions about your idol. I’d gladly vote for a Bobby Jindal and HIS policy prescriptions right now despite him being an Indian with a dot. I’m sure you liberal wusses have some endearing ethnic term for Asians who don’t follow the ANSWER/Soros party line.
And there is also the possibility Urkel will have a massive myocardial infarction from all the stresses. Petic justice. You never know. Well, I’m sure that Hill or the VRWC would be blamed with some fantastical conspiracy theory.
McCain gets slandered by the NY Times for alleged infidelity. Then there was Rather’s truths despite evidence to contrary about Bush’s TANG service. Media won’t question Lurch’s Swiftboat stories or rumors about Obama’s sexual dalliances at Trinity. Not that they are true, but why not put him to same innuendo standard as McCain. It would be truly hilarious if Michelle did a Lorenna Bobbitt amputation in a pique of rage.
I’d be happy if media asked the questions about Urkel’s fitness for office given his experience and also revealed what his plans are for America. I’m sure his friends such as Richard Daley have no desire for payback in a future administration.
madmax333 (9e16eb) — 6/7/2008 @ 10:43 amBy that do you something like an assassination of Obama? or some kind of “accident”?
Comment by love2008 — 6/7/2008 @ 9:59 am
lovey – I think putting a halt to rampant democratic voter fraud should be sufficient, don’t you?
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/7/2008 @ 10:43 am“Even if he is an empty suit without visible experience and qualifications.”
Lovey – Thank you for finally admitting this about Obama.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/7/2008 @ 10:48 amThat’s some of the dumbest shit I’ve ever read.
Comment by Levi — 6/7/2008 @ 7:43 am
Levi – I’m still waiting for your answer on why democrats revere Hugo Chavez. Fair is fair.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/7/2008 @ 10:52 am“cool, suave” mulatto…
classy. we can figure out what madmax333 calls obama in private. of course, like most black men, obama has a bigger trigger than madmax333.
assistant devil's advocate (02ae1d) — 6/7/2008 @ 10:55 am#44
“Even if he is an empty suit without visible experience and qualifications.”
Lovey – Thank you for finally admitting this about Obama
love2008 (6e616b) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:02 amthere will be more “admitting” to be done after nov. 4th. Look out for more on the 5th Daley.
While perusing the news reports of the Clinton campaign’s public statements today (June 7), I was struck by the fact that Clinton selected the verb, “suspend” to describe the action her campaign was taking. She could have selected such verbs as “end, stop, halt, or cease and desist,” but she chose “suspend,” the precise definitions of which my dictionary presents as:
to defer or postpone
to cause to cease or bring to a stop or stay, usually for a time
to keep in a mood or feeling of expectation or incompleteness; keep waiting in suspense
to keep in a mood or feeling of expectation or incompleteness; keep waiting in suspense
to come to a stop, usually temporarily; cease from operation for a time.
Is that choice of words not particularly interesting in light of Sen. Clinton’s recent references to Sen. Robert Kennedy in 1968? In other words, is something in the works that is causing Sen. Clinton to unconsciously choose words that imply what she perceives will soon happen?
Mike Yanczysin (2c94f1) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:04 am#44 Yes, one do wonder how many of those 20 million or so “undocumented” workers will be voting this year and how many dearly departed in Cook county and Philly, etc. will be voting Urkel this year.
You’ll note dems want harsh standards vis a vis military absentee ballots but push for voting rights for convicted felons?
Then there are all the various lib groups that circumvent the McCain-Feingold campaign finance outrage against free speech.
madmax333 (9e16eb) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:06 amShould be interesting to see who the eventual Vice Pres. nominees will be. Rumors of Huckleberry or Nanny mayor of NYC should remain just rumors. Although there is talk that perhaps up to 40% of evangelicals would vote for Obama. Just shows that ignorance knows no bounds. Expect near unanimous support for BHO from the AA side. Add the intellgensia and other lib elites, college students, white guilt and uninformed voters who get their info from evening news/jon stewart/letterman and those who would vote dem regardless of who was on the ballot plus media totally in O’s pocket, transfixed by idiocy such as thrills down their legs or the bulge in Urkel’s tight jeans (plenty of that sort of “journalism” out there).
carter I gave us swimming predator rabbits, lust in his heart, removal of the Shah and mad mullahs taking over in his stead, Chrissie Matthews’ American malaise speech for Jimmuh, OPEC price gouing/oil embargo, wear a sweater and turn down that thermostat, the Teheran hostage crisis of over 500 days and general impotence on the world stage PLUS some nasty ass stagflation and resulting 18% interest rates, etc.
Maybe Obama can improve on that record of futility and Wright’s chickens come home to roost rhetoric will indeed come to fruition. Perhaps several terroist outrages that make 9/11 look relatively benign…even if Obama totally kisses the jihadists asses. Afterall we should not be tapping their phones, “torturing” them or taking the fight to them. Talk is the answer and lots of love. Kumbaya. Change! Hope! Seas receding and planet healing already under O’s gentle divine guidance. We must all sacrifice except for the special ones like the O’s, Edwards and Goracles and assorted limo libs like not in my back yard Fat Teddy.
#46 forget his racial status..libs push the black man historic precedent things and the AAs buy into it hook, line and sinker. O is eight times more white than black blood- so how does that make him african american? WHAT are his qualifiactions? WHAT has he ever actually accomplished other than to have you gullible leftists swoon over him, buy his books and vote present or not show up at all for votes? And I’m not the one interested in his pecker. It is your own media obsessed sexually with the puppet that is Obama. Wouldn’t surprise me if Olberman and Matthews pulled an Anne Heche and decided they wanted some of that man meat, given the way they drool over Urkel. Show me that Obama possesses a lick of common sense, has any judgement at all of character, loyalty to anything other than black supremacy and marxism.
madmax333 (9e16eb) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:13 amLevi needs a good copy editor to get things correct: “
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:13 amThat’s someI’m one of the dumbest shitsI’veever toreadbreathe.”there will be more “admitting” to be done after nov. 4th. Look out for more on the 5th Daley.
Comment by love2008 — 6/7/2008 @ 11:02 am
lovey – Why wait? Have the courage of your convictions and tell us now.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:17 ammadmax – Don’t you realize that when Obama gets elected the jobless rate will drop to 0.0% because everyone will have a “green” job that will eliminate the need for petroleum, there will be parades of people in the streets of Gaza, Tehran, and Paris because anti-American sentiment (which began with the Bush administration) will come to a screeching halt, Ahmadinejad will say “Sorry ’bout all that nuke shit,” all of the troops will be magically teleported out of Iraq, even though every single person will have free health care it won’t be needed because the sick will be healed (like the Earth)with a wave of his magic hand, racism (that wretched belief that only exists in the minds of white Americans) will be eradicated, Obama’s statue will be placed in the town square of every city and people will stop and bow before it in homage to the New Age of peace and greatness that Obama will usher in the day he is inaugurated.
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:21 am#48
love2008 (6e616b) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:25 amIdeally, the word “suspend” would still be okay. If suspend is to be taken for what it means, she is not quitting on her political ambition. She is merely defering it to a latter date. Maybe 2012 if Obama loses this year. So she is right to use the word “suspend” because her political career is not yet over. She will contest again but definitely not this year.
That’s some of the dumbest shit I’ve ever read.
How do you know that, Mr. Sunny?
Did you actually read the post and comments up to that point?
Or did you already “know” the contents?
“You don’t have to read something to know its contents. I’ve gotten A’s on papers I’ve written and tests I’ve taken about books I’ve never read”
Paul (90f626) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:30 amIf the war continues to go well, even fewer young Obama voters will vote. Nixon ended the draft before 1972 and won the election against McGovern, even though 18-year-olds could vote for the first time, suggesting private interest against lofty idealism in the minds of voters in presidential elections.
It’s McCain’s to lose, IMO.
Patricia (f56a97) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:31 amPaul – the fungus has delightfully been incognito for awhile. But like with herpes, you can always fear a future outbreak.
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:32 amJack #53 –
Oh come on. You are exaggerating.
It will take until the day after the inauguration for Obama to usher in all that the New Age of peace and greatness.
No way he does it in the same day.
Paul (90f626) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:34 am#53 that sounds real groovy. Where do I sign up for the Messiah’s bandwagon? I hope that dastardly George W Bush doesn’t try to pull some stunt like calling off the elections and making himself king for life. Scary because the white ridgerunners have so many guns and want to keep the black man down.
madmax333 (9e16eb) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:37 amI don’t know though. Even with the media entirely in his pocket, Urkel is not even loved by some of the diehard moonbat crowd. I don’t think it has anything to do with his color either. I suppose some see him as a misogynist for raining on Hill’s parade.
Funny she’s talking now and asking her crowds to support dinglebarry obambi and many are booing. Naturally CNN downplays the booing by claiming the ceiling acoustics really ACCENTUATES the low frequencies. Hahahaha- talk about kissing urkel butt.
also check out http://www.hillary.com open thread- love it. Won’t make the obamatonshere any happier though.
#48, yes, I was struck by her use of “suspend” as well. “Suspend” clearly connotates “temporary” and must have been a very deliberate choice of words.
I think she is still counting on voters’ remorse setting in by August. Maybe she has a few things up her sleeve to help that process along.
Missy (6ac4f3) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:40 am#54
Missy (6ac4f3) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:56 amShe didn’t say she was suspending her political ambition. She said “Today as I suspend my campaign…”
Those words have a precise meaning, as Mike Y pointed out above. If she meant “end” she would have said it.
sorry, omitted the clinton on website
http://www.hillaryclinton.com open thread
wrong one is for software
madmax333 (9e16eb) — 6/7/2008 @ 11:57 amCatching up…
Peter @ #20: The Dems ran against Hoover for 30+ years – plus,
they are still trying to run against a “second-rate actor”;
#28 & followup comments:
Another Drew (8018ee) — 6/7/2008 @ 12:11 pmWhat everyone has overlooked, is that L… never reads his own shit!
#61
love2008 (6e616b) — 6/7/2008 @ 12:16 pmSo missy, tell me, what does “suspend my campaign mean..” And how does it not mean she is pulling out of this particular race? And what secret motive do you think she is hiding somewhere in that mix-up? educate me.
madmax – stopped by the open thread. Interesting how many commenters there are not only saying that they will not vote for the Messiah but are stating their plan to vote for McCain. I tend to believe what they say more than the self-proclaimed “true” conservatives who say that they will not vote for McCain. None of them ever seem to follow up that statement with “I’m voting for Obama” and I believe that most of them will, at crunch time pull the lever for McCain rather than come away believing that their not voting for him is somehow striking a meaningful blow on behalf of pure conservatism.
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/7/2008 @ 12:56 pmThe real danger for McCain is not that “true conservatives” will vote for Obama, but that they just won’t vote at all.
Another Drew (8018ee) — 6/7/2008 @ 12:59 pmIf that happens, a lot of down-ticket candidates will suffer too.
A rhetorical genius worthy of Cicero:
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/7/2008 @ 1:11 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxBX8sz3tO8
#62
love2008 (6e616b) — 6/7/2008 @ 2:04 pmChecked the link you provided Maddy. Those Hillary supporters are deranged. What do they think this is? A cult war? They sound like loyal, brainless zombies. It’s always good to know when the party is over folks. Hillary is done as far as 08 is concerned. It’s time to move on.
Like one Hillary fan stated: Just because the circus has come to town, doesn’t mean you have to support it.
madmax333 (353d45) — 6/7/2008 @ 2:53 pmJeez, Hill website actually asks for people to donate and work for Urkel.
What’s wrong with those women, don’t they realize Obama be the chosen one? Are they racists? Trailer trash? They’re screaming selected, not elected. Does the truth really matter? The truth is what the media says it is.
Regular people should avail themselves of Obama info:
http://www.meetbarackobama.com
#67 Jack Klompus-
madmax333 (353d45) — 6/7/2008 @ 3:26 pmDon’t you know that pointing out what the Messiah actually said is racist? Shame on you! That fool Mark Steyn did the same thing having his book sold in Canada and thus offending Muslim sensibilities when they took umbrage at Steyn throwing their own words back at them. And now the Human Rights drones have his sorry Jewish arse on trial, with truth no defense and with a 100% conviction rate. I think all their cases have been brought by offended Islamomutants.
I can see the kool-aid drinkers going along with an amendment making Urkel potus for life or at least being up for election every four years. Those Chicago gangster/pols behind him know what is best for America.
Afterall monkey Chavez tried that in Venezuela. ufde law allwoing kerse acn
What about you Maddy, what do you think? Do you believe that Obama stole the election? That he was “selected” and not “elected”? Is this an honest and fair assessment of this democratic election? Do you believe Obama stole the election? Well its very obvious what you think. Obama is the anti-christ. right?
love2008 (6e616b) — 6/7/2008 @ 3:44 pmufde law allwoing kerse acn.
this is as much sense as you’ve ever made.
assistant devil's advocate (02ae1d) — 6/7/2008 @ 3:48 pmSuspending a campaign is a technicality that allows the candidate to keep collecting money, but she is clearly ending her bid for the presidency (this time). Hillary doesn’t want to dip into the family jillions to pay off her debt.
Patricia (f56a97) — 6/7/2008 @ 3:49 pmHowever, she is still available if Obama should be suddenly rendered unavailable, ahem.
Patricia (f56a97) — 6/7/2008 @ 3:51 pmCalling the sellection process for the Democrat canidate an “election” is fooling yourself. Obama only has the nomination “locked” because of the Super-Deligates, people not alocated by voters, but people given the ability to in essence sellect a canidate at will, withot having to answer to anyone.
So yes. Obama was sellected, not elected.
He might not have stolen the election, but he certainly is guilty of recieving stolen goods…
And I don;t know if he’s the anti-christ. He certainly isn’t the Second Coming the media portrays him to be.
But the anti-christ? Nahhh… I wouldn’t dismiss the idea that he words for the guy though…
Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec) — 6/7/2008 @ 3:56 pm#72 your stealth candidate gets great cover from the media. He wants to basically disarm America and most people are totally unaware of that. Check the story out at Investor’s Business Daily or the discussion at http://www.littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog
And Islamic cong. Keith Ellison is making speech calling America an Imperialistic power. Also, right wing radio and Fox news should be banned. You liberals love free speech for yourselves but want to prevent others from same free speech rights. and you can bioya as far as I am concerned. Why can’t you show us why Obama would be a good choice, rather than the old canards of Bush sucks and wrecked the country?
Lovetron/chocolate thunder lover-
madmax333 (353d45) — 6/7/2008 @ 4:04 pmlook at how Hill won the popular vote. She beats Urkel in Texas and yet HE gets most of the delegates. The party leaders want him badly and the clintons have fallen on hard times. Before their woes were all the result of the VRWC and the Clintons were innocent victims. I just want people to be aware of what Urkel stands for and the people pulling his strings. All this increased tax, regulations and that 45 TRILLION dollar carbon credits BS will indeed wreck the economy. Say hello to the New World-wide Depression. You libs already have increased millions of people on brink of starvation with your ethanol boondoggle using up corn supplies as gas prices soar. Don’t you think $450 a barrel oil will have consequences on daily life of most people- maybe not much on the Breck Girl, the goracle or lurch sKerry.
Hope you’re happy when your messiah wrecks our way of life with the meery band of libs in Congress at his beck and call.
Is Obama qualified to be president?
love2008 (6e616b) — 6/7/2008 @ 4:22 pmThe Constitution requires presidents to be natural-born citizens of the United States who are at least 35 years of age and have resided in the United States for 14 years. As a tacit statement of America’s commitment to democracy and equal opportunity, the Constitution gave any free white male citizen of the country the opportunity to become president. All males gained the right to become president in 1870 when the 15th Amendment to the Constitution gave African Americans the right to vote. Women were excluded from running for the office until 1920, when the 19th Amendment to the Constitution gave them the right to vote.
Yes he is qualified. (1) He is a natural-born citizen of America.
(2) He is above the required age of 35 years. he will be 47 in august.
(3) Though black, he has the right to contest for the office. The 15th Amendment made it so.
Thats pretty much what the constitution requires of anyone who wishes to be president of america.
(4) Women were not allowed to run for the office until 1920, when the 19th Amendment was enforced. So, yes, Hillary was qualified to run too.
Not much is said about educational qualifications, experience, military training and experience.
Although the Constitution specifies few qualifications for the presidency, as a practical matter the office is closed to most Americans. Today, a candidate who hopes to win the White House must have tens of millions of dollars and substantial political muscle if he or she hopes to make it through the arduous ordeal of presidential elections. The election process has changed through the course of American history, but the challenge has always been difficult, narrowing the field of viable candidates to a select few.
So lets rest this argument about qualifications and experience because it is unconstitutional. Anyone can be President in America. All he really needs is financial and political muscles. If he or she believes he or she has what it takes, let them go for it. Though experience in some areas of service, and success in previous endeavours is seen as a plus, it is not required.
“Why can’t you show us why Obama would be a good choice, rather than the old canards of Bush sucks and wrecked the country?”
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/7/2008 @ 4:25 pmI’ve been wondering about this one myself.
Jack – lovey has already admitted that Obama is an empty suit with no visible qualifications today. I think that’s a pretty good start.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/7/2008 @ 4:38 pm#80
love2008 (6e616b) — 6/7/2008 @ 4:39 pmAnd Scotty, before you jump into that whiners band wagon, remember who had the superdelegate lead all the while till very recently was Hillary. Then Obama was leading in number of delegates won, the popular votes, number of states won. Hillary only held an advantage in the superdelegates. She so believed in them when she said that SDs were free to vote for whoever they prefered, not minding who got the more delegates. Well, that comment turned back to bite her in the a…. The superDs merely followed the will of their people. You cant blame Obama for being the favourite of his people. They endorsed him because they prefered him. What is wrong with that? He won. End of story. whining and grumbling and pointing accusing fingers is just childish. He was not “selected”, he was elected. After the super tuesday in Feb. he amassed 12 straight wins and from then maintained a lead hillary could not beat. He ran an excellent campaign and he earned the victory. Dont take it away, man, give it to him. He ran a good campaign and won. Period.
“Those Hillary supporters are deranged.”
lovey, there is something incongruous about an Obamabot calling Hillary supporters deranged.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/7/2008 @ 4:42 pmI’ll give him his accomplishment of attaining the nomination. I don’t think that anyone is denying it’s take-notice quality. It is time, I think now especially, for the candidates to answer the question, “Why should I vote for you?” The history has been made, the legs have been thrilled, great.
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/7/2008 @ 4:49 pmSo how about an issue and what he is going to do that will be as remarkable as his campaign? I recall Levi went with “I’ll take Iraq” and in brilliant fashion said that it’s unwinnable and Bush fucked it up so bad how dare you ask what Obama is going to do. I’d like to think that the candidate has articulated to his fervert supporters something better than that, but I frighteningly so often don’t hear better.
Jack – lovey has already admitted that Obama is an empty suit with no visible qualifications today. I think that’s a pretty good start
love2008 (6e616b) — 6/7/2008 @ 4:50 pmdaley, maybe you should read my comment again and show me where I actually said that obama is an “empty suit” These were my words. History has shown that while Americans like to say they vote on the issues at stake, they also vote based on who is better looking. Who they like. Even if he is an empty suit without visible experience and qualifications.
Intellegent reading of that statement doesnt say what you are infering. Besides, what specific qualification does obama lack?
#86
love2008 (6e616b) — 6/7/2008 @ 5:11 pmBy deranged I mean delusional, insane, crazy. it is that state of not accepting reality. That descibes anyone who still thinks Hillary’s nomination battle is still alive. And if you call me an Obamabot, what about you Daley? Whose lackey are you? Resorting to labels and name-calling does not make a case.
#87
And Jack, is there anything Obama will say at this point that can ever change your mind? If you really want answers to your questions, I suggest you check out his web site. I believe there are people there who can assist you.
And I will say this once again for all who still possess some modicum of cognitive abilities. I am not a liberal. I am not even a democrat. I am even more inclined to be a republican conservative. I am just interested in Obama’s candidacy. I think he is cool. Yes he has alot of questions to answer about some of his associations, very questionable links. Like many, I began by viewing him with alot of suspicion. I am still researching to find any credible, undisputable proofs of his malignancy. So far all i hear is innuendos, conspiracy theories and assumptions. Nothing solid.
Please, for the love of God, tell that to the rest of the left…
Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec) — 6/7/2008 @ 5:23 pmI hear this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZxBX8sz3tO8 and I say that I want this man nowhere near the Presidency. If McCain were to hold forth in this manner, this clip would be on perpetual loop on every mainstream media outfit in the nation.
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/7/2008 @ 5:24 pmlovey – When you start your paragraph comparing McCain and Obama, it was pretty clear to me you were referring to Obama as the empty suit:
“Mccain’s greatest disadvantage will be his age. It’s very difficult to win a popularity contest with the likes of Barack Obama. History has shown that while Americans like to say they vote on the issues at stake, they also vote based on who is better looking. Who they like. Even if he is an empty suit without visible experience and qualifications.”
Are you denying that now upon further reflection?
Why did you feel it necessary to lie about your support for Obama for so long on this blog? It was visible in your comments yet you lied about it. Was it embarrassment?
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/7/2008 @ 6:22 pm“And I will say this once again for all who still possess some modicum of cognitive abilities. I am not a liberal. I am not even a democrat. I am even more inclined to be a republican conservative.”
Ah, the old lifelong republican voting for a progressive ploy. The media seems to find a lot of people like that when they conduct interviews. Lovey, are you registered as a member of a party?
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/7/2008 @ 6:25 pmFrederick Kagan in the Weekly Standard does a rather telling comparison between the two senator-candidates that he sums up nicely in the closing paragraphs:
“For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.
The two men brought different backgrounds to the test, of course. In January 2007, McCain had been a senator for 20 years and had served in the military for 23 years. Obama had been a senator for 2 years and before that was a state legislator, lawyer, and community organizer. But neither presidential candidates nor the commander in chief gets to choose the tests that history brings. Once in office, the one elected must perform.”
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/7/2008 @ 7:10 pmGreat op-ed in LA Times by John Bolton…”Obama the naive”. Times has a wall, but you can do google news for obama the naive. Bolton takes Urkel to school. Sure would be really groovy if Barry Hussein follows Mondale’s 1984 path of being blown out in general election. But then I doubt millions of citizens and the media were under Mondale’s spell and bought his spiel hook, line and sinker. Where do you leftwingers get freaky socialist bozos like this: McGovern, Mondale, Carter, Dukakis, Kerry, Obama? Sure hope the 20% of people on the far left fever camp don’t get their way. Berkeley is not mainstream America.
madmax333 (0cca50) — 6/7/2008 @ 7:52 pmmax – Mondale’s daughter used to be hawt. rawr!!!
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/7/2008 @ 7:59 pmdaleyrocks-
Didn’t get monica get brushed off once by Billy C. because he was otherwise occupied by the Mondale girl inside the Oral Office? Some of his alleged trysts were actually hot and not just BBWs or “trailer park trash” (as named by the clintons).
And you recall some of the watergate era honeys like Sally Quinn and Maureen Dean. But that was nearly 35 years ago.
madmax333 (0cca50) — 6/7/2008 @ 8:07 pmMax – Correct. Why do Monica when you can choose the other. I remember Sally ( I could have had any man) Quinn.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/7/2008 @ 8:40 pm#67 Jack Klompus-
Don’t you know that pointing out what the Messiah actually said is racist? Shame on you! That fool Mark Steyn did the same thing having his book sold in Canada and thus offending Muslim sensibilities when they took umbrage at Steyn throwing their own words back at them. And now the Human Rights drones have his sorry Jewish arse on trial, with truth no defense and with a 100% conviction rate. I think all their cases have been brought by offended Islamomutants.
Uh-oh. Madmax…does this apply if I simply quote someone else pointing out what he said, as I did in #37?
cfbleachers (4040c7) — 6/8/2008 @ 8:40 am#99
what do I know? You are probably treading on dangerous ground if what you bring up can in anyway be construed as critical of the new Messiah. Doesn’t matter if they are his own words or not. At the least, some people will feel it has a chilling effect. Maybe you and I should just shut our pieholes. The Canadian HR bs will no doubt make editors and publishers hesitate before introducing words that muslims find offensive. They can go into a rage and threaten you with death, but that’s pc and quite ok for some reason. In fact, it seems many people won’t speak out because they themselves fear the imams and retribution from Islam. The followers of the religion of peace themselves apparently are not going to be critical of anything the enemies of free speech espouse.
So Urkel and his legions of cult worshippers want everyone else on the defensive and rule out many areas of enquiry henceforth. Perosnally I think they can attempt the anatomically impossible and gft. I get attacked for having sexual jealousy of mandingo urkel’s endowment if I try to make fun of the lamestream’s media sexual arousal either looking at his groin or listening to his orations. Must be a defect in me because all I see is a grifter pulling the wool over the clueless lemmings who buy into his drivel of hope and change, the waters are already receding and the planet healing horseshit.
madmax333 (9429a9) — 6/8/2008 @ 9:40 am#69
Missy (6ac4f3) — 6/8/2008 @ 9:45 amAll I was doing was pointing out that “suspend” and “end” are not synonymous. However, since then I found out that Patricia at #78 is correct – it’s a technicality so she can continue to raise money against her debt. So I had that wrong. Sorry.