It's all over Hillary. Face the music gracefully, while the super delegates do the right thing.
CNN was able to declare Obama the primary winner of North Carolina as soon as the polls closed there. The prism that split the light into a Barack rainbow was no mystery. He has won that state by double digits and the black vote has abandoned Hillary Clinton as predicted and won’t be returning. Obama has garnered upwards of 92% of the black vote in NC and IN. This was why I emphasized that Clinton cannot and will not win the White House without Obama and the black vote.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments26 - Bennett
Arch is the new JOM
27 - Cindy D
In order not to appear to be an idiot Arch, you might like to refrain from putting quotes around the twists you make of other people's words.
Writing lesson #1 for the extreme right-wing:
Quotes are used to document what a person actually says--not what you construe them to have said.
28 - Ruvy
Arch is the new JOM
Bing, the guy's real name, is nothing like JOM. JOM was a nasty SOB who followed people around like a stupid attack dog. I was glad to see him kicked off the list as he made about five intelligent comments that I can remember. And he made shitloads of comments. JOM was nothing but a troll.
Bing, by contrast, attacks what he disagrees with. He expresses a point of view. It is not necessarily one I agree with, but all of his comments are based on that point of view, rather than the mere desire to attack an individual on the list.
I'm not going to complain about his strong language. I'm the last person here who has the right to do that....
29 - Dr Dreadful
Ruvy is right. JustOneMan was a stupid idiot. Archie, however he may express himself and however extreme his views may seem at times, is most assuredly neither stupid nor an idiot.
99% of JOM's comments were the slobberings of a moron and contributed nothing to the discussion. As such, they were routinely deleted, so what remained for other commenters to read was actually just the tip of the iceberg.
Archie, in contrast, invariably addresses the issues under discussion. His main fault is a tendency to get overheated and start name-calling. Those instances are dealt with as they arise by Chris and myself, but he's done nothing to warrant the kind of action that eventually had to be taken against JOM.
30 - Baritone
I think Arch is well on his way to taking JOM's place. His rancor is leading him around like a bitch in heat leads a horny bloodhound.
Arch is a bitter, anal-retentive, hate mongering conservative who believes everything is painted black and white and only his chosen color carries any validity. How anyone can be so cocksure of his site is beyond me. It's clear that he knows little and understands less - little knowledge, less wisdom. If he took part in an open face to face discussion with anyone, he would likely have his face rearranged. His name calling and lack of even a modicum of respect for his opposition renders him useless.
B-tone
31 - Clavos
Interesting study in contrast between comments #s 28 & 29, by Ruvy and Doc, respectively, and who seem to be more or less on the same page (with which I agree, BTW) regarding Arch, vis-a-vis B-tone's comment # 30.
Why are you so vehement about Arch, B?
32 - Baritone
The anger and condescension with which Arch presents his arguments is rankling at best. I can and do present my posts and comments, perhaps at times with passion, but not in the manner of AC. It's not a matter of whether I can stand the heat, it's simply that it is rude and unnecessary. In this case, I am not so charitable regarding Arch as you, Doc and Ruvy. Arch, in my opinion goes over the top. But, I suppose I'm just too dimwitted to understand where he's coming from.
B-tone
33 - Cindy D
"You and b-tone and every other dimwit leftist can save your bullshit epithets for your fellow moonbats that buy into them."
I'd say that sort of might have made me vehement.
34 - Ruvy
B-tone,
The anger and condescension with which Arch presents his arguments is rankling at best. I can and do present my posts and comments, perhaps at times with passion, but not in the manner of AC. It's not a matter of whether I can stand the heat, it's simply that it is rude and unnecessary.
........
If he took part in an open face to face discussion with anyone, he would likely have his face rearranged. His name calling and lack of even a modicum of respect for his opposition renders him useless.
Try to see this in terms of reality instead of pixelated comments on a screen.
That screen strips away certain inhibitions that face to face contact (or voice to voice contact on podcasts) either impose or reinforce.
If I viewed you merely by your point of view, I'd be disgusted. I don't. I view you as a person, a real live human being with aches, pains, desires, pleasures and memories.
So we can discuss things like driving, what it feels like to be in a foreign country, etc. and realize that we share quite a bit in common in attitudes, even though we differ tremendously in how we view given subjects.
I viewed Marthe Raymond (moonraven), someone who was forced from the list, in the same light, and we had conversations instead of rank-out matches. When others attacked me, she came to my defense.
I view Bing in the same light - as a human being. If you read carefully, you discover that he is about thirty, angry with the world he sees and frustrated. And if you read enough, you see that his views are neither arch nor conservative. He's boxed himself into a corner with the screen name he has chosen for himself, and this discussion about him is a result.
In a bar, or a coffee shop, or on a podcast, he'd probably be just a strident in his views, and a whole hell of a lot more polite in expressing them. Unless a person is truly a boor, real contact imposes rules of civilized behavior, rules that you, he and I, and just about everyone else on the list do understand and live by - just to avoid getting their faces re-arranged.
Generally, I do what I can to reach beyond the screen to talk to you all. But it isn't always so.
An example. On a different thread, I told zing zing, I'd be happy to blow Ken Livingstone away if the opportunity presented itself. That's because Livingstone is an existential threat to me in the way he uses power.
But you? Zing? Marthe Raymond? Shit, while she was conducting rank-out contests with the rest of the guys, she was giving me advice on how to deal with a dictatorship here in Israel.
That's what comes from remembering that a person is typing the words you see.
35 - Baritone
Ruvy,
I understand what you're saying, but, as you mentioned, you and I have had our moments, both good and bad. The same goes for myself and Dave, Obnoxious Am, and Baronius among others. Some of the exchanges have been heated. I had some truly nasty exchanges with Moon, but also a great discussion about jazz. Arch generally sends things a step or two further. His line cited by Cindy D above is a fair example. A personal attack doesn't have to include obscenities or be legally libelous to be offensive.
If someone wants to attack my positions, my beliefs - and being an admitted atheist, I get more than my share of that - so be it. But to refer to me as "a dimwit" and everyone to the left of Himmler as "useless fucking liberals" is bullshit, and in the end personal. I am a liberal who doesn't consider himself fucking useless.
If he's going to be a rude, name calling ass, he'd best learn how to take it as well. He may be a wonderful human being, a real prince, but on this venue he's no more than a repugnant, self-righteous bully.
B-tone
36 - Dr Dreadful
I suppose the basic difference between Arch and JOM is that while Arch is full of crap, that's not all he's full of.
Moonraven, now, that was a totally different kettle of fish. Whatever her motivations were (and I don't think any of us got close to the bottom of them), they were obviously complex and sophisticated. Unfortunately they manifested themselves as a concerted attempt to drag the site (or at least the Politics section of it) through the ca-ca. It got so no-one could express any sort of view without being put down and insulted in the most vile way. Thread after thread would grind to a halt in a hail of crudities.
JOM and Moonraven were extreme cases and in the end it was their persistence in behaving the way they did which got them kicked off. (As I understand it, though, Moonraven wasn't actually banned, but agreed to stop commenting.)
37 - Jet in Columbus
That damned witch doctor!?! I thought we were done conversing about JOM... I want my money back...
38 - Arch Conservative
So much is made of me attacking people but b-tone calls me a racist and not one of you comments on how that is a personal attack? I'm not drinking the Obama Kool aid and I have the gall to have my own interpretation on Michelle Obama's actions and character whcih does not conform to the standard "oh she's so great and classy and wonderful and super duper" line so that must make me a racist right? Trust me...when it comes to being angry, bitter, and resentful of others I don't have shit on this woman.
I guess you libs are so used to insulated groupthink and the rabid inane reinforcements of your own delusions by one another that it does strike you as so offensive when someone calls you out on your bullshit race baiting tactics. Call someone who disagrees with you a basless yet very socially stigmatizing, extremely undesirable, epithet loud enough and often enough and that must make it true right b-tone?
I have never said anything even remotely close to being racist about Obama. I have been around longer than JOM and a lot of others on this site and if there's one thing I have made clear it is that I do not care for liberals, leftists, moonbats, commies, reds, scoailiast etc....regardless of their color, race or sex. So anyone who would, after having read a number of my posts, insist that I am a racist, is an ignorant moron and I WILL point that out whether or not Bennet, dreadful, b-tone, cindy d., adam ash, realist or anyone else has a problem with that.
God forbid one poster does not succumb to the politically correct bullshit that seems to perade this site just as much as the general population. I'd rather be honest than politically corrrect.
As for JOM and Moonraven. JOM was an idiot with nothing to offer plain and simple and it seemed like moonraven's only purpose for being on this site was to daily put down the USA and it's people while talking about che guevera, or some other obscure south American rebel heroes of hers that no one actually had ever heard of or gave a damn about. That got pretty old pretty quick.
39 - Jet in Columbus
Has anyone seen the latest edition of Archie Comics? I had it here a minute ago?
40 - troll
...I (heart) the Con - he makes me laugh
41 - Cindy D
Arch,
I don't think calling Michelle Obama uppity (or insert whatever racially neutral pejorative) makes you a racist. I agree with you on that.
42 - Arch Conservative
I don't think calling Michelle Obama uppity (or insert whatever racially neutral pejorative) makes you a racist. I agree with you on that.
Well since you don't think that makes me a racist but that is why b-tone pretty much all but called me one without using the word would you also agree that I am not the only one thats makes personal attacks? Calling someone a racist without cause is surely as bad as calling someone a dimwitted leftist..si it not?
Screw it. Let's leave race completely out of it. I'll talk about Obama's record and inexeperience all day long with b-tone, cindy or anyone else that supports him.
Let's talk about how Obama thinks it's a good idea to give illegals driver's licenses.
Let's talk about how about voted against banning partial birth abortion in Oct 2007.
Let's talk about how Obama voted against reducing federal spending by 40billion in Nov 2005.
Let's talk about how Barry voted against ANWAR drilling in Mar 2005.
Let's talk about how Obama voted for illegals aliens to collect social security benefits in May 2006.
Let's talk about how he voted against repealing the death tax in June 2006.
Let's talk about he voted against extending the Bush tax cuts to capital gains and dividends in Feb 2006.
Let's take the words race, change, hope etc and all of the rhetoric that goes alogn with them and throw them away and discuss the records of Obama and Mccain.
Is that too much to ask?
43 - Bennett
"I'd rather be honest than politically corrrect."
Arch, your honesty or difference of opinion doesn't bother or offend, it's your rudeness and inability to express yourself in a civilized manner that grates.
If you would exercise your intellect, you could find words to clearly state your opinions and positions without resorting to childish insults, sweeping generalizations, or unnecessary cuss words. You would gain the respect of others, even if they disagreed with what you presented.
In other words, you'd become a real adult.
44 - Bennett
Regarding "uppity":
Although the dictionary doesn't indicate any racial overtones, the most common usage of the word here in the states (in my lifetime) has been in conjunction with the word "nigger".
You can be coy and say you didn't mean it that way, but calling a black woman "uppity" does imply the second word to most Americans.
45 - bliffle
I don't know (or care) if Archie's a racist, but if his point was that the south is too racist to vote for Obama in the general election, it's an interesting one.
Archie may be wrong (probably, as usual) and the southern states may vote similar to the other states, with the usual regional variations. In which case we simply have learned that Archie is wrong. Again.
But if he is right and the south seems to arise as one against Obama, then two new questions arise: (1) what are we to make of this resurgent racist south? (2) can Obama win without the south?
It would almost surely have to be a racist rejection of Obama since Archies dodge that the south will reject his leftism simply doesn't hold water: Obamas policies are not particularly leftist (being somewhat to the right of Hillary) and opposition to The War is now centrist (even many rightists want out).
IMO, the south won't be anti-Obama for racist reasons. So it won't effect Obama in the general.
46 - Clavos
the most common usage of the word here in the states (in my lifetime) has been in conjunction with the word "nigger".
And "woman."
47 - Bennett
That's true Clavos, but unless Arch feels that Mrs. Obama was "acting above her station" (whatever that means) then "arrogant" would suffice, unless one wants to imply an additional meaning with the word.
bliffle, good thoughts!
48 - Arch Conservative
I don't know (or care) if Archie's a racist, but if his point was that the south is too racist to vote for Obama in the general election, it's an interesting one."
I believe I made it clear why I don't believe Obama will win a single southern state......because he is too liberal...like John Kerry who also didn't win a single state in the south,...not because he's black.
49 - Baritone
Arch,
Okay, let's talk:
"Let's talk about how Obama thinks it's a good idea to give illegals driver's licenses."
And this is a bad idea because...??? - There are lots of illegals here. It'd be nice to know if they know how to drive a damn car. If nothing else, it would provide some kind of a paper trail would it not? In any case, just how many illegals do you suppose are going to show up at their local BMV?
"Let's talk about how about voted against banning partial birth abortion in Oct 2007."
Not everyone is a "bleeding heart" right wing fundamentalist. There are legitimate medical reasons why such procedures should be performed. A blanket law prohibiting them is counter to good medicine and intrudes upon an individual's rights.
"Let's talk about how Obama voted against reducing federal spending by 40billion in Nov 2005."
Because the bulk of those reductions were to come out of social programs making life more difficult for the poor and the elderly, while funding for bullshit like the Iraq war kept going up.
"Let's talk about how Barry voted against ANWAR drilling in Mar 2005."
Their remains legitimate controversy over the amount of Alaska's oil reserves and whether the cost - both monetary and environmental - is justifiable.
"Let's talk about how Obama voted for illegals aliens to collect social security benefits in May 2006."
Don't know about this one. I'll get back to you.
"Let's talk about how he voted against repealing the death tax in June 2006."
The so called "death" or inheritance tax generally only significantly affects those at the high end of the economic spectrum. But, I may be more or less with you on this one. I will have to look at the specifics of the particular bill in question before I render an opinion on the efficacy of Obama's vote.
"Let's talk about he voted against extending the Bush tax cuts to capital gains and dividends in Feb 2006."
Big surprise here. Virtually all democrats opposed the Bush tax cuts for a variety of reasons which have been discussed ad nauseam, or did you miss that? Would you really expect him to vote otherwise?
B-tone
50 - Ruvy
Bing,
You have legitimate ideological reasons to oppose Obama. But you do need to remember that America is not a parliamentary democracy like Canada, New Zealand or Australia (notice I didn't include that falafel dictatorship, Israel). In other words, merely because someone is elected president doesn't make his program or promises law. If his political party - or more to the point, his wing of his political party - controls both houses of your congress, then his programs will get passed.
That happened once in my lifetime that I remember - the administration of Lyndon Baines Johnson. A big reason for his success in getting his programs passed was his long years as minority or majority leader in the senate. He knew where a bunch of the bodies were buried - and had helped to bury one of them himself.
Obama does not have that kind of experience, a point you keep making. So, you can't have it both ways, Bing. Either the guy has sufficient experience to ramrod his "bolshevist" program down congress' throat - or he doesn't. If he doesn't, then what are you bellyaching about?
The worst that can happen is that the country will get sick of four years of "liberal" incompetence, just as it has gotten sick of eight years of "conservative" incompetence.
So his wife is bitter and hateful towards what she views as a racist nation. There is only so much that she can accomplish by wrapping her legs around his back. He would be president, not she. Once he pulls out his dipstick and showers, he is more or less free of her influence (until the next session in bed).
If you are indeed smart, by the way, ditch the "arch conservative" label. You are neither "arch" nor conservative in your views, and you shouldn't box yourself in a corner with stupid labels.
51 - Cindy D
Ruvy,
Did you get such a view of women because that's how your father treated your momma?
52 - Ruvy
That is not my view of women, Cindy, it is my realistic assessment of how much influence Michelle Obama can wield over her husband.
53 - El Bicho
"Uppity has absolutely no racial connotations in and of itself."
As has already been pointed out, that's not accurate and your denial is either dishonest or ignorant. PAr for the course for you.
"Trust me...when it comes to being angry, bitter, and resentful of others I don't have shit on this woman."
No trust is needed. All one needs to is go back through your comments to know that is another false assertion on your part.
"JOM was an idiot with nothing to offer plain and simple"
Oh, the irony. Thanks for the laugh.
54 - Dr Dreadful
On Arch's contention that Obama won't win any southern states: as I and others have opined, he'll likely be proven (again) wrong.
He's probably right that Obama won't take Florida, which seems to have been edging ever so slightly more to the right in recent elections, probably because Floridians want to play it safe and not end up as the black sheep of the family of States again.
But his blanket notion that the South doesn't vote leftwards is simply wrong. He clearly wasn't paying attention in November 2006, when Democrats replaced Republican Senate incumbents in Virginia and Missouri (I know, I know, arguably not a Southern state), came within a whisker of doing the same in Tennessee and held a seat in Maryland - all states which went for Bush in '04.
All those states are likely to go for Obama this time - as are, I think, both the Carolinas.
55 - bliffle
Archie over-estimates the power of southern racism. It exists but is not nearly as powerful as he hopes.
56 - Baritone
Ruvy,
Pretty vivid and unpleasant characterization of Michelle Obama. If we took stock in your and Arch's opinions of the woman, we would be obliged to conclude that she is one nasty assed, conniving and "uppity" bitch. Just as with Hillary, there are a great number of people who simply can't abide a strong, opinionated woman. If a guy stands up and speaks his mind the response is "He da man!" Let a woman do the same and she's a bitch. It also usually follows that this honkin' bitch has her husband pussy whipped. I wonder when it will come to be that supposedly "manly men" will get over themselves.
Again, in the particular case of Michelle Obama, Arch rakes her over the coals because she doesn't grovel in abject suplication in being thankful for her success in life. Does it follow that a wealthy, successful American man should NEVER criticize this country? Or is it only successful black women who should keep their mouths shut?
Michelle Obama came from very humble beginnings, and just as with Barack, made it to a top level law school through her own wits and her own efforts. If she can't be critical of this country, who can? Or is it just too fucking holy, too fucking great for anyone to have the gall to criticize it in any way (except of course the doings of any low life liberal?)
Arch,
I will say this: When your fingers are not betraying you with typos, you are a fairly effective and calculating writer. You are clever in your selection of particular words and phrases. Just as you state, I didn't specifically call you a racist, but you inferred it. The choices you make do infer a racist sentiment. But, then you cry foul if someone calls you on it.
If you don't intend that response, you should reconsider just how you write.
B-tone
57 - Arch Conservative
"Again, in the particular case of Michelle Obama, Arch rakes her over the coals because she doesn't grovel in abject suplication in being thankful for her success in life. Does it follow that a wealthy, successful American man should NEVER criticize this country? Or is it only successful black women who should keep their mouths shut?"
I didn't say that she should never critisize where criticism is due. However the woman makes over 300k a year, her husband is in serious contention for the presidency and from all that I can tell from what we see of her on tv and in the news she has a prettty damn good life. In spite of all this she can't bring herself to say anything positive about this nation? She has done nothing but exude disdain for this nation. I'm supposedly the opposite side of the coin...I see nothing but the positive right. That's not exactly true though. I'd be the first one to amdit that we have had in our past some very shameful things happen such as slavery, the internment of American citizens during WW2, the massacre of natives. However most of this stuff happened way before anyone who is lving today was even born. So what would be better for us to do as a nation, acknowledge these things, learn from them and move on, or dwell on them and pretend that they are somehow still the most influential and dominant factors in today's society?
Neither Michelle Obama nor I were alive during the time in which we had slavery but she is black and I'm white so does that mean that I personally owe her something? Am I responsible for the actions of people who lived 150 years before me just beacuse we have the same skin color.
"Michelle Obama came from very humble beginnings, and just as with Barack, made it to a top level law school through her own wits and her own efforts. If she can't be critical of this country, who can? "
Of course she can be critical but that's all she is. If she took a second to look at the rest of the world she'd realize that there are a good number of other nations where it would not have been possible for her to become so successful through her own efforts or otherwise. I don't think that occasionally acknowledging this and the opportunity that exists in this nation, whcih I have yet to hear or see her do publicly, makes one a one track nationalist sycophant.
58 - Clavos
B-tone,
There's a lot of truth in your first pargraph of #56, but it should be pointed out that it's unfair to Michelle Obama to compare her to Hillary; Hillary is WAY more than just "a strong, opinionated woman," which is a fair assessment of Obama.
In recent weeks, Hillary has shown us that she is a liar, that she is willing to use racism to achieve her goals, she's a backstabber, and a hypocrite.
She's also shown us the distinct possibility that she's not nearly as bright as most Americans had thought she was; she's made some monumentally stupid mistakes in this campaign.
And those are her good points :>)
59 - Arch Conservative
"The choices you make do infer a racist sentiment. But, then you cry foul if someone calls you on it."
They are inferred by people purposely looking to see racism in my posts because I do not share the same views on race that they themselves hold.
It's all the rage for white liberals to accuse any other white person who disagrees with them of being racist. But why don't you ask Michael Steele, Condaleeza Rice, Colin Powell etc who the real racists are. Ask them what names they have been called by people on the so called tolerant, inclusive left.
60 - Cindy D
"I didn't say that she should never critisize where criticism is due. However the woman makes over 300k a year, her husband is in serious contention for the presidency and from all that I can tell from what we see of her on tv and in the news she has a prettty damn good life."
So, criticism is not due if you have financially gained from our system? If YOU have a good life, you should be immune to empathizing with those who don't?
WTF are you saying Arch? The system is designed for the RICH and when they benefit, they are wrong for criticizing it?
61 - Cindy D
Arch,
I HAVE BENEFITED FROM OUR SYSTEM. So what? Am I wrong because I tutor children who haven't? Or because I come from a background where I easily might not have?
What the hell are you saying that makes any sense at all?
62 - Baritone
Clav,
I wasn't really comparing Michelle Obama with Hillary, it just so happens that they are currently the two most public and visible women in the country (at least till Britney rises again.)
I don't disagree with you about Hillary at this juncture. The wheels are coming off of her campaign and she is wildly grasping at straws. In the process she has increasingly embarrassed herself with statements that she probably wouldn't have made when she was the assumed nominee.
Yet, there are parallels between Michelle and Hillary as regards their public persona and how many people, men and women, react to them. There were people who rejected Clinton back in the early days of her husband's first term simply because she was not playing the expected role of the quietly supportive first lady, content with planning state dinners and organizing the annual Easter egg hunt.
Actually, I still think she's pretty bright. But she is also likely so numbingly tired that she doesn't know what she's saying half the time. My wife said that Obama recently said in a speech that he had been criss-crossing this nation and had visited 57 states. That's a remarkable feat.
As you may remember, I began responding to the election process this time around in Clinton's camp. I still feel she could be a very capable president. Nevertheless, I have moved my allegience to Obama, because, on balance, I feel that he will make a better president than Clinton, not to mention that the numbers say overwhelmingly that he is the people's choice amongst Democrats. The longer she continues in the race for the nomination, the more harm she does to herself, and more importantly, the more harm she may be inflicting on the party.
As I've said either here or in another thread recently, I am anxious to see the battle begin between Obama and McCain. As long as Hillary remains in contention, Obama and McCain cannot truly engage with each other head to head. Time's awaistin'!
B-tone
63 - Cindy D
Arch,
Michelle Obama is one up on me. Whereas, she has been proud of her country for the first time in her adult life. I, as a white woman, haven't been proud yet.
I might be proud if her husband stands for more than even he is able to admit. (And I am sure Michelle Obama wouldn't marry a low achiever.) Which is only another way of saying that B-tone's potential supposition is one I hope is true.
So, all of you who aren't well versed in reading, will by now have no idea what I am talking about, and that is as it should be.
Go back to watching American Idol, or whatever (it is you watch), there's nothing to see here.
64 - Cindy D
BTW, "In her adult life" speaks directly to the bill of goods she was (and we all were) sold in grammar school about our sanitized, superman-like government actions. Michelle Obama, is merely speaking about what any informed human being (black or white) should be recognizing by adulthood.
65 - Ruvy
You got so pissed off at my description of Michelle Obama and the limitations of her influence, that you all missed my points.
Cindy deflected it all. Nice job, Cindy....
First of all, I never called her an uppity bitch. I granted that she may well be bitter, and may well have a right to be. But that argument ties in with my other argument supporting Obama as a candidate - that he is not embittered by racial anger as he is essentially a white man in black skin who does not have the visceral connection to the American black experience that his wife does.
For your benefit, then, I'll repeat the rest of my argument below:
Bing,
You have legitimate ideological reasons to oppose Obama. But you do need to remember that America is not a parliamentary democracy like Canada, New Zealand or Australia (notice I didn't include that falafel dictatorship, Israel). In other words, merely because someone is elected president doesn't make his program or promises law. If his political party - or more to the point, his wing of his political party - controls both houses of your congress, then his programs will get passed.
That happened once in my lifetime that I remember - the administration of Lyndon Baines Johnson. A big reason for his success in getting his programs passed was his long years as minority or majority leader in the senate. He knew where a bunch of the bodies were buried - and had helped to bury one of them himself.
Obama does not have that kind of experience, a point you keep making. So, you can't have it both ways, Bing. Either the guy has sufficient experience to ramrod his "bolshevist" program down congress' throat - or he doesn't. If he doesn't, then what are you bellyaching about?
The worst that can happen is that the country will get sick of four years of "liberal" incompetence, just as it has gotten sick of eight years of "conservative" incompetence.
66 - Dr Dreadful
My wife said that Obama recently said in a speech that he had been criss-crossing this nation and had visited 57 states. That's a remarkable feat.
Remarkable, but not impossible. Some of the states he might have visited would include:
State of California
State of Texas
State of New York
State of Grace
State of Play
State of Mind
State of Confusion
...
67 - Jet in Columbus
Blacks will be afraid to vote for Obama in the name of being careful, not racist, because if he winds up getting elected and then blamed for Bush's tanked economy and we don't give him enough of a majority in congress to get out of Iraq or to actually get anything done, the REAL racists will say "See I warned you... they're all like that" and it'll be another century before another one gets elected. We just don't know what he'd really do under pressure NOT BECAUSE HE'S BLACK, but because he's inexperienced; but that won't stop the ignorant from blaming him because he's black.
Same with Hillary, if she gets into office they'll say, "See I told you so" and they'll never elect another woman.
We gotta be reeeeeeealy careful when we stray off voting some white guy in...
...but then you never hear someone say, "Bush is white-we better not elect any more white men"
Thank god some gay guy isn't running...
68 - Jet in Columbus
State of intoxication?
69 - Dr Dreadful
Yup, that'll do it.
Cheers...
But, aw, Jet, but, you're really trying to seventeenth-guess the jolly old American voting public above. You could really go crackers thinking about all the ramifications. Of course in a fair world, we'd never want to elect another white guy again after the Bush debacle...
70 - Clavos
Obama has remarkable feet???
How did you discover that, Doc?
71 - Dr Dreadful
Hello?
Doctor Dreadful?
I'm a doctor of chiropody...
...and, bearing HIPAA in mind, perhaps I should say no more.
;-)
72 - Jet in Columbus
Ah HA!!! You're the one that keeps taking Bing's foot out of his mouth... I KNEW it.
73 - Arch Conservative
"Michelle Obama is one up on me. Whereas, she has been proud of her country for the first time in her adult life. I, as a white woman, haven't been proud yet."
Your the one not making sens Cindy. What kind of person cannot find one single thing about this nation to be proud of?
If that's the way you feel....if you feel nothing but disdain and shame for the nation in which you live then why don't you go liver somewhere else.
I know we're all supposed to place nice and hold hands but when you make statements like you did in your last several posts I have to call you an idiot because that's what you are Cindy.
74 - Zedd
Dan,
"firm position that anyone silly and/or power hungry enough to run for the office of president should NEVER be elected.
My earlier comment may have been a tad frivolous, but referring to bad, nasty people as bitches really does get to me."
I completely understand your sentiments. I am startled at how much they reflect my views. From where I sit, those conclusions say quite a bit about your character. Thank you. And thank you for the substance.
On your loss, I felt your pain in the gut. I dread the time when I have to say goodbye to my baby girl. I hope that I wont loose her to such a tragedy. I am truly sorry.
75 - troll
Con - Uppity has absolutely no racial connotations in and of itself.
this is contradicted by fact: the term as you use it is of African American origin and its first written use was in Uncle Remus
do your homework