Obama...Kennedy...MLK Jr.

**Some Douche** · 02-20-2008, 05:13 PM

Originally Posted by MassLiberal

Get your facts straight. Obama has outspent hillary on superdelegates 2 to 1.

Haven't the Clintons been buttering the wallets of the super delegates for the past twenty years.

**Jer** · 02-20-2008, 05:21 PM

Originally Posted by RootSkier

I realize you are on her payroll and all, but let's be real.

You're seriously aking a Clinton supporter to "be real"? Seriously?

**MassLiberal** · 02-20-2008, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by RootSkier

Oh please. His willingness to throw Democrats under the bus?

He has done more to build the Democratic party than the Clinton's have, by a fucking longshot. I realize you are on her payroll and all, but let's be real.

You need to take of the obama blinders for a second and take a long look at his rhetoric. His campaign has been 100% about him, and not the Democratic party, in fact, if you look at his rhetoric, it blames democrats for the faults of the past 8 years as much as he does the republicans. He hasn't done anything to build party unity, all he has done is build loyalty to Obama. If you look at the numbers, Hillary is beating obama when it comes to D's who have cast their ballots in this primary. Obama has won mightily on the I's.

Obama supporters need to realize what they are getting with him. They will not be getting a nominee who can define differences between the parties. Obama seemingly only mentioned “Republicans” in the context of reaching out to them, while letting their leaders off the hook, as if the last seven years of graft, corruption, and circumvention of the Constitution were bipartisan in origin. Obama aimed his attack not against the party which controlled Washington for the better part of this decade and which controlled Congress for the better part of the 1990’s. Rather, he aimed his critique against both parties and Washington as a whole, as if Democrats are equally culpable for the country’s problems. If tonight is any guide, Democrats will be getting a nominee who runs just as often against them as Republicans. They will be getting a nominee who shows little stomach for holding the Republican Party in general and John McCain particularly accountable for what they have done to this country. His campaign seemingly has an easier time carving up a female Democratic opponent than they do a Republican standard-bearer who represents Bush’s third term, and who questions Obama’s fitness for office.

This nonpolitical message may be the message that Obama’s Millions want to hear, and we can all pray that they show up and vote for him and the Democratic Party in November to offset the wave of motivated far right forces aligned against him, as well as the Indies and Latinos that McCain will pull from him. My main question Senator Obama is this: with the nomination almost in hand now, when does your message shift from being all about you and the movement towards a call for a Democratic government to right the wrongs from years of GOP harm?

-soto

AlpineJunkie · 02-20-2008, 05:37 PM

Seriously, come on, when is someone going to finally tell me who Mark Twain really was?

**Jer** · 02-20-2008, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by AlpineJunkie

Seriously, come on, when is someone going to finally tell me who Mark Twain really was?

Shania's Father? Her husband?

**PNWbrit** · 02-20-2008, 05:49 PM

Masslib - with the greatest of respect....

I think you may have become too emotionally invested in your current campaign. That last post is bordering on the completely unhinged.

**The Dad** · 02-20-2008, 05:52 PM

Originally Posted by MassLiberal

willingness to throw democrats under the bus

I'm sorry, but coming from a Clintonite, this is seriously pot-kettle-black at best. Remember welfare "reform"? Does "don't ask, don't tell" ring a bell?

I held my nose and voted for a Clinton once -- in the general election in 1992. I hope that I won't have to do so again, because I don't like voting for Republicans.

Originally Posted by AlpineJunkie

Seriously, come on, when is someone going to finally tell me who Mark Twain really was?

We trust you to break out yer mad wikipedia skillz.

**Jer** · 02-20-2008, 05:56 PM

Originally Posted by MassLiberal

His campaign has been 100% about him, and not the Democratic party, in fact, if you look at his rhetoric, it blames democrats for the faults of the past 8 years as much as he does the republicans.

...and this is a bad thing??

**MassLiberal** · 02-20-2008, 06:00 PM

Originally Posted by alpinedad

I'm sorry, but coming from a Clintonite, this is seriously pot-kettle-black at best. Remember welfare "reform"? Does "don't ask, don't tell" ring a bell?

I held my nose and voted for a Clinton once -- in the general election in 1992. I hope that I won't have to do so again, because I don't like voting for Republicans.

We trust you to break out yer mad wikipedia skillz.

You must remember that the congress was held at the beginning of the current conservative movement. He had no choice but t go along with welfare reform if he wanted to get the funds for Americorp, schip and other programs that were, in my opinion, fantastic programs. The Democrats were in free fall, and exacerbating the situation by allowing gays to serve openly in the military would have been a disaster for Democrats.

**schindlerpiste** · 02-20-2008, 06:05 PM

Originally Posted by AlpineJunkie

Seriously, come on, when is someone going to finally tell me who Mark Twain really was?

Either Samuel Clemens ...or John Gault

**The Dad** · 02-20-2008, 06:07 PM

Originally Posted by MassLiberal

You must remember that the congress was held at the beginning of the current conservative movement. He had no choice but t go along with welfare reform if he wanted to get the funds for Americorp, schip and other programs that were, in my opinion, fantastic programs. The Democrats were in free fall, and exacerbating the situation by allowing gays to serve openly in the military would have been a disaster for Democrats.

Bullshit post-hoc rationalization. Clinton lost the fucking Congress in 1994. Clinton didn't "go along with welfare reform"; he promoted welfare reform starting at least in the 1992 general campaign, and IIRC, back in the primaries -- it was his signature issue to distinguish him and the other "new Democrats" from what Dean later called "the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party."

Clinton was a sell-out wannabe Republican fuckwit from the get-go.

So don't tell me that Obama is throwing us under the fucking bus. Clinton fucking drove that bus.

**MassLiberal** · 02-20-2008, 06:09 PM

Originally Posted by alpinedad

Bullshit post-hoc rationalization. Clinton lost the fucking Congress in 1994. Clinton didn't "go along with welfare reform"; he promoted welfare reform starting at least in the 1992 general campaign -- and IIRC, back in the primaries. Clinton was a sell-out wannabe Republican fuckwit from the get-go. So don't tell me that Obama is throwing us under the fucking bus.

And he lost congress because he was an inexperienced president who tried to be a bipartisan deal maker, just like obama.

**schindlerpiste** · 02-20-2008, 06:09 PM

I think that part of Obama's lure is the fact that he comes across as blaming both the dems. and reps. for the current situation confronted by this country. The partisanship by both sides has everyone reeling, and reaching out for unity. Obama is telling everyone that, as a dem., he wants to work with the reps. to unite the nation. People eat this shit up (although it will never happen). To counter this, McCain should choose Lieberman as a runningmate.

**Jer** · 02-20-2008, 06:10 PM

Originally Posted by MassLiberal

You must remember that the congress was held at the beginning of the current conservative movement. He had no choice but t go along with welfare reform if he wanted to get the funds for Americorp, schip and other programs that were, in my opinion, fantastic programs. The Democrats were in free fall, and exacerbating the situation by allowing gays to serve openly in the military would have been a disaster for Democrats.

Seriously - this is why so many people are sick of Hillary - the blame game. Bill had no choice but to push welfare reform and don't ask/don't tell through. And Hillary only voted for invading Iraq because mean old GWB tricked her. Obama doesn't play that game. Every speach I've heard from Hillary contains some remark about how badly the Bush admin has fucked up the country. Last time I checked, GWB wasn't on the ticket this Nov. When will she realise she isn't running against GWB? Guess it doesn't matter anyway - she's circling the drain. At least Obama looks forward - Hillary's stuck bitching about the past.

**RootSkier** · 02-20-2008, 06:12 PM

Wow. MassLib, you should take a serious step back before you forever damage your credibility.

Bill Clinton cost Democrats the House, Senate, and I believe 12 governorships.

Hillary Clinton is an unbelievably polarizing figure. Obama has brought out DROVES of new voters. Clinton is insulting them at the party's peril, and it's sickening.

And for fucks sake, Hillary is the "I" candidate, well Obama is the "we" candidate. Maybe you need to listen to some of their speeches side by side again. Get a grip, man!

**The Dad** · 02-20-2008, 06:16 PM

Originally Posted by MassLiberal

And he lost congress because he was an inexperienced president who tried to be a bipartisan deal maker, just like obama.

Bullshit.

He lost Congress because he was a Republicrat fuckwit who craved power for its own sake and to satisfy his big-hair fetish.

**MassLiberal** · 02-20-2008, 06:17 PM

Originally Posted by RootSkier

Wow. MassLib, you should take a serious step back before you forever damage your credibility.

Bill Clinton cost Democrats the House, Senate, and I believe 12 governorships.

Hillary Clinton is an unbelievably polarizing figure. Obama has brought out DROVES of new voters. Clinton is insulting them at the party's peril, and it's sickening.

Am I insulting you? Obama's supporters constantly engage in the same politics they so seemingly abhor, why go after me personally?

Bill Clinton didn't solely lose us Congress, democratic ineptness inside fucking congress lost it for us as well. You seem to forget that the fights of the 90's were brought upon us by the republicans, not the other way around. You would be well served to remember that in the General, as they aren't going to hold hands and sing kumbaya with obama as he prances to the presidency.

Alpine dad, you obviously have a personal bone to pick with the guy.

**Steven S. Dallas** · 02-20-2008, 06:18 PM

Originally Posted by My Pet Powder Goat

Yes, both men are black, and their word have moved grown men to tears

Don't forget my man Luther Vandross!

**RootSkier** · 02-20-2008, 06:23 PM

Bob Marley often makes my peepers moist.

**CUBUCK** · 02-20-2008, 06:24 PM

Originally Posted by RootSkier

Wow. MassLib, you should take a serious step back before you forever damage your credibility.

Bill Clinton cost Democrats the House, Senate, and I believe 12 governorships.

Hillary Clinton is an unbelievably polarizing figure. Obama has brought out DROVES of new voters. Clinton is insulting them at the party's peril, and it's sickening.

And for fucks sake, Hillary is the "I" candidate, well Obama is the "we" candidate. Maybe you need to listen to some of their speeches side by side again. Get a grip, man!

Sorry but the guy is an empty suit with a nice catchphrase. Saying yes we can doesn't make him the we candidate. When has this guy ever tried to reach across the aisle to get something accomplished. As much as I don't like john mcCain he is the only we candidate running for president and for better or worse that is why a number of repubs can't stand the guy.

**rideit** · 02-20-2008, 06:25 PM

Originally Posted by AlpineJunkie

Great, "White Trash Emporium", I'm sure that will be a very balanced and objective polling sample

I was building in a statistical favor for you:

Dumb-ass White Trash=Bush Supporters.

Yeesh, don't you know a gift when you see one?

**schindlerpiste** · 02-20-2008, 06:27 PM

Originally Posted by RootSkier

Bob Marley often makes my peepers moist.

or, atleast, bloodshot.

**Jer** · 02-20-2008, 06:27 PM

Originally Posted by RootSkier

Obama has brought out DROVES of new voters.

He may be a gay, but RootSkier speaks the truth. I voted for Obama yesterday, and everyone here knows what a GWB-loving Nazi Lifetime Republican I am.

**Jer** · 02-20-2008, 06:30 PM

Originally Posted by rideit

Dumb-ass White Trash=Bush Supporters.

Don't be so sure. I know quite a few dumb-ass white trashers who are big Clinton supporters (and registered Democrats). They'd probably support Obama too if he wasn't black. Sadly, bigotry trumps political affiliation for many people.

**Adolf Allerbush** · 02-20-2008, 06:34 PM

Originally Posted by schindlerpiste

I think that part of Obama's lure is the fact that he comes across as blaming both the dems. and reps. for the current situation confronted by this country. The partisanship by both sides has everyone reeling, and reaching out for unity. Obama is telling everyone that, as a dem., he wants to work with the reps. to unite the nation. People eat this shit up (although it will never happen). To counter this, McCain should choose Lieberman as a runningmate.

Lieberman as a runningmate for McCain would be a great idea if he wants to lose. I don't think Christian conservatives are going to vote for a Jewish guy...especially when there is a very good chance that McCain would croke in office.