Originally Posted by ibex

We can blame Clinton for the photo of Obama in native African garb, released and designed specifically to scare dumb, white hicks whom she courts as her base. We can blame Hillary Clinton for taking Obama's own words at that San Francisco gathering out of context and calling him an elitist. If that isn't total hypocrisy, I don't know what is. Overall, we can blame the Clintons for aping the tactics of Karl Rove. Her campaign thus far has sucked, relying heavily on pandering and bitch screaming. And to anybody pissed at me for not spacing my words more clearly, this single paragraph is shorter than any you would find in a decent book. Get off the drugs, take a reading comprehension class or get some better glasses.

Originally Posted by Veronica

With this theory then we should not expose the wrongdoings of the Bush Admin. THey will just take care of themselves. I do think it is the responsibility of the public to point out the wrong doing of Mrs. Clinton. As the media seems to have taken a break. I don't recall them showing:

1. Clinton purposely darkening Obama's image in her ad
2. That a Clinton surrogate was behind Wright appearance at the Press Club
3. Her spiritual mentor Doug Coe and "The Family"

And many more examples of the free pass she has received. Sorry but if these things are not discussed and pointed out they get swept under the carpet. People should have the facts in their face front and center when they are choosing Clinton over Obama.

Fire away Itsmeeee, we need more info!!

Originally Posted by CosmicRocker

hate to interrupt you mid bash, and i suppose you are too lazy to use the enter key -
but Obama's own words in SanFranciso were just that.

The media published them, in full - yet somehow that's Clinton's fault too?

YA YA "Karl Rove, bitch screaming" - more propaganda.
Have another glass of Obama Koolaid.

Originally Posted by ibex

Bullshit and you know it. They specifically omitted the beginning and end of that speech and focused on a small part of the middle. Go have another joint Cosmo. You're apparently so loaded you can't even lie straight.

Originally Posted by itsmeeeeeee

you know, i fully understand the point you are attempting to make. lord knows, i've heard it from you repeatedly and in a perfect world and another situation, it might carry a little weight. but as you so correctly point out - the electorate isn't very refined.

Originally Posted by itsmeeeeeee

so please also notice that you STILL refuse to concede the point i was making, and that andrew was clearly making - as to which candidate's official campaign reeked to high heaven... which candidate's official campaign used every negative, dirty trick in the book. let's NOT pretend there was no CLEAR difference between the two. i get the impression now, that now that things are finally coming to a head and this nomination process will be coming to a close, that you expect folks to just "be happy" - because that's pretending that there's been no lasting damage to repair, or that it will be easy to do that. because even when hillary concedes, the party will be very very damaged. and if you think all these hilllary supporters who are harassing super delegates now, are just going to turn around and hug obama, you're being downright silly. and if you think that there hasn't been lasting damage to race relations that have set this country back a great deal, you're in denial. AND I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO POINT YOUR FINGER AT THE PEOPLE WHO CALLED HER ON THESE THINGS AND SAY WE'RE ALSO RESPONSIBLE... but i don't buy that. no one put a gun to hillary's head and forced her to take the low road. and if she hadn't - no one would have had anything to be critical OF!

Originally Posted by itsmeeeeeee

i'm sorry, but you're refusal to acknowledge THOSE facts simply undermine all of your criticism of those who have been extremely critical of her dirty campaign of lies, distraction, racism and innuendo, and it will do little to heal the tremendous damage that's been inflicted. that's like saying, "gee, it's okay you beat me to a bloody pulp with a hammer! let's have lunch!" there's a time and place for pollyanna attitudes, but this isn't one of them.

Originally Posted by itsmeeeeeee

because no matter HOW you try to reframe the reality, calling a spade a spade is NOT negative, it's honesty.

exposing the lies and contradictions of a person is NOT negative - it's revealing truth.

basing an entire campaign and winning elections via appealing to the voter's lowest base qualities is NOT admirable, or defensible, it's reprehensible.

but, go ahead, knock yourself out continuing to take the supposed "high road".


but let's not try to make me (or anyone) feel BAD about VIGOROUSLY REJECTING someone who's demonstrated NO principles or moral compass.

Originally Posted by winthrop

There is no perfect world, and I never said there was. I was the one to point out the electorate is easily distracted, and until a majority puts the distractions aside and use their vote in their own interest, instead of in reaction to issues which will not impact them in any measurable way (gay marriage, flag pins, the Pledge of Allegiance, the quality of one candidate's voice at the higher registers) there will be no change.


My point was that Mr. Andrew's observation goes both ways. Hatred of each other will get us nowhere. Some supporters of Ms. Clinton may be petulant and determined to remove their noses to show their faces who is boss, as some of them have stated they will, just as some Obama supporters have stated they will, and the result will be President McCain with more Supreme Court appointments such as Scalia, a very possible unprovoked war against Iran, certainly escalation in Iraq, and a laissez faire approach to the mortgage and other financial crises, health insurance and the environment.


There is simply no other choice, as outlined above. There is no difference in petulantly declaring "let's have more of Bush 2 with McCain and then run Hillary again" and petulantly declaring "let's have more of Bush 2 with McCain and then run Obama again". We will have to repair the damage, get over our hurt feelings and think more about the good of the country than our individual egos.
I have no argument with your daily posts of Clinton criticism, since they are for the most part legitimate issues (unlike those threads about Ms. Clinton's "shrillness", wardrobe, and testicle bashing nature, which would be denounced as sexist rants were they about any other female politician), I simply prefer those like Curator's recent contributions which focus on the real enemy in this battle, John McCain and the Republican Bush Cult. I do wish you would concentrate on Mr. Obama's traits and policies, but I understand you have no intention of doing so.
My contribution to this thread was to point out Mr. Andrew's own words. If he did not mean them as I presented them, that renders them unfortunately ironic.


Reject them all you like, but in the end we are presented with a question. Do we insist on that perfect world you previously acknowledged does not exist or do we look at what our true options are? I gladly support Mr. Obama, and not only if it will keep those of you concentrating on what Mr. Andrew said was unnecessary in the fold and Mr. McCain out of the White House. But he must be kept out of the White House, whether or not we have to hold our noses while making sure of it.

Originally Posted by CosmicRocker

I read the whole statement, although the media play the end.
What does it change by reading the whole statement?

Originally Posted by ibex

Nice dodge but not terribly artful. Obama gives the reasons for their bitterness, mainly a lack of job opportunities and the seeming indifference of the political class to the problems of the economically hard pressed in small town America. These people do cling to guns, religion and xenophobia and thus make it more difficult for a Black candidate to get his message accross. The MSM left out the entire speech and focused on a little more than a dozen words, particularly 'bitter" because McSame and Shrillary ran with it. You didn't read all his words, you lapped up what you were told to. You're either dishonest or just plain dense.