HAHAHAHAHAHA.

What a crock.

Desperation is a stinky cologne.

BREAKING NEWS..........................
...........

NEWS ALERT~~~~~~~~~~~NEWS ALERT





Hillary Clinton pantsuit stolen along with her clip on earrings shaped like Wine Corks.

A 365 lb. male was arrested in Florida walking along Alligator Alley mumbling something about "Bill something and his lucky cigar" wearing the earrings and sniffing the crotch of the pantsuit.


Film at 11.

Ha!

Experiment in self-proving threads successful!

Thank you for your participation.

The Management

Experiment in self-proving threads successful!

No, we're just making fun of you.

The humor resides in seeing liberals adopt Reichwing tactics which have little basis in fact or semblance of rationality.

Mainly their hatred is the equivalent of a cognitive fart in an otherwise rational human being.

"Foolish men mistake transitory semblance for eternal fact" (Thomas Carlyle)

Corky - we are simply posting what is fact, Hillary would give the Whitehouse to the republicans, pure and simple, wanna go against those odds? Wanna post SOMETHING, you know SOMETHING positive about your candidate that would get anyone other than hard cord democrats to vote for her?

Waiting.

Fact is Corky that Hillary is the most polarizing candidate on the planet, you could put up Mighty Mouse up against her and they would win 90% of the vote. Hillary is a certain win to the Repubs..., you wanno go there?

The humor resides in seeing liberals adopt Reichwing tactics

Pot. Kettle. Black.

If you think people for good reason hate her now, wait until she becomes Commander in Chiefette.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Posted by ness_gadol






I feel as if I'm on usenet in the old days.

anon.penet.fi

wanker

Nessie

You don't know how much better it makes me feel to know that Lil' Britney is on your side.


Criticism I have made is based in fact and I'll be glad to defend anything (most anything) I have said that you disagree with.

But just because you disagree with an argument doesnt make it incorrect. If you are discontent with my arguments, wait'll you see what the GOP has in store for you.


Patrick Buchanan said today that, "Obama will be fresh meat thrown on the GOP table like they haven't seen since George McGovern. He might lose 40 or more states. The GOP smear machine OPs Research with 7 mos work will eat him alive."

Buchanan, at the least, knows what it is like to have the GOP go after someone.

The humor resides in seeing liberals adopt Reichwing tactics which have little basis in fact or semblance of rationality.

I laughed a while at this.

Corky, the slash and burn of character assassination with outright lying on the forefront, whines about people who see his candidate for the truth she is, that's just laughable.

Corky is showing the same moral standing as his candidate, very little, and what is there is convolutedly slanted for justification of behavior.

So wait cork the only reason you like her is because she can beat the GOP and Obama can't? Well I know thats a pretty compelling reason to chose a candidate. I mean who cares if she leads where we want to go, who cares if she even leads at all. As long as she can win thats what is really important.

Patrick Buchanan hates Jews and any color other than white.

Besides, I have always liked Obama. I said in January that it would be worth having him as President if only for the effect it might have on our image in the world to have him as President.

I supported Bill Bradley, Paul Tsongas, Gary Hart... all the insurgent lefties back to Jesse Jackson to my first vote for George McGovern to Bobby Kennedy before that.

Obama is different in that he has a built-in vote with the black community and more charisma that attracts more of the young, and might even get some of them to actually vote in the fall.

He might even win. But that is a ..... roll of the dice. One I'm not willing to take when we can have both.

Clinton/Obama 08!!
"16 Years is Better Than Eight!" (tm)

Who woulda thought this thread would bring out the Haters, lmfao!!?


-outright lying on the forefront

Give me an example, bitch.

-I mean who cares if she leads where we want to go, who cares if she even leads at all. As long as she can win that's what is really important

She is a Liberal Democrat. Not the Numero Uno Liberal like Big O, but at #16, pretty damn liberal. There isn't 5 cents worth of difference in their policies as far as the American people are concerned.

Remember, this is the electorate that voted for GW, twice.

The difference is that she can do what Gore and Kerry could not do, hold the numbers of women and Latinos needed to win in November, which is where those two races failed.

All of the paranoia and Hilary hating is just people talking with their penis instead of their brain.

You too, Brit-ney.

Dont: quoting the freeper on Democrats is akin to qoting Hitler on kosher cooking.

"I supported Bill Bradley, Paul Tsongas, Gary Hart... all the insurgent lefties back to Jesse Jackson to my first vote for George McGovern to Bobby Kennedy before that."

Pretty good track record, Corky. I not only voted for McGovern, but worked in his campaign. No one more decent and honorable than George McGovern has ever run for President.

I don't hate her. I simply love my country more and prefer not to have her socialistic agenda shoved down its throat.

-No one more decent and honorable than George McGovern has ever run for President.

Absolutely!!

And not many ever raised our spirits in the Dem Primary more, nor lost as badly in the general election.

Which is why we have SuperDelegates now.

Fool me once shame on... er.. you , but twice is nice unless it's shame on me." - GW

I simply love my country more and prefer not to have her socialistic agenda shoved down its throat.

So with McCain, we'll have a fascist agenda shoved down our throats. Either one is a disaster.

"And not many ever raised our spirits in the Dem Primary more, nor lost as badly in the general election."

It's ok. McGovern fought the good fight. Better to go down standing on principle, than sell out to the corporate masters.

It is my opinion that, contrary to popular belief, HRC is a true blue liberal, moreso than Billy ever thought about being, and probably smarter and more competent than even he, though admittedly not as charming. But then I care more about policy than personality, as I am really a Dennis K fan.

You don't work in a dirty system without getting dirty, but she is not a corporate whore, only a little slutty, and has gone on record promising to sign legislation for public financing.

Corky, you need to hope she can learn to be more charming than Bill and quick. Bill was *never* able to convince 50% of the American voting public to vote for him. To win (if there is no Perot) she's going to have to.

I'll vote for her if nominated. I love Ruth Bader Ginsberg too much not to. But, don't expect me to apologize/minimize/deflect for the next scandal to my friends. I did that too many times for the Clintons (and half the seeming improprieties were hers).

Obviously the Pro-Israel-Zionists are supporting Hilliary and no doubt for a big "quid pro quo",otherwise why would they even bother!
But then the Clintons were very accomodating to like types such as the Israeli Billionaire Marc Rich,who deftly secured a Presidential Pardon for his nummerous and nefarious crimes from ol'Bubba Boy Clinton!

Also as far as labels go talk show host Bill Maher said on CNN's Larry King that he was "Anti Catholic" but this opinion/denouncement doesn't "prove" the opposite that Catholicism was all good and never instigated or committed any crimes.
Mr.Fish on the other hand is trying to extrapolate and pronounce that anybody who is Anti-Hilliary really means that Hilliary is actually saintly and without blemish - Fish proclaims the same self serving,bone-headed conclusion for Zionism too I guess!

I DON`T UNDERSTAND WHY DO PEOPLE WANT TO VOTE FOR OBAMA.I CAN`T . IF I VOTE FOR OBAMA, AND THINGS WON`T CHANGE FOR THE BETTER THEN I `LL HAVE NO ONE TO COMPLAINT BUT MYSELF BECAUSE THE GUY DOESN`T HAVE ANY EXPERIENCE RUNNING THE GOVERMENT{LOCAL,STATE OR FEDERAL}.HE JUST SAY CHANGE,CHANGE,CHANGE........TH
E CLINTONS IS DIFFERENT.THEY RAN THE COUNTRY AND WE HAD A GOOD TIME BEFORE.

What? I didn't hear you.

The Clintons "is" different? They ran the country?
Wow!

I do not hate the woman, in fact there is a part of me that has sympathy for her.

I just think that her ideas for the country are dangerous.

She's a chameleon and that is exactly the problem. THAT'S what people hate about her. She is ALL of those things attributed to her and that adds up to her being a souless, programmable, marketable robot. That's what she is. A Fake, Phony Fraud.

And I really don't want to see the new Bill anywhere near that White House, either.

Democrats, please support Obama, he's the only chance we have of keping the White House away from the Republicans. And I think he's actually not too terrible, either.

There's a good column to be written in how Hillary can't win with some people -- act tough and she's shrill, act emotional and she's fake.

But his column unfairly smears legitimate critics of Hillary Clinton by grouping them with the deranged fringe crowd who thinks she's a serial murderer. The comparison to anti-Semitism is the icing on the cake.

It is my opinion that, contrary to popular belief, HRC is a true blue liberal, moreso than Billy ever thought about being, and probably smarter and more competent than even he, though admittedly not as charming.

That's my take on her too. I don't think Clinton's a bad candidate at all, but the historic opportunity offered to us by Obama should be seized. Getting behind the polarization of the Bush, Clinton, Bush years is important.

Rcade

It is too late for that. The republicans will never accept a democrat as President. They will attack all decisions every day for the entire Presidency. The attacked Clinton every day of his Presidency, and even before he was sworn in. Every day. Every decision. Day after day. There was not one day that they did not attack him--his wife--or his child. The same will happen with Hillary or Obama. The United States is not united anymore. It is too late for that.

Be well.

Most hardcore Hillary haters are afraid to look in a mirror, knowing that the horrid characteristics they attribute to her can be seen in their own reflections.

BELLA:

". . . please support Obama, he's the only chance we have of keeping the White House away from the Republicans."

Until when? 2012?

That's the part I'm worried about.

This Presidency is important for the USSC judges to be appointed. All other policy decisions will be of secondary importance to the country.

Be well.

"please support Obama, he's the only chance we have of keeping the White House away from the Republicans."

This bothers me.

Shouldn't you have said "keeping the White House away from the incompetent and self serving? After all, that's been the real problem the past several years...not the party itself.

This country will NOT improve until people vote for what's right...not for a party.

Lisa is correct.

It's not "Republicans" per se. It's the neo-cons who've done their best to ruin the country. The term "republican" unfortunately got swept up in the hoop-la.

There's not a doubt in my mind that the D.C. blood sport will crush a first term Obama into a broken and disillusioned man.

I wish he could put his pride behind him and join with a Clinton/Obama ticket and get himself some experience along with what it means to carry the mantel of the United States of America.

I'd like to see Clinton in 2008 and 2012.

Then I'd like to see Obama in 2016 and 2020.

Unfortunately, I have to agree with Buffalo Bob, the psychotic portion of the Republican Party have no limitations to the level of attack they will wage against whoever is the Democratic nominee and hopefully president. Bill Clinton was sort of a uniquely strong person who was able to deal with it. Hillary may share that strength, she has definitely endured all these years and still comes back smiling. Barack is simply un unknown quantity. He may be able to turn the Psychos' vitriol against them or he may be crushed by it. I know one thing though, the NONSENSE about reuniting the country, bipartisanship, etc. won't change the reality of the class war we aren engaged in. Our opposition is ruthless and will not put the welfare of the nation ahead of their own agenda. We will need an incredibly strong person to lead the charge against them.

While I was (and only a bit now) a Clinton fan I do understand the dislike of the Clintons. They play the political game and they play it well. They also give no pretenses that it is any more than a game. It upsets the idealistic right wing since they are...idealistic. Conservatives would rather have someone pretend to have moral direction but have no morals and are incompetent fools, BUSH. But to have a competent, albeit shallow, Clinton is apostacy to them. Sort of laughs in their idealistic faces.

And I also didn't care for Hillary messing around in the White House with her health care and Travelgate adventures. She was not elected nor appointed. She should have just shut up. But this doesn't come close to the horrors of Cheney/Bush/Gonzalez destroying the constitution.

They play the political game and they play it well.

Sounds more like an endorsement than a critique.

We should have both of them renditioned for the good of the country.

But it will be enough if those weasels lose.

Ozark,

W and Reagan were both complete bullshit players. Worse than Clinton. They looked good to conservatives because they spend on military, lower taxes (raise debt, lower dollar), against abortion, love guns, against Gays and praise Jesus. After they do these things the conservatives turn a blind eye to all of their other bullshit.

""We should have both of them renditioned for the good of the country.""

Interesting that a Clinton hater would mention a practice so unAmerican. Sort of gives a glimpse into the morality of Clinton haters.

Not me Furio, I was no fan of Reagan and Bush should be impeached, but the Clintons are in the same mold.

But I'm glad to see that rCade didn't let little corky's blog linger long on the back page. They're both nancy peloosy boys. Maybe there's something in the water down in Florida that causes chemical castration. Or maybe they were born without a pair, who knows.

"I was no fan of Reagan and Bush should be impeached, but the Clintons are in the same mold."

Riiight.
Balanced budge
Surplus
Health Care
Etc. Etc.

If you think Reagan and Bush are similar to either Clinton I suggest you don't have a clue.

Stupid generalizations like that are what enable lunatics like Bush and Reagan to get elected. Most voters had to vote against their own interests to elect them. Both made life harder for most of their own supporters.

a glimpse into the morality

Oh, cry me a river uber woman. Neither of the Clintons have any morals.

The lesbians have spewing their hate for 30+ years. That they have some standing in the Democratic Party only demonstrates the PC bigotry that has fractured its politics.

Face it Danni you don't want equality, you want preference based on your "status" as woman, subset homosexual.

So you vote for Clinton. What a surprise.

-who knows

What's funny is who's interested.

- historic opportunity offered to us by Obama should be seized.

If he truly had a better chance of winning, and if one truly did not mind a novice CinC, and if we don't think we could have it all with a "Dream Ticket", then maybe we should roll the dice.

I remain unconvinced of any of that, though.

I suggest you don't have a clue.

I didn't have to buy one if that's what you mean.

Clinton got lucky on the economy. Interest rates were dropping, tech markets surged, and while America was positioned to rebound Bubba pushed NAFTA through Congress.

Why? Because the Clintons have signed on the NAU and globalization. If you're a socialist it sounds good.

The Clintons are just a different flavor of poison.

You don't need two eyes to see that.

"I supported Bill Bradley, Paul Tsongas, Gary Hart... all the insurgent lefties back to Jesse Jackson to my first vote for George McGovern to Bobby Kennedy before that."



Posted by Bill_OReilly at 2008-02-04 10:02 PM |

and don't forget: Joseph Stalin, Chairman Mao, Pol Pot, all the insurgent lefties back to Ho Chi Minh to his first love Che Guevara to Nicolae Ceausescu before that.

But I'm glad to see that rCade didn't let little corky's blog linger long on the back page. They're both nancy peloosy boys. Maybe there's something in the water down in Florida that causes chemical castration.

What the hell is that supposed to mean? I linked to Fish's piece because it was likely to provoke discussion, not because I endorsed his argument. I've linked a wide range of pro-Obama, pro-Hillary, anti-Obama and anti-Hillary opinion views.

I don't know how you could have been here so long and decided that the stuff on the front page reflects my personal views. In order for that to be true, I'd have to be schizophrenic.

Clinton had the fall of Russia and the boom of new post communism markets.

Clinton was not a bad president. He didn't fuck anything up and did some good although belatedly like Ireland and Kosovo.

I give him a "6" on a 1 to 10 scale.

Ozarkannie

"The Clintons are just a different flavor of poison.

You don't need two eyes to see that."

Posted by OzarkAggie at 2008-02-05 09:50 A

Your views of Bush don't give you much credilbility in the vision department.

Be well.

Your views of Bush don't give you much credilbility [sic] in the vision department.

Be well.

Posted by Buffalo_Bob

You a LIAR b00b. Just yesterday ytou tried to say that I referred to a biblical god when I'd done no such thing. You fake blog posts, forge other people's names to them, and you are a degenerate coward.

Post something that I said about Bush. Take out of co0ntext you fucking liar and you still won't prove your point.

Notice how any criticism of the Clintons automatically labels you a Republican or a conservative or a Bush supporter.

Maybe some of us don't like scum. I guess some of you like to suck scum. That seems to be the main difference.

In order for that to be true, I'd have to be schizophrenic.

Posted by rcade

And when we all know the diagnosis is manic depressive.

Polls are all over the place. There is one showing Obama 14 ahead in CA, another with Clinton 10 ahead there.

They will split the delegates across the country pretty evenly it looks like.

It also looks like this will be decided by Super Delegates, who will be looking at the popular vote number and who won their state.

No one more decent and honorable than George McGovern has ever run for President.

Posted by Bill_OReilly



Ditto that.

""The lesbians have spewing their hate for 30+ years. That they have some standing in the Democratic Party only demonstrates the PC bigotry that has fractured its politics.""

Some posters live up to the stereotypes that their names imply.

Is it just me or does anyone else want to see hillary's tits?

"Is it just me or does anyone else want to see hillary's tits?"

I'm pretty sure you stand alone on that one.

How is it irrational to strongly dislike someone who constantly tells obvious, patronizing lies to your face?

"Is it just me or does anyone else want to see hillary's tits?"

Ever see "Raiders of the Lost Ark"? Enough said.

She is a gigabitch

Is it just me or does anyone else want to see hillary's tits?

Posted by retnluvnit

I saw her boob on CNN.
Bill was clarifying one of her policies.

"Is it just me or does anyone else want to see hillary's tits?"

It's just you.

"This country will NOT improve until people vote for what's right...not for a party."
Posted by Lisa


DAMMIT LISA - you couldn't be more rigyt about something. You're one of the clear-eyed ones, I think.

My way of agreeing with your above assertion:

McCain/Obama '08. This is the best chance for
1. a clear mandate, not a Florida-style squeaker
2. a TRUE reach across the aisle - a poke in the eye of gross partisanship
3. electing the most experienced as Pres
4. electing the most idealistic as VP
5. not perfect, but enough combined horsepower to unite and mobilize America

Pipe dream? Yeah. But it could happen.

"DAMMIT LISA - you couldn't be more rigyt about something. You're one of the clear-eyed ones, I think."

Thank you sir.

"My way of agreeing with your above assertion:

McCain/Obama '08. This is the best chance for
1. a clear mandate, not a Florida-style squeaker
2. a TRUE reach across the aisle - a poke in the eye of gross partisanship
3. electing the most experienced as Pres
4. electing the most idealistic as VP
5. not perfect, but enough combined horsepower to unite and mobilize America"

I agree with all but number 3. Only those who are up for a second term have actually had ANY experience of being a president. I believe that it's more important to surround yourself with those who are knowledgable in the areas you assign them, have an open mind about what they are telling you, examine every avenue and then base your actions on that.

"Pipe dream? Yeah. But it could happen."

I hate partisanship. I think it tends to make people narrow minded at best, close minded..worst case. I think their focus of importance is always on their party and taken off of our country where it should be.

I pray that America is smart this time around.

"McCain/Obama '08. This is the best chance for"

Lisa,

This would never help anything. Let me explain. There is a President and there is a Vice Bitch. Cheney was an anamoly.

This would never help anything. Let me explain. There is a President and there is a Vice Bitch. Cheney was an anamoly.
Posted by furio


Furio - your analysis of the Veep position, though charmingly cynical in a cigarette-waving, Eastern-European kind of way, is wrong. Remember when George Bush The First got elected?

"Is it just me or does anyone else want to see hillary's tits?"
It's just you.
Posted by Zatoichi


...and Charlie Manson and Quagmire from Family Guy...

The Clinton Chronicles will sink hillary's dream of living again in lavish style at our expense. I would like to see Obama win and pick hillary as his VP, A smart investor could make millions off a life insurance policy that would probably pay off in the first six months of his reign, And with a little luck she would be connected with the murder and the Country would win a double.

Hillary Clinton has been telling America that she is the most qualified candidate for president based on her 'record,' which she says includes her eight years in the White House as First Lady - or 'co-president' - and her seven years in the Senate.

Here is a reminder of what that record includes:

- As First Lady, Hillary assumed authority over Health Care Reform, a process that cost the taxpayers over $13 million. She told both Bill Bradley and Patrick Moynihan, key votes needed to pass her legislation, that she would 'demonize' anyone who opposed it. But it was opposed; she couldn't even get it to a vote in a Congress controlled by her own party. (And in the next election, her party lost control of both the House and Senate.)

- Hillary assumed authority over selecting a female Attorney General. Her first two recommendations, Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood, were forced to withdraw their names from consideration. She then chose Janet Reno. Janet Reno has since been described by Bill himself as 'my worst mistake.'

- Hillary recommended Lani Guanier for head of the Civil Rights Commission. When Guanier's radical views became known, her name had to be withdrawn.

- Hillary recommended her former law partners, Web Hubbell, Vince Foster, and William Kennedy for positions in the Justice Department, White House staff, and the Treasury, respectively. Hubbell was later imprisoned, Foster committed suicide, and Kennedy was forced to resign.

- Hillary also recommended a close friend of the Clintons, Craig Livingstone, for the position of director of White House security. When Livingstone was investigated for the improper access of up to 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies ("Filegate") and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, both Hillary and her husband denied knowing him. FBI agent Dennis Sculimbrene confirmed in a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing in 1996, both the drug use and Hillary's involvement in hiring Livingstone. After that, the FBI closed its White House Liaison Office, after serving seven presidents for over thirty years.

- In order to open "slots" in the White House for her friends the Thomasons (to whom millions of dollars in travel contracts could be awarded), Hillary had the entire staff of the White House Travel Office fired; they were reported to the FBI for 'gross mismanagement' and their reputations ruined. After a thirty-month investigation, only one, Billy Dale, was charged with a crime - mixing personal money with White House funds when he cashed checks. The jury acquitted him in less than two hours.

- Another of Hillary's assumed duties was directing the 'bimbo eruption squad' and scandal defense:

---- She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit.

---- She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor. After $80 million dollars of taxpayer money was spent, Starr's investigation led to Monica Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later admitting his affairs.

---- Then they had to settle with Paula Jones after all.

---- And Bill lost his law license for lying to the grand jury

---- And Bill was impeached by the House.

---- And Hillary almost got herself indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice (she avoided it mostly because she repeated, 'I do not recall,' 'I have no recollection,' and 'I don't know' 56 times under oath).

- Hillary wrote 'It Takes a Village,' demonstrating her Socialist viewpoint.

- Hillary decided to seek election to the Senate in a state she had never lived in. Her husband pardoned FALN terrorists in order to get Latino support and the New Square Hassidim to get Jewish support. Hillary also had Bill pardon her brother's clients, for a small fee, to get financial support.

- Then Hillary left the White House, but later had to return $200,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork she had stolen.

- In the campaign for the Senate, Hillary played the 'woman card' by portraying her opponent (Lazio) as a bully picking on her.

- Hillary's husband further protected her by asking the National Archives to withhold from the public until 2012 many records of their time in the White House, including much of Hillary's correspondence and her calendars. (There are ongoing lawsuits to force the release of those records.)

- As the junior Senator from New York, Hillary has passed no major legislation. She has deferred to the senior Senator (Schumer) to tend to the needs of New Yorkers, even on the hot issue of medical problems of workers involved in the cleanup of Ground Zero after 9/11.

- Hillary's one notable vote; supporting the plan to invade Iraq, she has since disavowed.

Quite a resume'. Sounds more like an organized crime family's rap sheet.

And SHE wants to be The President of the United States........

she's a lying piece of trash, but i don't HATE her - i, like most conservatives just wish she'd fade away.

she has NOTHING to offer this country but "change" - no thanks, i'm on black cohosh for that.

I think pretending that Hillary hasn't given us good reason to dislike her is irrational. She's a liar with a voting record that reads like a horror novel.

Wow. Dig the level of hatred spewing forth for a centrist lady whose agenda is anything but revolutionary, anything but "socialist." The corporations already realize that she's the best chance they have for absolutely nothing happening to rock their boat until 2016. Apparently national hatred of the vagina exceeds even the national hatred for melanin on the skin.

Personally, I back Obama for now but I'll proudly wear either a BO or an HC button when the time comes. Remember also that the main issue on which they compete is which one is the more likely to help depose the abysmal regime that has run our lives since 2000.

"Apparently national hatred of the vagina exceeds even the national hatred for melanin on the skin."

Oh look, someone can't make a legitimate point and can't play the race card so he invented the "vagina card".

Personally, I back Obama for now but I'll proudly wear either a BO or an HC button when the time comes.

I certainly don't blame anyone for voting for Hillary considering the field.

......but I wouldn't be "proud" about it.

What a ridiculus pandering article for Hillary, it tells me Fish is not too bright and has been given money to write this.

Hillary is nothing but a lying cheat, thief, killer, and about anything else that comes from the low end of any society.

White water doesn't ring loud and clear then you're too dumb and ignorant to even grasp prudent rational leadership.

Insider trading.

Associates deaths.

Missing papers.

And just think, all this corrupt activity is known and still idiots ignore and will vote for her. I put these people in the class of those who VOTE FOR BUSH knowing what they'll get.

That's kind of explains it all.

And just think, all this corrupt activity is known and still idiots ignore and will vote for her. I put these people in the class of those who VOTE FOR BUSH knowing what they'll get.

Money,

It doesn't happen often but I totally agree with you. It amazes me that anybody would vote for Hillary after they have bitched and moaned for the last 8 years KNOWING they are going to get the same thing. I'm not especially worried about Hillary as POTUS and I understand why someone might vote for her but it is difficult to understand liberals hwo have bitched and moaned about wanting change and then voting for her.

I don't think Obama is the 2nd coming or anything like that but I can't see how you can support Hillary knowing what we know about her.

The polls, however, were especially unloving last week. Only 35% of Americans surveyed in a TIME/CNN poll think they can trust Bill Clinton, down from 40% in January. More than half of those polled think the Clintons are hiding something about Whitewater, and a third think they broke the law. Even the financial markets decided they didn't like what they saw: on Thursday the bond market shuddered with rumors about new Whitewater bombshells, prompting investors around the world to dump their U.S. Treasury bonds and buy gold.

Article from back when people seem to forget what Hillary was really like.

Wake up people!!!!

I'm a woman in a predominantly male field, and I see this all the time. I used to be shocked when I met other women I had heard a lot about -- based on the whispering campaigns, I expected shrill, antisocial harridans. Instead they were invariably charming, friendly and incredibly smart. To this day, I don't get it, but it's an ugly fact of life.

Clearly, Hillary and her advisors have calculated that for a woman to be elected in this country, she's got to come across as just as tough as the guys. And maybe they're right. But so far, Hillary is not getting men with this strategy, and women feel written off. --Dontmentionit

I think the real issue is that to be successful in high-pressure, high-powered positions, ANYONE has to BE tough. Many people hold women to different standards, though -- they damn them for precisely the toughness that's required for the job.

How is it irrational to strongly dislike someone who constantly tells obvious, patronizing lies to your face? -- Sully

Not irrational at all, but what do Bush, Cheney, Rove and Rumsfeld have to do with this thread?

11.)She might (and that's a risky might) win the GE (although I don't know how she will pull off Florida and Ohio to be honest) but I don't see any equation where she will unite the country behind her. She has had 4 years of incumbency for the nomination and she can't even unite the Democratic party behind her. She has polled in the high 30's to the 40's since the straw polls of the primaries of 2004. She hasn't budged the needle out of the 40's her whole candidacy. She's ALWAYS been the odds on favorite to win this according to the MSM that has been coronating her for years. However, everytime someone drops out, most of the votes goes to who is left and not to her. She has a staunch core but she can't seem to recruit more. She was supposed to be coronated by now, but she's really just exposed the huge rift in our party. There's a vast RW conspiracy against her but there's also a vast LW conspiracy against her too. And that's because people don't like her, for whatever reason.

12.) I oppose Dynasty Politics. They are un-American and the framers of the country wanted to avoid 30 years of rule by 2 families.

13.) We don't need a "Bill Clinton" Co-presidency and I think his performance in the primaries are indicative he has ideas of his own.

14.) I don't like "politics as usual". To me, it's personal. I don't think the Clintons meet my threshold for consistent ethical behavior. They baited Obama on race, which considering how black people have been abused in this country for centuries, it absolutely not tolerable.

15.) She lacks vision. Her campaign is a script that she has rehearsed and memorized. It's poll tested for the primaries. If she gets past Obama, wait for the hard right turn. If she gets past McCain I'm not even sure what kind of President she will be, only the polls will tell.

16.) The arc of her life outside of shrewd pursuit of power seems to deal with charities, foundations, and organizations that benefit children. This is noble. However, it's her brand of pursuit of power that disenfranchises the powerless in the first place.

17.) I don't think she has the moral will and the force of charisma to galvanize the population for health reform. I fear we will just end up with a watered down subsidy for the private insurance companies (just like our current Medicare Part D). Respectable liberal publications are on record stating that was part of the problem back in 1993.

18.) Clinton is more likely to get Hawkish because she has the "most to prove". This was proven by her IWR vote and her Kyl Lieberman vote. One good terrorist attack and we will be back to doing assinine bullshit again in the name of the "war on terror"?

19.) She will be running for 2012 "on day one". Wait for it. Mark Penn will see to it. How do you think that will cloud her judgement on Iraq, Health reform, and other huge issues of the day?

20.) I don't think she is the best candidate for down-ticket dems. Actually, she is the worst. If not in 2008, remember 2010 is around the corner. Anyone remember what happened in 1994 after she screwed up health reform?

21.) Her "35 years of experience" talking point is hard to believe, it's laughable actually. She does have a lot of experience. However, none of it is executive experience, except for her failed health plan foray. She'd be more honest to say "I have more experience" than Obama and leave it at that. Really, she's just saying she's older than Obama, I can't refute that. And to be honest, Obama is light on executive experience as well. However, she will have a hard time that once she's made "experience" the cornerstone of her candidacy to face McCain. Let's face it, he's got magnitudes greater relative experience than her. That's just a dog that won't hunt for her in the GE. It will force her back to the "change" talking point - but seen #22 for more on this.

22.) Clinton is not an agent of change. Actually, McCain is more deserving of the title. He's sold out to Bush and the Bush Republicans in order to get the nomination. However, in his real life as a Senator, he's been on the forefront of changing goverment in terms of campaign finance and decreasing the quid pro quo crony politics of earmarking and the like. She's going to have a hard time selling she's the agent of change when she refuses to stand up against lobbyists and earmarking abuse.
23.) She says "I" instead of "we" too much. It's a rhetoric thing but I think it's telling about why she's running and who she's running for.

24.) She has a great chance to move feminist politics forward. It could backfire. I don't know. I think on balance it will be a good thing for women. There's a risk. But what am I going to tell my daughters? - "you can grow up to be President as long as you are married to a former President, publicly suffer his sexual affairs, and run on his record of a bubble economy which was partly ran on easy credit and a tech boom"!?!

25.) And finally, I just don't like her. She rubs me the wrong way.

P.S. Mandating the purchase of health insurance from private companies is NOT "Universal Health Care". Quit calling it that. The only serious Universal Health Care plan out their right at the moment is HR676, authored and sponsored by John Conyers.... guess who he endorses...

There are some of us who do not have "irrational hatred" for Hillary, but we are very suspicious of her - her sense of entitlement, her evasiveness, her failure to acknowledge mistakes, above all her complicated ralationship with Bill, which we know is about politics and "pay-back" of various convoluted kinds. That does not augur well for a Clinton Administration.

Then there is the Absolute Certainty, that if she gets the nomination, the issue of Bill's sexual conduct will be brought up. I'm not talking about raking over the past, I'm talking about what a lot of informed people are privately talking about - his affairs and improprieties SINCE 2000.

These will have a profound effect on Hillary's campaign. She "loves" this guy, right? She knows he has cheated on her throughout their time together but she still needs him, politically.

What does that say about her character and integrity?

That's my take on her too. I don't think Clinton's a bad candidate at all, but the historic opportunity offered to us by Obama should be seized. Getting behind the polarization of the Bush, Clinton, Bush years is important. --Rcade

I started the campaign season happy with all 3 major Dem candidates but favoring Edwards, in part because he was the first to introduce a workable health care plan. Clinton was my 3rd choice, because like a lot of people, her triangulation drives me nuts.

After watching the debates, though, Obama scares the hell out of me. The comparison to Kennedy is apt -- he's charismatic and inspirational, but mind-numbingly uninformed where foreign policy is concerned. In one of the debates (New Hampshire?) he said he'd address nuclear terrorism by strengthening the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. HELLO??? Days after Bhutto was assassinated, he's unaware that the NPT did nothing to prevent India and Pakistan from going nuclear? In an age when our biggest threats come not from nation-states but from transnational terrorists, his strategy centers around a treaty that can only be signed by nation-states? This is not a time, imo, for a President who couldn't pass an introductory college course in international relations. We've had 8 years of that.

Cokie Roberts made a good point about Clinton on "This Week" last week. Her divisive campaign is a stark contrast with her accomplishments and reputation in the Senate, where she is known as collegial and able to work with members of both parties. It would be terrific if her campaign were a better reflection of who she is, but regardless, I'll take a policy wonk over an airy orator any day.

I think this campaign is a true picture of who she is, a divisive shrew. She will just be another partisan hack. Nothing will get done during her regime.

he (Obama) said he'd address nuclear terrorism by strengthening the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. HELLO??? Days after Bhutto was assassinated, he's unaware that the NPT did nothing to prevent India and Pakistan from going nuclear? -Phoenix

Phoenix- You just made his point - that STRENGTHENING the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty would be good - if that treaty had been strengthened and given the importance it deserves, there would have been less nuclear proliferation...and it's time to give it more importance now. HELLO???

I don't hate Hillary Clinton, but that doesn't mean I would vote for her if was an American. To me she represents old politics. She is the Democratic Party equivalent of John McCain. Nothing but old, partisan politics willing to sell out to the highest bidder - just like most of the Republican Party candidates.

However, Obama seems to be a breath of fresh air. There's something about him that exudes presidential charisma. He is the John F. Kennedy of our time. Sadly, I think if he's elected he'd probably be assassinated by some right-wingnut in Texas or some other god awful dustpit.

STRENGTHENING the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty would be good - if that treaty had been strengthened and given the importance it deserves, there would have been less nuclear proliferation -- Sitdown

Nice rhetoric. Can you tell me how you'd STRENGTHEN the NPT? Are you really telling me that if it were even possible, under international law, for Bin Laden to sign a "strengthened" NPT, the world would be a safer place?

He is the John F. Kennedy of our time. -- Generico

That's what scares me. Breath of fresh air. Presidential charisma. Bay of Pigs. Cuban Missile Crisis. Closest we've ever been to nuclear war.

Generico - remember Lee Harvey Oswald? Not exactly right wing, if you will recall. He just happened to live in Texas and JFK had the supreme misfortune to drive by a certain Book Depository where this human pinworm was employed.

MrFair, you're right, Oswald was so far left he was almost right. And Phoenix, Kennedy faced different problems than we face today. It's a totally different political climate. Kennedy also took your country to the moon and won the Cuban Missile Crisis. I think every leader has their own Bay of Pigs. Remember that Reagan sowed the seeds of 9/11 in Afghanistan and Clinton had his missile attacks of distraction to take attention away from his indiscretions.

I'd still support Obama. Ideally, what I thnk the US needs is a Democratic/Republican team in the Oval Office (how does Obama/Huckabee or Huckabee/Obama sound?). Both parties need to heal after the divisive and partisan politics of the last couple of decades. Your country needs to address it's failing economy and endless, rambling war. Only a bi-partisan team could do that without falling into the polarized trap you're currently in.

Only a bi-partisan team could do that without falling into the polarized trap you're currently in.
Posted by Generico


GEN - For some weeks I have been pushing the same idea, but I said "McCain/Obama." This ticket could score a decisive win and receive a true mandate from a clear majority, PLUS help to start healing the partisan-inflicted wounds of the past 16 years.

The humor resides in seeing liberals adopt Reichwing tactics which have little basis in fact or semblance of rationality.

You better not look in the mirror then, Corky, or you might die of laughter, mon ami.

Your favorite online Obama cultist,
Gal

Bill Clinton better stay away from mirrors for the same reason, or Hillary will be running as a widow. FYI to Bill: no one is saying that you can't defend your wife; what some of us are objecting to is the way you have been doing it.

I have used legitimate argument based on substantive articles from major news sources.

Don't hope for so much from the GOP.

"I have used legitimate argument based on substantive articles from major news sources."

And been overwhelmingly, if not admittedly, slapped down by the same. And then you lash out that copy/paste is a cheap way to debate. Then you do it when its convenient for you.

Hypocrisy becomes you, Corky.

-slapped down

Not by you, sweetie.

I have used legitimate argument based on substantive articles from major news sources.

Yeah, like the "OBama wept" blog written by your local garbageman.

Or how about the famous Corky post...IF Obama dudn't quit smoking....

"Not by you, sweetie."

LOL. What do you call what just happened? I proved you are a hypocrite and you used the old rubber/glue retort.

Dipshits like corky never cease to amaze.

-"OBama wept" blog written by your local garbageman.

"Jake Tapper is ABC News' Senior National Correspondent based in the network's Washington bureau. He writes about politics and popular culture and covers a range of national stories"

Jake is my garbage man? How does he fit it into his schedule?

Dipshits like corky never cease to amaze.

Posted by kevin23

I love it. Oh, and don't forget, Whoopi endorsed Clinton.

-I proved you are a hypocrite

No, you only called me a hypocrite.

Only in your "mind", does that prove anything.

Only in your "mind", does that prove anything.


Posted by Corky

His, and anyone else who has logged onto the DR today.

Your favorite online Obama cultist,
Gal

It's interesting to see the term "cultist" being applied to someone who simply finds the other candidate to be uninspiring and not worthy your vote.

Kind of reminds me of 2000.

No corkwad-

Only in YOUR mind do the hundreds of Tony Roma's posts that smack yours down mean less than your propaganda. I love that you avoid his posts by saying CONSTANTLY that you don't respect copy/paste. Yet, here you are.

That is the definition of hypocrite, corky. Don't make me start copying and pasting your quotes along with the definition of "hypocrite". Even YOU cannot be that blind. Wait...scratch that.

-Tony Roma's posts that smack yours down

Your opinion. And we all know what opinions are like, everybody has one.

The inability to distinguish opinion from reality, as difficult as that seems to be for you, can be enhanced with visits to you local psychological counselor.

"Your opinion."

Mine? No, the opinion of the author being pasted. You really are THAT stupid? No need to answer. We all know where your loyalty lies, and that you'll sacrifice logic, integrity, and anything else for a short term Hillary gain. So sad.

-Mine? No, the opinion of the author being pasted. You really are THAT stupid?

You mean stupid enough to assume that the article "slaps down" what I have to say in every objective way and it isn't just your opinion that it does so?

No, that would be you it seems.

Corky, move on. Even a dog is smart enough to run instead of just standing there, taking a beating.

"You mean stupid enough to assume that the article "slaps down" what I have to say in every objective way and it isn't just your opinion that it does so?"

You don't think, do you? Why does it have to slap you down in EVERY way to be effectively countering your posts? Are you retreating to the one corner of your little box you think is safe? You really are stupid. I mean, really.

"Even a dog is smart enough to run instead of just standing there, taking a beating."

Taking a beating from whom?

There's only one thing Kevin from Winston Strawn is capable of beating, and it isn't Corky.

Taking a beating from whom?
Posted by Bill_OReilly

Mostly from people on your side of the aisle. Look at some of the other threads.

I was talking about this thread, Wisgod. I know some of the Obama cultists are trying to prove they are not cultists by ganging up on him and attacking every article he links to, regardless of how reasonable the content may be.

Bill O-

Is that why you couldn't answer for yourself yesterday? Because you were busy fantasizing about me?

I was talking about this thread, Wisgod.
Posted by Bill_OReilly

OK. I think the article is way too radical. Hell I don't like her, but I certainly don't hate her. Do you really think she isn't deserving of the criticism based on her antics so far? And Corky's only defense is that he thinks she stands the best chance in the General Election.

"Because you were busy fantasizing about me?"

I don't fantasize about dogs. Maybe that's your thing, but not mine.

"Do you really think she isn't deserving of the criticism based on her antics so far?"

No, I agree with you. And like yourself, I don't like her, but I don't hate her either.

Lil' Kevie claims that it isn't just in his opinion that TR's articles effectively "slap down" my posts, that it is a fact of reality.

Maybe in Doggy World, but not here.

"I don't fantasize about dogs. Maybe that's your thing, but not mine."

Wow. Good one. Did you slap your knee after delivering that bad boy?

And I love that you think you know where I work. It's f'n adorable how gullible you are. What else do you think you know? please, dazzle us some more with your ignorance. lol.

Corky-

I'm aware that you are too stupid to know when you are being slapped down with better information...which is about every post. Its not news to anyone.

"And I love that you think you know where I work"

You were the one that was bragging about Winston Strawn, moron.

Bill O-

Whose the moron who assumes to know me? Is your argument that it takes one to know one? Geez you really are dumb.

BTW, you must not have a lot of clients considering how much time you spend here. Must be tough being a shitty lawyer. My condolences.

Bill O-

"My condolences."

For having a secretary? Ok. Accepted.

"Whose the moron who assumes to know me? "

The only things I know about you is that you claimed to work at Winston Strawn...and that you're an obnoxious little troll.

"For having a secretary?"

So your secretary does your legal work for you? Impressive. For her. Not so much for you.

Bill O-

Thanks for trying so hard. I'm flattered. Too bad you just don't know shit. LOL.

"I know some of the Obama cultists are trying to prove they are not cultists..."

I am just amazed at those who seem so inclined to grasp at the straw of the day.

I guess when the "Obama's a Muslim", "Obama attended a radical madrassa", "Obama doesn't say the Pledge of Allegiance" stuff fell flat on its ass, trying to make his supporters into "cultists" is the fall back position.

Fuck this. Can't we go back to trashing Corky?

Ok, I've wasted enough time on you for now, chump. Maybe I'll return and slap you around some more later.

"I guess when the "Obama's a Muslim", "Obama attended a radical madrassa", "Obama doesn't say the Pledge of Allegiance" stuff fell flat on its ass, trying to make his supporters into "cultists" is the fall back position."

Those all are lies, of course. I didn't say otherwise. And not all Obamaites are cultists. But quite a few are, which is why there are so many commentaries in the blogosphere about their behavior.

-with better information

Your opinion. Again, your opinion is much like your asshole, widely distributed but rarely appreciated, mostly just abused.

"Ok, I've wasted enough time on you for now, chump. Maybe I'll return and slap you around some more later."

Or you could answer for yourself for the first time ever. Start with explaining the recession thread from yesterday. Until you actually show up to the game, no one believes you actually know how to play.

Or you can avoid and attack. Same old same old for weeks now. Pathetic.

The fact that no one has ever accused those who support Hillary of being "cultists" is prima facia evidence of just who's lost perspective and who hasn't.

Fact: Hillary Clinton is arguably the most popular and known woman in America. She topped the list for 2007, didn't she, even eclipsing Oprah Winfrey.

Fact: America has known Hillary Clinton for almost 20 years and has pretty much made up its mind about how they feel about her.

Fact: Before Barack Obama made a speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention, hardly anyone outside of Illinois knew who he was or what he stood for.

Fact: His speech was lauded as "The Speech" of the century so far because he spoke in a voice that linked all Americans to a common message. It had no partisan overtones and didn't try to demonize one group of Americans against another group.

Fact: Hillary Clinton started this campaign with more money, higher name recognition, and more Establishment support than every other Democratic nominee.

Fact: Barack Obama built an organization from the ground up that has not only matched the Clinton Machine but surpassed its fundraising capacity without accepting donations from groups that lobby Congress. He has won more states and collected more delegates as of this moment. All of this was done even though Hillary enjoyed leads as high as 40% in some states Obama subsequently won. In others he was able to reduce her margins of victory to 10% from more than 20% in less than a week.

Fact: Obama has swelled the numbers of people voting in the Democratic primaries while energizing youth to become involved in politics for the first time in their lives. Hillary has also energized her supporters and added numbers of voters but not in the degree that Obama has.

Fact: The Democratic Party is likely to swamp the Republicans in November if the internal sniping comes to an end and all factions pull together for the eventual nominee.

Fact: Based on personal negatives, Obama appears at this time to be the strongest candidate for defeating the Republicans. It doesn't mean that Hillary can't win, it just means she will have a harder road than he will.

I see nothing which resembles a "cult" in any of these facts. Those choosing to use such monikers merely illustrate their lack of objectivity when critiquing the rise of an obscure middle-American politician to the cusp of becoming the first President of color while going toe-to-toe with what everyone had considered the unbeatable Clinton machine in the process. It doesn't mean that the first female with a real opportunity of becoming President is not worthy of her status nor support.

"Fuck this. Can't we go back to trashing Corky?"

Who is your candidate, Wisgod? McCain? Let's trash him instead :).

"I see nothing which resembles a "cult" in any of these facts."

I don't either. I'm referring to the behavior discussed in a couple of threads, and commented on widely, even by Obama supporters, about the uncritical adulation of some Obamaites and their intolerance toward anyone that says anything critical about him.

Who is your candidate, Wisgod? McCain? Let's trash him instead :).

Posted by Bill_OReilly


I haven't picked a Candidate yet, but if McCain picks Huckabee as VP, it ain't going to be him.

Breaking news!

Poll: Obama Up By 14 In California Primary

Some people never learn.

Now that's a decent comeback, Corky. Bravo!

That you can't see it all would seem to indicate a deep immersion in the Obamaide.

Corky,

Besides Tony, who else do you think is in a "deep immersion in the obamaide" here on the DR?

I'm referring to the behavior discussed in a couple of threads, and commented on widely, even by Obama supporters, about the uncritical adulation of some Obamaites and their intolerance toward anyone that says anything critical about him.

Bill...

I must be missing that which you're referring to. Most of the time the criticism's of Obama are references to the smears already mentioned above. Corky has criticized his vote for the Energy Bill in 2005, and thats wholly legitimate. But far too many of the criticisms are based upon personal judgments, not objective criteria.

Is Obama a hopeful candidate? Of course he is, but he released a 64 page tome on his policy stances and issues at the very beginning of his campaign. No one ever seems to address the "substance" of his campaign, only his speeches. So when he's attacked as having no substance, its a bald-faced lie. When he's criticized for inexperience, the record shows he's held elected office longer than both Hillary and John Edwards, and has gotten more significant legislation passed than either of them as well.

These are the points I take issue with critics over and what I see Corky and others call "cultish" for us knowing what so many are ignorant of. Many of us, like myself, looked into Obama after his speech and read all that we could. There just wasn't much negative about him out there. He was beloved and respected by Dems and Republicans alike for his style and his intelligence. When people attack him on these points, they're not expressing their opinions, they're expressing their ignorance of who and what Obama is.

Criticize him on the issues, its everyone's right. But do not criticize him over things he never said, and things he doesn't believe in nor stand for. I don't do this to Hillary so it shouldn't be done to Obama.

Besides Tony, who else do you think is in a "deep immersion in the obamaide" here on the DR?

I would like anyone to point out a single post I've written about Obama that isn't based on factual information or opinion gleaned from a fact-based perspective.

Exception: Retorts made in anger toward Corky. Hey, I'm human, not a robot!

And Corky, sorry when the polls show hillary on the short side. Survey USA had Hillary up 10% in CA, they never had Obama up at any time. In other words, your point is moot and invalid on its face regarding veracity of their polling.

Here on the DR it's hard to tell, what with all the Hillary Haters. That the MSM has been thoroughly baptized is not in doubt, however.

On msnbc, they sometimes have to call in Tom Brokaw for an intervention.

Like with the stupid prick David Shuster saying last nite that Chelsea was PIMPING her mom. Not something he would ever say about a HRC supporter.

about an Obama supporter, I mean.

TR

Your comments on the LA Times article provided you above?

None? OK.

Messiah,

What planet are you from? And what the hell is this dynasty business. Hillary and Bill came from working class families - they are not the Bush'es - they're not the Kennedys - now those you might be right in calling dynasties.

You think you would have learned a lesson from all the lies we've been told over the years - Do not ape the media talking points as if they were were the gospel truth - think for yourself.

If you want to vote for an empty suit, then go for it but don't try to justify your choice by tearing down the opposition with a bunch of nonsense or repetitious garbage (mostly lies) we've all heard before.

Like with the stupid prick David Shuster saying last nite that Chelsea was PIMPING her mom. Not something he would ever say about a HRC supporter.

Slow down Corky. Schuster said the campaign was pimping Chelsea because she's making appearances by herself and robocalls trying to persuade younger voters. Schuster's problem is that Chelsea doesn't take questions from the press, not that she's a supporter of her mother. Every other supporter of any candidate has to expect questions from the press, I think its only natural.

And your last sentence obviously meant to imply Schuster wouldn't say that about an Obama supporter, not HRC.

Here on the DR it's hard to tell, what with all the Hillary Haters

so you can't name anybody other than Tony?

Corky...

I'm talking about "US" not the LA Times. Sorry, your continued deflections might be important to you but I don't agree. Why not access your own postings instead of bringing other's into this conversation?

"But do not criticize him over things he never said, and things he doesn't believe in nor stand for. I don't do this to Hillary so it shouldn't be done to Obama."

Wouldn't argue with that. I don't like threads that bash the candidates for alleged "scandals", and haven't participated in them. Read the post "Obama is not Jesus" which was written by an Obama supporter. That's what I'm talking about. Comments along the lines of "Obama is America's last hope" are just embarrassing.

Tony Roma,

Are you trying to convince your self or everyone else with all this crap. You're another one believing everything you hear and/or read as if it were written in stone. Remember, garbage in, garbage out. Believe about 10% of what you hear - that way you won't embarrass yourself when the fat lady sings.

"I'm talking about "US" not the LA Times. "

Tony, that article, Obamaphilia, was written by an Obama supporter who is embarrassed at the zealousness of some Obamites. I don't know why you can't admit that there is a cult of personality developing around him.

What planet are you from? And what the hell is this dynasty business. Hillary and Bill came from working class families - they are not the Bush'es - they're not the Kennedys - now those you might be right in calling dynasties.

Bill has been trotting the globe with G.H.W. Bush and amassed hundreds of millions of dollars for his causes and libraries. He isn't getting this money from working class people, he's getting it from the super-wealthy. What ever you believe the Clintons were, they AREN'T that anymore.

Working-class people cannot loan $5 million to their campaigns. Only millionaires or billionaires can.

Callling folks who support Obama cultists and Hillary haters tells me one thing: Hillary supporters have been studying the Republican playbook a little too much.

"that article, Obamaphilia, was written by an Obama supporter who is embarrassed at the zealousness of some Obamites."

The best advice I can offer is a careful rereading of that article followed by a quick peek at the definition of tongue-in-cheek.

It is more than apparent that for every Obamaphiliac there is an equal and opposite Hillmaphrodite here on the DR.

"Obama is America's last hope"

Some people look around the political lanscape and do not see any other politican making the case of personal empowerment that Obama does. It expresses a personal desire for needed change, not a mindless agreement with unsupportable positions.

Are you trying to convince your self or everyone else with all this crap. You're another one believing everything you hear and/or read as if it were written in stone. Remember, garbage in, garbage out.

This is precisely what I'm talking about, a criticism without a single shread of evidence to support its conclusion. Have you researched the things that I have? Have you read the stories written by real people who've encountered Obama along his life's journey that have no axe to grind? Then why accuse me of "believing everything I hear or read" if you don't know what those things have said? Can't I be capable of discerning the truth from fiction as you deem yourself able to?

Obamaphilia, was written by an Obama supporter who is embarrassed at the zealousness of some Obamites. I don't know why you can't admit that there is a cult of personality developing around him.

I agreed with the premise above, if you'd bother to notice. I also defined where I disagree with those so easily using it because they find such a notion threatening to whatever political results they're seeking which don't involve an Obama win. I read the article from its original source.

Let me ask all of you this:

Have you ever seen Americans so energized by the potential of a single election? This wasn't unknown in our past and the spring of 1968 felt the same way. I know, I was alive then and remember.

Our politics has been dominated by fear for way too long. Now a person has had the balls to step away from fear and embrace community and cooperation, and his detractors call supporters "cultish". Well if the cult is believing in the power of a united America and improving the lives of everyone, not just the wealthy, then give me a robe and a jug of "Obamaide" and call me a believer.

The facts are any politican would be estatic to have the types of support which Obama is getting. Don't be hater's, just see it for what it is: people overjoyed at believing their opinion counts after so long when it hasn't, at least in their own eyes.

"Callling folks who support Obama cultists "

Nobody said everyone who supports Obama is a cultist. Otherwise I would be calling myself a cultist. There's a difference between critical support for a politician and adulation. One is healthy, the other isn't.

Tony,

Bill "causes" are helping people all over the world, the money is not his personal stash. One major cause is "aids" treatment in underdeveloped countries.

As far as his library is concerned - all Presidents have libraries - in your estimation, he should be different because he Bill Clinton.

Moreover, I said they came FROM working class families - not that they still were working class. For goodness sakes, I also come from a working class background - third generation europeans - but we were educated in this country and now many members of our family are professionals (doctors, lawyers, teachers, nurses, pharmacists). So according to your view, that should be a stigma instead of an accomplishment or maybe our family should be referred to as a dynasty.

What absolutely flawed thinking.

" Now a person has had the balls to step away from fear and embrace community and cooperation, and his detractors call supporters "cultish"."

Sorry, I don't see anything particularly courageous about campaigning on glittering generalities like "hope" "unity" and "change". I take that kind of political rhetoric with a big grain of salt.

So according to your view, that should be a stigma instead of an accomplishment or maybe our family should be referred to as a dynasty.

What absolutely flawed thinking.

I've said nothing of the sort. You are implying that the Clintons are in touch with the common folks, and I think that is no longer true. The have wealth, they live in luxury. I'm not holding it against them, its just the truth.

When the Clintons left the White House, they were broke. Terry McAuliffe had to sign for their house in NY because the Clintons didn't have the credit to do it themselves. Today, its estimated that they're worth north of $50 million. Thats a lot of money for anyone to earn in 7 years. Are you aware that Bill has collected millions from Dubai? He just received $30 million for his Fund from Kazakstan for linking a new-found friend (another multi-zillionaire) to contacts there in a business deal. The Bill Clinton that "felt the pain" of poverty has been replaced by one who travels in the best circles and calls the wealthiest people in the world by their first names.

He has enriched himself during the course of his work. There's nothing wrong with that at all, but it does bolster the notion that today's Clintons are not that far different from the Bush family especially when it comes to business deals and mutual friends.

Sorry, I don't see anything particularly courageous about campaigning on glittering generalities like "hope" "unity" and "change". I take that kind of political rhetoric with a big grain of salt.

Then why haven't other politicans done this particularly when it was so successful in the past? Because they know they're incapable of delivering on these promises, where Obama understands the people gain these things for themselves by becoming involved in the process, not because he's giving them anything but the idea and providing the vehicle.

His entire political future lies on his ability of being what he says he is. I can't see anything more courageous than telling people the truth and having them agree to work harder than ever before for the things they want themselves.

Don't forget, faith moves mountains, rhetoric doesn't.