#5...

The question is, would you have voted for Hillary in you lived in NY. That is the epitome of running for self gratification. Or Franken in Minnesota.

8 | Posted by snoofy at 2009-11-06 11:26 PM

Al Franken was an actor and never involved in politics. Hillary was simply the wife of a popular president who moved to NY to run for the US Senate. Seems like they were for self serving purposes.

Crispee forgets that Hillary worked on Barry Goldwaters campaign back in the day. She has been involved in Politics Her whole life.

Actually Larry, You are right. I did forget about her working for Goldwater. But the fact she saw an opening in NY for a possible Senate seat still makes it a self serving decsion to run.

Well Crispee She learned from the "best" Alan Keyes.

#12 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2009-11-06 11:52 PM

Would have voted for Alan Keyes, hell I volunteered to work on his campaign if he ever came out to OC. Other than his reparation slant of course.

"Would have voted for Alan Keyes"

Republicans in a nutshell. Anything to stop Obama getting elected.
#21 | Posted by brock at 2009-11-07 07:25 AM

That was back in the mid 90's Brock. Like I said before I knew about his reparation slants. IMO he was a staunch conservative and excellent orator.

Would have voted for Alan Keyes

In that case, I hope you never decried Obama's lack of experience. Keyes has even less experience than Palin.

#20 | Posted by snoofy at 2009-11-07 07:23 AM |

Of course I decried Obamas lack of experience. Not only is Keyes just as educated if not more than Obama, but he has held many different positions in Washington and abroad and has more economical and foreign policy experience than Obama ever did. Not to mention he has proven to be a conservative and not some rino.

Thank Allen Keyes for the skyrocket that was Barak Obama's political ascendency.

Keyes was an abysmal candidate for Il. Senate. He was a carpet bagging, flaming rethoric, hateful man who was so offputing to voters that a neophite candidate, with very little experience kicked his ass.

Barak Obama, and the people of the country owe a huge thank you to Allen Keyes, and whoever else brought Keyes to Illinois to run for Senate.

#54 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2009-11-07 10:50 AM

Keyes was brought in late by the GOP and probably because of his race. Of course Sour Whiskey forgot why the repubs had to bring his in the first place. The Chicago Tribune went out to California and conviced a lib judge to unseal Ryans divorce records. Which prompted Ryan to avoid the embarrassment to himself and his kids. Of course Sour also ignores why Obama was unopposed to get the dem nomination, which again was the Tribune threatening to release Obamas dem rival and forced him out as well. Not surprised Old Sour thinks Obama won the Senate race based on his merits or experience though.

If I recall, the Repub candidate withdrew because it became public that he coerced his wife into attending swinging sex clubs. You may correct me if I am wrong.

Trying to paint the Trib as a lefty tool is seriously not speaking well for your argument.

#59 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour

There seem to be a plethora of untrue statements here presented as fact every day by the right.

Are the right wing allergic to gathering facts before speaking?

#62 | Posted by Timex at 2009-11-07 11:15 AM |

Maybe you should go back and look at the only poster claiming the Tribune is a lefty tool. You even pasted it in your #62 retort.

Unlike people who prefer governors to run for president, I like senators. I think any one-term senator who wants to make a presidential bid is qualified. And Joe Biden was exceptionally qualified to run. It was a pity that Iowa did not agree.

#61 | Posted by rcade at 2009-11-07 11:14 AM

I believe the last sitting Senator to go from the Senate to the White House was John F Kennedy. Had Nixon pulled a Gore ala 2000, Kennedy may have never been in the WH. Nixon refused to have the voting irregularities looked into and conceded in his words, for the good of the nation.

#62 was in response to WhiskeySour's post.

His was in response to you. The Chi Trib is a conservative newspaper.

#68 | Posted by Timex at 2009-11-07 11:54 AM

So how do you explain your retort when Whiskey mentioned it was a conservative paper? I certainly didn't mention anything about their political leanings, right? Why did you post this????

"There seem to be a plethora of untrue statements here presented as fact every day by the right."

"Are the right wing allergic to gathering facts before speaking?"

People also imply the L.A. Times has always been a 'lib' newspaper. Of course, they know nothing about the Chandlers - hard core right wing conservatives.

#70 | Posted by Timex at 2009-11-07 12:04 PM |

Maybe you should check your dates there Timex. The Trib was sold in 2007. Well after 2004. Right? Wasn't it owned by George Sessler before the Chandlers?

Trying to paint the Trib as a lefty tool is seriously not speaking well for your arguement.

#59 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2009-11-07 11:10 AM

First of all I said a Lib judge. Not the Lib Tribune. Skeweing that fact doesn't help your argument and makes you look rather lazy for posting that. Now if you want to argue that Judge Schnider wasn't appointed by Gray davis, you will lose that as well. Do your own search on Schnider and get back to me. Wouldn't want Timex to get caught up in your erroneous posts.

#74...

What is your point? I never mentioned anything about either papers political leanings. Right? You invoked the LA Times and Chandler, I noted that the Tribune was sold to the Chandlers well after the Ryan incident.

"You brought up the Trib in a post whose inference seemed to be implying they were in Obama's pocket doing his work for him to help him get elected."

I brought up the Tribune because THEY went to Cali and asked a Judge to unseal Ryans divorce records and threatened to expose Hull, Obama's Senate rival. Whatever political implications surrounding that came from Old Whiskey and you. Next time I will say a major newspaper in Chicago. Then maybe you and Whiskey won't be compelled to make it a dem/repub issue.

Or are you saying what happens in the bedroom (or bathroom) is people's own personal business, and thus you support gay marriage?

#92 | Posted by snoofy at 2009-11-08 04:20 AM

I guess the part of a "sealed" divorce settlement escaped you. Now if you can explain why a Judge who agreed to seal the records all of the sudden changed his mind, I am all ears. It is also laughable that you and most ignore the fact the Trib also used the power of the press and threatened Obama's dem rival and forced him out of the race. Of course all one has to do is look at Obama's campaign manager, one David Axlerod to know who was behind these Chicago style politics. Pretty much mirrors that of Mayor Daley. But then again, Obama had nothing to run on based on his political history and proved his worth by having outsiders do whatever they needed for him to win. Which is no surprise he thought he deserved the Nobel Peace Prize. Can one say pattern?

What is your support for this statement?

#96 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2009-11-08 01:56 PM

The fact Obama thought he "deserved" the Nobel Peace Prize, without doing a damn thing other than giving campaign speeches. The fact he thought he "deserved" the dem nomination for Pres or arrogantly believing he was even qualified to be running this early in his young political life. That he resorted to having the Tribune force out his opponents, because he "deserved" to be the candidate, in the Illinois US Senate race.

#92...

I couldn't figure out how you could not only ignore the actions of a judge reversing himself, for obvious political gain and respond with some moral bs of what Ryan should have done. I was puzzled by the last sentence of that post which I pasted. One was how or why you invoked the gay marriage question, and two bringing up the "what happens in the bedroom" line, when the sealed documents exposed the very same privacies you ask in your question.

#99 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2009-11-08 04:05 PM

I thought my rant pretty much explained what I thought was inside Obama's head these last 10 years and his pattern. As for the Nobel, and based on the criteria of the committee, it was for his campaign speeches the prior year. Not anything he has done as Presdent. He simply could have said thanks, but no thanks. Like his premature decision thinking he was qualified or deserved to be POTUS. How many years does, or did he have left to be Pres. or a Nobel winner? Or actually earn or deserve both honors? He was 47 and had plenty of political life left.