BS: Obama in Wilmington

Subject: BS: Obama in Wilmington, NC
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 01:37 AM

Hillary snuck in to town today (Sunday), according to some of her local blogging supporters, she was trying to steal the thunder from Obama's visit tomorrow. We shall see.

Carol and I have tickets. As do some of our neighbors. We are going to the town hall meeting. We are very much looking forward to this. I will write a report after Carol's dental appointment.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Mrrzy
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 08:47 AM

Do tell!

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Emma B
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 09:08 AM

Why do you use words like 'snuck'?
Sorry that was a rheotorical question - anything is ok to discredit another candidate isn't it? - unless it happens to be the one you support.

It seems that it's acceptable to accuse anyone who isn't under some kind of thrall to Obama's style of rhetoric as 'racist'

Do I detect more than a little 'sexism' in the continual sniping about Hilary Clinton in these repetitive and tedious posts?

'WILMINGTON, NC (2008-04-27) Democratic Presidential Candidate Senator Hillary Clinton made a campaign stop in Wilmington last night'

public broadcasting radio mp3 listen here

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 09:38 AM

This is the same tactic a handful of virulent Mudcat Kerry "supporters" used against anyone who didn't agree with their candidate choice in 2004.

SOS.

But EmmaB is dead on the money. Clinton "snuck" into the state where the upcoming primary is to "steal" Obama's thunder--rather than just campaign?

All extremely loaded emotional words, used by people who vote out of anger and frustration and an extremely well developed sense of being entitled and justified to "get back at" the Republican right by seeking vengeance against anybody who dares disagree with them.

There are several men here who routinely engage in this sick behavior.

Most Mudcatters share a real dislike for the current administration, regardless of their party affiliation or lack thereof. However, they don't stoop such a base and vulgar level as the men you see routinely flaming everyone and anyone who disagrees with their "anything goes to get the Bushie out" tactics.

Anything doesn't go with most of us, but that doesn't matter to these slash and burners.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Amos
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 10:51 AM

Ooooh, hiss, spit, snarl. Clawsies, duck.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 11:04 AM

And you are one of the ringleaders, Amos.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Peace
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 11:05 AM

"Obama will be next President of the United States and I don't give a rat's rear who knows it. Neither do I care to discuss it."

There. That oughta piss off the folks around these parts, but since I won't be back to this thread--hey, who cares?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Jeri
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 11:11 AM

I think all the negative bullshit is going to backfire on Hillary. I HOPE it is anyway, because if I'm tired of it, others might be as well.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 11:18 AM

People are just tired of the Democratic primary season dragging on. I don't think most people see the "negative bullshit" as coming exclusively from one side. Not by a long shot.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 11:18 AM

"Snuck" or whatever, The Cinton's have long been known to play hardball... Hope they have something left in the tank for McCain after the nomination process is thru... Unless, of course Obama get the nomination and McCain chooses Hillary as his VP nominee...

(lol)

B;~)

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Emma B
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 12:33 PM

A regular contributor to the Daily Kos an American political blog, publishing news and opinion from a liberal or progressive point of view. It functions as a discussion forum and group blog for a variety of netroots activists, whose efforts are primarily directed toward influencing and strengthening the Democratic Party has withdrawn from contributing....

'Writers need a safe place to reach out and exchange ideas, to communicate and challenge one another. DailyKos should be that place, but its tone, its essence has evolved into something ugly and destructive. Good writers can't survive in that kind of atmosphere. Democrats shouldn't have to put up with that from fellow Democrats.

Sadly, the majority of the administrators have allowed this hostile environment to develop in our online community for anyone who isn't planted firmly in the Obama camp. They've routinely ignored personal attacks and allowed disruptive, spam-like posts to go unchecked whenever anyone expresses support for Hillary or challenges something their candidate has said or done. There are however several front-pagers who have managed to avoid taking part in the attacks on Hillary and for that I'm grateful. But the site has grown to the point where they simply can't – or won't monitor it.

As a result, our community has become little more than an echo chamber with an attitude that harkens back to the early days of Dubbya's administration - yer either with us or yer a'gin us, heh! The attackers and disrupters are no better than Chris Matthews with their sexism, hate, lies, and obsession with bashing - all – things – Hillary.'

open letter

As I have written elsewhere, as a Brit, I would wholeheartedly welcome a US democratic president of any race, creed or gender but, it appears that every thread purporting to support Obama, is often little more than another attack on the rival candidate.

Some of the remarks/language here are not the stuff of informed, reasoned 'adult' debate.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 12:39 PM

"Anything is ok to discredit another candidate isn't it? - unless it happens to be the one you support."

Of course! ;-) That's how it works in politics. The politicians do it. The media does it. The citizens do it, and all the big blabbermouths here on Mudcat do it too. Standard procedure. They don't mind it when they do it, but they hate it when their opponents do it, because they can't stand seeing themselves reflected in the mirror of life.

No exceptions.

Look, people, you are all taught by the social system around you to do this from the time you are toddlers. It's conveyed to you in every way possible. You are taught to be mean, competitive, aggressive, judgemental, prejudiced, and fanatically partisan. You are taught this through organized sports, all forms of political discourse, those silly student council elections in your schools, beauty contests, business, and every other form of publicly competitive exercise, all of which produce a few winners and a great many losers.

This is how you are ruled from the top down...by divide and conquer tactics. You are kept uselessly fighting against each other while the $ySStem rules you all from the top down till the day you die. And it works like a dream.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 12:39 PM

Exact same phenomenon here, EmmaB.

Those Obama camp folk are the former Kerry folks who have villified Nader.

I stopped reading those sites (Daily Kos, MoveOn, and more and more, Huffington Post and some others which didn't seem as partisan prior to Super Tuesday), along with the so-called "progessive press" which includes The Nation, The Progressive, The New Republic, and increasingly Mother Jones.

It's awful, to see how deep the claws of the corporate Democrats have dug into the heart of the progressive left, and disemboweled it.

Really depressing.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 12:46 PM

I can't agree with you Little Hawk. This divide and conquer game has become far worse since Bill Clinton lost Congress in the 90s, and the corporate Democrats who control the party panicked.

Some of us go pretty far back to the New Left days and earlier, so we've seen the changes.

Which is why I am STILL arguing against voting for any of the 3 corporate candidates this year, and telling everyone who will listen objectively (which includes my car mechanic this week!) to give Nader one last look--because he won't be here after this election cycle. This is his last run, and our best last chance as a nation to turn things around.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 01:00 PM

I agree that it has gotten steadily worse, Fantasma. It has always been around, but it's definitely gotten worse in recent decades. It gets more shameless and negative year by year, and the media (radio and TV) have played a big part in allowing that to happen.

What we are witnessing is the accelerating decline and fall of a decadent civilization ruled by people with irrational ideas and extremely immoral attitudes. The chickens are coming to roost, just as they did long ago in Rome or Babylon.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 01:34 PM

Some over-generalizations going down here...

I support Obama...

I have never villified Nader and have worked for him and voted for him...

I did not vote for Kerry...

I am not "stupid", as Fantz would like to think of anyone who supports Obama...

And lastly, Fantz, you may have duped yourself into thinking that ***You*** are the only "objective" person here because people don'tr agree with you but you are as wrong as wrong can be... You come off as highly subjective and dogmatic...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 01:49 PM

And you are one of the very few of the Mudcat Obamamaniacs who claims not to have voted for Kerry.

But this election cycle, you joined the corporate Democrats ranks by supporting Obama.

So I'm not too concerned about you calling me dogmatic, Bobert. You are marching to the corporate Republicrat tune, in lock step this year.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 02:07 PM

That's not the way I see it, Fantz...

Like, ahhhhhh, if it isn't asking too mmuch, and in your own words, would you explain how supporting Obama is "marching to the corporate Rublican tune, in lock set this year."

I don't believe you can...

That's why I view you as subjective and dogmatic...

Oh sure, you can come up with any number of "twisted" logic explanations such as Obama's "support of the war" (Not!!!) because he voted for the supplimental... That is not support "of the war" but yer blogger buds have convinced you that if you say it enough then it will become true... Fact is that opne of 3 people will be the next president... One opposed the invasion... Two supported it...

But somehow the one that opposed it has made it to the top of yer hate/disgust list the other two get a free pass from you but in yer twisted world the one who opposed it is the one "marching to the corporate Republican tune"...

Well, if that is the case then, if you don't mind me asking, just what tune are the ones who voted for the war marching to??? Bobby Goldsboro's "Honey"???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 02:22 PM

Bobert, you know exactly what I'm talking about.

Obama is being financed by the corporations.

His voting record is pure Republicrat, including voting to sustain the Iraq war, rather than voting to end it, as he had the opportunity to do along with his Senate and House colleagues who did just that.

To claim that a vote for the appropriations bills that keep the war going isn't a vote in support of the war, is pure, unadulterated lying.

There was a clear choice. Vote to continue the war (yes on the appropriation bill) or vote to end the war (yes on any number of friggin' votes to end the war).

Now Bobert, a lot of people have provided you with the links, with excerpts of articles, bills, copy and pastes from the friggin' US Senate votes pages, ALL showing Obama's voting record on Iraq, but you don't accept that as "proof".

Which means you have no intention of taking the truth of your candidate's political stand on the issue of the Iraq war.

So why would anyone bother with you? You keep "proving" again and again and again you aren't willing to do the hard work of examining Obama's record.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Ebbie
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 02:27 PM

Talk about the candidates' quest dragging on... In 1968, as I remember well, it went on a good deal longer than it has so far in 2008. 1968 was another election year when the incumbent president did not run for reelection and the scramble for votes was an active one, leaving a lot of acrimony in the air. Had Kennedy not died midway, I think it would have brcome even more vicious.

"Kennedy was still in second place in the race for the candidacy with 393 delegates compared to the leader Hubert Humphrey who had 561." Wikipedia

And this was in early June.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 02:36 PM

Just before he was assassinated.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 02:44 PM

Which pretty much put an end to the race.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 03:12 PM

Yes, it sure did. It pretty much put an end to a lot of people's hopes at that time.

I didn't vote for Kerry either. ;-) If I'd been there, though, I probably would have. Because I believed in Kerry? NO! I don't believe in either the Democrats or the Republicans. Besides, Kerry and Bush are both alumni of the Skull and Bones Society, and I have a fairly good idea of what that means.

The only guy that got me really excited with what he had to say in this present campaign was Kucinich (well, and Ron Paul when it came to foreign policy). They never had a chance.

I don't know enough really about Ralph Nader to have what I would call an informed opinion about him...nor do I think he has a chance either, anymore than Kucinich or Ron Paul did. The MSM are ignoring him. The public won't vote in any significant numbers for someone the MSM ignores...just as sheep will not obey a sheepdog that they cannot see or hear. That's how it works. The MSM and the other power structures can easily insure who (from a select group of candidates) is electable and who isn't, because they control the flow of information. Result: Hillary, Obama, and McCain are now all potentially electable. No one else is. The flow of information controls the public mentality. The public is told who to vote for, and like good little sheep they go out and do it. When all of the officially sanctioned presidential candidates in the MSM's election campaign are already toadies of the $ySStem, the result is all wrapped up regardless who wins.

Wouldn't you say that is correct, Fantasma? I don't mind at all if you pin your hopes on Nader, and I understand why you do, but is it not a bit Quixotic of you to expect it to change that ruling $ySStem when they can easily ensure that Nader remains well below most people's radar and is barely ever even spoken of on the MSM?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Ebbie
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 03:17 PM

"The public won't vote in any significant numbers for someone the MSM ignores...just as sheep will not obey a sheepdog that they cannot see or hear. That's how it works."

Little Hawk, that is not the reason that Nader does not have the votes. Have you listened to RN answer questions? I would be happy to have him in an administration, preferably in a non-competitive position, but as leader of a country in all its facets, Ralph Nader would be a disaster.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 03:20 PM

I agree about the corporate control of MSM, but I don't agree that Nader is below the radar. Quite the contrary, anyone who even marginally pays attention to the "blue" spectrum of American politics knows very well who Nader is, what he represents, and if they chose to, could abandon the corporate Democrat candidate & vote for him.

When Democrats and their voting allies say Nader could never win, they are lying to themselves and each other, to protect their status quo, NOT to bring about political change.

You can't expect to bring about political change through voting, when you keep voting the way you've been voting for decades.

But by pulling one lever on election day, you CAN start a revolution.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 03:25 PM

No, Ebbie, I haven't listened to him answer questions. At least not that I recall. I've listened to Obama, Ron Paul, Kucinich, Hillary, and McCain answer questions...oh and Bush too...but not Nader.

My impression, though, is that even if he was the most brilliant question answerer in the world, the MSM would be ignoring him right now. What do you think? Honestly, do you think he'd be getting significant coverage on MSM then? I don't. He's not running as either a Democrat or a Republican. He HAS to if he's going to get any significant coverage by the MSM. That's how the $ySStem is set up. It's a closed shop with 2 official League teams that get to play off against each other at the end of each 4-year season...like the NBA playoffs or the World Series. You don't get to play in that Series if you're outside the official league.

Oh, you can make some noise. You just can't do it on the playing field, that's all. You can do it outside the entrance gates to the stadium. The audience is in the stadium.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 03:31 PM

Ah well...perhaps if I was an American I'd know a bit more about Mr Nader. My impression is that he's well below the radar of about 98% of the American public, but maybe I'm wrong about that.

I agree that continuing to vote for the Democrats or Republicans every time will effectively change nothing. I've thought so for a long time.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 03:33 PM

Just like you can't speak your political opinions freely here at Mudcat without being censored.

See the closed "Odd Etymologies" thread before they disappear it.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 03:34 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 04:45 PM

I used the word "snuck" because she came into town with no publicity and very little advance warning, Oh yeah I also used the word "snuck" because that's the word the pro Hillary blogger used. The reason given for the sneaking was "security". Do you think she is as fearful about visiting Wilmington openly as Bush is about Iraq? ;-)

I said that her supporter said she was trying to Steal Obama's thunder. It seemed like a challenge to me.

Having attended his rally and having talked to people who attended both, it is my opinion that Obama put on the better show.

If you watch the video, you may see Carol and me in the shot, We were directly behind the candidate just below the big blue banner. I hope I didn't yawn or burp or anything at the wrong time or do anything else that could put me on Olbermann. ;-)

I did laugh so loudly when Obama said McCain said that the economy was good that the Senator seemed to glance back to see where the noise was coming from. I'm not sure he meant that line for a laugh. But come on!!? funny is funny.

The hall was packed. the capacity is 6,100 for basketball, but some of the stands were not in use because of the cameras and there were chair on the playing floor. Obama said there were 5,000.

I was pleased that Obama made a pledge to stop being negative about Hillary. He criticized the Bush administration to wild applause and found issue with McCain's Tax policy and foreign policy.

He seems smaller in person, but perhaps that was because we were six or seven rows back and above him. It also seems to be true for him that the camera adds ten pounds.

We thought that we were not going to get good seats. we showed up an hour and a half before the doors opened and there were at least a thousand ahead of us. But the volunteering and donations paid off and we were given little gold stars which allowed us to be placed directly behind the stage by the head of the official Wilmington Obama Campaign.

The half hour speech was rousing; the Q&A informative and entertaining. A ninety two year old lady railing about global warming stole the show. The sound was bad where we were from the questioners mikes. But we got the gist.

For me it was like witnessing history being made. I'm so glad that we got to go there. I feel very blessed.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 04:50 PM

No, but she & her dumb ass husband ought to be scared to death to step in front of an all black audience for the rest of their lives, and deservedly so.

Notice how no one ever asks the question "why can't Hillary get blacks to vote for her" like they keep asking Obama why he can't get whites to vote for him?

Hmmmm....wonder why THAT is.

Like I said in the race and religion thead--I am FED UP with all of them. With the Clinton's race baiting and card playing, and Obama's religion baiting and card playing.

I'm sick watching these egomaniacs tear the nation asunder for their personal ambitions.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Dani
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 04:50 PM

Thanks for the update!

We're heading to see Obama in Chapel Hill tonight: very excited!

Dani

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 04:54 PM

Dani! You will love it!

Very entertaining and inspiring!

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 04:54 PM

It was a very good event. And I was also pleased to see the amount of security he has around him now. He had six or seven secret service men surrounding him any time he wasn't up on the stage. While he was shaking hands with members of the audience after he finished, the security guys were in a semi circle behind him, and right up close, shielding him with their bodies.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Amos
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 04:54 PM

Just like you can't speak your political opinions freely here at Mudcat without being censored.


Sigh. I don't find this credible, Fantzy. I think it is a subjective distortion on your part.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 05:02 PM

Really. Well, folks are free for a few more minutes to go the thread "Odd Etymologies" themselves, and ask why it was closed.

Censorship is the only reasonable answer, of course.

There weren't any personal attacks. There was nothing controversial--hell, it was barely even provocative.

It took Rev Wright's comment today that the word "damn" came from "D E M N" etymologically, which is most certainly does not. We were discussing the OED etymologies, when the thread was suddenly closed.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 05:19 PM

What does D E M N signify? And what does OED signify?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 05:22 PM

As to what D E M N signifies, you will have to ask the Rev Wright.

As to what OED signifies? Oxford English Dictionary.

And you a Canadian!

I don't dare conjecture as to what the D E M N significance is, for fear of the Mudcat censors swooping down and banishing this thread as well. They made it clear (as quicksand) why they HAD to close the "Odd Etymologies" thread now, didn't they?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 05:24 PM

This link won't be any good tomorrow but if you look at the picture under.
"Obama holds Town Hall event at UNCW"


I am under the "B" in "Believe", Carol is under the "A" in "Can".

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 05:25 PM

Demn is defined here Little Hawk.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 05:32 PM

Except we weren't discussing definitions, we were discussing eytmologies, which your link doesn't provide.

Which is why intelligent people use dictionaries.

Perhaps Carol will buy you one for May Day.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Amos
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 05:39 PM

I think the point was clearly made in that thread that "condemn" and "damn" are conjugate and have the same root. That's the point he was making, I belileve -- what you glibly dissed as "ebonic etymology". Kind of a racist remark on your part, I would suggest. Especially since he was speaking perfectly sensibly. If you want to get your knickers in a twist because ..."demn" is not the immediate unwed father of "damn", go ahead.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 05:41 PM

Yes, I knew I could count on you to suggest that, Amos. Utterly predictable.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 05:46 PM

Yo, Rufus... Pass me one o' demn Iron Ceety beers, willz ya???

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Herga Kitty
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 05:49 PM

Just for a moment I had a vision of Obama on the A35 in Devon, England... as Wikipedia says, "Wilmington is a village between Axminster and Honiton in East Devon on the A35 road.

The village is in the parish of Offwell. St Cuthburts Church dates from the 14th Century and nearby Castle Hill is of historical interest"

Axminster is famous for carpets, Honiton for lace.

Kitty

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 05:51 PM

Whether or not Rev. Wright was correct in saying that 'damn' was derived from 'condemn', I think he probably came by his understanding of the word's etymology honestly. I have two books of word origins. One of them gives the same etymology as the OED, and the other gives the same etymology as the one Dr. Wright gave.

This is what it says:

Though it is first recorded in the 16th century 'damn' is a much older oath than that. It derives ultimately from the Latin 'damnare', to condemn.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 05:58 PM

Ummmm, I musta missed the demn comment last night but I didn't even know he was gonna speak and had been gone all day, turned on CNN and there he was so I sat thru the rest of the speech and thought it was real good...

Reminded me of a few black preachers I knew a long, long time ago...

Right on, Reverand, right on...

Lets have that conversation afterall, brother...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 06:16 PM

There seems to be a pretty strong consensus across the board that the problem wasn't the Moyers interview, the speech to the NAACP, or the first half of Wright's appearance at the National Press Club, which was with prepared remarks.

What seems to be a near universal consensus (at least among the online news outlets, I haven't listened to radio or TV today) forming that the problem was with the Q & A session that followed his prepared remarks this morning.

Carol, the issue I raised here wasn't etymology, it was censorship of political threads in this forum.

I was also aware of the etymology you reference, but the OED is far clearer as to the subject to which Wright was referrring, which is the Christian use of the word 'damn'.

Context is everything.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 07:24 PM

Yo, Fantz... When I came here I was probably more of a leftest radical than 'bout, ummmmmm, maybe 99% of the folks that were here then and I've never had one single "political" post of mine censored or removed...

I think you bnedd to stick to your positions and you poklitics and leave the personal attacks behind... To call everyone who supports Obama "stupid" is gonna get alot of yer posts censored... Stick with the ideas...

Just some ***good*** advice... Take it or not... Yer the one who wants to have yer posts stick... Unless, of course, you want yer posts to go away so you can cry "foul"??? I donno...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 07:34 PM

Like I said, he may not have been correct, but he may have legitimately thought he was using 'damn' in the way he said he was.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Little Hawk
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 07:47 PM

I am trying to grasp why any of this matters to anyone... ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Bobert
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 08:58 PM

me, too, LH... Lotta anti-Obama spinsters out there tryin' to make chicken salad outta chicken sh*t...

Like the Clintons, for two... They lost this nomination and now they are so pissed off that they are willing to roll the entire Democratic party under the bus to show the entire friggibn; universe just how entitled they were to another 8 years in the White House???

Fact is stranger than fiction...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 10:16 PM

How many times does she have to be proved wrong before we all decide her opinions are not worth the pixels they are written on?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Riginslinger
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 10:17 PM

It's easy for McCain now. All he has to do to win the election is remember two words: Jeremiah Wright.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Amos
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 10:24 PM

I don't mind being predictable, as long as I am being straight with people. You think unpredictability is a virtue? I think that's a really stupid idea.


A

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Ron Davies
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 10:44 PM

It's obvious "Jeremiah Wright" is all you'll ever remember, Rig.

But don't bother to give us a song and dance about how that's why you're against Obama. You were against him long before you ever heard of Wright--just trying to find a reason to camouflage your real reason for opposing him.

You're rather transparent, to say the least.

And it's still interesting that your worst foes seem to all be brown- or black-skinned.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: katlaughing
Date: 28 Apr 08 - 11:38 PM

If you wonder why a thread gets closed, take a look at it for personal attacks. Politics has never been censored here, just personal attacks. And, those are not caught often enough, imo. It also doesn't help that you all continue to feed the trolls...they get off on it. Starve them out!

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Emma B
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 06:29 AM

I am neither 'anti-Obama' or a spinster.

As an 'outsider' I would just like to see the most electable candidate win the nomination and put an end to the Bush regime that has so deteriously influenced events in this country too.

It was my personal view that this candidate was Hillary Clinton; that has nothing to do with 'feminism' or the colour of anyone's skin.

The leval of negative campaigning on BOTH sides has been very off-putting looking from this side of the Atlantic.

The open venom expressed in many of the posts here has also been unsettling; the repetitive, continual, almost messianic fervour is only matched by prefacing or substituting support for Obama with blatent attacks or snide comments (like the one that opened this thread and caused me to comment) against Clinton.

As someone who has actively campaigned against racism all my adult life I find some of the responses equally unacceptable.

Today I read an article in The Washington Post which seemed to sum up many of the frustrations I feel.

'The longer the race goes on, however, the more bitter it becomes. Increasing numbers of your supporters say they will never support your competitor. And growing numbers of Democrats, once excited at the prospect of two extraordinary candidates, are turned off by all the negativity. What should you do? Pulling out of the race means giving up your dream -- when you think you are the better choice. Staying in risks collective disaster.

The fault line in this dilemma -- the interests of a candidate pitted against the collective interest of his or her party -- shows up in many economic and political domains and is sometimes called the "tragedy of the commons." Individuals embroiled in similar dilemmas find them impossible to solve on their own, because they are confronted by a Hobson's Choice: Act selfishly and cause collective disaster, or act altruistically and aid someone else who is acting selfishly. Either way, selfishness wins.'

Clinton, Obama and the Narcissist's Tale
by Shankar Vedantam

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Bobert
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 08:21 AM

Ahhhhhh yes... The sky is falling and, BTW, Obama isn't electable...

So why has he recieved more votes is sanctioned primaries than wither McCain or McClinton???

Hmmmmmm??? Me thinks there is some tag-team mischief going one here with 3M (McCian, McClinton, McMedia)....

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 08:23 AM

I read that WP article yesterday, and it struck a chord with me, too.

One thing the article doesn't mention though, are the two surrogate narcissists in this campaign season: Bill Clinton and Jeremiah Wright.

After "sleeping on it" re: the Rev Wright yesterday, the bottom line for me because "what the hell kind of pastor does this to one of their parishioners?"

This campaign just keeps getting more and more distressing.

More and more alarming.

On the Democratic side, we have the Clinton dynasty, and on the other we have the poor judgment of a candidate who decided to play identity politics with the hardcore US identity politics masters, in order to seek and attain his political ambitions. That decision to play identity politics with the south side guys over a decade ago is, sadly, now what is truly "coming home to roost".

Being a veteran of Chicago politics too, I guess all I can say--wearily--is I guess we should have expected as much.

Now southern Dems in tough re-election races are beginning to distance themselves from Obama. Once that starts to happen, the bleeding becomes nearly impossible to stop.

This whole sorry, sordid, narcissist mess will pull the Democratic ticket down in the fall--maybe not in the presidential race, but it sure as hell will have an effect on the balance between the parties in Congress.

But nobody cares. It's all about the presidential horse race.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 08:27 AM

Sorry, above line should have read: "...the bottom line for me became..."

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Bobert
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 09:47 AM

It juts ight be the other way around, Fantz... One thing that has occured over the last few years is that the the Dems have reorganized from the "bottom-up" and have won local races where they didn't use to even run people... The are especially strong in suburban areas that were once Repub strongholds... There are a lot of issues, especially around developement" that has created this situation...

One of the reasons that Virgina, a traditionally red state, has become increasingly blue, is that suburbanites from Chesepeake to Northern Virgina have seen what happens when land use is "de-regulated"... And Virginia isn't alone...

So what we have now is a situation where federally elected folks are getting a boost from local issues...

Howard Dean gets alot of credit as well for spreading DNC $$$ around to more local precincts to re-organize...

But I agree that Obama is dealing with a number of external distarctions but I'd rather see him have to fight them now than later.. This is like the middle rounds of a 15 round title fight and it's a good opportunity for him to learn just how tough things can be... He needs these middle rounds and if they don't kill him he will come out of them tougher than he thought he could ever be... If ghe doesn't survive the McCain/McClinton/McMedia mugging then he will be in much better shape for the '12 campaign...

I really don't care thatr much if McCain wins... No matter what the Dems say about McCain being another 4 more years of Bush it won't be tghat at all... The economy can't withstand 4 more years and McCain ain't stupid... Yes, his trillion dollar tax cuts sound stupid but whomever in sworn in January 20, 2009 is going to have to do some major cleaning up of 8 years of "spend and borrow"... NO way out of it... If Donald D. Duck is elected he's gonna have to make the same hard choices...

This is reality...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 12:23 PM

Funny, I thought this trip was about our experience with Obama.

Emma B. I use the word "Snuck" To describe a trip into town with little advance warning, 18 hours before Obama's announced trip, and I get dumped on for being both racist against Obama and sexist against Hillary? Thanks a lot.

Here is some news for you sanctimonious Hillary clone. THIS IS NOT THE ELECTION this is the Internet. You are not going to turn one vote either way here and you are not going to change the attitudes of the American electorate by pissing on people posting here. Here is some more news. If I say that Hillary "snuck" then I say it because I honestly believe that she snuck. I am sure that she had what she thought were good reasons, not the least of which would be that she didn't want her little outdoor rally filled up with "curiosity seekers" who would not cheer her. But she snuck. Was that "snide" of me to say so? Bugger off, grow up!

You think that Hillary is the best choice? I know that you are wrong. On the one hand, she is running on her experience in the White House, on the other hand when her "experience" is politically inexpedient, she tells us now that all along she disagreed. We have found out that all of her "foreign policy experience" is negated by her lack of security clearance. Without her and her husband having committed treason she could not have known things that wouldn't have been in the papers. Breakfast conversations don't give you experience.

Hillary is risking the election and the destruction of her party for a very low probability of victory in the nomination. After February fifth the Oddsmakers were giving her a 15% chance, now it is up to 22%. In my opinion that is the same type of attitude and behavior that got us into Iraq. I don't want it getting us into Iran.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Azizi
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 12:50 PM

Moving right along, with regard to Senator Barack Obama's rally in Wilmington, here's a link to a great YouTube clip of that rally:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AeBpPjIlaEw
Obama to 82 year old, "Will you be my running mate?"

"Don't hit on Hillary, bring us all back, let her do that stuff. Leave her alone, you don't need to do that, you are higher than that. Bring us up higher than that," Weiss said with 82 years of experience.
Wilmington , NC. April 28, 2008

**

Here's a link to a dailykos diary that provides more information about this exchange that occurred during the Q&A portion of that rally.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/29/12241/0475/54/505397

**

JTS & CarolC, it's great that you both were at that event! Thanks for starting this thread, JTS, and thanks for all the work you two have done and are doing in your area!

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Emma B
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 01:11 PM

From the link provided by Azizi....

'During the question and answer session, an 82-year-old woman encouraged Obama not to attack his opponents'

Perhaps Jack could be encouraged to do the same in these threads.

Well you see Jack it's my 'view' that your choice of 'snuck' was exactly the same insiduous snide putdown as your description of 'her little outdoor rally'

Unlike yourself who 'knows' I am wrong, I don't claim to have absolute truths I merely express my opinions and would welcome adult rational debate rather than being called names and exhorted to 'bugger off' and 'grow up' because I have the temerity to simply disagree with you.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 01:55 PM

Ms. Weiss spent several minutes speachifying before asking her question. I couldn't hear what she was saying very well because there was an echo on the mics that were being used for questioners, but from what I could hear, I think she had a lot on the ball.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 02:08 PM

Emma B, your posts look to me as much like attacks as what you are accusing JtS of doing.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Emma B
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 02:14 PM

Carol you are welcome to your 'beliefs' - please permit me to have mine too without name calling and other playground bully comments.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 02:17 PM

Please show me where I have called you any names, or engaged in any "playground bully comments" against you, Emma B. Or are you now engaging in making personal attacks against me?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Little Hawk
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 02:18 PM

As I said way back there...everyone attacks. That's the nature of politics, unfortunately. Some attack a bit more politely than others. The one thing we all have in common is that we don't like being attacked.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Emma B
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 02:30 PM

Well politeness costs nothing and keeps the tone a little more 'civilized' :)

You are correct LH - no one likes being attacked personally for simply stating a preference which just happens to be contrary to someone who has had some kind of 'revelation'

I don't think I said that 'you' had used the bully boy language of the playground Carol but, as you yourself brought JtS into the equation .....

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 02:33 PM

I should mention that the reason many Obama supporters want him to not engage in attacks on anyone, including Hillary, is that this is what they have come to expect from him based on prior experience. They expect him to take the higher road and focus on issues instead. That is certainly the case for me. I was very uncomfortable when he was taking little shots at Hillary, saying she looked like she was in her element when she was taking shots at him.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 02:37 PM

Emma B, I honestly stated my opinion that your posts in this thread look as much like personal attacks as what you are accusing JtS of doing. You seem to think I am not entitled to an opinion on this matter. Another thing you are accusing others of doing.

You many not be using the same kind of tactic, but attacks come in many forms. Calling him a sexist because of his use of a term he borrowed from Hillary's supporters looks as much like a personal attack as anything he's said to you in response. And it looks to me like you started the personal attacks in this thread. He was talking about Hillary. You were talking about him.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Emma B
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 02:55 PM

LOL oh dear - do you use the same prompt cards too?

Carol, read my lips......
I don't like the negative campaigning that has been going on from EITHER side (please don't pretend this is all one sided) and I can recognize snide comments and selective use of language when I read them.

Now I'm not a 'Hillary clone' (although I realize that is a rather nasty insult in some people's lexicon) neither am I an uncritical defender of Obama but, like many people on this side of the Atlantic, I find the sorry spectacle of two Democratic candidates tearing each other apart an extremely unedifying exhibition.

I reserve the right to express a purely personal opinion that I considered Hillary Clinton to be the 'most electable' candidate (please note - NOWHERE did I suggest that Barack Obama was 'unelectable' or make Chicken Little noises!)

Now I understand that that appears to cause some people problems but - live with it eh?
'THIS IS NOT THE ELECTION this is the Internet'

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Bobert
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 03:08 PM

Yer right, LH... All do attack at some level even in defense...

As for Obama right now??? He is alone in the ring with McCain, McClinton and McMedia so he's a purdy buzy guy right now... I reckon he knows what Custer might have felt...

I think he will survive the onslaught myself but who knows... McMedia is real tricky...

Yo, CarolC,
Keep us informed on his comings and goings in NC... BTW, the P-Vine will be in NC thru next Tuesday for a national azalea convention and visiting the grand-youngins...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: gnu
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 03:13 PM

Custer? His marching song was Garryowen. Now it's a music thread, despite the awful screeching of shovels in hard ground.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 03:28 PM

Emma, I am not saying that your support for Hillary is a personal attack, or even the fact that you don't like the negative campaigning is a personal attack. I don't like negative campaigning either. I am saying that your comments about JtS look as much like personal attacks to me as anything he has said to you. That is my opinion, and I stand by it.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: gnu
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 03:36 PM

Don't stand so close to me. Sting's. Music thread again.

Sorry if my comments are trite. But, I try.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 03:38 PM

Because you are his wife, of course.

Which also answers the prompt cards question, I believe.

Birds of a feather, as they say.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Bobert
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 03:41 PM

"Hey, Mr. Custer
I don't wanta go..."

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 03:43 PM

Emma B.

Honesty costs nothing and it is a lot more constructive than pretend politeness and hypocrisy. If you didn't want a fight the first thing you ever said to me wouldn't be calling me snide. You have been a self righteous hypocrite in this thread. You have attacked first. In fact you have acted just like your hero Hillary. That's why I called you a Hillary clone. Her tactics are not working except when Obama responds. Your tactics are irrelevant because the Mudcat is not a political campaign. I'm telling you to bugger off, because there are better topics of conversation than how horrible I am. You obviously do not agree. But I am done with that conversation.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 03:46 PM

Looks like the personal attacks are coming in swarms now. I'd like to keep the personal attacks out of this thread, myself. But Emma started them, and I think she has the ability to at least stop making them herself. The reason I would like this thread to be free of personal attacks is because both JtS and I wanted this thread to be about the positive experience we had at the Obama rally. It's obviously too late for that, but perhaps if Emma would take responsibility for her own behavior, there would be less negativity on this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 03:48 PM

My last post was in response to someone other than JtS.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 03:51 PM

Emma B's link

Not a little out door rally.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Emma B
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 03:57 PM

Carol I have said that you are entitled to what you choose to 'believe' as am I - I have never claimed to 'know' what, or who, is 'wrong'

I also 'believe' I have the right to hold the 'opinion' that many of the repetitive plethora of threads, purporting to support Barack Obama, are actually very thinly disguised attacks on Hillary Clinton and there is more than a little element of 'sexism' present in some of the language used to put down any dissenters to this apparently uncritical adulation.

Note - I did not attribute this to any one individual but you are also entitled to read into my remarks anything you choose.

In addition, please note I have never told anyone to 'bugger off' or 'grow up' however great the temptation on occasions.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 03:59 PM

No Emma, your chosen method of attack is insidious, malignant, fake politeness and manufactured indignation. Mine is directness and honesty. Now bugger off!

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 04:04 PM

Well, Emma, as a gesture of your good will, perhaps you would like to take that discussion to another thread, maybe one that is about the thing you are complaining about, and leave this thread for the people who want talk in positive terms about the subject of this thread, which is the positive experience JtS and I had at the Obama rally yesterday.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Emma B
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 04:10 PM

'Hillary snuck in to town today (Sunday), according to some of her local blogging supporters, she was trying to steal the thunder from Obama's visit tomorrow. We shall see.'

If this is your idea of 'positive' I will be more than pleased to.

Maybe the content will more accurately reflect the thread title in future?

and btw - my 'indignation' is in no way 'manufactured'

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Bobert
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 04:50 PM

Actually, other than this thread all the recent threads that have been started have been started by one particular Obama basher...

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 05:48 PM

As he said, he was using that word after he saw Hillary supporters using it in reference to her visit to this town. The fact that you refuse to acknowledge this shows me that what you are interested in has nothing whatever to do with positive discourse. Now perhaps you will consider exiting the thread and allowing those of us who really are interested in positive discourse to continue the discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Emma B
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 05:54 PM

whatever Carol

feel free to enjoy your 'positivity'

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 05:55 PM

Like I said...

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 07:52 PM

I imagine the "thread closed" sign will go up soon enough. Wouldn't it be better to carry on these personal squabbles in separate threads rather than derail any kind of discussion that might be developing?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Riginslinger
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 08:07 PM

If we could just keep preachers out of politics, none of this would be happening.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 08:56 PM

I agree with you to some extent, Riginslinger. For instance, when pastors publicly endorse candidates, like the ones who have endorsed McCain, for instance, how are their churches able to maintain their tax exempt status?

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Sorcha
Date: 29 Apr 08 - 11:32 PM

Oh my, Carol and Jack are at it again. If you can't say something intelligent, say something anyway.

Sorry, Carol, but that is the way it appears to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Little Hawk
Date: 30 Apr 08 - 12:24 AM

"If you can't say something intelligent, say something anyway."

Ahem! Okay then, how about this...

If we could just keep penguins out of convents and seminaries, none of this would be happening!

(to paraphrase Riginslinger)

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 30 Apr 08 - 12:43 AM

You're entitled to your opinions, Sorcha. I would only point out that it appears to me that you are doing yourself exactly what you are accusing others of doing. Which is something I've come to expect from you over the years.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 30 Apr 08 - 12:57 AM

I also find it interesting that people think there is something wrong with JtS and I agreeing with each other from time to time. (People don't seem to notice that we frequently don't agree with each other as well.) But for some reason, agreeing with JtS is considered inappropriate, for no reason other than because he is my husband. I find that to be a profoundly bizarre and perverse kind of attitude.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 30 Apr 08 - 06:53 AM

Carol, you are right. We shouldn't project onto the two of you that way. In my experience, you are both your own people, and yes, I have seen you hold differing opinions. Mine was a cheap shot in that regard and I apologize. Sorcha's was a cheap shot as well, but you are right, it is what people expect of her. EmmaB, OTOH, is really dead on.

That said, JtS has been so belligerent, unbalanced, and unfair in his defenses of Obama, what on earth did you expect in this thread?

For weeks he and a handful of others have been railing against Clinton in the most unfair and often misogynist of ways, so of course his threads are going to draw fire.

Rant mode off.

Have a nice day.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Apr 08 - 09:34 AM

I suppose the trouble is, when its a GUEST involved in a squabble with a member it can't be conducted via PMs. But perhaps it might be better, when this happens, for the antagonists to start up a separate thread in which to square off against each other? Rather like moving out from the bar into the pub carpark to sort out a difference. Except in this case there's no danger of real blood being spilled. Just virtual blood.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 30 Apr 08 - 11:52 AM

You're entitled to your opinions, Fantasma, but I disagree with you about Emma B. I also don't think you are in any position to point fingers about people railing against any of the candidates.

Having said that, there is nothing misogynistic about JtS' distaste for Hillary. She used to be his second choice for nominee until he saw the kind of underhanded tactics she was using against Obama. That's what has caused him to revise his opinion of her and to come to profoundly dislike her as a person.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 30 Apr 08 - 12:03 PM

I have to disagree with you, too, McGrath. I find that the back channel stuff is frequently far more destructive than what goes on in the open forum, and is frequently the cause of bad feelings that surface in the open forum.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Dismayed
Date: 30 Apr 08 - 03:08 PM

Things I have learned during this campaign season:

In a race that includes a former First Lady of the United States and a multimillionaire Republican senator rumored to share up to eight residences with his wife, the black guy from Chicago is unforgivably elitist.

Racism in America is caused primarily by black Chicago preachers.

The guy who keeps getting confused over the relationship between Iraq, Iran, and al Qaeda is the foreign policy expert.

The guy who goes to campaign stops on his wife's private jet aircraft is the most down-to-earth.

The guy who changed his stance on tax cuts, Roe v. Wade, immigration, gun control, the confederate flag, torture, public financing, and his own anti-earmark rhetoric is the "straight talker".

People in the heartland don't like it when you call them bitter, but they do like it when you explain to them that they're too dumb to understand issues more important than whether or not they like to be called bitter.

Arugula is the measure of a man.

Bowling is the measure of a man.

Orange juice is the measure of a man.

Flag pins are the measure of a man.

Success in Iraq consists of any reduction in violence, except when violence increases that's good too.

A recession is only a recession if you call it one.

Bill Kristol, Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Karl Rove, Maureen Dowd, David Brooks, David Broder, Charles Krauthammer and Bob Novak are all intensely interested in giving advice to the Democratic candidates because they just want to be helpful.

There are people in this world dumb enough to believe every one of these things.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Fantasma
Date: 30 Apr 08 - 03:15 PM

Nice cut and paste, there Dismayed. I've read that one too.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: CarolC
Date: 30 Apr 08 - 03:54 PM

We just came back from Obama headquarters. The 82 year old lady, Ms Weiss, who Obama asked to be his running mate at the rally, was working the phones there. JtS and I had a nice chat with her. She's a pretty amazing person.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 30 Apr 08 - 04:22 PM

Fantasma,

I am used to reading things from you that I do not think have been thoroughly thought through. I will put you calling me a misogynist in that category. The only thing that I have said about Mrs. Clinton that has anything to do with her gender is saying that being First Lady is not a qualification for the President.

No thoughtful person would consider that misogyny.

Again, what Emma has said in her first post is not dead on. I repeated the word snuck and it was an accurate description for what she did. Nor was it particularly meant to be derogatory. Apparently it was a calculated move to steal some of the local spotlight form Obama. To a degree it worked, but the recent Rev. Wright flap made that point moot and got a lot of that attention back.

I have never called anyone a racist for not being enthralled. I did say that Ferraro was racist for saying that Obama was lucky to be where he is. Since then, she made a misogynist comment about her own Vice Presidential run. At this point, I am disinclined to call her anything but just crazy.

I have no sexist agenda against Hillary. I am against her because she is knowingly decreasing her party's chances for, at best, a one in ten chance of winning a two person race. I am against her because she has been actively praising John McCain in the same sentence where she dissed her own party member. I am against her because she has poorly managed her campaign. I am against her pandering and her close connection to and defense of lobbyists. I am also against her using her time as first lady as a qualification. I hope no one considers it misogynist to say that I don't want the first woman President to have ridden in on her husband's coattails.

There are other things, like her recent support of John McCain's "Tax holiday" that show me that we would get business as usual in DC if Mrs. Clinton is elected.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 30 Apr 08 - 04:23 PM

Nice post Dismayed. If you got it somewhere else, please give credit.

Subject: RE: BS: Obama in Wilmington
From: Ebbie
Date: 30 Apr 08 - 04:56 PM

Things I Have Learned this Campaign Season