|
|
|
|
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/20/2008 9:06:34 PM | Racism is racism... doesn't matter what color the skin or what ethnicity the DNA.
Wright has stood out glaringly and will be a topic throughout this election year. If Obama's association with him had been casual... that would be one thing. Fact is it wasn't/isn't...and, that, like it or not, will be a major fact when the real race begins.
As for the rally... the rock star status rally... most will hang around to parttttyyy! period. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/20/2008 9:45:10 PM |
The point is simlasa, the idea these people came out to hear Obama is absurd.
75,000 people came out to see a low-level indie band play for 45 minutes?
That's more people than major music festivals like Lollapallooza get in a full day of music packed with big name bands. | |
|
| |
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/20/2008 11:40:34 PM | I think 75,000 were in the audience at the American Idol show tonight. Didn't look like a real large crowd to me.
Oh sheeett... not only have I admitted to being a neocon in another thread... now, I'm an American Idol watching neocon.
Does watching CSI have any redeeming qualities? I swear I watch it. All of em. CSI..CSI Miami...etc.  | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 12:29:58 AM | Hillary is going to find out the hard way that the map is not the territory.....the delegate map, that is. She'll get some of the Michigan delegates she wants, but not all of them. Same with Florida. Discounting some of the caucus states (like Hillary wants to do) is ridiculous.
After the rules committee meeting where Hillary's plans will get shelved, she'll have 3 more days to soldier on. On June 4th, the thing will resolve itself whether she wants it to be over or not. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 2:26:43 AM | The point is simlasa, the idea these people came out to hear Obama is absurd.
Oh COME ON, Phil!!! Even if you dislike him as a candidate, distrust him, are convinced he's going to be indicted, etc. ... Can't you give the man credit for SOMETHING??! 
Hell, he drew over 35,000 right there in Philly, Felllow! and neither Patti LaBelle, The Stylistics, or anyone else was out there in concert to lay claim to the crowd draw.
So if we say that 75,000 people (more than enough to sell out most baseball stadiums) came out to see The Decemberists ( ), it would stand to reason that everybody would've headed for home after the show, instead of breaking out their "Obama 2008" and "Yes, We Can" signs, right?
Well ... I'm sure you guys all know me and Montreal Guy by now; always ready with a link.
http://v.wordpress.com/S6VDfcPj
Now let's seat those FL and MI delegates and swear Barack in!!!  | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 3:49:16 AM | Shammy, it was a LOCAL Portland band that got extremely good reviews in the top rock music magazine for both their first two albums. You might not know how important that is, but young people into music do know. Reviews like that almost certainly means that band is going to get national exposure and their albums will get national distribution. Remember too it was actually two bands that performed that day giving a FREE concert.
Afterwards, the young people there after the last band had done their set probably thought,"Oh who is that big blowhard up there on stage? Hell, its gorgeous weather. Lets hang out with our friends and talk about the great music we just heard."
PhillyFellow | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 3:56:05 AM | Alright Vyper I'll give him credit for 35,000 but not 75,000.
After all, even John Kerry was able to beat that with a crowd of 50,000:
Kerry rally draws 50,000 in Portland, Ore.; Bush pledges port-dredging funds:
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_hb5553/is_200408/ai_n22217746
John Kerry, I'm sure you'll recall, lost to George Bush.
PhillyFellow | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 7:51:09 AM | the issue is WHY would the media not mention anyone being at this "political rally" other than the crowd and Obama
the only conclusion has to be that the media, which is supposed to be neutral, (neutral as in oh, BTW, it was a fantastic day, and oh, sure there were two rock bands, and oh, you can pull up your boats to watch, oh and it's FREE...) didn't include any of this...
the media has contributed to Clinton losing this race and this is one of MANY examples of their unprofessional bias in reporting, how else could you explain that they didn't report anything but Obama's presence and ignored the bands, weather, boats, location and price?
they're supposed to be reporters, not supporters~ | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 8:02:28 AM | Letter to journalists: the reason Hillary is still in the race.
I've sent sent this letter to some journalists I've corresponded with before. Hillary can't say these things because she's been commanded by the DNC leadership to play nice since they believe (wrongly) that Obama will be the nominee.
But we can say them.
PhillyFellow
===========================================
I liked your articles that were at least willing to give Hillary a fair shake.
However, it's time for me to be mean again against the national press.
The REAL reason why Hillary is staying in the race? It's right there staring the national press right in the face and they refuse to acknowledge it. Instead of reporting on the real reason they concoct increasingly preposterous reasons like she WANTS McCain to win, because then she can run against him in 2012?!?!
I'm sure you're wondering now what the reason is. Well, I already told you before what it is in a previous email:
Barack Obama - The Wizard of Oz
Saturday, 29 March 2008, 1:43 pm
Column: Evelyn Pringle
"The most trusted leaders of the Democratic party,
such as John Kerry and Ted Kennedy, ought to be
ashamed of themselves for supporting Barack Obama.
With use of the internet, a fifth grader could connect
the dots to show a picture of a guy who was picked up
in college and carried up the political ladder by a
corrupt gang of influence peddlers."
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0803/S00452.htm
This is a majorly important story but the national press is so deeply in bed with Obama that they refuse to report on it.
I remember during one of the debates Hillary made mention of Obama's connections to Rezko. I just got the idea there was just some shady deal where Rezko was able to help Obama get his million dollar house at a cut price.
But after researching the Obama and Rezko connections, and not just this series of Evelyn Pringle articles, but also articles the Chicago press have been writing for years, I'm convinced that Obama is deep in Rezko's pocket and has been during the entire time he's been in Chicago politics. In regards to the press, the most sickening thing about this is that since the national press is so deeply in bed with Obama, and Obama so deeply in bed with Rezko, this is tantamount to saying the national press is deeply in bed with the likes of Rezko. The national press is getting f***ked by Rezko and they don't even know it.
Once a few weeks ago, in a general politics discussion forum someone asked me if Hillary didn't get the nomination, would I vote for Obama or McCain? I said I would have to think about that. I admired Obama's work for disadvantaged people during his time in Chicago, but I admired McCain's stance as being a maverick in the republican party, sometimes voting against policies that George Bush supported.
But now I can't even give Obama credit for his work for disadvantaged people!
Barack Obama and his slumlord patron :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Tony Rezko:
Obama and his Rezko ties.
DAY ONE OF TWO
April 23, 2007
BY TIM NOVAK Staff Reporter/tnovak@suntimes.com
"For more than five weeks during the brutal winter of 1997, tenants shivered without heat in a government-subsidized apartment building on Chicago's South Side.
"It was just four years after the landlords -- Antoin "Tony'' Rezko and his partner Daniel Mahru -- had rehabbed the 31-unit building in Englewood with a loan from Chicago taxpayers.
"Rezko and Mahru couldn't find money to get the heat back on.
"But their company, Rezmar Corp., did come up with $1,000 to give to the political campaign fund of Barack Obama, the newly elected state senator whose district included the unheated building."
http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/rezko/353829,CST-NWS-rez23.stng
Obama's letters for Rezko.
NOT A FAVOR? | As a state senator, he went to bat for now-indicted developer's deal.
June 13, 2007
"Obama's letters, written nearly nine years ago, for the first time show the Democratic presidential hopeful did a political favor for Rezko -- a longtime friend, campaign fund-raiser and client of the law firm where Obama worked -- who was indicted last fall on federal charges that accuse him of demanding kickbacks from companies seeking state business under Gov. Blagojevich.
"The letters appear to contradict a statement last December from Obama, who told the Chicago Tribune that, in all the years he's known Rezko, "I've never done any favors for him."
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/425305,CST-NWS-obama13.article
Yeah, Obama had concern for poor and disadvantaged people, except when it involved his corrupt political cronies.
The Rezko trial has gone to the jury. Given the overwhelming amount of evidence against him, he will almost certainly be convicted. Because of his extensive list of charges, he will get a life sentence when convicted. There is little doubt he will accept a deal with federal prosecutors for a lighter sentence in exchange for testimony against his chief political cronies, current Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich and Senator Barack Obama.
Blagojevich will almost certainly be indicted. The one question is will the evidence revealed by Rezko be sufficient to result in an indictment against Obama? Even if it doesn't, his connections with the arch political corrupter Rezko and the soon-to-be-indicted Blagojevich will give republicans enough ammunition to make it impossible for him to mount a successful campaign in the Fall.
The Evelyn Pringle articles are long and involved. They are rather difficult to read on a computer screen. Most reporters wouldn't take the time to read them in detail. On Hillary Clinton support forums I suggested they be printed out on paper in an easier to read format, such as that used with newspaper articles.
================================================ | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 8:16:05 AM | | Hillary is losing because the media is right in the middle of a huge Obamargasm. Chris Mattews confirmed it with that funny feeling he had running up his leg during a broadcast. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 11:50:21 AM | Hey does anybody think Hillary Clinton would accept a Secretary of State position in a potential Obama cabinet? I think Secretary of State is more an appealing position in the party for her as opposed to VP. I think she would provide a great voice to promote American policy, considering how she totally kicked ass in the last televised debate. She and Bill would then get to travel the world.
She could decide to get further entrenched in party policy decisions if she pursued some sort of path that led to her being Senate leader. Or she might pursue governorship of New York. VP, I don't see that happening, especially with her Bill Clinton baggage. I think her chance to be president are pretty much shot. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 12:20:40 PM | If she ran for governor, I'd change my official residence to NY and vote for her. I probably wouldn't have stayed (or even picked) a man who couldn't keep is d1ck in his pants, but it's not my business if she wants to put up with it. I don't really care about the private lives of the candidates as long as they're not doing anything illegal.
I'd stay as far away from smelly Obama as I could. In the unlikely prospect that he becomes president, linking to him is a career ending move.
Wish this thing were over already so I could just join the McCain campaign. I'm not holding out any hope that Hillary will be the nominee, but if the unexpected should happen I don't already want to be committed to a campaign. | |
|
| |
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 12:28:33 PM | In the unlikely prospect that he becomes president, linking to him is a career ending move. Hillary is over 60 years old; after her next job, what else do you think she'd want to do? She definitely would have enough money to retire comfortably, even after taking a potential $10-20M loss because of her campaign expenses. She pretty much has only one more job left. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 12:36:13 PM |
I don't really care about the private lives of the candidates as long as they're not doing anything illegal.
I'd stay as far away from smelly Obama as I could.
I'm still wondering what it is then that you're "smelling," that you do care so passionately about that you are ready to back McCain.
I know that, despite my personal disgust at how stinkily Hillary has run her campaign, I would back her against McCain every day of the week if she won the nomination. That is because her, my, and Barack's political philosophies and positions are diametrically opposed to those of Senator McCain and I remain confident that her agenda will tend to better serve people like me than those like the corporate and independently-wealthy citizens who are most typically cared for by those under the Republican banner. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 1:40:56 PM | Hey does anybody think Hillary Clinton would accept a Secretary of State position in a potential Obama cabinet? I think Secretary of State is more an appealing position in the party for her as opposed to VP.
Not Secretary of State (because of her complete lack of diplomatic skill), but the Attorney General position might be great for Hillary. She has a strong legal background and there is no question that the reputation of the Dept. of Justice suffered a bit under Alberto Gonzales a while back. A stint as Attorney General could be Hillary's chance to finally prove that she can run a large organization. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 2:03:04 PM |
I don't really care about the private lives of the candidates as long as they're not doing anything illegal.
I would think that the church someone attends qualifies as "private life". | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 2:08:22 PM | I pictured John Edwards as Obama's AG.
I'm not sure why someone would assign a "lack of diplomatic" skill label on Hillary, just because she isn't a slick talking campaigner like BO.
I would think that the church someone attends qualifies as "private life". Yes and no.
Private sure if you attend for some spiritual reason (which Obama has now repudiated).
Public if you use the church's parishioners as a stepping-stone to local political jobs. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 6:46:39 PM | You guys he is winning. I know it may be hard to believe, but he is winning.  | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/21/2008 7:48:52 PM |
I would think that the church someone attends qualifies as "private life".
I mean their sex life or family life, not if they associate with bigots.
Can you see Condi Rice or Colin Powell at that church? Even Oprah was smart enough to leave. It's impossible that he didn't know what was going on there.
David Duke isn't doing anything illegal either, but I sure wouldn't vote for him. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/22/2008 2:07:02 PM |
I'm not sure why someone would assign a "lack of diplomatic" skill label on Hillary, just because she isn't a slick talking campaigner like BO.
It has to do with Hillary's divisive and polarizing demeanor. She has been a disruptive force ever since her days at Wellesley. She showed no diplomacy when she attempted to ramrod her health-care plan through Congress in 1993, alienating members of her own party. She showed no diplomacy when she hid Vince Foster's files from the Justice Department, forever casting a taint on Foster's reputation. Her current campaign shows the effects of a divisive leader who can't assemble a cohesive group. She showed no diplomacy when she eagerly threatened to "obliterate Iran" in her interview with Steve Kroft. And lastly, Hillary is showing no diplomacy by handling the delegate issue like a defiant pugilist rather than a facilitator. It's obvious that she's more concerned about making herself a place in history rather than quietly negotiating to seat the delegates. Her egocentricity and self-importance demand fireworks rather than resolution.
As president, Hillary would quickly deteriorate our reputation around the world even further. | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/22/2008 2:14:36 PM | She is losing because she is dishonest.
after swearing an oath to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States she voted for the Patriot Act. She voted in favor of attacking Iraq..........
She has never said she was wrong or sorry. Many, many, mnay people could see that the white house was lying about WMDs etc. So, she did not know , she was lied to is not an adequate claim.
She pissed off the progressives (who have turned out to be right on the money!) and they will not forgive her.
Progressives= Intelligent liberals | |
|
| Why is Hillary losing?
Posted: 5/22/2008 2:17:28 PM | Look, the two best examples of why Hillary has lost this were obvious.
First, she adapts the gas tax holiday plan of McCain. That's not smart, for multiple reasons. It gives your opponent ammunition, Ms. "Gee, thanks for copying MY idea".
Then she writes off economics, and economists, as elitists when they all go "D'UH , It doesn't work ! "
Add to that the concept of using Karl Rove in her own defense as a candidate, and you have a political analogy roughly equal to the Road Runner actually following that painted detour off the highway, and smashing into that painted tunnel entrance on the mountainside at top speed, while a smiling Wil. E. Coyote breaks out the knife and fork and ties a napkin around his neck.
For someone with all those decades of "experience" in politics, it's less than I'd expect from Ms. Ida Krump, PTA President candidate , in Woonsocket, Rhode Island. | |
|
| |
|
| Page 59 of 98
|
58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98 |
|
Home
login 
All links I found had Rove railing against Hillary. I'll read a cut and paste explanation if you can come up with one. 