Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

FixCam Week in Preview: Great Outdoors Edition

Note: Please upgrade your Flash plug-in to view our enhanced content.

While tomorrow's presidential primaries in Kentucky and Oregon aren't likely to change the fundamental dynamic of the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, they will mark an important milestone in the contest.

Barack Obama, the presumptive nominee, is almost certain to secure a simple majority of the 3,253 pledged delegates up for grabs in the nomination process. Heading into Tuesday's votes, Obama has 1,602 pledged delegates, or 49.25 percent of the total number at stake in the primaries.

Oregon has 52 pledged delegates, and Obama is expected to win a clear majority of both the popular vote in the state and its delegates; Kentucky has 51 delegates at stake, and Hillary Rodham Clinton should win handily there.

Claiming a majority of the pledged delegates will represent a significant marker in the race, argues the Obama campaign. Tuesday is an "important" day in the campaign, according to campaign manager David Plouffe, but not a determinative one. "We are definitely not going to declare victory," Plouffe added. "We have to get to 2025" (i.e. the simple majority of delegates needed to claim the nomination outright).

Down a level, both Oregon and Kentucky play host to competitive and intriguing Democratic Senate fights.

In Oregon, state House Speaker Jeff Merkley (D) is the favorite of national Democrats but has struggled to get his campaign on track and is in a much closer than expected contest with Democratic activist Steve Novick.

Polling shows that neither Merkley nor Novick is particularly well known and that either could win tomorrow. Democrats argue that either of their candidates will give Sen. Gordon Smith (R) a serious run in the fall, Merkley's difficulties in the campaign to date should raise questions about whether or not he can topple the likable Smith.

In Kentucky, wealthy businessman Bruce Lunsford is the heavy favorite in the Democratic primary despite his two primary losses in 2003 and 2007 races for governor. If Lunsford wins, he moved on to face Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R), whom Democrats argue is vulnerable but is also one of the most able and effective campaigners in the Senate.

Assuming Lunsford and Merkley win tomorrow, both of these seats will remain on the national radar screen throughout the summer and fall. If either or both fall, it could take two seats off the table in November.

By Chris Cillizza  |  May 19, 2008; 8:55 AM ET
Categories:  FixCam  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: McCain's SNL Appearance: 'Oldness' as a Plus
Next: Managing the Obama-Clinton Merger

Comments

And the reason that a Lunsford/Merkley victory would keep the races on the national radar screen, while a victory by their opponents would take the seats off the table, is what exactly?

Chris, sounds like you've been drinking the Kool-Aid.

Posted by: Jay Gold | May 20, 2008 9:40 AM | Report abuse

It appears DDAWD is at Obama headquarters


I really do not believe it is appropriate for a campaign to conduct itself in this manner.


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 10:45 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD and bsimon


Apologies are in order from the two of you, your attacks today were vicious lies, the entire day long.


http://tinyurl.com/6gcstl

This video clip is the proof of your lies and deception - Tim Russert directly questioning Obama.

yes, your wonderful Obama, lying through his teeth, time and time again on the clips.

What a joke.


The whole thing was pre-planned by the Obaam campaign to blame Hillary the whole time through.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 8:26 PM | Report abuse

To all who have lied and deceived us about Obama today

http://tinyurl.com/6gcstl This link will show you the truth


clips from 3 networks......


Formal apologies are in order.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 8:22 PM | Report abuse

I support Senator Hillary Clinton She is a strong candidate. Senator
Clinton will win Kentucky and Oregon. Watch the results!

Posted by: mmarii | May 19, 2008 4:16 PM | Report abuse

CC:

When is the registration going to be "Fix"ed?

Posted by: mnteng | May 19, 2008 3:25 PM | Report abuse

"Ferraro was accused by the Obama camp of making statements that were "offensive" this was generally viewed by clear-thinking Americans as a false charge."

Well, I personally found the comments more moronic than offensive, but heck, I can't argue with anyone who does find them offensive.

If the ONLY example you have of Obama playing the race card is this stretch, well, I think that pretty much makes my point that he's never done it.

Posted by: DDAWD | May 19, 2008 3:01 PM | Report abuse

for the curious, from last week, the Post article titled "Clinton Quiet on Own Ties to Radicals"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/18/AR2008051802101.html

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 2:50 PM | Report abuse

To the poster at 2:12


I have news for you - in the 90s the Weather Underground alumni were at the DNC in Washington - under CLINTON !!!

Then Clinton did some pardons.

The Clintons have ties to the Weather Underground as well - however it does not appear to be as close as Obama's ties to Ayers - that of a close political mentor.

Senator Barack Obama (D-Weather Underground)

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Response to FirstMouse


The democratic party had no right to drag the voters of Florida and Michigan into their dispute.


They should have figured out another way other than saying the voters, who were essentially innocent bystanders in an intra-party dispute, do not count.

This is typical of the democrats, it is everyone else's fault except their own.


Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Response to FirstMouse


The democratic party had no right to drag the voters of Florida and Michigan into their dispute.


They should have figured out another way other than saying the voters, who were essentially innocent bystanders in an intra-party dispute, do not count.

This is typical of the democrats, it is everyone else's fault except their own.


Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 2:35 PM | Report abuse

Translator


YOU are one of the main causes for the negative atmosphere on this board,


All you do is snipe at people.

I would not be surprised if you were employed by Obama himself - or Michele Obama - or the Rev. Wright.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

Translator


YOU are one of the main causes for the negative atmosphere on this board,


All you do is snipe at people.

I would not be surprised if you were employed by Obama himself - or Michele Obama - or the Rev. Wright.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 2:32 PM | Report abuse

11:05, Cooler Heads Will Rule:

"Florida and Michigan have to count somehow - AND those are Hillary states"

Yes, and Hillary has been saying that everyone should be able to vote if they choose to exercise this right.

How does she propose to make operable this right to vote and to have one's vote count by Floridians and Michiganders who stayed at home or at work because they were informed that voting in the primary held by their states was meaningless?

Will Ms. Clinton join and lead others who have sought "do-over" voting in FL and MI? Or are her words merely campaign rhetoric meant to de-legitimize the votes won by the candidate who played by the rules?

Posted by: FirstMouse | May 19, 2008 2:24 PM | Report abuse

Words of Wisdom wrote:

GDA is 100% Correct


Michele Obama got into Princeton -


Still she was not proud of America


Michele Obama was given student loans and grants to go to Princeton -


Still she was not proud of America


Michele Obama got into a good law school


Still she was not proud of America


Michele Obama got a good job at a good law firm


Blah blah blah, and it just kind of rambled on like that....anyhoo, so WOW, your idea of taking pride in America is taking Pride in what you can personally gain? Instead of say, the masses who are not quite as lucky as she was, or pride in enviromental policy, or the way we conduct business with the rest of the globe, or taking pride in say...not starting stupid wars???

Do tell...

Posted by: Charles W Gray | May 19, 2008 2:22 PM | Report abuse

for the curious, from last week, the Post article titled "Clinton Quiet on Own Ties to Radicals"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/18/AR2008051802101.html

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 2:17 PM | Report abuse

" this relationship with Ayers is not that long ago - in the mid 90s, Obama was still a State Senator in 2004."

So... Obama's relationship with a 60s radical in the 90s is grounds for dismissal, but Clinton's relationship with 60s radicals in the 60s is not?

It seems the critics are looking for reasons to explain their dislike of Obama, rather than establishing consistent criteria by which to analyze the candidates.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 2:12 PM | Report abuse

Ferraro unwittingly tastes delicious irony. As the candidate who has most benefitted from demographically-motivated selection processes, she now accuses Obama of the opposite infraction.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/05/geraldine-ferra.html

"Ferraro, a staunch Hillary Clinton supporter who sparked a brouhaha earlier this year over whether she made a racially dismissive remark about Barack Obama, apparently is no longer a reliable Democratic vote.

Ferraro, in the NYT story, terms Obama "terribly sexist." And, as a result, she says she may not be able to cast her ballot for him if, as anticipated, he gains the Democratic presidential nod."


latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/03/ferraro-comment.html

Ferraro didn't call Barack Obama, Clinton's rival in the battle royale for the Democratic presidential nomination, a "monster." But in an interview with the Daily Breeze of Torrance, Ferraro broached Obama's race in a way that diminished what the Illinois senator has accomplished.

"If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position," she said for an article aptly headlined "Geraldine Ferraro lets her emotions do the talking."

She went on: "And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept."


How amusing of Ms Ferraro to overlook her own history of running for national office - an opportunity that would not have presented itself, had she not been a woman. It seems she has projected upon others her own experience of being selected for her gender, rather than her gifts and abilities. Sorry sister, that chip on your shoulder is apparently blocking your view of reality.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 2:09 PM | Report abuse

To the poster at 1:56


OK maybe you have some points there - I have not researched those - However, a political mentor who launches a political campaign for someone is a little closer to a candidate than some people one had some associations at a very young age.

Not to excuse any of it.

HOWEVER we are talking about OBAMA having a close political relationship with William Ayers - that AYERS helped Obama get his start with Obama's STATE SENATE campaign - actually in AYERS' HOUSE.

The story is the previous State Senator was retiring -


Ayers recommended Obama to fill the State Senate seat - offered to help Obama with the fundraising and clearing the field for Obama to win the State Senate seat.

A very close relationship anyone in politics would have to recognize.

AND this relationship with Ayers is not that long ago - in the mid 90s, Obama was still a State Senator in 2004.

Look up this story and read about it yourselves.

.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Response to the poster at 1:44 who refuses to call himself a name

I really do not see too much tolerance in politcal correctness.


I don't see too much tolerance or respect for opposing viewpoints on this board either.

Even today false charges of "racism" have been sent out.


Mind you, those people would only use that label against white people - having those same people apply the racist charge to a follower of Black Liberation Theology - that is way too much for them to grasp.


well.

I really do not believe that you want to see the hypocrisy in the Obama campaign - you want the benefits from claiming to be post-racial, however Obama is not really your man.


Obama does not cut it.


Find someone else who can restrain himself from the attacks on Bill Clinton, exercise restrain in the attacks against Gerry Ferraro AND someone who does not have a long running history with a Black Liberation Church.

OH - find someone with some EXPERIENCE TOO.


.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 1:58 PM | Report abuse

1:48 p.m. post

"The codeword 'clear-thinking Americans' is shorthand for 'the tiny minority of hardcore bigots that I shill for.'

I apologize that my posts are unclear and need to be translated. Please understand that my sock-puppet schizophrenia makes lucidity difficult. Thank you to the Translator for this valuable service."

Posted by: 37th&OStreet Translator | May 19, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

"Practically the entire political establishment of the country agrees that Obama played the race card against Bill Cliton."

Since you love buying into the media hype, almost every media outlet viewed it the same way. If it looks like a dog, smells like a dog, and barks like a dog. Then it is probably a dog.

Also, you were big into the Ayers thing against Obama, now that that article showing Hillarys connections between Black Panthers and Communists, I see you backed off that line of attack. What happened?

Posted by: Stop the insanity | May 19, 2008 1:56 PM | Report abuse

To the Poster at 1:44


I am militantly against affirmative action.


I do not believe in any racial preferences at all.

I believe in a colorblind society - and a completely level playing field in all admissions and hiring.

I was offended by the whisper campaign against Bill Clinton after South Carolina and before SuperTuesday.


I was offened by the attacks on Geraldine Ferraro.


I am offended by all the attacks against Freedom of Speech.

I guess I am intolerant of somethings, like people killing innocent people in New York - I do not like that.


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 1:53 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD


Ferraro was accused by the Obama camp of making statements that were "offensive" this was generally viewed by clear-thinking Americans as a false charge.

This is your problem - either you do not understand, or you are pretending.


OR you are attempting to create a deception.

Go ahead, try It will not work - We are going to be here, calling you on all your lies, deceptions, and hypocritical actions until you go down in defeat.

And Obama will have to go home to Michele.


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 1:48 PM | Report abuse

Just a reminder to zouk's sockpuppet and WoW and his sockpuppets: like manure in the garden, a little concern-trolling goes a long way. You may be used to the smell, but everyone else is turned off by it.

And a reminder to CC and the Post: trolls kill blogs dead. What's going on in here lately in most threads is little better than spam. Please Fix The Fix, or at least police the comments until you have a fix.

Posted by: novamatt | May 19, 2008 1:45 PM | Report abuse

Between Words of Wisdom and 37 & O, they have to be the least tolerant people on this board, except for svreader, of course they could all be svreader trying to post comments so he can agree with himself.

#7th and O, if you seriously think you are a tolerant person, you are seriously mistaken. Just reads your rants on this block and the amount of times you bring up race, that is a sure sign when all you do is argue about race, you surely cannot be a tolerant person, unless you are referring to your tolerance toward white people.

Then keep on fighting the good fight, and when the war is done get off your horse and take off your white sheet and your pointy white hat and crown yourself the Grand Wizard.

Kudos to you and your "tolerance". Did David Duke happen to be your teacher?

Now go cry in your next post about how people in the Obama Camp are saying these things. What about normal people who believe in equality and see you trying to bait people into race discussions. Shame on you and your parents for raising such a misguided fool.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 1:44 PM | Report abuse

DDAWD please review the posting at 12:53

you must have a problem with your computer


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 1:43 PM | Report abuse

"There are several examples there."

So, cmon, let's see one.

This is reminding me of that scene from Hardball where Chris Matthews is trying to talk about Neville Chamberlin and his appeasement of Adolf Hitler. The guest BSed for like five minutes until it becomes clear he has no idea what the heck happened to appease Hitler.

Same thing here. WOW can BS for days and nights about Obama's playing the race card and how its all over the media and stuff.

But ONE example? Nah.

Mainly because it never happened. We all know it.

Posted by: DDAWD | May 19, 2008 1:39 PM | Report abuse

'Mitch McConnell is rumored to have more in common with Larry Craig and Mark Foley than Kentuckians realize. If the truth comes "out" before the election, old Mitch might not be such a lock for reelection.'

Posted by: harlemboy | May 19, 2008 11:38 AM
----------------------
Don't forget McShame's great VP choices Sen Lindsey Grahm and Gov Crist.

Posted by: Patrick NYC | May 19, 2008 1:32 PM | Report abuse

Hillary projected to win in "cracker" Kentucky...what a surprise!

Posted by: A.Lincoln | May 19, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

Response to WOW

If Obama's playing of the race card has been played over and over, then surely you can tell me what he said, can't you? I must have missed it.

And Ferraro worked for Clinton, not Obama...

Posted by: DDAWD | May 19, 2008 1:29 PM | Report abuse

bsimon Please review the posting at 12:53


There are several examples there.


We also re-posted the original thesis - that playing the race card - falsely claiming that untended comments were "offensive" - is a form of racism against whites.

It is also an attempt to silence people which is an attempt to limit the civil rights of freedom of speech.

I thought we would repeat the idea because apparently you didn't get it the first time.

So while you are all off congratulating yourselves in a park about how against racism you are, you can think about how you are being racist against whites for seeking to limit their freedom of speech.

I don't see you going down to the Black Liberation circles and saying they are being racists so they should stop.


NO it is just the bloggers you dont like - the rules only apply to the white people, right ????

THAT is racism.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

Do we know the real status of McCain's health? Is his cancer in true remission or is its real status just hidden from the media?

Does anyone wonder if McCain's age is the reason he seems so tired in the late afternoons and evenings? Or is it something else like early signs of alzheimer's disease?

Does McCain actually have the physical stamina to survive more than a couple of months in the presidency if elected?

When will these questions be asked and answered by McCain?

Posted by: Short Termer Mccain | May 19, 2008 1:26 PM | Report abuse

bsimon has a good point - he is describing exactly the tactics used by Obama between South Carolina and SuperTuesday.

Employing a whisper campaign on race - like Obama did against Bill Clinton is out of bounds -


However, it gives everyone in the country a green light to go against Obama in the same way.

Obama can not claim immunity after what he did to Bill Clinton after South Carolina.


There appears to be a lack of ability of the Obama campaign to think ahead - they really should not have done that whisper campaign and complained about Bill Clinton's remarks the way they did.


The Obama campaign did it again with Geraldine Ferraro.

Don't you get it? If you don't agree with the Obama people, they want to push you out of the party.


Ferraro does not want to vote for Obama?

NO CLEAR THINKING PERSON SHOULD.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Obama Family should first read the American history and role of The First Lady in the White House.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Lady_of_the_United_States

Americans are also very scared of Michelle Obama in the White House.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 1:13 PM | Report abuse

ddawd asks
"Hey, are you ever going to provide evidence that Obama or his top guys have ever played the race card?

Like just even one piece of evidence?"


Ddawd- its not their intention to report facts, or have a rational, respectful discussion of the issues. Their intention is to win elections, by whatever means necessary. If all you care about is winning, the means are irrelevant. If a nonsensical whispering campaign is more effective than the facts, you go with the whispering campaign.

Posted by: bsimon | May 19, 2008 1:07 PM | Report abuse

Michele Obama is out there on the campaign trail - she is fair game

It's not like she has been staying home the whole time.

What Obama teaches his children is fair game - if it's Black Liberation Theology the public has a right to evaluate that and make that a part of the assessement of Obama.

.

Posted by: Well Well Well | May 19, 2008 12:59 PM | Report abuse

It is actually AMAZING that after it is pointed out to these Obama people that playing the race card is a form of RACISM AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE, that they continue to do it.


I am offended by the Obama people who continue this practice.


Again, it has been stated, that this practice is an ATTEMPT TO LIMIT THE CIVIL RIGHTS OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH OF WHITE PEOPLE.


Apparently, there is no respect her for the First Amendment.


When I was younger, they taught that the essence of the First Amendment was tolerance.


Now all I see is intolerance with these Obama people. IT is unAmerican.


Call me Old School, I don't care.


Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 12:55 PM | Report abuse

Response to DDAWD


The example of Obama playing the race card has been repeated several times today : the attacks on Bill Clinton's remarks after South Carolina, in which he was FALSELY accused of "offensive remarks."

Again, the Gerry Ferraro episode can be cited again.

The "typical white person" comment, the bitterness comments.

Not exactly sure what Planet you are on, or if you have been following the democratic primaries this year from January until now.


Ddawd it appears that you have been out of touch with the media since 2007.

.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

Response to DDAWD


The example of Obama playing the race card has been repeated several times today : the attacks on Bill Clinton's remarks after South Carolina, in which he was FALSELY accused of "offensive remarks."

Again, the Gerry Ferraro episode can be cited again.

The "typical white person" comment, the bitterness comments.

Not exactly sure what Planet you are on, or if you have been following the democratic primaries this year from January until now.


Ddawd it appears that you have been out of touch with the media since 2007.

.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 12:53 PM | Report abuse

dePaul Consiglio

The NYTimes quoted Mr Obama today May 19,2000 Monday on our calendars as saying he has come "full circle".So have we.
This is great since now we are back to square one and that means that everybody has a chance at winning.

Vote for America


Into the Future and Back to the Age of the Pioneers.


Regarding,

dePaul Consiglio

Posted by: dePaul Consiglio | May 19, 2008 12:51 PM | Report abuse

DDawg


Practically the entire political establishment of the country agrees that Obama played the race card against Bill Cliton.

What a joke.


Now you will brush it off by saying its a lie.


Seriously, maybe you have been on Planet O for too long.


Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

DDawg


Practically the entire political establishment of the country agrees that Obama played the race card against Bill Cliton.

What a joke.


Now you will brush it off by saying its a lie.


Seriously, maybe you have been on Planet O for too long.


Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 12:49 PM | Report abuse

Don't count out Greg Fischer to be the democrat to face Lunsford in Kentucky. I am a Republican, but Fischer's had a lot of ground presence across the state and clearly won a debate between the two a few weeks ago. Lunsford also has a few ghosts in his closet from a few years ago--he ran for the democratic gubernatorial nomination in 2003 (as well as 2007, when he was defeated) and dropped out five days before the primary to support the republican candidate, who went on to win the race, become indicted for ethics violations and is considered one of the worst governor's in anyone's memory. Democrats still hold a grudge for Lunsford awkward choice of support. Look for a strong Fischer showing or, with some likelihood, a Fischer upset.

Posted by: Meguy11 | May 19, 2008 12:48 PM | Report abuse

"It is actually AMAZING that after it is pointed out to these Obama people that playing the race card is a form of RACISM AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE, that they continue to do it."

Hey, are you ever going to provide evidence that Obama or his top guys have ever played the race card?

Like just even one piece of evidence?

Posted by: DDAWD | May 19, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

It is actually AMAZING that after it is pointed out to these Obama people that playing the race card is a form of RACISM AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE, that they continue to do it.

I am offended by the Obama people who continue this practice.

Again, it has been stated, that this practice is an ATTEMPT TO LIMIT THE CIVIL RIGHTS OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH OF WHITE PEOPLE.

Apparently, there is no respect her for the First Amendment.


When I was younger, they taught that the essence of the First Amendment was tolerance.

Now all I see is intolerance with these Obama people. IT is unAmerican.

Call me Old School, I don't care.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 12:42 PM | Report abuse

12:29 p.m. post

WARNING - Does not compute. Posting is utter nonsense. Translation impossible.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet Translator | May 19, 2008 12:39 PM | Report abuse

"McCain's Campaign Led by Tainted Lobbyists".

That McCain is dependent upon lobbyists for his career, campaign and myth is not a surprise. Anybody who digs into McCain's record quickly realizes that it is one curveball of deception after another.

In the ad, MoveOn focused on McCain's brain, lobbyist Charlie Black. Specifically the ad focused on Black's work as a lobbyist for despots in Angola, Zaire and the Philippines back in the 1980s.

That got my attention. Jack Abramoff was also a lobbyist for some of these same despots back in the 1980s.

And yes, Charlie Black and Jack Abramoff are linked.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

How much does the game change if Hillary somehow wins Oregon? The polls are much tighter than imagined this close to the election. What happens with an upset?

http://www.political-buzz.com/

Posted by: matt | May 19, 2008 12:37 PM | Report abuse

"Obama is a complete hypocrite to claim to have a campaign about being post-racial and transcendent of race - and then turning around and playing the race card."

Yeah, this one is also a lie, no race card played.

Posted by: DDAWD | May 19, 2008 12:34 PM | Report abuse

"Obama's nomination will be forever tainted by the RACIAL whisper campaign conducted against Bill Clinton after South Carolina"

Well, its already been well established that this is a lie. Just thought I'd repeat it for newcomers

Posted by: DDAWD | May 19, 2008 12:30 PM | Report abuse

pineoakhill


You are free to go to the New York Times, have they rehired Jason Blair yet??


How about Judy Miller is she still there?


You can blame the Obama people for the nasty personal comments on this blog - however we have to defend the truth, justice and the American way.


Say hello to Christine Quinn when you are in New York.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

no one cares what losers think.

Posted by: gbooksdc | May 19, 2008 12:29 PM | Report abuse

GDA is 100% Correct


Michele Obama got into Princeton -


Still she was not proud of America


Michele Obama was given student loans and grants to go to Princeton -


Still she was not proud of America


Michele Obama got into a good law school


Still she was not proud of America


Michele Obama got a good job at a good law firm


Still she was not proud of America


Michele Obama lef the law firm because she didn't like it

Still she was not proud of America


Michel Obama got a job at a hospital paying $300,000 per year

Still she was not proud of America

Do I have to go on ?????

.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

I have to remind Chris that his board has been taken by too many vulgar comments in contrast with the ones on the NYT's comments board. This will be my last post here for a long while.

Posted by: pineoakhill | May 19, 2008 12:26 PM | Report abuse

Now we know how Michelle Obama learned how to hate America.

Michelle Obama: "For the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country."
You can not blame America and cash in $360,000.00 annual paycheck.
Here in rural America, it takes TEN families to earn that kind of money. We still love America!

Sorry, Michelle Obama lost this election for Barack.

Posted by: GDA | May 19, 2008 12:15 PM | Report abuse

Obama - your wife will have a great deal of influence on the office you are running for.


Michele Obama's views are fair game.

If you don't like it Obama, don't run for President.

The FACT that Michele Obama appears to be a militant supporter of BLACK LIBERATION THEOLOGY - and this is how Obama has agreed to bring up his children - that is fair game.

Obama, come off your Planet, WHAT you teach your children IS FAIR GAME.

.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 12:09 PM | Report abuse

Translator


I have a valid point that pretending that some comments are "offensive" when they were never intended that way is a form of RACISM AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE.

I believe many people in this nation were ACTUALLY OFFENDED by the whisper campaign against Bill Clinton after South Carolina.

The hypocrisy of the Obama campaign is clear - I believe this episode was pre-planned - AND at least a few people said, "hey doesn't this go against our message of a post-racial campaign."

That is the history Obama has made.

A case study in how NOT to run a Presidential campaign.

It goes to Obama's lack of experience.


It goes to Obama's lack of leadership ability.


It goes to the lack of anything on Obama's resume that did not come to him via some affirmative action program or racial quota or whatever.


Read Obama's book, see how offended he has been about everything.

Typical White Person.

.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

The great, neo-con economic experiment is over and the results are in. Outside of the top 1%, there's less income growth than in any past business cycle. The key macro-indicators, such as employment, GDP growth, and investment have faired uniquely poorly. The "ownership society" is a cruel joke: homeownership rates are falling for the first time in decades.

The defenders of the status quo will howl in protest: the Democrats blocked us, the terrorist attacks and the war changed everything, we must stay the course to victory! But such rhetoric should be dismissed as what it is: the last, desperate gasps of a dying movement. They've had their turn and they've failed.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 12:05 PM | Report abuse

WASHINGTON -- Democrat Barack Obama has a message for Tennessee's Republican Party: "Lay off my wife."

Obama, his party's presidential front-runner, and his wife, Michelle, were asked in an interview aired Monday on ABC's "Good Morning America" about an online video last week by the state's GOP taking her to task for a comment some considered unpatriotic.

"The GOP, should I be the nominee, can say whatever they want to say about me, my track record," Obama said. "If they think that they're going to try to make Michelle an issue in this campaign, they should be careful because that I find unacceptable, the notion that you start attacking my wife or my family."

He called the strategy "low class."

Posted by: republicans have no class | May 19, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

WASHINGTON -- Democrat Barack Obama has a message for Tennessee's Republican Party: "Lay off my wife."

Obama, his party's presidential front-runner, and his wife, Michelle, were asked in an interview aired Monday on ABC's "Good Morning America" about an online video last week by the state's GOP taking her to task for a comment some considered unpatriotic.

"The GOP, should I be the nominee, can say whatever they want to say about me, my track record," Obama said. "If they think that they're going to try to make Michelle an issue in this campaign, they should be careful because that I find unacceptable, the notion that you start attacking my wife or my family."

He called the strategy "low class."

Posted by: republicans have no class | May 19, 2008 12:04 PM | Report abuse

I too am a racist with nothing else to do but sit here and blither racist epithets all day. I hate thm all...

Posted by: 37&0 Street | May 19, 2008 12:02 PM | Report abuse

HILLARY TO SURPRISE WITH OREGON SQUEAKER

Obama will win, but by a razor-thin margin


His huge crowd this weekend notwithstanding, Obama's about to receive a big Hillary surprise as she loses by only a hair's breadth in tomorrow's Oregon primary.

Voters want another choice. Not necessarily Hillary -- but tomorrow, that's all they've got on the ballot.

So look for Hillary to capture 48 percent of the vote to Obama's 52 percent.

Obama's agitated over-reaction to Bush's "appeasement" remarks and to criticism directed at his wife once again demonstrates his thin skin and his inability to respond to political attacks with a show of strength rather than pique.

Voters are beginning to detect an empty suit here. Obama's dismissive attitude toward voters in West Virginia and Kentucky underscores his effete, elitist tendencies. Yes, the ugly spectre of racial politics has been injected into the primary contests. Had Obama shown some counterpunching, he could have at once narrowed Hillary's margins of victory and also demonstrated that he's got the courage to campaign for votes among all blocs of voters, "red necks" included.

By ceding those two states to Hillary, Obama only perpetuates the racial narrative that he oddly has been unable to overcome since the early "post-racial" days of Iowa.

Obama has tried to pretend the primaries have been decided. He's straining to play the role of the anointed one. But the truth of the matter cannot be hidden by a thin patina of premature self-congratulation.

Obama is wearing the Emporer's new clothes, and voters are starting to see through the artiface. Tomorrow, Hillary's narrow loss once again will tug at his sacred robe, revealing a candidate ill-equipped for the coming fall battle.

And once again, the supers will nervously huddle and ask, "What do we do now?"

And once again, some will whisper the name that has become code for a "third way": Al Gore.

Posted by: scrivener | May 19, 2008 12:00 PM | Report abuse

George Burns:

Too bad that all the people who really know how to run the country are busy driving taxi cabs and cutting hair.

Posted by: Duh | May 19, 2008 11:56 AM | Report abuse

Posted by: Peter | May 19, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

Please read my words and believe them, do not look at the man behind the curtain. I am a bigot who has to throw out words like Islamic nations, and militant Black Liberation Theology when speaking of Obama, in the hopes of creating a white uprising and denouncing Obama.

I say these things so when people respond to my hate speech and call me a racist, I can use that to vilify the Obama camp for playing the race card. Me thinks me is so smart...

Posted by: Words of Wisdom Translator | May 19, 2008 11:54 AM | Report abuse

People in America are really scared of racist idiots like me, who have nothing else to do but live in my mommy's basment and type racist insults all day long.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 11:52 AM | Report abuse

Mitch O'Connell is definitely a member of the Larry Craig Club [as is about half of the Republican party, why they obssess on it so much] but the question is whether it will uh, 'come out' this time...


Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 11:50 AM | Report abuse

oBaman is so far left that he has left America. He left us with "GD America" crowd with maxed out credit card debt.

Kentucky found out more and they do not like what he has to offer to America. That is why he is down by 30 points in Kentucky.

Folks in Oregon are also finding out in panic. As of last night, his margin is down to 4 points only and the real trend line is going south. oBaman Team is so worried about margin of victory in Oregon, they had to move to Montana for Tuesday night speech.

People in America are really scared about real oBaman.

Posted by: oBaman 8002 | May 19, 2008 11:42 AM | Report abuse

Quote in today's Washington Post article by Williams - on the how the democratic women in the democratic party view the Obama supporters:


"There's just been an attitude that if you aren't voting for Barack Obama, then you're a racist," said Cowley, 49, a mother of four from Massachusetts who has vowed to never back the senator from Illinois. "I just find that intolerable. I feel like when the members of the media talk about how [Obama's supporters] would react, they say, 'Well, we can't take the vote away from African Americans.' Well, excuse me, there's a higher percentage of women."

*********


My comment here from here is that the Obama supporters on this blog support this statement - in fact one of them just called Words of Wisdom a racist for no reason at all.

At this point, in America this discussion is out of control. Obama has caused race relations to go backwards.

However, calling someone a racist without sufficient justification is being a RACIST against white people - it is offensive to white people - it is an attempt to limit the CIVIL RIGHTS OF FREEDOM OF SPEECH OF WHITE PEOPLE.

I suggest that the Obama supporters stop these offensive actions immediately and get back to the main topic of the campaign: why they support Black Liberation Theology.


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 11:40 AM | Report abuse

Mitch McConnell is rumored to have more in common with Larry Craig and Mark Foley than Kentuckians realize. If the truth comes "out" before the election, old Mitch might not be such a lock for reelection.

Posted by: harlemboy | May 19, 2008 11:38 AM | Report abuse

Here's just a small sampling of how this has played out in just the last six years:

Al Gore needed to be taught how to be an "alpha male." He doesn't "know who he is."
John Kerry "flip-flops" like a flaccid penis.
John Edwards is "the Breck girl."
Howard Dean was "hysterical."
Barack Obama is "Obambi."
Bill Clinton was "a pervert."
Hillary Clinton is a lesbian.

The underlying premise of the modern conservative movement is that the entire Democratic party consists of a bunch of f*gs and d*kes who are both too effeminate and too masculine to properly lead the nation. Coulter says it out loud. Dowd hints at it broadly. And the entire press corps giggles and swoons at this shallow, sophomoric concept like a bunch of junior high pom pom girls.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

11:32 a.m. post

"Stop pointing out the obvious! Obvious to all but me, that is. This is a free country, and I am free to make up whatever I want, no matter how foolish it is.

Here are some more meaningless buzzwords I will use to justify my post-racism: anti-white, affirmative actionized, pre-racial, liberation theology, liberal, blah blah blah."

Posted by: 37th&OStreet Translator | May 19, 2008 11:36 AM | Report abuse

I hate them all.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 11:35 AM | Report abuse

This is now the official blog for racists. Nobody else on here but us.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 11:34 AM | Report abuse

The posting at 11:29 was not made by me,

however, it is the Obama people playing the race card again.

.

Posted by: Words of Widsom | May 19, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

11:28 a.m. post

"Fools! You can't keep my message down! Affirmative action is the response barriers my kind have thrown up to artificially keep people smarter and more talented than me out of school and the workplace. Look at the dangers the Obamas present to me - both smarter and driven than me. Now do you see why affirmative action must be banned?"

Posted by: Words of WIsdom Translator | May 19, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

It's all about his race.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 11:33 AM | Report abuse

Response to Translator


Am I the only one, or are your postings becoming more difficult to understand ?


As to what appears to be your point, I would be happy to discuss with you the meaning of "post-racial"

On one condition: you forward the remarks to the Obama Campaign who instead of actually practicing being "post-racial" decided to play the old politics of playing the race card by pretending to be "offended."


This is the history which Obama has made - an entry in the Hypocritipedia.

.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 11:32 AM | Report abuse

I am a racist and I openly admit it.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 11:29 AM | Report abuse

Below is apparently is the passage under discussion for anyone who is concerned:


This is the campaign


This is the campaign issue this year, whether you like it or not.


These are the actions of Obama himself. Obama, lacking much on his resume other than items from affirmative action programs, must be evaluated on what his campaign has done.


************************************


Obama's nomination will be forever tainted by the RACIAL whisper campaign conducted against Bill Clinton after South Carolina -

it will be studied for generations in colleges on how not to be a hypocrite while running for President.


This all coming from a campaign that initially claimed to be post-racial transcendent of race.

This is a major stain on Obama's record.

Right next to the thousand of dollars he gave to Rev. Wright's church which advocated a "Black Values System" and militant Black Liberation Theology.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 11:28 AM | Report abuse

While there are good grounds to question Sen. McConnell's service to Kentucky as now its senior Senator, he is a lock to be re-elected , particularly if his opponent is Mr. Lunsford, who alienated many Kentucky Democrats by running as a Democrat for Governor in 2003, withdrawing in what many view as a pique and then endorsing the Republican candidate, Mr. Fletcher, who won and served one particularly rocky term. McConnell is very smart and his campaigns in the past have been very effective. That he is rightfully lumped as a Bush Administration acolyte is not too much of a handicap in Kentucky. The Kentucky race is unlikely to be on The Fix's Top 10 list this fall.

Posted by: Robert | May 19, 2008 11:27 AM | Report abuse

11:01 a.m. post

"They have turned on me as Words of Wisdom. That durn Translator - coot coot!

In the context of my posts, 'post-racial' means a license to bigotry."

Posted by: 37th&OStreet Translator | May 19, 2008 11:15 AM | Report abuse

From "Head of State"
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/05/hot-bush-injection-brief-history-of.html

Monday, May 19, 2008
Hot Bush "Injection": A Brief History of Appeasement

It was this morning, while on the elliptical machine, that I heard the 20th (when I began counting) reference to Bush having "injected" foreign policy, via his raising of "appeasement" before the Knesset, into the Democratic campaign debate.

Aside from the face that a Bush injection would likely require more investigation from the FDA and CDC than vaccinations laced with 50% thimerosol, the discussion, which has shown surprising legs, has revealed a remarkable lack of basic knowledge about the distinctions between negotiation (e.g. Nixon's intervention with, at the time a rogue Chinese state, which largely prevented conflict and helped to usher China into the family of nations; ) and appeasement--ranging from the Kevin James school of international policy negotiation through utter lack of knowledge to more informed but still significantly incomplete or incorrect understandings of appeasement as it has been used in this context.

Therefore, I provide you with brief, fully accurate history of the "appeasement" that has been raised in these debates, so that those who wish to use actual fact in advancing their arguments can do so (For those who wish to continue to rely on insinuation, distortion, or the ritual, repetitive, seemingly talismanic use of the cry "He's an appeaser! You know! Like Munich! Like Chamberlain!" without knowing what this actually means. Please proceed to Remedial History, room 101B. No gum).

The Munich Agreement:

The Brief Pre-History of Munich:

Hitler, levered into power in January of 1933 (ironically after their first significant national election outcome decrease in 1932, after which they very well may have faded into their earlier insignificance) through the dramatic miscalculations of former Chancellor Von Papen (who, in his proposed role as Vice-Chancellor, hoped to be the "power behind the throne", and to return to the Chancellorship) and prominent Nationalist Alfred Hugenberg, among others to isolate and co-opt Hitler in a cabinet of Conservative Nationalists ("We've hired him"--Von Papen; "We've boxed him in"-Hugenberg), who persuaded the reluctant, aging President Hindenberg to accept this agreement, soon gained primacy and control over the cabinet, government, and increasingly the nation, through a series of questionable legislative (e.g. "The Enabling Act") and viciously revolutionary and counter-revolutionary (i.e., the elimination of other political parties, the Rohm Purge, brutal and cynical anti-Semitic actions by the SA, the Gleischaltung or "Coordination" of virtually all German organizations and press in 1934) actions.

After gaining such control, and with an autarkic economy that, from the start, invested huge sums in rearmament, Hitler brought the German military into coordination as well, under the aegis of the compliant General Blomberg, and with a shared mission of challenging the restraints placed upon German armament under the Versailles Treaty which followed World War I (Hitler's railing against this treaty had been a key element in the rise of the Nazis to power, particularly in the most dire economic phases of the Weimar Republic). In a series of shocking and escalating violations of this treaty, Germany announced the reestablishment of the German Air Force (1935), the reoccupation of the Rhineland (1936) and the Anschluss of Austria (1937), Hitler began an express drive for expansion conveyed as a correction of the Versailles Treaty, but in fact a clearly stated intent to increase the "living space" (Lebensraum) of Germany, and to attain hegemony in Europe (and, eventually, beyond).

In 1938, under the pretext of incorporating the Sudeten Germans who lived in Czechoslovakia (and utilizing Czech Nazi sympathizers to provoke manufactured "incidents" among this group), Hitler continued this expansionist drive by threatening, beginning in the famous "Weekend Crisis" of May 20-22, 1938, to attack Czechoslovakia on behalf of the Sudetens. Months of anti-Czech propaganda created by the Goebbels-controlled ministry continued through June, July and August. Following a vicious tirade at the conclusion of the Party Congress against the Czechs on Sept. 12, threatening action if the "issues" regarding the Sudetenland were not resolved. This provoked a wave of fear and disturbance across France and the Sudetenland.

As a result, on September 15, Neville Chamberlain flew to Munich to meet with Hitler. Hitler, in this first meeting, presented Chamberlain with an apparent fait accompli, stating that he would settle the matter himself "one way or another", clearly implying force. Chamberlain met this with the remark that under such conditions, there was no further point in talking--after which, Hitler tactically receded and stated that if the question of incorporation of the Sudetenland was open, discussions should continue. Hitler's ultimate goal here was to use the tactic of Sudeten independence to force Czechoslovakia to cede the Sudeten potion of its nation to Germany, claiming that "we want to Czechs"--e.g., the remaining part of the country--and that without such an incorporation, he would attack--thus unleashing the protective guarantees of France to Czechoslovakia, and thereby, a second World War.

Under such pressure, France, Britain placed pressure on Czechoslovakia to cede the Sudetenland. Hitler, Mussolini, Chamberlain and Daladier (the French premier) provided the basis for the Munich Agreement--which indeed carved off the Sudetenland, leading to Chamberlain's notorious statement of "peace in our time"--set along side Goebbels statement that "We have achieved everything we wanted according to the small plan, while the big plan is...for the moment, not realizable".

Hitler, in fact, intended to incorporate the rest of Czechoslovakia--and was described as disappointed that the agreement had denied him the opportunity for a war against the Czechs that would allow him this full territorial conquest in a single step. In March of 1939, following a similar propaganda barrage regarding Slovakian nationalist independence, Hitler threatened Czech President Benes with the razing of Belgrade, should he not cede the rest of the nation. Under such threat, Benes collapsed, and the Germans seized the remaining portion of Czechoslovakia without resistance.

Ironically, these constant risk-all gambits led Hitler to his fatal mistake--the conquest of Poland, which, although "victorious", led Britain, France, and ultimately the USA to enter the fight against Germany, and Germany to seek to end the battle against these enemies by removing their most likely ally--the Soviet Union--a combined two front battle which led to the downfall of Nazi Germany.

Appeasement here was agreeing to give away Czechoslovakia. It was shameful--and wrong.


Negotiation: Talking To Leaders

Two examples:

Nixon's Rapprochement With China:

Despite the well-known failings of the Nixon Presidency, Nixon's engagement with China remains a signal achievement. Note that Nixon, throughout his career, was an ardent fighter of Communism. Thus, we might have fully expected him to take the "negotiation is weakness" position with a country that, at the time, was regarded as a rogue nation in the West.

Nevertheless, this fervent anti-Communist chose to negotiate--a marked change from previous U.S. policy--and continued to do so even as highly inflammatory border attacks occurred between China and the Soviet Union in 1969, stating that "We simply cannot afford to leave China outside the family of nations." (a statement that would likely draw errant fire of commentators from the Right if it were uttered today). With a persistent diplomacy through 1969-1972, culminating in a meeting with Chou en Lai, these negotiations led to a dramatic thawing of relations with both China and the Soviet Union--where, in meetings with Leonid Brezhnev, an anti-ballistic missile treaty, a trade agreement worth a billion dollars, and a SALT treaty were signed.

Reagan and Gorbachev

Reagan, of course, was noted for referring to the Soviet Union as the "Evil Empire."
Despite this stance, he too was willing to negotiate with Gorbachev in the interests of nuclear disarmament--and despite the objections of many on the Right, whose statements at the time regarding the weakness of negotiation could be easily grafted onto the present debates.

As we know, Reagan's meetings, according to Alan Greenspan, "started the sequence of geopolitical initiatives that led Mr. Gorbachev to figuratively tear down the Berlin Wall", and contributed to the break up of the Soviet Union.

Many from the right called for aggressive military action--for missiles first, rather than negotiation. Reagan, in negotiating, was proved right.

Note that in each case, the President talked with a leader who they regarded as hostile--in the face of those who argued then, as they do now, that talking--negotiation--signifies weakness.

In each case, talking--strong, informed negotiation--did not result in appeasement of the aggressor, but instead resulted in the desired outcome--in one case, the component breakup of the aggressor nation--in another the end of a threat of nuclear conflict--without a single loss of life.

Negotiation is not appeasement.

When negotiation is chosen, however, it will be the case that those who simply wished for the visceral strike--the simplistic first solution of subduing an enemy through the use of might--will not find its satisfaction. We have seen the results of this position, throughout the years--from the events recounted in the first section, to the present.

Perhaps, in negotiation, it is *they* who have been appeased.

If so, given history--this was a favorable outcome indeed.

Cite:
Head of State
http://headofstate.blogspot.com/2008/05/hot-bush-injection-brief-history-of.html

Posted by: Robert Hewson | May 19, 2008 11:11 AM | Report abuse

Glennmcgahee


I guess Obama actually brought someone in who could count - and found out he didn't have the votes yet.


It is kind of bizarre all this talk about Hillary being mathematically out of it.


Perhaps it is Obama who is mathematically prevented from getting the majority number either.

By the way, there are 50 STATES in the country, not 48 or 57, so Florida and Michigan have to count somehow - AND those are Hillary states - so Florida and Michigan are the tiebreakers - for Hilllary.


Posted by: Cooler Heads Will Rule | May 19, 2008 11:05 AM | Report abuse

To the commenter at 10:38


Obama is a complete hypocrite to claim to have a campaign about being post-racial and transcendent of race - and then turning around and playing the race card.

What do you think? You got away with it?

The Obama campaign got away with NOTHING - what Obama has done is RUIN his reputation for generations - no one in this country will take Obama seriously for anything.

The Obama campaign will be in the history books - for this hypocritical move - as a lesson on what stupid moves never to try again in future campaigns.


Obama did it to himself, that is the hilarious thing about it.


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 11:01 AM | Report abuse

Obama's nomination will be tainted by that whisper campaign against Bill Clinton, falsely claiming that the black community should find those comments "offensive."


Sorry.

I was offended by the actions of the Obama campaign, how about that ???

.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 10:55 AM | Report abuse

Words Of Wisdom = 37 and O so stupid

Posted by: Sore-Losers | May 19, 2008 10:43 AM | Report abuse

Words of Wisdom = Fear monger, race baiter


Yeah words of wisdom, this is how you unite a party, by spewing this garbage.

Posted by: Socom | May 19, 2008 10:42 AM | Report abuse

Whispering campaign? How about a shouting campaign by Bill Clinton and then getting caught by his own words.

============
Obama's nomination will be forever tainted by the RACIAL whisper campaign conducted against Bill Clinton after South Carolina -

it will be studied for generations in colleges on how not to be a hypocrite while running for President.


This all coming from a campaign that initially claimed to be post-racial transcendent of race.

This is a major stain on Obama's record.

Right next to the thousand of dollars he gave to Rev. Wright's church which advocated a "Black Values System" and militant Black Liberation Theology.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 10:38 AM | Report abuse

Words of Wisdom needs a new monniker, maybe Cruel thoughts of the mindless?

Posted by: nclwtk | May 19, 2008 10:36 AM | Report abuse

Lately most people choose not to give a monkey's about Ann Coulter, her acolytes or her vomitus passed off as insight. Let's try to keep it that way, shall we?

We all have the freedom to be bigots and hatemongers, but there's no obligation to exercise that right.

Posted by: FlownOver | May 19, 2008 10:35 AM | Report abuse

Put this in your favorites and refer back frequently. This is just the beginning as we expose this fraud.

http://www.mccainpedia.org/index.php/Main_Page

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 10:35 AM | Report abuse

I was so looking forward to Obama's coronation Tuesday. What happened? I thought he had it all wrapped up to declare that he is President on Tuesday. What changed? There were announcements all over the news and internet that he would declare victory tomorrow.

Posted by: Glennmcgahee | May 19, 2008 10:33 AM | Report abuse


Translator


Is there anything that you might find particulary offensive today - we would like to know


Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Translator is back !!!


(Please no one notice that the word "translator" makes him a sock puppet)

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 10:26 AM | Report abuse

Translator is back !!!


(Please no one notice that the word "translator" makes him a sock puppet)

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 10:26 AM | Report abuse

Did David Plouffe actually realize that declaring victory based on pledged delegates might not be such a good idea, since the superdelegates whose votes Obama actually needs, might feel that Obama's campaign is attempting to marginalize them?

Did David Plouffe come up with this himself, or did someone call him and tell him?

Obama and this superdelegate saga is becoming a little silly - why has it taken over 2 months for Obama to get the superdelegates he now has?

Obama needed to declare victory with North Carolina, he lost his window.

Michael Barone talked about this in his piece over the weekend.

Obama has no choice right now than to support the seating of Florida and Michigan delegates, watch Hillary pull ahead in the popular vote and then Obama must make his case to the remaining superdelegates.


That is where he is right now.


Metrics mean nothing outside of arguments to get superdelegate votes - it would be wise to avoid metrics which marginalize the superdelegates.

I am actually pondering a word which describes that idea if that was really the plan of the Obama campaign.


.

Posted by: 37th&OStreet | May 19, 2008 10:24 AM | Report abuse

9:59 a.m. post

"I have completely lost it. The combination of backing the wrong candidate and being mocked with great hilarity on this board has left me completely unhinged. Will my lunacy transfer to my sock puppets? We shall see."

Posted by: Words of Wisdom Translator | May 19, 2008 10:22 AM | Report abuse

Response to the Poster at 9:35


You are attempting to control not only the speech of the people, but their thoughts as well.

I take issue with your hostility toward the First Amendment and with Constitutional Freedoms in general.

I am beginning to wonder if the supporters of Black Liberation Theology have less support for Constitutional Freedoms because they believe that the Constitution originally did not outlaw slavery.

Do you find that comment offensive? Certainly something to think about whether you are offended or not.


.


Posted by: Well | May 19, 2008 10:11 AM | Report abuse

Novamatt, Blarg, blert, Bokonon and Colin -

pls email me at

mark_in_austin@operamail.com

some of us want to hear from you.

Posted by: MarkInAustin | May 19, 2008 10:06 AM | Report abuse

To the poster at 9:35


Which comment do you find offensive? I have many so many.


I am not sure which one you are referring to.

Please be specific next time so I can repeat it. By the way, we have FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN AMERICA.

That means we are FREE in this country to BE OFFENSIVE.

I believe your posting is an attempt to silence my point of view - that is unAmerican. And please, tell me what offends you again so I can do it again.


.

Posted by: Words of Widsom | May 19, 2008 9:59 AM | Report abuse

Obama's nomination will be forever tainted by the RACIAL whisper campaign conducted against Bill Clinton after South Carolina -

it will be studied for generations in colleges on how not to be a hypocrite while running for President.


This all coming from a campaign that initially claimed to be post-racial transcendent of race.

This is a major stain on Obama's record.

Right next to the thousand of dollars he gave to Rev. Wright's church which advocated a "Black Values System" and militant Black Liberation Theology.

.


Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 9:54 AM | Report abuse

Novick would be every bit as strong a candidate against Smith as Merkley would be -- but alas, I'm not optimistic about either of them beating old moneybags Gordo.

Posted by: Oregon Democrat | May 19, 2008 9:53 AM | Report abuse

Hillary too. Here's Coulter again:

Q: Does Hillary Clinton have a good chance in 2008? What are her strengths and weaknesses? What did her reaction to your "Jersey girls" comments tell you about her as a potential candidate?

A: Good chance of what? Coming out of the closet? I'd say that's about even money.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 9:48 AM | Report abuse


"It was remarkable to see Barack Obama's hysterical diatribe in response to a speech in which his name wasn't even mentioned." McCain campaign

"If he is this prickly, he is way too much of a girly man to be president of the United States." Monica Crowley on the McLaughlin Report

"Well, at least they didn't kiss. I was bracing myself for the lip lock Wednesday when John Edwards endorsed Barack Obama....Obama and Edwards make an attractive picture -- Ultra Brite cover boys of youth and glamour
Kathleen Parker, Washington Post


Maureen Dowd has already blessed the meme with her oh-so-clever depictions of Senator Obama as an "anorexic starlet" and "desperate debutante."

I knew they would do it, but I didn't think they could get away with doing it so blatantly. Sometime back, I wrote:

I think that one of the reasons the conservatives are mostly hanging tough with Coulter is at least partially due to what she specifically said. She used the word "f*ggot" to describe a Democrat. This is the premise that forms the entire basis of the Republican claim to leadership and lies at the bottom of the media's continuing ridiculous assumption that the Republicans are more natural leaders than Democrats.

For forty years the Republicans have been winning elections by calling liberals "f*ggots" (and "d*kes") in one way or another. It's what they do. To look too closely at what she said is to allow light on their very successful reliance on gender stereotypes to get elected.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 9:47 AM | Report abuse

To the poster at 9:37 we have no idea who you are.

AND yes, you have been fooled.


.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 9:46 AM | Report abuse

To the poster at 9:37 we have no idea who you are.

AND yes, you have been fooled.


.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 9:46 AM | Report abuse

Oregonians draw implicit parallels between the Hillary vs. Obama and Merkley vs. Novick races. Merkley had all the advantages of being part of the party establishment, and got ambushed on his way to his coronation by a smarter, nimbler, more resourceful, more inspirational opponent.

I defer to Oregonians which would have the better chance against Smith in the fall, but from my perspective I'd rather have Novick as the nominee.

Posted by: novamatt | May 19, 2008 9:39 AM | Report abuse

'words of widsom' you are not a democrat. you don't fool anyone.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 9:37 AM | Report abuse

'words of 'wisdom' -- I have reported your comment as offensive. You are a stinking corpse, a warped and twisted piece of garbage.
You and your party deserve each other.

Posted by: Anonymous | May 19, 2008 9:35 AM | Report abuse

Hillary Clinton's votes will be tainted by the way she went about getting them. By exalting hard-working white Americans, she is dissing non-white Americans who also are hard-working...when they have jobs.

This is not the pathway to Party unity.

Posted by: FirstMouse | May 19, 2008 9:32 AM | Report abuse

SIMPLE MAJORITY IF ONE COUNTS ONLY THE VOTERS IN 48 STATES


Wait a minute ....

We all know that Obama believes there are 57 states, or he is getting confused with the 57 Islamic nations.

Once one includes the pledged delegates from Florida and Michigan - which more accurately represents the WILL OF THE PEOPLE - then Hillary has the majority of the pledged delegates.

Also, watch Hillary have the majority of the popular votes when Montana and South Dakota marks the end of the primaries.

.

Posted by: Words of Wisdom | May 19, 2008 9:28 AM | Report abuse

I think you are down playing Novick's chances in the fall. If he wins on Tuesday then I would expect him to make a serious run at Smith especially with Obama on the ticket increasing the younger vote which Novick should win handidly.

McConnel is safe in Kentucky. Although I don't like him the idea that he will fall is a pipedream.

Posted by: Andy R | May 19, 2008 9:01 AM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company