BARACK OBAMA: PROFILE IN COURAGE!!!

Email Print posted by KenTX 04/29/2008 05:39:15 PM EST

Google Technorati del.icio.us digg reddit
If you like this story, digg it!
Barack Obama throws his beloved Rev. Wright under the bus.

Then he runs over him.

Then he backs up, and runs over him again.

Then, just for good measure, he runs over his own grandmother one more time, just so people know that he doesn't like her either.

Remember this famous political quote? I thought it could never be topped, until today.
< On Supreme Court ID ruling: Calm Down | Policies of Tyler Sutherland (Me) for Politics >
 Display:
BARACK OBAMA: PROFILE IN COURAGE!!! | 63 comments (63 topical, 0 hidden)
*yawn* (none / 0)
Not buyin' it.

by jarett on 04/29/2008 07:28:59 PM EST

Intelligent Design (none / 0)

After this post you probably need to watch the movie again.

That way you can make the incredible leap from the primordial mud.

 

by MRFred on 04/29/2008 09:08:39 PM EST

Ken: The Source of All Texans (none / 0)
What Obama is doing by backpedalling here is every bit as brave as Hillary ducking sniper fire and McCain making friends with his VC captors.  It's getting increasingly hard to choose between these three "pillars of virtue."

by OneHitKill on 04/29/2008 09:16:22 PM EST

[ Parent ]
telling details (none / 0)
missing from your sad little post; however, it is not surprising considering the source

by 1xx3xy on 04/29/2008 09:13:28 PM EST

hey BoboTX lets talk flip floppin wanna? (none / 0)
This one is great for starters.

"When it comes to getting U.S. troops out of Iraq, Sen. John McCain was for the idea before he was against it.

Three years before the Arizona Republican argued on the campaign trail that U.S. forces could be in Iraq for 100 years in the absence of violence, he decried the very concept of a long-term troop presence.

In fact, when asked specifically if he thought the U.S. military should set up shop in Iraq along the lines of what has been established in post-WWII Germany or Japan -- something McCain has repeatedly advocated during the campaign -- the senator offered nothing short of a categorical "no."

"I would hope that we could bring them all home," he said on MSNBC. "I would hope that we would probably leave some military advisers, as we have in other countries, to help them with their training and equipment and that kind of stuff."

Host Chris Matthews pressed McCain on the issue. "You've heard the ideological argument to keep U.S. forces in the Middle East. I've heard it from the hawks. They say, keep United States military presence in the Middle East, like we have with the 7th Fleet in Asia. We have the German...the South Korean component. Do you think we could get along without it?"

McCain held fast, rejecting the very policy he urges today. "I not only think we could get along without it, but I think one of our big problems has been the fact that many Iraqis resent American military presence," he responded. "And I don't pretend to know exactly Iraqi public opinion. But as soon as we can reduce our visibility as much as possible, the better I think it is going to be."

Gosh how is McLame going to explain this?

Or this . All of a sudden supporting torture when he rejected it

Or This. The war candidate not knowing the difference between a sunni  and his wrinkled  ass.  ( I can put links but Im to lazy look em up yourself your a google bomber you know how)

Since 4000 American guys are dead already  and the economy is tanking because of the occupation of Iraq . I think its more important than what a preacher said  20 years ago.

The Dems havent even started taking Mccain on and he is still behind BOTH Dems  in national polls.

Viva this

by Chinese Democracy on 04/29/2008 09:28:08 PM EST

(I have something (none / 0)
that will make you forget all about it.)

by KenTX on 04/29/2008 10:08:56 PM EST

[ Parent ]
How's McCain doing? (none / 0)
Pretty good, considering Hillary and Barack are on page 1 everyday, and he is way back on page 37.

1 

 2

by KenTX on 04/29/2008 10:35:25 PM EST

[ Parent ]
It's the other way around (none / 0)
McCain isn't doing well considering that he's not getting a lot of attention. It is precisely because he is " way back on page 37" that nobody's paying attention to his dumbass statements.

by Erik on 05/01/2008 02:23:28 PM EST

[ Parent ]
This is hilarious (none / 0)

Apparently bobo missed the memo that conservatives are now PRO-flip-flopping.

Wait until he hears serving and being wounded in Viet Nam, being in the Senate forever and having a rich wife are all now virtues.

by ProfRich on 04/30/2008 12:06:46 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Is that a NEW rope yer bitchin' 'bout? (none / 0)
I take comfort at the thought of Ken's face next November...

by MedfordTim on 04/29/2008 09:44:23 PM EST

Either way, (none / 0)
I'll still be smiling.

Nothing would invigorate the GOP like President Barack Obama.

by KenTX on 04/29/2008 09:58:25 PM EST

[ Parent ]
WOW!!! (none / 0)
You guys are really mad!

All I did was post a couple of links from Barack Obama?

I was really nice and sweet when I did it.

Please don't hate me for offering direct quotes from the Alpha Male of the Democrat Party.

by KenTX on 04/29/2008 10:06:12 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Nah! No "angry white guy" here (none / 0)
I'm glad that Rev. Wright decided to take the stage so early in the race instead of waiting. I'm with Cenk; I didn't feel "outrage" at all. The vitriol of the press and punditry seemed more over the top than Wright. Maybe this will deflate it close to nothing for when the Republicans bring it up ad nauseum in the fall.

I do feel like I'm so "fringy" after all this that I may have to quit commenting as it is obvious that I really don't have the faintest idea of what I'm talking about.

But...you knew that already...

by MedfordTim on 04/29/2008 11:57:01 PM EST

[ Parent ]
even more than (none / 0)
President Hillary Clinton?

by 1xx3xy on 04/30/2008 12:52:39 AM EST

[ Parent ]
good question (none / 0)
I don't think it matters.

There is a strong "eight year itch" (1960, 1968, 1976, 2000, 2008)

There is an even stronger "twelve year itch" (1992, 2012)

No party can hold power for very long in the U.S. The people will not allow it.

by KenTX on 04/30/2008 01:25:11 AM EST

[ Parent ]
nice try (none / 0)
2012.  four more years of bush policies is difficult to stomach.  just the thought makes my tummy hurt.

by 1xx3xy on 04/30/2008 01:36:07 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Hey Tim (none / 0)
Remember back just a few weeks ago when all of you guys were hugging each other and crying?

Do you feel even the slightest bit manipulated at this point?

Where are bobo and hubble and lord foul when you need 'em?

by KenTX on 04/30/2008 01:33:51 AM EST

[ Parent ]
premature elation (none / 0)
You sould be more careful about exposing yourself while "she" still lives.

Maybe, just maybe, your friends in the media miscalculated and shot their load to soon. They should have waited until he actually won the nomination.

My friends here are to emotional over the subject right now but shortly reality and common sense will sink in.

Obama's "rage" at Wright's comments' is too little too late and "look" completely manufactured for political expediency.

Obama's biggest problem coming into this election was that the "voters" didn't know him. Now they know him as the radical black candidate associated with the likes of Wright, Sharpton and Jackson. Who is only disagrees with them because he wants to get elected.

Is it B.S.? Yes! but it just doesn't matter.

We both know that the recession (that we're not in) will be over by mid summer and that "miraculously" gas prices will drop drastically by November.

The only real question is whether we are smart enough to nominate someone who can actually "win" the Reagan Dems in November.

by LORD FOUL on 04/30/2008 10:16:49 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Reagan was a Democrat once (none / 0)
There aren't any "Reagan Dems." That was 1980. This is now. If what you are courting are Republican voters crossing over to vote for a Democrat in November, say so. They are NOT Democrats, "Reagan" or otherwise.

If you want to support Hillary, more power to you. That's isn't my point. I just hate seeing Republican framing when it isn't necessary.

by MedfordTim on 04/30/2008 12:00:54 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Lord Foul is a very smart guy. (none / 0)
That's why I invited him to participate in this thread.

Tim: "There aren't any "Reagan Dems." That was 1980. This is now."

That's exactly what Lord Foul is trying to explain to you. If you nominate Barack Obama, there will be a new group of voters created. The McCain Democrats.

Why do you think that I voted for Obama?

by KenTX on 04/30/2008 12:50:10 PM EST

[ Parent ]
So thats how it works now? (none / 0)

You invite people to participate in threads?

You are such an arrogant pompous douche bag it makes my head hurt just reading this garbage.

And just to be clear, McCain Democrats are racists, right?

That is what you are promoting and counting on.  Just making sure we are all clear on that. 

by ProfRich on 04/30/2008 01:34:00 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Why not Lieberman? (none / 0)
There is no such thing as McCain Democrats. ANYONE who votes for McCain is stupid - doesn't matter which party they get contributin requests from.

by MedfordTim on 04/30/2008 03:12:07 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Was that rhetorical? (none / 0)
"Do you feel even the slightest bit manipulated at this point?"

I'm an American. I feel manipulated at EVERY point...

by MedfordTim on 04/30/2008 10:19:45 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Why do you need them? Feeling a little lonely? (none / 0)
Whats the matter boboTx? the forum changing to much for ya?

Manipulated by whom?  Rush? Hannity?  Bush?  Obama rocks   you dont

by Chinese Democracy on 04/30/2008 10:55:04 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Hey, Lord Foul (none / 0)
This simple post was even more effective than I thought. It sent the Obama people into orbit. They are starting to understand how gullible and easily manipulated they really are.

by KenTX on 04/30/2008 01:00:42 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Obama's Jive Talk Express (none / 0)
Michelle Malkin nails it. You will be hearing this phrase again.

by KenTX on 04/30/2008 01:16:27 PM EST

[ Parent ]
enhance your calm (none / 0)
Like I said don't get too happy yet.


My friends are idealists, they are not stupid.


My hatred for the media runs deep, that is why I knew something was amiss when it came to Obama. They buried Edwards over a haircut, An F'n hair cut for God's sake. Yet they turned a blind eye to this story until 2/3 rds of the way through our primaries? You would have almost thought that Obama was McCain or some other Pub.

and Tim there are "reagan dems" and it is that demographic we must win in order to secure this election. I don't exactly like her either but she stands a better chance of winning.

How about a truce, we kick both of them to the curb nominate Gore with Edwards. Make Clinton Chief Justice and Obama Secratary of State


by LORD FOUL on 04/30/2008 02:14:43 PM EST

[ Parent ]
thanks for the offer LF (none / 0)
But I really like the two candidates you are working with now.

by KenTX on 04/30/2008 02:39:52 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I expect better, Prof. (none / 0)
Invoke the name and the demon appears.

If you know of any Democrat voting Republican, tell them to change their affiliation. At least go Independent.

As long as people keep using that term, it will damage credibility for Democratic candidates.

by MedfordTim on 04/30/2008 03:17:37 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Sorry, not Prof but Foul (none / 0)
nuts...

by MedfordTim on 04/30/2008 08:05:14 PM EST

[ Parent ]
We're straight (none / 0)
I was gonna call it out but I didn't think it defamed me too bad

by ProfRich on 05/01/2008 12:00:17 AM EST

[ Parent ]
homer (none / 0)
God Bless America

People have the right to vote for whomever they want.

It's called democracy, you just can't stand that some simply won't kowtow to the party line.

When Pubs and Ind's cross over to vote for Obama I saw no complaints from the peanut gallery.

Like it or not the "reagan dems" are the group we must win in order to win in November.

They will vote for us (1992, 1996 & 2000) if we nominate a candidate they can rally around.

Your attitude is exactly the type of high minded elitism that turns those voters off to our candidates.

For people with such intelligence I wonder why we always seem to alienate the very voters we need to win elections.

You would think after the Nader fiasco in 2000 Liberals would realize that winning trumps principle every time.





by LORD FOUL on 05/01/2008 11:05:24 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Elite? Sure, that's me... (none / 1)
FUCK the "Reagan Dems" - If they are so fucking wishy-washy that they sway that easily, WHO NEEDS 'EM? Why should the rest of the party kiss their asses? Either they approve of a candidate or they don't. It is counterproductive to pander to these bastards, these REPUBLICANS.

If a Liberal point of view isn't popular enough to stand on it's own merits, SO BE IT. For far too long, Democratic candidates have courted their votes - other than the conservative Clinton, how has THAT worked out?

"People have the right to vote for whomever they want."

In the general election, sure. Primaries are intended to choose a party's nominee. To allow the other party to influence the decision is MADNESS. That ought to be the first thing changed in the party rules - the second being "no primary contests allowed prior to March 1st."

(Actually, no one has a complete "right" to vote for anyone they want. Geographical limitations come immediately to mind - can't vote for Mayor of Brunswick if you live in Eureka)

I don't think I understand your logic very well. Are you suggesting that "Reagan Dems" voted for Nader in 2000 and that's why Gore "lost?" Doesn't scan too well.

It's not fucking elitism to want the BEST. It is not elitism to EXPECT the person I choose to stick to promoting the values I revere and not pander to the unwashed masses who don't understand they vote against their best interest when they vote for a Republican. If Obama or any other candidate can convince them without subverting the agenda, cool - but don't go lowering the plan to lowest common denominator so the morons run the concession.

All you have to do is look at the last two years of Congress to understand that it does NO GOOD to "reach across tha aisle" because the fucking Republicans are playing their OWN game - and they WON with a MINORITY.

E

Fucking

Nough

by MedfordTim on 05/01/2008 04:25:51 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Great quote from Tim (none / 0)
"Republicans are playing their OWN game - and they WON with a MINORITY."

Exactly right. 

Republicans are dealing with an opposition that wants to withdraw all American forces from the Middle East immediately.

Republicans are dealing with an opposition that wants to turn the country into an economic clone of a European socialist state.

Republicans are dealing with an opposition that has a Reverend Wright viewpoint of the world.

Republicans are dealing with an opposition that wants to appoint activist judges to the Supreme Court to re-write the Constitution without amendments.

There is nothing for us to work together on. Our only objective is to prevent you guys from achieving your objectives. 


by KenTX on 05/01/2008 05:15:49 PM EST

[ Parent ]
More stupidity from Ken (none / 1)

Could say a lot but you all mostly know it anyway.

I did want to take a second to point out those "European Socialists States"  are kicking our ass economically and are poised to play second fiddle to the ascendant Chinese as we sink into third place.  In fact more and more countries are using Euros to buy oil instead of dollars which is evidently a significant factor in our collapse.

But as the saying goes, "if you can't beat 'em, demagogue insanely against their succesful strategies despite the fact your arguments make no sense in order to perserve your precious rich people tax cut." 

While I'm here, it is clear to everyone that Ken has no idea what the phrase "activist judge" means, right?

Fianlly, Ken thinks the GOP has no agenda but to stop the democrats. 

How was invading a country iligitimately just to stop the Dem agenda?  

How is giving billions to right wing religious groups just stopping the dems?

How is privatizing our army?  Letting contractors rape cute little Texas girls? Spying on the people? Torture? Treason?

This is the GOP strategy come election time.  "We don't have any policies, we just want to stop the evil things the Dems want to do."  Then you elect them and you get Bush. 

by ProfRich on 05/01/2008 05:49:41 PM EST

[ Parent ]
More (none / 0)
I did want to take a second to point out those "European Socialists States"  are kicking our ass economically and are poised to play second fiddle to the ascendant Chinese as we sink into third place.

The Europeans don't think they're kicking ass. Businesses are abandoning European states with high tax rates. Unemployment is much worse in Europe's socialist states than the U.S. Unemployment is 9 percent in France, 8 percent in Germany and over 12 percent in Spain. Many Europeans are frustrated with the socialist welfare state and are demanding American style reform.

by Twba on 05/09/2008 05:16:14 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Dear God! (none / 0)
Twba just beat Rich to a pulp!

Rich, are you still alive!

Rich!

Rich!

Rich!

Oh, the humanity!

by KenTX on 05/09/2008 05:20:31 PM EST

[ Parent ]
My graphs (none / 0)

I never said things are perfect in Europe, I said their economy is doing better than ours.  Explain these please:

GDP Here is the dollar vs. the Euro (Tip: down is bad for US)

Of course this is through last November.  Its gotten quite a bit worse since then.

by ProfRich on 05/10/2008 02:10:27 AM EST

[ Parent ]
European Economy (none / 0)
Here is a multi-year comparison of GDP growth between the U.S. and the EU. Rich's charts are from four quarters in 2005-2006, and even then the US was doing better than Europe.
deal with it

by KenTX on 05/10/2008 06:25:56 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Apples to Oranges (none / 0)

The "Euro Area" is not the "European Union."

It would include all the crappy little Eastern European countries and the economies too weak to join the "Socialist" EU.

My guess is this is an attempt at disinformation from the right.

Maybe Ken thinks area is spelled urea and that is why its EU.  Or maybe he is being duped.  Or maybe he is being deliberately deceitful.  You decide. 

by ProfRich on 05/10/2008 05:51:11 PM EST

[ Parent ]
apples to apples (none / 0)
You want EU/US comparative data? You should know by now that I'm happy to serve.

Notice how the U.S. bounced back after 9/11 and the dot.com debacle (in the middle of an expensive war) with the help of Bush tax cuts. 

here ya go rich

by KenTX on 05/10/2008 09:08:25 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Exactly (none / 1)
Republicans are working as hard as they can to screw the population, ruin the country, and line their own pockets while doing it by obstructing everything Congress tries to do to fix the Republican fuckups of the last 16 years.

To save you a post: Yes, about half the damn Democrats act as if they are Republicans and are just as big a problem as the REAL Republicans.

Why do you hate America?

by MedfordTim on 05/01/2008 05:59:20 PM EST

[ Parent ]
My friend (none / 0)
You are better than this.

Liberals set up this BS primary system

Most people support "liberal" positions but don't call themselves liberal

Clinton won & so did Gore that is how it worked out.


Gore won in 2000 remember with large reagan dem support, cept some "far left liberals" Dems couldn't live with voting for the "moderate dem" so they voted Nader. The rest, as we say, is history.


Bashing your head against a wall repeatedly and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity.

I never said that we had to reach across the aisle to work with Pubs. You have to reach out for the voters that is entirely different.

Wait a minute aren't you a big Obama supporter? Isn't he the candidate who can end the partisanship in Washington? Isn't that the BS you guys have been selling for months?

You mean you actually woke up and realized that the Pubs will never work with the Dems, any Dem. Including saint obama?

Watch them turn resko into Whitewater and then we can comiserate together


Ranting and raving isn't going to change the fact that, if you want the WH you must appeal to the Reagan Dems.

But then again the truth lies in your rage doesn't it. You have finnaly come to the realization that Obama isn't going to win in November and you need someone to blame.

Look no further then yourself

by LORD FOUL on 05/02/2008 02:18:42 PM EST

[ Parent ]
No, cut the bastards loose once and for all (none / 0)
Let them be Republicans if that's they way they think. If someone thinks Reagan was worth remembering in a positive light, then become a fucking Republican.

"Liberals set up this BS primary system"

No. They didn't. The current Democratic party system of having "superdelegates" was created in response to the McGovern campaign by CONSERVATIVE Democrats. Or, as YOU call them, "Reagan Democrats."

"Bashing your head against a wall repeatedly and expecting a different result is the definition of insanity."

Which is exactly what occurs every four years when the Democratic candidate tries to prove how far to the Right they can bend. The only possible outcome from this is a conservative like Clinton being the only one who slides in.

It's time to start being as LOUD as the fucking Conservatives - and time for Democrats to push the fucking Right away instead of embracing them.

You haven't been following my candidate preferences very closely, have you? Obama became my choice when it was down to the two of them I had pregerences for two other candidates who more closely mirrored my values. Instead, we have three conservatives of varying degrees again and I choose to support the least conservative of the bunch. And I fucking CRINGE every time I hear him talk of "bi-partisanship." ; "Bi-partisan" is just a code word for "Vote the way Republicans want." It never seems to work in any other direction.

And, frankly, no. I fully expect Obama to be the Democratic candidate and I expect him to win in November.

My rage is at the level of ignorance in this country and the lack of enthusiasm of people to understand even the minimum about the world they live in.

by MedfordTim on 05/02/2008 11:03:30 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Common ground (none / 0)
This country runs best from the center (there I think we disagree)

The primary system should be changed (?)

Were you an Edwards supporter? Me too. Ever wonder how his hair was "more" important than Wright until now? Let's say it together, Obama was chosen by the Pubs (MSM). That is why he got a free ride. This election has changed from being Dem vs Pub, it is now white vs black. We both know who wins that battle.

I do agree with your last sentence, the people are their own worst enemy. We have to find better ways to reach them. Reality bites, do you want to WIN or not. Clinton can carry the voters we need to win this election in November and we both know it. Also remember this Mr. Clinton was playing with a Pub congress, Mrs Clinton will be playing with a Dem Congress and that makes a world of difference.


Hillary and Obama need to align now Clinton as Pres and Obama as VP, Obama will then be able to show his stuff on a national stage and minimize the damage done by Wright. In 8 years Obama will be better known and better trusted. They might even agree to have Clinton step asside after her first term, so Obama can get his shot in 4 years.

Also remember this, she is old and has nothing to lose, Obama still has his whole career ahead of him.

TIMING IS EVERYTHING!!!!

WE NEED TO WIN "NOW"

by LORD FOUL on 05/03/2008 07:44:59 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Diff'rent strokes (none / 0)
The "center" might be nice...except it never is the center. Imagine American politics as a seesaw, six feet long. You would assume that the center would be at the three foot mark, right? But, sadly, no. The left side of our seesaw is only one foot while the right has five feet. The "center" has been out of alignment for decades.

When the alignment is readjusted, I might be more inclined to compromise. but for now we need to get our two feet back.

I still think Mike Gravel was the one closest to my core beliefs (except for his tax plan), but I leaned toward Richardson until he dropped out. I never really thought Edwards had a snowball's chance at getting the top spot.

Why you want to make me spew my coffee all over my keyboard? I'm sure you KNEW that would be my reaction at the suggestion that Hillary would willingly give up the office in four years. Bwaa-ha-ha-ha, that's FUNNY! 

I'll leave primary rules changing up to others. I truly don't think I'll be around for the next one, so it ain't my worry.

Timing IS everything - and Clinton's time is the PAST. I don;t want to go back - if I did, I'd vote Republican all the time! The future is now. Obama can and will win in November. 

by MedfordTim on 05/03/2008 10:51:46 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Common ground (none / 0)
This country runs best from the center (there I think we disagree)

The primary system should be changed (?)

Were you an Edwards supporter? Me too. Ever wonder how his hair was "more" important than Wright until now? Let's say it together, Obama was chosen by the Pubs (MSM). That is why he got a free ride. This election has changed from being Dem vs Pub, it is now white vs black. We both know who wins that battle.

I do agree with your last sentence, the people are their own worst enemy. We have to find better ways to reach them. Reality bites, do you want to WIN or not. Clinton can carry the voters we need to win this election in November and we both know it. Also remember this Mr. Clinton was playing with a Pub congress, Mrs Clinton will be playing with a Dem Congress and that makes a world of difference.


Hillary and Obama need to align now Clinton as Pres and Obama as VP, Obama will then be able to show his stuff on a national stage and minimize the damage done by Wright. In 8 years Obama will be better known and better trusted. They might even agree to have Clinton step asside after her first term, so Obama can get his shot in 4 years.

Also remember this, she is old and has nothing to lose, Obama still has his whole career ahead of him.

TIMING IS EVERYTHING!!!!

WE NEED TO WIN "NOW"

by LORD FOUL on 05/03/2008 07:45:09 AM EST

[ Parent ]
LF (none / 0)
Hillary was out saying today that no matter who ends up being the D nominee we should back them 100%. Good on her . I will. In my opinion either one of them is light years better than a conservative in there.

Look at the troll's posts as proof of what sort of mentality we will get if we let conservatives win.

by Chinese Democracy on 04/30/2008 07:24:13 PM EST

[ Parent ]
We agree (none / 0)

by LORD FOUL on 05/01/2008 11:08:41 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Ammunition for Lord Foul (none / 0)
All of this tough talk about how Barack Obama is a lead pipe cinch this year is really making me laugh.
 
Take a peek at the exit poll results from Pennsylvania.
Only 53% of people who voted for Hillary Clinton said they would vote for Barack Obama in November if he wins the nomination. And 25% of the Pennsylvanians who voted for Hilary Clinton said they would vote for John McCain if Barack Obama is the nominee.

Considering how many Democrats voted for Hillary over Obama in Pennsylvania, that’s a lot of “McCain Democrats” we can count on in November.

Here's how Nora O'Donnell reported the poll results on MSNBC: 
"NBC News poll specifically asked Clinton and Obama voters what they would do if their preferred candidate did not win the nomination, and they were faced with the following choice:  Support the other Democrat or vote for John McCain or stay home.  First, as you see here, only 53% of Clinton voters said they would vote for Barack Obama.  That's stunning! Only 53%.  And when you look essentially at Obama voters, 69% said they would vote for Hillary Clinton if she ends up the nominee.  And what about those new voters that we were talking about, remember, more than 300,000 new Democratic voters in Pennsylvania today?  Check out this number: 29% of those new voters said they would not vote for Hillary Clinton in November."

by KenTX on 05/01/2008 03:37:20 AM EST

[ Parent ]
you make me laugh (none / 0)

by Chinese Democracy on 05/01/2008 01:37:24 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I have one question... (none / 0)
Where is Michelle Obama? We haven't seen her in WEEKS!!! I wonder why??? Hmmm...

They know they are in trouble with angry white voters... I just wish you guys would open your eyes and see it too... The dream is collapsing around the faithful, but their Kool Aid induced comas wont let them respond in kind...

August is gonna be ugly...

Thanks...

:)

by bobo1 on 04/30/2008 12:14:30 AM EST

your concern is touching (none / 0)
it really is.. but as a conservative twit dont you think you should be worring about McLame? I mean have you seen all the stuff that can be used against him?

by Chinese Democracy on 04/30/2008 09:12:30 AM EST

[ Parent ]
No they haven't (none / 0)

To a conservative elections are viewed as Democrat: yes or no.  Their own candidates and their policies are irelevancies.  Notice on this forum none of the trolls ever defend McCain much less extoll him. They don't defend Bush or his eight years as president.  They don't talk about McCain's polices or their potential impact (with the exception of capital gains tax cuts).  In order to preserve their precious wealth they are willing to completely ignore every aspect of Republican candidates, odious as they are, and the impact of their policies.

Go ahead and hold your breath waiting for these clowns to start talking about why we should vote for McCain.  Hell, turn on the news and wait for the rightie pundits to explain why we should vote for McCain.  The only discussion is why we shouldn't vote for Obama. 

by ProfRich on 04/30/2008 09:39:13 AM EST

[ Parent ]
Far be it from me... (none / 0)
to tell anyone that they should vote for Grandpa Death - I will never do so... I KNOW HE'S PSYCHOTIC...

:)

by bobo1 on 04/30/2008 09:43:38 AM EST

[ Parent ]
What motivates Obama people? (none / 0)
"To a conservative elections are viewed as Democrat: yes or no." 

Rich, I don't have time to respond to this post properly, but I wanted to drop a quick note before I forget it.

I can produce dozens of posts from you and the other Obama loving knuckleheads in this forum, talking about how Hillary Clinton is the worst person in the world, and she is evil to the core. But without exception, the very next sentence is a pledge to vote for Hillary if she gets the nomination, to prevent McCain from appointing more conservative judges.

Hillary supporters don't feel the same way about Obama. The guy is an empty suit, and they know it, and they will vote for McCain in November.

by KenTX on 04/30/2008 12:58:36 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Do it! (none / 0)

Show me the posts where I have said Hillary is evil.  Show me where I have said she is not a fine candidate.

I have said she has lost and needs to drop out but I don't recall ever bashing her as a candidate based on her policies or who she is. 

by ProfRich on 04/30/2008 01:36:56 PM EST

[ Parent ]
Rich's Pepsi Challenge (none / 0)
I have carefully studied the sentiments of Hillary suporters versus Obama supporters. What I've found is that Obama supporters will vote for Hillary if she wins the nomination, regardless of what they think about her.

On the other hand, a very large segment of Hillary supporters will not vote for Obama in November. For this reason, I have supported Barack Obama.

Jdenham dislikes Hillary very much, but he will vote for her if she is nominated.
Hazmat can’t distinguish between Hillary and McCain. He doesn’t like her, but he can be counted on to vote Democrat, like he does in every election.
Mijoh can’t stand Hillary Clinton, but he still plans to vote for her.
Ihavenobias plans to vote for Hillary, then take a shower and wretch.
Ihavenobias says that voting for Hillary would be like diving into a septic tank head first. But he would still do it. 
Spencer admits that nobody likes Hillary, and yet all good liberals will vote for her.
Leeberal: “Hillary is just out of the question for me.”

zenie: “I don’t like Hillary.”

Jarett: “Anyone but Hillary.”

Iowa Greg: “Hillary has no chance to get elected President.”

Das Gimp: “I don’t like Hillary at all. We might as well elect a Republican.”

MRFred: "If Hillary gets the nomination, I'm not sure how I would vote."

MRFred: "If you must know, I voted for McCain." I guess now we know how he will vote.

schmoab:  “A Hillary nomination is like handing the election to the Republicans on a silver platter.”

ihavenobias: “I’ll be happy with anyone but Hillary.

mathcore: “I might as well vote for a Republican.”

mookie: “I just don't see any way that Hillary becomes our next president.”

gdoud: "I can't stand Hillary."

spinny: "Hillary getting the nom would have me begging for a palatable third party run so I wouldn't feel tempted to vote for the Dark Side."

Hue: “Liberals don’t like Hillary.”

Prezalex: “She’s the worst, easily.”

army193: "Want more [Clintons]? Not on my watch!"

dhultz: "I will be sick to my stomach every day watching [Hillary] so uncharmingly trianglulate with that voice from Mars Attacks."

Iyouwe: "Hillary Clinton is beyond repair."

bobo1: "The reason many libs wont vote for Hillary Clinton is not because of that single Iraq vote, but the 35 years of trickery, coniving, two faced politics that her and her other half have practiced."

sunsawed: Absolutely hates Hillary’s guts.

by KenTX on 04/30/2008 07:10:23 PM EST

[ Parent ]
I gotta hand it to you (none / 0)
this was fun to read. Still, at the risk of stating the obvious, Rich's challenge was to find a quote from him where he called her evil or put her down for non-policy reasons.

by hazmat on 04/30/2008 07:17:26 PM EST

[ Parent ]
The pinnacle of Ken's career (none / 0)

I can't recall seeing Ken work so hard to avoid such a simple challenge.

I mean I know it is pretty much all he does on these boards but this is a true masterpiece.

Rich knows that the option he scorns today he may be begging for tomorrow.  Rich dated a long time before getting married.  :-) 

by ProfRich on 04/30/2008 11:57:31 PM EST

[ Parent ]
BoboTx did (none / 0)
all the work long ago. He has used that list before or components of it. He has it in word pad saved. He is quite boring . The same old stuff ( literally) over and over and over. Limbaugh must not have anything new for him to parrot.

by Chinese Democracy on 05/01/2008 02:18:16 AM EST

[ Parent ]
A Majority of Americans want us out of Iraq (none / 0)
What is John McCains postion on Iraq. Get it?

Now shut up

Guess what percentage of the country would choose R over D? 33%  there is that number again.

by Chinese Democracy on 05/01/2008 01:42:40 PM EST

[ Parent ]
You know how the say that Republicans... (none / 0)
... keep talking about random horseshit that has nothing to do with the issues? This is it, right here.

by Erik on 05/01/2008 02:25:24 PM EST

BARACK OBAMA: PROFILE IN COURAGE!!! | 63 comments (63 topical, 0 hidden)
 Display: