Hillary to Acknowledge Obama as the Nominee

[cannon_fodder]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown


Okay, Mr. Obama, When you can really say you are the winner, please remember it is the responsibility of the winner to be gracious and generous and to extend an olive branch to his opponents.

What has he been doing for the last week?  He constantly talks about what a great person Clinton is, how she ran a great race and is a strong leader.  He has lavished praise on her.

What you really mean is Obama needs to pay her off to go away or she will destroy him and the party.  A VP nod, cabinet position, judicial appointment, or some perky ambassadorship - something Obama can promise from the federal coffers to the Clinton's.    Or maybe an outright bribe, just give her $20,000,000 to cancel out her debt and go away.

I imagine that's what you actually want to see extended.  Not an olive branch in terms of kind words and high praise.

Great Washington Post article:
In Defeat, Clinton Graciously Pretends to Win

quote:FOTD/AOX wrote
[George Bush is a ] facist imbecile...

That was great on so many levels:
1) "Facist" is spelled fascist.

2) A fascist believes the State is more important than all else, usually accompanied by a socialist agenda.  One would expect a push to nationalize or further control industry while proclaiming it for the good of the people - not further deregulation.  

Think "big brother needs to take this from you for your own good."  Be it your rights, freedoms, or wealth.   Bush's intrusion into some rights is certainly a step towards fascism, but so is higher taxation (more state control of wealth), socialism, gun control and many other policies you advocate.  So I wouldn't throw the word around so lightly.

3) Imbecile refers to an adult with the mental age of 3-7 years old.  Which clearly does not apply here.  But if you were just trying to degrade him go for idiot, it is the mental state of a 2 year old.

But what's funny, is you incorrectly spell fascist while using the word in too broad of a connotation and then call the subject mentally retarded.  Isn't that great?

[iplaw]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

Why?  Because he's a socialist?

Checklist for winning the admiration of the "world":

1. Activism in socialist organizations in college...check.

2. Close friendships with socialist professors in college...check.

3. Belonging to a church espousing "black liberation" socialist theologies...check.

I see exactly what you mean.

You know, it's been a looooong time since I've heard anyone throw around "socialist professors and college organizations".  I'm definitely digging that whole retro smear angle you're working.  Though my question to you is, do you think drawing that deeply from the well is going to pay off for your party in the general?  Maybe I'm just not feeling the fear of commies as deeply as I should, because really, those are some hilarious statements.

Shows a consistent pattern of socialist leanings starting from his early days that continue on to this day.  His ideas regarding redistribution of wealth, increased taxes, etc., are directly tied to the people this man has chosen to surround himself with his entire life.  Show me your friends and I'll show you your future.

Maybe if he wore a Santa suit I would trust him more.

[we vs us]

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

quote:Originally posted by iplaw

Why?  Because he's a socialist?

Checklist for winning the admiration of the "world":

1. Activism in socialist organizations in college...check.

2. Close friendships with socialist professors in college...check.

3. Belonging to a church espousing "black liberation" socialist theologies...check.

I see exactly what you mean.

You know, it's been a looooong time since I've heard anyone throw around "socialist professors and college organizations".  I'm definitely digging that whole retro smear angle you're working.  Though my question to you is, do you think drawing that deeply from the well is going to pay off for your party in the general?  Maybe I'm just not feeling the fear of commies as deeply as I should, because really, those are some hilarious statements.

Shows a consistent pattern of socialist leanings starting from his early days that continue on to this day.  His ideas regarding redistribution of wealth, increased taxes, etc., are directly tied to the people this man has chosen to surround himself with his entire life.  Show me your friends and I'll show you your future.

Maybe if he wore a Santa suit I would trust him more.

No no, what I'm saying is that socialism is totally antique.  That it's still the ideology you're teeing up against shows more about you than your targets.  You're still fighting the ideological wars of the 50's and 60's.  

It's cute, really.

[Hometown]

Tell that to Communist China.  Their economy is expected to swamp ours by about 2050.  This is the Chinese Century and they are still communists.

[rwarn17588]

I agree. The socialism argument nowadays, as Conan would say, dissipates like a fart in the wind.

The U.S. already has large portions of "socialism" already in the system, such as highways, water and sewer service, police and fire departments, Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, to name a few.

You could eliminate all those programs in the guise of eliminating "socialism." But the repercussions to many, many people in our country would be grave.

Just sayin'.

[cannon_fodder]

Wow, no love lost by the UK Guardian on the Clinton's now. Basically, Obama was gracious in victory and Hillary was shamefully rude and pompous in defeat:

quote:The lead story tonight - my "lede," as we spell it here - should have been about the remarkable fact that a black man has been nominated by a major party to lead a developed Western nation for the first time in the history of the world. A man - in whose lifetime people with his shade of skin were denied the right to vote and to use public accommodations - who is now on the cusp of the presidency. It says something good about America, and I would like to have been able to dwell on it.

But no. Once again, it's all about Hillary Clinton, who delivered the most abrasive, self-absorbed, selfish, delusional, emasculating and extortionate political speech I've heard in a long time. And I've left out some adjectives, just to be polite.

Here's an interesting point for you. Barack Obama's speech, which featured a long and gracious nod to Clinton toward the beginning, was posted on various websites as early as 8:10pm East coast time. That means that Clinton - who didn't start speaking until 9:31pm, noticeably missing her introductory cue - and her staff had more than an hour to read Obama's speech and see that he was going to be more than kind to her.

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/michael_tomasky/2008/06/no_shame_no_gain.html

Ouch.  

More and more people are turning on her.  The conventional wisdom says that she had a better shot at the VP if she DIDNT throw down the gauntlet.  Bah.  Anyway,  that was one of the harsher pieces I have read in a major source overseas...

[Hometown]

quote:Originally posted by pmcalk

Obama was incredibly gracious to Hillary last night.  He was gracious when he didn't push the 50/50 split for Michigan (which he had the votes for) over the weekend.  Obama is showing what it takes to be a good leader, and how to allow your opponent the opportunity to exit with dignity.  I still have faith that Hillary will do that.

It was interesting to listen to the talking heads acknowledge Obama's apparent victory last night. Each and every one of them used the occasion to talk about Obama as a symbol of Black progress -- period.  There was no discussion about Obama's plan for the U.S.  There was no discussion about Obama as an individual.  Literally every comment revolved around how far Blacks have come in the U.S. and how good it made everyone feel.

After listening to Obama this past year I still have no sense of what Obama the individual is planning to do other than end the war and shoot for watered down Universal Healthcare.

But the truth is once he is president Obama will be very much an individual with his own unique agenda that has very little or nothing to do with being a symbol of Black progress.  After one year in the public eye, he is still a big surprise package.  

Geraldine F. was right on target when she said we were buying into a concept with Obama.  The concept is the symbol of Black progress in the U.S.

I hope we get lucky and find something wonderful in the surprise package.  But frankly, I'm uncomfortable with the risk.

Oh, and just a little warning, we better see Clinton offered the vice presidency or we'll risk losing something bigger than the election.

[Conan71]

HT, probably the best post I've ever read of yours.  

Something tells me Hillary has more than delegates to try and leverage the VP position.  The rumor has been circulating for weekst the Clinton's have something pretty nasty on Obama and they've been trying to figure out the smartest way to use it.  Granted rumors, but the Clintons do have a history of character assassination of their rivals.

[Hometown]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

Wow, no love lost by the UK Guardian on the Clinton's now. Basically, Obama was gracious in victory and Hillary was shamefully rude and pompous in defeat:

quote:The lead story tonight - my "lede," as we spell it here - should have been about the remarkable fact that a black man has been nominated by a major party to lead a developed Western nation for the first time in the history of the world. A man - in whose lifetime people with his shade of skin were denied the right to vote and to use public accommodations - who is now on the cusp of the presidency. It says something good about America, and I would like to have been able to dwell on it.

But no. Once again, it's all about Hillary Clinton, who delivered the most abrasive, self-absorbed, selfish, delusional, emasculating and extortionate political speech I've heard in a long time. And I've left out some adjectives, just to be polite.

Here's an interesting point for you. Barack Obama's speech, which featured a long and gracious nod to Clinton toward the beginning, was posted on various websites as early as 8:10pm East coast time. That means that Clinton - who didn't start speaking until 9:31pm, noticeably missing her introductory cue - and her staff had more than an hour to read Obama's speech and see that he was going to be more than kind to her.

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/michael_tomasky/2008/06/no_shame_no_gain.html

Ouch.  

More and more people are turning on her.  The conventional wisdom says that she had a better shot at the VP if she DIDNT throw down the gauntlet.  Bah.  Anyway,  that was one of the harsher pieces I have read in a major source overseas...

Rude and Pompous in Defeat?  She was extremely generous to and supportive of Obama.  There was nothing rude in her speech.  Unless of course you believe that women should defer to men.

You just can't deal with a woman that presents herself as an equal to male leadership.

[FOTD]

The party does not need Hillary or Bill. The party will survive. Not only that, the new dmocrats will spread their net and they will be the one's convincing the Clinton faction to vote against what has transpired over the last 8 years. The technological magic that got Obama here will be stepped up to reveal an honest issue oriented campaign.

Hillary's manipulations seem to be geared to 2012. I am beggining to think Hillary is negotiating for money and not the veep position. Being the first to predict Hill as a potential Obama Supreme nominee, I now withdraw that possibility. She'll be relgated to a Senator. Nothing more.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

The party does not need Hillary or Bill. The party will survive. Not only that, the new dmocrats will spread their net and they will be the one's convincing the Clinton faction to vote against what has transpired over the last 8 years. The technological magic that got Obama here will be stepped up to reveal an honest issue oriented campaign.

Hillary's manipulations seem to be geared to 2012. I am beggining to think Hillary is negotiating for money and not the veep position. Being the first to predict Hill as a potential Obama Supreme nominee, I now withdraw that possibility. She'll be relgated to a Senator. Nothing more.

Oh so now we can lampoon "neo-libs".  Remember where you first saw this folks.

[Hometown]

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

The party does not need Hillary or Bill. The party will survive. Not only that, the new dmocrats will spread their net and they will be the one's convincing the Clinton faction to vote against what has transpired over the last 8 years. The technological magic that got Obama here will be stepped up to reveal an honest issue oriented campaign.

Hillary's manipulations seem to be geared to 2012. I am beggining to think Hillary is negotiating for money and not the veep position. Being the first to predict Hill as a potential Obama Supreme nominee, I now withdraw that possibility. She'll be relgated to a Senator. Nothing more.

Right.  And mean and evil politics doesn't exist anymore.  Isn't that what you said earlier?

Fortunately for us, Obama seems to be a little more on the ball than you are.

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

The party does not need Hillary or Bill. The party will survive. Not only that, the new dmocrats will spread their net and they will be the one's convincing the Clinton faction to vote against what has transpired over the last 8 years. The technological magic that got Obama here will be stepped up to reveal an honest issue oriented campaign.

Hillary's manipulations seem to be geared to 2012. I am beggining to think Hillary is negotiating for money and not the veep position. Being the first to predict Hill as a potential Obama Supreme nominee, I now withdraw that possibility. She'll be relgated to a Senator. Nothing more.

Right.  And mean and evil politics doesn't exist anymore.  Isn't that what you said earlier?

Fortunately for us, Obama seems to be a little more on the ball than you are.

Nope. That's NOT what I said.

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by FOTD

The party does not need Hillary or Bill. The party will survive. Not only that, the new dmocrats will spread their net and they will be the one's convincing the Clinton faction to vote against what has transpired over the last 8 years. The technological magic that got Obama here will be stepped up to reveal an honest issue oriented campaign.

Hillary's manipulations seem to be geared to 2012. I am beggining to think Hillary is negotiating for money and not the veep position. Being the first to predict Hill as a potential Obama Supreme nominee, I now withdraw that possibility. She'll be relgated to a Senator. Nothing more.

Oh so now we can lampoon "neo-libs".  Remember where you first saw this folks.

Just because the new dems are technologically advanced, where do you get the connection to "liberals"? That's you saying that I said that.... I did not. Many of the Obama voters this time around will be fiscal conservatives.

[cannon_fodder]

HT, I didn't say anything about Hillary having to bow to men?  I didn't even imply it.  But thanks for throwing ye' ole' sex card out on the table.  Clearly I dislike her and think she can't do anything because she has a vagina.  It's one of my main criteria for how I judge people.  

My wife has a penis (that gave birth).  That's how we get along so well as equals in our household.  I'm impressed that you figured all that out based on the fact that I don't like Hillary Clinton (you didn't even know that I dislike other women to - Ann Coulter, some female comics, Nancy Pelosi, and Paris Hilton among them).  

Please don't tell the female that owns the company I run, my wife, mother, or other females that have authority with or over me.  They'd be pissed if they found out.
- - -


She said "he ran a good campaign" but did not congratulate him on his win that night, or over all.  She then went on to imply that she won the popular vote (a dubious proposition and irrelevant) and certainly gave the impression that the fight was not over.  That is in addition to basically trying to blackmail her way into the VP office.

Not congratulating him on his victory was rude.  Pretending like she is still winning and can not be defeated is pompous.  I, and most the rest of the world apperently, failed to see the graciousness towards Obama you are speaking of while you fail to see the brevity Obama is paying to Hillary constantly.

But that's just because "we believe that women should defer to men [and] just can't deal with a woman that presents herself as an equal to male leadership."   I assume you hate blacks and heterosexual white males since you didn't vote for them.

Either that or you disagree with their politics and/or dislike them on some personal level.  Maybe, just maybe, people have different opinions for reasons other than "they must be a bigot."  Nah...