Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Dems 2008: In adversity, bitter pundits cling to their Obamessiah [Karl]

The New York Times editorial board is bitter:

The Pennsylvania campaign, which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it.

Voters are getting tired of it; it is demeaning the political process; and it does not work. It is past time for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton to acknowledge that the negativity, for which she is mostly responsible, does nothing but harm to her, her opponent, her party and the 2008 election.

If nothing else, self interest should push her in that direction. Mrs. Clinton did not get the big win in Pennsylvania that she needed to challenge the calculus of the Democratic race. It is true that Senator Barack Obama outspent her 2-to-1. But Mrs. Clinton and her advisers should mainly blame themselves, because, as the political operatives say, they went heavily negative and ended up squandering a good part of what was once a 20-point lead.

Voters in Pennsylvania were so tired of the campaign that they turned out in record numbers to prolong it.  Democrats are evenly split on the question of whether the long campaign is hurting the party.  No candidate who has won as many votes and delegates as Clinton hasn’t taken the fight to the convention.  There is no evidence that the tightening of the race was due to Clinton’s campaign tactics.  We saw the same pattern in Ohio.  It is telling that the NYT does not give any credit to Obama’s skills as a campaigner. 

Furthermore, Clinton’s Keystone State victory does change the calculus of the race, as Bob Novak notes:

Clinton will use her victory in Pennsylvania to argue that her total popular vote now exceeds Obama’s (counting in disputed totals in Michigan and Florida). As soon as she was announced the winner, her advocates were pointing out to superdelegates that Clinton had won every high population state except for Illinois.

Indeed, it is now possible that Clinton could overtake Obama in the popular vote without Michigan, particularly if one uses the results of the Washington state primary instead of that state’s caucus totals.  Even in the delegate race, OpenLeft’s Chris Bowers (an Obama backer) is now blogging about the “margin of a brokered convention.”

Of course, the NYT editors are not the only embittered pundits the morning after.

The Atlantic’s Matthew Yglesias?  He is demanding that the superdelegates end the campaign now.  At least he is honest enough to admit that his demand stems from the fact that he is tired of the campaign, instead of projecting his anti-democratic desire onto the electorate.  Obama has been unable to knock Clinton out entirely, and will almost certainly have to rely on superdelegates to win the nomination in any event.  The argument that superdelegates should not observe the process to render their best judgment about the relative strength of the candidates seems irrational and… bitter.

Editor & Publisher’s Greg Mitchell?  Oh, he’s bitter:

And once again, as I’ve suggested previously, the old phenomenon of exit polls proven wrong because people with racist views do not tell pollsters the truth on election day again reared its head. The major and final exit polls today indicated only a 4% Clinton win. Now it looks like 10% or maybe 8%. That difference is largely the racial vote, most likely.

Just like in Italy, where exit polls just underestimated support for Berlusconi’s coalition… except for the racial part.  The bedrock of Clinton’s support in Pennsylvania is the same type of voter who would rather vote for Doug Wilder than John F. Kerry, which does not register with Mitchell.  In this cycle, Clinton has now won white men in 12 states and Obama has done the same in 10 states.  That Obama routinely carries the overwhelming majority of the black vote is an inconvenient truth that Mitchell prefers to avoid.

And what post like this would be complete without Excitable Andy turning into Bitter Andy:

It’s worth recalling what this primary came to be about, because of a self-conscious decision by the Clintons to adopt the tactics and politics of the people who persecuted and hounded them in the 1990s. It was indeed in the end about smearing and labeling Obama as a far-left, atheist, elite, pansy Godless snob fraud. That was almost all it came to be about…

It did work, it seems to me. It will work, to some extent. It’s valid in the sense that Rove is not stupid. But it works less and less the younger the vote is; and it is obviously losing some of its divisive salience even among the older generation…

Aside from the unsupported claim that the Clintons tried to smear Obama as a pansy, no label or smear was necessary here.  Obama is the one who told his San Francisco donors that small town Pennsylvanians clung to God and guns for economic reasons.  They did not insult Obama’s religiousity; he insulted theirs, behind their backs.  He privately suggested their anti-trade sentiments were misplaced, even as he publicly pandered to them.  If Sullivan thinks Bill Kristol’s misdiagnosis of Obama as a Godless Marxist (as opposed to a member of a Black Liberation Theology-based church) swung the primary to Clinton, he should consider taking a leave of absence at a sanitarium.  If he thinks the fact that a younger cohort currently leans left is predictive of how that cohort will vote years from now, he should consider cracking open a political science text sometime.

Though Sullivan still imagines brighter days ahead, his wallowing in despair over the reality that character counts to a large bloc of voters suggests that Sullivan is practicing the Audacity of Mope.  In that respect, he is clearly not alone.

Update: HotAir-lanche!

161 Replies to “Dems 2008: In adversity, bitter pundits cling to their Obamessiah [Karl]”

  1. Lisa says:

    I thought that support for Obama among white menincreased in PA?

    Was that wrong? There is so much babbling and most of it is bullshit. But I did hear more than one talking bobblehead say that this morning.

  2. Carin TWPBH says:

    They wanna complain that Hillary’s support is strong among white women … but how come they don’t have their pants equally in a bunch over black block voting? Hillary’s 65% of the white woman vote was worth a mention (not to mention the hand-wringing over the white male vote), but the 90% black vote for Obama? Just expected, right?

    Blacks – the most racist demographic out there.

  3. Pablo says:

    And once again, as I’ve suggested previously, the old phenomenon of exit polls proven wrong because people with racist views do not tell pollsters the truth on election day again reared its head.

    Yep. You know why John Kerry isn’t President? Racists, that’s why.

  4. Lisa says:

    Oh and another thing: I thought his ten point loss was considered a victory, since he was supposed to lose by 20 points? Why are the goal posts being moved post game? Interesting, interesting.

    What will be even more interesting is when Hillary is running against McCain, who has never been that kind of skanky campaigner (and got smacked around by the Rove Machine in 2000 – hopefully he learned his lesson from that). Will you guys be so magnanimus about her campaign tactics then? Probably not so much.

  5. alppuccino says:

    What’s she gonna say?

    “Look how old he is! He’s got old balls!”

    “Look he can’t even lift his arms! That’s hilarious!”

  6. Dan Collins says:

    This looks like a job for Magnanny Mouse!

  7. Carin TWPBH says:

    Lisa, we’ve always complained about Hillary’s tactics. It’s just AMUSING now, because before O the liberal side didn’t seem to notice or care.

  8. Pablo says:

    Lisa, McCain is a known quantity and can’t be successfully attacked on those grounds. Swiftboating (the highlighting of inconvenient truths) isn’t going to work with him. The most disturbing things about Maverick are features, not bugs, to voters sympathetic to Billary. So, expect to hear “100 years of war” and “4 more years of failed policies” from here to November, regardless of which Dem wins. That and misquoting him is all they’ve got to work with.

  9. Dan Collins says:

    People with sense have better things to do than talk to a pollster about how they voted.

  10. JD says:

    The Pennsylvania campaign, which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday

    So, they skipped all pretense and just started lying in the first sentence. A 10% point win is inconclusive? In what world?

    That difference is largely the racial vote, most likely.

    He offers proof of this, or asserts it?

    It’s valid in the sense that Rove is not stupid.

    Karl, you magnificent bastard. When did you gain control of the Dems?

  11. it is interesting to point out that there seems to be a trend now among Libs… lying to pollsters. this is an interesting phenom, as it points to some sort of acknowledgment of a PC stance/preference (that must be claimed in polite society), and a shameful preference which if discovered will lose you friends and your progressive credentials.

  12. Lisa says:

    I think there is a misogynist and racist element out there pulling the lever over silliness. And I think these coveted “undecideds” were likely people who were not jazzed about either a woman or a black guy being their nominee. But I think the fact that so many affluent, well educated white people like Obama says more about the class and age divide than the race and gender divide. There is way more “you dumb old fuckers just want to vote for some moron who you think you can have a beer with! fuck you! ” vs. “you rich little queerboys don’t know fuckall about us! we are the backbone of this country, go drink your pinot grigot, fags!”

    Oh, and no one (no one sensible)will blame white people when we go down in flames. We already blame Hillary for being such a craven, desperate hag. But we won’t be as bitter as we were after the last two elections. McCain and his “war in the Middle East Forever Yay!” agenda is disturbing. But McCain the reviler of right-wing crankery, and bitchslapper of soft fatboy chickenhawks is pretty awesome. He will be ok. And after he seals the nomination, he will divest himself of the wingnut loons he is pretending to respect right now. I suspect he still harbors some resentment for his ill treatment in 2000 on up to a few months ago, and will exact his revenge upon gaining the White House. Which will be entertaining.

  13. Bitter in Altoona says:

    Sullivan thinks Bill Kristol’s misdiagnosis of Obama as a Godless Marxist (as opposed to a member of a Black Liberation Theology-based church) swung the primary to Clinton,

    I was too busy sighting in my deer rifle on immigrants while quoting Bible verses to have read that. Anyway, I don’t give a sh*t for the opinion of that Joo from “City Slickers.”

  14. Ric Locke says:

    The other aspect is: simple minds require simple “answers”. The contest is complex and multidimensional, and Teh Press can’t wrap their minds around it. They have accordingly picked a one-word “explanation” for the whole mess, and that word is “racist”. It’s all-encompassing, simple enough for a journalism graduate to pronounce, and allows them to bash working-class white men, the only category of humanity they totally despise. And since there is, in fact, a racist component (though much more complex than what they depict) it lets them utilize their favorite tactic, which I have called “homeopathic TRVTH” — one gram of truth to ten tonnes of bullshit, administer liberally.

    Regards,
    Ric

  15. JD says:

    I am almost looking forward to voting for Hillary on May 6th

  16. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – PEW just isn’t living up to its rep as a PR firm. The Dems need to shop for a new propaganda firm.

  17. MayBee says:

    was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled …

    I remember when the NYTs wrote that same line about Harry Reid saying the Iraq was already lost (though he’d still pay for soldiers to die in it).
    I also remember when they worried that they were having a negative effect on their country with their leaks of national security secrets.

  18. McGehee says:

    Will you guys be so magnanimus about her campaign tactics then?

    This is one reason why I’ve held — nay, clung to my bitter refusal to support McCain.

  19. JD says:

    McCain and his “war in the Middle East Forever Yay!” agenda is disturbing.

    Lisa – Most of your rant was quite amusing. This, however, is an outright lie. McCain gave voice to a position that Obama’s military advisor holds. So, are we correct if we say that Obama would call for War in the Middle Eastn for Evah?

  20. McGehee says:

    “Look how old he is! He’s got old balls!”

    Not in Florida he doesn’t.

  21. Mark Penn says:

    Nothing really changed here because this was the ideal Clinton state. Of course she won. This is not a game changer, and most people know it, including the Clintons.

  22. JD says:

    Now there is a bitter person, but rich.

  23. SGT Ted says:

    The NYT obviously had that editorial in the can before they knew the election results. The CW all day yesterday stated that Hillary needed a 10 point win to stay competitive. Hillary actually just needed a win for forms sake; she ain’t quitting.

    Andrew continues to descend into Teh Stupid with his crack about the Clintons allegedly adopting the tactics and politics of the people who persecuted and hounded them in the 1990s.

    Hello? McFly! Remember the endless campaign? Remember the politics of personal destruction, Billy Dale, Newt Gingrich, all those whores and trailer trash wimmins and every Clinton opponent nailed to a tree by the Clinton attack machine? Blame it on the right?

    Does he have AIDS onset dementia? I mean, WTF else explains it?

  24. Dan Collins says:

    Obiter dictum? O! bitter dictum!

  25. Salt Lick says:

    Thing is, Lisa, most people here don’t automatically respect those ofays. Your point seems to be that Obama is acceptable because these young, affluent, white people like him. I see this as a sign of the exact opposite. Because, having grown up among them, I know their motivations.

  26. TerryH says:

    Bob Dylan predicted the course of the campaign : decades ago
    And your gravity (of identity politics) failsAnd negativity (attack ads) don’t pull you through.
    Leaving the Hillary Brand &trade only one option:
    I’m going back to New York CityI do believe I’ve had enough.
    Or maybe not

  27. Carin TWPBH says:

    But I think the fact that so many affluent, well educated white people like Obama says more about the class and age divide than the race and gender divide.

    I think that you’re not thinking this completely through.

    If you think that the affluent, well educated white people aren’t affected by the race issue, I think you’re mistaken. To follow that logic, you get: people who vote against him are racist, and those who vote FOR him are utterly unaffected by the racial component they just think he’s “the real deal”. Except, of course, the black voters … who we just don’t want to talk about.

  28. Pablo says:

    This is not a game changer, and most people know it, including the Clintons.

    Yes, it is. It puts Hillary in the popular vote lead, and it leaves Obama with a delegate lead comprised of delegates from states that no one imagines are going to vote Democrat in the general. Is there a battleground state that the Dems need to win that Obama has taken?

  29. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – Interesting situation for the Dems, masters of “teh spin”. What do you do when the spin spins you.

    – Tha panic and confusion is palpable. Me, I’m loving it.

  30. SGT Ted says:

    Will you guys be so magnanimus about her campaign tactics then?

    We’ve known about them for about, oh, 16 years now. So, the shock factor isn’t there for us. It is more amusement to see it being used within the Democrat party in a mondo bitch fight between leftwing bigot Identity Group politicians who are trying to blame it on the right, despite a long record of them and their ilk using said tactics on anyone to the right of them.

    Wake up Lisa. You merely parrot the lib CW in so many ways.

  31. BJTexs TW/BP says:

    Lisa, obviously if enough editorials and political pundits state that the difference in the race is “racism” or “sexism” then it must be true.

    The cold, hard truth is that nobody can state with any certainty to what degree identity politics have played in this race. All of the talking heads and writing hands can only assert without adequate foundation the effects of the unknown inner hearts of the supposedly biased voters. The fact that we are dealing with this issue in a Democratic primary makes it even more uncertain which doesn’t stop the intelligencia from pounding the nail into a block of wood attached to nothing.

    This race has been more about the perceptions of voters with regards to the individuals running. Hillary has had to deal with her previously known significant negatives (billary, dynasty, bitch, liar) while Obama cruised for a time on the generic hopey/changey. His gaffs (as well as revealed information add odds with his stated outlook) reflected a bursting of the bubble of comfort, raising issues that caused at leat some starry eyed synchophants to jerk back in shock.

    While the NYT would presume to blame the Hildebeast for the tone of the campaign it would be well considered for both candidates to look inward and eschew the simplified, cartooned rantings of racist/sexist preferences and tend to their own knitting. The Democratic party has played the identity politics card in all of it’s forms for years (class, race, sex, education) and now must live with the “bitter” truth that when the bull gores itself the insuing hemorrhage is not the fault, this time, of the narrative strawman matador.

  32. Sarah atWp says:

    Does he have AIDS onset dementia? I mean, WTF else explains it?

    The Hep C is helping.

  33. Rob Crawford says:

    Oh, and no one (no one sensible)will blame white people when we go down in flames.

    Oh, boy. Can we quote you on that? Because, really, I expect it to be exactly the opposite.

  34. Fred in Pennsylvania says:

    A first-rate summation of the “mourning”-after whining on the left. Hot Air is right that the NYT editorial has become indistinguishable from the blatant lies and distortions of rabid Obama-worshipping TV pit bull Keith Olberman. (BTW, it’s “Olberman dicked ’em!”)
    McCain in ’08. He ain’t the one I wanted / But he’s the one we got!

  35. JD says:

    Pablo – He did win Missouri, which is one of, if not the smallest of the battleground states.

    Today, we now know that there are more racists in Pennsylvania than sexists.

  36. JD says:

    I watched Olberdouchenozzle’s rantings all night long. He was calling for Hillary to quit within 30 minutes of the polls closing, because he thought that since they were not able to call the race at that time, it was proof that she failed. He is fucking hopelessly in the bag for Baracky, and MSNBC should be, but sadly is not, ashamed to have him allegedly reporting news. I kept waiting for him to go live to Mary Mapes.

  37. Smirky McChimp says:

    Obama’s a clown. The fact that he’s made it as far as he has is testament to the racism of his supporters, who are orgasmic with delight at the pleasureable self-flagellation of voting for a minority, because he’s handsome, and so Well Spoken! Not like those other Negroes!

    So excited are they that they failed to notice that there’s worse than no there there, there’s the tedious zombie of 80’s-era Mike Dukakis liberalism, a delicately carved shell full of good old-fashioned let’s-raise-taxes-and-federalize-stuff. Their boners from his soupcon of MLK-lite timbre blind them to the fact that he says very little, even going by presidential candidate standards, and what he does say raises hackles in exactly the kind of people who are lukewarm about supporting McCain.

    In short, he should continue to struggle for the nomination, because in doing so, he can make his point — that an educated mulatto can achieve high office in America — and thus step out of Jesse Jackson’s shadow, becoming the black McGovern. That’s if he’s lucky. If he’s unlucky, he becomes the black Jimmy Carter.

  38. SmokeVanThorn says:

    Isn’t anyone going to deconstruct the (sexist) significance of Obama’s “tit for tat” comment?

  39. sherlock says:

    “That difference is largely the racial vote, most likely.”

    I agree, assuming you mean that the racial vote is the reason she didn’t win by 20%…

  40. Carin TWPBH says:

    It’s so sad that Smirky can’t see through his thick veil of racism that Obama is our only hope for the future.

  41. BJTexs TW/BP says:

    Obama’s not a clown, Smirky.

    You are forgetting that Obama’s greatest strength as a candidate, in addition to the generic hopey/changey, is his ability to organize at the grass roots level. Susan Estrich (*grosn) had it right. Obama’s startegy to organize and vigoursly contest the caucuses was brilliant and telling. He may not have the policy chops that the hildebeats has but he and his organization have run rings around her’s in managing their resourses, both people and money.

    Exit wright and “bitter” from the equation and he sews this thing up without a sweat. The fact that there’s no “there” there is beside the point. He’s calculating and pretty damn good at crafting a campaign. Unfortunelty for him he was unable to hide past associations and currently held beliefs and thus exposed himself to the lightweight status of one who can’t handle the heat. Mr. Articulate simply couldn’t afford any “hamina-hamina” moments.

    He could have fumbled 27 questions about Capital Gains and foreign policy and still would have rode the shining Change! steed into the convention.

  42. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – A 97% Black block vote for the Black candidate?

    – Oh, well they’re a minority, so they have a right to be racist, You know, affirmative action, so that explains it.

  43. Cave Bear says:

    Carin, I recall a sound bite of an Obama speech I heard over a year ago, where he said flat out “Anyone who does not vote for me is racist, and anyone who votes against me because of my policies is racist”.

    As for the “black vote”, probably the biggest reason nobody’s talking about it is because….it doesn’t matter. It never has, not in presidential elections. Blacks have always voted 90+% Dem, and look at how many elections the Repubs have won, often by landslides, over the years, despite how the overwhelming majority of blacks have voted.

    Of course, there is a racist component in this case, as most American blacks would vote for the Devil Incarnate as long as he/she had the “correct” amount of melanin in their skin. After all, blacks are no less prone to racism than any other ethnic group. And yes, this is what a lot of people don’t dare talk about.

  44. JD says:

    BJ – He sure can raise money. Outside of that, and a good strategy to go after Republican states, he really hasn’t shown any real political chops. He is lousy off script. He is not good outside of staged events and speeches. And, most importantly, he has lost every damn state that really matters in the general election. He is the beneficiary, to his credit, of the byzantine system the Dems constructed to select, not elect, their nominee.

  45. Darleen says:

    Also from the NYTimes

    For at least two months, Mr. Obama has struggled to close the deal on the nomination. Attempts to defeat Mrs. Clinton at the ballot box have repeatedly proved to be unsuccessful — especially, as she has pointed out, in the larger states — so his campaign is now employing a two-front strategy: trying to ignore Mrs. Clinton while working to overwhelm her campaign by using its financial advantage to advertise more and build larger organizations in each of the remaining nine contests. […]

    Seeking to blunt any political damage from losing in Pennsylvania, the Obama campaign distributed a memo to supporters late Tuesday titled, “A Fundamentally Unchanged Race.” His strategists noted that he had narrowed the gap from a few weeks ago and improved his showing among white voters and voters over 60 since the Ohio primary.

    His advisers said they would not call for Mrs. Clinton to end her campaign and would urge supporters to do the same. Not only could it backfire, they said, but it could also alienate her supporters, which the Obama campaign hopes to ultimately attract.

    Even in defeat, the spirits were high among Mr. Obama’s aides. A leading reason was that Pennsylvania was in the rear-view mirror — for now, anyway.

    On the campaign plane, Mr. Axelrod and Robert Gibbs, the communications director, wore T-shirts with the message: “Stop the drama, vote Obama.”

    This is just too good.

  46. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – It probably won’t happen, but the idea of a McCain/Rice ticket, and the effects it would have on this already cluster-fuck of a election, boggles the mind.

    – I notice every time the possibility is broached the Dem talking heads run for the exits en masse. -snort*

  47. Lisa says:

    I don’t think Obama is acceptable because rich white people like him. I am saying that the divide is less about race and more about class.

    And yes, black people like Obama. They are totally excited to see a non-clown black guy running for president. Racist? I don’t think so. Nor do I think women who vote for Hillary Clinton are a bunch of man-hating harpies. That is just ridiculous.

  48. royf says:

    and what he does say raises hackles in exactly the kind of people who are lukewarm about supporting McCain.

     

    In a way the Dems did the same thing in 2004.  One thing that is rarely mentioned is that a large percentage of Vietnam veterans many who considered themselves Democrats, saw John Kerry salute and “Report for Duty” at the convention.

     Those voters which included a number of the “Swiftboat Veterans for Truth” immediately joined forces more in opposition to Kerry than in favor of President Bush.  How stupid and tone deaf can a party be than to nominate the one person most responsible for the labeling of Vietnam Vets as “Baby Killers”, Then running him as a war hero.

  49. Carin TWPBH says:

    The black vote does matter. Perhaps not on a national level- but certainly locally. And national politics bleed over.

    Detroit would vote a black criminal into office before they elected a white person. A black candidate need only be endorsed by a white person to taint ’em. Black racism needs to be called out.

  50. Bob in California says:

    With Obama wimping out on any further debates, Hillary (with the Penn win) can attack and attack and attack Obama.
    Hillary can go at Obama for outspending her 3 to 1 and losing big to her. (“Obama just throws money at a losing cause” whereas “Hillary will get the most for one´s money”.)
    Without the Black vote – 97%!- Obama has a very thin base of voters: yuppies and college students (who usually don´t vote in the general election).
    And without a speech to grandstand behind, Obama is very, very weak in answering questions that he has not rehearsed an answer for. (As witnessed by his last debate performance.)
    And without the press backing Obama at every move and slamming Hillary at any chance, Obama would be long gone. (Thank goodness for the internet!)
    Go Hillary Go!

  51. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – So then Lisa, I assume from your take on the Black vote thing that all these decades of Left accusations of “White voter racism” was all bullshit. Do I have that right?

  52. Carin TWPBH says:

    So, Lisa, if I got TOTALLY excited about a non-black guy running for mayor of Detroit … that wouldn’t be racist of me? I mean, in my lifetime, I’ve never known a white mayor.

  53. BJTexs TW/BP says:

    JD: All of that is true but his organization and management skills in campaigning make him something more than a “clown.”

    Keep in mind the most likely scenario remains an Obama nomination. Not all of that can be assumed because of the Dem’s goofy delegate process. This guy has run a pretty effective campaign and has only recently been undone by the revealations of some of his inadequacies. These speak more to his inexperience in national politics than stupidity.

    I think it would be a mistake to count him out.

  54. Lisa says:

    #42: Excellent response. I didn’t even want to touch that one and become mired in what promised to be a tiresome argument.

    #44: Cave Bear: Really? Please point me to that one. That will be an interesting speech to deconstruct. I wonder how he would explain that.

    #45: Agrees.

  55. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    “I think it would be a mistake to count him out.

    – I do not count him out. Barring some additional revelations that simply destroy him as a viable candidate, he probably wins in the end.

    – Both because the Left wants it that way, and Dean and company will game it so it comes out that way, regardless of what Hillery does unless she wins the delegate count outright, unlikely at this point, and because the Dems don’t want to see cities go up in flames on the eve of a general election, something that in spite of Lizas assertions that theres “no racism there”, will happen if the super delegates go for a brokered anti-Obama shift.

    – It must be a living bitch when the facts on the ground keep kicking your Narrative in the balls.

  56. Cave Bear says:

    BJTexs sez:

    “Keep in mind the most likely scenario remains an Obama nomination.”

    Yeah. The Dems are scared to death that if they don’t nominate him, Denver could make the ’68 ‘Crat convention in Chicago look like a cakewalk.

  57. Cave Bear says:

    Carin, that is why I specifically did NOT mention local elections. The black vote very much matters in those, especially given how racially gerrymandered political districts are.

  58. thor says:

    Aside from the unsupported claim that the Clintons tried to smear Obama as a pansy, no label or smear was necessary here.

    Karl, put away your campaign pictures of Hillary, pull up your jumpers and wash your hands.

    Jeebus, third-rate rubes and their fantasies. Sick, I tell ya!

  59. McGehee says:

    Obama nomination.

    Am I the only one who hears the theme song of theold Dick Van Dyke show when reading a phrase like that?

  60. Lisa says:

    #53: No. It wouldn’t. Especially if all of the previous white candidates had been embarassing caricatures.

    But I am not sure that 97% of black people in this country are in the bag for Obama. That sounds bogus to me. My family is split right down the middle with the older folks solidly for Hillary and the younger ones for Barack. There is a small but vocal bunch who are all about McCain (I suspect there are more, being that there are so many military people in my family).

    But that is just my anecdotal evidence. And since a huge chunk of my family’s ‘hood is Park City, Utah, they can’t exactly represent for the folks living in South Philly.

  61. Lisa says:

    Ah Big Bang Hunter and his race war fantasies.

  62. JD says:

    BJ – I am not counting him out, by any stretch, and willing puking all over the person in front of me in line when I go vote against him on May 6th. Having said that, outside of the hopeynesschangeyness and soaring speeches, and a great idea to concentrate on caucuses, he brings very little to the table. Tax the hell out of the successful. Surrender in Iraq. Free healthcare for everyone. Talk to Ahmadinerjacket. Leave me alone to eat my waffles. Blah, blah, blah … Some of the bloom has been knocked off the rose, but once the Dems finish their self immoliation, they will united behind the hopey one, and we will have to listen to his empty words until November, where I have the audacity to hope that McCain will hand him his hopey changey ass.

  63. Lisa says:

    LMAO @ #60!!!!!!!!!!!! Oh you bastard. I will never get that out of my head now.

  64. JD says:

    Lisa – My younger brothers are in Park City, UT as well. Small world.

  65. Ardsgaine says:

    Lisa wrote: And yes, black people like Obama. They are totally excited to see a non-clown black guy running for president. Racist? I don’t think so.

    It’s like arguing that blacks who supported Jackie Robinson’s acceptance into the major leagues were racist. It is certainly a form of race-based boosterism, but calling it racism makes it more extremist than it necessarily is.

    Carin wrote: So, Lisa, if I got TOTALLY excited about a non-black guy running for mayor of Detroit … that wouldn’t be racist of me? I mean, in my lifetime, I’ve never known a white mayor.

    You wouldn’t consider it a sign of progress? A sign that black people were open to voting across racial lines? That wouldn’t make you feel good?

    I’m not arguing for Obama. His leftwingedness is a non-starter with me. In the context of Democratic politics, though, he is not that extreme. He may even be a little to the right of the last guy they ran for president. It’s harder to say since he doesn’t have a solid voting history to look at, but when you consider Kerry’s involvement with the Winter Soldier group and his record in the Senate, Obama is just about what you expect from the other side of the aisle.

  66. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    “…But I am not sure that 97% of black people in this country are in the bag for Obama.

    – Good, because as usual you drifted off somehow. Focus here. We were talking about the DEMOCRATIC vote, not “everybody”. But then you knew that, thuse the evasion.

    – As someone who had to have some of my Black engineering associates walk us whiteys out of the plant during the Cleveland riots while bullets were breaking out the factory windows way back in the 60’s, I can assure you its anything but a fantasy. But do continue with you’re Leftist temporizing delusions. Its amusing to see how far people will bend over to avoid reality when it doesn’t go down to well with the latte’.

  67. Cave Bear says:

    Lisa, all I can tell you is that I heard that back during the holidays of 2006, on the radio as I was driving home from work, back when this whole fiasco was first getting off the ground. I must say my astonishment knew no bounds, as I didn’t think he was quite that stupid. Of course, given what we know about Barry and his associates now, not so much surprise.

    In any case, my opposition to both Obama and Hillary have nothing to do with irrelevancies like ethnicity or gender. It has everything to do with the fact that both of them are not-so-closeted Marxists, and so should not be allowed anywhere near the White House.

  68. Carin TWPBH says:

    arin wrote: So, Lisa, if I got TOTALLY excited about a non-black guy running for mayor of Detroit … that wouldn’t be racist of me? I mean, in my lifetime, I’ve never known a white mayor.

    You wouldn’t consider it a sign of progress? A sign that black people were open to voting across racial lines? That wouldn’t make you feel good?

    Erm, if a white guy were running for mayor of Detroit … he would lose. A sorta white guy did run a few years back and he went down in flames. But, I was talking about what “my ” support might mean. Or, what white “white” support of a white candidate in Detroit would mean.

  69. Karl says:

    Ed Morrissey:

    Hillary now gets less of the African-American vote than Republicans — only 8% in Pennsylvania.

    Ouch. Though I’ll bet that’s untrue by November, still funny.

  70. Rocks says:

    “…the old phenomenon of exit polls proven wrong because people with racist views do not tell pollsters the truth on election day again reared its head.”

    Sooner or later this is finally going to sink in with reporters.
    This is true but not for racial reasons, there is an “effect” but it’s not “Bradley”. Instead let’s call it the BO Effect for Back OFF (with a nod to Barack Obama of course). What is the BO Effect?
    It’s that the more conservative candidate, in any race from any party, starts out with a built in advantage in any poll. I would say it ranges from 2 points in the bluest of places to 10 points in the reddest with an average of 4 to 5 points overall.

    Why? Because the more conservative voter will be much more likely to tell a pollster to Back Off, they just don’t talk about their private business. Especially in the age of identity theft, etc. Any poll is going to lean liberal because any poll taken is going to have people who lean liberal over represented.

  71. Karl says:

    Also, Lisa is right that it’s more about class than race. Attend a church that disavows the bourge for 20 years, and the antipathy gets so ingrained that even a professional pol can’t keep it hidden. Who’da thunkit?

  72. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    “Also, Lisa is right that it’s more about class than race.”

    – So then the Left has an inferiority complex?…What?

    – Sounds like some of the identity politics arguments are starting to circle back on themselves.

  73. Lisa says:

    Big Bang Hunter you need to lay off the steroids. This is 2008, not 1965. I am 100% positive that my fellow Americans (who happen to be white)won’t string me up from the nearest poplar tree if Obama wins the White House. You should give your fellow Americans (who happen to be black folks) the same benefit.

    I don’t think I am being delusional when I expect the non-apocalypse. Put down those Turner Diaries, sir. That is what is so great about this country. We peacefully transfer power, to douchebag President-Elects of all shapes, sizes – and possibly now genders and races. We whine about stolen elections, electoral fuckery, stupid candidates, stupid voters, Jesusland, hanging chads, racists, chicken-box bribed motor-voters, etc., etc., but we still wave our flags (and middle fingers) at inaugural parades and then get on with our lives.

  74. thor says:

    It’s about pretending it’s about churches, race, Reverends, class and crypto-Marxist symbolism.

    The man is too big. The man is too strong.

    O!

  75. Salt Lick says:

    Erm, if a white guy were running for mayor of Detroit … he would lose.

    Sounds like one of them chocolate cities.

    Erm, just out of curiosity — what percentage of major American cities with a majority black population have white mayors?

  76. Salt Lick says:

    “Also, Lisa is right that it’s more about class than race.”

    I had no idea 90% of African-Americans were doing as well as the Obamas. ;-)

  77. MayBee says:

    I wonder if the NAACP will run an ad like this one this year.
    The temptation must be great.

  78. Bravo Romeo Delta says:

    Lisa @74

    Kudos for one of the best statements about the American culture and it’s political psyche that I’ve read in some time.

  79. Lisa says:

    78#: I don’t know that 90% of American blacks are in the bag for Obama. I am not convinced. That seems like horseshit. Who are all of these black people who are are still crazy loyal to the Clintons? A REALLY noisy 10%? Seems suspicious, like it fits the “darkies are stupid lemmings” meme.

  80. Bravo Romeo Delta says:

    Lisa,

    Now that I think about it a bit more, it’s pretty much a picture perfect definition of something – I don’t know what exactly, but something. I am reminded of this in conjunction with something Lilek’s wrote a while back:

    I’ve been trying to find the right words for a certain theory, and I can’t quite do it yet. It has to do with how a candidate feels about America – they have to be fundamentally, dispositionally comfortable with it. Not in a way that glosses over or excuses its flaws, but comfortable in the way a long-term married couple is comfortable. That includes not delighting in its flaws, or crowing them at every opportunity as proof of your love. I mean a simple quiet sense of awe and pride, its challenges and flaws and uniqueness and tragedies considered. You don’t win the office by being angry we’re not something else; you win by being enthused we can be something better. You can fake the latter. But people sense the former.

  81. Pablo says:

    #79 MayBee, they might be too busy opposing the death penalty so that John King and Lawrence Brewer can be spared from Death Row. After that, maybe they can get back to the business of demanding tougher penalties for racially motivated crimes.

  82. gamera says:

    throw all the chaff you want, theocons.
    the superdels have already chosen the candidate. They are politely letting the voters have their say.
    this graph and this graph are all they need.

    Obama is teh kryptonite for the GOP.
    u can’t push HRC on us, hehe.

  83. BJTexs TW/BP says:

    I’m going to shout this now because some people aren’t paying attention:

    NOBODY KNOWS WITH ANY DEGREE OF CERTAINTY WHAT EFFECT RACE AND/OR GENDER HAVE IN VOTING PATTERNS!!11ELEVENTY11!!

    Let’s step slowly away from the race wars and suicide bra flingings and call this bullsh*t for what it is.

    Blatant Sore Loserness!!

    It’s tough on Dems like Lisa because she knows that some of her party have made a career out of racial politics (“Reverend Sharpton, Helloooo!”) or gender politics (“Ms. Ferraro, Shut uuuuup!”) Those are same people who still think that Republican mainline strategy is to whip up the white working class voters into a foaming racial hateytood to reject the negro loving liberal.

    Check your calenders, people. It’s 2008 and Lisa is right that this isn’t going to end up with blacks burning down Denver or aging feminazis storming the YMCA and performing suicide castrations. No matter how hard the NYT and their ilk try to make this about racial/sexual disconnects, it’s still about class struggle and policy by misery anecdote (“I met with Wilma yesterday, a single mom with 15 children who’s husband died of trans fats and melting polar ice caps. She and her children work collecting vacant lot garbage and haul it to the local incinerator for a few pennies. No matter how many used condoms and crack needles they collect they cannot afford even the most basic health care and, as a result, they’ve all lost all of their teeth. UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE!”)

    the rioting in Denver will be far left activists determined to make their mark as THE SOUL OF THE PARTY!

  84. Lisa says:

    82# That is exquisite. And very important. Snottily wishing we were France doesn’t cut it. But neither does stupid, boorish jingoism.

  85. MayBee says:

    gamera- did you see your man O is a vaccination doubter?

  86. Lisa says:

    86#: Laughs hard. Claps. Waves burning bra and shouts hallelujah!! Laughs some more. Crack needles indeed.

  87. gamera says:

    nah, he’s just a panderer. like the rest. he’s gotta get elected.
    ;)

    that age thing is gonna have more legs than a colorado centipede.

  88. nishi's doppleganger says:

    i haz graphes lulz!

    an i haz mee bama luv cuz hee maks mee swet n moanz oooo babee

    hee spekz n eye shivrz n evenz pea meeselfz
    eye dreemz in bama brownz lulz

  89. MayBee says:

    It’s 2008 and Lisa is right that this isn’t going to end up with blacks burning down Denver or aging feminazis storming the YMCA and performing suicide castrations.

    No, of course not. I’m just wondering if it is going to end with McCain virtually tying a black man to a pick up truck and dragging him to his death.
    If we can just talk about politics, policies, and socioeconomic issues…that would be dandy with me.

  90. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – So then Lisa. You assert that Black America, along with the ObamaBots side of the crazy aunts in the Dem attic, are just going to tacitly accept having their votes voided if the Billery machine manages a brokered convention, and envagles enough super delegate support to negate the entire primary process…… Interesting….

    – Time will tell.

  91. thor says:

    Bitter Obama destroyers cling to their Coke slurpees.

  92. Pablo says:

    Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
    Wednesday, April 23, 2008

    The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Wednesday shows John McCain with a three-point advantage over Barack Obama, 47% to 44%. McCain attracts support from 82% of Republicans, Obama from 71% of Democrats, and McCain has a very slight edge among unaffiliated voters. The presumptive Republican nominee has a similar advantage over Hillary Clinton, 47% to 44%. In this match-up, McCain is supported by 83% of Republicans, Clinton by 75% of Democrats, and McCain has a double-digit edge among unaffiliated voters.

    We’re getting to the point where who the Dems nominate barely matters anymore. The dominating factor is the blood on the floor that is going to cause some significant number of Democrat to either break for McCain or stay home. In a straight up race, each of them fails to have the support of 25%+ of Democrats. And this is before they ever campaign head to head, and before Clinton and Obama have to sit through hearings and vote on the nomination of Gen. Petraeus as CENTCOM commander. [Rove, you magnificent bastard!] Barring some sort of enormous blunder on McCain’s part, he’s your next president.

  93. Carin TWPBH says:

    the superdels have already chosen the candidate. They are politely letting the voters have their say.

    Honestly, I don’t understand why we allow the commoners to have any say at all.

  94. McGehee says:

    Obama nom

    Doo dooooo doo doo doo!

  95. McGehee says:

    First it was Her Inevitableness. Then it was O!mentum.

    If I were McCain I’d be worried — he’s bound to be the focus of the next Mainstream Media Meme of Doom™.

  96. McGehee says:

    <ominous chord>

  97. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – Oh, and Lisa. Flowery hyperbole plays to the crowd, but as for the debate….not so much. Nor does thinly veiled personal attacks, seeking to avoid the subject.

    – Wheres all this vaunted “Lisa IQ”, spoken so highly of. Dissapointing.

  98. Cave Bear says:

    The problem with “stupid, boorish jingoism” is that, to the average liberal/left barking moonbat, if you don’t wax poetic (as Baracky and his wifey are prone to do) about how horrible the United States has been, is now, and ever shall be, then you are a stupid, boorish jingoist TWP.

  99. Rob Crawford says:

    Uh, Lisa and BJTexas — I have no idea whether there will be riots either way, and hope there won’t be, but race riots are *NOT* a long-distant piece of history. Just seven years Cincinnati was torn by a riot ginned up by racial demagogues like Rev. Wright. We were damned lucky no one was killed.

  100. Lisa says:

    Well (giggles at Black America)….I am not saying that there will not be a shitty argument about what a fucking bunch of fuckers the Clintons are and what a race baiting cuntbeast she is. And I am sure that the local newsfolks will go to the nearest crackhouse to ask the nappiest crackhead to tell the world what “black America” thinks about this tragic, racially divisive elction. Then the limo-lib white people will make fun of the racists in Jesusland for not voting they way they thought they should. But whatever. That is par for the course. Or, maybe Obama will win and the Hillary people and the Republicans will point and laugh and wait for him to make an ass of himself on a grand, Carteresque scale.

    Either way, people are going to complain about and make fun of whoever wins. But no one is going to burn anything down.

  101. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – Anyone who under-estimates the power of human passions/emotions is in for a exciting life.

  102. Lisa says:

    #101: I don’t agree with that. I think that is a stereotype. The average liberal is not some fluffy fool created in an Aaron Sorkin screenplay. This primary highlights the glaring differences in “average liberals”.

  103. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – “an” exciting life…..an….damn predicates….

  104. Lisa says:

    #101: And yes, there are lots of people on the Internets that think the way you are talking about. But they are not the average liberal. They are who they are. They are not representative of anyone but themselves.

  105. Rob Crawford says:

    And yes, there are lots of people on the Internets that think the way you are talking about. But they are not the average liberal. They are who they are. They are not representative of anyone but themselves.

    But why do so many of them get so much attention from the Democrats?

    And why did Obama spend twenty years in a church run by one of them?

  106. Pablo says:

    But no one is going to burn anything down.

    I wouldn’t be so sure of that. And that feeling has exactly nothing to do with race. If I had to lay odds on the skin color of the perp, should such a thing happen, at this point I’d bet on white.

  107. Lisa says:

    Cant stop chuckling at #98 & #99. So true. And the ominous chord was a nice touch.

    (Chuckles some more. Boss walks by and wonders if I have been collecting crack needles for personal use.)

  108. Lisa says:

    #108:

    A) Because they are noisy in the way that James Dobson noisily represents himself as “the base” for the moral majority – but even more irritating than him.

    B) I bet he is wondering the same thing as he holds his rusty, once gleaming halo in his hands and sobs bitterly.

  109. thor says:

    America, your watermelons are coming home to roost!

    O!

  110. MayBee says:

    Uh, Lisa and BJTexas — I have no idea whether there will be riots either way, and hope there won’t be, but race riots are *NOT* a long-distant piece of history. Just seven years Cincinnati was torn by a riot ginned up by racial demagogues like Rev. Wright. We were damned lucky no one was killed.

    I lived there then, and remember it well. Was it just the year before that the anti-free trade folks marched through downtown and broke the windows of various businesses (like Chiquita?).
    Are the Seattle riots too ancient to bring up?
    Or the Woodstock 1994 bottled-water-is-too-expensive riots?

  111. Smirky McChimp says:

    I stand by what I said. Hopey Changeyness as cloak for the New New New Deal *may* be enough for Denver, but not for November. Postulating what would happen if Wright and Bitter hadn’t happen is irrelevant. They did happen, and they will be there to wound him after the Convention.

    His schtick will get old with the kind of people who sway elections. No matter how much pretty he puts in his speechifying, eventually he needs to come up with the beef, and his beef will not be sufficient. He’s sold himself a bill of goods, namely that he had the gravitas and the experience necessary to be POTUS, and his remarkable lack of those things means he will be a poor GE candidate or a disasterous president. That earns him the red nose and the big floppy shoes in my book, “grass”-roots organizing or no.

  112. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – You know, it would be high;y helpful if fewer assumptions were made on all sides.

    – I happen to agree the possibility of hard reaction has little to do with skin color. Personally I would guess any demographic would be some what pissed at being dis-enfranchised.

    – So no Lisa. I’m not heavily invested in the race card meme. Independents have a tendency to avoid lock-step thinking. But its understandable if the word “independent” is lost on you.

  113. Lisa says:

    #115: I actually use the word “independent” all of the time. It is a nice word.

  114. thor says:

    Fried change legs and hope melon cubes are today’s lunch special at the Bitter Knob Cafe.

    O!

  115. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    – Yes. We Independents cling to it “non-bitterly”.

    (Cue theme music from “My favorite Martian”)

  116. MayBee says:

    I wouldn’t be so sure of that. And that feeling has exactly nothing to do with race. If I had to lay odds on the skin color of the perp, should such a thing happen, at this point I’d bet on white.

    I have no idea what will happen, but this chuckle chuckle, nobody ever really does that act is annoying the crap out of me.

  117. JD says:

    I am disappointed in the modern Democrat party. They seem hell bent on nominating jimmah redux, without the experience, as their nominee. You can get more meat on a spare rib in the local Asian buffet than you find on Baracky, literally and figuratively. To thinking Dems, he should be an embarassment. He has nothing other than an interesting life story, and the ability to read a speech.

  118. Scape-goat Trainee says:

    “Comment by Lisa on 4/23 @ 7:53 am #

    I don’t think Obama is acceptable because rich white people like him. I am saying that the divide is less about race and more about class.”

    I guess that means that only rich blacks voted for Barack, whereas poor blacks voted for Hillary.

    Care to test that theory?

  119. Cowboy says:

    I commented, snarkily, yesterday about the 92% PA African American vote for Obama.

    On second thought, it’s probably unfair to imply, as I did (in a humorous, yet oh-so-clever way) that those voters were motivated by racism.

    Certainly, a portion of that vote came from people–as Lisa has written–expressing pride in an African American candidate. But is this racist?

    Other voters in the bloc may very likely have voted for Obama because they identify with his ideology.

    Maybe voting for Obama because he’s black isn’t racist–just ill-conceived.

  120. BJTexs TW/BP says:

    Comment by thor on 4/23 @ 10:33 am #

    Fried change legs and hope melon cubes are today’s lunch special at the Bitter Knob Cafe.

    O!

    thor: Will you take Barack Obama as your waffley wedded husband?

    O! Noes!

  121. gamera says:

    oh pablo……
    here’s a dash of reality water for u.

    and we haven’t even begun to talk age yet.
    ;)

  122. nishi's doppleganger says:

    oh theoconz mcain oldz lik stonhinje
    hez gut althiimrz n wil bee bablin idyut bye 2nd yeer
    hees teath bee al gonz by 3

    bama wel hungz n veerile n makez mee shivrz n gasm Oooooooooo
    hee goz al nitz n onlee neads water lulz
    i neadz napz aftre bama luv lol

  123. Carin TWPBH says:

    Certainly, a portion of that vote came from people–as Lisa has written–expressing pride in an African American candidate. But is this racist?

    I mean, don’t you believe it when the skin-head says he’s merely part of the “white pride movement” … proud of his white heritage .. yada yada yada.

  124. McGehee says:

    hez gut althiimrz n wil bee bablin idyut bye 2nd yeer

    What I don’t understand, nishi-dop, is why that doesn’t make nishtoon SUPPORT McCain. If he’s really going to be babbling like an idiot soon, she’ll finally have someone in the White House with whom she can relate.

    Oh, if only she were old enough to remember Jimmy Carter…

  125. Lisa says:

    Carin: Equating a skinhead whose “white pride” is all about preserving the purity of the white race and preserving white privledge is hardly the same as the “black is beautiful” or “black pride” stuff. It was supposed to be a self esteem boosting antidote to the travails of being categorized as ignorant monkeys (well, 1/3 monkeys or some crazy equation). I agree that it is goofy and ill-conceived. Probably “I am lovely and smart, no matter what color my skin or heritage is” would have been a better message to people suffering from the heavy burden of being perceived as the dumbest, most violent, ugliest, nappiest, big-lippedest, watermeloneatingest…. but “black pride” is what the geniuses of the 60s and 70s came up with. A kind of stupid solution to a nasty legacy? Yes. Equivalent to Tom Metzger? No. I am sure you know this. You are likely just being snarky. But I had to explain it anyway.

  126. Lisa says:

    #121: My opinion is that the animosity between supporters of the two camps is more class resentment than race or gender resentment. I would love to see the numbers and see if my theory holds up.

  127. Ardsgaine says:

    He has nothing other than an interesting life story, and the ability to read a speech.

    It worked for FDR.

    Heh. And it’s one up on Bush. :-P

    In the end, the thing that’s going to do Obama in is the fact that he is a leftist. The only Democratic presidential candidate to win a majority of the popular vote in the past 32 years was Al Gore, for all the good it did him. The reason why is very simple: Americans don’t trust Democrats to serve as commander-in-chief. As a group, Leftists tend towards pacifism and anti-Americanism. The majority of Americans don’t like that, strangely enough. They will vote for Democrats for Congress, because they love their middle-class entitlements, but they want a strong president. Obama’s twenty years with Jeremiah “God damn America” Wright will be enough to sink him in the general election. His plan to speak with Ahmadjihad is more weight pulling him down. He cannot win a majority. If it were a three-way race with another conservative candidate to draw off votes from McCain, he would have a definite chance. Not in a straight up contest though. Unless McCain does somethine really, really dumb, he’s a shoo in.

  128. Lisa says:

    True Ardsgaine. As an avowed leftist, I have to say that you are probably right. Though I am certain that progressive, liberal politics plays an important role in this country, in my lifetime it has hardly ever made its way into the White House except by fluke (or after a conserevative does something REALLY stupid like break into someone’s campaign office). We like Chuck Norris in the White House and George Clooney holding the purse strings in congress.

    But ya never know. Didn’t Obama get his senate seat by his opponent doing something loopy and basically handing Obama the election on a platter?

  129. Lisa says:

    Okay, I just walked over to where students get ID cards at the undisclosed university where I work. Some lady in one of these

    http://www.essenceofblack.com/images/overhead_abaya_blackha31front.jpg

    was getting her picture taken for her ID card. WTF?!?!?!?

    Sorry for getting off topic, but that amused the hell out of me.

  130. Aldo says:

    In this cycle, Clinton has now won white men in 12 states and Obama has done the same in 10 states. That Obama routinely carries the overwhelming majority of the black vote is an inconvenient truth that Mitchell prefers to avoid.

    Mark Steyn picked up on this over at The Corner:

    Nora Ephron’s sneer over at The Huffington Post about whether Pennsylvania’s embittered white men are more racist than they’re sexist or vice-versa gets things completely upside down. The embittered white men are just about the only demographic weighing these candidates on their merits. The significant proportion of women and blacks in the Democratic base for whom identity politics trumps all is what’s stopping either candidate from gaining the momentum that would have emerged in a contest between two squaresville dead European males. It’s the identity-uber-alles blocs that prevent the black guy from finishing off the feminist or vice-versa.

  131. Pablo says:

    Didn’t Obama get his senate seat by his opponent doing something loopy and basically handing Obama the election on a platter?

    No, that was because of his divorce records being made public over the objections of both he and his wife. Unless you’re talking about Alan Keyes, in which case, yes. It was being Alan Keyes.

  132. Pablo says:

    Some lady in one of these was getting her picture taken for her ID card. WTF?!?!?!?

    Oh. That was me. Didn’t recognize me, did you?

  133. Lisa says:

    No, I didn’t know that was you. You look great. Did you have some work done?

  134. Lisa says:

    Really? So what was so big about his divorce records? And isn’t that standard operating procedure now, post Monica/Larry Flynt to dive headlong into people’s divorce records for salacious tidbits? You should probably not discuss your penchant for autoasphyxiation and pink, frilly undergarments during your divorce if you have designs on high office in the future. Maybe tone down the “you fucking money grubbing cuntbeast!!!” expostulations during a heated dissolution. That does not play well with the folks in Peoria.

    I dont know that any of that was part of his divorce. But I remember something that raised everyone’s brows sunk the poor guy’s campaign.

  135. MayBee says:

    Actually, 2 of his opponents had their sealed divorce records unsealed and made public during Obama’s Senate race. First the Dem Blair Hull, then the Rep.

  136. Lisa says:

    I just read the history on Jack Ryan, Obama’s opponent in 2004 (Jack Ryan: Awesome name!!!)

    That was sleazy. Not new (reporters love that shit – who cares about Hillary’s economic proposal….WERE YOU THERE WHILE YOUR HUSBAND WAS GETTING A HUMMER BY AN INTERN!??!?), but it was sleazy, nonetheless. Especially since the court originally acted to protect the minor child then reversed themselves for some fuckorific reason.

  137. MayBee says:

    Yeah, and considering it was the second opponent of Barack’s to have his divorce records unsealed, it’s double fuckorific. If it were Bush, we’d be hearing how Karl Rove must have paid off some judge.

  138. Lisa says:

    Yeah but Karl Rove would have paid off some judge (hee hee).

  139. Pablo says:

    Plus, his ex-wife is crazy hot, even as an alien. So, you know, I question the judgment.

  140. Pablo says:

    Yeah but Karl Rove would have paid off some judge (hee hee).

    We are taking about the Daley Machine here. There aren’t many dirtier hands in politics.

  141. JD says:

    Maybe tone down the “you fucking money grubbing cuntbeast!!!” expostulations during a heated dissolution.

    That does not tend to go over too well with the ex-, nor the finder of fact, who is likely to vivisect you for said statement.

    In Ryan’s case, he was a wimp for caving. Men and women alike that take even passing glance at her could understand why any man would want to make sweet sweet love to her as often as possible, in as many places as possible.

  142. Pablo says:

    Yeah, but sharing? Uh, no.

    I’m greedy like that.

  143. Lisa says:

    JD, lol. True. She is really gorgeous. He is not a bad lookin’ feller either, in a vaguely Hasslehoffian way.

  144. BJTexs TW/BP says:

    Yea. Lisa, but he’s no Eric LaSalle now. Is he?

  145. Dave in SoCal says:

    Speaking of crazy hot aliens.

    I for one welcome our new robot overlords.

  146. Rusty says:

    #131
    Didn’t Obama get his senate seat by his opponent doing something loopy and basically handing Obama the election on a platter?

    When the Cook County board wants you to be senator, you get to be senator. It really is that easy. It’s the reason you don’t want him in the White House. Just look at who runs Chicago and Cook County, the relationship there is incestuous, and ask yourself if you really want that bunch running this country. Remember Barack Obama owes them a lot of favors. Lisa. Obama is playing his black voter base like the Chicago politician he is. Suckers.

  147. Lisa says:

    LOL @ #147. No way babe. Especially now that we have been reacquainted with his mullet/jheri-curl hybrid thingie. That was smokin.

    #149: Yikes. I keep hearing about the Chicago “political boss” system. I think this needs to be discussed before the bodies start floating to the surface, literally and figuratively.

  148. McGehee says:

    I think this needs to be discussed before the bodies start floating to the surface, literally and figuratively.

    NO! I’m looking forward to the DNC’s Claude Rains as Captain Renault impression when that happens!

    “I am shocked — SHOCKED! — to see all these dead bodies here!”

    “Your shovel, sir.”

  149. Aldo says:

    …ask yourself if you really want that bunch running this country.

    If it is a choice between that bunch and the Harold Ickes/Clinton machine then it would be a coin toss.

  150. thor says:

    #

    Comment by Karl on 4/23 @ 8:51 am #

    Also, Lisa is right that it’s more about class than race. Attend a church that disavows the bourge for 20 years, and the antipathy gets so ingrained that even a professional pol can’t keep it hidden. Who’da thunkit?

    If this is about class, Karl, which class are you in? I’d put you, based on your words, squarely in the throngs of the lowest class. And I’m not talking socio-economic class. Never let it be said that I didn’t call you out as a race-baiting twerp. I did and still do.

  151. guinsPen says:

    [Obama] may even be a little to the right of the last guy they ran for president.

    Only because he’s about to lap him.

  152. guinsPen says:

    @ #74
    That is what is so great about this country. We peacefully transfer power…

    Exactly. But then you speak of a different we.

    We whine about…

    So I’m running a poll.

    1. stolen elections: D R
    2. electoral fuckery:D R
    3. stupid candidates:D R
    4. stupid voters:D R
    5. Jesusland:D R
    6. hanging chads:D R
    7. racists:D R
    8. chicken-box bribed motor-voters:D R ?
    9. etc., etc.:D R
    10. but we still wave our flags:D R
    11. (and middle fingers) at inaugural parades:D R
    12. and then get on with our lives:D R

    Perfect score wins pie.

  153. guinsPen says:

    @ #90
    that age thing is gonna have more legs than a colorado centipede.

    Nishidanratheroshinji.

  154. guinsPen says:

    The average liberal is not some fluffy fool…

    Typical fits better.

  155. Big Bang Hunter (pumping you up) says:

    “11. (and middle fingers) at inaugural parades:D R”

    – Yeh ma-yan…..that’ll sure show those wingers….

    – Any sort of symbolic “sticking it to the imaginary man” is as good as a baby rattle for the adalpated Left. What a bunch of immature moroons.

  156. ironpacker says:

    I would like to be as positive as Lisa concerning the liklihood of violence if Hillary wins a brokered convention. However as a hedge, I would increase my homeowners insurance and plan on being out of town during the convention if I lived in Denver.

  157. Rusty says:

    #150

    Politics in Illinois is a feudal system of patronage.
    Knew a guy. Raging alchaholic. Worked in the Cook County department of Paroles. He had a desk and a phone and a 51 week vacation. He worked one week out of the year, getting out the vote. That was his job. That’s all he did. And dozens like him in that office. He would hit the streets and round up hundreds of people and take them to vote democratic. There is no other party in Chicago and Cook County.

  158. Lisa says:

    #151: Now that I am done laughing (how do you think shit like that up? I showed my mom that one and got a laugh out of her) I am really nervous about the Daley connection. We will see, won’t we.

  159. universal life insurance quote says:

    What a nice site, been surfing on it for the whole night and day and i neva got bored for a single minute. Keep up your good work and all of the best in everything you do! :-)

Comments are closed.