(Ted Kennedy) is hardly perfect & while endorsement was nice news for Obama it's being treated as a decisive endorsement. We'll see about that.
Originally Posted By: the G-man
I don't know how decisive if will or won't be but I did hear an interesting take on it this afternoon. The commentator opined that Kennedy's endorsement, coming from perhaps the best known democrat outside of Bill and Hillary alive today, may be seen as (and this is me paraphrasing) permission for the rest of the Democrat mainstream to sign on to Obama against Hillary.
I don't know if that will be the case but it was an interesting take.
Like lovers scorned, Bill Clinton’s longtime liberal supporters are walking out on him, slamming the door behind them and rebuking the 42nd president for his behavior leading up to last weekend’s South Carolina primary.
Clinton’s base seems to be eroding fast as liberal Democratic stalwarts join up with Barack Obama, whose message of change seems now to apply not only to the Bush Administration of the last seven years, but the eight-year Clinton Administration that preceded it.
Obama’s biggest “get” was Sen. Ted Kennedy, who abandoned his neutrality in the presidential race and endorsed Obama over Hillary Clinton on Monday. While Obama insists the Massachusetts senator’s endorsement was not a repudiation of anyone, it was clear that Kennedy - along with his niece Caroline Kennedy and son Rep. Patrick Kennedy — had reached beyond the Clintons to pass the mantle of the Democratic party’s liberal wing to Obama.
And while the Kennedys may open the floodgates, they were hardly the first liberals to abandon the Clintons for Obama. In recent weeks the Clintons have watched many of their supporters drift to the young senator from Illinois.
Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy and Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry, the Democrats’ 2004 presidential candidate, endorsed Obama recently. On Tuesday, Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius climbed aboard, the morning after she delivered the Democrats’ rebuttal speech to President Bush’s State of the Union address.
Even novelist Toni Morrison, who once called Bill Clinton the “first black president,” has come out for Obama.
Liberal criticism of the Clintons has come from inside and outside the Beltway, from former supporters and colleagues. It ranges from the thinly veiled to the blatant
But Florida isn't a real primary for you guys today and turnout is supposedly really low. So I don't know if the normal rules apply.
BTW, you gotta admit that video was pretty well done.
Really the Miami Herald is saying it might set a record for high turnout & it is a real primary despite those like yourself who want the Obama coronation to begin ASAP.
Congresswoman Maxine Waters Endorses Senator Hillary Clinton for President
In a move that is sure to solidify a state that already supported Senator Hilary Clinton, Representative Maxine Waters officially announced her endorsement of Clinton to reporters on Tuesday. While the endorsement could have been expected by many within the political field, in no small part because she also endorsed Bill Clinton for President in 1992, this will nonetheless give Senator Clinton a powerful ally in her corner for the upcoming caucuses and primaries. Waters has been a member of Congress since 1991, and has been representing the 35th District of California. Her area of representation encompasses South Central Los Angeles, and stretches from Inglewood down to Lawndale and Gardena, California. According to Wikipedia, she has continuously won the district by a handy margin, increasing in popularity to her receiving 83.8% of the vote in 2006. A powerful Congresswoman with major support from her constituents, she is a voice that would have been valuable to any candidate receiving her endorsement. She is also said to be one of the most influential members of the Congressional Black Caucus, according to Transworldnews. Outside of the fact that Waters can be an important person to have in Clinton's corner, the value of this endorsement is particularly high because Waters is one of the most vocal African-American leaders in Congress. In an election that could come down to race relations and who can capture the minority vote, this is a strong statement for Senator Clinton's campaign. It also comes at a time when Clinton can use any type of momentum to carry her campaign into Super Tuesday. Trailing Senator Barack Obama in overall delegates that have already been decided (41-21) this is a spark that has been much needed for Clinton's campaign, and one that could prove to provide huge dividends in the long run. ...
I'll admit I'm not paying that much attention to the FL Democrat primary, but it was my understanding that:
the Florida Democratic primary has been relegated to a "beauty contest" because the Democratic party stripped the state of its delegates. Thus, Florida Democrats may have little impact on who eventually becomes the Democratic nominee.
But as far as turnout goes, you may be right. At least one source I looked at after reading your post says that the turnout is high, especially for a contest in which no delegates are awarded.
As far as who the lack of delegates benefits, CNN thinks:
Without a campaign, who wins? Probably Hillary Clinton, the best-known contender. She will be in Florida Tuesday night to collect her "prize." Which is what? Momentum, she hopes, heading into Super Tuesday on February 5.
I think those that are pushing the "beauty pageant" idea are mostly Obama supporters. It's a huge swing state with a vary diverse population & it's looking like a record turnout. Obama supporters like John Kerry are running around & trying to spin it like it doesn't matter but it could give Hillary a huge bounce. BTW, is it really a good idea for Obama supporters to be so for dissenfranchising a big state like Florida? They may be wanting those votes in November.
How are Obama supporters "disenfranchsing" the state? It was the national committee that made the decision to strip the state of its delegates, not Obama or his supporters.
How are Obama supporters "disenfranchsing" the state? It was the national committee that made the decision to strip the state of its delegates, not Obama or his supporters.
Kerry was running around saying people should disreguard any Dem voting results from Florida.
That's a little different than "disenfranchsing" someone. If anyone "disenfranchised" them (that is: made a legal determination that their vote didn't count), it was the democrat leadership.
And, technically, Kerry is correct (there's a sentence I never thought I'd write). Because no delegates are being awarded as a result of the results, the vote doesn't count.
That's a little different than "disenfranchsing" someone. If anyone "disenfranchised" them (that is: made a legal determination that their vote didn't count), it was the democrat leadership.
And, technically, Kerry is correct (there's a sentence I never thought I'd write). Because no delegates are being awarded as a result of the results, the vote doesn't count.
It's not out of the question of those delegates being reinstated at some point. Even so, those votes do count as it tells you who Florida wants. If Hillary doesn't do well, she probably is going to go into the big primary day hurting. If she does really well though (say over 10 points) then Obama has a big problem.
How are Obama supporters "disenfranchsing" the state? It was the national committee that made the decision to strip the state of its delegates, not Obama or his supporters.
Kerry was running around saying people should disreguard any Dem voting results from Florida.
You guys both obviously know, but for those who don't, Florida moved up its election date (which normally would have been Super Tuesday), so that Florida's primary would stand alone from the other states, and the Democrats penalized Florida by taking away some of their delegates.
It looks like Hillary Clinton is the winner for the Democrats in Florida.
And John McCain is the winner for the Republicans.
Wonder Boy User leaving Whomod, rex and Ray Adler to fry in their own bile 3000+ posts 35 minutes 54 seconds ago Reading a post Forum: Politics and Current Events Thread: Hillary in 2008
Late on Sept. 6, 2005, a private plane carrying the Canadian mining financier Frank Giustra touched down in Almaty, a ruggedly picturesque city in southeast Kazakhstan. Several hundred miles to the west a fortune awaited: highly coveted deposits of uranium that could fuel nuclear reactors around the world. And Mr. Giustra was in hot pursuit of an exclusive deal to tap them.
Unlike more established competitors, Mr. Giustra was a newcomer to uranium mining in Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic. But what his fledgling company lacked in experience, it made up for in connections. Accompanying Mr. Giustra on his luxuriously appointed MD-87 jet that day was a former president of the United States, Bill Clinton.
Upon landing on the first stop of a three-country philanthropic tour, the two men were whisked off to share a sumptuous midnight banquet with Kazakhstan's president, Nursultan A. Nazarbayev, whose 19-year stranglehold on the country has all but quashed political dissent.
Mr. Nazarbayev walked away from the table with a propaganda coup, after Mr. Clinton expressed enthusiastic support for the Kazakh leader's bid to head an international organization that monitors elections and supports democracy. Mr. Clinton's public declaration undercut both American foreign policy and sharp criticism of Kazakhstan's poor human rights record by, among others, Mr. Clinton's wife, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.
To make a long story short, less than 48 hours later, Giustra's company signed a deal giving it the rights to buy into three Kazakh uranium projects. Months later, Giustra secretly donated $31.3 million to Mr. Clinton's charitable foundations.
And it looks like the Times may be pursuing this story further. Acccording to the American Spectator:
New York Times sources say that if Sen. Hillary Clinton loses the Democratic nomination or a general election for President, it will largely be due to the efforts of their investigative and political reporter Jo Becker
Becker, who formerly worked for the Washington Post, has been put on the Bill Clinton beat for the foreseeable future, and has been digging around the Clinton Foundation for months, according to Clinton campaign sources, one of whom has been assigned to track Becker's activities.
The campaign has been trying to keep tabs on sources Becker has been talking to for several months now, attempting to figure out which lines of inquiry she is undertaking. As reported several months ago, the Clinton campaign attempted some time ago to "oppo" the former President's post-White House time, trying to anticipate potential thorny issues that might arise for Senator Clinton.
Becker's work has focused almost exclusively on the Clinton Foundation, and the ways in which Clinton has used the entity to further his own personal wealth, as well as those who support him and his philanthropic activities.
Recently, the Wall Street Journal reported that Clinton was negotiating terms to exit a partnerships and consulting deal with longtime supporter Ron Burkle. Clinton was able to attract large sums of investment money to Burkle's operation from several sources, the biggest being the royal family of Dubai. "Everyone assumes that if he separates from Burkle that the relationship with Dubai is severed, too," says a source with ties to the Clinton Foundation. "But the Dubai ties aren't the result of Burkle. That's a personal relationship with ties to the foundation, and those aren't going to end."
Matter-eater Man argumentative User Fair Play! 4000+ posts 02/01/08 10:38 AM Making a new reply Forum: Politics and Current Events Thread: Re: Hillary in 08: new scandal brewing?
I'm sure if Hillary wins the nomination some sort of new Whitewater will be propped up. Yet it won't be any different if Obama wins. His 15yr relationship with Rezko or something else will come out. Since much of his appeal is based on being above stuff like that, it might hurt him more.
I'm sure ... if Obama wins... His 15yr relationship with Rezko or something else will come out. Since much of his appeal is based on being above stuff like that, it might hurt him more.
I don't know. A lot of people, including in your own party seem to be getting tired of the Clinton sleaze factor. I'll admit that Hillary did a good job of covering it up and/or putting it behind her for the past few years. However, with Bill continuing to take an active role in her campaign and her own attacks on Obama for things that seem to pale in comparision to her own exploits, it may remind your party that Hillary has a lot of baggage that they may not want to dredge back up again.
Well more people still favor Clinton over Obama nationally, so when you say "alot of people" that still doesn't translate into a significant number necessarally. Their certainly not being put on pedastal for their ethics while Obama is. Right now that has been an advantage for him but very little scrutiny has been applied in his direction. He's been allowed to downplay his long relationship with Rezko as being "only 5 hrs of legal work." for the most part but it's pretty easy to see that it was far more than that. I doubt that will last till the general election.
Since pretty much any candidate can be sleazed up, hopefully more people will be interested in who will be the best person to tackle issues like the economy.
That was an insightful and surprising commentary by Coulter, G-man.
I found this one quite insightful as well:
I voted for Romney in the Florida primary, and consider him the most representative of conservative principles, something I can't really say about either John McCain or George W. Bush.
I support McCain and Bush on certain issues, particularly the need to complete the mission in Iraq.
But I oppose Bush on his weak border enforcement, amnesty for illegals, vastly increasing the money in presidential campaigns, and other issues. And on a number of these issues, McCain is too close to the policies I don't support Bush on.
Worst case scenario, it might be better to cede the election to a Democrat for 4 or 8 years, to hold out for a true Republican, than to vote for a Republican who further dishonors what Republicans are all about.
Romney has a proven track record as a business owner, as an organizer for the 2002 Olympics, and as a Massachusettes governor, balancing budgets, reducing debt, and turning failures into successes. And with the personal wealth he has, I see Romney as a guy who can pay for his own campaign and not make backroom deals and obligations to special interests to stay in the race. As I believe Hillary, Obama and McCain already have.
On the subject of the Rezko scandal, and how it affects both Clinton and Obama, this Mclaughlin Group transcript, from 1/29/2008 :
Issue Two: Hot Rage.
(Begin videotaped segment [televised debate between Clinton and Obama].)
SENATOR BARACK OBAMA (D-IL, Democratic presidential candidate): Let's talk about Ronald Reagan. What you just repeated here today is patently --
SEN. HILLARY CLINTON (D-NY), Democratic presidential candidate): Barack --
SEN. OBAMA: Wait. No, Hillary, you just spoke --
SEN. CLINTON: Barack, I did not say --
SEN. OBAMA: You just spoke for two minutes.
SEN. CLINTON: I did not say anything about Ronald Reagan. You said two things.
SEN. OBAMA: You just spoke --
SEN. CLINTON: You talked about admiring Ronald Reagan --
SEN. OBAMA: Hillary, I'm sorry, but --
SEN. CLINTON: -- and you talked about the ideas of the Republicans.
SEN. OBAMA: -- you just --
SEN. CLINTON: I didn't talk about Ronald Reagan.
SEN. OBAMA: Hillary, we just had the tape. You just said that I complimented the Republican ideas. That is not true. What I said -- and I will provide you with the quote -- what I said was that Ronald Reagan was a transformative political figure because he was able to get Democrats to vote against their economic interest to form a majority to push through their agenda, an agenda that I objected to. So these are the kinds of political games that we are accustomed to.
SEN. CLINTON: No. Now, wait a second.
SEN. OBAMA: I'm sorry.
SEN. CLINTON: Wolf [CNN reporter Wolf Blitzer] -- wait a minute.
(End videotaped segment.)
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Question: Did this exchange unveil a hidden side of Obama's personality? I ask you, Monica.
MS. CROWLEY: Well, the Clinton team fights like biker chicks at a biker bar with broken beer bottles, right, and they've got you on the defensive. And the next thing you know, they've got their combat boot on your neck. Barack Obama is like Wile E. Coyote. Finally the anvil has landed on his head and he's woken up to the tactics of the Clinton team. And what you saw in that clip is Obama finally wising up to the fact that the Clintons play gutter politics. And unless he is willing to be as aggressive on the substantive points and actually calling her out -- and him, by the way, meaning Bill -- calling them out on their tactics, he's going to be sunk --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You think Obama --
MS. CROWLEY: -- (inaudible).
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Do you think Obama appeared mean-spirited in any way in that exchange?
MS. CLIFT: Actually, that reminded me of the McLaughlin Group. And when I heard him say, "Let me finish," I identified with him -- (laughs) -- not with her. And I have to admit, I wanted to close my eyes and imagine Romney or Giuliani standing in Obama's place, because, look, Hillary Clinton knows how to fight, and that's the whole premise of her campaign is that she can handle it in the fall.
I think it was hard to watch and I think Obama is beginning to find his voice in fighting back. But he doesn't want to damage his brand as a healer and a unifier. And if he gets down there in the back and forth --
MR. BUCHANAN: He's been dragged --
MS. CLIFT: -- it hurts him.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: The public is concerned about health insurance. They're concerned about the price of gasoline. They're concerned about the state of the economy. And they're talking about whether or not you're a Reaganite.
MR. BUCHANAN: What happened is --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: What is that, dancing on the head of a pin?
MR. BUCHANAN: No, I think the Clintons have done a job on Obama. He came out of Iowa. He was a transcendent, transformative figure. He'd gotten all these white votes. He's running way up high. And they gutted him and kicked him and dragged him down. And now he's fighting back, and it's very unseemly. And he's being reduced to the African-American vote in South Carolina. He's lost the women. He's lost the Hispanics. He's lost the --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Because of the evil Clintons.
MR. BUCHANAN: Because they all got him into this ugly brawl.
MS. CLIFT: I'm not going to go that far. MR. ZUCKERMAN: The way she is now fighting in this campaign is the kind of -- it's an echo of the partisan politics that was associated with the Clintons while they were in office. And I think both of them were diminished as a result of it, because he went off -- she forced him off the pedestal.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Why don't you focus on the weakness of his campaign, Obama's campaign?
MR. ZUCKERMAN: No, I think -- not only I have focused on it, frankly, because I think the real problem with it is it's too ethereal. There is not enough substance in the way of policy.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Okay. Icy rage -- icy rage.
Obama taunted Hillary by saying that during Ronald Reagan's presidency, he, Obama, was pounding the streets in Chicago as a community organizer at the same time Hillary was a director on Wal- Mart's board.
SEN. OBAMA: (From videotape.) While I was working on those streets, watching those folks see their jobs shift overseas, you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board of Wal-Mart.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: That Wal-Mart barb from Obama triggered Clinton to correct Obama, saying that she actually fought the Reagan policies while Obama was on the payroll of a lowlife influence-peddler.
SEN. CLINTON: (From videotape.) I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor, Rezko, in his slum landlord business in inner-city Chicago.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: The Rezko that Hillary named is Tony Rezko, a Syrian-born American restaurateur and real estate developer. Rezko is regarded as a political fixer and a back-room operator.
1990 -- Obama, still at Harvard Law School, interviews for a job at one of Rezko's development companies and declines it.
'93 -- Obama joins a Chicago law firm that represents Rezko.
'95 -- Rezko contributes $2,000 to Obama's Illinois Senate campaign.
'98 -- Illinois Senator Obama seeks government funding for a Rezko housing development.
2003 -- Rezko foots the bill for a $1,000-a-head kickoff cocktail reception for Obama's U.S. Senate run. Obama appoints Rezko to serve on his U.S. Senate campaign finance committee.
'04 -- FBI begins investigating Rezko for business fraud, influence-peddling, extortion, conspiracy and money laundering. June '05 -- Obama executes land transaction with Rezko involving an Obama $1.65 million home purchase, $300,000 under the asking price, and the purchase of land adjacency involving Mr. And Mrs. Rezko.
December '05 -- Obama purchases a piece of the adjacent lot from Mr. And Mrs. Rezko for $104,000.
'07 -- Obama divests himself of $44,000 in funds tied to Rezko.
January '08, one week ago, on the eve of the debate, Obama divests himself of an additional $40,000 in Rezko-linked contributions.
February 25, '08, one month from now, Tony Rezko goes on trial on federal charges of business fraud, influence-peddling, extortion, conspiracy, money laundering, with Patrick Fitzgerald as prosecutor -- the same U.S. attorney who gained headlines and the conviction of Scooter Libby.
Rezko and Obama have had dealings for 17 years.
FYI, there is no evidence whatsoever that Barack Obama or Mrs. Obama were involved in anything illegal regarding Tony Rezko.
Question: Is Obama tarnished by Rezko? Eleanor Clift.
MS. CLIFT: With all due respect, John, you're not the first person to turn over all these rocks. It's been examined by the Chicago newspapers.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Sun-Times.
MS. CLIFT: Right. And, yeah, I mean, I think the Clintons are going to try to make this seem like Jim McDougal and Whitewater, the 2008 version of that, which was a whole lot about nothing.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: They've been on it for a year, examining it.
MS. CLIFT: Right. But, you know, if you want to make charges like this stick, there has to be some underlying characteristic about this candidate that makes you uneasy. I really don't think people look at Barack Obama and think corrupt; they think he's in it for the money somehow.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: The public will say, "Why is he hanging out with this guy?"
MR. BUCHANAN: Well --
MS. CLIFT: Well, and the Clintons also hung out with this guy.
MR. BUCHANAN: But John, you know, this --
MS. CLIFT: There's actually photographic evidence of that.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Okay. Okay. She's raised a point. This photograph has emerged of the Clintons and Rezko.
(Begin videotaped segment.)
MATT LAUER (NBC "Today"): It is undated, I'm going to tell you right now. We know it's him. We don't know when it was taken. We think it was taken during your husband's presidency. I'm just curious. Do you know anything about the picture? Do you know when it was taken? Do you remember meeting this man?
SEN. CLINTON: No, I don't. You know, I probably have taken hundreds of thousands of pictures. I don't know the man. I wouldn't know him if he walked in the door. I don't have a 17-year relationship with him.
MR. LAUER: Does it make sense to use someone like this, Tony Rezko, against Senator Obama when there really is no such thing as political purity anymore?
SEN. CLINTON: There's a big difference between standing somewhere taking a picture with someone you don't know and haven't seen since and having a relationship.
(End videotaped segment.)
MR. BUCHANAN: You know, John --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Question: Has this photograph turned Hillary's bullets, destined for Obama, into blanks? Pat Buchanan.
MR. BUCHANAN: No, it hasn't. Look, anybody that's been in politics know they walk people through hundreds of them at fund- raisers and you take a photograph and move on. That's what that is.
Now, this thing -- he does have a connection with a sleazy character, but let me defend Obama. I have seen no hard evidence that this guy did anything criminal at all -- I'm talking about Obama -- for this guy. He's got a guy who hangs around politics, who turned out to be very sleazy and maybe a crooked character. And I think it's tarnished Obama. And I think it's somewhat unfair, all this attention focused on that.
MS. CROWLEY: Yeah. And you know what? The reason that Hillary did this is because that's the only thing that they have on the guy. Barack Obama is a very intelligent, skilled, class act. They found one guy, and so she gets panicky in the debate. She goes nuclear on Obama by dragging up the Rezko guy, which is particularly rich coming from the queen of the mother of all shady land deals, Whitewater, okay.
MS. CLIFT: Which was a whole lot about nothing.
MS. CROWLEY: Wait a minute. What the Clintons are so good at is accusing their rivals and opponents, accusing them of exactly what they are guilty themselves of.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Are you so positive towards --
MS. CROWLEY: It's -- (inaudible) -- from them.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Are you so positive towards Obama because of your odium for the Clintons?
MS. CROWLEY: Look --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Is that why you're positive towards him?
MS. CROWLEY: I would not -- no, no, no. Look, I think that the Clintons have a rap sheet of shady donors going right up to Norman Hsu as of, what, last week. But there's some nerve on the part of the Clintons to attack Barack Obama for one night --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Do you think a list could be put together --
MR. BUCHANAN: How about Marc Rich?
MS. CROWLEY: He has apologized and given the money to charity.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Two-part exit question. Part one: Will Rezko's association with Obama torpedo Obama's prospects in the primaries to come? Second part: Will Rezko torpedo Obama's prospects long term?
MR. BUCHANAN: No. But look, there's a tarnish, a bit of a smear on Obama. But, no, that's not what's going to kill him, John. What's going to kill him (is) what's already been done in Nevada and South Carolina, which is turn him from a candidate who happened to be black into the black candidate.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Have you forgotten something?
MR. BUCHANAN: And second --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: I'm doing this for the rest of the panel so they will not embarrass themselves. We've got a trial coming up. The trial is going to be prolonged. There are many counts.
MR. BUCHANAN: I don't know of --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: It's Patrick Fitzgerald. It's day in and day out, video every night --
MR. BUCHANAN: I don't know that Rezko --
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: -- of Rezko.
MR. BUCHANAN: I don't know of a thing that Obama has done for Rezko that is in any way shady or criminal.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: I'm telling you, the trial is not going to leave a pleasant odor.
MS. CLIFT: The answer is double no. Barack Obama is not on trial. And every politician in Washington has a rap sheet of donors. It's unfortunately the system that we operate under.
MS. CROWLEY: Well, what is going to torpedo Barack Obama is the Clinton war machine. It's not this individual Rezko charge.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: You mean, there's more that they have on him?
MS. CROWLEY: Well, I mean, look at how the Clintons are playing this game. Barack Obama is trying to run a class operation, and the Clintons wouldn't know class if it hit them on the head.
MS. CLIFT: It's called politics, Monica. (Laughs.)
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Could there be a counter-sympathy for Obama because of what the alleged Clintons are doing?
MR. ZUCKERMAN: Well, I think there is. There's been a lot of editorial comment really hostile to both Bill Clinton and Hillary for doing exactly this. And frankly, both of them end up being diminished by it. The country is just sick and tired of this kind of stuff. If you want to go back through the Clintons, you could find all kinds of material, okay, that could be brought up. I think this is an absolute non-issue.
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: The trial will be a non-factor?
MR. ZUCKERMAN: Absolutely. He is not on trial. You know, it is really a ridiculous issue. It is just another attempt to smear. And I think both of them --
MR. BUCHANAN: Hey, Mort -- you've got to get behind Romney, Mort. (Laughs.)
MR. ZUCKERMAN: I will. I will, if I knew who he was, okay?
MR. BUCHANAN: (Laughs.)
MS. CLIFT: Which Romney should you get behind?
MR. ZUCKERMAN: Right. Which Romney?
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: My feeling is Obama --
MR. ZUCKERMAN: Who is he today?
MR. MCLAUGHLIN: Can we get out? My feeling is Obama will not be hurt permanently by the Rezko matter.
It will be interesting to see what happens with the Rezco story if Obama wins the nomination. My guess is that it will get alot of play from conservatives, especially those in talk radio if that happens.
so if she didn't cry you'd call her unfeeling, and when she does cry you say she's faking? no matter what she does, you seem to hate her. And it's all such minor things. Are you really so close to her personally that you can tell her emotions with such accuracy. You're not saying they look fake, or seem fake. You are stating they're fake as if it were an absolute fact.
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
so if she didn't cry you'd call her unfeeling
I don't recall calling Hillary unfeeling in the past for not crying at the drop of a hat. Could you refresh my recollection?
It's one thing to shed a tear at something like, I dunno, 9/11 or a visit to Auschwitz. But Hillary (and she's my senator so I get exposed to more coverage about her than most of the rest of you) only seem to shed a tear when she's in a close election and then about fairly trivial things.
Also, this is the same candidate who changes her accent depending on her audience so the idea of her manipulating her affect for votes is hardly without precedent.
Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
so if she didn't cry you'd call her unfeeling
I don't recall calling Hillary unfeeling in the past for not crying at the drop of a hat. Could you refresh my recollection?
"if" "you'd" please refresh my memory as to how I said you did say that.
Quote:
It's one thing to shed a tear at something like, I dunno, 9/11 or a visit to Auschwitz. But Hillary (and she's my senator so I get exposed to more coverage about her than most of the rest of you) only seem to shed a tear when she's in a close election and then about fairly trivial things.
ah, so I see you've gone from traffic lawyer to Judge of Emotions. People under stress, and I think you'll agree a campaign for President is stressful, react in their own way. A few tears under such stressful circumstances is a better reaction than sitting dumbfounded for seven minutes.
Quote:
Also, this is the same candidate who changes her accent depending on her audience so the idea of her manipulating her affect for votes is hardly without precedent.
well, yeah that is weird. But some people do that. I think it's a blunt tactic that people think is a good idea but really doesn't work in practice.
You predicted that, if Hillary didn't cry, I would call her unfeeling. Your prediction would appear to be based on something I said in the past. In the alternative, you engaged in speculation as to one's thoughts...which seems to be something you condemn when you think I did it about Clinton.
You predicted that, if Hillary didn't cry, I would call her unfeeling. Your prediction would appear to be based on something I said in the past. In the alternative, you engaged in speculation as to one's thoughts...which seems to be something you condemn when you think I did it about Clinton.
I have a machine that specifically reads your thoughts. It was kind of a bad investment since 99% of the time you're thinking about penises, but sometimes I get some anti-Hillary readings and so my belief was based on that.
C'mon, Ray, you live in San Francisco. Any thought-reading machine you might own is going to be so overwhelmed by the thoughts of every man in the city thinking about penises that it's bound to skew the readings.
C'mon, Ray, you live in San Francisco. Any thought-reading machine you might own is going to be so overwhelmed by the thoughts of every man in the city thinking about penises that it's bound to skew the readings.
it was keyed to evil lawyer thoughts. I installed some filters that screened out all people who didn't at least once a month think "bush" "penis" "cock" "superman" "writ" "asshole" "i hate liberals" and "bush's penis." that left me with just your thoughts.
my thought machine is already telling me that you know you've lost and...well this is interesting...you're thinking that you always lose and you wish you had run off with Brad all those years ago.
