Message in a Bottle to the Obama Acolytes

Don’t even give them a second thought, they look foolish, manipulated tools.

Why would I respect someone who not only can’t think for himself, but also allows himself to be manipulated, resorting to intimidation, when opposed, high pitched braying, just seconds away from a cracked voice?

If the first reaction to conflict is violence, intimidation, they’re scared, nothing but frightened little kids.

Why bother?

Mindlessly fighting fire with fire is internecine warfare, and they can’t see it, don’t even understand what it means. An entire US defense, pre neocon, was predicated on understanding and outsmarting your enemy, without violence, not fighting like the Israelis v the Palestinians.

So why would anyone emulate the losing strategy of a frightened, insecure boy?

I don’t like liars.

BREAKING: Huge New Disclosure in Obama/Rezko Land Swap
by Greuben
Mon Feb 18, 2008 at 07:59:28 AM PST
Now cross-posted at MyDD.com for your enjoyment

MyDD Link

This is for all those who have not yet been infected with the PLAGUE that is Obamamania… Yes, for those REAL DEMOCRATS out there who want the real news.

I fully expect to be flamed, drawn, and quartered for this, but there’s been a brand new disclosure in the Rezko/Obama front that demands attention.

We all remember Tony Rezko, right? The indicted former “Friend of Barack” who, while under indictment, just so happened to go splitsies on a land purchase with the Obamas in 2005. Rezko (through his wife, Rita), bought a vacant parcel of land for full price – $625,000 – while the Obamas bought the adjacent house for $1.65 million – a full $300,000 off of the asking price!!!

We also remember how quickly Obamabots POUNCE on any mention of Rezko’s name or any suggestion of any impropriety in this deal… How quickly they suggest that Obama’s huge discount simply reflected real estate economics.

Well, well, well… Guess who decided to show up late to the party with a story to tell? The Sellers

That’s right, America is about to become intimately acquainted with the names, Frederic Wondisford and Sally Radovick. An intrepid journalist tracked them down and asked them whether Obama received a favorable price because of the involvement of Rezko and his wife in the purchase of the vacant, adjacent parcel for full price. They were also asked whether Obama paid less than the next highest offer for the house.

What did they say?

The couple who sold Barack Obama his Chicago home said the Illinois senator’s $1.65 million bid “was the best offer” and they didn’t cut their asking price because a campaign donor bought their adjacent land, according to e- mails between Obama’s presidential campaign and the seller.

Bloomberg – the Sellers Speak

That’s right – read it and weep. Becasue of Rezko’s involvement, the Obamas received a ZERO dollar discount from the price they would have paid from the market. Because of the Rezko’s purchase of the adjoining plot, the Obamas beat out ZERO other bidders on the same property!

This is HUGE! Why did the Sellers come forward?

The sellers hadn’t previously made their side of the story public out of concern for their privacy, according to Bill Burton, a spokesman for Obama’s campaign. They approached Obama’s Senate office 15 months ago and agreed to break their silence now through the campaign out of concern that the story was being distorted in the media, Burton said.

And check this out: how did they reach the sales price?

It also says that “in the course of the negotiation over the sales price,” Obama and his wife, Michelle, “made several offers until the one accepted at $1.65 million, and that this was the best offer you received on the house.”

Wondisford has declined to talk directly about the matter.

The Obamas submitted three bids: $1.3 million on Jan. 15, 2005; $1.5 million on Jan. 21; and $1.65 million on Jan. 23, according to a copy of the sale contract shown to Bloomberg News. Obama received more than $1.2 million in book royalties and a book advance in 2005, the year he was sworn in to the U.S. Senate, his financial disclosure statement shows.

I think this is very telling about how the Obamas do business in general: they are clearly NEGOTIATORS who will COMPROMISE on price points in order to close a deal. Why didn’t they stick to their demand of $1.3 million? Where is their backbone? And do we really want to elect a President who is able to negotiate a good deal on a piece of real estate without receiving financial favors?

Finally, check out this damning admission of how Rezko DIRECTLY helped Obama purchase the property:

Burton said Obama toured the property with Rezko for 15 to 30 minutes at some point before the purchase. Burton said Obama wanted Rezko’s opinion of the property because Rezko was a real- estate developer in the area. Burton said he didn’t know when the pre-sale tour occurred.

Wow. Just shocking. An admission that Rezko directly assisted Obama in purchasing the property with 15 to up to 30 minutes of assistance and “free,” undisclosed, professional advice as to whether the Obamas should buy the property or not, and whether the Rezkos were going to purchase the adjacent parcel.

Imagine that: a politician with a friend in the real estate business asks his friend for advice as to a real estate purchase. And the friend gives that advice without receiving anything in return.

Is this the man we want to elect as President? Someone who asks questions before taking decisive action? Someone who negotiates to a more favorable price and backs down from an initial demand?

I think not. I rest my case.

Update: Wow, my first Recc’d diary!! You like me, you really really like me. I dedicate this to all those Hillary fans who flogged this pseudo-scandal to death despite the absence of any evidence that this was other than a simple, normal real estate deal. In the parlance of beer commercials, you are all “real Democrats of genius” to me. And I apologize to anyone else who suffered a bit of whiplash from the heavily ladeled snark.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/18/103737/109/704/458974

Identifying Obama’s supporters as “brain-eating zombies” is neither humorous nor particularly useful nor is it even reasonably mature. I really encourage you to read through the posts that have been showing up in numbers on this web site and ask yourself who really is a “cultist”, a “villager with a pitchfork”, a “brain-eating zombie”, “on crack”, an “asswipe”, or any of the multitude of other obnoxious, insulting, and empty names that have been used against Obama supporters here over the last 48 or 72 hours alone.

It might make you feel better to choke bitterly on sour grapes; yes, your candidate did not turn out to be as inspiring to the broad public as she did to you, yourself. But frankly, the entire reality of Hillary Haters has now been matched this year by the new reality of Obama Haters. You aren’t accomplishing much of anything except poisoning the well from which we all drink -

The Republicans are holding radio silence for a reason. They want to attack after the convention.

add to the list of obnoxious names used against Obama supporters on this web site within the last 48 hours another, in the first comment on the thread: “foolish, manipulated tools”.

For all your supposed sophistication and maturity, the Clinton supporters on this web site are beginning to resemble the “Freepers” of the Free Republic web site, quite closely.

In other words, you are not entitled to verbally abuse me just because I don’t support your candidate.

Notice the last sentence that Obama ridicules Edwards because of John’s weakness in feeling the pain of others. Cripes, how lucky we would be if all politicans felt as Edwards does!

HALPERIN’S TAKE: Why John Edwards’ Endorsement Matters (and what the best reported tea leaves say about whom he will pick)
John Edwards is not known to have made a decision yet about whether to endorse or not in the Democratic nomination battle. If he does endorse, it would be big – even if not kingmaking (or queenmaking). Still, both Clinton and Obama obviously want the endorsement very badly; they are not known to have made any other trips to someone’s home for the specific purpose of seeking an endorsement.

Part of Edwards’ appeal as an endorser is based of his ties to union members and blue-collar voters – key constituencies in the three big upcoming battlegrounds of Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.

Although it has been widely assumed by some observers that if Edwards endorsed he would pick Obama, knowledgeable Democrats have made it clear that he is genuinely torn between the two remaining candidates. He sees strengths and weaknesses in both of them.

Even before he left the race, Edwards secured pledges from both Obama and Clinton that they would emphasize his poverty and middle-class agenda items, and both former rivals have mentioned him and his issues on the stump of late.

Edwards’ endorsement would have resonance in part because he observed Clinton and Obama as closely as anyone else for the last year. If he chooses Obama, it will suggest that he thinks Clinton would not be a reliable agent of change. If he chooses Clinton, it will raise questions about his views of Obama’s readiness for the job and toughness.

Most of all, the media is almost certain to cover any Edwards endorsement for at least forty-eight hours. With just over two weeks to go before the all-important Ohio and Texas primaries (and with early voting in Texas starting this week), that alone makes Edwards’ nod much desired.

As to what Edwards might do in the end, several informed Democrats believe no endorsement could be the most likely outcome. ABC News reports that Edwards’ advisers believe he will decide before the March 4 primaries.

But the best reported tea leaves come from the Associated Press, whose reporting has been confirmed by The Page, regarding John and Elizabeth Edwards:

“The couple has been impressed with Clinton, who has more effectively courted them since the 2004 vice presidential nominee dropped out, people who talk to the Edwardses say. Obama has been less attentive, they say, and some of those close to the Edwardses have been annoyed that Obama has continued to ridicule him for once saying his biggest weakness is that he has a powerful response to seeing pain in others.”

Isn’t it disingenuous for the Obama campaign to be peddling an “interview” that their campaign conducted by email? For all the public knows, the Obama campaign could have faked the emails. If the seller is going to be interviewed, it should be by someone other than the campaign in question.

Our country has invaded and occupied another country.

I’d like to remind you that your candidate helped to start that invasion, and has made not even an apology as of yet, and instead has attempted to dissemble and spin her way out of accountability in the eyes of the voters she now covets. Some have said she voted to start the war in order to look “strong” in her upcoming presidential bid; how ironic that her vote is now one of her greatest weaknesses.

Or, perhaps, as I become more and more of an Obama supporter (especially the more I encounter Hillary supporters in places like this web site) I have, in fact, been “touched” by this reality?

Was I “touched” by this reality when I was protesting in the streets in 2003, before the AUMF, during the lie campaign coming out of the White House even had its full effect on the public? Were you in the streets protesting then? How many of Obama’s supporters protested the war before it ever actually began? How many of Hillary’s supporters discovered how bad and morally wrong the war was, only after the “cakewalk” became a disaster?

It is very insulting and presumptuous of you to author writing which starts out demeaning me as a “brain-eating zombie” prior to asking if I have been “touched” by the reality of the Iraq war. Opposition to the Iraq war has been a major part of my personal development over the last half-decade, thank you very much.

You really need to do some thinking before you just put up these hateful rants.

Salo,

They don’t have to do a thing. They have Hillary supporters as attack dogs!

Interesting article from Politico talks mainly generalities in attacking Obama. “RNC Donor Event Outlines Obama Attack Plan” – http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8564.html

She really is the best Republican candidate in the race this year, no?

Let’s get real here. Neither Obama nor Clinton is going to be able to repair the damage done to this nation by Bush and Cheney, or for that matter the whole conservative madness since Reagan. Either Obama or Clinton will have a difficult and nasty race against McCain and the Republican slime machine.

I worry too that the young people who are in the throes of Obamania today will be very disappointed by a President Obama, should he win. It would be great if the American public understood the perilous position of our democracy and our republic and the massive effort it will take to restore the government to what it should be. They don’t, and they don’t want to hear it. What people want is a positive message, even when it is bullshit. That’s what Obama is giving them. Obama is the unknown gift with the attractive wrapper, Hillary Clinton is this year’s version of a product we bought years ago and weren’t that satisifed with.

It seems to me that people who yearn for democracy, justice, peace, and real security for all need to focus on the House and Senate rather than the Presidency in 2008. Regardless of which Democrat wins, we will need more progressive voices in the Congress and new leadership in both houses to strengthen the President’s hand and move this nation forward. If a Republican wins, we will need every progressive vote to block him from further destruction of our nation.

I’m still processing – while trying to get my laughter under control – the notion that someone could be pleased to have a diary rec’d at Daily Joke…but I digress.

Greuben still has not answered the burning question: why go to Tony Rezko for help to purchase the property? Why go to someone he knows is under federal investigation? Are we supposed to believe that Obama knew no one else who had the means to buy the lot so that the Obamas could buy the house? Tony Rezko is the only developer Obama could turn to for an opinion about the property – especially given that the property was not being bought for, and was not zoned for, development?

And where is Greuben’s discussion about Michelle Obama using her position on the Landmarks Commission to get the property sub-divided because they could not afford the house without carving up the lot? Did the sellers – who were the applicants on the subdivision – make any mention of who paid for all the work involved in that subdivision?

It has been known for some time that there was nothing illegal about the sale itself – the sellers were not – at least as far as we know – pressured to accept the Obamas’ offer, although we don’t know when the Rezko offer was made. Was it always the case that Rezko offered the full asking price for the lot, or was that offer made only after the Obamas had had two previous offers rejected? You know – cut Obama a break because they were getting the full price for a lot that wasn’t going to be much use to anyone?

It’s about judgment. Even Obama has admitted that it was “boneheaded” on his part to involve Tony Rezko in the deal – sure – now that he has the house he wanted, with the extra piece of the lot he bought from Rezko, he can act chagrined and innocent-in-the-ways-of-the-world. But what does it say about his judgment?

Nothing particularly good, but I can see why the folks at Daily Joke ate it up.

Obama is an idealist who will likely have a bone crunching fall once the jarring blows of reality hits him. He has a “change” and “hope” platforms in his speeches but the reality of it is he has to be ready to compromise in order to “change” whatever he wanted to change. If he could not do that, he would be no better than our President Bush, who has been intransigent to change.

and btw, our President Bush was also relatively inexperienced and ran on a “change” platform, too. It might be better for these so called “independents” to think about that.

You have to go beyond Obamas’ magnetism and awe in order to do an objective analysis of his speeches. And to me, his speeches are full of idealism but short of realism. In other words, full of half-empty promises. That is, if you so called “independents” are realistic enough to go beyond your awe with Obama.

And, one more thing: As Hannity of Fox News( yes, Fox News!!!) asked those Obama rallyists,”Name me one fruitful accomplishment of Obama.” Gosh, that was a classic.

Heres’ the link:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzFOOcEQtP0

Lemon,

Compare the records

Senator Clinton, who has served only one full term (6yrs.), and another year
campaigning, has managed to author and pass into law, (20) twenty pieces of
legislation in her first six years.
These bills can be found on the website of the Library of Congress
(www.thomas.loc.gov), but to save you trouble, I’ll post them here for you.
1. Establish the Kate Mullany National Historic Site.
2. Support the goals and ideals of Better Hearing and Speech Month.
3. Recognize the Ellis Island Medal of Honor.
4. Name courthouse after Thurgood Marshall.
5. Name courthouse after James L. Watson.
6. Name post office after Jonn A. O’Shea.
7. Designate Aug. 7, 2003, as National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
8. Support the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart Recognition Day.
9. Honor the life and legacy of Alexander Hamilton on the bicentennial of
his death.
10. Congratulate the Syracuse Univ. Orange Men’s Lacrosse Team on winning
the championship.

OBAMAS:
Now, I would post those of Obama’s, but the list is too substantive, so I’ll
mainly categorize. During the first (8) eight years of his elected service
he sponsored over 820 bills. He introduced
233 regarding healthcare reform,
125 on poverty and public assistance,
112 crime fighting bills,
97 economic bills,
60 human rights and anti-discrimination bills,
21 ethics reform bills,
15 gun control,
6 veterans affairs and many others.
His first year in the U.S. Senate, he authored 152 bills and co-sponsored
another 427. These included:
**the Coburn-Obama Government Transparency Act of 2006 (became law),
**The Lugar-Obama Nuclear Non-proliferation and Conventional Weapons Threat
Reduction Act, (became law),
**The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act, passed the Senate,
**The 2007 Government Ethics Bill, (became law),
**The Protection Against Excessive Executive Compensation Bill, (In
committee), and many more.
In all since enter the U.S. Senate, Senator Obama has written 890 bills and
co-sponsored another 1096.

You make a very good point about the need to focus on the Congress in 2008. We have had some terrible, terrible failures in the Congress amongst supposed “leaders” since 2000.

I have been waiting for some time for Clinton’s supporters to qualify what she has actually done in office. In my view, she’s been a real do-nothing just plotting out her presidential bid.

And I challenge any Obamabots to say something about this video.(chuckle) ok, the link again:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=PzFOOcEQtP0

Craig Crawford weighs in on Obama –

Yes we can what?

The news media’s long-awaited scrubbing of Barack Obama’s concrete plans for governing has begun and, not surprisingly, it doesn’t take long. The Democratic presidential contender’s famously inspirational speeches offer little sustenance for wonks.

…

Obama’s supporters and advisers refer pesky policy inquiries to the campaign web site, but it is difficult to connect the dots between this internet data dump and a candidate whose public comments reveal little evidence that he has read it himself. As Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, an Obama fan, concluded after examining the web site, “I’m still puzzled about where to locate Obama on this policy map.”

…

…his admiring crowds appear content to chant “Yes We Can” without bothering to finish the sentence.

I would throw in the creepy religious-like fervor and intolerance of many of his supporters to round out the picture.

Gosh, Cee – when I go to thomas.gov and enter Clinton’s name for bills sponsored in the current Congress, I get 150 bills and amendments.

Some examples:

S.2524 : A bill to improve the enforcement of the Davis-Bacon Act.

S.2515 : A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to establish a comprehensive national system for skilled construction workers to assist first responders in disasters.

S.2514 : A bill to amend the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 to provide for an increase in the Federal minimum wage and to ensure that increases in the Federal minimum wage keep pace with any pay adjustments for Members of Congress.

S.2426 : A bill to provide for congressional oversight of United States agreements with the Government of Iraq.

S.2310 : A bill to establish a National Catastrophic Risks Consortium and a National Homeowners’ Insurance Stabilization Program, and for other purposes.

S.2244 : A bill to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to carry out demonstration projects and outreach programs for the identification and abatement of lead hazards, to establish the Joint Task Force on Lead-Based Hazards and the Task Force on Children’s Environmental Health and Safety, to strengthen the authority of the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, and for other purposes.

S.2222 : A bill to require the International Trade Commission to report on the specific impact of each free trade agreement in force with respect to the United States on a sector-by-sector basis, and for other purposes.

S.2114 : A bill to amend the Truth in Lending Act, to provide for enhanced disclosures to consumers and enhanced regulation of mortgage brokers, and for other purposes.

S.2082 : A bill to amend the Public Health Service Act to establish a Coordinated Environmental Public Health Network, and for other purposes.

S.1950 : A bill to require a report on contingency planning for the redeployment of United States forces from Iraq.

S.1898 : A bill to amend the Family and Medical Leave Act of 1993 to expand family and medical leave for spouses, sons, daughters, and parents of servicemembers with combat-related injuries.

I could go on, but I think it plays up the total disingenuousness of your post; I can’t believe you so want to elevate your candidate that you would resort to something that is so easily checked.

That cannot be correct, too much substance to the Obama list. The man is a parvenu. A Barry come lately. Strictly a lightweight. Where is his support for brain eating zombie entitlement? Doesn’t he know that he should be coming from a town called Hope instead of doing substantial shit like this. It is tooo much to bear. Wherever is my fainting sofa when I need it?

Know what, Obamotrons keep going back to Hillary’s vote on the war.

It seems to me that Obama has some explaining to do on his support of Lieberman against Lamont to me. How quickly we forget.

Oh in case you Obamatrons don’t remember Hillary supported Lamont.

Cee:

you are misleading us about those records. Sen. Clinton has 150 legislations enacted( or authored and cosponsored) not 10 as you would have us believe. And Obama has only 113 bills enacted( or authored or cosponsored) not 599 bills.

Where are you getting all this info? And it is the same website that you offered me to go into.

The issue is where Rezko gets his money, and does he launder, and for whom?

Is it that difficult, or do you really think this crap is relevant?

Now let’s see, Obama couldn’t afford to buy the mansion on his own. The parcel was rezoned to split it into two lots (I won’t even ask whether Michelle Obama used her position at City Hall to facilitate this). Rezko buys the vacant lot created by the split and, voila, Obama can now magically afford the mansion sitting on the remainder of the land. And who is now using the vacant lot to park his vehicles on? Obama.

How can anyone seriously contend that Obama received no benefit from Rezko in this transaction? The only thing I don’t understand is why Oprah didn’t just buy it for him. And a car.

You post quite a bit, BG, never really ADDING anything to the discussion, I already dismiss you.

Was that the goal?

Here’s a concept for which I would like to see some discussion. Note that I am not attacking Obama nor delving into the smarm swirling around his supposed involvement with Rezko in Chicago and elsewhere. What I am questioning is this: assuming Obama’s being chosen as the Democratic presidential nominee, what happens when the bush department of justice indicts him two weeks before the presidential election. Right wing pundits have signaled their like of Obama. Can this be part of wingnut strategy? Shouldn’t we have a thorough investigation of Obama’s involvement, and government manipulation of the process of investigation, simply to protect against piece of shit wingnut efforts?

So, either Obama didn’t qualify, even for subprime paper, or the house was essentially a gift, as some have speculated, indirect influence purchasing, or peddling, if you’re Obama.

And Pat Fitzgerald said he already recognizes this tactic of new age corruption, along with the K-street, or Springfield, IL lobbyist poker game, “Oh, look, Obama won 65,000 dollars and stock options in Raytheon. Wow, he plays one hell of a hand, doesn’t he?”

Or something like that…

The first thing I look at is Obama’s lobbyist connections. Then I see what was in it for him, and trace monies exchanged, or donated, to either him, or a pet charity, like the woods fund, say. And then I look for a middle east go-between, jesferfun.

Clinton put together a UHC initiative in 1993, defeated, I guess, because she didn’t blow anyone in the insurance industry.

So, Obama has knee pads, too, like Monica?

WHAT an attractive visual.

Cee,
Not only do you mislead, but you also miscount. According to thomas.gov, during this congress, the Big 0 has worked on 113 bills and amendments to Hillary’s 150.

Talk about fuzzy math….

This kind of exaggerated claim represents to delusions that undermine the credibility of Obama’s followers. It’s embarrassing that we’re members of the same party.

Let’s face it: his supporters are enamored of him because they think he’s cool. He’d make a cool-looking president. They can’t understand why anyone would vote for a candidate whose Youtube videos and songs weren’t as cool as their candidate’s. His campaign plays cooler songs. His speeches are cooler. The fact that he’s black is way cool. His campaign posters are cooler. I honestly think it is that shallow and simple. They have fallen for an image. And it shows you just how out of touch his supporters are with the issues and problems of everyday Americans.

If the Democratic party decides to fall for this con man, then expect four more years of Republican rule.

The media will turn on him, he won’t have his little bullshit red state caucuses to prop him up, and after all of the arrogant Hillary bashing coming from his camp, the best you can hope for is tepid support among Hillary backers, some of whom won’t even bother to show up at the polls.

From what you’ve posted, Clinton’s voted appear NOT to be money, lobbyist motivated, lobbyist motivated.

Whereas Obama’s bills, and connections, DIRECT connections, stink to high hell.

“First thing you do when you get to Washington is set up your own lobbyist firm, and spread it around.”

I’ll bet.

Like syphilis.

So, you’re making Clinton look even better, at least she appears to be fighting for the public, as opposed to fighting for a initiative Pritzker suggested.

Oh, lets have a big chicken take over the chicken house, but let’s dress him as a little chicken, too.

NO way that man is fox.

what happens when the bush department of justice indicts him two weeks before the presidential election.

Is there an investigation of Senator Obama, already, re: justice?

Larry, it will get worse before it gets better. The media scrutiny and online pushback against Obamamania has already begun. When more unfavorable articles start appearing about Obama, the cultists will go on overdrive.

I keep posting this analogy here, but I saw the same thing happen with the Dean campaign. Supporters didn’t want to or refused to deal with reality. Negative stories were countered with “kill the messanger” handwringing and angry letters to editors and chat-show hosts. When it got really bad after the scream, DFA was an echo-chamber where nothing negative was allowed to flourish.

I have no idea whether Obama can sustain his huckster carnival through Ohio and Texas, but my sense is that the media pile-on is only getting started.

Then the cultist will really start hollering.

But if you come to this site and ridicule Hillary’s supporters, don’t be surprised if they flame you. There are plenty of websites at which you can lurk and post if you want to avoid angry comments from folks who don’t like or trust your chosen candidate, but this primary has inflamed passions amongst Democrats unlike anything I’ve seen in previous years, and those passions are not going to dissipate simply because you want a pony. That the Democratic party may suffer from this factionalism is certainly possible, but there may also be benefits, such as a more fully engaged electorate, and greater Democratic turn-outs. The Democratic Party may be able to emerge from their convention energized and united against the Republicans; our collective future depends on it.

Mary Jo Kopechne?

Ah, she does live!

Let’s face it: his supporters are enamored of him because they think he’s cool. He’d make a cool-looking president. They can’t understand why anyone would vote for a candidate whose Youtube videos and songs weren’t as cool as their candidate’s. His campaign plays cooler songs. His speeches are cooler. The fact that he’s black is way cool. His campaign posters are cooler. I honestly think it is that shallow and simple. They have fallen for an image. And it shows you just how out of touch his supporters are with the issues and problems of everyday Americans.

If they were cool, they’d be Obama, bottom line.

Same thought process as the little girls who love Hannah Montana, Brit being old hat now…

She really is the best Republican candidate in the race this year, no?

No, that would be Obama, Hillary will advocate for the public, Obama, no.

Did you miss that?

Again?

Someone just sent me this cartoon. Pretty much says it!

http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x103/The_Macallan/NewStuff/Obama_NoThereThere.jpg

Chris, you have unfortunately accurately described Obama’s appeal and what to expect if he is the nominee.

Yet “your” candidate has funded to continue the war.

I’m curious as to how you rationalize this away enough to like him? I’m serious. Because I’m in the same boat, in a sense, because it wasn’t until I saw how Obama’s supporters were reacting to things that I was really turned off to them. Prior to that it was Gore/Kuchinich/Edwards.

And if I’m not mistaken, didn’t Obama state that he probably would have voted for the war if he’d even been in the Senate at the time?

I live in Maryland, and on the Sunday before the Potomac Primary I was visited by no less than three Obama canvassers. I told all three of them that I was for Hillary, thanks anyway.

All three looked at me in shock, with looks of anguish, pity and disgust on their faces. I’m frankly surprised they didn’t mark my door with blood before moving on.

Here is one Democrat who will NOT vote for Obama if he’s the nominee. I’ll write in Al Gore, then hunker down and wait out a four-year McCain Presidency and work for redemption in 2012.

Cee added in the state totals, I believe. Did you read? 8 years, he said.

You might convince yourself of your own superiority by authoring silly things like that online, but in reality you are simply insulting a vast range of people all of whom have different reasons for choosing a candidate different than yours.

Sour grapes.

I am getting very tiered of this particular meme from Obama supporters. How about remembering that Hillary was the Senator from ground zero? It was 3,000 of her constituents that got killed on that day. Only a few Senators had the guts and the vision to vote against the war- none of them had Presidential ambitions. Unfortunately the Senate at that time reflected the general mood of the country. We wanted payback for 9/11 and W pointed to Iraq as one of the culprits. Remember Bush had 80% approval ratings and the Iraq war was supported by almost as many Americans. Yes Hillary failed, but so did the American public- remember they voted for the war again by reelecting Bush in 2004, when it was becoming clear that Iraq was a disaster. Even after the election of 2006 Democrats are still letting Mr. 30% approval rating have his way in Iraq.

Answer me this question-exactly what has your candidate done in the Senate to end this war? Exactly what has he done to get a date certain for withdrawl. Exactly why did he campaign and Support Joe Lieberman, why is he letting the Likud Senator from Connecticut be his mentor? Barak Obama has been part and parcel of every post 2006 Democratic cave in to Mr 30% approval rating including funding the idiotic surge. He has been more than willing to support the oops of W’s Iraq policy.

Screw that speech in 2003- he took absolutely no risk; he was representing his very liberal constituency. What has he done lately? When did he show leadership in the Senate to stop the war? Compare and contrast with Russ Feingold in the Senate and Dennis Kucinich in the House. There is no comparison.

Mr Ghost you are a perfect example of a spinning, spewing, out of control Obama partisan. That spin you put out on the Rezko house purchase is especially precious. When that deal was done it was widely know in Chicago that Fitzgerald was about to indite Rezko, every other pol in the Windy city was running away from Rezko as fast as their little fat legs could carry him. Rezko was absolutely toxic. At best it showed incredibly poor judgment for Obama to have any type of dealings with the man. And that is your supposed trump card–that Obama has better judgment than Hillary.

What really burns my toast with Obama partisans is their arrogance; a trait they share with there candidate. There is a profound intellectual dishonesty and a obvious double standard with Barack’s true believers. If the Rezko story was a Hillary or Bill Clinton Story you know that they would be on it like white on rice. Oh, your campaign interviewed the actual sellers and found nothing untoward? What a pleasant surprise! I’m sure that those staffers really dug deep and did a through job. I’m also sure that when the Clinton campaign researches some controversial issue dealing with Hillary you will extend the same trust and confidence in their research.

I believe I have added more than calling someone a “brain-eating zombie”, a “cultist”, or an “asswipe”, for example. If you do not wish to read what I write, feel free.

That’s what I think is hysterical- the idea that Obama got “free” advice on the house purchase from Rezko. Unless they are really bosom buddies who like to hang out at the barbecue on weekends, politicans dont get FREE advice from people like Rezko. There’s ALWAYS a price to be paid. If Obama is elected, we’ll find out what it is– and how much it costs US.

It’s difficult to imagine how what I wrote could be construed as “ridiculing Hillary’s supporters”. I merely pointed out that the pathological name-calling and insults and rabid Obama-hating are all unconstructive and divisive. This not ridiculing. The people posting on this site (in particularly Larry and Susan) need to start thinking maturely about whether or not it is really just “OK” to author rude, insulting, and empty angry post after post. People here could make a positive change by expressing their anger in ways better than “asswipe” or “brain-eating zombie” or “you’re all on crack” etc. at least.

Add Hillary’s co-sponsors to your list and you’ll get much different numbers. Also, Thomas gives you an interesting look at the bills Obama has actually passed. (An interesting exercise. BTW, Thomas=library of congress.)

Regarding Obama’s state senate legislation, I’ve actually taken a look at his tenure there during my candidate research, and will say that many of his “sponsored” bills never made it to a vote. But oh well, talk is better than actions!

Pass me the Hopium, baby!

Yes, but the media won’t mention that, and Obamatons have conveniently tossed it down the memory hole because it doesn’t match their favorite narrative.

I love how, every time you bring up an argument against Obama, there’s always one of his worshippers ready to jump up with “But Hillary voted for the War!” Doesn’t matter what the topic is- Health Care, Taxes, whatever- it’s the last snowball in the fort, the “so’s your mother!” last gasp of the guy losing the argument.

Add in Hillary’s first term and the numbers go up even more. But who cares about pesky details, eh?

I don’t rationalize the situation away. I am very unhappy with the presidential election this year, and I have been since it started. After 8 years of the radical lunacy of George Bush, where is the leadership? It is almost as if the political class in this country is incapable of producing a leader. Obama I can vote for while minimally maintaining my integrity.

I don’t know if this makes me a “cultist” or a “brain-eating zombie” or a “manipulated tool” or an “asswipe” or “on crack” or not “touched by the reality” of the Iraq war or not.

One thing is for sure: encountering Hillary’s supporters is building in me a very reactive support of Obama’s candidacy. They say you can tell a man’s quality by the enemies that he makes.

Wow, I am accused of not being “touched by the reality” of the Iraq war and when I respond that I was protesting it before it ever happened, and that opposition to that war has been one of the defining parts of my personal development over the last half-decade, along comes yet another Hillary supporter who accuses me of having a “meme”.

Who has not been “touched by the reality” of the Iraq war? The figure who was protesting it before it happened? Or the figure who sees the anger at Hillary for what she did as a “meme”?

As for “arrogance”, I guess I am just a “brain-eating zombie”. Sorry about that.

Cee clearly included every speech Obama made, be it on the floor of the Senate or to a kindergarten group, as “sponsoring” or “promoting” legislation. I’m sure Obama sees it like this too.

If Obama happens to talk in his sleep, he probably is even MORE prolific in his “policy proposals.”

I don’t like being called “Obamatron”. I am not a robot. And some of us actually DO believe that voting to start a morally bankrupt and pragmatically disastrous war, because one’s advisors are trying to plot out your upcoming presidential bid, is actually a meaningful campaign issue.

Or, perhaps I am just a “brain-eating zombie” who has not yet been “touched by the reality” of the Iraq war.

Simon

This is all crap and you know it. If I didnt know different, sir I would swear you were a Repug troll.

I know what you are, sir its even worse you are a

GODDAMMNED HILLARY TROLL

Yeh, sir, I am mad, damn mad with all the silly useless crap you and the other Obama haters continue to spew out on this blog.

You know what sir, I will vote for Obama just to piss you off

You sir have the cajones to call Obama “a frightened, insecure boy?”

You sir are the “frightened insecure boy” and by the way thanks for your racial slur calling Obama a “boy”.

What do you have to say for yourself Mr big racist attack guy?

While I dont have the luxury that you and others with nothing to all day except post here with you venom, I will monitor what you are saying as often as I can and will call you for what you are until you back off leave this blog or Larry kicks me off.

>>> “…the damage done to this nation by Bush and Cheney, or for that matter the whole conservative madness since Reagan.”

SINCE Reagan?

Please forward the name of what you smoke/shoot/snort, that I might partake thereof myself and erase the memory of eight years of union-busting, recession-starting, piss-on-the-people (pseudo)-governance by the Addled Puppet Reagan.

Yes, we are. And your point?

Obama supporters dont DESERVE respect. I don’t feel I need to “respect” someone’s decision to vote for a candidate because gosh he talks nice and gee he makes me feel warm and fuzzy and well all my friends are for him and I want to fit in. I sure as HELL don’t need to respect people who have devoted themselves to the character assassination of Hillary Clinton as a way to benefit their own candidate.

So if there are any Obama fans out there who have been insulted by my threads- Kiss Off. The insult was entirely intentional.

Look, all I was trying to do was point out to the poster I replied to that the original poster was adding in Obama’s state totals. I wasn’t saying anything beyond that. In my perception Hillary Clinton has been a real do-nothing Senator and has given George Bush basically everything he wanted while she has been in office. But all I was trying to do right above was point out to the previous poster that she apparently didn’t understand the original writing. I wasn’t trying to defend or attack the original claim about who sponsored what when or why.

Speaking of “pesky details”. Why don’t you reply to what I actually write rather than whatever you seem to imagine.

What I notice is that a LOT of Hillary supporters on this web site seem desperately to need to shore up a sense of your own superiority, and that you seem to rely on banal insults and mutual agreement without consideration to accomplish that reassurance.

It’s a point well-taken. I’d just feel more comfortable if it weren’t Frank “Phrase-It-So-It-Sounds-Palatable” Luntz asking the question with his (perhaps) hand-picked audience.

But see here, BG, ‘minimally maintaining your integrity’ doesn’t cut it. There’s no “minimally maintaining one’s legs or arm blown off by an IED’ etc etc. You’re either for the war or against it, at least in its current form.

I mean, somewhere recently you said, the war issue was your guiding light (my words) about this election and such. If you’re against the war, you can’t be for continuing the funding of it in its current form. That’s what HRC and BO have BOTH done.

And so you, you justifiably despite HRC for voting for the war in the first place. (And I’m not happy about that either, at all!)

But you really are giving BO a pass on it. Cute snarky comments aside, this is the sort of logic is unacceptable to me.

To continue to support Obama, even minimally, despite his support for the war, you are rationalizing in a way contradictory to your stated priority.

Well, you certainly seem typical of her supporters.

Hey, it’s OK, let McCain attack Iran, and then “work for redemption”. Yeah, sure.

I’d be a hell of a lot less bothered by this sort of thing coming from Hillary supporters if the same Hillary supporters that just sort of shrug and say “Fuck it, let McCain be president if my candidate doesn’t get the nomination” weren’t so simultaneously so sanctimonious about how they want to rescue the country from Obama. When you make the arguments against Obama that he is a lightweight, that Hillary is the only one can lead the country from disaster, but, if she loses, then fuck it, let McCain win, you don’t across as having any integrity at all. It seems that you just want your “side” to win and if your “side” loses, then you will take your marbles and go home with them.

Nice,

And a pack of lies. I’m sure that Clinton was a also a co-sponsor of many of those bills. Plus she has done tons of Yeoman work in her committee where Barack has done exactly none. Lets repeat that, Hillary has done tons of heavy lifting in the Arms Services committee and Barack has not even bothered to swing a gavel in his subcommittee.

Typical partisan Obama non-sense, typical Obama Partisan spin. Typical Hillary bashing crap. Of course if we were to post a xerox of your talking point except belittling Obama and extolling Clinton you all would be crying “racism” or some other such garbage. See the evil, awful, terrible, hideous Clintonistas are claiming Barack is lazy; a not so subtle bigoted meme.

Yes someone does need to take a seat on the couch and relax with a perspective and soda, and it ain’t the Clinton supporters. You’re at a 10 you need to come down to a 2 and you need to check your Hillary bashing–you’re getting way too shrill.

If you don’t feel that I deserve any respect, then I can’t imagine why you would seem to expect any from me. Yes, I have been insulted by you, as have others. And, frankly, I think you are probably one of these people who loves the anonymity and lack of accountability of the internet, where you can anonymously insult people whereas in face-to-face real life, you never would.

Is this how you address people in your community around you? If so, I bet you don’t have too many friends.

Only the complicity of the MSM has prevented Obama from being consigned to the Dumpster of Democratic “Ain’t He COOL?” candidates by this stage of the campaign.

Governor Moonbeam comes to mind immediately…

despise

This is a valid point, except I think it’s easily provable that Obama’s followers are even more in that camp than Clinton’s.

Here:
http://www.groupnewsblog.net/2008/02/what-price-quest.html
This is the enemy. Quibble as you will about obamadroids and ms inevitable; this is the enemy.
and this is the future of the late great nation
homeless people sleeping in foreclosed homes until the public utilities get around to disconnecting the heat and the electricity.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-02-17-foreclosure-homeless_N.htm
And this: Northern Rock bank nationalized in UK. The taxpayers will now pick up the bill for the looters again. Coming soon to a bank near you, be the first to close your accounts before your access to them is denied.
http://jameshowardkunstler.typepad.com/clusterfuck_nation/

American politics has ben, traditionally, been crudely defined as, “Hooray For Our Side!” rather than, “Come, Let Us Reason Together.”

(see: Jackson, Andrew)

Or, as a pretty bright old boy told me one night in a Place of Poor Quality: “Grab ‘em by the balls, and their Hearts and Minds will follow!”

Banquo’s Ghost – It’s not that. I truly hesitate, as well to vote for Obama. It’s not that I would ever vote for a Republican. But please understand my thinking and experience. Jimmy Carter was charismatic and very intelligent. He was not the least bit experienced. That lack of experience brought us 12 more years of Republican rule in the White House. In fact, the only Democratic President in my lifetime (I’m 52) who has served 8 years in the White House is Bill Clinton. I really want Obama to be president in 8 years, after serving as vice president for 8 years. Surely, in those 8 years as vice president, we can fix our voting issues and run a somewhat clean campaign for an experienced President Obama. I am a Democrat, with democratic values. I want my country back as much as you do. We just have different views of how to accomplish that.

No, I am not giving anyone a pass on anything. And while you are certainly free to believe that I am, we could also take a look at the pass you apparently give Hillary Clinton.

There is no way to avoid her war vote or attempt to build up a war against Iran with K-L or her voting for PATRIOT acts or (fill in the blank). She’s been a real craven figure in the Senate. And with respect to the Iraq war, she has demonstrated not just no leadership whatsoever, but has gone further and acted as a foil for the Bush Administration to use against liberals and Democrats.

Obama is no great saviour. OK. I can vote for him and minimally maintain my integrity. My other option is not voting. Until quite recently, I was probably going to go that route.

Really, before telling me that maintaining my integrity “doesn’t cut it” perhaps you could detail how it is that you get by without maintaining yours?

I’ve heard Hillary supporters say they would write in a candidate, or stay home, but I can think of only one who I recall saying she would vote for McCain if Hillary does not get the nomination.

On the other hand, I see example after example of Obama supporters saying that if their guy doesn’t get the nod, they will vote McCain.

I think you also have to take into account the growing anecdotal reports of Republican voters in open primary and caucuses openly declaring that they are voting for Obama now but will vote McCain in the general, regardless of which Democrat is the candidate.

I’m an Edwards supporter who was left with having to choose a new candidate. I chose Clinton, even though I was not happy about her AUMF vote, her Kyl-Lieberman vote and the Bill Baggage that the media insists she carry with her wherever she goes.

I think Obama is selling us something he can’t deliver on, and in trying to build a movement which is based on himself, he risks disappointing significant blocs of voters. I fear another Jimmy Carter presidency – one where nothing gets done, and what does get done pleases no one. I see big losses in 2010 and a one-term presidency.

It’s probably about time to admit that people like us, who are reading blogs and are reasonably politically aware, have made our choice, and it isn’t likely to change. I don’t think there is anything an Obama supporter could tell me that would make me change my opinion, and I’m pretty sure that works in reverse.

I will touch the screen for whatever Democrat is on the ballot in November – I won’t be happy about it if it’s Obama, but the entire administration, all the agancies and departments, US Attorneys and judicial appointments – including the Supreme Court – are at stake, and I cannot make a conscious choice to put all of that in John McCain’s hands.

I suspect he meant “since Reagan was elected.” and just elided the last two words.
At least that is how I interpreted his sentence.
He could have gone a bit further back and said since this nation decided to elect Nixon.

You: War votes are my priority.
Me: But BO voted for funding extension, ie, for more war. Obama gets pass.
You: No, voting for BO lets me maintain integrity.
Me: Integrity’s consistency is in question because:

vote for barack = vote for extension of war = vote for more war =/ (that is, does not equal) voting against war.

My integrity is not the issue, I haven’t BOTH stated I oppose any candidate who supports the war and yet supported a candidate who supported the war.

You can’t say I will not vote for any candidate that has been for the war (which is more important, a speech or floor vote?) and then turn around and say you’ll vote for Barack Obama. Forget integrity, you’re not being consistent.

Hi Folks
OT:
you probably are wondering why i haven’t been here for awhile..
After fighting Cancer for 10 hard long months my mother passed on Valentines day.
my mother was unlike many mothers that I knew..
She was very athletic and taught us kids hoops, baseball, Golf and most importantly good sportsmanship..be it victory or defeat she taught us kids to be graceous and respectful of our challengers.
my last words to her were ” you are my hero ”
I saw her fight cancer as a true champion of the human spirit and she set the example for our family and friends.
I can’t tell you how many hundreds of people visited her in her last days.. golf club members, Bowling people, athletes of so many different sports who knew and loved her spirit..( i only beat my mom one time in golf my entire life..she scored consistantly in the 80′s and her team always won the indiana breast cancer tournament)
She taught me so many things, to be kind, strong and to care about people of all walks of life.
She raised my young sister to compete in life when women in sports were looked down on.. My sister in the 80′s was a champion speed boat racer with a bud sponsorship only because our mother inspired her to challenge men in a man’s only sport.
So i leave you for a few more days as i mourn the most important person in my life.
Although my heart is broken..she leaves all of us with the spirit and values i will always share and impart to my children..thus she lives forever here.
She was and always will be my hero.

Where have I ever given Hillary a pass?

Who said the war vote was my only consideration. Projection, methinks.

Wow, Banquo’s Ghost, how SENSITIVE you are! Every post shows this “hurt” you express….which reveals, so tellingly, that your reactions are actually a whole lot less about Hillary than they are about you…. they’re all about YOU and how dare anyone INSULT you for your choice. Gee, THAT will help all of us make the right choice for the next four years. Right!

Thanks for your posts, James and Charles. Well worth reading and considering.

How do you justify Obama’s support of Lieberman versus Lamont? I’m really curious to see the logic and rationale there.

Cee you are an idiot. Just because you copy and pasted that bullshit email (as any good Obama bot is programmed to do) does not make you a legislative expert.

You give Obama credit for all the bills he has cosponsored and compare it to bills that hillary has authored and passed?

Um, I think your comparison is way off base just like your myopic support for your candidate that reads a teleprompter good.

Jesus…

No they’re not. Krauthammer has a column doing this”Obama voters as crazed cultists” meme in my morning paper. I’m not going to bother to find the link online because it’s more of the same old dreck, although I do admit it sounds a little worse coming from the guys who were pushing GWB as the next best thing to God.

But please, this has all gone way beyond rational. If everyone could just admit we have two highly qualified, highly intelligent candidates to choose between, we could all pretend to be civilized adults and conduct ourselves accordingly. But NOoooooo …… It’s got to be bitter and destructive down to the end and we let the next warmonger walk off with the Presidency.

Way to go, Dems.

They say, “he was against the war from the beginning.”

But, frankly, there’s no evidence he was ever really against this war. He voted to fund the war every time. He voted against John Kerry’s withdrawal bill. He said he may withdraw troops by 2013, but can’t make any promises. He makes one speech in 2002; pulls it off his website when he catches flack for it; then puts it back UP when he announces his campaign for president…Is this man really against the Iraq War, or did he just make a calculated speech because he already had plans to run for president? He wasn’t in the Senate at the time he made the speech. He wasn’t forced to vote up or down for the AUMF. And, he’s even said he “wasn’t there, doesn’t know how he would have voted…”

Universal Health Care is a huge issue for me.

It’s probably THE overriding issue for me. Hillary Clinton has a proposal that is a very good step in that direction; Obama says he’s “for it” then he says, he never said “he’s for it,” then his spokesman says “he’s for it, but it’s not achievable.”

Well, that’s not the Obama I saw making the speech where he mocked Sen. Ted Kennedy to an audience, saying “Ted! Ted!” We’ve got to make some bold moves in the Democratic Party, Ted! Where is is bold proposal on universal health care. Nowhere to be found. His proposal is exactly like McCain’s proposal. More of the same.

Hillary Clinton wins the round on Health Care.

The Harry & Louise Ads redux from Obama infuriated me; using a right-wing tactic that killed universal health care in 1993? Man, that’s low. That’s gutter.

Barack Obama lost me with that ad. I really am contemptuous of a candidate who thinks I’m so stupid I can’t see he’s pulling a con (as in neocon!).

Obama’s been using GOP talking points, running to the right of the Democratic Party, saying one thing and doing another, and trying to re-write the rules of the Democratic Party, shutting out Democratic voters in two states, trying to eliminate the 60%delegates rule, to win the nomination based on delegates he’s won in states that will go Republican in November. Why would any progressive support this candidate?

U.S. Sen. Barack Obama expressed regret late Friday for his 2005 land purchase from now-indicted political fundraiser Antoin “Tony” Rezko in a deal that enlarged the senator’s yard.

“I consider this a mistake on my part and I regret it,” Obama told the Chicago Sun-Times in an exclusive and revealing question-and-answer exchange about the transaction.

The previous owners said there was no mistake, yet Obama did admit it was a mistake.

Where there’s smoke, there’s fire.

Last January, aiming to increase the size of his sideyard, Obama paid Rezko $104,500 for a strip of his land.
The transaction occurred at a time when it was widely known Tony Rezko was under investigation by U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald and as other Illinois politicians befriended by Rezko distanced themselves from him.

Yet Obama’s wife was on the zoning commission at the time. The property was able waive tax for the time, based on a zoning board decision.

In the Sun-Times interview, Obama acknowledged approaching Rezko about the two properties being up for sale and that Rezko developed an immediate interest. Obama did not explain why he reached out to Rezko given the developer’s growing problems.

Then again, Obama said in the debates he only knew Rezko for five hours.

Obama and Rezko have been friends since 1990, and Obama said the Wilmette businessman raised as much as $60,000 for him during his political career. After Rezko’s indictment, Obama donated $11,500 to charity–a total that represents what Rezko contributed to the senator’s federal campaign fund.

Q: Did you approach Rezko or his wife about the property, or did they approach you?

A: To the best of my recollection, I told him about the property, and he developed an interest, knowing both the location and, as I recall, the developer who had previously purchased it.

Somehow, the Obamas got underbid in their offer the house, as they claim it won the deal below market also.

Yet the Rezkos only had to match, not exceed the adjoining property offer, and did so, at the same time. Then he paid above the value for that stretch of property, when everyone else was buying under or meeting values. Perhaps he owes Rezko, a developed of government contracts, a favor.

Michelle helped return the favor in the form of zoning breaks for tax obligations on Rezko’s undeveloped lot they purchased a driveway from, while she was on the Landmarks board.

With Michelle sitting on the Landmarks board, Commission approval wasn’t expected to be an issue, even though I have not located notice of the Public Hearing from any of the involved boards. From there it would go to the City Planning Board and the Zoning Boards, which also require public hearings. Each of these steps average between 6 weeks and 3 months to complete.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/4/20117/25087

“How To Buy A Mansion You Can’t Afford”
by truthteller2007, Mon Feb 04, 2008 at 08:11:07 PM EST
“Posted on behalf of No Quarter blogger City Nell”

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/02/04/how-to-buy-a-mansion-you-cant-afford/#comments

Nothing about how the house was sold by the prior owner makes any of the transaction or conflicts from zoning and purchase/property swaps and upgrades proper.

Yet Rezko was under Federal scrutiny, a known known to Obama, while this bargaining went on leading to his indictment.

“The sellers hadn’t previously made their side of the story public out of concern for their privacy, according to Bill Burton, a spokesman for Obama’s campaign.”
…
“Wondisford has declined to talk directly about the matter.”

Yet the commenter says “The Sellers Speak” and it turns out Obama’s campaign does the speaking.

Not only did they speak, they spoke a long time ago.

“They approached Obama’s Senate office 15 months ago”

So why did Obama deny deny knowing Rezko, said he only knew him for five hours, and waited to talk of the land purchase through the prior owners well after disclosure, until things looked like they were, a croney deal going down with a Federally Indicted rent shark.

If it takes Obama fifteen months to disclose items that would make things clear or transparent doesn’t that actually deem him inadequate for America’s highest office?

There was nothing to see here, only Obama admits to the paper he made a mistake, and denies knowing Rezko longer than five hours on national television at Presidential debates at the same time.

Wait until you see how deep into the teacher retirement fund Rezko bilked the State of Illinois and City of Chicago in card house deals that were jacking up value on public housing he let fall apart.

Oh, OK

How about lock-step, mindless person who ignore their candidates obvious contradictions and researchable votes? Dose that work for you? How about rigid ideologue(s) who despised Hillary and Bill well before the war and give there candidate far too much credit for a way past its sell-by date speech? How about people who put far too much stock in the unique “abilities” of one man to undo 20 years of Republican misrule? How about Obama supporters who are absolutely clueless about the vile partisanship and nastiness from the Republicans that awaits their choice for President? How about parisans who refuse to acknowledge their candidates obvious weakness on National Security matters and his foolish foot-in-mouth pronouncements on foreign policy? How about people who care much more about style versus substance? How about people who seem far too willing to engaged in generational conflicts and the slagging of the core principles of the Democratic party? How about people who are willfully dismissive of the older more experienced veterans of the culture wars who are telling you that compromise=surrender; that our opponents will never play nice and never play fair? How about people who really don’t understand that the very word “moderate” has been taken over by people who are no such thing- that sometimes moderation and compromise are unacceptable? How about voters who will be deeply disappointed by disconnect between their idea of what an Obama Presidency will be like and what actually happens during his (one) term in office?

Cee:Respectfully, Do your homework.

1)The seller is a matter of public record. The only question I have is weather the sellers were asked by the buyer to intiate the permits to subdivide, with the understanding they would be re-imbursed at closing. This would facilitate certian outcomes in how the buyers deal was structured. The Suntimes has reported the sellers did not wish to subdivide originally.I would also want to know if any pressure was brought to bear via Michelle Obama’s position at the time, which she resigned from directly after closing the deal.

2)”some intrepid reporter” is cited as Timothy J. Burger
3)Put on a hard cold eye to this statement. 15 months ago…now..?? Which one is it?

They approached Obama’s Senate office 15 months ago and agreed to break their silence now through the campaign out of concern that the story was being distorted in the media, Burton said.

4)Timothy J. Burger takes it on Burtons’ word for confirmation of the story? The “email” and phone calls are heresay.

5) Have you googled what else this guy writes? Or are you taking it on face value or does Timothy J. Burger has an agenda?

6) The sellers could give a crap!; they wanted sell a house. It is the buyers that are of interest, one of which is SITTING IN JAIL.
7) The source of the reporting is a CAMPAIGN SPOKESMAN for Obama. A real “deep throat” eh?
WTF? Rezko had a financial interest in the property and the deal. It was not “free advise”.

Burton said Obama toured the property with Rezko for 15 to 30 minutes at some point before the purchase. Burton said Obama wanted Rezko’s opinion of the property because Rezko was a real- estate developer in the area. Burton said he didn’t know when the pre-sale tour occurred

9)

Wondisford has declined to talk directly about the matter.

Fitzgerald or the lawyer representing the seller would have told him to not say anything publicly because one of the buyers is the subject of a criminal investigation and prosecution and the seller could very well be ask to testify under oath at Rezko’s trial.

He said he may withdraw troops by 2013, but can’t make any promises.

He said late 2009 on 60 Minutes.

My grandfather was a homebuilder in a major Mid-Western city for 40 years, and his continued prosperity depended upon, among other factors, a certain amount of favorable treatment by the City Fathers.

He was a big time outdoorsman in an era when one owned an outboard motor, and attached it to a rented boat at the fishing spot. Every year he bought a new Oldsmobile (never a Cadillac) and a new outboard motor. He took me to the Dealer one year (I was 8 at the time) on New Outboard Day.

Seems that each year, when bought a new Evinrude, he’d put it in the trunk of the new Olds and take it to the home of a certain Alderman and pick up the outboard that he had bought the previous year, which was living at the Alderman’s house. Then he’d take it to my father’s house. At the same time, he bought a second, new outboard on a sales ticket with my father’s name on the invoice, delivering same to his own house.

I asked, in my 8 year-old innocence, if it wouldn’t be simpler to just buy the Alderman a new outboard and give it to him.

I was told: “That’s not the way The Game gets played here, son.”

Granddad also had a big corner commercial lot that he wouldn’t sell to Kroger or Bettendorf’s at any price. Nice corner, complete with a traffic light.

Each year, several things happened on that site:

1. There was a Christmas tree vendor on the lot in December;

2. There were two small secular carnivals on the lot at different times;

3. Saint-someone’s church always had a Columbus Day Italian shindig on the lot, while the Eastern Orthodox (or whatever sect was predominant in the Croatian community) has their Saint-whoever’s Hoedown at a different time.

As a part of 2 and 3, above, he used to get a pile of carnival tickets and pass them out to the children of City cops, firemen, building inspectors, school principals, and nurses at the local County hospital.

Essentially, the same people who each got a BIG-assed turkey at Thanksgiving, a fifth of whiskey and a discounted Christmas tree in Holiday season and a box of cigars (Cubans for a boy baby, Tampa Panatellas for a girl) upon the birth of a child.

Crooked?

De jure; Oh HELL yes!

De facto; I’m certain that he thought of it as, “Taking care of People.”

My father called it, “Inspired Marketing and Pre-Emptive Public Relations.”

Oddly enough he was a firm Republican who referred to FDR as, “Franklin Delano Rosenfeld,” and cursed the Democrats for their Socialist programs.

Like the FHA, which made it possible for him to build/market 200-300 homes every year.

The point is: that’s how Things Got Done in his city in his time. I’m certainly not excusing Obama because of his charisma (thin on the ground, to me), or his Message, such as it is.

If Obama’s deal was for a piece of a mall deal or 300 condo units, well, that would stink pretty badly. Almost Hastert-ishly, if you will.

But a little Re-Zone Arabesque so that Mama can have a big house consistent with her (perceived) station in life?

Not so much.

Get serious here: you don’t REALLY believe that Lady Bird Johnson got all those Broadcast Licenses from the FCC fair and square, do you?

It’s their blog. Get one of your own if you don’t like it.

Prove it then.

It might make you feel better to choke bitterly on sour grapes.
I disagree; it will make you feel better. The rest of us will go on about our lives as best we can.
With respect to “the new reality of Obama Haters.”
Please I beg of you, take head; you have not seen anything yet! The 527 filth and bigotry directed at Obama will sound like a frieght train going up a mountian pass in British Columbia and will be heard from miles around!

inspiring to the broad public ???
(Note to self: I must imagine myself to be Bart Simpson writing on the blackboard 100 times…”I will be inspiring to the broad public” ……”I will be inspiring to the broad public” ……”I will be inspiring to the broad public”.)

That the Democratic party may suffer from this factionalism is certainly possible, but there may also be benefits, such as a more fully engaged electorate, and greater Democratic turn-outs. The Democratic Party may be able to emerge from their convention energized and united against the Republicans; our collective future depends on it.

Rob, I certainly hope this is the case. I am a strong Hillary supporter, but I feel that Obama would make an incredible VP candidate for her. Imagine the voter turnout and enthusiasm for a dual ticket – and Obama would only be 54 when he ran for President in 2016.

I can only hope that our candidates are smart enough to realize that they should become one for the good of the country and the Democratic Party. The alternative may be President McCain, which would be too horrible to contemplate.

And to show how important I think this is, I called Hillary’s campaign and suggested it.

It is almost as if the political corporate class in this country is incapable of producing a leader

Randi Rhodes said today that “Obama has won more delegates, he’s won more primaries, and he’s ahead in the popular vote, so the only way Hillary can win is by illegitimate means…if she is the nominee, it WILL destroy the party.”

So there you go. “America’s most popular progressive radio voice” telling her listeners that if Obama is not the nominee, the Democratic party is finished, and will have to rebuild for the future.

Sorry, but it cuts both ways. Obama supporters are making it VERY clear that as far as they are concerned, Obama has ALREADY won, because he’s a dozen delegates ahead with more than a thousand left to be chosen– the kind of “my candidate is ahead, we can stop counting now” mentality that put Bush into the presidency. The other day I was wearing my Hillary button on the street in DC and a guy came up to me and snapped “Obama’s going to be President and she’s going to get indicted!” I had no idea what he meant, nor did I care. But I’ve had enough of these guys, who are engaging in the political murder of a decent, Progressive woman because she’s not their personal choice.

I have to laugh at the “hey we all have to come together when this is all over” crap I hear from the Obama camp- sure, after you have done smearing my candidate as a racist, and after you’ve sat back and let the media stick knives in her for months for your benefit, we are supposed to rally for the “better good.” Well, screw that. We’ll get through the next four years with President McCain. I will NOT reward Obama for the crud his campaign and it’s lapdogs in the media have pulled in the last few months.

You want to call me a sore loser? Fine. I’ll remind you of how disgusted many of us were when McCain endorsed Bush in 2000 only a few weeks after Bush stood by and let McCain be smeared in the South Carolina primary. Remember the “McCain is insane?” leaflets? How about the “McCain has a black baby” flyers stuck under windshield wipers in church parking lots? If McCain supporters had refused to support Bush after that, would you have called them sore losers?

Sorry, I’d rather be a “Sore Loser” than an “Anything To Win” Obamatron. I will NOT vote for Obama.

Cee,

The POINT is that Obama LIED about Rezko’s involvement. Congratualtions on your first REC – but Kos and his site have lost all credibility.

If you choose to keep going to every thread to prove how Obama LIED yet again, I fail to see your purpose. Please be careful quoting Bllomberg – rules are only 10% of an article, not 80+%.

Once again

Sorry that just does not cover it.

1. Obama is caught in yet another LIE – He told the Sun-Times, I am paraphrasing “I may have mentioned it to Rezko because he knew the developer”. NOW we find out he actually toured the property with Rezko per Bloomberg’s article. HUGE difference. Like me saying to the guy behind the counter were I pick up small groceries items that “I am going to have my car fixed”, as opposed to actually taking the guy with me. Why lie about it in the first place?

2. He made 3 offers in January – However his wife told a reporter she was “surpised” in October, 2004″ that their condo had sold so quickly. Obama also said that the Property had been on the market 3 months, roughly around the time they sold their condo. What were they waiting for when their condo was sold? Had the advances for the book not arrived yet?

3. When or where were the hearings for the sub-division?

4. Michelle Obama was on the Landmark Board until March 2005. She would have been present at any hearings or approvals. Why did she wait until March 2005 to resign?

There are still many , many holes in this story. Further you can see the property is on the corner of Hyde Park Ave and 51st steet if you follow the comments in the diary below. Hyde Park Ave is a divided type highway with an island down the middle. The Property has a cement wall around it with no access to the sub divided lot except through the fence on Obama’s property. So how would the empty lot be viable since there would be no access from Hyde Park Ave?

As Simon pointed out in the Post at NQ, Rita Rezko sold the Property to Rezko’s Lawyer, and the neighborhood quickly made a stink when he tried to develop it for commercial use for a High Rise Condo. If there was nothing fishy, and the lot was the size required by zoning, the neighbors would not have had any argument as the lot faces a Jewish Synagogue, which is also commercial proerty even though the classfication would be religious for property tax reasons.

In the comments you will find Truthteller is a neighbor who lives in the same two blocks, as Obama. He concurs this is NOT a straight deal. Further down you will find a comment by Dale A, who also lived in the neighborhood, and gives quite an eyeopening comment about the Chicago Landmark Commission, and how they operate.

Here’s the link http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/4/20117/25087

Yes Cee it is a big deal when you are involved in a multimillion dollar Real Estate Deal and you KNOW the person you bring touring the home is under investigation by the FBI, so you ask a crook for advice? How does that show the judgment we need from a president?

And you still haven’t responded to the questions posed above.

This is exactly the type of Robotic, non -thinking responses the rest of us are extremely concerned about.

Cee,

One more thing – If you read the links in the MyDD story, you would see Obma ALREADY had a proessional Realtor – So again Why was Rezko’s advice as a developer needed?

No -if Obama is the candidate there will be NO UNITING! Obma and his supportives have cruelly rippped the party apart. And after in depth research, I WILL NOT vote for a Fake, Phony Fraudster, that has done nothing but give “soaring” empty speeches,and is as corrupt as they come.

My country deserves MUCH BETTER!

Great Point Vee – Slipped by me completely.

And your candidate has illegally used his Senatorial Hopefund PAC to buy votes and Super delegates:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/25/AR2007112501454_pf.html

http://www.capitaleye.org/inside.asp?ID

So how does a pattern of ongoing corruption, LIES, Smears, association with criminals, a rehash of Deval Patrick’s speech, stealing Ideas, and continual votes against the progressive agenda, voting to continue the war war, arbitrarially sending an adviser to work against a US ally on Terror, and everything elese supercede ONE vote.

It’s as if you view the world as one isolated incident at a time, without seeing continual patterns of unacceptable behavior and lack of principle or ethics.

Teak,

Respectfully: give up the nonsense.

No wonder the Democrats keep getting their asses kicked.

The reason Obama lacks substance is that his masters will not let him.

Obama sold himself to the Fiancial Establishment in full in December 2006. Read it and weep.

http://nymag.com/news/politics/30634/

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=14481

Cee you are an idiot.

Mike,

I expect this response from a losing Clinton supporter.

Pitiful.

Oh Banquo,

None of us are being superior – somewhat exasperated by the same old shallow arguements -but exasperation is not superiority.

I do believe that most of us ADULTS here are secure with who we are, and where we are in life. I can’t say anyone, other than Obmama fans, has any strong need to be accepted by a particular group, or blog.

Barb,

Obama did support Lamont. Did you miss his going to give a speech on his behalf?

I can’t believe you so want to elevate your candidate that you would resort to something

Gosh Anne,

Please don’t talk to me about tactics to elevate candidates after what I’ve read from Clinton supporters here.
I should have have checked the site myself rather than just looking where the stats were posted at The Hotline. My bad.
Did you happen to find the bill that Hillary wouldn’t support that would have banned landmines?

Did the governor of Alabama got to jail? and how did that happen?
What about the US prosecutors that kept their jobs? What did they sign?
Has this administration instigated criminal prosecutions of Democrats during an election cycle contrary to Federal law / guidlines? and the ones that did not play ball fired?
Does Karl Rove have friends at Justic who owe patronage to him and a Roledex to die for?

In the realm of possibilities it is not unthinkable. The thing about it is the Raiths will have other “long screw drivers” in the tool box and 527′s for greese that will make a grown man weep and pour tranny fluid into to crank case to free up all those siezed pistons. Hella of thing!

Barb,

Lamont also ENDORSED OBAMA.

I had to check as well Simon.

Nellie,

Ah, that would explain all of the former Kos readers running here in tears.

Hoosier,

I’m sorry for your loss.

Sometime,

Do you believe that Obama or Hillary are withdrawing troops?

I don’t.

Same here. Sincere condolences.

Sorry to Hear about Your Family losing “MOM”.. I have also gone through similar loss’s..the hardest was the death of our navy seal son in Law on Active Duty just before thier baby son was born…

that was a wonderful tribute to Your Mom..She sounds like a wonderful mother and lady and I’m sure she was very pround of You…God Bless..

Honestly, I don’t know. There will be problems when it happens, if it’s this decade, the next or 2060s. Whatever other negative things one can say about him, Powell hit the nail on the head with, “You break it, you own it.” It’s a shitty situation, damned if you do, damned if you don’t.

Though I’d be perfectly happy with bringing all the actual troops (Army, Marines, National Guard, etc.) back and leaving the security contractors who have been ripping us off and setting us back over the past several years to their fate. (Is that mean? I can never tell. )

I might be forced to vote for him, just so when the Obamites say it was the Hillary supporters (and, in reality, I’m an Edwards supporter) who did it, I can say, “Nope, I voted for him. Find another excuse for why your candidate failed.”

Senator and has given George Bush basically everything he wanted while she has been in office

Seems to me you can’t recall the Raith majority in congress and der lieter at motel 1600 FOR 7 YEARS.Crap Rethugs have used the Jacobs brake in the Senate for 60 votes. Does that mean the Dems are not due for the Wimpy Wennie Award? Hell No!

“In my perception Hillary Clinton has been a real do-nothing”
DO nothing? Like the recent thank you note from an amazing Canadian doctor who posted at NQ,who literally bumbed into Hillary Clinton 9-12-01 at ground zero and thanked Hillary for getting health care assistance for those fucking heros that went down there to help and are slowly dying for it?
DO you watch the Senate on C-Span? It is amazing what goes on down there. Do I fault Hillary on the way she voted on issues important to me? YES. Sorry if I seem pumped, but if you are going to argue from a subjective “perception” point of view, go stand in line for the freaking Latte you love so much. Geez.

I will; if you do your homework deal?

Aside from the recent display of hubristic plagarism, Obama is now lifting Clinton’s economic policy which has been out there a LONG time. Obamatons become hysterical at any healthy and valid inquiry or criticism of their hero.

Anyone who is not stunned by Obamalove would ask why he is using Jimmy Carter’s old foreign policy advsor, Zbigniew Breyzinsky, a failure during the Hostage Crisis that brought down the ineffectual one term of Carter and his incompetent administration.

Obama claims to bring change and reject the OLD Washington? He is being advised by Zbig, Susan Rice and a Carter Cast from the OLD and FAILED WASHINGTON regime of Jimmy the Born Again anti semite whose recent book on Israel created outrage from Jewish communities all over the world.

Our Nobel Prize author Carter’s aides are all anti Israel, pro Palestine and ALL part of an OLD FAILED WASHINGTON regime.

And anyone questioning Obama’s close relationship with Reverend Jeremiah Wright, a supporter of Louis Farrakhan who called him, “one who epiomizes greatness”. Farrakhan is the man who said, “Judaism is a gutter religion, and Jews were bloodsuckers”. In distancing himself prior to Obama’s campaign, Rev. Wright told the New York Times that “he feared Obama’s Jewish support could dry up faster than a snowball in hell”.

And we’re not supposed to question?? Inspite of his oratorical skills there remain many unanswered questions and issues as to who Obama really is and exactly what does he stand for besides the adjectives?

If his followers wish to accept him on blind faith during these critical times I would have to question their ability to make an informed decision of any kind.

Hillary is going to be blamed if Obama wins the nomination and loses in the general anyway. If Obama WINS, it will be because he overcame the hostility of Hillary and her husband, not because they campaigned their asses of for him in the general.

I was an Edwards supporter too, when I gave up hope that Gore might run. So you might say that Hillary was my third choice. I actually liked Obama- a LOT- before this campaign entered the primary season. But so much about him now appears totally contrived, and his supporters in the media and blogs have just completely turned me away.

If Obama wins, it will have to be without my help. I will never vote Republican, but I can’t vote for Obama.

I am not a democrat, I am a very concerned citizen who will ask..no DEMAND that our elected officials up hold the contitutional oath they took. If the Dems get their asses kicked it won’t be because some concerned citizen failed to ask questions. It will be because no one else liked the anwsers.

They say you can tell a man’s quality by the enemies that he makes. And the friends he keeps…Is the rest of that phrase.

They say you can tell a man’s quality by the enemies that he makes

Which would necessarily be inversely proportionate, correct?

since Reagan was electedI sometimes wonder if one can go back to the advent of nuclear weapons…
One big constellation of connected dots obscured and eroded by time, money, power and death.

Nellie:
The second artical by Paul Street is brutally frank. (and has attributions..imagine that?)

Except if it ‘s done in conjunction with selling arms to Middle East terrorists, or laundering money for them, and their American benefactors, resulting in the murders of other Americans.

And it is a big deal, sometimes the pests just start to eat the house, and the foundation fails, you know?

A few termites?

Ok.

The integrity of the house threatened?

Then we have a problem.

Teak, don’t you know others are allowed to pick your party? You will be shoved into the Democrats by one whack, and into the Republicans by another whack. Don’t choose your own path and simply be a “concerned citizen”, be the label you’re given damnit and pay attention.

How dismissive…Bush Haters, Obama Haters….

I Don’t Hate Obama. You are engaged in a distraction each time you say that. You’re On Notice!

in fact, I don’t hate you, or even Obama’s followers. In fact, I find their enthusiasm rather heartening….I just don’t buy the oil he’s selling. And if you can’t deal with that, then perhaps you should survey your own hatred field.

I can watch the candidates with my own eyes just fine. I have my own seasoned background, just like you, and I come to a different conclusion. I have explained much of my conclusions, and I haven’t received much in substance back about them. I get empty comments. And its perfectly fine if people want to call names, or engage in insults of intelligence. In the end, there is still some credibility gaps in Obama, for me.

I am straining at this point to not hold Obama responsible for the behavior of his supporters, but obviously you cannot do that about Clinton. If an individual like Larry Johnson comes forth and says, “I have a concern”….and it favors Clinton, then he is an Operative for the Clinton Campaign. That’s a fucking smear friend. Why not criticize the folks who smear other citizens for their opinions on who would run for president.

Today I was on the phone with a friend who is pretty different than me in many ways. I really respect her and she said she was really enthusiastic for Obama. She asked what I thought and I told her I was planning, not solid but sure, to vote in the primary for Clinton.
“YOU, CLINTON? what tha?”

When I explained several reasons, written in volumes here, that I had for my choice, she respected it, and heard out my comments about Obama without feeling insulted, nor dismissed. She didn’t jump to pathological counterpoints, or dismissive snears. She mentioned her criticisms of Clinton, then said, but yes they are old news.

Tony Rezko’s name never came up. I didn’t have to bring it up. I focused simply on the fact that most of the things she and I had been lead to believe make Hillary Clinton so damn evil, empty and worthless, were as much a result of the RightWing TalkMachine, as some of the criticisms being heard about Obama.

Hillary Clinton did not attack Kosovo. Hillary Clinton did not screw Monica Lewinsky. She did not bake cookies while her Husband was Mr. Important Guy. She was active in issues that she says she cared about. Whitewater was a bullshit witchhunt. In the face of major embarrassment, Clinton stood up to the attacks with more prowess than most people I know could have handled. She didn’t back down and shrink away, she got more involved.

The Obama followers are trying to make Hillary and her followers out to be the Republicans of the Democrat party, and all I can say to that:
I Accuse you of dividing the party in exactly the way Karl Rove, Limbaugh, and all the other decades old Hillary Clinton Haters have wanted you to. Congratulations for your Mission Accomplished.
Obama’s supporters acheived against Clinton what Limbaugh, Karl Rove, Anne Coulter could not have. You fell for the Karl Rove Machine.

(i’m actually sorta jesting with all this, but enjoy the humor to see the effect).
When a house is divided, one must ask….who benefits?
When facing adversaries, pit them together via jealousy and vice.

As Willie Lynch said, Distrust Is Stronger than Trust.

Who benefits from Obama vs Clinton?
Why is it that Obama followers feel more entitled to having their choice become the Final Candidate? What sort of crap is that?

Today a jerk walks into a Clinton rally, and starts his ProBama campaign. Then he parades on TV claiming an assault by Bill Clinton. He says he told Clinton, “do us a favor and have Hillary quit the race” (paraphrased).

This is about as offensive a behavior in a campaign cycle as you can get outside of real violence. TAKE YOUR CANDIDATE OUT OF THE RACE. What sort of message….

Who benefits from a house divided?

From what you have cited, Randi Rhodes is not saying she won’t vote for the nominee, nor is she encouraging her listeners to not vote for the nominee. I think that Hillary could still pull it out legitimately, although if she did do it illegitimately, yes, it would destroy the party.

It is too bad about some of the rhetoric coming from Obama supporters. I don’t deny it exists. However, the attacks that the Obama campaign has focused on Hillary are not at all like the vicious smears that Bush did on McCain. That is not a fair comparison.

Saying you’d rather have McCain than Obama is really too bad. I would rather have Hillary or Obama than what would amount to Bush’s third term.

Let’s remember Obama claimed he was not close to
this crook. So who does he consult when buying the
house????? the crook he wasn’t that close to. Obama claimed Retzko knew nothing about the purchase of the house, that the Retzko purchase next door was a total surprise to him. He didn’t hink Retzko knew about his purchase. How about a liar for President.

running here in tears.
And Your Point is? That “they” are running or they are in tears? I reacted to your post by why this maybe so as I aam not clear on exactly what you mean and would like to know.

(Sorry Cee; the visual of a blogger “running” on the internet is funny as hell. I hope “they” don’t shortout any routers with those tears on their way over) Thanks for that.

Patrick,

My sympathy to you as well.
Parents aren’t supposed to outlive their children.
I’m sure you do your best to fill the life of grandchild. Your son would be proud of you.

Sometime,

That is mean. So what! LOL!

Nellie, well said.
In fact, my grumpy asshole irritation comes from a profound belief that we are all equal.
And as implied in your last comment, yes, the more pressure I feel to vote for a Candidate that I Just Don’t Feel…the more pissed off I get at that candidate.

Ask Al Gore if I should have had the right to vote for Nader, Ask Clinton if I had a right to vote for Perot, and ask Dukakis if I had the right to make a mistake and vote for Bush I.

Its easy to see who the elitist peer pressure folks are by how they post.

BQ: If I had friends that did not tell me I was on cloud nine when they thought so, the I would not respect their advise and counsel;

ergo: Cum amicitia similis illa quisnam postulo hostilis?

Actually maybe we are just sick of the Obama crap..
and being attacked on every blog site and we are quite frankly not going to take the crap anymore.
It is impossible to reason with any Obama follower.
I am tired of the only mantra being hope and change and then a glazed look when you ask….what hope and what change? Maybe we are tired of every cable network, progressive radio stations like Air America, progressive websites who told us we should support all the candidates inviserating ours and the news media going after Hillary 24/7 and treating Obama as Chris Matthews said, “it’s like the New Testament.” He is not
Jesus and not even a good imitation of him. When
you all finally figure out he can’t walk on water,
it will be too late for our country and a troubled world. Before this election, everyone was made that the Congress didn’t duke it out with the
Republicans, now you seem to think it’s OK to make a guy President who wants to compromise on everything….do you even know what you want.

The thing about that is, they came knocking…in spite of Obama current “message”, that has to be respected, all of the anguish, pity and disgust on their faces aside.
“Gimme Shelter” will be sung by a whole lota folks soon enough.

Hoosier,
My deepest condolences my friend.

Thanks for the Links CK; It will be ignored until it can’t be. The smart money is long gone. Perfect storm.

The homeless artical reminds of a homeless buddy of mine when I was kid…He was arrested for “entering” an unlocked vacant apartment to seek shelter from a wicked NY winter night. He was given 18 months (with no priors) up in Seneca…he had just turned 18. I remember him a few days before that, sleeping in the snow in an igloo he had fashioned.

Beautifully said, Patrick. You know how I feel about you buddy.

I’ve been “hearing” you for a couple of a days now…in the wind…I am truly sorry for your loss and extend our condolences. God speed to your mom, who sounds like a real Stradivarius of a soul.God Bless

Those Obamazoids like BG who find Hillary supporters so offensive with “the pathological name-calling and insults” – there is a place for you. It was called Huffington Post, but I call it Obamington Post now.

There at Obamington Post you can freely do all “the pathological name-calling and insults” you like about Hillary and anyone else who doesn’t view Obama as the Second Coming. Rehash all the favorite Republican talking points over and over. Use the most vicious gutter language to describe Hillary and her supporters. Go ahead, check it out. You will meet many new friends. You will love it over there.

Or if you don’t like reading so much, you can just listen to Air Obama, formerly known as Air America. Start listening when Randi Rhodes comes on. She likes to play Obama’s speeches to start her show. I don’t think she has actually endorsed Obama yet. I am not sure since I stopped listening to her several days ago. Now Jon Eliot has endorsed Obama. Obamabots need not worry about any discouraging words about their hero offending their sensitive ears.

You have expressed so many of the same concerns that I have, but have done it far better than I could have done.

What Obama leaves out about his 2002 speech (besides the fact that he wasn’t in the Senate at the time) is that Dick Durbin was re-elected with an almost 60% majority a few weeks after his vote against AUMF. Any knowledge of the political climate in Illinois (especially in Chicago) would have made opposition to AUMF the politically astute thing to do and not the courageous stand that Obama’s supporters seem to think it was.

The Chicago Tribune recently published another article about Obama’s disingenuousness regarding contributions from lobbyists:

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/chi-lobbying_bdfeb10,0,7215849.story

Regarding his acceptance of millions in campaign contributions from employees of corporations, Obama would have us believe that all such contributions are made because these employees are “inspired by my message of change”.

I voted for Obama for senator because he was touted as a progressive. His record and his rhetoric have since made it clear that he is a centrist with a strong tendency to “compromise”, even if that compromise amounts to rolling over and playing dead. The Harry and Louise ads infuriated me also, as did his nonsense about how the Republican Party was the party of ideas in the 1980′s (he neglects to mention that the ideas were all bad).

Something that hasn’t been mentioned in this stream is Obama’s fund raiser with ministers and Donnie McClurkin. I cringe whenever a candidate closely identifies himself with a particular religion as I am a firm believer in the separation of church and state. What made this fund raiser absolutely reprehensible to me was Obama’s acceptance of McClurkin’s diatribe against the gay community. Had McClurkin’s speech been directed at any other group, there would have been an uproar.

I love ZMag, forgotten how much actually.

This is a great article by Paul Street.
We should see it republished here if possible.

Excellent post!

This was some of the first points of my “conversion” to Hillary from NoCandidateThisRound. Once someone mentioned her “voting” and “legislation” record, I was back in my area of interest. I read these bills and these amendments all the time. Loves that Thomas Archive for fast tracking.

Yes, once you compare the legislation work to the various attacks, its easy to see where the candidates really stand, their votes.

Once I looked at the records of Clinton, Obama, and McCain, I easily could see the smear on Clinton about her “lack of substative legistlation”. The smear didn’t come from a RightWinger, but an Obama supporter right here at NoQuarter.

Go back in the archives, and just weeks ago I said, “screw both of them. Screw the Democrats”. But then someone had to drop a big ole lie I could read up on, and voila, there are ton of lies there to dig up now.

No Experience for Hillary Clinton…bullshit
-Brownie and Girl Scout
-Maine East High School student council
-Debating team and National Honor Society
-National Merit Finalist
-Helped in Canvassing in South Side Chicago at 13
-Volunteered for Barry Goldwater in 1964
-Majored in Political Science at Wellesley College
-Served as President of Wellesley Young Republicans
-Elected President of the Wellesley College Government Association
-Served as intern to House Republican Conference
Left Republicans in protest of smear campaign.
-Submitted Senior Thesis – There Is Only The Fight…An Analysis of the Alinksy Model
-First student of Wellesley College to deliver their commencement address.
-Yale Law School Graduate
-Served on Board of Editors for Yale Review of Law and Social Action
-Worked at the Yale Child Study Center
-Took cases of Child Abuse at Yale-New Haven Hospital
-Volunteered at New Haven Legal Services (to provide free advice to the poor)
-Awarded Grant – Marian Wright Edelman’s Washington Research Project
-Worked on Subcommittee on Migratory Labor 1970
Intern for Treuhaft, Walker and Burnstein Law Firm
-Campaigned for George McGovern in Texas 1972
-Receives Juris Doctor Degree from Yale 1973
-Publishes “Children Under the Law” in Harvard Educational Review 1973
-Serves as staff attorney for Edelmans’ Children’s Defense Fund and consultant to the Carnegie Council on Children
-Member of the Impeachment Inquiry Staff under Chief Counsel John Doar and Bernard Nussbaum
-Faculty member at University of Arkansas Fayetteville’s School of Law
-Joined Rose Law Firm, specializing in patent infringement and intellectual property
-Did pro bono work in child advocacy
-Published “Children’s Policies: Abandoment and Neglect” (1977)
-Published “Children’s Rights: A Legal Perspective” (1979)
-American Bar Association chair: “Her articles were important, not because they were radically new but because they helped formulate something that had been inchoate.”
-Historian Garry Wills called her: “one of the more important scholar-activists of the last two decades”
-Co-founds Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families
-President Jimmy Carter appoints her to board of directors of the Legal Services Corporation (1978-1981)
-She served as chair through most of her appointment.
-During Time as Chair, the funding for LSC expands from $90 million to $300 million despite Reagan efforts to cut funding to and changing the nature of organization
-First Lady of Arkansas (1979-81, 1983-1992)
-Served as chair for Rural Health Advisory Committee
-Chaired Arkansas Educational Standards Committee from 1982-1992
-Introduces “Arkansas’ Home Instruction Program for Preschool Youth (1985)
-Named Arkansas Woman of the Year 1983 (Arkansas Democrat)
-Named Arkansas Mother of the Year 1983 (Arkansas Association of American Mothers)
-Named Headliner of the Year 1983 (Arkansas Press Association)
-Given Honorary Doctorate by University Arkansas at Little Rock
-Chaired American Bar Association’s Commission on Women in the Profession (1987-1991)
-Named one of “100 Most Influential Lawyers in America” by National Law Journal (1988 and 1991)
-Served on board of Arkansas Children’s Hospital Legal Services (1988-1992)
-Served as Chair of Children’s Defense Fund (1986-1992)
-Served on Board of Directors for TCBY (1985-1992)
-Served on Board of Directors for Walmart Stores (1986-1992)
-Served on Board of Directors for Lafarge (1990-1992)

-First Lady of the United States from 1992-2000
-(first First Lady to hold a post graduate degree)
-(first First Lady to have her own professional career up until entering White House)
-(first First Lady to have an office in the West Wing instead of East Wing)
-Appointed Head of “Task Force on National Health Care Reform
-Major advocate of State Children’s Health Insurance Program
-Promoted nationwide immunization against childhood diseases
-Promoted mammogram detection in Older Women
-Successful at increasing research funding for prostate cancer and childhood asthma at National Institutes of Health.
-Worked on reports of Gulf War Syndrome
-Helped create “Office on Violence Against Women” at Department of Justice
-Initiated “Adoption and Safe Families Act”
-Hosted White House Conference on Child Care (1997)
-Hosted White House Conference on Early Childhood Development and Learning (1997)
-Hosted White House Conference on Philanthropy (1999)
-Hosted White House Conference on Children and Adolescents (2000)
-Hosted White House Conference on Teenagers (2000)
-Travelled to 79 countries as First Lady
-Gave Speech before Fourth World Conference on Women (September 1995)
-Spoke about treatment of Women’s Rights in Beijing while criticising China and the Taliban in Afghanistan
-Withstood investigation into Whitewater afterwhich independent counsels stated there was “insufficient evidence” of Clinton criminal wrongdoing.
-Withstood investigation into “Travelgate” and “filegate”
-Endured Bill Clinton’s ExtraMarital Publically Displayed Affair and Remained In Marriage
-Initiated and Founding Chair of Save America’s Treasures
-Head of White House Millennium Council and intiated Millennium Project
-Awarded “Living Legacy Award” by Women’s International Center (1994)
-Awarded United Arab Emirates Health Foundatin Prize (1988)
-Honored with Lifetime Achievement Award from Children of Chernobyl Relief Fund (1999)
-Awarded “Mother Teresa Award” highest honor given to civilians by Albania, in recognition for efforts following Kosovo War
-First First Lady to be a candidate for Elected Office
-Elected Senator of New York – 55% of the vote
-Sworn in January 3, 2001
-Reelected in 2006
-Served on Committed on Budget (2001-2002)
-Served on Committee on Armed Services (since 2003)
-Served on Committee on Environment and Public Works (since 2001)
-Served on Special Committee on Aging
-Served as Commissioner of the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (since 2001)
-Voted for USA Patriot Act in October 2001
-Supported Action in Afghanistan after 9/11/01
-Voted for Iraq War Resolution Oct 2002
-Voted against “Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001)
-Voted against “Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconcilation Act of 2003”
-Voted against confirmation of John Roberts
-Voted Against Samuel Alito
-Voted against “Federal Marriage Amendment”
-Voted against “Iraq War Troop Surge” 2007
-Voted for spending bill that required troop withdraw (bush veto)
-Voted against compromise bill without withdraw guidelines
-Voted in favor of Senate Resolution calling Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps “a foreign terrorist organization”
-Criticized David Petraeus’s 2007 Report to Congress on the Situation in Iraq
-Called for Alberto Gonzales to resign March 2007
Published weekly column “Talking It Over” from 1995 to 2000
-Publishes It Takes A Village: And Other Lessons Children Teach Us
-ITAV becomes New Yorks Times Best Seller
-Grammy Award for Best Spoken Word Album 1997
-Publishes Dear Socks, Dear Buddy: Kids’ Letters to the First Pets (1998)
-Publishes An Invitation to the White House: At Home with History (2000)
-Wrote Foreward to Beatrice’s Goat
-Publishes “Living History” an autobiography
-Grammy Award for Best Spoken Word Album for Living History
-Awarded “Nursing Health and Humanity Award” from University of Rochester School of Nursing (2004)
-Awarded German Media Prize 2004
-Awarded “American Medical Women’s Association’s President’s Vision and Voice Award” (2005)
-Awarded honorary Doctorate from Agnes Scott College outside Atlanta
-Awarded Reserve Officers Association’s National President’s Award
-Inducted into National Women’s Hall of Fame
-Awared with Remembrance Award from Northeastern New York Chapter of Alzheimer’s Association
-Awarded “Energy Leadership Award” from United States Energy Association.
-Awarded honorary Doctorate by Goteborg University

These are just a few of those UnAccomplishments.

Each of us has a convenient point somewhere back in time when the shit hit the fan and nobody bothered to turn off the fan.
For me, it is when the articles of confederation were replaced by the constitutional convention coup. The first coup to undo the revolutionary war.
The citizenry has had many chances to undo the damage, but they like the results of the damage. Whoever is the dem standard bearer come august, will be crippled by the kinds of things emphasized on this blog. If it’s Barack this blog and its kindred will have given the thugs a free ride; if it’s Hillary other blogs will have helped give the rethugs a free ride. Not that I think it will matter much, the economy is worsening. The wars are not accomplishing anything. The enemy is still a demented old gollum who the dems will allow to pretend heroism. Are you better off now than you were eight years ago? Is your family better off than your parents were? Sadness abounds, inflation explodes, unemployment grows, house values crater. But at least the homeless will be able to squat in the foreclosed homes until the utilities turn off the electric and the water.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hooverville
There are already a few of these started in california. I think they will be called Bushtowns, or Hillaryvilles or Obamacities or maybe McCainlesses. A Bush blanket will be a day old WAPO or NYT.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army
Hundreds of thousands of vets without homes, bankrupted by payday lenders, suffering from PTSDs, treated with contempt … and trained and angry.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_Plot
It’s never very far beneath the surface. The desire for a “man on a white horse,” a “strongman” to whip the peons into shape.
The ultimate difference between the two parties is that the dems wanted a Mussolini, the rethugs have always preferred his northern ally.

Whoville?

I guess those folks at DuPont “have a better idea”

Please don’t call those who oppose Israeli policies anti-semitic. It’s offensive, and it’s the same tactic that Obama supporters have used against Clinton and her supporters. Only in their case they call you a racist.

Wow! You continue to miss the point. Scandals don’t have to be real to be effective. Have you already forgotten that we impeached a president for getting a blow job?

Here is the real issue. Obama knew or should have known that Rezko was under investigation, and yet he is caught associating with Rezko while purchasing his new home. Obama is the candidate that is asking us to believe he has the judgment if not the experience to be president. I’m sorry, but I don’t see it.

I’m sorry but your numbers are wrong. Since joining the Senate, Senator Obama has sponsored or co-sponsored 1067 bills in total. Of those, he sponsored 265. Now if we assume that a bill’s primary sponsor actually wrote the bill, then am I to assume that he wrote those other 625 bills, but failed to put his name on them out of some form of modesty?

Now lets look at Senator Clinton. I will only list her numbers for the 109th and 110th congress to make it fair to Senator Obama. She has sponsored or co-sponsored 1530 bills. Of those she sponsored 327.

Now I know you are going to tell me that Senator Obama works across the aisle more, so I thought I’d test that hypothesis. Of the 1067 bills mentioned above, only 154 passed the Senate. Of Senator Clinton’s 1530 bills, 217 passed the Senate. So Obama has managed to get 14.4% of his bills through the Senate vs. Clinton’s 14.2%. Wow!

CHRIS..

I am replying to your Research and Post Below,..Thank you for Posting ALl or Most of Hillarys Experiences..Education..Background.. Qualifications and Awards..

She is to be admired..she did not do that just to get recognition..or so she would have a resume someday…She did it because she is Very Intelligent and Committed ..

She is not only experienced and an Expert on Domestic and social Issues…She has been to over 80 Foreign Nations…Knows Most of the World leaders…and Knows that just like the
Domestic problems in the United states…That the
Entire World and its Cultures are just as Diverse and Complex..

Thats why she is MOST QUALIFIED to be President of the United States..and I think its time for
a Woman like Hillary ..with her Qualifications..

To BE ELECTED..

Thanks Chris and everyone here for the great Posts..comments and Debates…

I use a different term…Obamacrats.

Because as far as I can see, technically, the “followers” of Barack
are NOT loyal democrats in the same sense that the supporters
of the REST (in peace) of the democratic field passionately are/were.

In impressive numbers, admittedly, the Obamacrats
are putting forth a democratic candidate in the Democratic primary
and they surely ARE quick to conjure the ghosts of Democrats past
and cynically share podiums beside their last living surrogates.

But, by their actions and grievances and skull pounding platform,
and deft and devious swiftboating of the trusted elders in the party
merely to eliminate any and all compitition to THEIR nominee,
it is VERY clear that these New Obamacrats with their old republican ways
have no lasting devotion to either the desires of fellow Democrats
or the continuation of the party we have built…together.

They SAY they are unifiers but every gesture and ploy devides us.
SO are they who they SAY they are? Or are they what they DO?

In FACT their stated intent is to overthrow the outmoded leadership
to render the Old Boomer Ways obsolete acts of dottering folly
Which is why many of us, Hillary, too, feel positively besieged (we are!)
except for indulgent parents…like…Caroline Kenndy (bless her)
who have been swept up by their children’s charming…enthusiam…

It’s getting less and less…charming…in that Lord of the Flyish way.
(stab the bitch, do her in, spill her blood!)

And isn’t that what is WRONG with our child proofed country?
That there is NO aspect left where reasoning adults decide…anything?
(even now it seems, the next (worst case scenario last!) president)

I mean we are boomers and all for letting kids find their way. We did.
But this is the last absurd nightmare of the Boomer rollercoaster.
Where we finally reap what we sewed in our own rebellious youth.
Ground Hog Day for the McGovernites…

in a time when, literally, “The Whole World is Watching”
I’ve heard echoes of that (also borrowed) mantra in the Obama stance
over the prudent practices of the…clearly needed…superdelegates.
(sometimes called the grown ups)

Obamacrats don’t like…grown ups. They’d like to be rid of grups.
Shades of Star Trek.

The Obamacrats sort of remind me of a steering comittee I was on
my first quarter of college during the ’72 riots at the University of Minnesota.
THOSE fired up young patriots wanted to draft a platform to demand
that then U president Malcom Moos turn over his entertainment budget
to fund the activity of thier steering comittee.

The primary activity of their steering comittee was to try to
impeach Malcolm Moos.

I happened to like the guy myself, and found it absurd to ask him to
FUND the forces marshalled AGAINST him. I mean…wasn’t that…silly?
Needless to say I lost my…unpopular…position on the sterring comittee.

I was twenty at the time and it was a good lesson. I’ve hung onto it.
Zealots are Rediculous.

I was SO not surprised when the Rebubs tried to impeach Bill Clinton
( it IS such a zealot thing to do! )

Now the new zealots, The Obamacrats want to “turn the page” on us.
but they want The Page to all the heavy lifting…for them
How do they THINK pages of history turn, anyway?
A sudden stiff breeze comes along and…then what…what’s next?

In FACT the Obamacrats seem to be factioning off into Independents
(Minnesota loved Jesse Ventura. He certainly was…a change.)
They have chosen a charismatic to OPPOSE the democratic party.
And that is fine if they want to.

But they expect the democratic party to pay the high tuition
of their all too steep learning curve

As I said,

zealots are rediculous.

I’d prefer reading in my native language, because my knowledge of your languange is no so well. But it was interesting! Look for some my links: