Will Obama Give Hillary the VP Nod?

georgeob1 wrote:

snood wrote:

Though you speak as someone who resides in the deep end of an abyssmal denial that has been filled from an endless reservoir of WASP insulation and privilege, even you should be able to acknowledge that the doubts about the realtime status of race and gender equality in the US are at least not unreasonable. But then I'm just a cockeyed optimist.

I think he was instead noting that the logic that leads to the conclusion that Hillary's 3rd place showing is a necessary result of gender bias, must also lead us to conclude that Obama's victory in Iowa necessarily means the end of racial bias.

Thanks for sharing what you think. I'm always interested in other opinions.

You evidently claim that both still exist - a point I won't argue - and that we are necessarily motivated by "... abyssmal denial that has been filled from an endless reservoir of WASP insulation and privilege".

"We"? I was talking to O'Bill.

This, of course established you as the equal - in terms of the categorical prejudgement of others - of those whom you criticize.

Again, I was only referring to one person's blindness and denial, not a community, not white people in general, and not you.

It was a pretty good phrase though - despite the fact that 'insulated and priviledged WASPS' are but a small minority of the white population. Besides, I'm not a WASP, and have always regarded them with a mixture of bemusement and mild contempt.

Bully for you. But since I wasn't talking to you or referring to anyone else but O'Bill, as moot a point as I've seen lately.

0 Replies

[yawn]

snood wrote:

I was talking to O'Bill.

Hardly. If you were, we'd have had a cordial conversation. The truth is; you were lashing out at some nameless, faceless, hated enemy that you've inexplicably and quite incorrectly identified with me.[/yawn]

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

[yawn]
snood wrote:
I was talking to O'Bill.
Hardly. If you were, we'd have had a cordial conversation. The truth is; you were lashing out at some nameless, faceless, hated enemy that you've inexplicably and quite incorrectly identified with me.[/yawn]

No, O'Bill - the person wasn't nameless or faceless, it was you. I was saying you are an oblivious white male, inordinately enamored of and impressed by his own importance in the scheme of things. I was saying you are in denial that you probably have had to shift if even slightly your take on Obama's credibility just like most everyone else.

And you bore the shyt out of me, as well.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:
[yawn]
snood wrote:
I was talking to O'Bill.
Hardly. If you were, we'd have had a cordial conversation. The truth is; you were lashing out at some nameless, faceless, hated enemy that you've inexplicably and quite incorrectly identified with me.[/yawn]

No, O'Bill - the person wasn't nameless or faceless, it was you. I was saying you are an oblivious white male, inordinately enamored of and impressed by his own importance in the scheme of things.

Provide even one shred of evidence that excuses your WASP accusation or learn to keep your racist nonsense to yourself, you ignorant fool.

snood wrote:

I was saying you are in denial that you probably have had to shift if even slightly your take on Obama's credibility just like most everyone else.

1) That has zero to do with this thread. 2) That started out as a strawman you invented by extrapolating from my shared opinion with Nimh that it was easier to guess Obama in NH than IA. That's it. It was such a moronic thing to first invent, and then get excited about; I opted to encourage you rather than point out the obvious idiocy in your deduction. If you'd like me to prove this to you; no problem. Simply ask on the appropriate thread. Oh, and try to keep your racist hyperbole to a minimum, please. I'm not your imaginary foe.

snood wrote:

And you bore the shyt out of me, as well.

All evidence to the contrary.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

snood wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:
[yawn]
snood wrote:
I was talking to O'Bill.
Hardly. If you were, we'd have had a cordial conversation. The truth is; you were lashing out at some nameless, faceless, hated enemy that you've inexplicably and quite incorrectly identified with me.[/yawn]

No, O'Bill - the person wasn't nameless or faceless, it was you. I was saying you are an oblivious white male, inordinately enamored of and impressed by his own importance in the scheme of things.
Provide even one shred of evidence that excuses your WASP accusation or learn to keep your racist nonsense to yourself, you ignorant fool.

I'm mortified that you would call me such a thing, you pompous ass. I have no burden to prove anything save that I wan't referring to anyone but you, and that's just to avoid the confusion of anyone thinking I believe all white males to be as arrogant and blind to themselves as you are. I think you get your blindness to your own motives from a lifetime of taking yourself so terribly seriously - not an uncommon thing to white males in America, but most proudly on display to me here of late by lil' ole you.

snood wrote:
I was saying you are in denial that you probably have had to shift if even slightly your take on Obama's credibility just like most everyone else.
1) That has zero to do with this thread.
Sez you. Like all your babbling is ever so relevant.

2) That started out as a strawman you invented by extrapolating from my shared opinion with Nimh that it was easier to guess Obama in NH than IA. That's it. It was such a moronic thing to first invent, and then get excited about; I opted to encourage you rather than point out the obvious idiocy in your deduction. If you'd like me to prove this to you; no problem. Simply ask on the appropriate thread. Oh, and try to keep your racist hyperbole to a minimum, please. I'm not your imaginary foe.

You can't tell me where to post what, anymore than you can obfuscate the fact that you are full of shyt if you think you are somehow immune to now taking Obama more seriously since he won Iowa. You self-important ass.

snood wrote:
And you bore the shyt out of me, as well.
All evidence to the contrary.

Why? Because I continue to reply you think you're fascinating me? Go away for a long time, then come back and see if I haven't continued to be fascinated by all threads touching on Obama's candidacy. That would be a "proof" even you could understand, you officious pain-in-the-ass.

0 Replies

There are several kinds of people in this world of politics...

Some stick their necks out when no one else does.

Some stick their finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing.

Some wait for someone else to stick their finger in the air and follow their lead.

Some like to go around saying "told ya so" or "I knew it all along" while others just put their heads down and go to work to get the job done and don't really care who gets or takes credit for necks, fingers, foresight or hindsight as long as the goal is accomplished.

I find that last one the most attractive to work with to achieve a common goal.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

I have no burden to prove anything save that I wan't referring to anyone but you, and that's just to avoid the confusion of anyone thinking I believe all white males to be as arrogant and blind to themselves as you are. I think you get your blindness to your own motives from a lifetime of taking yourself so terribly seriously - not an uncommon thing to white males in America, but most proudly on display to me here of late by lil' ole you.

I see. So you have no proof to back up your racial slurs, but since you are angry over a strawman you conjured up yourself; you think it's okay to hurl them anyway? Rolling Eyes

Interesting position for the most race-sensitive person I've ever encountered to take. I won't be returning the favor, because I realize your feeble ability to reason has nothing to do with the color of your skin.

snood wrote:

You can't tell me where to post what, anymore than you can obfuscate the fact that you are full of shyt if you think you are somehow immune to now taking Obama more seriously since he won Iowa. You self-important ass.

Wise choice to avoid the thread where the truth is obvious, I suppose, if your plan is to keep hurling your ever evolving Strawman with a mix of unfounded racist and sophmoric nonsense... rather than face your folly head on.

If anyone is interested in seeing where Snood had his latest logic implosion; it begins here. I just reread it myself and I still can't figure out what the hell his problem is.

Snood: Since I don't much care for the unwarranted personal attacks; I will likely continue to illuminate the idiocy you're demonstrating, for as long as you continue demonstrating it.

0 Replies

Butrflynet wrote:

There are several kinds of people in this world of politics...

Some stick their necks out when no one else does.

Some stick their finger in the air to see which way the wind is blowing.

Some wait for someone else to stick their finger in the air and follow their lead.

Some like to go around saying "told ya so" or "I knew it all along" while others just put their heads down and go to work to get the job done and don't really care who gets or takes credit for necks, fingers, foresight or hindsight as long as the goal is accomplished.

I find that last one the most attractive to work with to achieve a common goal.

While still others like to put such "I told you so" claims in others mouths, out of nowhere. Sometimes, after one objection, said other may just go along and watch him make an ass of himself.

(And some aren't bright enough to recognize even not so subtle sarcasm.)

0 Replies

For anyone who's wandering by (probably shaking their heads and muttering "wish they'd STFU") wondering what it is that O'Bill and I are going on and on about...

The night of the Iowa caucus and after Obama's historic, suprising and exhilarating win, Nimh made a prediction that Obama would win his party's nomination. I asked, quite understandably considering the shocking nature of Obama's win, if Nimh would have made the same prediction before the Iowa win.

Nimh never got to answer; O'Bill answered as he thought Nimh would have.

Here's the thing that has him accusing me of lunacy: I accused him of being smug, and exhibiting a know-it-all quality, and of being in denial if he was claiming that Obama's win in 93% white Iowa was something that didn't affect his opinion of Obama's credibility.

After all - couldn't it reasonably be expected to have had an affect on the opinion the whole freakin' WORLD has of Obama's, and black peoples' in general, credibility in American presidential campaigns?

Anyway, that's the real crux of my "problem", as O'Bill puts it - that he seems to see himself as somehow above all that; that he indeed somehow had "called it all along". In my opinion, that attitude is just arrogant bullshit.

Hope that clears it up for anyone who wondered.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think it is another subject for another place, but I have further stated that Bill's insufferable smugness comes (IMO) from living a life of white privilege and from taking himself too seriously. Hey, it's just a guess. If I offended anyone by saying that I think a lot of white males are arrogant, let me say that my intent is not to offend.

0 Replies

Is that really what you think happened, Snood? Not. Nimh merely indicated that NH was not as hard as IA to predict Obama. Predict, not guarantee. New Hampshire, not the nomination. I guessed that nimh would have based that opinion based on charts that showed Obama charging in NH; and provided some from pollster.com, that showed just that. Nimh later confirmed my assumption with charts of his own. Meanwhile; you had already went on your irrational melt down. Upon your first accusation; I told you no, that's not what I said. But you persisted in inventing more and more ridiculous strawmen to pretend are mine, while I sarcastically encouraged you to continue making a fool of yourself. The chain of events you imagined is interesting; but straight BS. Your racism and willingness to slime indiscriminately is a bit shocking as well. At any rate; the truth is still available for you, or anyone who wishes by clicking HERE.

My apologies to everyone for responding to Snood's incessant idiocy. But I'm not comfortable ignoring personal attacks that are hinged to bald-faced lies.

0 Replies

My apologies to all others on this thread...

You're a "bit shocked", are you, O'Bill?

You're pretty good at the slur and the slime yourself. Hard to imagine you're shocked.

My contention is that you are an arrogant ass who claims that Obama's success in Iowa affected your opinion of his chances not at all. That makes you an arrogant ass who's a liar, as well.

Now just so these folks can have their thread back - have the last word, blowhard.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

Nimh never got to answer

For the record; I did answer, soon as I was back online again.

0 Replies

The truth. is available for the clicking... which is how I'll respond to this idiocy if you continue it. (Only a moron would take your word, instead of simply reading the truth, so you're wasting your breath).

0 Replies

Besides personality, what are the differences between Senators Clinton and Obama?

Are there any differences in their promises and platforms?

0 Replies

Jim wrote:

Besides personality, what are the differences between Senators Clinton and Obama?

Are there any differences in their promises and platforms?

IMO, the platforms are essentially similar. The striking difference is the attitude. Hillary promises to fight the Republicans to accomplish her goals. Obama promises to work with the Republicans to accomplish his. I know which attitude I like better. Hill's made some pretty serious adjustments to land where Obama has always stood.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

The truth. is available for the clicking... which is how I'll respond to this idiocy if you continue it. (Only a moron would take your word, instead of simply reading the truth, so you're wasting your breath).

Let me ask you this, Bill - did Obama's winning the Iowa caucus at all affect your opinion about what his chances are to be president?
( Embarrassed

and yeah, I know I said I'd stop, but I'm weak...)

0 Replies

snood wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:
The truth. is available for the clicking... which is how I'll respond to this idiocy if you continue it. (Only a moron would take your word, instead of simply reading the truth, so you're wasting your breath).

Let me ask you this, Bill - did Obama's winning the Iowa caucus at all affect your opinion about what his chances are to be president?
( and yeah, I know I said I'd stop, but I'm weak...)

Of course, you damn fool. How many times do I have to point you to the same place? You first asked:

snood wrote:

Why not? You gonna feign like Obama's credibility is the same today as before the Iowa caucus?

I answered NO, and went on to explain why Nimh and I thought New Hampshire would be easier to predict than Iowa.
WTF is so hard to understand about that, I have no idea.
This is when you began losing your mind in earnest. You then suggested that some people would think Obama had no chance before Iowa; and I responded that wouldn't be Nimh or I... because Nimh's the number one political student I know, and I have ZERO recollection of ever saying "Obama has no chance". By this time; both Nimh and I have provided charts that clearly demonstrate Obama was on the rise in New Hampshire (the original friggin point)... and you come back with the ridiculous strawman about my not changing my opinion at all (as opposed to never having believed he stood no chance). This idiocy is 100% yours Snood. Look; this post contains the beginning of our exchange, and the evolution of your idiotic, false contention.

snood wrote:

OCCOM BILL wrote:
snood wrote:
OCCOM BILL wrote:
snood wrote:
Why not? You gonna feign like Obama's credibility is the same today as before the Iowa caucus?
No, I was feigning like I was nimh (notice pretty charts from pollster.com). :wink: You may notice; Obama's trending stronger in New Hampshire than he was yesterday in Iowa. And lose the attitude. It's a beautiful day to be an American.

I'm happy as a pig in slop. Nothing wrong with my "attitude" - My simple point is that a lot of people who didn't think Obama had a chance are now thinking twice. No reason Nimh (or you) might not be some of those people.
Sounds like there's a lot of people who's face you could rub that in. Neither Nimh or I qualify. Nimh tracks these things like no one else I've ever even heard of; and I was among the first to recommend Obama to the Democratic machine... and have never recanted. For that matter; I distinctly remember you voicing considerable doubts yourself.

Exactly my point. There are a lot of people - probably most people, if we could have honesty - who have had to reevaluate, to some degree, the extent of Obama's viability after Iowa. Yes, I'm included in that. Not you though, huh O'Bill?

Nowhere had I said anything remotely like what you're accusing me of (No evaluation, to any degree Rolling Eyes

). My response to that nonsense would be recognized as sarcasm by your average 7 year old:

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Nope. Nadda. Never. Go ahead and search Obama by O'bill in reverse order and witness my unwavering support.

Hell, I even wrote him a song.

Notice... even while at my most sarcastic; I still don't say anything remotely as stupid as "Obama's winning the Iowa caucus didn't at all affect my opinion about what his chances are to be president" and no "OCCOM BILL" search would reveal any point where I said he had no chance. This idiocy is your own invention Snood. It is not my fault that you are too damn dense to understand the word NO and I'm sick and tired of you attributing your idiotic stawman to me, on this and several other threads, all unprovoked... and I get to hear I'm a smug WASP because of YOUR idiocy on top of it? Click the friggin link... see that I'm STILL telling you the truth... and then if you have an ounce of decency you can apologize to me and everyone else for this inexplicable bout with idiocy.

0 Replies

I can see little of objective substance in the dispute between Occam Bill & Snood. Clearly, from the repeated rebukes given on both sides there are strong feeling aroused here, however they seem to be disproportionate to the observable elements of the disagreement between them.

All of us consider many factors in reaching the opinions & judgemnents we express on these threads, often including only the most prominent ones, or those assumed most relevant to the discussion at hand in our posts. It is therefore a bit senseless to jump on another's expressions of opinion without first inquiring whether the point of friction was intended or merely omitted.

There was indeed a dramatic quality to Obama's win in Iowa, and, yes it is a first in American national politics. However, one must recognize that Obama's rapid ascent in the public mind has been quite visible since his speech at the last Democrat Convention. Moreover, everyone knows that, had he sought it, Colin Powell could easily have taken the Republican nomination in 2000, and very likely the Presidency. That a Black American may view all this a bit more skeptically than others is entirely in keeping with the human nature we all share. However, that doesn't make such skepticism a more accurate predictor of reality.

0 Replies

OCCOM BILL wrote:

Jim wrote:
Besides personality, what are the differences between Senators Clinton and Obama?

Are there any differences in their promises and platforms?
IMO, the platforms are essentially similar.

I guess I'm missing something here. If there is no discernable difference between their positions, then what is the argument about?

Let's say you went to the supermarket to buy a gallon of bleach. You found two different brands, with different fancy labels, but what is inside each bottle is exactly the same. Why would anyone get in an unpleasant argument with another shopper about which bottle to put in your cart? They're the same thing!

0 Replies

Butrflynet wrote:

while others just put their heads down and go to work to get the job done and don't really care who gets or takes credit for necks, fingers, foresight or hindsight as long as the goal is accomplished.quote]

THats what Ronald Reagan once said.

"Its amazing what can get done when noone is worried about who gets the credit"

0 Replies

Will Obama Give Hillary the VP Nod?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know