Obama '08?

I think they look pretty stupidly desperate, with some of the stuff they're "exposing" about Obama.

0 Replies

Snood, are we safe to presume that these journalists have no links whatever, and have not gained any tips whatever from the Hillary Clinton campaign people?

0 Replies

Obama has as much chance as I. Hillary slightly more. Who is really going to be the Dem nominee?

0 Replies

Wow, John Edwards is on A2K, who knew?! Great to meet you, stick around, you're doing great things with health care and global warming, keep it up!

0 Replies

0 Replies

Good one. The question remains, who will it be?

Dean is nutty,

Clark even more so,

Edwards is slimy and too cute,

Hillary is evidently insincere,

Obama has nothing but complexion and a leftist orientation, which will always do well in primaries and always fail generally,

Kerry blew it, and has more change his mind/ aloofness/ Francophile baggage than before.

So who else can win the nomination and then beat

Fred Thompson,

Giuliani,

the Morman guy,

or whomever else the Repubs nominate, WHO, you can be sure, will sound sincere, and like someone you would like to kick back with which is their secret after all.

0 Replies

You should note that Kerry dropped out and Dean and Clark aren't running.

So far Thompson isn't either.

0 Replies

paull wrote:

So who else can win the nomination and then beat

Fred Thompson,

Giuliani,

the Morman guy,

or whomever else the Repubs nominate, WHO, you can be sure, will sound sincere, and like someone you would like to kick back with

Yeah, because that "Mormon guy", flip-flopper Romney - now thats someone who sounds sincere and like someone you would like to kick back with.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Snood, are we safe to presume that these journalists have no links whatever, and have not gained any tips whatever from the Hillary Clinton campaign people?

I don't know what you're asking, but if you are trying to say "Do you think the negative stories currently being circulated about Obama have and merit?"

-no.

0 Replies

paull wrote:

Good one. The question remains, who will it be?

Dean is nutty,

Clark even more so,

Edwards is slimy and too cute,

Hillary is evidently insincere,

Obama has nothing but complexion and a leftist orientation, which will always do well in primaries and always fail generally,

Kerry blew it, and has more change his mind/ aloofness/ Francophile baggage than before.

So who else can win the nomination and then beat

Fred Thompson,

Giuliani,

the Morman guy,

or whomever else the Repubs nominate, WHO, you can be sure, will sound sincere, and like someone you would like to kick back with which is their secret after all.

What does "Nothing but complexion..." mean?

0 Replies

They're just flinging as much mud as they can to see if any of it sticks, Snood. So far, batting 0.

0 Replies

Quote:

What does "Nothing but complexion..." mean?

It means that if he were pink skinned, or what we call white, he wouldn't get the time of day.

As if you didn't know.

0 Replies

I have to say, on further review that Edwards is the most appealing candidate at this point. He is a trial lawyer, but at least that is a job, and his wife's problems he has certainly taken to heart, and to the public, well. So far, of course, no one knows what he thinks about anything, but he couches that way better than Hillary.

Quote:

You should note that Kerry dropped out and Dean and Clark aren't running.

I missed the news that Kerry bowed out, but I believe it. I am sure the last episode was quite a bother to that older woman to whom he is hitched. The others only need a small shove to make our imagined adulation match their egos.

0 Replies

paull wrote:

Quote:
What does "Nothing but complexion..." mean?

It means that if he were pink skinned, or what we call white, he wouldn't get the time of day.

As if you didn't know.

Huh? Did he draw the winning number in the "be the artificially interesting black candidate lottery"? Laughing

Please try to support that nonsense (this may be amusing).

0 Replies

paull wrote:

Quote:
What does "Nothing but complexion..." mean?

It means that if he were pink skinned, or what we call white, he wouldn't get the time of day.

As if you didn't know.

I agree that his being black makes him more of an attraction to the national media. But his being black isn't why he got the votes he did in his US senate race, or in his state senate race. "Nothing but complexion" is too dismissive of this man, IMO. If black and "left-leaning" is all he was, he wouldn't attract the very astute, who pay attention to what's said - like O'Bill and Sozobe.

0 Replies

I guess then, that we will have to wait until Obama becomes an un-, or non- contender, which will happen. At that point any of you can call me correct, and that adulation will be received in the spirit is was given.

Quote:

Huh? Did he draw the winning number in the "be the artificially interesting black candidate lottery"? Laughing Please try to support that nonsense (this may be amusing).

Short time single term US senators with average accomplishment in their position, as Obama has, have NEVER gotten the respect that he has. I give him credit for his time in the Illinois legistature, though who knows what would have happened if his constituants knew that he really wasn't an "African American". Kennedy had two terms in the bank, and his fathers's clout beside, and he barely won, fairly or not.

Barack Obama is advantaged by the media and a loving left. Nothing wrong with that. But it won't play long term, nor in the big stage.

I hope you find this amusing Bill, as it seems to be your only pastime.

0 Replies

snood wrote:

okie wrote:
Snood, are we safe to presume that these journalists have no links whatever, and have not gained any tips whatever from the Hillary Clinton campaign people?

I don't know what you're asking, but if you are trying to say "Do you think the negative stories currently being circulated about Obama have and merit?"

-no.

To be honest, I haven't been interested enough to study them much, but I am aware of them. All I am asking is - do you think Hillary's campaign has absolutely nothing to do with feeding little tips to their friends in the press, concerning these little negative hits on Obama every week or two or three? The information sort of dribbles out on a regular basis, and if her numbers begin to suffer, they become a bit more severe, and if her numbers look good, they lighten up a bit.

Obama's best hope is to be vice presidential candidate on Hillary's ticket, and he had better toe the line, snood. We all know Hill has a temper, and she runs the show.

By the way, I think Edwards ought to hang it up, its over for him, and he needs to tend his wife and family. Perhaps he is looking for a sympathy vote, but I don't think it will fly. The more people get to know Edwards, the more his numbers will suffer, and they aint lookin that hot now.

As a side note, I look forward to hearing the tape on talk shows each day of Hillary doing her black impersonation from her appearance in Selma. It is absolutely priceless.

0 Replies

paull wrote:

I have to say, on further review that Edwards is the most appealing candidate at this point. [..] So far, of course, no one knows what he thinks about anything, but he couches that way better than Hillary.

If you dont know what Edwards "thinks about anything", you must not have read a single newspaper article about the man since 2004. Of the three main contenders, he's the one who's been taking the clearest and most strident stands. He's definitely got the most progressive/liberal/leftwing platform of them. Which is why I like him.

0 Replies

paull wrote:

I guess then, that we will have to wait until Obama becomes an un-, or non- contender, which will happen. At that point any of you can call me correct, and that adulation will be received in the spirit is was given.

Quote:
Huh? Did he draw the winning number in the "be the artificially interesting black candidate lottery"? Laughing Please try to support that nonsense (this may be amusing).

Short time single term US senators with average accomplishment in their position, as Obama has, have NEVER gotten the respect that he has. I give him credit for his time in the Illinois legistature, though who knows what would have happened if his constituants knew that he really wasn't an "African American". Kennedy had two terms in the bank, and his fathers's clout beside, and he barely won, fairly or not.

Barack Obama is advantaged by the media and a loving left. Nothing wrong with that. But it won't play long term, nor in the big stage.

I hope you find this amusing Bill, as it seems to be your only pastime.

Kennedy had better speech writers than Obama, but he couldn't have held a candle to him in delivery. Mountains would slide aside if Obama delivered a speech as well written as Kennedy's inaugural address.

That you were until recently ignorant of Obama's heritage; is no reason to assume the constituency of Illinois shared your ignorance. His popularity there seems almost unprecedented anywhere and hasn't faltered. Were this rapid rise on account of the color of his skin; why not the better known Sharpton or Jackson? The FACT is; you are talking out of your A$$ and providing not one shred of evidence to back your claim... which is no surprise because no such evidence exists.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

Of the three main contenders, he's the one who's been taking the clearest and most strident stands. He's definitely got the most progressive/liberal/leftwing platform of them. Which is why I like him.

I like him for the other half -- because he takes the clearest and most strident stands.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know