|
Hillay bites the dust
HK wrote:
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:21:07 -0500, HK wrote: Oh, and despite what the pundits say, I believe Clinton and Obama will be well-served by fighting for the nomination to the very end. Democrats will be happy with either candidate. My friend, you are in a serious state of denial. Hispanics are abandoning Hillary because she fired what's her face who was a Hispanic. And they ain't going to Obama. Yeah, right. They're going to flock to the Republicans who want to round them up and deport them. Sure...that's the ticket. Didn't you see McCain slapping backs with the other Senators last summer when they told the public about the amnesty bill? McCain is on the side of the illegal alien not legally allowed to vote crowd regardless of their ethnic or cultural origins. |
Hillay bites the dust
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:37:32 -0500, BAR wrote:
HK wrote: BAR wrote: HK wrote: Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: ----- Original Message ----- From: "HK" Newsgroups: rec.boats Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:03 AM Subject: Hillay bites the dust Yet another reason why I prefer *closed* primaries and secret ballot voting, as opposed to open primaries, which encourage crossovers, and caucuses, which encourage group vote, not secret ballot vote. Yet, you are a fan of "brokered" conventions? Eisboch I like the rough and tumble of tight primary races and conventions in which delegates make a difference, and have to vote many times in order to select a delegate. A good convention is like a microcosm of the House of Representatives, with the delegates elected by the people back home working for consensus. It's not the same animal as a caucus. Today's conventions are just too antiseptic for my taste. That's all fine, good and healthy if it weren't for the "Super Delegates" who don't necessarily have the backing of the people back home. That's where the "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" deals are made. Eisboch The super delegates as a group will support the will of the voters and their delegates. If Hillary doesn't do very well in Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, it is all over for her. What is the original purpose of the super delegates. Why do they exist? What problem(s) do they solve to justify their existence? For the Democrat party, which wants to be called the Democratic party, to use super delegates to select their nominee to the Presidency is laughable due to it not being a democratic process. Read a book, d.f., and become enlightened. I really do not understand why an educated man such as yourself Harry puts up with this den of idiocy and stupidity? Wouldn't it suite your stature and place to go to group more worthy of your intellect, intelligence and general presence? I will assume that since you will not answer the question about super delegates it is due to the fact that the DNC wants to make sure that the leadership of the party controls the nominating process. Great way to get the nominee to accede to the will of the party leadership rather than the will of the people. Democratic Party? You have got to be kidding. There is the matter of 'cojones'. -- John H |
Hillay bites the dust
BAR wrote:
HK wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:21:07 -0500, HK wrote: Oh, and despite what the pundits say, I believe Clinton and Obama will be well-served by fighting for the nomination to the very end. Democrats will be happy with either candidate. My friend, you are in a serious state of denial. Hispanics are abandoning Hillary because she fired what's her face who was a Hispanic. And they ain't going to Obama. Yeah, right. They're going to flock to the Republicans who want to round them up and deport them. Sure...that's the ticket. Didn't you see McCain slapping backs with the other Senators last summer when they told the public about the amnesty bill? McCain is on the side of the illegal alien not legally allowed to vote crowd regardless of their ethnic or cultural origins. McCain is not the Republican Party, and will not support his proposal. |
Hillay bites the dust
BAR wrote:
HK wrote: wrote: On Feb 13, 11:08 am, HK wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:21:07 -0500, HK wrote: Oh, and despite what the pundits say, I believe Clinton and Obama will be well-served by fighting for the nomination to the very end. Democrats will be happy with either candidate. My friend, you are in a serious state of denial. Hispanics are abandoning Hillary because she fired what's her face who was a Hispanic. And they ain't going to Obama. Yeah, right. They're going to flock to the Republicans who want to round them up and deport them. Sure...that's the ticket. The big question on all the news shows to undecideds is "what exactly has Obama done?". There are still no answers except that he is motivational, Black, and hopeful... Not one accomplishment could even be noted by his strongest supporters... I suspect his C.V. will stand up to yours. And what accomplishments does his C.V. contain that leads you to think he will make a good executive? This past weekend I saw part of an interview with Obama where the interviewer asked what have your run since you ran the Harvard Law review 20 years ago? Consider this: you aren't qualified to take out the trash at the Harvard Law Review. |
Hillay bites the dust
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 08:32:29 -0800, justwaitafrekinminute wrote:
The big question on all the news shows to undecideds is "what exactly has Obama done?". There are still no answers except that he is motivational, Black, and hopeful... Not one accomplishment could even be noted by his strongest supporters... That says a lot about news shows, undecideds, etc. It doesn't say anything about Obama, does it? Besides being "motivational, Black, and hopeful", he's devoted his life to community service. There are several biographies online, perhaps you should read one. For a young man, his life seems filled with accomplishments, not the least of which, being the Democratic front runner in the race for POTUS. |
Hillay bites the dust
HK wrote:
BAR wrote: HK wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:21:07 -0500, HK wrote: Oh, and despite what the pundits say, I believe Clinton and Obama will be well-served by fighting for the nomination to the very end. Democrats will be happy with either candidate. My friend, you are in a serious state of denial. Hispanics are abandoning Hillary because she fired what's her face who was a Hispanic. And they ain't going to Obama. Yeah, right. They're going to flock to the Republicans who want to round them up and deport them. Sure...that's the ticket. Didn't you see McCain slapping backs with the other Senators last summer when they told the public about the amnesty bill? McCain is on the side of the illegal alien not legally allowed to vote crowd regardless of their ethnic or cultural origins. McCain is not the Republican Party, and will not support his proposal. As soon as he secures enough delegates to get the Republican Party's nomination he becomes the Republican Party. |
Hillay bites the dust
HK wrote:
BAR wrote: HK wrote: wrote: On Feb 13, 11:08 am, HK wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:21:07 -0500, HK wrote: Oh, and despite what the pundits say, I believe Clinton and Obama will be well-served by fighting for the nomination to the very end. Democrats will be happy with either candidate. My friend, you are in a serious state of denial. Hispanics are abandoning Hillary because she fired what's her face who was a Hispanic. And they ain't going to Obama. Yeah, right. They're going to flock to the Republicans who want to round them up and deport them. Sure...that's the ticket. The big question on all the news shows to undecideds is "what exactly has Obama done?". There are still no answers except that he is motivational, Black, and hopeful... Not one accomplishment could even be noted by his strongest supporters... I suspect his C.V. will stand up to yours. And what accomplishments does his C.V. contain that leads you to think he will make a good executive? This past weekend I saw part of an interview with Obama where the interviewer asked what have your run since you ran the Harvard Law review 20 years ago? Consider this: you aren't qualified to take out the trash at the Harvard Law Review. Again, you provide no facts to support your arguments. |
Hillay bites the dust
|
Hillay bites the dust
On Feb 13, 4:13�am, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here
wrote: That loud sucking sound heard in Potomic area was Hillary losing 3 more primaries. It looks like the only way Hillary will win the primary is if Billary can steal this away with super delegates and some rule changes. Not so fast. The Democrats don't really "lose" primaries. Because the delegates are apportioned, there is a lot of value to be gleaned by coming in a close second in a lot of contests, and a candidate can be nominated by finishing close in a lot of the small states and winning outright in just a few of the larger ones (like CA, TX, etc). One of the talking heads on the news last night used a computer model to forecast a deadlocked D convention. He noted that if Obama won every remaining state with the same margin he has averaged so far in the primaries he would *still* be short of the nomination. And the same is true for Hillary. Unless something dramatic happens, (Headline: Barack Obama indicted as a 9-11 conspirator), the Deomcrats risk wasting all of the fresh energy and enthusiasm the primary campaigns have generated. If it gets down to the "super-delegates" retiring to a smoke-filled room to make side deals and make the only meaningful decision regarding the nominee, the resulting public cynicism will be very ugly indeed. |
Hillay bites the dust
Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 13, 4:13�am, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote: That loud sucking sound heard in Potomic area was Hillary losing 3 more primaries. It looks like the only way Hillary will win the primary is if Billary can steal this away with super delegates and some rule changes. Not so fast. It appears you agree with my statement. If she gets the majority of the vote via Super Delegates or changing the rules concerning Fl and Mich. it will be a major upset for the new energized Dem. voters. As much as many people are upset with the Republicans, they have stronger feelings against Hillary. The Dems may not vote for a Rep., but many will sit at home. Obama is the Dem's one chance to win in Nov. The Democrats don't really "lose" primaries. Because the delegates are apportioned, there is a lot of value to be gleaned by coming in a close second in a lot of contests, and a candidate can be nominated by finishing close in a lot of the small states and winning outright in just a few of the larger ones (like CA, TX, etc). One of the talking heads on the news last night used a computer model to forecast a deadlocked D convention. He noted that if Obama won every remaining state with the same margin he has averaged so far in the primaries he would *still* be short of the nomination. And the same is true for Hillary. Unless something dramatic happens, (Headline: Barack Obama indicted as a 9-11 conspirator), the Deomcrats risk wasting all of the fresh energy and enthusiasm the primary campaigns have generated. If it gets down to the "super-delegates" retiring to a smoke-filled room to make side deals and make the only meaningful decision regarding the nominee, the resulting public cynicism will be very ugly indeed. |
Hillay bites the dust
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:07:05 -0500, BAR wrote:
That says a lot about news shows, undecideds, etc. It doesn't say anything about Obama, does it? Besides being "motivational, Black, and hopeful", he's devoted his life to community service. There are several biographies online, perhaps you should read one. For a young man, his life seems filled with accomplishments, not the least of which, being the Democratic front runner in the race for POTUS. Doesn't mean he has what it takes to run a country. The same goes for Hillary and McCain. Last time I looked, one of those three, will be the next President. On an experience scale, they all seem to be about average or above, of the candidates we've had in the recent past. |
Hillay bites the dust
On Feb 13, 10:37*am, Tim wrote:
wrote: On Feb 13, 7:13?am, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote: That loud sucking sound heard in Potomic area was Hillary losing 3 more primaries. It looks like the only way Hillary will win the primary is if Billary can steal this away with super delegates and some rule changes. Nah, as far as delegates, she's really not that far behind. The media spin, however makes it look like Obama is just running away with the nomination. yeah, "Sweeping" and "Landslide" victories, etc... Here's the sco http://www.ndtv.com/convergence/ndtv...011:11:00%20AM This part: The Associated Press count of delegates showed Obama with 1,210. Clinton had 1,188, falling behind for the first time since the campaign began. Neither was close to the 2,025 needed to win the nomination at the party's national convention this summer in Denver. |
Hillay bites the dust
On Feb 13, 10:23*am, HK wrote:
BAR wrote: HK wrote: Eisboch wrote: "HK" wrote in message ... Eisboch wrote: ----- Original Message ----- From: "HK" Newsgroups: rec.boats Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 9:03 AM Subject: Hillay bites the dust Yet another reason why I prefer *closed* primaries and secret ballot voting, as opposed to open primaries, which encourage crossovers, and caucuses, which encourage group vote, not secret ballot vote. Yet, you are a fan of "brokered" conventions? Eisboch I like the rough and tumble of tight primary races and conventions in which delegates make a difference, and have to vote many times in order to select a delegate. A good convention is like a microcosm of the House of Representatives, with the delegates elected by the people back home working for consensus. It's not the same animal as a caucus. Today's conventions are just too antiseptic for my taste. That's all fine, good and healthy if it weren't for the "Super Delegates" who don't necessarily have the backing of the people back home. * That's where the *"you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours" deals are made. Eisboch The super delegates as a group will support the will of the voters and their delegates. If Hillary doesn't do very well in Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, it is all over for her. What is the original purpose of the super delegates. Why do they exist? What problem(s) do they solve to justify their existence? For the Democrat party, which wants to be called the Democratic party, to use super delegates to select their nominee to the Presidency is laughable due to it not being a democratic process. Read a book, d.f., and become enlightened.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - You don't read, you watch movies and Drew Carey reruns. |
Hillay bites the dust
On Feb 13, 9:45*am, BAR wrote:
wrote: On Feb 13, 7:13 am, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote: That loud sucking sound heard in Potomic area was Hillary losing 3 more primaries. It looks like the only way Hillary will win the primary is if Billary can steal this away with super delegates and some rule changes. Nah, as far as delegates, she's really not that far behind. The media spin, however makes it look like Obama is just running away with the nomination. She has lost 6 or 8 in a row. It is hard to get contributions when you are on a big loosing streak. The Associated Press count of delegates showed Obama with 1,210. Clinton had 1,188, falling behind for the first time since the campaign began. Neither was close to the 2,025 needed to win the nomination at the party's national convention this summer in Denver. |
Hillay bites the dust
"HK" wrote in message ... wrote: On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 10:26:17 -0500, Reginald P. Smithers III wrote: They were started because of the 68 Convention, and because every time they had a brokered convention, they hurt themselves so badly, they lost the general election. The Republican's use a winner take all delegate program in many states so it won't go to a broker convention. Since this follows the general election, I think it makes more sense than Super Delegats who can overide the entire primary system. With all this talk of the Democrat's Super Delegates, it's interesting to note, the Republicans will have the same percentage of *unpledged* delegates at their convention. Although, in the case of Republicans, it's dependent on the way the states designate their delegates. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/hor...republica.html My guess is that the "Super Delegate" buzz is just something the media is using to try to build up more interest (and ratings) in political coverage. How lucky the super delegates are. They can vote as they please without worrying about the will of the people or being accused of accepting bribes or of influence peddling, or making deals under the table. Pure and simply the best way to represent the people. At least that is the way Harry looks at it. |
Hillay bites the dust
"HK" wrote in message ... Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:21:07 -0500, HK wrote: Oh, and despite what the pundits say, I believe Clinton and Obama will be well-served by fighting for the nomination to the very end. Democrats will be happy with either candidate. My friend, you are in a serious state of denial. Hispanics are abandoning Hillary because she fired what's her face who was a Hispanic. And they ain't going to Obama. Yeah, right. They're going to flock to the Republicans who want to round them up and deport them. Sure...that's the ticket. Nobody is looking to round up any immigrants that are legal. I sure wouldn't want to be standing downwind of you, Harry. |
Hillay bites the dust
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message . .. HK wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:21:07 -0500, HK wrote: Oh, and despite what the pundits say, I believe Clinton and Obama will be well-served by fighting for the nomination to the very end. Democrats will be happy with either candidate. My friend, you are in a serious state of denial. Hispanics are abandoning Hillary because she fired what's her face who was a Hispanic. And they ain't going to Obama. Yeah, right. They're going to flock to the Republicans who want to round them up and deport them. Sure...that's the ticket. Harry, The ones voting are not concerned about deporting, and McCain policy on immigration is very similar to the Dem's policy on immigration. You really do need to start thinking before you post. Thinking is not his strong suit. Might be due to Harry's role as the piñata all these years. |
Hillay bites the dust
|
Hillay bites the dust
BAR wrote:
wrote: On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 12:07:05 -0500, BAR wrote: That says a lot about news shows, undecideds, etc. It doesn't say anything about Obama, does it? Besides being "motivational, Black, and hopeful", he's devoted his life to community service. There are several biographies online, perhaps you should read one. For a young man, his life seems filled with accomplishments, not the least of which, being the Democratic front runner in the race for POTUS. Doesn't mean he has what it takes to run a country. The same goes for Hillary and McCain. Last time I looked, one of those three, will be the next President. On an experience scale, they all seem to be about average or above, of the candidates we've had in the recent past. I have a feeling something is going to happen at the Republican National Convention. What, are they going to declare defeat and go home? Draft Bob Barr? Have Ron Paul give the keynote address? Come out of the closet? |
Hillay bites the dust
On Feb 13, 1:33*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 06:17:15 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Feb 13, 7:13*am, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote: That loud sucking sound heard in Potomic area was Hillary losing 3 more primaries. It looks like the only way Hillary will win the primary is if Billary can steal this away with super delegates and some rule changes. Nah, as far as delegates, she's really not that far behind. The media spin, however makes it look like Obama is just running away with the nomination. Perhaps because he is passing her at warp speed. Look where things were a month ago. It's not really attributable to spin no matter how much you might wish it was. Hillary's in the breakdown lane and Barack's in the passing lane. At the instant when a car going 100 mph passes a car going 30, do you interpret them to be doing about the same thing as each other? The statement that I was replying to was this: It looks like the only way Hillary will win the primary is if Billary can steal this away with super delegates and some rule changes They aren't far apart. So let's use your analogy, shall we? What happens if the car going 100 mph slows to a crawl, and the car doing 30 speeds up considerably long before the end of the race? See, pretty simple! |
Hillay bites the dust
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 13:18:50 -0500, "Jim" wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote in message ... HK wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:21:07 -0500, HK wrote: Oh, and despite what the pundits say, I believe Clinton and Obama will be well-served by fighting for the nomination to the very end. Democrats will be happy with either candidate. My friend, you are in a serious state of denial. Hispanics are abandoning Hillary because she fired what's her face who was a Hispanic. And they ain't going to Obama. Yeah, right. They're going to flock to the Republicans who want to round them up and deport them. Sure...that's the ticket. Harry, The ones voting are not concerned about deporting, and McCain policy on immigration is very similar to the Dem's policy on immigration. You really do need to start thinking before you post. Thinking is not his strong suit. Might be due to Harry's role as the piñata all these years. LOL! -- John H |
Hillay bites the dust
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:37:46 -0500, "John" wrote:
John, we're glad to see you can copy and paste emails you've received. -- John H |
Hillay bites the dust
John wrote:
wrote in message ... On Feb 13, 11:08 am, HK wrote: Short Wave Sportfishing wrote: On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:21:07 -0500, HK wrote: Oh, and despite what the pundits say, I believe Clinton and Obama will be well-served by fighting for the nomination to the very end. Democrats will be happy with either candidate. My friend, you are in a serious state of denial. Hispanics are abandoning Hillary because she fired what's her face who was a Hispanic. And they ain't going to Obama. Yeah, right. They're going to flock to the Republicans who want to round them up and deport them. Sure...that's the ticket. The big question on all the news shows to undecideds is "what exactly has Obama done?". There are still no answers except that he is motivational, Black, and hopeful... Not one accomplishment could even be noted by his strongest supporters... George W. Bush Resume Past work experience: a.. Ran for congress and lost. b.. Produced a Hollywood slasher B movie. c.. Bought an oil company, but couldn't find any oil in Texas, company went bankrupt shortly after I sold all my stock. d.. Bought the Texas Rangers baseball team in a sweetheart deal that took land using tax-payer money. Biggest move: Traded Sammy Sosa to the Chicago White Sox. e.. With fathers help (and his name) was elected Governor of Texas. Accomplishments: Changed pollution laws for power and oil companies and made Texas the most polluted state in the Union. Replaced Los Angeles with Houston as the most smog ridden city in America. Cut taxes and bankrupted the Texas government to the tune of billions in borrowed money. Set record for most executions by any Governor in American history. f.. Became president after losing the popular vote by over 500,000 votes, with the help of my fathers appointments to the Supreme Court. Accomplishments as president: a.. Attacked and took over two countries. b.. Spent the surplus and bankrupted the treasury. c.. Shattered record for biggest annual deficit in history. d.. Set economic record for most private bankruptcies filed in any 12 month period. e.. Set all-time record for biggest drop in the history of the stock market. f.. First president in decades to execute a federal prisoner. g.. First president in US history to enter office with a criminal record. h.. First year in office set the all-time record for most days on vacation by any president in US history. i.. After taking the entire month of August off for vacation, presided over the worst security failure in US history. j.. Set the record for most campaign fund-raising trips than any other president in US history. k.. In my first two years in office over 2 million Americans lost their job. l.. Cut unemployment benefits for more out of work Americans than any president in US history. m.. Set the all-time record for most foreclosures in a 12 month period. n.. Appointed more convicted criminals to administration positions than any president in US history. o.. Set the record for the least amount of press conferences than any president since the advent of television. p.. Signed more laws and executive orders circumventing the Constitution than any president in US history. q.. Presided over the biggest energy crises in US history and refused to intervene when corruption was revealed. r.. Presided over the highest gasoline prices in US history and refused to use the national reserves as past presidents have. s.. Cut healthcare benefits for war veterans. t.. Set the all-time record for most people worldwide to simultaneously take to the streets to protest me (15 million people), shattering the record for protest against any person in the history of mankind. (http://www.hyperreal.org/~dana/marches/) u.. Dissolved more international treaties than any president in US history. v.. My presidency is the most secretive and un-accountable of any in US history. w.. Members of my cabinet are the richest of any administration in US history. (the 'poorest' multi-millionaire, Condoleezza Rice has an Chevron oil tanker named after her). x.. Had more states to simultaneously go bankrupt than any president in the history of the United States. y.. Presided over the biggest corporate stock market fraud of any market in any country in the history of the world. z.. Created the largest government department bureaucracy in the history of the United States. aa.. Set the all-time record for biggest annual budget spending increases, more than any president in US history. ab.. First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the human rights commission. ac.. First president in US history to have the United Nations remove the US from the elections monitoring board. ad.. Removed more checks and balances, and have the least amount of congressional oversight than any presidential administration in US history. ae.. Rendered the entire United Nations irrelevant. af.. Withdrew from the World Court of Law. ag.. Refused to allow inspectors access to US prisoners of war and by default no longer abide by the Geneva Conventions. ah.. First president in US history to refuse United Nations election inspectors (during the 2002 US elections). ai.. All-time US (and world) record holder for most corporate campaign donations. aj.. My biggest life-time campaign contributor presided over one of the largest corporate bankruptcy frauds in world history (Kenneth Lay, former CEO of Enron Corporation). ak.. Spent more money on polls and focus groups than any president in US history. al.. First president in US history to unilaterally attack a sovereign nation against the will of the United Nations and the world community. am.. First president to run and hide when the US came under attack (and then lied saying the enemy had the code to Air Force 1) an.. First US president to establish a secret shadow government. ao.. Took the biggest world sympathy for the US after 911, and in less than a year made the US the most resented country in the world (possibly the biggest diplomatic failure in US and world history). ap.. With a policy of 'dis-engagement' created the most hostile Israeli-Palestine relations in at least 30 years. aq.. Fist US president in history to have a majority of the people of Europe (71%) view my presidency as the biggest threat to world peace and stability. ar.. First US president in history to have the people of South Korea more threatened by the US than their immediate neighbor, North Korea. as.. Changed US policy to allow convicted criminals to be awarded government contracts. at.. Set all-time record for number of administration appointees who violated US law by not selling huge investments in corporations bidding for government contracts. au.. Failed to fulfill my pledge to get Osama Bin Laden 'dead or alive'. av.. Failed to capture the anthrax killer who tried to murder the leaders of our country at the United States Capitol building. After 18 months I have no leads and zero suspects. aw.. In the 18 months following the 911 attacks I have successfully prevented any public investigation into the biggest security failure in the history of the United States. ax.. Removed more freedoms and civil liberties for Americans than any other president in US history. ay.. In a little over two years created the most divided country in decades, possibly the most divided the US has ever been since the civil war. az.. Entered office with the strongest economy in US history and in less than two years turned every single economic category heading straight down. Records and References: a.. At least one conviction for drunk driving in Maine (Texas driving record has been erased and is not available). b.. AWOL from National Guard and Deserted the military during a time of war. c.. Refuse to take drug test or even answer any questions about drug use. d.. All records of my tenure as governor of Texas have been spirited away to my fathers library, sealed in secrecy and un-available for public view. e.. All records of any SEC investigations into my insider trading or bankrupt companies are sealed in secrecy and un-available for public view. f.. All minutes of meetings for any public corporation I served on the board are sealed in secrecy and un-available for public view. g.. Any records or minutes from meetings I (or my VP) attended regarding public energy policy are sealed in secrecy and un-available for public review. h.. For personal references please speak to my daddy or uncle James Baker (They can be reached at their offices of the Carlyle Group for war-profiteering.) The popular vote is meaningless, check Dougie's copy of the constitution. |
Hillay bites the dust
On Feb 13, 3:02*pm, wrote:
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 11:57:41 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Feb 13, 1:33*pm, wrote: On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 06:17:15 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Feb 13, 7:13*am, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote: That loud sucking sound heard in Potomic area was Hillary losing 3 more primaries. It looks like the only way Hillary will win the primary is if Billary can steal this away with super delegates and some rule changes. Nah, as far as delegates, she's really not that far behind. The media spin, however makes it look like Obama is just running away with the nomination. Perhaps because he is passing her at warp speed. Look where things were a month ago. It's not really attributable to spin no matter how much you might wish it was. Hillary's in the breakdown lane and Barack's in the passing lane. At the instant when a car going 100 mph passes a car going 30, do you interpret them to be doing about the same thing as each other? The statement that I was replying to was this: It looks like the only way Hillary will win the primary is if Billary can steal this away with super delegates and some rule changes They aren't far apart. So let's use your analogy, shall we? What happens if the car going 100 mph slows to a crawl, and the car doing 30 speeds up considerably long before the end of the race? See, pretty simple! It's so simple you have failed to understand the concept completely.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - No....... You've failed. using your analogy, tell me what would happen in my scenario. |
Hillay bites the dust
On Feb 13, 3:37*pm, "John" wrote:
wrote in message The big question on all the news shows to undecideds is "what exactly has Obama done?". There are still no answers except that he is motivational, Black, and hopeful... Not one accomplishment could even be noted by his strongest supporters... OK, let's try again... |
Hillay bites the dust
On Feb 13, 6:05*pm, "JimH" wrote:
wrote in message ... On Feb 13, 3:37 pm, "John" wrote: wrote in message The big question on all the news shows to undecideds is "what exactly has Obama done?". There are still no answers except that he is motivational, Black, and hopeful... Not one accomplishment could even be noted by his strongest supporters... OK, let's try again... =========== Pick me.....pick me........ 1. *He promised to raise our taxes. 2. *He promised to increase the size of government. 3. *He promised to increase entitlement programs. 4. *He looks good in a suit. 5. *He has a good tailor. 6. *He is eloquent. 7. *He is black. 8. *He is charismatic. 9. *He is young. 10.He has 2 years as a Senator. Impressive.........eh? Is that all it takes to become our next POTUS? Very good Johnny, anyone else?? I have seen the question posed to several strong democratic voices, and they can not seem to come up with anything more than that. |
Hillay bites the dust
"JimH" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Feb 13, 3:37 pm, "John" wrote: wrote in message The big question on all the news shows to undecideds is "what exactly has Obama done?". There are still no answers except that he is motivational, Black, and hopeful... Not one accomplishment could even be noted by his strongest supporters... OK, let's try again... =========== Pick me.....pick me........ 1. He promised to raise our taxes. 2. He promised to increase the size of government. 3. He promised to increase entitlement programs. 4. He looks good in a suit. 5. He has a good tailor. 6. He is eloquent. 7. He is black. 8. He is charismatic. 9. He is young. 10.He has 2 years as a Senator. Impressive.........eh? Is that all it takes to become our next POTUS? The one thing in which I think Obama will be of great benefit is the rebuilding of the USA's reputation and image globally. IMO, that is a more important short term goal than addressing domestic issues right now. The USA is heavily dependent on the global economy and relationships with other countries. If the trust and image of the USA is not restored, none of the domestic issues matter because we can't afford to fix them anyway. Towards that end, he's articulate, polished and smart. I think he will command immediate respect in the rest of the world because he's at least willing to listen. Unfortunately, McCain would not. Eisboch |
Hillay bites the dust
JimH wrote:
wrote in message ... On Feb 13, 3:37 pm, "John" wrote: wrote in message The big question on all the news shows to undecideds is "what exactly has Obama done?". There are still no answers except that he is motivational, Black, and hopeful... Not one accomplishment could even be noted by his strongest supporters... OK, let's try again... =========== Pick me.....pick me........ 1. He promised to raise our taxes. 2. He promised to increase the size of government. 3. He promised to increase entitlement programs. 4. He looks good in a suit. 5. He has a good tailor. 6. He is eloquent. 7. He is black. 8. He is charismatic. 9. He is young. 10.He has 2 years as a Senator. Impressive.........eh? Is that all it takes to become our next POTUS? Hey, our current POTUS is a failed businessman with an arrest record. |
Hillay bites the dust
|
Hillay bites the dust
John wrote:
"John H." wrote in message ... On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:37:46 -0500, "John" wrote: John, we're glad to see you can copy and paste emails you've received. -- John H I'm glad you appreciate it, but of course you miss the point. Where Obama maybe an unknown - Bush's track recorded was abysmal, but the American people were stupid enough to elect him - TWICE! In spite of starting a war based on lies and running up the national debt to point where China has us by the gonads..... We've been through this "based upon lies" business quite a few times. If you are going to make that assertion you accepting that Clinton lied about Iraq and WMD's too. Do you want to smear the Clinton with the same brush? |
Hillay bites the dust
"HK" wrote in message ... JimH wrote: wrote in message ... On Feb 13, 3:37 pm, "John" wrote: wrote in message The big question on all the news shows to undecideds is "what exactly has Obama done?". There are still no answers except that he is motivational, Black, and hopeful... Not one accomplishment could even be noted by his strongest supporters... OK, let's try again... =========== Pick me.....pick me........ 1. He promised to raise our taxes. 2. He promised to increase the size of government. 3. He promised to increase entitlement programs. 4. He looks good in a suit. 5. He has a good tailor. 6. He is eloquent. 7. He is black. 8. He is charismatic. 9. He is young. 10.He has 2 years as a Senator. Impressive.........eh? Is that all it takes to become our next POTUS? Hey, our current POTUS is a failed businessman with an arrest record. Careful about slamming presidents. Bill Clinton wasn't exactly a paragon of virtue, integrity, nor truthfulness. Now that I think about it, maybe Bush 43 learned at all from his predecessor..... |
Hillay bites the dust
HK wrote:
JimH wrote: wrote in message ... On Feb 13, 3:37 pm, "John" wrote: wrote in message The big question on all the news shows to undecideds is "what exactly has Obama done?". There are still no answers except that he is motivational, Black, and hopeful... Not one accomplishment could even be noted by his strongest supporters... OK, let's try again... =========== Pick me.....pick me........ 1. He promised to raise our taxes. 2. He promised to increase the size of government. 3. He promised to increase entitlement programs. 4. He looks good in a suit. 5. He has a good tailor. 6. He is eloquent. 7. He is black. 8. He is charismatic. 9. He is young. 10.He has 2 years as a Senator. Impressive.........eh? Is that all it takes to become our next POTUS? Hey, our current POTUS is a failed businessman with an arrest record. Our previous POTUS was a failed laywer, misogynist and an accused rapist and a federally acknowledge liar. |
Hillay bites the dust
"JimH" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Feb 13, 3:37 pm, "John" wrote: wrote in message The big question on all the news shows to undecideds is "what exactly has Obama done?". There are still no answers except that he is motivational, Black, and hopeful... Not one accomplishment could even be noted by his strongest supporters... OK, let's try again... =========== Pick me.....pick me........ 1. He promised to raise our taxes. 2. He promised to increase the size of government. 3. He promised to increase entitlement programs. 4. He looks good in a suit. 5. He has a good tailor. 6. He is eloquent. 7. He is black. 8. He is charismatic. 9. He is young. 10.He has 2 years as a Senator. Impressive.........eh? Is that all it takes to become our next POTUS? You're forgetting...he has Oprah in his corner. |
Hillay bites the dust
John wrote:
"BAR" wrote in message . .. John wrote: "John H." wrote in message ... On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:37:46 -0500, "John" wrote: John, we're glad to see you can copy and paste emails you've received. -- John H I'm glad you appreciate it, but of course you miss the point. Where Obama maybe an unknown - Bush's track recorded was abysmal, but the American people were stupid enough to elect him - TWICE! In spite of starting a war based on lies and running up the national debt to point where China has us by the gonads..... We've been through this "based upon lies" business quite a few times. If you are going to make that assertion you accepting that Clinton lied about Iraq and WMD's too. Do you want to smear the Clinton with the same brush? Minor distinction - Clinton may have believed that Saddam was trying to get more WMD's - but he was not going to do anything without proof. AS ANY rational human should do. Bush on the other hand, wanted to invade Iraq so bad, that he FABRICATED proof. Sorry if you are too stupid to understand the difference..... Very few Bush supporters understand that difference. |
Hillay bites the dust
HK wrote:
John wrote: "BAR" wrote in message . .. John wrote: "John H." wrote in message ... On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 15:37:46 -0500, "John" wrote: John, we're glad to see you can copy and paste emails you've received. -- John H I'm glad you appreciate it, but of course you miss the point. Where Obama maybe an unknown - Bush's track recorded was abysmal, but the American people were stupid enough to elect him - TWICE! In spite of starting a war based on lies and running up the national debt to point where China has us by the gonads..... We've been through this "based upon lies" business quite a few times. If you are going to make that assertion you accepting that Clinton lied about Iraq and WMD's too. Do you want to smear the Clinton with the same brush? Minor distinction - Clinton may have believed that Saddam was trying to get more WMD's - but he was not going to do anything without proof. AS ANY rational human should do. Bush on the other hand, wanted to invade Iraq so bad, that he FABRICATED proof. Sorry if you are too stupid to understand the difference..... Very few Bush supporters understand that difference. Keep stroking each other. |
Hillay bites the dust
On Feb 13, 1:57*pm, wrote:
On Feb 13, 1:33*pm, wrote: On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 06:17:15 -0800 (PST), wrote: On Feb 13, 7:13*am, "Reginald P. Smithers III" "Reggie is Here wrote: That loud sucking sound heard in Potomic area was Hillary losing 3 more primaries. It looks like the only way Hillary will win the primary is if Billary can steal this away with super delegates and some rule changes. Nah, as far as delegates, she's really not that far behind. The media spin, however makes it look like Obama is just running away with the nomination. Perhaps because he is passing her at warp speed. Look where things were a month ago. It's not really attributable to spin no matter how much you might wish it was. Hillary's in the breakdown lane and Barack's in the passing lane. At the instant when a car going 100 mph passes a car going 30, do you interpret them to be doing about the same thing as each other? The statement that I was replying to was this: It looks like the only way Hillary will win the primary is if Billary can steal this away with super delegates and some rule changes They aren't far apart. So let's use your analogy, shall we? What happens if the car going 100 mph slows to a crawl, and the car doing 30 speeds up considerably long before the end of the race? See, pretty simple Well, I suppose it woud take consideration of how far back the accelerating care is, and how close (inch's?) the crawling car is to the finish line. I guess... |
Hillay bites the dust
On Feb 13, 5:05*pm, "JimH" wrote:
10.He has 2 years as a Senator. And most of his senate time has been promoting himself to be the next POTUS |
Hillay bites the dust
Tim wrote:
On Feb 13, 5:05 pm, "JimH" wrote: 10.He has 2 years as a Senator. And most of his senate time has been promoting himself to be the next POTUS So? If elected he will be a far better president than the lying, stupid scumbag who currently occupies the White House. |
Hillay bites the dust
On Feb 13, 8:34*pm, HK wrote:
Tim wrote: On Feb 13, 5:05 pm, "JimH" wrote: 10.He has 2 years as a Senator. And most of his senate time has been promoting himself to be the next POTUS So? If elected he will be a far better president than the lying, stupid scumbag who currently occupies the White House. Maybe. and I'm not saying he won't but... "Beware of Trojans bearing gifts" |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:49 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com