Hillary Voters Threaten to Go McCain

The writing on the wall was writ large last night – perhaps even large enough for Hillary and Bill to make it out.  Needing a big win in Indiana and something approaching close in North Carolina, the metric got switched.  Barack Obama won N.C. in a landslide and closed to 2% in Indiana (a state with extremely Clinton-friendly demographics).  It is now almost impossible for even the most steadfast Clinton lovers to make anything like a cogent argument that Hillary ought to stay in the race.  She cannot win more delegates, the popular vote or more states.  Any argument that she would be the stronger candidate versus McCain in the general election is washed out by the demographic breakdown, the vote totals and The Limbaugh Effect, which was in full play in Indiana if exit polls are to be taken for anything.

I’ve written at length why Hillary is not the best person, or the right person for the job of POTUS.  I’ve written at even greater length why she’s the wrong person.  Tonight, perhaps the best evidence in support of that proposition has come out in the exit polls: Around 50% of Hillary’s supporters seem to be asserting that if Barack Obama is the Democratic nominee, they will either vote for McCain or not vote at all in the general election.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot? 
This little tidbit is worth examining.  It’s an odd thing.  After eight years of neocon Bush/Cheney misfeasance, malfeasnace and nonfeasance, what in the name of God or the FSM could prompt any Democrat to vote Republican…to choose a senile, doddering warmonger – a dumber version of Dubya – over an educated, broadly popular, fresh Democratic face?  The Hillary Effect.

The Hillary Effect strikes those who have devoted themselves so completely to their candidate that they can no longer see the forest for the trees, or the fate of the American forest if left in the hands of those rabid logging pyromaniacal arsonist neocon fuckwits.
They lept aboard the Hillary train early – back when Hillary was the shoe-in candidate; the Democrat ready to be nominated on day one.  Their devotion to Hillary was so powerful and overwhelming that it never occurred to them that there might be anyone else in the race.  The appearance on the stage of an alternative to Hillary, one who didn’t carry the burden of being a Clinton and one who was actually winning more states, more votes and more delegates, so confounded their preconcieved notions that they had no other alternative but to engage in the worst sort of smear tactics, underhanded backstabbing, rumours, lies and attacks.  In short, they had to behave exactly like Hillary, who (it has been perfectly clear all along) is willing to burn down this village to save it.

These people are not concerned with defeating McCain.  They’re concerned with ensuring Hillary’s win in the primary.  And they’re willing to murder the country to make sure no one else can have it.  Some of them want a woman – any woman – in the oval office.  I hope someday they get their wish in a strong candidate that doesn’t lie about sniper fire, NAFTA, the Family Medical Leave Act, the peace process in Northern Ireland, her daughter having to dodge falling debris from the WTC on 9/11, or shamelessly pander to the lowest common denominator.  Other’s however – the ones that post “Barack is a Muslim,” “Obama is a threat to national security,” or foolish crap about Jeremiah Wright on the boards of hillaryis44.com – are nothing more than ignorant racists who deserve to endure the full pointy weight of the thrashing their candidate took last night in Indiana and North Carolina.  To them, one can only smile, gesture and say, “Fuck you!”

The exit polls seem pretty clear.  Something like half of those who voted for Hillary claim that if she is not the nominee, they will vote for McCain or not vote at all.  This is not rational behaviour.  It’s the behaviour of a spoiled rotten child who takes her ball and goes home when she doesn’t get her way.  Even assuming Hillary withdraws from the race and exhorts her cult-like zombie followers to support the party, it must be taken at face value that some percentage of those whiners WILL switch to McCain; that all of Hillary’s desperate yammering about “disenfranchised voters” in Florida and Michigan (voters she agreed to ignore back when she thought it was all locked up) will result in problems for the Democrats in two very important states come the general election.

The race Hillary has run and the behaviour of her supporters ought to be an embarrassment to the party, to Hillary and to thinking people everywhere.  The Hillary gang has taken spin to new levels, blurring the line between looking at the bright side and outright lying on the scale of George Bush and Karl Rove.
No matter how you slice it, Hillary’s chances at winning or stealing the nomination are finished:  Popular vote, delegates, states won, demographic dances versus McCain, polling stats…it’s just over.  Forget that the Clinton machine is flat broke, deeply in debt and their financial backers no longer answer the phone.  Forget the fact that Hillary’s entire campaign was horribly mismanged from the start – financially, tactically and politically buggered by the likes of Mark Penn and an unbridled Bill Clinton.  Forget the wilted presence of Hillary herself as she gave her “victory speech” in Indiana and the look of exhausted resignation on Bill’s face.  It’s all over for Hillary.  But not for her supporters.  They seem determined to have their “Told you so” moment.  To defect to McCain in large enough numbers to swing what should be a certain Democrat win in November to a Republican victory so that they can smugly assert, “Hillary would have won.”

What motivates this twisted version of justice?  Where does that come from?  It comes from Hillary herself.  Of course, Hillary would never say anything like, “Go forth, my zombie hordes, and crush Obama in the general election,” but everything she has said and done in this far too lengthy primary battle; every tactic she has employed – from the 3AM phone call ad to waving the bloody shirt of 9/11 and photos of Osama Bin Laden – absolutely reeks of that very message.  And her supporters gobbled it up, drank it to the very last drop.  Having enlisted their hearts and minds so completely, there is now almost no way back for them.  Much like George Bush will never be able to say, “Invading Iraq was a mistake,” Clinton backers will never be able to abandon the slimey spin and vicious tactics they embraced over the past few months.  They’re now the political version of a Scientologist.  You show them the numbers, the delegate tally, the list of states won, and they start screaming, “He’s a MUSLIM!  His name’s HUSSEIN!  He HATES AMERICA! YOU’RE A MISOGYNIST!”

Barack Obama is now the presumptive nominee for the Democratic party.  The choice, come November, could not be more clear:  Four more years of utterly failed neocon policy, or a step in a new direction. 
More Bush (with senile sprinkles), or change.  Should it transpire that the Republicans hold the oval office, and the polls reveal that defectors from the Hillary camp brought it about, it will be a truly dark day for Hillary Rodham Clinton because she will not even have her “I told you so” moment.  The fact of the matter is that the Republicans WANTED to run against Hillary, her husband and the plethora of negatives and baggage she drags with her.  They would have crushed her like a paper cup.  But to have run such a primary race – an embarrassment to the very idea of democracy; to have so infected and corrupted the ability to think or reason of so many of her rabid backers that John McCain gets to be president, will be no consolation.  The cries of “Hillary would have won” will be drowned out by the accurate accusation “This is YOUR fault!”

Advertisements

11 Responses

  1. Isn’t it interesting how everyone, no matter who they are for, spends more time attacking their candidates’ opponents than they do touting whatever virtues their candidates might have. On the Republican side, Rush Limbaugh holds the honor of doing that best. But now bloggers are doing that job very well.

  2. It’s stuff like this garbage that makes the choice clear as a bell. I’m voting for McCain!

  3. List three reasons John McCain would make a good president.
    I’ll give you ten why he’s a disaster waiting to happen.

  4. The problem isn’t why or why shouldn’t McCain be president. The problem is Obama. It’s great that Obama understands his race so well. It’s funny that early on the fear was he wasn’t “black enough”. The reality is he has made much of white america afraid of him. He has had meetings with terrorists and openly plans to meet with leaders of countries who sponser terrorism against our troops and that want to destroy Israel. His wife was never proud of America until white people started to vote for him. He called his grandmother a “typical white woman”. He has avoided campaigning in white rural areas, is he afraid of something? Hmm, what could that be? I wonder what the message is that his fear of rural white america portends? He has tried to explain these people he doesn’t understand to rich upper class white people in San Francisco, yet he doesn’t really get them at all.

    The dems feel they can win the white house without rural white america. They have to know by now that Obama will never get those votes. Sit back and wait for those states to turn blue and see how far it gets you. The democrats had a chance to elect a Clinton, who’s husband gave them the only 8 year term in most of their lifetimes. They chose to turn their backs on the Clintons. I’m now torn between hoping Hillary runs as an Independent and just waiting to see McCain destroy Obama in November, so that Hillary can run again in 2012.

  5. How predictable to hear a Hillary supporter blither on about Obama’s racism as the reason why “white, rural Americans” will not vote dem in the general. The Clinton camp has openly displayed the depth and breadth of their contempt for the American voter in terms of race, from the mouth of Hillary herself, just this week. I mean, really…do you miss the irony of poor, white hicks saying, “I’m not voting for a black man because he’s a racist.” Does even that degree of projection escape you? Have another tall glass of Hillary kool-aid.
    And if you think the GOP has been any friend to white, rural America – or any American earning less than a few hundred thousand dollars per year, you need to pull your head out of your ass and take a look at the economy, the debt, the infrastructure….
    Bill Clinton was a good president. But those days are gone and you can’t have them back by electing his craven, desperate, power hungry, lying wife. In fact, Bill’s behaviour during this primary has served only to severely harm his image and his legacy. He has proven himself just as willing to lie, dodge and play cheap, dirty politics as Hillary always was.
    You yammer foolishly about Obama calling his grandmother a “typical white person”…WTF?
    How about Bosnia, NAFTA, The Family Medical Leave Act, The Northern Ireland Peace process, White Water, Travelgate, claiming that Chelsea had to dodge falling debris on 9/11…?
    If you’re deluded enough to think HRC ought to be president simply because she’s a Clinton, despite her lies and disreputable conduct during this race; to call Obama a racist as an excuse for YOU not to vote for a black man, and to idiotically permit a doddering, senile old warmonger like Senator Mumblefuck McCain into the Oval Office, you truly deserve the government you might well get: Four more years of fucked up neocon policies that have so well served America both at home and abroad for the past eight years.
    You MUST be the idiot who stumbled onto this article by searching for HILLARYIS44.com. Go on back over to your little HRC knitting circle and save your stupid, delusional reasoning for those like-minded, hopelessly myopic twits.

  6. This attitude you display makes my point. What’s amazing to me and others like me is you don’t see it. Over and over again Obama supporters claim that anyone who doesn’t support them is a racist or an idiot. Look in the mirror pal. Read your own post and read Obama’s speaches and tell me how they go hand in hand.

  7. I don’t have to “claim” you are a racist. YOU brought up the issue of race. YOU accused Obama of being a racist (really a truly ridiculous thing to even suggest, much less believe…especially with Bill out there talking about Jesse Jackson and Hillary blithering on about poor, WHITE, rural voters and proud BLACK voters). Then you point out your own foolish assertion that Obama is a racist – something not even Bill O’Reilly has been stupid enough to try – as your reason for NOT voting for him.
    And you have the gall to accuse me of being a racist???
    HAHAHA! You Hillary kids are as bad as your candidate. You have truly drunk the koolaid.
    I never claimed that “anyone who does not support Obama is a racist”.
    In fact, if you read the article, I clearly state that SOME HRC supporters simply want a woman in the white house. I hope they get one someday. Just not a lying, race-baiting, incompetent like Hillary.
    Your kind keep chattering about her experience and ability…WHAT has she done? She’s told more lies than passed laws. The lowest common denominator in this race has been Hillary’s Rove-inspired playbook – photos of BHO in Muslim garb, 3AM phone call ads, clips of Osama Bin Laden…. That’s who you think would make a good president?
    As far as the racism barb goes, my friend, it’s YOU who engage in projection: YOU call Obama a racist and proffer that as reason to not vote for him. It’s beyond silly. It’s cultish, pathetic and weak – sadly qualities all too evident over at your private hillaryis44.com love-in. Wait…let me guess…some of your best friends are black, huh?
    As for anyone not supporting BHO being an idiot: Of the available cadidates, I’ll happily take a new approach over four more years of Bush policies, or the desperate, pandering, prevaricating, say-anything sense of entitlement that is Hillary Rodham Clinton. In fact, it’s not your choice that makes you an idiot, it’s the reasons for it. There might be some reasonable argument for supporting HRC, but you don’t mention any of them. I’d love to know what it is that makes HRC such a wise choice – something besides, “She has the ability to bring the country back!” A little more specificity would be appreciated, beneficial to your cause…but, of course, countered by all of her statements and behaviour (not to mention rafts of experts who unanimously pan Hillary’s proposed policies…but Hillary would never toss her lot in with a bunch of elites on matters related to the economy, especially when those experts are ECONOMISTS! Christ…how can you not gag on this?)
    In any case, whatever her positive qualities, it’s merely that she’s made them very difficult to see or name with all her outright lies and underhanded tactics. However, the reasons you present quite plainly reveal that you are not interested in truth or reasonable debate…and that does make you an idiot.

    Since you seem to have your head jammed really very far up your ass, here’s a pretty good take on who played the race card, and how it has played as an issue in this primary:
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/andrew_sullivan/article3907239.ece

    Even SNL gets it:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/11/saturday-night-lives-mess_n_101177.html

    See if you can get your pointy little Hillary brain around it before posting here again.

  8. Yes, I brought up race. Why is it ok to talk about hispanic voters and black voters, but when someone mentions white voters, people freak out.

    I’m honestly afraid of your candidate. It’s that simple. I tried to like him, I’ve got several friends who are into him and his speaches. My own step-father voted for him. And yes, my best friend is black and he supports Obama. I just don’t think we should be talking to terrorists, we should be killing them, bringing them to justice, arresting them or whatever it takes. Because what they’re going to do next is set off a nuclear bomb in this country and all the Obamas in the world and all the speaches won’t stop them. Only action will.

    Which brings me to my biggest reason for supporting Hillary and now McCain. I don’t believe we can continue to project our will in the middle east and around the world and when we fail, just leave. We leave millions behind to suffer and it’s criminal. Hillary has said over and over again that she will get us out of Iraq in a responsible way and not leave the people behind who helped us. She has the support of the following former generals.

    1. General Wesley Clark
    2. Admiral William Owens
    3. General Johnnie E. Wilson
    4. Lt. Gen. Joe Ballard
    5. Lt. Gen. Claudia J. Kennedy
    6. Vice Admiral Joseph A. Sestak
    7. Lt. Gen. Frederick E. Vollrath
    8. Major General George A. Buskirk, Jr.
    9. Major General Paul D. Eaton
    10. Rear Admiral Stuart Platt
    11. Rear Admiral David Stone
    12. Major General Antonio M. Taguba
    13. Brigadier General Michael Dunn
    14. Brigadier General Evelyn “Pat” Foote
    15. Brigadier General John M. Watkins, Jr.
    16. Brigadier General Jack Yeager
    17. Former Secretary of the Army and Veterans Affairs Togo West
    18. Former Secretary of the Navy, John Dalton

    What Hillary has also done is propose detailed solutions to this country’s foreclosure crises. She has proposed a health care system that leaves out no one. She has spoken in great detail about supporting our troops when they return home and she’s already worked for them in congress, which helped lead to her support among former generals. She has proven that she can work with Republicans in the senate and she earned their respect on the armed services commitee.

    Since it appears I won’t have the candidate of my choice, I am turning my support over to John McCain. I feel that he won’t leave our troops without the support they need and he won’t abruptly leave behind the millions in Iraq who have risked their lives to assist us.

    I didn’t support going into war. I didn’t support Bush or vote for him. I voted for Gore, I voted for Kerry, although I think Bush ran a better campaign than Kerry. Now, I’m left with the choice of a candidate that in my view is not going out of his way to relate to rural voters and instead tries to explain them to rich voters. This country will not be taken over by someone who doesn’t inspire support of the military families and doesn’t relate to rural coal miners, gun owners and church goers. It just won’t happen.

    So, now I’ve had a rant and I know that’s what it is. I didn’t call you or your candidate names. Are you capable of stating your case without stooping to name calling and insults? That’s been the hallmark of Obama supporters and as good as it may make you feel, it’s not a winning strategy.

  9. First of all, the word is SPEECH; plural SPEECHES. Not speach.

    Hypothetical, currently non-existant nuclear bombs being set off in America by terrorists? That’s your reasoning? Good lord. Are you really George Bush? Where to begin.
    Firstly, that’s precisely the politics of fear bullshit that has allowed a bumbling moron to gut the constitution and invade Iraq. It’s bullshit from the start, and when you employ it as a point, you simply fail to present an argument worth answering. If it’s terrorism you’re worried about, there’s a really simple way to avoid it: Stop participating in it.
    They have no bomb, and staying over there destroying their country and killing their brothers, uncles, cousins and fathers is no way to dissuade them from wanting to bomb you.
    America has no more business in Iraq today than it did in Iran forty years ago when it toppled the democratically elected government and installed the Shah. If America has problems with Iran today, it’s because America MADE those problems.
    I can’t quite make out whether or not you think it’s a good idea to “project our will” in the middle east or not. If you think invading countries that have done nothing to you is a good idea, then by all means, vote for McCain – he’s definitely your guy. If you think “obliterating” Iran is a fine notion, then stick with Hillary. Neither of them pay ANY attention to America’s shameful history of foreign policy fuckups in that part of the world and they both totally buy into the idea that “they” (Muslims?) are the antithesis of all that is good, just, right, and of course American.
    When you make a huge, bone-headed mistake like plunging into the Iraq war, you don’t find some way to keep going until it’s all better. You get the fuck out of there and stop wasting money, political capital and American lives.
    Of the choices before us, we have one who will continue to exert American military might as a means of advancing foreign policy, another who voted for the war without bothering to read the intelligence report before casting her ballot, and one who said at the outset that this war is a mistake. Which of those three do you think demonstrates the sort of judgement that is requisite in a president?

    You construct a straw man argument when you assert that Obama “will withdraw our troops without the support they need.” What sort of bullshit is that? Does supporting our troops equal leaving them in Iraq until they either win or die? I certainly fucking hope not. You may rest assured that Barack Obama supports the troops. He supports them SO much, he wants to bring them home so they can be with their families and resume their jobs and education, and not stay over there fighting a bullshit war that cannot be won at the cost of their limbs, lives and sanity.
    And speaking of “supporting the troops,” would that we had had a president who refused to LIE America into a war over WMD; lie about spreading democracy and creating a stable, democratic Iraq, and then lie about progress on the ground, while sending troops into combat without proper body armour or armour plating on their vehicles; who takes every opportunity to have his photo-ops (Mission Accomplished, turkey dinner…with a fucking prop turkey), yet who has never attended even a single funeral of those soldiers for whom he claims to weep. Yes, James, we’ve had quite enough of presidential power unchecked by such trifling things as truth.
    As for the “millions” of Iraqis that support America…where in the name of the FSM did you get that number? I know…like the rest of your stats, you pulled it out of your ass. If America were concerned with the fate of everyday Iraqi citizens, they should have left Saddam in place. Yeah, he was a bastard, but he kept the lid on the Shi’ite, Sunni, Kurd, AQ quagmire America now finds itself amidst. Spreading democracy, indeed.

    The fact that a GOP bag-licking general like Wes Clarke and his ilk have chosen to support HRC is not really an endorsement that ought to carry any weight, but I’m sure you’re more than dazzled by the medals. Frankly, I give more weight to the endorsements piled up by Barack Obama – people whose job it is to conduct foreign policy and know something about those other people and countries, rather than just carry out orders from incompetent draft-dodgers like Cheney and Rumsfeld.
    People like:

    Clifford Alexander, Jr., former Secretary of the Army

    Richard Danzig, former Secretary of the Navy

    Scott Gration Major General (USAF-Ret), former Director of Strategy, Policy, and Assessments of the United States European Command in Germany

    Donald Joseph Guter, former Judge Advocate General of the Navy, current Dean, Duquesne University School of Law, Pittsburgh

    John Hutson, former Judge Advocate General of the U.S. Navy

    Jeh Johnson, former General Counsel of the U.S. Air Force

    Lester Lyles, former Vice Chief of Staff of the United States Air Force

    John B. Nathman (Ret), former Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command and Vice Chief of Naval Operations

    F. Whitten Peters, former Secretary of the Air Force

    Zbigniew Brzezinski, former National Security Advisor

    Greg Craig, former Assistant to the President and Director of Policy Planning, State Department

    William M. Daley, former Secretary of Commerce

    Bob Gee, former United States Assistant Secretary of Energy under Bill Clinton

    Eric Holder, former Deputy Attorney General

    Douglas Kmiec, legal counsel to Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, and co-chairman of Romney’s Committee for the Courts and the Constitution

    Noel Koch, former Special Assistant to President Nixon; former Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs

    Lawrence Korb, former Assistant Secretary of Defense

    Anthony Lake, former National Security Advisor under Bill Clinton

    Robert Litt, former Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General; US Attorney

    Jan Lodal, former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense

    Angela E. Oh, former member, of the President’s Initiative on Race

    Susan E. Rice, former Assistant Secretary of State for African Affairs

    David Scheffer, former Ambassador-at-Large for War Crimes Issues

    Sarah Sewell, former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense

    Gayle Smith, former Special Assistant to the President, National Security Council

    Ted Sorensen, President John F. Kennedy’s top advisor and speechwriter

    Tara Sonenshine, former Special Assistant to the President, National Security Council

    Jeffrey Bader, former U.S. Ambassador to Namibia and Fmr. Assistant US Trade Representative for Asia

    Henri Barkey, former member of U.S. Department of State Policy Planning and Professor of Lehigh University

    David Birenbaum, former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. for Management and Reform

    Esther Brimmer, former member of U.S. Department of State Policy Planning

    Art Brown, former National Intelligence Officer for East Asia and Chief of CIA’s East Asian Operations Division

    Mark Brzezinski, former Director of European Affairs of National Security Council

    Joseph Cirincione, Vice President for National Security and International Policy at the Center for American Progress

    Bonnie Cohen, former Undersecretary of State for Management

    Ivo H. Daalder, former Director, European Affairs, National Security Council

    Tobi Gati, former Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence and Research; Senior Director for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasian Affairs, National Security Council

    Robert S. Gelbard, former Presidential Envoy for the Balkans; Assistant Secretary of State for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement; Ambassador to Indonesia; and Ambassador to Bolivia

    Matthew Goodman, former Director for Asian Affairs, National Security Council

    Philip Gordon, former Director, European Affairs, National Security Council

    As for military families, it’s really one-sided (at best), or the sort of ignorance of detail that is part and parcel of drinking too much Hillary kool-aid (at worst) to assert that he does not have their support. He, in point of fact, has far more support from the boots on the ground than any other candidate. Why is that? Because HE wants to BRING THEM HOME. If Hillary were such a strong candidate, why is she lending her campaign money while SOLDIERS are donating to Obama in amazing numbers (do the research – these are public figures). In actual fact – and I know facts are not your strong point – the “military families” you claim do not support Obama, DO support Obama…in record numbers, and with their wallets.

    Hillary’s proposal on the foreclosure crisis has been savaged by people who know a few things about the economy; her health care plan requires – REQUIRES BY LAW – that you buy it. Are you nuts? This is what you want? To have the police come and arrest poor people because they can’t afford to pay for insurance you have mandated they MUST purchase. Heckuva solution! If you put them in prison, then the state is on the hook for their health care.
    One would think Hillary’s last go ’round on “fixing” health care would be instructive of what you might expect. The words “horrible clusterfuck” come to mind. But, and of course, without examining any of the details – oh, those pesky details – you simply yammer that HRC has A SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM FOR EVERYONE!

    So, you want a candidate who will go out of his way to relate to rural voters – the very voters you previously asserted would never vote for a black man. Sheesh. Really, now. Sorry. Obama is not in the pandering business. He’s in the business of conducting America’s foreign and domestic policy in such a manner as to improve the lives of citizens and relations with the rest of the world. Not something you will get from Old Senator Mumblefuck McCain and 100 years in Iraq, or from Hillary’s “I have a solution (that very few experts think has a snowball’s chance in hell of actually working, but trust her).

    If you’re really worried about terrorists coming to America, then elect a president who WILL talk to Iran and Syria, not some warmonger who, I promise you, will make matters much worse…or Hillary, who demonstrated her foreign policy experience by ummm….ummm…oh yeah…sniper fire in Bosnia and solving the N. Ireland Peace process over tea.

    James…I gotta say. You make having reasoned debate really difficult, and not from the strength of your arguments. It’s more like trying to get someone who BELIEVES in fairy tales to see that there’s really no such thing as unicorns.
    I also notice, despite your earlier apoplexy over race and how Obama is a racist, AND despite my providing a link to an article that, IMO, fairly sets out who played the race card and how, you have failed to address that issue in your lengthy reply. Merely changing the tune when you can’t match the steps is not good strategy and goes a long way to explaining why Hillary’s support (everywhere except over at hillaryis44.com) is eroding like a sand castle at high tide.
    While I appreciate your passion and dedication, you would do well to exchange half of it for taking a fair look around at something more than the flyers and doorknob hangers printed up by the Hillary Rodham Clinton for President Committee. The truth IS out there, but it won’t come looking for you. You have to go find it. And Hillary Clinton has amply and repeatedly demonstrated that she isn’t on speaking terms with the truth.

  10. You are incredible! Very well worded argument from someone who started out using name calling every other sentance. You should be proud of yourself, you constructed a few paragraphs with only minimal childish accusations.

    The point I made about rural whites not voting for Obama is a fact.

    The point I made about former generals supporting Hillary is a fact. You named mostly diplomats and politcal appointees. It’s clear to everyone that the left wing of the party is controlling this democratic nomination process.

    It’s a fact that Bill Clinton left the country with a surplus and HIllary has a right to stake claim to some good things that happened during her husband’s presidency.

    It’s a fact that Obama has not ONCE not ONCE in a single “speech” or debate that I witnessed stated an argument as detailed as yours. Believe me, I watched, waited and hoped for it. He instead relies on droning rhetoric, such as “yes we can” and “it’s time for change”. HIllary killed him every time on the details.

    it’s a fact he said he would meet with nations who sponser terrorism and the killing of our troops. In fact, just recently he had to fire someone from his campaign who jumped the gun and just couldn’t wait to start sucking Hammas’ private parts!

    You know what? I actually wish Obama were 1/2 the candidate you think he is. I truly do. I think it’s high time we elected a black president. Our standing in the world would change instantly and old wounds that run deep in this country could begin to heal. I wish this guy was the right choice. It wouldn’t take much. He would just need to get out there and meet face to face with these voters he avoided in the white rural areas of the country. The ones that always turn out in huge numbers for the Republicans. But, instead he seems to either fear them or not understand them. You can sense it, at least I can. You know why they bought into Clinton? He wasn’t really one of them. I lived in Arkansas and knew him when he was governor. He was even voted out of office once. He was seen as liberal and Ivy League. He remained governor for as long as he did, because he never really faced much opposition. But, when he got to the white house and even as he ran, he learned that the rest of the country didn’t know he wasn’t really “bubba” and he could morph into the folksy hero he is today for these people that turn out to see him now.

    My point is. Obama hasn’t really displayed that he’s a fun loving down to earth american yet. He’s seen as very uptight and needs to loosen up a lot. I’ve not yet seen that he can.

    As for my views on the war. I feel we should have stayed in Iran. I have friends who lived under the Shah and they said he was good, good for the country. After the Shah, they no longer paid or respected professionals, such as doctors. Many of them fled the country and now live here in LA. We supported the Afghanistan rebels until they kicked out the Russians, then we left them to suffer under the Taliban. Now we’ve gotten ourselves into a horrible war in Iraq and we might leave behind 4 million kurds in Northern Iraq to suffer at the will of the other 83% of the population? It’s beyond sad and it’s criminal. We’re in this mess now and we can’t just run from it. We have to build a true coalition and stop trying to get the oil for ourselves. We have to work with the rest of the world to help rebuild Iraq. It might take 20-30 years, but if we turn our backs on them now, it will come back to haunt us much much sooner than that.

    Now, you can tell me I’m not as smart as you and your left wing extremists. You can point out the fact that I can’t spell was well as you. But, that doesn’t make me wrong.

  11. The point you made about rural whites not voting for a black man was merely another way of saying they’re a bunch of racist fucktards who don’t give a rat’s ass about any issue beyond skin colour. No one ought to pander to them for votes. Ever.

    The point you made about those same rural whites tending to vote Republican does not help your argument that HRC is a better candidate (unstated, but implied one supposes). In case you haven’t noticed, Hillary is a Democrat (although one would be hard pressed to notice from either her policies or tactics). Nevertheless, there ain’t much point in Democrats spending time kissing up to a bunch of racist, gun-toting morons who will vote for four more years of neocon crap anyway.

    Re: The generals versus diplomats. Exactly so. Generals are nothing more than West Point grads who have done a good job of following the orders provided by their political masters. I’m more interested in where the brains are looking than what the muscle wants to do. People who know a little more about the world and how it works are far more weighty than people who know how to point a gun.

    Hillary has no “right” whatsoever to take credit for any of the circumstances of her husband’s term as president. She had no power, no authority and no security clearance. The one thing she did try – health care reform – was a dismal failure…I believe I used the word clusterfuck.
    If she had any legitmate claim to anything, she would never have needed to lie about Bosnia, N. Ireland, NAFTA, the Family Medical Leave Act, or any of the other big, fat, giant LIES she’s told during this campaign. In point of fact, Bill has little enough claim to credit for the economic conditions when he left office. Of course, if you want to credit both of them with some things, be sure to credit them with the rest of it: Perjury, impeachment and disbarrment, chinagate, Mike Espy, filegate, Dick Morris, travelgate, and a cleaning bill for a blue dress…among many others (dresses and scandals).

    Hillary’s detailed plans (as you call them) are pretty fucking short on details. Furthermore, the details she HAS bothered to provide have caused those that know a few things about economics and health care to damn near puke. Hillary’s response? Well, they’re elitists.
    Yeah…that’s a good plan – ignore expert advice.
    As for Hillary winning the debates…?
    So, in your opinion, she has strong, detailed solutions, won the debates, and yet her support is drying up faster than a piss puddle in Death Valley.
    Methinks you are blinded by some pathological Clinton love that horribly distorts your vision, hearing and reason.

    Yes, Obama would meet with Iran and Syria. Not meeting with them has worked so well. Just look at the progress!
    The fact that they’re willing to meet with an American president after so many years of American foreign policy fucking with them speaks well of THEM. America has engaged in the worst sort of criminal conduct and interference with sovereign nations throughout it’s history. From Cuba, Haiti, El Salvador, Nicauraugua, Chile and Colombia to Iran, Iraq, Indonesia, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Lebanon…Vietnam…
    Christ, it’s a wonder they haven’t all gotten together and destroyed the US as a matter of simple justice. Sponsor terrorism? Kill troops? Junior, add up the dead, study some history – you’ll soon see who the terrorists are.
    If the Nuremburg laws were applied to America, every president since WWII would have been HUNG.

    As for your amazingly stupid, utterly myopic notion that Operation Ajax – a covert bit of shit between the Brits and the CIA to overthrow A DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED LEADER OF A SOVEREIGN NATION and replace him with AN ABSOLUTE DICTATOR – was somehow right, just and a darn tootin’ good idea, how does one even begin to respond to such backward, complete idiocy? Is that how you go about spreading fucking democracy? Showing the world what a beacon of freedom and hope America is?…you let them have a vote and if they don’t vote the right way, you install a puppet? Fuck you, you moron.
    I even ignored your ad hominem crap – accusing me of name-calling when you started out this little tete a tete by calling Obama a racist. Asshole. There, and it fucking well fits. Dickhead – another ringer.

    Your knock against Obama that he’s not the folksy, good ol’ boy Bubba that was Bill Clinton doesn’t really rise to the level of political analysis.
    While you might enjoy hanging out with Bill’s southern drawl, having a few cold ones and chasing skirts, perhaps it’s time for a president who doesn’t get blowjobs while on the phone with world leaders. In any case, Bill’s limitless charm is no reason to elect his wife, who (as I’ve pointed out time and time again) LIES. She lies when it’s convenient, when she thinks it will help her, when she’s been caught…
    Personally, I think a president at least ought to be able to distinguish between the truth and what spills out of their mouth.

    Once again, you leap around like a frog on a frying pan. No cogent analysis, no facts, nothing more than your feeling that Obama needs to loosen up and pander to racist fucktards who will vote for senile Senator Mumblefuck anyway.
    Enough, James. Enough. Vote for Clinton, or McCain. Whatever. Your prevaricating, power-hungry candidate is getting precisely what she has earned with her tactics, methods and attitude. I find the degree of your insight and thought processes frankly depressing. Presuming they represent some larger segment of the American population does not bode well for the future of that once great nation.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: