Arkansas Blog

Watch a Presidential debate?

Your must be joking, American Idol is on and I'm taping Survivor!!

/where my Cheetos at??

:)

My early comment is America needs both of them, either is fine, both is fantastic! Look...it's a team!

Where does Hillary get those awful pantsuits?

They both look great, speak well..and neither candidate has threatened to start a war.. what a novel idea peace has become.

As for CNN (Big Media, Fairness Doctrine be damned)

Why is Mrs Dan Senor (Campbell Brown), he of the Coalition Provisional Authority, moderating a Democratic debate on CNN?

CNN stopped even trying to be unbiased so long ago.

a lot of agreeing with each other so far

HRC does best when contrasting herself with the current administration

BHO does best when arguing that HRC agrees with his proposals

both are gingerly incorporating as much of Edward's message as they can

I watched 15 minutes and it was all Obama, Hillary is done.

Obama on the importance of substance

"i have substance, but you also have to be able to inspire"

ouch!!!

They are so similar that it's nearly a moot point. I agree that they should join as one and get on with it. That's the type of change this country is looking for. Quit splitting hairs! I think she might ask him to be VP if she was the front runner. However, I'm not so sure he would ask her if/when he officially wins the nomination. He might ask Edwards though. (I was an Edwards person until he dropped out. I have since been disappointed that he didn't go ahead and throw his support behind one or the other.)

If either of them would just flat out state that Bush is a lying, stupid, moron who has led this country into the biggest SNAFU ever recorded in USA history, and then flash the McCain-Bush LOVE pictures in the background, it would all be over.

If Hillary goes under it will be a long, long time before another female will be a formidable candidate for the Oval Office.

Same with a black dude, Cato. If Obama loses, that is.

I'm just curious, why do you feel that way Cato and JD? As well as they've both acquited themselves, I would think they have have both helped those causes.

another draw

HRC finishes with her best line/answer of the night

BHO holds his own with a skilled and experienced debater

W's approval rating (in one poll on one day) is below 20%
polls consistently show 3/5's or more Americans want US military presence in Iraq ended
it should be the easiest DEM victory since 1932

even i, a cynic to the core, am beginning to HOPE that CHANGE may come
but then i am originally from Missourah, so you'll have to SHOW ME

Too bad one has to lose..........
music to my ears to hear english spoken so beautifully, by both.

If either of them would just flat out state that Bush is a lying, stupid, moron who has led this country into the biggest SNAFU ever recorded in USA history, and then flash the McCain-Bush LOVE pictures in the background, it would all be over.

Posted by: BlueRidge

AMEN! Impeach, Start the War Crimes trials... and troops home now!

At my name is a link to the full debate transcript (NYT)

The plagiarism skirmish between them was classic. A clip is available in my name.

Clinton's done for. She simply doesn't match up to Obama, sorry folks.

I don't think so JD, Obama is 46, he's got 20 good years ahead of him, Hillary's got 6 or 8 until she's up there with Grandpa Munster. I love old people, I'm well on my way to being one, but there are some jobs too damn hard for the elderly. Don't cha think maybe President of the United States is too hard for geezers to do?

Look at Herbert Hoover Bush. He's done nothing but play for nearly 8 years and he still looks 20 years older than when he stole the job. So for me, I think 65 is the cut off point and I'd prefer 60. If Obama wins and isn't JFK'ed in office, Hillary will be 68 when the 2016 election rolls around, 69 when she takes office in January, 2017. I remember Ronnie Raygun and I don't want to sit thru that movie again.

Unlike some of you, I like both the people currently filling my TV screen. I'm proud of both of them. We'd be in good hands with either of them. I just see unlimited strength in a Clinton/Obama team. Plus we get Bill Clinton for free.

Bitch all your want about Bill but he has more experience than all of them put together. I want my country back. I don't want to live in a broken America that's become the bully of the world. I may be looking into the face of the last President I ever see. I want him or her to restore our country and the world before I die. I want to die knowing I'm leaving my kids in a world that is as OK as it can get. Screw tax cuts and stimulus checks, I want an America that doesn't wage war, doesn't torture, doesn't turn its back on people drowning in the Gulf.

I want Congress filled with honest people, not sell-out quivering bowls of Jell-o like Pryor and Lincoln. I want our Justice System restored and not be the modern version of the Salem Witch Trials. I want what Castro gave the people of Cuba, free health care and free college for everyone. I want a President that will hold us together when NAFTA costs us all our jobs. Don't worry, without jobs we can't buy. If we don't buy, the Whirlpools of the world will be forced to come back to America...but it will be tough till they do.

We need this team! Bush is black and white, we're flexible, us Democrats can have it all. Don't miss the opportunity to make real change by sending a woman and a black man to the White House. Crash 2 glass ceilings for the price of one, give me what I want and give the Obama supporters what they want too. Let's have our cake and eat it too and have Bill riding shotgun to boot. Clinton/Obama '08!

DBI, since there is no way I can top your post, I'll just say ditto.

FIXED NEWS is sure getting down on the Rs for some reason. Too many Repubs being outed.
bluename

No, JD, you're not, or you wouldn't be acting like a Rove clone or Elephant Echo Outlet. We have had 2,589 days of the most bitter partisanship, I ever want to see.

Now you're trying foment even more partisanship, rancor, and division among the very people who have worked very hard to remove Bush and his ilk and replace them with something better.

I know it's hard for some to remember, but there was a time in this country when we let everyone vote and waited to see who would win. I don't know which will win the nomination, but I am ready to support both or either.

Your glee at Hillary's bad tactical debate move reminds me so much of the rightwing nuts that slaver at the mere mention of "Clin . . ." They too overlooked the stuttering unease of their candidate when he was "off script." That was Obama's bad debate tactic tonight. He seemed to struggle for points and trains of thought when extemporizing. Strange in someone lauded for inspirational speeches and phrases. But as previous posters mentioned, it is a delight to have two articulate candidate that don't have to memorize talkers before each appearance.

You have the right to support whomever you like, you don't have the right to act like Karl Rove, a "Faux New"anchor anxious to suppress opposition votes, or a Mellon Scaife purchased Swiftboater. Let Texas and Pennsylvania voters and the rest of the primaries make-up their own minds. Your attitude makes it harder for all the party to coalesce behind our nominee when it is decided.

Bush may have a 77% disapproval rating, but he is not McCain, nor are we sure that Obama's current popularity won't melt away under the full attack of the Rovians and EEC.

would it not be best to have the telegenic, articulate inspirer on the tv everyday answering questions and have the gritty, experienced wonkette esconced out of sight in the VP's office, formulating and implementing policy?

you gotta admit, that GB41 and Cheney had more impact on US policy than the guys who said "Well" and "Nukular"

Well, DBI, I agree that we have two very good candidates. I still think it's a mistake to vote this year based upon what you hope will happen in eight years. The only thing we can control in this election cycle is who will be president for the next four years. If you think that person is Hillary, vote Hillary. If you think that person is Barack, vote Barack. Besides, why couldn't Hillary be president at the age of 69? George Washington was 67 when he first entered office and he's widely considered to be our best or second best president.

Well...clearly two qualified candidates...

I hear the Obama-Nots, very well...that's fine...if Hillary wins she still gets my vote as long as it counts...

Here's the thing: Obama has run a good campaign; Hillary has not...she had a Super Tuesday hangup that was a bit...well...short-sighted...and cost her some staffers...

While I am feeling the eyes roll I'd like to add that it's time to get on the same page...no...feeling the eyes roll again...experience is an issue...okay...

Hillary Clinton is experienced. There...good enough?

John McCain is experienced. There...bad enough?

Mike Huckabee is...well...I don't know, but Jethrine is kickin' it at Hooters...

______ (insert cadidate here) is experienced. But out...

Barack Obama is new. New guy! Hey! New guy, got donuts?!

Oh well...for the Obama-Nots who were counting on Hillary's inevitability I hope that the proper adjustment can be made respectfully...

Off to Texas, I am tryin' to go...

I think the only way I could support Hillary as part of the final team (as a VP on the ticket) is if she and Barack stood up and said unequivocally... The next VP will be dedicated to reversing everything Cheney did..and will chase down and hold his minions fully accountable under the rule of US and International law. And all of the country and the rest of the world will be fully informed about what happened. Cheney and Rummy (and the Bush family) have been a cancer on our country since Nixon... and Bill (and Congress) let them get away AGAIN after Iran Contra.. Hillary has never said anything more than "vast right wing conspiracy"... it's way past time we prosecuted them.

America would have never elected Ford after he pardoned Nixon... and we should not elect anyone who will not even demand full accountability now.

I don't hear it from Barack either...but..if i have to vote on hope... he's the only candidate left. Guarantees of a return to Clintons is like asking a car to back up and run over you a second time... at least it's a familiar person running over you.

I recall a day about a year ago..right here on the AR blog.. when the ERA was under consideration at the legislature... Max was constantly updating the post in a near play by play format... All of the sudden a report came in... David Pryor had arrived to help.. and I yelled NO no no... don't let him in or it will surely be over for women again.... and almost instantly Phyllis Schlafly prevailed... Arkansas women remain second class citizens today (on paper)...

When I think of change or accountability for the neo cons..then I think of the Clintons.. I get the same feeling about Clinton as I did about David Pryor... We have about 30 to 40 percent of the D party today who are really Republicans or more than willing to protect the Republicans. In Arkansas the percentage is far higher. And Clintons record in spite of their ability to get elected is clearly a record of covering and capitulating to the Republicans first. Women, Peace, Democratic values, the Constitution, the American worker, the concept of free and fair media, supporting true blue genuine Democrats in Congress, and so much more be damned.

DBI wants to go back to business as usual... Well we can't just do that without removing a few tumors..and admitting it's time to quit smoking (butt out the wars and oil addiction).. change our ways.. the old Clinton model led us here and just turning back to it will not help.

We cannot just leave the Neo Con Criminal Cabal (VRWC) to retire.. they don't retire, they spawn hate and escalate.. isn't 40 years of constant escalation proof enough?

Muleboy303 said... "HRC finishes with her best line/answer of the night"

True, but unfortunately she lifted it from John Edwards.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAYItnI-lPo&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/

Sorry Hawk...you're math is off. Washington was 57 when he became our first President.

Eureka, I just don't know why you are so anti-Clinton? I remember 8 good years with Bill in the driver's seat. Was he perfect? No! Was he liberal enough for me? No! But if you ignore the Republicans who hounded him, the same bunch alive and well today, it was a fabulous 8 years of peace and prosperity. I'll gladly take it back. I'm sorry Clinton pushed thru the Bush #41 NAFTA and I'd be real interested in what Bill and Hillary would say about NAFTA today. The other black spot in my opinion was Waco....I'm still ashamed.

I see 16 great years with the Clinton/Obama team, instead of 8 or 4 or zero. I think it will take both Clinton and Obama to overcome whatever evil the neo-cons have planned between now and November, and you know in your gut, they have a plan...a kamikaze plan...an all or nothing plan. Though if there was a god it should be a cakewalk for any Democrat this fall, but I worry that Obama alone can't beat them and their dirty tricks, nor could Clinton alone. That's why I'm pulling for a team of our best players. United we stand and all that stuff.

Satan Cheney has opened a door in the VP office, hell...he's knocked out the wall. We've had the VP as the Prez and the Prez as a retarded boy pulling his pants down for treats. I don't advocate any VP running the country, but like the Bill Halter position here in Arkansas, as much shit as we're in, we don't need the next VP to be a door knob. The person in that office should be working his or her ass off to right the country. So since Cheney opened the door, I'd hope the next P & VP would work as a solid team, a real team to fix what's killing us today.

After all we are at war, not only in Iraq, but inside our own country. Someone in the next administration is going to have to go back thru 8 years of treachery and cut out the Bush cancer, cell by cell by cell. Cheney-Bush has inserted a poison pill into nearly every law, rule, custom, tradition, arm and branch of our government and someone has comb over it all and cut out the Bush bad. That would be a great job for the next VP, cause if it's not all restored, it will fester and be BushWorld back with a vengeance next time we look up.

If Barack and Hillary and Bill were all the same age, I wouldn't care which was VP, but I'm a chronological kinda guy, age before beauty and all that good stuff. The bright spot here is that no matter who our Democratic nominee is, as soon as they're named you and me and rosso will all be back on the same page, pulling as hard as we can. That makes me happy and hopefully that will make us all winners in the end. I don't give a flip about teams and sides....I just want my country back and tonight I saw 2 strong, intelligent people who would be stronger and more intelligent as a team. I rest my case. Good luck to us all!

"No, JD, you're not, or you wouldn't be acting like a Rove clone or Elephant Echo Outlet. We have had 2,589 days of the most bitter partisanship, I ever want to see." -docholliday

I'm not what, docholliday? Come again?

"Now you're trying foment even more partisanship, rancor, and division among the very people who have worked very hard to remove Bush and his ilk and replace them with something better." -docholliday

You got that much out of my post? Impressive.

I find it ironic that you're saying this TO ME, when it just a few days ago Clinton supporters were tearing apart Obama supporters after his first real success on Super Tuesday. Do you not remember how condescending Clinton supporters were treating us Obama supporters? (In fact, the editor of this newspaper was posting official threads where he snootily referred to Obama and his supporters.) A bit hypocritical, no?

Where were you when there was a thread devoted to Michelle Obama's supposed gaffe where she didn't officially state whether she'd support Clinton? I pointed out one of Hillary's tactical mistakes tonight, just as you guys took glee in Michelle's refusal to state adamant support for Hillary should she win the nomination. And yet when I point out Hillary's gaffe, I am charged as being a cog for Faux News and Rove? Pathetic.

And most of all, Mr. High and Almighty, if you AGREE that Clinton did make a tactical mistake with her plagiarism allegations, why were you apparently supporting those same allegations in the Obama youtube-thread? When Obama was getting lambasted by what you agree (at least in the debates) was weak argument on the part of the Clinton Campaign, why didn't you say something like: "the attitude behind this video makes it harder for all the party to coalesce behind our nominee when it is decided" instead of what you did: "He's just showing his 'green' credentials by recycling!"

Let's be honest: a lot of your resentment stems from the fact that Hillary is losing. After all, why weren't you crying the injustice earlier when Clinton supporters were doing the exact same thing I did in my earlier post (which I don't think was all that virulent to begin with)? What I said in this thread was no more vile than anything else said by you or any other Clinton-supporter--but apparently that qualifies me as a "Karl Rove, a 'Faux News' anchor anxious to suppress opposition votes, or a Mellon Scaife purchased Swiftboater."

Sit down.

I didn't vote for Sen. Obama, but if (when?) he gets the nomination, I will support him with pride. I may take my teenaged daughter to D.C. so she can someday tell her grandkids she was there when a fellow African-American was sworn in as president for the first time in our nation's history.

But this is what I wonder: one of Sen. Obama's major themes is "reaching across the aisle" to get things done. Doesn't sound like he's even claiming he will display the backbone some here feel that the Clintons lack.

So what is it that makes some so confident that he won't be a Bill Clinton or a Mark Pryor -- that he won't move to the center to consolidate and enhance his base? Is it just that his last name isn't Clinton? I'm asking what in his career as a state senator or his time in the Senate, what specifically, convinces some he won't be co-opted? What tangible factors make some feel they won't be in the Arkansas Times blog in four years talking about how President Obama let the scum get away with this or that? Is it just Hope? Is it just the calculation that Hillary is statistically less likely to draw the line and fight for us? Is it just his stance on Iraq at a time when lots of folk were buying the lies?

Or is it just ABC?

HRC is akin to the most heavily armoured dreadnought that ever sailed a sea

with her, change will come, but ever so slowly and deliberately

the American people, after 28 years of faster, then slower, then warp speed devolution (during the past 7 years) have become understandably impatient to put things right (pardon the pun) again.

HRC has steadfastly refused to offer them that, BHO has done the opposite.

I remember A Dem President Clinton who coddled the defeated President (Iran Contra) Bush Senior and shoved NAFTA down the rest of the D partys slate. I remember A Dem Clinton president who believed so much in dragging D congress to the right.. the country ended up with Newt Gingrich and his minions in control (many who are still in congress today). Now the Dems cannot tell the difference between a Republican and a Democrat because they think Pryor and Ross's are OK because of the big D. I remember a Dem Clinton president starving a million Iraqis with sanctions and bombing them apart with air partitioning. And I remember Secretary Albright not having a problem with it at all.

I remeber being horrified with media in those days..and what they did to Bill and Hillary... and what did he do? He passed the freaking telecommunications act for the GOPers, as we discussed the other day, making things worse. I remember the proposed Health Care changes back then dying on the vine..even though they were still in the seat of power for many more years, they just dropped it and millions of Americans suffered or died without care because of it... I remember the drug WAR getting much much worse for Black Americans in particular.. heck even the GOPer courts have finally reduced the harsh sentencing now. I remember a great moment of hope re Gays in the Military..who ended up with a bigger closet. I remember a very smart woman, Joycelynn Elders.. an ardent supporter and friend of the Clintons being disposed of for less than nothing at the slightest sign of difficulty created by the GOPers. Median wages went down in Clintons term. Oil consumption shot up. Banking deregulation, another unraveling of the New Deal. The Clintons only successful way of fighting GOPers is to let the GOPers have their way...and via triangulation..encourage only other Dems who will do the same.

That's a partial list of double timing, anti Dem, anti American, anti women, anti sound energy policy, Pro nice polite war and genocide.. spineless capitulating BS that I am sick and tired of from the DLC Blue Dog champions, AKA the Clintons way of governing.

No, I don't see any hint of a plan to fight the neo cons... not when Hillary votes with them constantly(AUMF etc.).. not when both Bill and Hillary court them for money (Murdoch) and positions of power (Lieberman and Pryor). It's a plan to do the opposite that I see. maybe barack has a plan.. I don't know.. but he has not voted with the neo nuts nearly as much and he has not supported neo nuts candidacy for office.. Clinton does it constantly.

Imagine for a moment in 6 years we still have Pryor in the Senate but a half way decent human being or better stands up to run against our State shame.. Now who do you think President Clinton is going to funnel millions in campaign funds too? Who is Clinton supporting now? And don't forget Ross... child of the Clintons too. Clinton forcing Marx Pryor upon us (without a choice) now and will do so as long as we pretend Clinton is a good politician.

The Clintons were a miserable failure on so many levels.. don't let the Neo Con Republican nightmare blind you from that. That is precisely the purpose of the DLC and what Clintons bank on happening. We don't have very many do-overs left before we have to get the MIC and Energy meme corrected... and we can't leave the neo cons nor their lovers, the DLC Blue Dogs alone to fade away.. the neo cons need harsh punishment and the Blue Dogs need expulsion... pronto.

The D party is the only hope for America at this point in time.. but DBI you know it's a very wounded weak puppy right now. I know you do because you watch the congressional hearings, the votes for Gonzo on into Mukasey..and PAA/FISA, the lack of a fight to stop endless needless killing.. The D party needs every shred of help we the people can muster..and the dogged determination and clarity to call our failings out for what they are.. or we will be no better than the Bush's Cheneys McCains Pryor's Clintons, Ross's Liebermans, Landreius, and so on, think we should be... which will be endless war and oil consumption as we head straight into economic and environmental disaster.. much less honoring that quaint little document, the constitution.

I think the Clintons know a lot and are smart people... but that's the danger, they sell out and trick folks into buying into the wrong schemes, they are not honorable or noble citizens. They don't fight at all for the main part of their oaths to protect the constitution.. which should always be job one.

Sorry to be a pain.. but the facts just haunt me like bad Frankenstein movie haunts a young kid at bedtime in a thunderstorm.

I think we agree about much of the problems we are facing and even agree some serious accountability is due.. but we just disagree on the Clintons intending to do it all. They would have to apologize and admit to some very bad acts, decisions, philosophy of governance, which thay are not about to do.

I think it's a great hope for all of us that former Republican voting folks such as yourself are in the D party now. It's an honor to have you..and why I am trying to stay in the D party and fight it out.. but you have got to understand the dark forces have also crossed over long ago (money buys both sides of the game if you let it).. The battle is going to have to be fought on every front. Honestly calling out the failures and the traitors is the first step.. Clinton Pryor Ross

Pryor alone should be all one needs to know about what the Clintons are actively doing to undercut the most basic fundamentals of our way of life, constitution, and human decency.. but the list grows daily with the Clintons.. I don't know what its going to take to break the spell.

Understood, muleboy. I can see the drive to try something new, and that makes sense.

This just in from the latest polls....

After the debate a new poll shows that Hilliary is now leading in one state, the State of Denial...

McCain has 26 registered lobbyists working in his campaign.

Hillary has 11.

Obama has 0.

Listening to both the obvious thing we all noticed was how much of an imbecile--a thoroughly stupid, ignorant, imbecile--our current president is.

How was he ever elected? Twice. Shame on us.

Thought it was a great give and take and either or must make the "Can't get nothing accomplished GOP" do back flips.

Four more years with John? I think not!

However the great line of the day -- "I Did Not Have Sex with That Woman" Ooooooops John not Bill!

Of course you didn't John --- Just show every American male with an ego what a damn fool you really are.

While y'all are trying to pick the best Dem. candidate, the Repubs strategize how to keep the White House.
A percentage of you would vote for a yellow dog before you would vote for Hillary Clinton...a percentage of you would vote for a yellow dog before you would vote for Barack Obama.
Democrats better unite to win or America's middle class will lose.

Democrat Battle Cry--Remember the illegal Selection 2000!

Such a relief to go back to comfortable MSM/Republican stomping grounds: Hillary is Satan...and a shrill, fat one in ugly clothes, to boot. Given the only booing I heard last night (though I did flip in/out) came from Obama supporters who didn't like her plagiarism remark, I still maintain the blatant nastiness needs to stop there. Wouldn't it have been better to cheer for your guy/gal rather then give Republicans some free meat for November?

On the other hand, I would believe that Huck's gang was behind the McCain stuff...but I'd have to give them more brain credit than I'm comfortable with...plus it's scary. It's a nice preview, however, of the impending mudslide. If Obama is our selection I hope his nice, get-along words come with a B-plan when the mud-bullets fly. I don't want another Kerry who defends himself by wrapping himself in nice, long-winded intellect about why he shouldn't smack (figuratively...of course, ha) the guy/gal who just called him a lying sniveling coward. But I'm just a heathen...

I agree, blueridge...I smell some anti-Democratic stirrings among us.

DBI, you're right about Washington's age. Clearly, I shouldn't try to do math late at night. Still, I don't see age being as big an issue as you do. Although, I suppose the media would really be catty with Hillary showing signs of age. I could see an entire Dateline devoted to the number of wrinkles on Hillary's face and debating the need for Botox.

It's McCain who most certainly has a face full of botox... watch his forehead and notice it is impossible for him to raise an eyebrow.

Security breach at Obama Rally:

The Secret Service stopped screening people for weapons at an Obama rally and just started letting them in because "the line was too long."

A snippet:
-------------------------------
Several Dallas police officers said it worried them that the arena was packed with people who got in without even a cursory inspection.

They spoke on condition of anonymity because, they said, the order was made by federal officials who were in charge of security at the event.

"How can you not be concerned in this day and age," said one policeman.
-------------------------------
Smacks of the RFK assassination before he was going to win the Democratic nomination?

Link in my name

JD,

Your original post claimed your were sorry, but the tenor and approach of you post was not. It was reminiscent and redolent of CCRRR, Swiftboaters and Elephant Echo Chamber attacks from the past 8 years. Some of us believe that Rove and the Republican operatives will try to spike the Democratic candidate as they have tried and sometimes succeeded in the past by posing as Democratic Pary Members.

Look-up the Muskie Letter and Charles Colson, Tim Griffin and "caging," your strident post does not inspire unity behind a Democratic candidate. It reminds me of the "Nya-nyah nya nyah ya" taunting of Republican pudits and Elephant Echo Chamber outlets, interrupting anyone who does not 100% agree with them.

I saw another one today on Hardball, a man named Ed Reed or Reid who would not let the opposing viewpoint even speak a single syllable without interruption by ranting and it makes me even more suspicious of Republican plants being divisive as an election tactic. Maybe you're not, but you are certainly not trying to encourage the Clinton supporters to join you in supporting Obama.

It's almost as if you're trying to discourage Clinton supporters from voting as was Mr. Reid/Reed. That is classic Republican election behavior, prevent as many of the opposition from voting as possible, spread dissension and disruption. If I have misjudged your motives, then I apologize.

However, I will be supporting the winner of the Democratic nomination whomever it is. I will just waiting until the votes of ALL primaries are counted, regardless of your comments.

Whoa Doc, let's take a step back here. I wasn't apologizing for anything. I said, "She simply doesn't match up to Obama, sorry folks." If you're a native English speaker, you should realize this is an expression, a turn of phrase. I didn't literally mean: I'm ever so sorry I truly regret what I'm saying. A parallel would be me saying: "I'm sorry, but Grandma's pumpkin pie tastes like crap." It's more conciliatory than repenting.

"Some of us believe that Rove and the Republican operatives will try to spike the Democratic candidate as they have tried and sometimes succeeded in the past by posing as Democratic Pary Members."-doc

Are you honestly suggesting Obama, with his record and rhetoric, might be an impostor? REALLY?

"Maybe you're not, but you are certainly not trying to encourage the Clinton supporters to join you in supporting Obama."-doc

Doc, as I pointed out in my last post in this thread: you guys aren't making it easy either. Remember the references to St. Barack? Or some posters equating us Nazi-supporters in our fervor?

"It's almost as if you're trying to discourage Clinton supporters from voting as was Mr. Reid/Reed."-Doc

It's odd that you would say that, because it's exceedingly obvious that Barack's campaign has been more positive and uniting than Hillary's. In fact, Hillary's communication director recently charged Obama with "working with terrorists," as I linked in a few other threads. Naturally, divisive politics make it harder to everyone to re-coalesce for the Dem nominee....but what say you of that? Nothing.

You should realize that if you were truly sincere in the high-brow morality you're toting around, you would be condemning Hillary supporters as well--not just the Obama ones (or me). But you're not.

I accept your apology, although I have to admit in a sort of selfish way: it's hard for me to be sincerely sorry when I feel like your rebukes of me could easily be applied to Hillary supporters, if not more so.

That said, I'll be around after the Democratic primaries, and I won't be harboring any ill-will over what has happened in this blog. Life's too short to be taxed by virtual hate.

"The conference will be shown on C-SPAN this weekend.

Obama turned down Smiley's request -- it sounds now more like a demand -- because of that old standby, "scheduling conflicts," but he offered to send his wife to the New Orleans conference on his behalf.

Smiley wasn't even trying to hear that. He sounded almost apoplectic on "The Tom Joyner Morning Show" syndicated radio program, accusing Obama of not wanting to appear at a black event. I swear, it was hard to tell whether Smiley was castigating the candidate for allegedly ignoring blacks -- the ostensible reason for his anger -- or for ignoring him.

My money is on "a combination of both."

Parish the thought...The big 'O' won't go to "The Big Easy," The City that Care Forgot!
[LINK] blue bejeeus

"I wasn't apologizing for anything. I said, "She simply doesn't match up to Obama, sorry folks." If you're a native English speaker..." by: JD

JD you're not helping!

Hahaha... I know, I know.

On a completely unrelated note: I can't believe this thread hasn't been pushed of the front page yet. It seems like it's been here forever.