Subject: He can, she can't
Thanks for the thunderbolt, and you're right,
"solved" was a bad choice of words.
I've seen the analysis of the belt of states
running from PA through the Appalachians. And other things.
We have two great candidates, and either will
be subjected to withering and evil assaults this fall.
I agree - and one has 17 year's experience fighting
the evil bastards and she's still standing,
while the other's never been in the ring, unless
you count the Rev Wright mini-scandal.
In Obama's entire career, he's had the press on
his side, running stories that flatter him
while ignoring the shit they put in headlines
about the Clintons.
Example: If Obama had a funny or
weird laugh, and CNN ran loops of that constantly,
Obama would be considered a national joke the
way Howard Dean is. The press has
chosen to help Obama get elected and that's great
- until they turn on him.
You have decided that HRC will overcome this assault,
and that Obama will not,
No, I just think her chances are better than his.
...because the US swing vote is racist, meaning
that the majority of Americans are racist.
Racism is like evil - everyone has some,
Some people let it define them, (Bush, Cheney,
Reagan, Inhofe, Lott, etc) and some
people are knee-jerk, semi-racists who, after
some thought, often do the right thing.
OK, then let's vote for a candidate that will
sway enough racists to win the election.
That's your logic, that a capable black man has
less of a chance to become President than a capable white woman.
I didn't make the rules, I just observe people.
Isn't race what seperates Democrats and Republicans?
Republicans hate welfare and affirmative action
and fair housing rules because it allows "those people"
to get a leg up. When the GOP talks about
"less government" they mean less equality for blacks and gays.
And you may be right, but I'm voting for a candidate
inspires, who is capable of defending himself,
and who has articulated ideas that suggest a
new approach, especially (since in other ways they are
practically indistinguishable) in our foreign
relationships, a problem that has become acute. It is an
approach buttressed by enough foresight to oppose
a war that was obviously a mistake.
If I was a football referee I would throw a flag
Yes, Obama has a crystal ball and he knew things
would go very badly for us,
so I wonder why he stood silent and let it all
go down? Plus, it's easy to have an
opinion when you represent nobody and have no
constituents to keep happy.
If Al Qaeda had hit the Sears Tower on 9-11,
Obama might've been our biggest hawk.
And if it as obvious to me in 2003, then it should
have been obvious to HRC back then,
except that it either wasn't or couldn't be,
for other reasons. Being a senator is hard, I know.
But speaking up is easy - I wonder why Obama stayed
His face will put a BIG mirror up in our collective
face, much like Hillary's would if she were
the nominee. Let the f-ing chips fall where
they do, and let's see how deep this country's issues go.
John, what I'm hearing is "Let's gamble,"
and Earth's future is in the pot.
I enjoy gambling, but for much smaller stakes.
Thanks for keeping it clean.
Back to Bartcop.com
to Bart | Discuss
it on The BartCop Forum | Comment
on it at the BartBlog