any of the insta polls, which seem to give it to Obama.
Who ya’ gonna believe, K Lo? The facts or your own dying lies?
If John McCain threw a temper tantrum, called Obama an “uppity darkie,” mooned the audience, threw his pen at Bob Schieffer, and stormed off the stage in a huff, I suppose K Lo would swoon over “McCain’s authentic style, showing himself to be the man that America wants and needs right now.”
Whaddaya mean “If John McCain threw a temper tantrum”? I thought he was going to burst into flames any number of times, or at the very least, that his head would explode.If he wasn’t such a vicious old bastard, I’d almost feel sorry for him.
I mean if he actually was jumping up and down, pounding his fists on the floor, screaming “I wannit, I wannit, I wannit.”
It’s all down to electoral fraud now.
“It’s all down to electoral fraud now.”Democrats should be able to win this year without engaging in electoral fraud. But it looks like ACORN is working on that too — I guess for insurance.
And if Obama hung out with terrorists who have set off bombs here in the US, stated they wished they had set off more and were willng to do the same again,or if he hung out with racketeers who built substandardd housing for the poor with tens of millions of State funds and then split, or if he spent tens of millions of dollars meant for educational enrichment NOT on academic programs but rather to line the pockets of radical movementsthen you might–Wait a minute there are no IFs up there, it’s all true.
Dan:Compared to the crimes and cronyism of the Bush Administration over the last eight years, these claims seem positively pedestrian.
I like “hung out with terrorists”. It’s a nice vague way of saying “served on non-profit boards with one person who was accused of terrorism 40 years ago, but isn’t actually personal friends with and publicly repudiated”. But I like “Pallin’ around with terrorists” better, because the folksiness makes the crime a Crime Against the People.Besides, doesn’t McCain have connections to Cuban terrorist Eduardo Arocena? Someone who really did kill people and not just blow a lot of hot air like Ayers? Or is terrorism not a crime when directed against communist civilians?Still, let’s keep arguing this stupid guilt by association line. It’s not like anything important is happening anywhere.
“Redhand said… Dan:Compared to the crimes and cronyism of the Bush Administration over the last eight years, these claims seem positively pedestrian.October 17, 2008 “Bush isn’t running”I like “hung out with terrorists”. It’s a nice vague way of saying “served on non-profit boards with one person who was accused of terrorism 40 years ago, but isn’t actually personal friends with and publicly repudiated”. But I like “Pallin’ around with terrorists” better, because the folksiness makes the crime a Crime Against the People”No more like getting one’s start in politics under the tutalege of someone who escaped conviction because of illegal wiretapping Oh and who has never denied his involvement in terrorist bombing, who has repeatedly said the only thing he regrets is that he did not do more,be more militant in an interview with Connie Chan in 98 both he and his wife took that stand in an interview for a magazine which through some bizzare quirk of the Cosmos came out just after 9/11 he repeated thisAyers set of the Chicato Annenburg Challenge, took an unknown lawyer and put him in charge of tens of millions of dollars of dispersalThen ushered him into politics with a coming out fund raiser in his own home.Just someone in the neighborhood our kids go to the samee schools?I will admit one thing Obama can lie in an uttterly convincing and eloquent mannerI could go into more detail, but I hope the above is sufficiently unvauge.By the way Obama has had to repudiate quite a few of his former associates,Wright, Ayers, RezkoRacist, Terrorist, RacketeerSpeaks to a pattern of association.
Bush isn’t runningNo, the Repubs are running McBlinkey, a rage-driven hypocrite with an obscene sense of entitlement who has betrayed every “maverick” artifice he once used to pretend he wasn’t just another old pol.I wouldn’t vote for the crazed creature we saw in the last debate for anything. I swear, McCain reminded me of Gollum lusting for “the precious.”McCain’s an emotional trainwreck, and too old to think straight IMHO. (I wouldn’t be surprised if he’s had a few mini-strokes.) How else do you account for grotesque senior moments in this campaign like, “My fellow prisoners”?!As for Palin, that vindictive, ethically challenged harpie may be just your cup-of-tea, but any VP candidate who sings the praises of Dick Cheney’s brand of vice-presidential “flexibility” doesn’t get my vote. We’ve had enough unconstitutional power grabs and blatant illegality emanate from that office to last a lifetime.Compared to these two dangerous and incompetent clowns, voting for “Obama the terrorist” is very easy. I’ll do it with pride and a clear conscience that I’m voting hands down for the best candidate we’ve seen for President in decades.
I was going to respond to redhand’s post, but I know it’s pointless to try to keep counteracting the same overwrought nonsense. “I’m voting hands down for the best candidate we’ve seen for President in decades.”That’s probably the funniest part.
That’s probably the funniest part.I knew you’d appreciate it. Of course, coming from someone who is just fine with Cheney’s husbandry of the Administration’s torture policies, and the violation of numerous other US laws and basic principles of the separation of powers – Presidential Records Act, Presidential Signing Statements, ad nausiam – I consider the source.The rant was also great therapy after processing Dan’s “lost in the 60s” wingnuttery.