(Photo courtesy NPI)
Wow. I guess Clay Bennett is right. We really do need a new arena. That is, as long as Barack Obama is playing there, instead of the Sonics.
According to press reports Obama packed Key Arena with as many as 20,000 people, while thousands more were turned away from the door, in what was likely the largest crowd for a political candidate in the 16 years I’ve lived in Seattle. Compare that to the estimated 5,000 people who crowded Pier 30 for a glimpse of Hillary Clinton last night, or the hundreds of enthusiastic Republicans likely to show up at the Westin tonight for John McCain, and you get a good sense of where the excitement lies, at least in our blue corner of the nation. NPI has more here, here and here.
I’m thinking it’s gonna be a big day tomorrow for Obama. How big, could help determine the course of the campaign as pundits and voters fish for a clue as to which way the momentum is swinging after Super Tuesday, and by how much.
Oh yea, it was PACKED. A couple of minor points… 1. The Key is a lousy venue for a speaker. I’ll have to visit Obama’s YouTube site to hear everything he said. And 2. The wait was a bit long for the event to begin (nearly 2 hours from when I sat down). By the time the event started, everyone around me had lost their enthusiam — of course, we all got it back quick enough. Overall, I’m glad I was there, I think that I was a witness to history.
If you are a Progressive and not just a Democrat, then Barak is your man.
I was an Edwards supporter, but the last surrogate progressive standing is Barak.
A charismatic Democratic outsider who has an enthusiastic younger base vs a more mature Democrat favored by the party establishment. Sounds like 2004 all over again. Let’s just hope Obama doesn’t let out a scream.
By the way, those of you who have swallowed the Clinton machine’s koolaid and now are parroting their spin about how she’ll “hit the ground running,” and will be ready “from day one,” can you tell me what the hell that even means?
I honestly think people who actually believe that she’ll be “ready from day one,” but Obama for some reason won’t be, are dumber than Bush.
Well, now the spin coming out of the Clinton campaign is that Obama is the “Establishment” candidate and Clinton is the “Insurgent” candidate… Good luck selling that!
Billary has always been big on smoke and mirrors.
I thought I would get there at 10:45 a.m., but ran into massive traffic all around. Then couldn’t find any parking whatsoever in any parking lots nearby. I drove around looking for parking, finally parked at the top of Queen Anne hill! (At least I parked for free.) Got to Key Arena finally at about five minutes to noon, only to find that people had been turned away already for perhaps the past hour. Listened outside for nearly thirty minutes, then went into Center House to use the bathroom and see if I could grab a bite to eat. They had the big screen TV in there, and NW Cable News promised to cover the rally. So I watched all of the coverage on the Center House TV (with about a thousand other folks in there), since the speech by Governor Gregoire had started by the time I finally got to the head of the lunch line.
I was extremely impressed with Senator Obama’s speech. And with the massive turnout — there were probably over 20,000 inside the arena, over 5,000 standing outside, another 1,000 in the Center House, and perhaps even more who tried to come, but didn’t stick around outside (and instead listened to the car radio or TV at home after leaving).
@1: My sister went, and this is pretty much what she told me too.
I find this amazing: The coverage equates Hillary turning people away from a venue one quarter the size of the Arena to Obama’s draw. Get a clue. Hillary is using Bush’s trick of reduced expectations.
On the other hand, Obama energizes people and fires up their expectations.
@8
“Obama energizes people and fires up their expectations.” Like Howard Dean did?
My own feeling remains that Obama is long on rhetoric but will come up short on delivering the goods.
@3, 8
I was a Dean supporter in ’04 and I’m a Obama supporter now and I’m nervous.
Roger, getting people on their feet and moving and shouting is easily as much a part of politics as policy.
Napoleon could be said to have come up short “on delivering the goods”, but he did set the Grande Armee in motion.
The PuddySon was there with there with his UW friends.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200....._delegates
Obama leads in delegates
@11 If I were Obama, I would try to rent the old ‘Pope-Mobile’ with the bulletproof bubble. . . .
10 Roger, I think we’re all going to feel a little like that. To quote the Rolling Stones, “You can’t always get what you wa-ant…”
Hell, what’s a little disappointment compared to the last eight years of disgust?
michael…don’t be nervous. The primary is the time to vote your heart. While I disagree, most feel either Dem candidate would be ok, but Obama offers the promise of being great.
I’m going with the possibility of greatness myself, and doing so unashamedly.
Obama probably will win Washington’s caucuses, but that doesn’t make him the best option for Democrats hoping for fundamental changes to how our country is governed. Wht matters is not what a candidate says, but what he or she can accomplish in the office. I have always feared that Obama will be cannon fodder for Republicans determined to obstruct the Democratic agenda. We saw this week how tough it will be to get anything done, even with Republicans in a minority in Congress, when the GOP successfully blocked food stamps and extended unemployment benefits as the nation teeters into recession. How will a President Obama deal with Republican obstructionists? By caving in to them, like Pelosi and Reid?
Unfortunately, I won’t get to vote tomorrow because I’m still too suck to crawl out of my hole.
Roger. I would counter your skepticism with two points:
Hillary was an abject failure in her attempt at creating health care reform. How have things changed since then?
Two, with a bully pulpit and his ability to energize people and put them in the streets, I ask you, how successful do you think the Rethuglicans will be in thwarting any initiative Obama puts his weight behind?
I mean, really,can you see Denny Hastert having to deal with 100,000 full throated objectors in the streets outside Congress?
Roger Rabbit says:
My own feeling remains that Obama is long on rhetoric but will come up short on delivering the goods.
02/08/2008 at 6:19 pm
A year ago, most of the nation had no idea who Barack Obama was. One year ago today, virtually every person in the world knew who the Clintons were.
Obama’s task at the beginning of this campaign was to create, organize, fund a national apparatus that was capable of taking on the renowned Clinton Machine that had been in the making for 2 decades.
Obama’s task at the beginning of this campaign was to take on what conventional wisdom called the best politician of our time AND the best machine of our time.
He has out organized them, out funded them, out politiced them. In the course of that one year he has undone what it took the Clintons 2 decades to do.
He has sent that conventional wisdom best politician of our time to a closet to sit quietly.
So who again has come up short on delivering the goods?
too sick
@21 You’re confusing campaigning with governing.
@21 (continued) You haven’t described a single thing that Obama has delivered. The only thing you’ve described is a popularity contest. Yes, Obama is popular. But that has absolutely nothing to do with running the country.
Obama’s theme of bipartisanship is fatally flawed, because he assumes the cooperation of a GOP that we know from experience will fight Democratic initiatives tooth and claw. People dedicated to erasing the New Deal and 100 years of social and economic progress will hardly cooperate with Obama because he asks them to. He isn’t tough enough for the job ahead. He’ll be cannon fodder for the Republican obstructionists and retrogrades. We need someone who is willing and able to stomp the GOP into the dirt, because that’s what it’s going to take to solve our country’s problems. This is the wrong time for a Pollyanna. We need a street fighter.
Winning “the battle of the crowds” isn’t nearly enough. We need a candidate who can govern. Without that ability, merely winning the election in November will be pointless.
@10 Roger “Where’s the free handouts?” Rodent:
‘My own feeling remains that Obama is long on rhetoric but will come up short on delivering the goods.’
Funny! Kinda like the story of your life huh?
can you see Denny Hastert
TFF, that loser has turned tail and run out of the beltway. He didn’t bother to serve out his term.
He’ll probably be back to cash lobbying checks like that other lovable thief Trent Lott.
@17
I’m nervous about the money and power establishment lining up behind Clinton and taking down Obama like Kerry and Gephardt did to Dean in ’04. I’m not nervous about Obama.
Roger, My take is the exact opposite. The hallmark of the Clinton’s is “triangulation”. Half measures proposed and only partly enacted with a finger held up to test the wind. That doesn’t bode well for any “stomping”. Hillary is bought and paid for by Rupert Murdock. Any change he would countenance will be strictly smoke and mirrors.
@29 Yes. The structure of the parties is such that those who are always engaged in party machinations are not interested in letting “outsiders” near the levers of power.
For me it boils down to how do I feel about the candidate. First as person, as a human being and second as an experienced politician.
Obama wins the former and Hillary the latter.
All things being equal, I will take the better human being. The one with a vision. It is time for this country to have hope. To change the culture.
“We are the ones we have been waiting for”.
Barack Obama
We’ve had a surfeit of manipulation by lies, deception, and deception. Barack revives the possibility of idealism.
Needless to say, this terrifies some and is extremely dangerous. . .think of the transportation of the “microbe” Lenin in a sealed railroad car into the heart of Czarist Russia.
‘Whoops, make that: “lies, deception, and cynicism.
Whether it is Obama or Clinton, the next President will stand little chance getting much done without a large Democratic majority in congress. The repugs will never allow responsibility and honesty back into D.C unless they are silenced by the real moral majority.
And I truly believe that Obama is the candidate that can get the people to the polls to ensure that Democratic majority.
I have no doubt that Obama can deliver the goods, and make a very great party leader and President.
2008! The year America takes America back!
The world saw the rise of Al-Qaeda under the first Clinton. Bush has made things a million times worse. I believe Al-Qaeda when they say one day they’re going to do something that’ll make 9/11 look like nothing. And I believe Obama is the man to start to reverse this tragic course.
Electing a President isn’t about getting the most qualified person into the White House. It’s about electing a leader who will inspire people to follow his vision of what America should be. Obama has this vision and will change the course of history. Hillary is merely a competent manager. She’ll improve a few things on the domestic side, while America moves closer toward another tragedy.
Someone up above I think nailed it – Obama is the candidate of the Progressives, Clinton the candidate of the Working Class democrats.
Progressives caucus, Working Class primary.
It explains why she does so much better in primaries. I consider myself one of the latter, a working class, which is why her message resonates so much with me.
KillaTroll@30: Tree Froggy, stop stealing the PuddyThoughts. I said she traingulates and puts the wet finger in the wind and that’s why she changed her vote on drivers licenses for illegal aliens.
I also brought to you the data that Murdoch and his second in command are her supporters.
See Clueless Idiot, some people use the PuddyStudy Data as truths. You on the other hand are an Idiot.
Maybe I should thank TreeFrogKillaTroll for seeing it as Puddy does.
@27 Totally out of context and does not require a reply.
Ummm DustinJames: I am no NEW Democrat Progressive. Also since in your small mindedness you forgot Heilary said she was a NEW Progressive of the 1900s. Need the Source URL again since you can’t figger things out… or remember what Puddy posts in his PuddyStudies?
@30 You assume Hillary is Bill. She’s not.
39: Perfectly fits. You were looking for the Heilary medical handouts as you were a poor sick bunny. You said it earlier two weeks ago.
40 – Actually Bill identified as a “New Democrat”, not a New Progressive as you try and quote. And that didn’t apply to Hillary, I don’t recall her identifying as such in the campaign.
Your immediate cast seems to imply that republican could never be married to a democrat, because everyone who is married shares the exact same philosophy on everything – right?
@30 9continued) Also, 2008 is not 1992 or 1994. The issues today are different. The partisan backdrop is different. The complexion of Congress will be different. If Hillary becomes president in 2009, she won’t have as free a hand to govern as FDR or LBJ did, but she’ll have more room to run in than her husband ever did. After all, he had a Republican Congress for 6 of his 8 years, had been elected with only 42% of the popular vote, and the only burning issue on his plate was the economy. 2009 is different. The nation faces crises on multiple fronts and is coming out of a failed presidency. The only obstacles to health care reform, the right kind of social security reform, and tax reform is getting a 60-vote Senate majority to prevent Republican filibusters. She can reinvigorate federal regulation — sorely neglected under Bush — without Congress. The FDA, for example, will once again keep dangerous drugs off the market instead of sucking up to the drug companies. The FCC will serve the public interest instead of powerful media corporations. But all of this requires the will to make it happen, and it’s silly to talk about giving Republicans a seat at the table. The whole point of winning this election is to keep them away from the table so they can’t run our government for the benefit of their corporate cronies anymore.
Hillary is the workhorse. Barack is the show horse. We need ’em both this time around.
I see all these people who want so badly to believe in Obama. I want to believe in him, too, but I’ve lived too long to take pretty candidates at face value.
Tree Frog Farmer says:
Billary has always been big on smoke and mirrors.
did you feel this way during the clinton years? or even since? isn’t this the first time you have ever made a statement slamming the clintons? what happened? i thought they were gods to you……..
i KNEW this BEFORE clinton was elected….so, anyone should listen to you “the world’s slowest study”….why?
Well, at least you’ve got one part right, Roger:
“…I’ve lived too long…”
Isn’t taking things out of context fun?
Please, Supreme Being, let Obama win the nomination instead of Hillary so her aspirations to be prez are finally killed!!
oabama is like a rock star right now. he is riding the “kumbaya” wave.
but, what happens when people start asking the tough questions? about what he is really saying for instance?
sure, it’s pretty and sure it sounds civilized compared to hillary the hag BUT, what is he really saying?
and then during the main event when he gets slimed for his wife’s corporate connections, REZKO, his inexperience, crazy church that makes the mormons look normal…what then?
i have to agree with roger on this one. another dean moment coming up.
and how are you feeling roger?
that would be OBAMA…….duh!
nightmare scenario for the us republicans? an obama /clinton ticket or vica versa. that isn’t going to happen though unless jethro bodine kicks the bucket…….
DustinJames: Do you want another smackdown by her words like I gave you this past week? Don’t you learn anything from PuddyStudies? Last chance to let it go or be made a fool?
Your call.
Roger, don’t let age decay your hope. Don’t be afraid of change. Sometimes good things come in pretty packages.
i have to say that i laughed so hard that i almost choked [don’t get your hopes up lee and goldy] when i saw christine “is he really black? i hope he doesn’t read my bio” gregoire up there. what a moment!
don’t worry queenie……according to red eye he’s a halfrican american.
Well, I haven’t been smacked down yet, I have pride, so I’d probably leave the board for a year like I did last year. So please, by all means, ‘smack me down’.
Okay you were warned…
left foot….as a republican i would far prefer obama over clinton anytime. BUT, as to your comment that sometimes good things do come in pretty packages? that’s true enough, BUT those packages have to be opened, you know? and i don’t think he has anything to back those pretty speeches up with yet. in 4 to 8 years he will be a real force to reckon with. but now? isn’t going to happen.
and if you think clinton will go quietly into that good night……good night! are you kidding?
she is going to slime him but good….maybe so much that he will be forever wounded politically. and then what?
someone here made a reference to horses. work horse versus show horse. i’ll make another one based on that. as someone that has raised many a horse, if you work that horse before it’s old enough or ready enough you will blow it.i don’t care if it’s the fastest horse in the world….if it isn’t ready, you will blow the chances forever. and i think that’s what’s going to happen here.
i think that’s a real risk……..
DustinJames: Her words placed on this blog earlier:
“You know, it is a word that originally meant that you were for freedom, for the freedom to achieve, that you were willing to stand against big power and on behalf of the individual. Unfortunately, in the last 30, 40 years, it has been turned up on its head & it’s been made to seem as though it is a word that describes big government, totally contrary to what its meaning was in the 19th & early 20th century. I prefer the word “progressive,” which has a real American meaning, going back to the progressive era at the beginning of the 20th century. I consider myself a modern American progressive, someone who believes strongly in individual rights and freedoms, who believes that we are better as a society when we’re working together and when we find ways to help those who may not have all the advantages in life get the tools they need to lead a more productive life for themselves and their family.”
That body and head blow has to hurt DustinJames.
DustinJames: While clearing the cobwebs from that smackdown you can watch it here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C2oOoCdFblc
Just say “Thanks Puddy” and all will be well.
Pelletizer you need to teach this young punk to not test the PuddyWaters!
DustinJames you were smacked down last week then you tried to change the subject like most 16%ers here.
DustinJames: The subject was another Heilary statement you claimed she didn’t make.
Do you really want to be made silly twice within the same hour?
By the way DustinJames
James Carville – democrat is married to Mary matalin – Republican Google it bud.
From the debate DustinJames
SEN. CLINTON: You know, Rob — (laughter) — you know, it is a word that originally meant that you were for freedom, that you were for the freedom to achieve, that you were willing to stand against big power and on behalf of the individual. Unfortunately, in the last 30, 40 years, it has been turned up on its head, and it’s been made to seem as though it is a word that describes big government, totally contrary to what its meaning was in the 19th and early 20th century. I prefer the word “progressive,” which has a real American meaning, going back to the progressive era at the beginning of the 20th century. I consider myself a modern progressive, someone who believes strongly in individual rights and freedoms, who believes that we are better as a society when we’re working together and when we find ways to help those who may not have all the advantages in life get the tools they need to lead a more productive life for themselves and their families. So I consider myself a proud modern American progressive, and I think that’s the kind of philosophy and practice that we need to bring back to American politics. (Applause.)
MR. COOPER: So you wouldn’t use the word “liberal.” You’d say “progressive.”
SEN. CLINTON: (Nods her approval.)
DustinJames: just say uncle…
Right, correct, I am WELL aware of that quote, if you re-read my statement I was saying she didn’t identify as a PROGRESSIVE in the original Bill Clinton ’92 election.
Silly Puddybud, please read.
well, more specifically, I was saying she didn’t identify as a “NEW DEMOCRAT” – the term you use for Progressive in the ’92 election.
Dustin Dustin Dustin you wrote as an answer to my suggestion of her being a NEW Progressive Democrat of the 1900s: “And that didn’t apply to Hillary, I don’t recall her identifying as such in the campaign.”
Silly Dustin, you can’t change the argument after the smackdown!
You debate like Clueless Idiot.
So as expanded upon over at DailyKos, this shit is coming down to a brokered convention in Denver unless Obama runs the board with these voting states tomorrow + TX, OH, and PA in March.
If it comes down to a brokered convention, conventional wisdom says that it most likely will be a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton ticket to semi-satisfy both members of the party.
I know that it’s been said that it would never happen, but it looks more and more likely. Over at DailyKos, the Obama supporters concede (grumbly, I may add) it’s more likely to be a Clinton/Obama ticket since he’s got the extra years to spend as a VP, and it would remove the ‘experience’ issue that thus far has been his big achilles heel in the campaign.
As a Clinton supporter, I would be okay with a Clinton/Obama ticket, or an Obama/Clinton ticket.
As an Obama supporter, would you?
I didn’t bring up the 92 election. This is the same deflection tactic us tried last week.
Stay on topic. Where did I mention Bill Clinton of 1992 election in entry #40. I was responding to your assertion in #37: “Obama is the candidate of the Progressives”.
You need to remember what you write cuz Puddy does!
Puddybud – “I consider myself a modern progressive” – she said in the year 2007. Hardly the “1900’s” that you quote.
Are you on your medication?
My family (including my older sisters and brothers) will not vote for Clinton as president.
They remember the Bernie Schwarz deal of Loral in 1995 where Clinton authorized the sale of improved rocket telemetry technology to the Chicoms and Chinese Missiles can now lock onto American targets more efficiently.
Obama is the candidate of the Progressives. People that identify as “Progressive” strongly go for Obama. People that identify as “Working Class” strongly go for Hillary Clinton.
If she identifies as a “Progressive” in a 2007 debate, that doesn’t mean that the Progressive side of our party is going to immediately throw their arms open in a wide embrace, just like if Obama suddenly identified as a working class, do you think people like my sister who’s making minimum wage at two separate jobs is going to suddenly start embracing Obama?
Dustin Dustin Dustin you are as dense as spent uranium. Again her words:
“I prefer the word “progressive,” which has a real American meaning, going back to the progressive era at the beginning of the 20th century.”
I can’t help your thick skulledness.
Puddybud – your family won’t vote for someone who had no role in that deal? What’s wrong with your family?
Shit, by that logic, Hillary was getting blow jobs from Monica too.
DustinJames asks:”do you think people like my sister who’s making minimum wage at two separate jobs is going to suddenly start embracing Obama?”
Well
1) Don’t know your sister
2) Don’t know her politics but I bet if she’s anything like you I’d be scared
3) Don’t know why she working two jobs
4) Don’t know why she in this predicament
Correct, and she identifed as such in 2007. Show me where she identified as “Progressive” before 2000, and I’ll relent.
Just because she said the word has etymology back to 1900 doesn’t mean shit. I identified as a democrat in 1995, you couldn’t really call me one in 1982 just because “democrat” has been around since the 1800’s.
DustinJames: Again Triangulation and wet willie finger in the winds. My direct quote from before.
70:
As a liberal, progressive Democrat who supports Obama, I would be ecstatic with any combination of an Obama/Clinton ticket. The Republicans would never recover. With this ticket, the rest of the dominoes would fall in the House and Senate. It is possible to have a Senate and House where the minority has NO say. They would be going along for the ride.
Sound familiar you RightwingNutFucks?
DustinJames: Dont’ try and change the argument. Doesn’t work on Puddy. She’s running for president. Those are her words July 2007. I proved my point in post #40.
YOU LOSE GIVE IT UP!
She’s working class, she has a high school diploma, and is juggling a job at a daycare center and as a data entry clerk to make enough money to get by.
Not everyone out there has gone to college, can afford to go to college, or is good use for the college system.
Puddybud, you’ve proved that you have more in your kool-aid than just the red stuff. Beyond that, you’ve proven nothing.
Carl Left Foot: How’s the heart?
Obama/Clinton is acceptable to all my siblings and faimly. The other way is not palatable. Clinton in a subservient role fits us just fine.
Rog, Kennedy was whispering to O,,,B,,,a that if He would take her home, would he make him the VP….?????
He said…Hic..Hic. I’ddd be d willing to take that B over the bridge, if I Hic Hic could be the VP.
DustinJames I proved my original hypothesis in #40. You decided to take me on and lost. Big Time. Twice now.
Good try though DustinJames.
My Left Foot, I completely agree. I think this is an unstoppable combination, and I can’t tell you how much support I think the combined ticket would get, overwhelming.
@48, 49 Please, Great Mother Rabbit Spirit, where are the fucking lightning bolts when we need them?
Puddybud, I’ve said it before, I don’t see any proof. And with that, I’m not going to fill up this board with this debate and your delusions, so this will be my last response to anything on that topic from you – with me saying just one more time: You didn’t prove shit, please take your troll prozac.
@54 Don’t be too quick to brush off the practical wisdom that comes with seniority. There’s a reason why us old critters are still around.
Ahhh yes, the liberal mind of DustinJames. You show him the words and he rejects it. You give to him the YouTube and he denies she said it.
And he claims I need the prozac. These are the people supporting Heilary.
As I say to Clueless Idiot, DustinJames keep up the good work. You make your side proud.
You DustinJames, are stuck on stupid.
How Evolution Works
Smart rabbit: http://tinyurl.com/opkdy
Dumb bunny: http://tinyurl.com/ywcwff
DustinJames: THe wife helps people find the money to go to college when others say you can’t. It’s one of her acts of kindness. But we are in the need of prozac.
Okay. Keep on trucking baby. You got to keep on… trucking – Eddie Ruffin
See ya Dustin…
@91 He’s mistaken. You need Ritalin.
If I had no other reason to support Hillary, I would vote for her because wingnuts loathe her.
@64 All that proves is man’s brain is between his legs. See, e.g., Mark the Welshing Redneck.
Everyone DustinJames said in post#78 “Correct, and she identifed as such in 2007. Show me where she identified as “Progressive” before 2000, and I’ll relent.”
Well I was sitting here and something came back into the PuddyMind about a Guiliani dig back in 1999.
Smackdown#3: “The Clinton campaign sought to impart a darker motive for the donations from outside New York. ”The mayor has clearly tapped into a national network of well-funded right-wing donors intent on keeping Hillary Clinton’s progressive policies from the Senate,” Mrs. Clinton’s campaign manager, Bill de Blasio, said yesterday.”
I just query the NY Times. http://query.nytimes.com/gst/f.....A9669C8B63
See ya DustinJames
Pelletizer do you need to see your ever growing list again? You need a straight-jacket.
Like your rant on Haiti?
Like your rant on Ohio?
Like your rant on electronic voting machines?
Like your rant on the liberal MSM?
Like you used to think it took superior intellect and character to be a lawyer?
Like your rant using Ted Bundy as the answer for all ills?
Like your rant on “IF”?
And that’s just a microcosm of you small liberal mind!
You are the biggest BULLSHITTIUM placer on this board.
re 98: Shut the fuck up you garulous old fool.
re 98: You are an old, head-up-his-ass Republican.
“Please get out of the new boat if you can’t lend a hand.
For the times, they are a changin’!”
Finally!
And you are NOT a part of it — you old miserable smelly butt-crack Republican on-your-knees jag-off.
Headless Lucy@99&100: Surely not good to see mr. 24/7 arrive. How are your black friends treating you. Oh… you don’t have any?
We’ll I gots me many whitey friends you racist pond scum.
hehehe
Excuse me, Mr. PubbyTubby: I would not want to appear to be ungracious to a Brother: “…you old miserable (Negro) smelly butt-crack Republican on-your-knees jag-off.”
Peleltizer@96: You sure have the audacity to talk like that when you place all of the “exploits in your sick mind” on this board.
There you go headless@102. The best of your mind onto pixels.
I’m sitting here reading about the acts of kindness of Amy Wilson Carmichael and headless appears.
re 101: “We’ll I gots me many whitey friends you racist pond scum.”
If you looked whiter, you’d know what they say behind your back. Word to the wise.
@99 Tsk, Tsk… How unfriendly and unenlightened from someone who claims their side is the preeminent defender of free speech.
I-Burn to learn about headless lucy@99 Search this blog from September 9-15 2005 and you’ll see his racist rants against PacMan and me which only 6 of 62 NEW Progressive Democrats 16%ers have denounced.
*108 Oh, I’ve noticed. I’ve quite enjoyed the slapdowns you’ve been laying on him over the last few weeks.
Pud- what world do you live in where it is worth the time to search back into old posts?
Get a life bud.
Roger, all I have to say is I hope you get weel well soon.
We want no sick wabbitts :)
Cheers to you! …………:)
re 111: Pud’s got a weapon: “My pussy hurts — and it’s BLACK!”
Well, even this Obama supporter can concede that Puddy Bud has had the facts backing up his claims. I have a feeling we will not be hearing from Dustin James after the primary. He is probably part of the Clinton Machine. At least he acts that arrogant. One of the ingredients of honor is the ability to admit when you are wrong, and acknowledge it. Dusty acts arrogant and tries to bully you, and when that does not work, he tries to change the subject. Another of his stupid human tricks is to try to make you answer his fuzzy logic filled questions.
He debates like a fifth grader. Which is about one grade level higher than Hillary is capable of. I mean really…getting schooled by Tim Russert? Even Quayle would have sniffed that one out.
OK, that might be going a little far. But…Tim Russert? Holy Schnikeys!
In 2009, I think Clinton will end up as a Senator from NY.
Obama/Richardson, that is your winning ticket. After all, where are all the old ladies and pussy whipped men going to go? To Nader?
PuddyIdiot – so full of shit, he’s stinks up each thread.
You’re doing a great job for “YOUR SIDE”.
Keep it up Silly!!
Puddy,
I am for Obama because of the quality of his character (and because I believe he’ll kick McCain’s ass in November). As far as I can tell, the only reason you will vote for him is because of his skin color, given how you detest his positions. You have also suggested that you want a Republican Congress to rein him in. So, you want a president because of his skin color, but you don’t want him to succeed. Puddy, you have some dissonance going on here. The demons raging within you must be fierce.
re 113&114: How long you been driving that bus, Mike? Making more than $11 an hour yet?
I’m sure you have lots of time to brush up on your logic while you are driving around in circles all day.
And don’t try to call me ‘elitist’. The media has already explained that Hillary supporters are uneducated blue collar types.
See any discrepancies in the picture you are trying to paint?
Another part of honor is not using two names on a comments section of a blog so you can agree with your other identity. I guess we will not be hearing from cretin barrel or Dusty after the Hillary Machine leaves town, since they seem to be the same posing poster.
Uh, yeah. I am making more than $11 an hour. You can check the King County website if you want to know what a union transit operator for Metro makes. With my seniority(OT), I have no trouble keeping myself in chips and salsa.
You are busted, Dusty boy. But since you have no honor, you will just keep up your dick headed ways, posting blythely like everyone has a shred of respect for your opinions. Like we are all just idiots, and you are the light and the way. In your little mind, we all exist in the Dusty/Cretin solar system, we are all just little specks of sand, on a small lifeless planet, at the outer edge of the Sun. The Sun named Dusty Cretin.
The only problem with all this “change” in the air is it is going to cost about 10 trillion a year for all the new free shit. AND they are going to balance the budget. This is going to be good.
Creighton Beril @ 117: “How long you been driving that bus, Mike? Making more than $11 an hour yet?”
You’ve crossed the line, dude. You seem unfamiliar with Democratic and democratic values. Lay off.
It was the biggest crowd for any politician in the history of the city from what I heard. Very impressive indeed.
@18
RR, Obama has accomplished more as a U.S. Senator in his 1/2 term than Hillary has in her 1 1/2 terms as a Senator. The best being the most significant campaign reform since the 1970’s and the transparency law so that Congress Critters now have their earmarks listed.
Beyond that, you said it further down. Hillary sticks in the craw of those that vote Republican. She will drive their numbers and where as I don’t think they will have enough to prevent her from winning the White House, they will be enough that those that otherwise would have stayed home with the Bush debacle and McCain leading the ticket will come out and prevent Democratic wins down ticket in Red/Purple states. We have a chance with Obama to get a super-majority in the Senate. With that, there will be no Republican filibusters. Health care will be passed, while under Clinton that will not happen and Health care legislation will never make it through the Senate. The Republicans will make sure of it, just as they been doing with the Iraq War. To think otherwise is seriously delusional.
Totally separate from my year-long bias towards Obama:
Calls received this week – Clinton campaign: 4
Calls received this week – Obama campaign: 1
Of these, all 4 Clinton calls were automated recordings. The call from Obama campaign was a live human volunteer.
Clinton spent her money on expensive recordings because she can’t get enough committed people to help make personal calls. Hence her money drain.
Meanwhile, Obama uses the personal touch. Plus, they gave actual useful caucus information (site, time, etc) instead of trying to plug Obama’s campaign.
Money vs People. Pretty much sums it up.
I saw that Michelle Obama said that she would have “to think about” supporting and working for Hillary if she wins the nomination. Unlike a lot of spouses of candidates, Michelle Obama strikes me as a vicious vindictive person. Just a vibe she puts out. And where is the party unity? Are the Obama folks just going to get up and take their ball home if he doesn’t win? What’s the point in that? I want to embrace the democratic nominee and make sure we win. But the Obama partisans don’t seem to project the same spirit. All their rhetoric is about how they are kept out of the system. And this strikes me as a formula for party fracturing, not consolidation around a nominee. So maybe Obama and all the visible members of his campaign should pledge to support the nominee. Hillary has already said as much, it is a no brainer response. And the fact that Michelle Obama “has to think about it” worries me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gp_7nnIvWJM
I hate prejudice of any kind..black/white, Hispanic, Asian. However, before you caucus today you need to read this.
Obama Proves America Is Still Racist
By Ben Shapiro
CNSNews.com Commentary
February 08, 2008
Super Tuesday was certainly super for Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama. The less-than-one-term senator proved he was more than a flash in the pan with wins in Alabama, Connecticut, Colorado, Delaware, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota and Utah. Obama is a serious challenger for the Democratic nomination.
The media – and Obama’s supporters – would have us believe that Super Tuesday was super for America. Obama’s big showing, we are told, demonstrates that Americans have finally moved beyond the racial divisions of the past.
This is exactly wrong. Obama’s big showing demonstrates how far Americans still have to go when it comes to race.
Barack Obama is the Halle Berry of American politics – he’s a pretty, non-threatening face who happens to be the right color and, therefore, demands our plaudits. Never mind that he was brought up by his white mother, went to a private high school and has spent about as much time facing down serious racism as Mitt Romney. He’s got African genes, and we’re all supposed to pull the lever for him to prove to ourselves that we’re not racists.
Let’s not kid ourselves: Obama’s candidacy is strictly about his skin color. If Americans were truly ready to move beyond race, they’d take a look at Obama the Candidate rather than Obama the Friendly Black Guy.
And here’s what they’d see:
Obama is a candidate whose empty bombast could float a fleet of hot air balloons. “We are more than a collection of Red States and Blue States,” Obama spouted on Super Tuesday during his victory speech. “We are, and always will be, the United States of America.” This prompted my 14-year-old sister to exclaim, facetiously, “So that’s why they call it the United States.”
Obama is a modern day Warren G. Harding, of whom William McAdoo once said, “His speeches leave the impression of an army of pompous phrases moving over the landscape in search of an idea. Sometimes these meandering words would actually capture a struggling thought and bear it triumphantly a prisoner in their midst until it died of servitude and overwork.”
The only difference between Harding and Obama is that Obama’s speeches never actually capture a struggling thought – and if they did, they’d have to waterboard it for information. Obama’s speechmaking isn’t deep. It is profundity for dunces.
Obama is a candidate who knows less about foreign policy than Rick Salomon, who at least knows about Paris. He has suggested unilaterally invading Pakistan while inviting Muslim dictators to a sit-down, no questions asked. He points to the gap between “worlds of plenty and worlds of want” as the source of Islamic terrorism. He states that the real threat to peace in the Middle East isn’t Islamic extremism, it’s “cynicism.” He’s Pollyanna on steroids.
Obama is a candidate with the same amount of federal experience as Ken Salazar. Salazar is a Democratic senator from Colorado, elected in 2004, He has actually been involved in major legislation. He won his seat in a heated race – unlike Obama, who inherited his seat when Republican opponent Jack Ryan imploded due to a sex scandal.
You probably haven’t heard of Ken Salazar. But you’ve heard of Barack Obama. That’s for one reason and one reason only: Obama’s race.
So before Americans punch the ballot for Obama and pat themselves on the back for their racial awareness, let’s get one thing straight: It’s the soft bigotry of low expectations that’s lifting Obama to unprecedented heights.
If voters looked realistically at Obama, unblinded by the desperate desire to elect a nonmilitant African-American to the presidency, they’d scoff. And they’d have every right to do so. Obama is utterly unqualified to be president of the United States.
If we elect him to the White House based on the misguided desire to feel good about our own broadmindedness – if we ignore his emptiness in favor of his melanin – we deserve what we get.
Obsma’s nomination will bring out the Confederate-flag waving racists that dominate the GOP’s base. This will expose the GOP for its true nature. Win or lose, it will be good for America to finally see what the republicans “core values” are – hate.
Candidate “Feel-good” Obama is proposing the Americans With No Abilities or Ambition Act (AWNAA) to provide aid & special status for folks who choose not to get an education and sit around doing drugs & impregnating young women or becoming impregnated….and everything else to buy votes. Obama has become a rock-star for Hollywood & lazy asses.
On foreign policy, Feel-good will “negotiate with everyone!!”. Isn’t that what Neville Chamberlain did with Hitler & the Munich Pact?? That worked out well. Isn’t that what Svoboda of Czechoslavakia did in 1968 with Breshnev of Russia….and 3 weeks later they were invaded.
Happy days are here again!!
I am a white male who served in South East Asia in the sixties. I am happy that we, the Caucasians, have apparently gotten past some of our prejudices. We are accepting of all nationalities in all aspects of life. I am not sure we have gotten past these prejudices in the minority world. The negro or black vote in Georgia was 87% for one specific candidate. That same candidate received 45% of the white male vote. Now the white females supported this candidate at 37%. If this candidate can only win with black votes or independent votes something is wrong. Another thing, here in Cincinnati, is the school drop-out rate. In the inner city schools the rate is near 10% These voter are the same ones Barack Obama is attracting. This is not a negative on his part, it is just that there is only one consideration when this group of voters are voting.
Barack reminds me of the Bengal coaches that have been in Cincinnati for the last seventeen years. The are very good cheer leaders, but the Bengal’s have hade only one winning season. Rah rah and optimism got us nothing but mostly loosing seasons. Leadership comes from chances taken and results achieved. Three years spent in the U.S. senate with one of them spent campaigning isn’t much of an accomplished record. One major accomplishment was getting endorsed by Senator John Kerry and Senator Ted Kennedy. This endorsement is the very Old Washington Establishment that Barack portrays Mrs. Clinton as being and his being against.
Some of you youngsters need to research how the republican attach machine went after President Carter. Then they went after President Clinton for frivolous items until they could find something that would work. Finally look at how they attacked Harold Ford of Tennessee two years ago. Obama needs to spend eight years as V.P. with Mrs. Clinton. He would learn how to deal with the republicans and then he could be President for eight years.
If Barack is the democratic candidate, some of us will likely vote republican for President and try to have a democratic congress to keep things in check. The reason for this is if the republicans can keep the public distracted the way they did under Clinton and Carter. When this happens no governing is accomplished and they get every thing back in four years. Remember when President Clinton went after Osama Bin Lauden he got accused of the tail waging the dog. The republicans were after President Clinton and he was after Osama. Who hit the world trade center eight months after Bush took over the White house.
Why does experience count? Would we want our sons and daughters being led into battle in a war by a rookie or a seasoned accomplished veteran? Is General Patrais a rookie or a veteran? We have numerous Lieutenants just out of officers candidate school who are very bright, but they just don’t know what they don’t know.
#125
From Wikipedia:
“Cybercast News Service (also CNSNews.com) is a conservative news website operated by the Media Research Center. It was founded on June 16, 1998 under the name “Conservative News Service”
“Media Matters for America has also repeatedly criticized the MRC, charging they view the media “through a funhouse mirror that renders everything–even the facts themselves–as manifestations of insidious bias.””
So at the end of the road for the Clinton Machine, a bunch of Hillary supporters show up on HA on the morning of an important caucus to support Hillary Rodham Clinton by using a backhanded racist smear against Obama. Remember when Clinton said that a vast right wing conspiracy was out to get her and Bill? Looks like she has hired a few of them to blog in the days leading up to our caucuses. Dusty, Cretin, and now this newbie. All spreading the hate for Obama.
@90 Roger “Where’s the free handouts?” Rodent:
‘Don’t be too quick to brush off the practical wisdom that comes with seniority. There’s a reason why us old critters are still around.’
Yes, it’s because of theose med. coupons that the gov’t gives you. Extended life expectancy. As far as your self-described “practical wisdom”, those of us that are sane call those delusions. Crusty ole’ bunny!
#129.
What is Hillary’s experience? Seven years of elected office, versus twelve for Obama?
Proud Leftist: You betcha I am supporting Barack Obama because he’s black. You betcha I am supporting Barack Obama because Heilary is a fool.
See the difference? No? Then I can’t help you.
I want Barack Obama to discuss the plight of our people in poverty held down by the poverty pimps of your party Jesse and Al. Have you noticed the poverty pimps have been silent even when the “great black man” tried to inject them into the race over South Carolina. That was telling for my family. Even one of my older sisters became incensed over Bill comments and she is more blue than most 16%ers here.
I want Barack Obama to discuss the lousy inner city school systems perpetrated by the NEA. What are they doing to ensure poor kids leave with a chance at higher education?
I want Barack Obama to discuss the drug problem in the inner city and why the poverty pimps allow it to go on Maxine Waters. What has Maxine done to clean up her LA neighborhood?
I can go on and on how your party treats my people. I can see Barack bringing thee to the forefront of discussion. There are many a Republican, black and white who will vote for Barack and Republican elsewhere. We have seen Nancy and Harry in action and they scare us.
I also know since Heilary has up to 55% negatives many independents will run forrest run from her.
Just look at who supports her, racists like Cretin Headless Lucy Baril.
Why is it every time I prove another name used by headless is him by his words you all give him a pass. This is why I despise almost all of the 16%ers here. This is why PacMan is almost always a no show anymore. Haters who drink haterade will caucus for heilary. Have at it ladies and gents.
Curiously Brenda H. has gone SILENT. The Sound of Silence – Simon and Garfunkel.
To Clueless Idiot@115: When you have a cogent thought tell your son first. Allow him to determine if it works.
The only reason I deal with you is you said the words of Creighton the Cretin Headless Lucy Baril don’t belong here. Other than that your commentary is so much from the left-wing sites it’s pathetic.
So Busdrivermike are you ready to denounce cretin headless lucy’s blog racism?
I noticed proud leftist is missing in action on this issue as always.
Why do you think I’d break bread with correctnotright and rhp6033? At least the acknowledged his racism and came out against it. They also admitted they were wrong when I delivered the PuddyFacts.
Why do you think PacMan and I are willing to meet GBS and talk over lunch?
They denounced headless lucy people. The most plain and simple commentary one can deliver here.
We can disagree over politics but we can look each other in the eye and talk civilly.
From Andrew Sullivan:
“A meme is developing is that support for Obama is all emotion, fantasy, hysteria, etc. There’s no question that the emotions behind Obama are powerful. And any fool can see why. His oratory does what oratory should. He is the greatest public speaker in American life since Reagan. And the shame and demoralization of the Bush-Cheney years – when we launched a war with reckless indifference to planning it, when we tortured prisoners and called it “enhanced interrogation”, when we saw a government rendered so utterly useless that a hurricane made the US look like the third world, when conservatives added $32 trillion to the debt of the next generation, when a president made sophomoric jokes about not finding weapons of mass destruction he leveraged American global credibility on … if you don’t feel emotions in wanting to put this disgrace of an administration behind us, then you are not being rational.
But the strongest case for Obama is not emotional; it is as coolly rational as he is. I tried to express it in my “Goodbye To All That” essay. On the most critical issues we face – Iraq, the war against Jihadism, healthcare, and the economy – he makes more sense as a president than Clinton. And when you watch the knee-jerk opposition to him, I think it is actually more emotional and less rational than the support for him. Fear is more emotional than hope.
And defending Clinton on the grounds of “experience” and “substance” is a fairy tale on both counts, if you pardon the expression. Her legislative experience is one term longer than Obama’s (and that’s if you don’t count Obama’s state legislative record), is notable mainly for its uninspired diligence in constituency work, and on the most important issue of the day, Iraq, simply wrong. Her main executive branch experience was destroying a historic opportunity for healthcare reform through arrogance, secrecy and over-reach. Her “substance” claim is just as phony. There is no detail in her policy apparatus that isn’t matched by Obama’s. But you’ve heard a lot from me on this.”
Proud Leftist@120: So you see the haterade of headless lucy on the working folks?
Waaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa haaaaaa haaaaaaa
The Obama cult of personality scares me in the same way the Deaniacs scared me in ’04. A campaign built on personal likeability is perfect fodder for the right wing smear machine. By the time the GOP gets done with him most Americans won’t be able to tell the difference between Barak Obama and Saddam Hussein or Osama Bin Laden. Unfair yes, but we’ve seen them turn the strengths of two past candidates Gore and Kerry into major character flaws. Of course they’ll try the same thing with Clinton, however we’ve all heard the smears already and most everyone has already decided whether they buy into them or not.
@138,
Clinton Backer Spin Warning!
notice how ewp turns simply being excited and inspired by a candidate into “cult of personality?”
Why is it every time I prove another name used by headless is him by his words you all give him a pass.
No one here has expressed support for HL’s statements.
However, everyone here is unanimous is in rejecting you.
We don’t and never will take orders from you. It’s that simple.
Oh and you’re so addicted to right wing bullshit it isn’t funny.
@141 Just out of curiousity, how many times a day do you use ‘racist’, ‘fascist’ or ‘right-wing’ in a sentence?
Let me guess:
The Israeli’s are Nazi’s. The US Military is filled with clueless losers. All Republicans (and most Democrats) are useless drones who do and think what their corporate masters tell them. And Socialism *really will* work, if it’s implemented correctly, oh and the *right* people are in charge.
That about cover it?
After reading all these comments (no – i really didn’t read them all, there are too many and too little time) I can surely say the following: PuddyBrain is retarded.
#74 DustinJames says:
Good point. Your sister is working 2 crappy jobs and he’s a successful black man. I can see why she would be bitter, and vote democrat.
The last candidate to fill Key Arena for a political rally was Ralph Nader. Just saying.
#80 My Left Foot says:
Gotta love it when the dixiecrats speak their mind.
#106 Creighton Baril says:
I’ve been saying that for a while. The white liberals in seattle are racist. If only the black people knew what the whites were saying behind their backs.
Tommy Thompson & Thorn: Have yet to belly-up to the table and say something useful here.
Clueless Idiot@141: Sorry idiot silent majority doesn’t work on racism it enables it.
What a hemorrhoid. Lancing is the next step.
@149 “Lancing is the next step.”
I’d suggesting starting at the neck.
Here’s my set of pictures from the rally.
#138: “The Obama cult of personality scares me in the same way the Deaniacs scared me in ‘04.”
That’s one of those declining verbs, isn’t it? I‘ve made a rational choice, you are making a choice swept by emotion, he‘s a member of a cult of personality…
We’ve already seen how effectively Obama handles being swiftboated by the way he’s reacted to the smears regarding “experience” by a Senator with barely more tenure than he has, no other elective record, and no named bills passed.
If you want to have a nominee that many in the GOP base will find even more objectionable than McCain, by all means, support Clinton. If you want a candidate who is open to the attack, “35 years experience? Let me remind you what I was doing 35 years ago while you were in anti-war rallies, Senator Clinton…”
If, instead, you want a candidate who will resolutely keep the campaign focussed on the issues — where Democrats always outpoll the GOP — the clear (and, dare I say it, rational) choice is Obama.
125:“Obama is a candidate who knows less about foreign policy …”
Take a look at this video, dated 11/25/2002. At the time, Obama was “only” a state legislator — not running for President, nor with an obvious larger agenda. Notice how Obama states flatly he would vote against a war in Iraq. Notice how his main concern is that Iraq, “would splinter into factions” — and then he names the three main ones, Shias, Kurds, and Sunnis. Notice how, domestically, he worries that voting for war would give a carte blanche to the administration for a doctrine of preemptive strikes that wouldn’t be a good precedent.
There were a great many in DC at the time who were profoundly more ignorant of what was at stake than Obama.
Some them are running for President today.
“You probably haven’t heard of Ken Salazar. But you’ve heard of Barack Obama. That’s for one reason and one reason only: Obama’s race.”
As it happens, I have heard of Ken Salazar. Mostly what I’ve heard is disappointment, from general friends in Colorado to ex-staffers of his. If you do a Google on “salazar dino voting record” — Dino in this case standing for “democrat in name only,” and not narcissistic Republican candidates for governor who won’t make way for someone competitive — you’ll 2,200 hits.
I suspect that has much more to do with why Ken Salazar hasn’t made it at all onto the national scene than his race.
145: “The last candidate to fill Key Arena for a political rally was Ralph Nader. Just saying.”
Actually, no.
Here’s a contemporary report from the Seattle Weekly. It estimated the crowd for Nader in 2000 at 10,000.
This is the New York Times’ recent article on Washington’s race:
“In nearby Seattle, at the Key Arena, where the N.B.A.’s SuperSonics play, about 17,000 people gathered to see Mr. Obama, filling the building and leaving nearly 3,000 people waiting outside.”
That would put Obama’s total draw at 20,000, or double Nader’s. It would also imply Nader only filled about 60% of Key Arena’s seats — which I wouldn’t call, “full.”
Hal – Way to dissect ewp – Clinton Jock Strap.
re 134: GBS is a figment of your fertile imagination. He seems to resurrect when he serves your purpose of inviting people to meet with you. You need a liberal sock-puppet to say they’ve met with you and that you are a swell guy with very dark skin.
Not buyin’ it, Pud.