DISQUS

Mike_H · 1 year ago

Given how other, male, Democratic second-place candidates have been treated in previous conventions... and given how incredible close this year's race was, this seems reasonable, fair, and adult. And keeping with tradition.

It will certainly do much more for fostering true unity than shutting Clinton out of the convention.

Good on both Obama and Clinton for working this out.

lincat · 1 year ago

Why is it always about Hillary. It's his night. When he won the primaries she made sure she got all of the attention. He deserves this to be his night only.

Cpeterka · 1 year ago

BITCH !!

KarenMrsLloydRichards · 1 year ago

On the one hand, there is abundant precedent for it, so it will be OK. On the other hand, Hillary's Bitter Enders and PUMAs will never be appeased and Obama and Dean should have let them know it was all over and they needed to STFU. If it ultimately means turning the page on the Clinton Era, at long last, then Obama and the rest of us can go through the motions--it's all Kabuki theater in the final analysis.

existenz · 1 year ago

I don't see a problem with it. I remember Jerry Brown getting votes at the DNC convention in 1992, which helped me get over his loss. As long as Clinton doesn't WIN the vote, which she won't, it will be a unifying moment. I wasn't comfortable with denying a roll call vote, and I'm glad they did this.

Anyway, it's just Tuesday night. It will be old news by the time Thurs. night comes around.

scytherius · 1 year ago

Wow. She is indeed one of the biggest bitches of ALL time.

SouthernYankee · 1 year ago

Gosh I feel the same way. The Clintons aren't happy unless they have the center of attention.
I wouldn't of let Bill Clinton speak. He is such a sore loser. I wouldn't have let them take over
in Denver. Hell the bitch wants her own producer. What is she getting ready for? The next election.
If I were Obama I would want final approval of their speeches. If they don't give a full support I wouldn't
let Bill speak on Wed. They way they are doing things you would think its their convention only. Shame
on them for over stepping Obama like that.

ezpz · 1 year ago

Feh!

If the roles were reversed, and Sen Obama had come in 2nd, would HIS name be placed into nomination to commemorate the even MORE historic campaign of an African American nominee?

I didn't think so either.

moreleesafer · 1 year ago

I was thinking the same thing. Why should he have to share his big night?

BorninUSA · 1 year ago

Why are we just hearing about this? WTF does Hillary want? With some of the kooks supporting her they will take this as a signal to get behind Hillary and make sure she is the candidate. Things could get ugly. I honestly thought that next time around, in 8 years, I would vote for Hillary but never after this.

jr · 1 year ago

I'm going to look for condos in Canada now. This is Kennedy and Carter all over again. McCain's going to win

Õ¿Õ · 1 year ago

I don't see that yet. But if I suddenly stop commenting, you know I saw something and that's the time to make a move...

SouthernYankee · 1 year ago

Now now friends, lets all calm down. Oh hell find me one of those condos. I don't think I could
last 4 yrs of McCain or the Clintons. I worry McCain looking for war somewhere and Bill looking
for piece of ass somewhere in the White House.

ezpz · 1 year ago

I have a queasy feeling about this.
It wasn't so long ago that she made the awful RFK references.

Sorry, but I don't trust the Clintons, whom, until these primaries, I defended at every turn.

Now, I have second and third thoughts about Vince Foster, Ron Brown, and many others.

bumpkis · 1 year ago

Would JFK jr be in your thoughts as well?

Õ¿Õ · 1 year ago

Would you stop being so cryptic all the time now and back the way you used to be. That avatar has gone to your head.

ezpz · 1 year ago

I think there was definitely more to that than the 'official' story.

SouthernYankee · 1 year ago

Now stop thinking like a republican. The Clintons are alot of things but
I don't believe any of that cramp. They may be bitches and ho's but that it.

jimfromthefoothills · 1 year ago

Her convention. Like Dukakis licking Jesse Jackson's balls at the convention, Obama apparently must do the same thing. What if he just told her to fuck off? Then what would she do?

iggy · 1 year ago

I fail to see why people are so angry about this. Placing both names in nomination has been pretty common in previous elections.

I also don't get why people are calling Senator Clinton names when the decision appears to have the full support and acquiescence of Senator Obama.

I also think it's a good idea. I don't want Hillary supporters staying home, and the fact is that she had a lot of support. It would be really stupid to pull a Bush and pretend that something that was damned near a tie was actually a sweeping mandate for one side. That causes lots of anger.

The two should unite and go forward, and that appears to be what they are doing.

SouthernYankee · 1 year ago

Don't you bet on the farm iggy. Those Clintons are dirty players. She speaks out of both side of her mouth.
Don't ever turn your back on them. Just look what happen when Gov Richardson sided with Obama. You are
either for them or against them. Just like the Bushies. They want total loyalty at all costs.

Ben Dover · 1 year ago

Clinton supporters voices WERE heard during the primaries. Clinton LOST the primary election. Hillary Clinton needs to STFU, get behind Obama and do everything she can to see him elected. ALL she is trying to do now is throw the election and position HERSELF for the next general election.

NOTE TO HILLARY: People like me, now, will NEVER vote for you after this self serving stunt you're pulling. NEVER.

SkippyFlipjack · 1 year ago

exactly. she made her case to the Democratic faithful, and they decided by a pretty close margin that they wanted Obama to be their candidate. her supporters were heard, and they found that they were slightly fewer in number than Obama's.

I also wonder why the outcry, though; isn't there a roll call vote every four years?

kirkaracha · 1 year ago

No, not by a pretty close margin. The popular vote doesn't matter; Obama took an insurmountable lead in delegates in February and had a commanding lead in delegates by the end of the primaries.

SkippyFlipjack · 1 year ago

LOL.. how does an insurmountable lead turn into a commanding one? isn't it usually the other way around?

I'm no hillary supporter -- and the closeness of the race wasn't even my point -- but you should check your history. at the end of February, Obama was ahead (1315-1245, says CNN) and gathering steam. but the only way that was an insurmountable lead is if by that word you mean "she didn't surmount it."

kirkaracha · 1 year ago

You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

I meant "she didn't surmount it," because she didn't, you know, surmount it. Obama built a big lead in pledged delegates in February, which Clinton was unable to surmount; his lead turned into a commanding lead in May as the super delegates were declaring for him 4:1.

SkippyFlipjack · 1 year ago

to me, an insurmountable lead means one that she couldn't, in February, possibly surmount. in fact, she absolutely could, but she didn't. it's like the ballgame is over and you're saying that the visiting team took an insurmountable 1-0 lead in the top of the first, just because the game ended 1-0.

but if the same word was used by the WSJ, I guess that means it's okay.

(stop that rhyming; I mean it)

barts · 1 year ago

Oh my God! Rather than repudiating the Republicans in ONE unified Democratic voice we're going to continue waste time money and effort to funnel more sugar up Clinton's ass.

McGive me a Mcfuckin Break!

davidkc · 1 year ago

As usual, Hillary is all about Hillary. And once again, Obama caves to the Clintons' demands and gets nothing much in return, except their agreement to not trash him in any kind of blatant way. The Clintons are not lifting a finger to help get Obama elected. All of their efforts seem to be going into rehabilitating their own images. So much for party unity.

scottinsf · 1 year ago

Sounds like a great statement to me!

Ben Dover · 1 year ago

Hillary is planning on a Convention Coup, she will demand that she take the nomination or threaten to walk and take her "supporters" with her. Basically, if she is allowed to get away with this; McSame wins. And I believe, by her actions, that she wants this to happen so she can smugly say, "See, I told you so."
Bite it Clinton. You LOST.

SouthernYankee · 1 year ago

Well that something different. Bush did it 2000 on election night. She learns from the best.

mmedefarge · 1 year ago

my browser is acting weird--I just tried to post and it disappeared somewhere...weird. Just wanted to say how creepy this is----I feel the Clintons are up to something awful...

barts · 1 year ago

Hillary almost won, but din't. She waged a great campaign, but not good enough. Let's put this past us and recognized that Obama is our final choice.

Obama's presidency has been handed to him; all he has to do is take it.

This dual nomination crap - the republicans are going to a have a field day.

barts · 1 year ago

"and to to"?

I assume (and hope) that the typo is John's...

mirth · 1 year ago

I agree, this stinks. But there is this to consider:

Obama comes out of Chicago politics and he surely knows the game. In his convention negotiations with Hillary, perhaps he solidified her support of his administration policies. I f'king hate her and I would never vote for her, but I do want her cooperation in the Senate.

As KarenMrsLloydRichards writes below, this is theater. If it turns the page on the Clinton era, in the Big Picture this is good.

scottinsf · 1 year ago

Exactly!

barts · 1 year ago

This latest stunt is representative of our Democratic party as a whole. We can't agree on anything. One thing the Republicans do better is show some unity and backbone.

PeteWa · 1 year ago

yes, let us honor Hillary's historic campaign...
/rollseyes

cowboyneok · 1 year ago

Question:

If someone went into a State Republican headquarters and shot the STATE PARTY CHAIRMAN dead, wouldn't it be covered 24/7 by cable news? Why the news blackout on cable news
re: Republican wingnut going into Democratic Party headquarters in Arkansas and shooting the state party chairman?

crickets...

ezpz · 1 year ago

I was thinking the same thing.

IIRC, Keith didn't even mention it last night.

Õ¿Õ · 1 year ago

The dittoheads are murdering us. O&W asked some months back about should we arm ourselves and I didn't know but now I'm wondering if we should. If perdictions from the experts are true, it's only going to get worse.

scottinsf · 1 year ago

I've definitely noticed a blackout on this story. Tight lips even.

Hmmm.....

Soundboy_jeff_meanie · 1 year ago

it does seem really odd...

Yesterday afternoon it was all over CNN... and he was in critical condition.

this morning? checked CNN to see if there was an update... had to search a bit before finding out he'd died.
you'd have thought the press would be all over this... who shot him? why did he do it? etc...

nada.

and yet... Anna Nicole Smith got MONTHS of coverage on ALL the networks.

scottinsf · 1 year ago

So you noticed it too.

For crying out loud. You would THINK we could get some more details. To all the folks that say "let's not speculate" I say Fuck you! I want the facts. This story is getting buried for some reason.

Thank you Jeff. You're right again.

cowboyneok · 1 year ago

Maybe the media is afraid if they report on it too much there might be some kind of backlash against Republicans that might hurt their water carrying campaign for John McCain?

The only reason why this isn't big news is it doesn't benefit Republicans to keep reporting another Republican terrorist has committed a Terrorist Act against Democrats in post 9/11 America!

ron071 · 1 year ago

This murder must be investigated as to the motive. It's a must do regardless of where the chips may fall.

zavlin · 1 year ago

Disgusting. This is going to be used to fuel ballot confusion, while encouraging others to vote hillary anyway.

Soundboy_jeff_meanie · 1 year ago

umm... will Obama's security check hillary for a strap-on that night?

I mean, I can TOTALLY see her try and fuck him.

Soundboy_jeff_meanie · 1 year ago

“With every voice heard and the Party strongly united..."

---

I'm telling ya... read that as hillary saying "Obama doesn't know it yet, but I'm going to petition for ALL the delegates from Michagan and
Florida be counted. Yup, I'M THE ONE AND ONLY WINNER HERE!!!!"

she's gonna try and fuck him.

ezpz · 1 year ago

Obama recently asked that they all be seated.
I got that queasy feeling then too.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/m.s.-bellows/obam...

Õ¿Õ · 1 year ago

Just shut the fuck up. Hillary is the greatest woman on the planet.

Soundboy_jeff_meanie · 1 year ago

just ask her!

Dusty · 1 year ago

WOW, you must be Chelsea Clinton.

kladinvt · 1 year ago

Why in the world would you say that? What has she actually accomplished? What an insulting thing to say to all the really great women out there!

zavlin · 1 year ago

The more i think about this the stranger it seems, and it leads me to this: is the obama camp preparing to name hillary as VP? Everyone has said she was dead in the running. but..dual nomination??? Even symbollicaly its hard to declare this without creating alot of confusion and stirring up more resentments. By giving hillary a "fake" victory of a nomination they are prying open wounds. The only way this makes any sense is if obama is naming her as vp. Dual nomination? WTF?

Ben Dover · 1 year ago

Let's not forget that Hillary only "suspended" her campaign, she never ended it. Hillary already knew that she was going to cause a floor fight and split the party for her own good and not for anyone else.

Obama should pull her, and Bill's, invitation to speak at the convention. If he doesn't put a stop to her maniacal grab for power now, before the convention, she will never let up.

Hillary could have gone on and become an American statesman, and a damn fine one. But she cannot believe that anyone is more "deserving" than her to take the WH. She was the lesser choice during the primaries, she is a worse choice now.

Õ¿Õ · 1 year ago

Well, I was brutally attacked by her supporters here first before anyone else on the internet and you all basically threw me to the wolves as far as that was concerned. I'm able to see things in advance. Now it's different but not back then. Cowards. I defended myself alone here and at another blog and was ganged up against. But ya know what? I'm still here. I endure.

dolly lanna · 1 year ago

This is only hurting Hillary and causing Democrats to wince at the theatre that is going on. How pathetic. I almost thought Hillary could be VP, now I think that would be more theatre and not good for the country. Sorry Hillary, but you and your few PUMAS are really silly and harmful. This is also bad for woman. Woman need more understanding, more consoling, more respect, more hugging, more attention, more expression of feelings,, more whining, more silliness. Jeeeez is this sterotypical action.
From a woman not a republican man.

ezpz · 1 year ago

Rachel Maddow proven right.
She called this.

Õ¿Õ · 1 year ago

Not one of you would defend me against her campaign operatives on this site or the other one. The least among you, wasn't. Look, it's been said before, karma's a beoyoutch or something like that, just as sure as we're sitting here...

Õ¿Õ · 1 year ago

Er, I think I may have done some things with my voodou back then because I was angry that might have doomed this whole thing and you can't undo a curse other than just plow ahead, regardless, and that's what I've been doing. I did it while angry so I will suffer as well so you can know that.

larz · 1 year ago

Just when I start feeling a little sorry for her she pulls another crazy stunt that serves only to stroke her ego.

ezpz · 1 year ago

Narcissists know how to manipulate and elicit pity when it serves them.

Indigo · 1 year ago

A load like that makes the boat ride mighty low in the water.

JamesR · 1 year ago

I am not a Democratic party historian, but I really don't see what possible "precedent" this could be honoring, looks more like any "precedent" is simply an excuse. For what? The cover story makes no sense. Why lie? Besides being a Clinton. Sorry - but it's true. "Honoring" her voters? "HER" voters?? Please.

Do her brittle injured supporters need some sort of "closure" - like they're weak females who are unable to process loss in any other way and must be coddled?? Some feminists they are.

This will just give her another loss, anew. WHY? Does she and her posse really need to take down the names of their 'enemies?' They already know them. They are only making more.

Not being in her head I cannot say if these things are, but it sure LOOKS like it's selfish, vainglorious, and coming from a sense of deep insecurity and or sense of impending powerlessness AKA desperation. Now that may not be, though I do not know what ELSE it could be, but she should know that it sure LOOKS like that therefore IS that to many, so WHY? Besides demonstrating yet again her incredible political tin ear. Remarkable.

I sure hope Obama comes well equipped with a few extra wood stakes, plenty of holy water and garlic and ENDS THIS as soon as possible.

Õ¿Õ · 1 year ago

What's the matter with you people. Say what you want. I say the most far out shit that I think is correct or getting and then nobody wants to respond to me anymore. Which reminds me, I do think that space aliens are slowly infiltrating our gene pool with theirs. And their the explanation of the piggish nature or the repukes. Or, depending on how long they've bee around, maybe they infiltrating the gene pool with theirs to us mammals. Somehow I doubt the later because their actions seem very sinister.

Grrrowler · 1 year ago

I thought we already honored Clinton's historic race as the first woman to compete in all the nation's primary contests by letting her compete in all the nation's primary contests...?

She lost, lets move on. Next we'll be honoring Walter Mondale's historic race against G.H.W. Bush :-S

cowboyneok · 1 year ago

Oh, hell, whatever it takes to satisfy her ego and get her off the stage.

Lets UNIFY and WIN this time, DAMMIT!

Grrrowler · 1 year ago

Haven' t you heard? Being a Democrat is not about winning. It's about making sure your opponent isn't offended at any time during the campaign. That seems to hold true for both Democrat and Repub opponents, and even after your opponent loses (yeah, ironic isn't it?).

mirth · 1 year ago

You say it for me, Cowboy.

She may yet salvage her Senate career, but as a prez candidate she's done, now and forever more. Let the ruffled feathers of her and her pissed-off husband and wacko supporters get smoothed at the convention and then let's get on with it. By the time Obama accepts the nomination, the Clintons are a very tiny piece of our history.

ezpz · 1 year ago

There's no satisfying an insatiable ego.
That's the problem.

It WON'T satisfy her, her husband, or her supporters.
They'll keep demanding for more and more and more....

The line needs to be drawn.

Mike_H · 1 year ago

The paranoia and misogyny in these comments is really beyond the pale.

This isn't ANYTHING different from previous conventions. Clinton isn't getting ANYTHING special that other 2nd place MEN candidates got in previous conventions.

Men candidates, I might add, who didn't come as close to winning as she did!

It would have been unprecedented to EXCLUDE her. It's not a coup, it's not a sneaky move, it's not some byzantine plot, it's simply doing the reasonable thing BASED ON PREVIOUS CONVENTIONS to respect her vote and campaign.

Some Obama supporters complain about the "Clinton" wing of the party, Clinton supporters complain about the "Obama takeover pushing out traditional Democrats"... this kind of back-and-forth weakens the party. And BOTH sides, when using such inflammatory language, are equally responsible.

Obama and his campaign staff have realized this, and taken the mature, responsible, legitimately unifying action. Instead of continually trying to prove the superiority of one side or the other, or trying to undercut the supporters of one side or the other, Obama and Clinton are taking action to put the divisiveness behind them and focus on things that both candidates agree on, a platform that all Democrats can support -- and they are trying to do it in a way that respects supporters of both of them.

It's unfortunate that some of Obama's supporters can't respect his choices or his wisdom in this action. It's sad that there are some people who can't simply take a victory, but instead must obliterate, destroy, and defame the other side. I'm glad that Obama and Clinton have taken this action, as it bodes much better for true party unity than some of the other suggestions commenters have made.

Steve_in_CNJ · 1 year ago

well said. the dual nomination is good theater, meant to unify and move us forward. i don't like hillary very much but i like the joint statement, especially the last paragraph.

Õ¿Õ · 1 year ago

I always write what I'm thinking and it's always correct. But then many times I ask myself, they're going to think that's crazy. Then that's when it's most important I click 'post.'

Õ¿Õ · 1 year ago

I love most of the Clinton supporters. They're really sweet but wounded right now and I sense and feel that from them. They shouldn't be made fun of. I will rag on her campaign supporters who attacked me here. She's fine with that. She did do something historic.

Õ¿Õ · 1 year ago

OK, just checked my individual apartment mailbox and I haven't received an eviction notice yet. It's hard to evict someone who doesn't want human feces around. Hard to find that in the 50 page lease agreements they make you sign now. Still, I've become someone who will cause them millions of dollars to fix the problem so I expect that. Just let me out of the lease. I will say that but will continue to swing by to make sure they're not pumping raw sewerage into the storm drains again, so alot of good it will do them.

Jim Olson · 1 year ago

GG, do you ever have a thought that you don't post here?

kladinvt · 1 year ago

UGH! And to think 8 yrs ago, I liked the Clintons! Now, they've both shown that it's always been about them & their enormous egos. I really wish, along with the Bushes, they would all go away.

GrMtGirl · 1 year ago

Amen . . . I once held Clinton in very high esteem and deemed him a good, not perfect, president!
He has really shown his true colors as has she.. . . This show of colors is why she
lost the primary . . . .talk about goals for PERSONAL GAIN . . . she went dirty politics
on a fellow candidate in desperation to win. . . .that's what they are all about POWER
. . . NOT COUNTRY !!

SociologistTina · 1 year ago

No way that have MY support.

FunMe · 1 year ago

We are STILL dealing with her?

Geez!

moreleesafer · 1 year ago

Why should he have to share his big night?
If the tables were turned you know she would not extend the same courtesy to him.
I hate to go THERE but being a black woman...I have seen this many times.
Everything is all fine and dandy with a single winner and THEN when a minority finally
makes it to be valedictorian or whatever; suddenly we need to honor the two highest scores.

really, is this necessary to show unity for the die hard Hillary fans?

mirth · 1 year ago

I hear you. But keep in mind that she will not share his big night. By the time Barack is making his acceptance speech, Hillary and her screechers will be over and done with. Her appeasement, as disgusting as it is, will be finished.

Ben Dover · 1 year ago

Hillary's continued self-serving political stunts demonstrate two things:

1. Why she was not the better candidate.

2. That choosing Obama was the right decision.

If her little ego is still so bruised and battered since her primary loss it further demonstrates that she was not ready to lead to begin with. And that she, and her finger wagging husband, will do anything to usurp the rightful candidate.
Maybe if she watched how she voted on waging war, or even apologized for her bad decision, she would be the candidate.

GrMtGirl · 1 year ago

Points 1 and 2 say it all . . .

What I don't understand is why do we have to to keep
catering to her whims? Do we do it for Kucinich?
Biden?, Edwards? or others? Hell, NO

ron071 · 1 year ago

Why allow this nonsense to continue? Perhaps, this will be the end of the road for a very poor loser and

disgraceful democrat. She and Lieberman have so much in common. Her primary campaign really showed what she is made of
and it is very ugly. As a long-standing democrat I am so ashamed of the Clintons.

GrMtGirl · 1 year ago

Bottom line . . . SHE'S A POOR LOSER . . . . SHE JUST CAN'T ACCEPT THE FACT SHE LOST AND
SHE LOST TO A LITTLE KNOWN JUNIOR SENATOR . . . . to her, unblievable!

hardeknox · 1 year ago

I understand that she wants closure and the last pound of flesh. I wish she didn't want us to suck her dick, too.

jimfromthefoothills · 1 year ago

I still get her fundraising emails ( I signed up on her website to tell her what I thought of her). I laugh every time I get one. The dumb bitch is still spending more than she is taking in.

shell · 1 year ago

How better to progress the "women can't manage money" line?

Yes, she IS a dumb bitch. And those who keep giving her money -- and supporting her -- after she lost -- are even dumber bitches.

ron071 · 1 year ago

THE CLINTON (s ) LEGACY : Should Barack Obama not win the office of President the
legacy of the Clintons will forever be even more tainted than it already is. SHAME on the
losers who won't admit their loss. SHAME!

WANT MORE PAIN ???????? VOTE McSAME !!!!!!!!!!!!!

ron071 · 1 year ago

Obama will emerge as an even stronger and a more respected President.
The Clintons will reap what they sow. Hopefully we can defeat her in NY next time she shows up
yet again. A wooden stake may be the answer.

yamsel · 1 year ago

Why are so many Obama supporters freaking out about this? This was a JOINT statement and apparently a JOINT decision. Obama was part of it. It couldn't have happened without his cooperation, if not his outright approval. But instead of getting mad at Obama for HIS decision, let's rip into Hillary as usual. I've never seen so much intellectual dishonesty crammed into so little space.

ezpz · 1 year ago

Wow, Jack Cafferty just spewed out a classic.
He doesn't like this and even says this makes Obama look like a wussie.

shell · 1 year ago

Why doesn't she -- and her supporters -- just shut the F up??????

Yamsel -- I can answer you -- because silly little women are undermining the woman's movement 50 years. Obama appears to agree with them because there are a lot of them -- supposedly. I tend to think there are many fewer than conventional wisdom thinks. (God I hope so -- if there ARE that many, how depressing!)

Every time I see Hillary, my stomach turns. BECAUSE of this stupidity. If she were a REALLY strong woman, she would tell those supporters -- demanding this and that at the convention -- to grow up. But nooooo -- she encourages it. Why? She is hoping Obama will lose this year and she can come back in 2012. Is she kidding? If that happens, I will work like I never have before to defeat her.

Didn't it give anyone a clue that when other females were mentioned as Obama's running mates, Hillary supporters screamed, "No! It is HILLARY'S spot!" That says it all -- they don't care about equality for women -- they only care about getting Hillary a spot. (And I suspect many of these die-hard Hillary supporters are (like Hillary), closet Republicans.

And that is the polar opposite of WOMENS' RIGHTS.

yamsel · 1 year ago

Yes, shell - I get it - you hate Hillary. She turns your stomach, blah-de-freakin' blah! What does that have to do with Obama? With all his charisma, charm and beautiful rhetoric he surely could have told her no, couldn't he? He's the head of the party, isn't he? He's the winner of the primaries and the presumptive nominee, isn't he? What, then, does he have to lose? And if he has nothing to lose, what do you have to lose?

shell · 1 year ago

No. 1 -- I do not HATE Hillary. (But it is very telling that Hillbots
always claim certain people HATE her. I realize you need that -- to be a true
VICTIM. But I have seen too much of that martyr shit. No more.)

No. 2 -- In case you haven't noticed, Obama is BLACK. And I am very serious
about this -- those who won't let go of Hillary are RACISTS. That is the
only explanation. She lost -- mostly because she ran an awful campaign. HER
fault. Not mine, not Obama's -- HERS. I actually SHOULD hate her, yet I
don't. I only feel sorry for her -- as I do her die-hard supporters who can't
let go. (I hope one day, you children can grow up.) And don't bother telling
me your age -- most of the children are ancient -- their minds are still
child-like.) Then again, they are racists, so who cares?


In a message dated 8/14/2008 6:32:08 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
writes:

ron071 · 1 year ago

Obama is not being pushed. He is giving all possible breadth to achieve unity within the party. Great if he succeeds. If not, he gave it his best effort which is all that can be expected. The Clintons, however, deserve only the condemnation of all who want to improve this country and reverse the destruction of the Bush/Republican years.

WANT MORE PAIN ??????? VOTE McCAIN !!!!!!!!!!!!

yamsel · 1 year ago

So you're upset about this stupidity, which Obama is powerless to stop or say no to because he...um...uh...? Help me understand how the winner of the primaries and the presumptive nominee (which, to clarify, means he got more votes and more delegates than she did) is mysteriously powerless against Hillary and her evil minions.

shell · 1 year ago

Who said he got "MANY" more votes? He didn't. But he DID get MORE. And,
therefore, he WON.

I suspect the die-hard Hillary supporters who can't let go are VERY few and
far between. (But the GOPigs, claiming to be Hillary supporters, are very
large. Are you brain dead or something '' T-H-I-N-K-!)

Again -- Obama isn't POWERLESS, but, in America, being BLACK is an extreme
hardship. (Esp. with Hillary's base -- the old folks.)

You Hillbots can rant all you like -- but it just says one thing: RACIST!
And you are.


In a message dated 8/14/2008 6:37:22 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
writes:

vickif · 1 year ago

I totally agree with this. I care about women's rights but this is not the right woman to be president.

nsr · 1 year ago

I don't think it's going to be a big deal. It'll be like when Ted Kennedy lost the floor fight in 1980, she'll give a speech and that will be it. Expecting more fun out of the Republicans.

Happy_Housewife · 1 year ago

If all she wants is a roll call vote, I say let her have it: It is historical, after all, and the convention is the place for the drama and pagentry......

BUT, if she - or any of her sleazy surogates or psychotic supporters - want to try to pull some grandstanding crap, they need to save it for their analyst's couch or group session.
I have voted straight Democratic my entire life, but after her performance during the primaries (which I would blame her handlers for, but that would be excusing her role
in it because she is a woman, and I refuse to do that) I would never, ever, vote for her. I'd vote Dem for everything else, and just not vote for President.

And I know that there are a lot of people out there who feel the way I do - much more than the handful who say they won't vote for Obama.
That's mostly a GOP invention.

Fireblazes(CheetohsandCatfood) · 1 year ago

That is a pretty broad brush, maybe neurotic and singleminded are better words

ron071 · 1 year ago

I totally agree with Happy Housewife. The Clintons have destroyed their reputation ( what was left of it ) and now have entered into a new and more despicable role of destroyers of all and any who don't serve THEIR INTERESTS. Shameful is too weak a word to describe the Clintons.

ron071 · 1 year ago

I totally agree with Happy Housewife. The Clintons have destroyed their reputation ( what was left of it ) and now have entered into a new and more despicable role of destroyers of all and any who don't serve THEIR INTERESTS. Shameful is too weak a word to describe the Clintons.

shell · 1 year ago

Remember the Daily Show sketch about Hillary taking money from Dalton Hatfield, the young boy who sold his bike and video games, to send HER money?

Stewart ended with, "And she took it." AND went on to urge viewers to go to her website to give her MORE money.

Face it. ANYONE who gives her money is a sucker and a fool.

Fireblazes(CheetohsandCatfood) · 1 year ago

Good for Obama and Clinton. I would think that you all would have more faith in Barack. I just hope you people will finally admit that you won and quit blaming Hillary for all of the drama in the campaign. All of us have a big part in that.. This is what politics is about. If you do not like the proportional system then change it to the Repub way and just let Rove or his demo counterpart choose. Politics is a dirty business, it is ironic that so many of you who were so against "politics of the past" are now calling for scorched earth against McC. Glass houses and all that. Don't get me wrong but I think McC deserves to be figuratively slapped around. I think it would be awesome if Obama nominated her and Clinton nominated him. Then perhaps they could break out in a big chorus of KUMBAYA, and dance off the stage together. Maybe then you would drop the misplaced anger and get on with what is really important winning the GDamned election.

Fireblazes(CheetohsandCatfood) · 1 year ago

no reply, where is your vociferousness?

SkippyFlipjack · 1 year ago

I think that during the nominating roll call, Hillary is going to start a rumor that they're unveiling the world's first 106" plasma flat screen TV across the street. Once the guys have cleared the convention hall, she'll continue with the roll call, her victory assured.

:D

ezpz · 1 year ago

David Gergen seemed to echo many of our feelings.

He said that in a way, this makes Obama look like he's giving more and more concessions, while he did acknowledge that he (O) was probably trying to be magnanimous.

He said that initially, Obama didn't want a "catharsis".
Hillary wanted a prime time speaking slot. She got it.
Bill wanted a prime time speaking slot. He got it.
Hill and supporters want "catharsis". They're getting it.

He went on to say that the Clintonites are seeing more and more that in Obama's attempt to be "gracious", they read weakness, and if they demand long and loud enough, they can "roll him".

I don't always agree with Gergen, but the guy's been around many presidents, including Clinton, and he seems to know a thing or two about primaries, conventions, and the Clintons.

econprofes · 1 year ago

Type your comment here.

ron071 · 1 year ago

The Clintons have become toxic to the Democratic Party. They have destroyed their reputations but will fail in their sneaky attmpt to defeat Obama. There is no limit to their treachery.

Vote Obama

econprofes · 1 year ago

Dick Morris, former Clinton advisor, wrote a very interesting article. I normally take what he says “with a grain of salt” but when I saw Bill Clinton, when he was asked a few weeks ago was Obama fit to be President, and Bill Clinton’s answer was “according to the constitution he is” made me give Dick Morris article very serious consideration. He points out how Bill Clinton strategically undermined John Kerry Presidential bid. I remember Clinton doing the things in 2004 that Dick Morris says he did but I gave Clinton the benefit of the doubt, but come to think of it, Bill Clinton did not help Gore (most of that was Gore’s fault) he did not help Kerry and now he is not helping Obama. Not supporting the Democratic nominee is a reoccurring unsettling precedent being made by Bill Clinton; if I am not the star I am not going to support it. In fact Bill Clinton takes it one more step, if I am not the star I am going to undermine it so that I am the star. The case can be made Bill Clinton even undermined Hillary’s campaign. Hillary has the same narcissistic mindset as Bill Clinton and the Bushes, it’s all about me. That’s why Bill Clinton and the Bushes get along so good. The power and money associated with being President has turned Bill and Hilary Clinton into a pawn for the Large Corporations and they will do their bidding just so they can stay in power. Who knows 8 years from now Barack Obama might become like the Clintons, thank God you can only serve two terms.

This is a sign of weakness by the Obama camp and a gross miscalculation of the Obama camp enemy. Yes the Clintons are Obama’s enemy. It is time out for caving in to the Clintons. They never have nor will they ever support Obama and it is getting very late in the game for him not realize that. If Obama would stand up to the Clintons, he would expose their true priority which is to maintain power and the issues are just a means to get power and not real convictions. Most rational Democrats (98%) when they would see what the Clintons are all about will get behind Obama. The nut cases are not going to vote for Obama any way. If Obama thought if they concede to the whining of the Clintons they are going to get him more votes he is sadly mistaken. If a Democrat is so fanatical that they would vote for insane McCain because Hillary didn’t win then that person was never going to vote for Obama anyway.

Here is Dick Morris article

http://www.newsmax.com/morris/hillary_against_o...