iOS app Android app
Clicking Follow Back will add user to your friends list and may allow access to your Social News timeline..

HuffPost Social News

Badges:
Your Badges and the Badge Module will be removed from your profile

mickeyrat's Comments

View Comments:   Sort:
next
1 - 25
Not Until the Fat Lady Sings

Not Until the Fat Lady Sings

Commented Apr 6, 2008 at 11:50:37 in Politics

“coronated????

bah ha ha

and they say the Obamabots are educated.”
Obama Fails To Assuage White Indiana Voters With Speech On Race

Obama Fails To Assuage White Indiana Voters With Speech On Race

Commented Apr 1, 2008 at 09:52:11 in Politics

“"snipergate".

What an idiot. Granted that the suffix is overused as it is, but, still, since "gate" refers to some sort of crime, are you suggesting that she committed a crime?”

Kingbreaker on Apr 1, 2008 at 10:03:47

“If we can get HRC to repeat her story in court, it would be a crime.”
Obama Fails To Assuage White Indiana Voters With Speech On Race

Obama Fails To Assuage White Indiana Voters With Speech On Race

Commented Apr 1, 2008 at 09:50:04 in Politics

“huh? Hillary was responsible for Bill's affairs?

How low can you go, buddy?”

treadway123 on Apr 1, 2008 at 10:13:24

“No way Hillary responsable for Bills Affair. But she did continue to live with him, knowing monica lowensky was not the first of the string of woman who was serviceing him! A New York Governor is in trouble for lying about his affair, and Bill Clinton got a FREE ride by the Polititions in Washington and the American people! There is something very wrong with that! You know it, and I know it. Hillary's lie's about Bosnia, an now saying Obama is going around telling her to get out of this race is comeing OUT OF HER MOUTH AND THERE OUT RIGHT LIE'S! So who's worse? Some one being crusified by something some one alse say------------OR THE AMERICAN PEOPLE LETTING HILLARY SPOUT THE BOSNIA, AND OTHER LIE'S RIGHT TO YOUR FACE'S. This article is a LIe, and it's HILLLARY and her camp drumming it up! You should be ashamed of another Demacrate doing the Republicans work for them!”

JUSTME on Apr 1, 2008 at 10:02:54

“Bill needed no help from Hillary to be the pig that he is. But she covered up, she lied, she slandered, attacked, and demonized every woman we learned about in turn--even a 22 year-old who was younger than her own daughter is now. So, while she did not cause Bill to have these affairs, she certainly made them and his behavior possible.

We have had an uninterrupted chain of congenital crooks and liars in the Oval Office since January 1993. What's it going to take, fella, to convince you that a third Clinton-Bush term is the last thing this country needs?”
huffingtonpost entry

How to Avoid a Democratic Disaster

Commented Apr 1, 2008 at 09:48:45 in Politics

“oh, I agree that 90% of the disaffection will wither away.

The problem is that still leaves 2-4% of Dems who WON'T vote for the other guy.

In the purple states--and those are the ones we are talking about--that 2-4% is all that's needed to give McCain the 270 he needs to win.

National polls aren't important.

The big blue states aren't important.

The little red states aren't important.

All that's important is those critical purple states. And that's where this election will be lost.

congrats, Dems.”

flycatcher on Apr 1, 2008 at 10:48:50

“Heckuva job, Howie.”

tcpgh on Apr 1, 2008 at 10:01:48

“You're correct about the so-called purple states being key, such as Ohio and Missouri. But besides the cooling down that will inevitably occur (which many previous Presidential races demonstrate), let's also keep in mind the historic levels of registration and voting -- in the primaries, no less! Just imagine how many Democrats will storm the polls come November. No matter how contentious and messy the situation currently looks, in November I honestly don't think McCain has a chance. Far too many people, including independents and "liberal" Republicans, have had more than enough of the Bush/Rove/Cheney era and want to move in a new direction.”
As Campaign Has Evolved, So Too Has Clinton's Tone

As Campaign Has Evolved, So Too Has Clinton's Tone

Commented Apr 1, 2008 at 09:43:38 in Politics

“I see. So calling someone a "monster" is "talking about the issues".

On the other hand, talking about the qualification for being Commander-in-Chief, whether you think she's right or not--that's not talking about the issues.

Obamabots have very strange minds.”
As Campaign Has Evolved, So Too Has Clinton's Tone

As Campaign Has Evolved, So Too Has Clinton's Tone

Commented Apr 1, 2008 at 09:41:14 in Politics

“oh for god's sake. Do you not read Huffpo? All of those attacks, and others, have been made by Obamabots on Huffpo alone. Where do you think they're being generated from? The tender consciences of Obamabots?

Duh.

Try the campaign itself.”

Ashall on Apr 1, 2008 at 10:13:43

“So you think things posted on HuffPo are accurate and can be used as "sources". You need to learn about opinions and politics and out-and-out lies, or as the Clinton camp prefers, "mis-statements". When accusations are made, there SHOULD be definitive and reliable sources, not just someone's opinion repeated. Should I add. . .DUH!”
huffingtonpost entry

How to Avoid a Democratic Disaster

Commented Apr 1, 2008 at 09:17:15 in Politics

“question for the Obamabots.

Many of you in these comments have announced adamantly that you will not vote for Hillary if she is on the ticket.

Why, then, do you expect Clinton supporters to vote for Obama if he's the nominee? If your contempt for Clinton is so deep that you would rather see McCain win than she, then why would you expect the Clintonistas to feel any differently?

Don't you see what Cuomo is getting at? It's not the candidates who are destroying Dems chances--it's you, their respective supporters.

Please, Obamabots, answer my question. If you won't vote for Hillary despite the chances of electing McCain--if he seems preferable to you than Hillary--then why do you expect Hillary's supporters to vote for Obama?”

Ptama on Apr 1, 2008 at 16:22:47

“mikeyrat
If you want party unity maybe you should stop calling them "Obamabots"

Don't you see what Cuomo is getting at? It's not the candidates who are destroying Dems chances--it's you, their respective supporters.


If you want party unity maybe you should stop calling them "Obamabots"”

stageplay on Apr 1, 2008 at 11:33:38

“Cuomo is a Clinton supporter, as we all know. Now, to answer your question: Obama intends to fundamentally change the way our government has been doing things for the past two decades. This means no more Clintons or Bushes. No more Washington insiders and big time lobbyists. No more lies and scandals. The time for change has come, and Hillary Clinton does not, and will not represent change. Therefore, Obama, our next Democratic nominee cannot and will not have Hillary as his running mate because she represents much of what he is trying to change in order to get our country back on the right track. He cannot effect true change with a figure as divisive and untrustworthy as Hillary Clinton (and her husband) as his Vice President. Hillary's supporters cannot see this, of course; therefore, when Obama is the nominee they will demand that she be on the ticket. Obama, for the sake of our country's future, which he cares more about than the old politics as usual, will have to decline. Then, he will have to beat McCain, even with Hillary's supporters voting for McCain. It will be a tall order, but Obama is up to it. In the end, the Democratic Party will win this fall IN SPITE of Hillary, Bill Clinton, and their supporters.It is about real change. And real change is going to come, and Hillary, and Bill, and McCain, and all their supporters (including Mario Cuomo) will not be able to stop it.”

MouthFountain on Apr 1, 2008 at 09:58:31

“Dear Msr. Rat,

I do suppose that you hit a nerve. Of course I will vote for Obama, as an all to pliable bot, even with Hillary on the ticket. In spite of initially supporting Hillary, for years actually as people dissed her, I was unable to fathom the vote since she voted for war. As I have a son of age, it seemed politically cowardly to vote for something any intelligent, sentient being, knew was wrong. Top it off with some whipped cream and pixie dust, you must know what that is Mick, and we have a full on search for self interest!

But yes, as Cuomo is a Hillary, and I will avoid any derogatory comments unlike you, surrogate, I am sure that this is a plant. Again, any intelligent, sentient being is aware of the likelihood of a Clinton win.

Nobody is destroying the Dems chances except for the Dems! Congratulations on playing the role so very, very well! And, I look forward to grandchildren so that I can visit your humble castle!”

tcpgh on Apr 1, 2008 at 09:42:22

“I am a very enthusiastic Obama supporter, but of course I will support Hillary if she's the nominee. There's far too much at stake for the Democrats to lose, especially considering Supreme Court appointments. If another Republican wins, they could realistically get to appoint four or five new justices. That possibility must be avoided at ALL costs. Period. Also, I wouldn't get too excited about people on either side who are currently saying they'll vote for McCain if their choice doesn't get the nomination. It's a lot of sound and fury in the midst of a heated primary.”
huffingtonpost entry

How to Avoid a Democratic Disaster

Commented Apr 1, 2008 at 09:11:04 in Politics

“NO! Stop that. Not everyone is a "Republican troll" just because they don't support Obama. What the HELL Is the matter with you people that you cannot grant supporters of Hillary the convictions of their conscience. I DON"T support Hillary, and will vote Green, but I don't get HOW THE HELL you Obamabots think you're doing the Democratic party any favors by accusing every Clinton supporter of being a Republican troll, a racist, a devotee of Karl Rove etc. etc. ad nauseum ad infiinitum.

This type of language you use above is EXACTLY what Cuomo is talking about. If you were a Hillary supporter, would you be remotely interestedi in voting for someone whose supporters make clear to you their belief that you are scum?

The Obamabots are going to destroy Dems chances this fall.”
Cancer Expert: Cell Phones More Dangerous Than Smoking Or Asbestos

Cancer Expert: Cell Phones More Dangerous Than Smoking Or Asbestos

Commented Apr 1, 2008 at 09:00:46 in Healthy Living

“actually, the irony is all those who immediately dismiss the professor's study. Why would you dismiss out of hand something? Nor is it "just one study", in fact, the guy has collated information from a variety of studies. It's called meta-analysis. Now, granted, there's problems with meta-analysis. But to dismiss it as "one" study is illogical itself.

Or is it that like the cigarette smoker who didn't believe cigarettes were dangerous because he was too lazy to quit, are you one of those who won't believe cell phones are dangerous because you use one too much?

Think of it this way. Did any idiot really need to be told that drawing the smoke from burning leaves into your lungs is not healthy? I mean, common sense tells you that it's not healthy.

Given that we know radiation breaks down dna, then do we really need a whole bunch of studies to tell us that spending 5 hours a day on the cell phone, which is common for many, is going to have deleterious effects in the long run?

I'm a smoker. I don't need a whole bunch of studies to tell me I'm stupid for smoking, You shouldn't need a whole bunch of studies to tell you you're stupid for holding a device to your head that is constantly emitting radiation.

And I'd love to see what is going to happen to peoples' ears from all those high frequencies ten years down the road.”
huffingtonpost entry

The Destructive Rise of Big Finance

Commented Apr 1, 2008 at 08:34:20 in Business

“perhaps because too many want to wrap up the serious problems that Phillips points out into their own fantasies of "one world government" the "bilderbergers" and the CFR.

People like you do more harm than help. Being aware of the problems we face is different than straight out black helicopter paranoia.

Please, if you want to save the Republic, shut up. The way you talk, I guarantee folks will dismiss the real problems Phillips points out as they dismiss the paranoid fantasies you exhibit in your post above.

Nothing personal--there's a lot of Americans like you. But, please, SHUT UP and let those of us still relatively sane explain Phillips to Mr. Averageman.”

SisterAnn on Apr 6, 2008 at 14:18:02

“Kfdan is right. I have watched it all unfold and came to the same conclusion on my own.

There is room for both of your theories, because both are correct.

Here is an example of the difference of 18 years ago and now:

When we got our last mortgage 18 years ago, they took info on his income, what assets we owned and years of work. They checked with where he worked to make sure the info we gave was ok. They also asked for the last 3 years of income tax returns.

The appraisal they did on our home was paid for by us, but controlled by them. The aappraiser made the remark that he would have appraised it higher but the bank wouldn't let him.

The lenders now, tell them to put down higher income and never check it. The higher the appraisal, the more money they make. No regulations are enforced, if there are any left.

They said that they had to help Bear Sterns because the market was intertwined, that if they hadn't it would have had a domino effect. If our markets are too intertwined and too difficult to regulate, we need to break them down to smaller pieces, that are not dependent on each other.”
huffingtonpost entry

The Destructive Rise of Big Finance

Commented Apr 1, 2008 at 08:28:49 in Business

“I agree absolutely. If I had one book that I could force Americans to read, it would be American Theocracy. The single best job I've ever seen of wrapping the information people need to make informed decisions about where we've been and where we're headed to in the upcoming years in terms of the death grip the evangelical/oil combo has on this nation's body politic.

Phillips is a modern day Cassandra. No one will believe him until it's too late.”
Gore Launches $300 Million Climate Change Initiative

Gore Launches $300 Million Climate Change Initiative

Commented Mar 31, 2008 at 10:46:16 in Politics

“what a bunch of crap. The Constitution says the states will decide their electoral mechanisms, not the Supreme Court. Try actually reading the Constitution once in a while.

Even SCOTUS choked on its own decision, that's why THEY SPECIFICALLY SAID IT DIDN"T SET PRECENDENT AND APPLIED TO THIS INSTANCE ONLY.

What kind of court is wiling to issue a ruling that makes it binding on one case only?

A court bought and paid for.”

Binea on Mar 31, 2008 at 12:27:06

“My Kids play board games,and in order to win,My son always tries to change the rules in the middle of the game.Which was what happened in Fl.I stopped following it after all the Chad counting,and it's over,so who cares ? I don't put anything past eigther side anymore.As for Gore,he seems a decent enough guy to me,Fl is at fault for the whole thing.”
huffingtonpost entry

Should Obama Drop Out of the Race?

Commented Mar 31, 2008 at 10:32:45 in Politics

“Nine, Obamabots are crybaby whiners that I don't want in charge of this country. What will Obama and his supporters do in the first foreign crisis, whine that that foreign leader is using "Rovian" tactics? Say that he's "smearing" Obama.

Youth is good. Childishness and, "Gimme gimme gimme" whether or not you've earned it yet, is not good. The Obamabots fall definitively in the latter category.

boo hoo hoo.

Get a kleenex and dry your tears, Obamabots.”

Bluesman48 on Mar 31, 2008 at 12:26:11

“Well named, rat. You've really convinced us now.”
huffingtonpost entry

Should Obama Drop Out of the Race?

Commented Mar 31, 2008 at 10:25:57 in Politics

“Wrong. It's not about the blue states. It's about who will do better in the purple states. I think a case can be made either way, but at least get the argument straight.”
huffingtonpost entry

What Hillary Really Learned in the White House

Commented Mar 30, 2008 at 12:54:09 in Politics

“I really think that at this point, Dems have to start considering a third candidate, someone who can unite, even if imperfectly, Democrats. I think the supporters of both HIllary and Obama will resent bitterly the other one winning, but I think while they may grumble a bit initially about a third candidate, in the long run they will realize it is the best option, and will feel better and far more enthusiastic about the campaign.

Please do the math. Neither candidate can win the general election. Who cares which is the nominee if either is going down to defeat against McCain?

There are, I think, three potential draft candidates who could unite the party. algore, Edwards and, as a safe but boring choice, Joe Biden.

I want to ask Democrats this then. Suspend for a moment your hope and belief that your own candidate can win both nomination or election. If you support Hillary, could you support a ticket with Obama as VP and one of the above three named as President? . And if you support Obama, can you accept a solution which does not give your guy the nomination this time around, but sets him up for one or two terms down the road?

Both are damaged good. Either of them at the top of ticket, because of the damage done and that will be done, spells crashing defeat in November. When will Dems see that?”

nohat on Mar 30, 2008 at 16:01:55

“Hillar isn't going to concede the nomination to a third candidate any more than she will concede it to Obama.”
huffingtonpost entry

"Obama's Test" or Ours?

Commented Mar 30, 2008 at 12:47:01 in Politics

“I really think that at this point, Dems have to start considering a third candidate, someone who can unite, even if imperfectly, Democrats. I think the supporters of both HIllary and Obama will resent bitterly the other one winning, but I think while they may grumble a bit initially about a third candidate, in the long run they will realize it is the best option, and will feel better and far more enthusiastic about the campaign.

Please do the math. Neither candidate can win the general election. Who cares which is the nominee if either is going down to defeat against McCain?

There are, I think, three potential draft candidates who could unite the party. algore, Edwards and, as a safe but boring choice, Joe Biden.

I want to ask Democrats this then. Suspend for a moment your hope and belief that your own candidate can win both nomination or election. If you support Hillary, could you support a ticket with Obama as VP and one of the above three named as President? . And if you support Obama, can you accept a solution which does not give your guy the nomination this time around, but sets him up for one or two terms down the road?

Both are damaged good. Either of them at the top of ticket, because of the damage done and that will be done, spells crashing defeat in November. When will Dems see that?”

Justtellthetruth on Mar 30, 2008 at 15:07:48

“To what math do you refer? Obamas going to win, with a majority of states, votes and pledged delegates, and He is going to win the General, because, in the end, McCain is promising "more of the same" thing that has been provded by a president with almost historically low approval ratings.

Hillary is also promising more of the same, but just a little LESS than McCain (or so her deluded followers hope. She really ought to be running with McCain, in that her and Bill are already appear to be campaiging for him.

Don't waste your time trying to decrease the enthusiasm of Obama supporters. I see NO enthusiasm for Hillary, but rather, most of the time I either see her supporters attacking Obama supporters or trying to make excuses for things like Kosovo war stories, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Failed Health Care, ect.ect.ect.”

dutchess2 on Mar 30, 2008 at 14:25:41

“Woah Nelly!

I don't see the supers giving it to Hillary after Barack has more delegates, more states and more popular votes...

I CERAINTLY don't see them giving it to a third yahoo who didn't go the course..

Its Barack's.”

deutchs on Mar 30, 2008 at 14:18:49

“No. I do not think that America and the world can wait eight more years for the change that Obama promises. This is not an issue of what you think is fair, or who's turn it is. This is an issue of who is best prepared to unify this country and tackel the problems that we face. Also, why are you suggesting that Obama should step aside when he is winning by every measure of the race?”
Hillary Clinton Deluged With Calls For Her Withdrawal

Hillary Clinton Deluged With Calls For Her Withdrawal

Commented Mar 30, 2008 at 12:43:57 in Home

“I really think that at this point, Dems have to start considering a third candidate, someone who can unite, even if imperfectly, Democrats. I think the supporters of both HIllary and Obama will resent bitterly the other one winning, but I think while they may grumble a bit initially about a third candidate, in the long run they will realize it is the best option, and will feel better and far more enthusiastic about the campaign.

Please do the math. Neither candidate can win the general election. Who cares which is the nominee if either is going down to defeat against McCain?

There are, I think, three potential draft candidates who could unite the party. algore, Edwards and, as a safe but boring choice, Joe Biden.

I want to ask Democrats this then. Suspend for a moment your hope and belief that your own candidate can win both nomination or election. If you support Hillary, could you support a ticket with Obama as VP and one of the above three named as President? . And if you support Obama, can you accept a solution which does not give your guy the nomination this time around, but sets him up for one or two terms down the road?

Both are damaged good. Either of them at the top of ticket, because of the damage done and that will be done, spells crashing defeat in November. When will Dems see that?”

kevenseven on Mar 30, 2008 at 13:40:14

“That would be madness.

The sap that took that spot would have no legitimacy and no support. There is nobody, short of Gore, who could be presented to the party, and for that to work, he would need to be carried to the stage on the shoulders of both Hillary and Barack.

Never going to happen.

Please order off the menu.”

3billis811 on Mar 30, 2008 at 13:23:09

“I think this is a terrible idea. Sorry. To have some third dem candidate sort of just come in at the end of all the crap Obama and Hillary have gone through, well, I personally think it would more damage then the Superdelegates picking for a candidate. Who would this third, unvoted for, unknown candidate be? No one with an ounce of political self preservation, that's for sure. Anyway, we already have a Joke candidate. His name is Ralph Nader.”

apogee2perogee on Mar 30, 2008 at 13:14:08

“I already voted for my version of that third candidate: Edwards!”

GoodGuysandBadGuys on Mar 30, 2008 at 13:13:50

“you cannot put in a 3rd candidate this close to the end of the game. the 3rd candidate has not done any campaigning, and has not had to fundraise for their campaign. it's just not going to happen, it isn't even an option.”

rwferr on Mar 30, 2008 at 13:01:18

“I am a Clinton supporter but like you I know believe neither Clinton nor Obama can win the General. I would happily support a Gore/Obama ticket. I think it would give us the WH for 16 years as Obama would probably win two terms after Gore.”
huffingtonpost entry

The Fear Factor

Commented Mar 29, 2008 at 11:10:05 in Politics

“mark twain was famous for,

"Suppose you were an idiot, and you were in Congress. But I repeat myself."

Now we've got the:

"Suppose you were an idiot, and you were an Obamabot. But I repeat myself".”

UTMark on Mar 29, 2008 at 14:31:45

“Thanks for illustrating and proving my point (above) Mickey! Gosh, if only the world had a few more people as clever and creative as you.”

veracal on Mar 29, 2008 at 12:25:12

“Obamabot...what originality!!!”
huffingtonpost entry

The Fear Factor

Commented Mar 29, 2008 at 11:08:15 in Politics

“very well said, someone on this board, for a change, knows his political history (or hers). We can add "voodoo economics" to the list, which became the tagline of Reaganomics for a generation thanks to George H.W. Bush. We can remember the push polls of George Bush against John McCain in SD and Michigan in 2000. We can even remember the gibes against Bob Dole being too old in 1996, or his returning the complimenting by trashing Kemp's & Forbes' flat tax proposals.

What I find frankly stupid is the idiocy of the Obama crowd in expecting Hillary to drop out. You don't spend all this time running for president, be within 2% percentage points in delegates of your competitor, in a race neither of you can win with pledged delegates, and then just throw up your hands and drop out.

And I'm frankly sick of the Obamabots taking anything the Clintonistas say and calling it a smear. It's evident to them that unless you anoint Obama a saint in your every word, you are "smearing" him because you're a "racist". These kiddies need to learn to grow up and realize that politics is a deadly serious business, and that character, policies and tactics are all fair game in a campaign. They certainly haven't held back when it comes to trashing the Clintons--but they seem to think everyone must grovel and scrape before Obama the Great.”
huffingtonpost entry

The Fear Factor

Commented Mar 29, 2008 at 11:01:01 in Politics

“if you need an explanation, jesse jackson was telling superdelegate office-holders that if they didn't endorse obama, Jackson inter alia would be sponsoring primary competitors against them to drain their campaigns of cash preparatory to taking on the Repubs in the general.

clear enough now?

duh.”

UTMark on Mar 29, 2008 at 13:55:15

“Jesse Jackson has endorsed Obama, but is not a part of his campaign.

I hate to receive another "duh" from you, oh wise one, but what is "Jackson inter alia"? It doesn't sound too threatening.”
huffingtonpost entry

Now, Team Hillary Goes After Speaker Pelosi

Commented Mar 28, 2008 at 14:31:41 in Politics

“as in Henry Tudor's attempt to force the Scots Lords Regent to accede to the marriage of his son Edward, later Sixth of the name, to the infant Mary, Queen of Scots.”
huffingtonpost entry

Don't Boo The Home Team!

Commented Mar 25, 2008 at 05:06:13 in Politics

“why, oh why, oh why, do you obamabots not recognize that Hillary and her supporters believe just as fervently as you do in the rightness of her candidacy? Why do you expect her to drop out just because you like Obama?”

Fabienne on Mar 25, 2008 at 11:46:04

“We expect her to drop out because the statistics are overwhelmingly against her and she is doing harm to the Democratic nominee's chances in November, no matter who it is. She is a member of the Democratic Party and democracy means government of the people, by the people and for the people. If a majority of the people do not support her (even if it is by a slim margin), why is she entitled to the nomination simply because her husband was President (and not so successful at it) for eight years?”
huffingtonpost entry

Don't Boo The Home Team!

Commented Mar 25, 2008 at 05:02:48 in Politics

“actually, she's a Bay Area rep, her constituents voted SOLIDLY for Obama.”

greejambri on Mar 25, 2008 at 09:26:29

“RIGHT ON. I live in the Bay Area, and I EXPECT Nancy Pelosi to vote for Barack Obama, not only because her constituents voted that way but because he will end up with the most votes, states, and delegates. There is only one way to get Clinton to step aside so we can all rally around the nominee -- the SUPERS need to shut down Clinton's rove-inspired smear machine ASAP!”
huffingtonpost entry

Don't Boo The Home Team!

Commented Mar 25, 2008 at 05:01:50 in Politics

“the logic of the Obamabots is scary. Start off by saying, "Hillary doesn't want to pull out of Iraq". Someone points out that she said she does, and the Obamabot response is..."Well, she lied about Bosnia, so she must be lying about this, which means I'm right: she doesn't want to pull out".”

nippersdad on Mar 25, 2008 at 17:47:49

“The logic lies in the trajectory of her statements over the last seven years. When it was politically expedient she voted for the AUMF over the objections of the committee head without reading the intelligence. She then voted for the same type of bill as concerns Iraq. As late as last year she was saying that she would TRY to get troops out of Iraq in her second term.

She is a past master of the politically expedient. I don't see this changing anytime soon.”

Nix on Mar 25, 2008 at 09:22:19

“Obamabots? Are you a Hillarytart?”

greejambri on Mar 25, 2008 at 09:21:16

“Well, I can only go on Hillary's RECORD on Iraq (and Iran). She doesn't exactly inspire me to hope that she really intends to end the war, no matter what it takes. What I AM inspired to believe is that Hillary knows there is NO WAY she can win the Democratic nomination by campaigning as what she really is -- a HAWK! People need to pay less attention to what she says (because she's only saying it to get nominated), and a LOT more attention to what she has done, and how she has voted. Thanks, but on the war issue, I TRUST Barack Obama's record and words more than Hillary Clinton's.”
huffingtonpost entry

Michigan, Florida, and the L-word

Commented Mar 24, 2008 at 05:48:22 in Politics

“what arrogance. Just for the record, you and your cohorts are why Obama will lose. "We'll trust you..." who the hell are you to tell us who "we" will trust or not.

You Obamabots have taken someone who originally supported Edwards, happily turned to Obama as a second choice, and now been driven to vote for the Greens again. There is no way I will reward the puerile Obamabots with my vote. I don't care if McCain gets elected--at least no one's going to act like he's God or something.

Get over yourself, obamabots. He's a politician, not God.

Christ you people are sickening to anyone who believes in democracy. You'd do better in some dictatorship where cults of personality are both expected and rewarded.”
next
1 - 25