Billy
Just one question.

When this campaign started, and you had one candidate with probably one of the highest name recognitions in the country, the presumptive political machine behind her, a vast rollodex of big money donors and the most popular living president alive today as her spouse, running against a black, 1st term Senator named Barack Hussein Obama... did you EVER think it's be a close race???

You gotta admit one thing, either HRC has run one of the worst campaigns in history, or Obama has run one of the best.

Posted at April 12, 2008 6:21 PM in response to Obama Just Won

I do have a question for Senator Clinton supporters. She has said that Michigan and Florida must be seated, that voters in those states MUST have their votes count.

That's certainly magnanimous and noble of her, in spite of the fact that I heard her say, when questioned by a called on a radio station, prior to those elections, why she hadn't removed her name from the ballot, as the other candidates had, "It doesn't matter, the primaries in Michigan and Florida are not going to count, that's been agreed to by the DNC, and all of the candidates, so it doesn't matter if my name is still on the ballot or not"...

So Senator Clinton argues that we cannot simply ignore the votes of the citizens of those two states, that their voices MUST be heard!

She then argues that, once we've "heard" the voices of the good citizens of Michigan and Florida, that there would be nothing wrong if the Super Delegates come in, at the 11th hour, and over-ride the votes of ALL Democrats, if the Super Delegates basically made the past 18 months of debates, primaries, caucuses... made them all just go away.... poof! And suddenly, HRC is the Democratic nominee for President.

So if I understand her and her supporters arguments correctly, while it would be undemocratic and WRONG to ignore the voters of Michigan and Florida, it would NOT be wrong to then ignore ALL the voters throughout the country.

Do I have this correct?

Posted at March 31, 2008 12:35 AM in response to Obama: Hillary "Can Run As Long As She Wants"

"This may surprise you, but some people think loyalty is a virtue, and some people like Carville have written books about it."

Yes Bev.

I believe Bush is very big on loyalty. He gives positions to Arabian Horse judges, with no experience in Emergency Management, because they supported him in his campaign. Very loyal on Bush's part... he sticks with appointees, long after they've demonstrated their incompetence... VERY loyal....stuck with Rumsfeld, stuck with Brownie... stuck with Scooter...

What ever happened to loyalty for our COUNTRY, and choosing people based on their abilities? (Isn't that why Clinton supposedly chose Richardson for his appointments, or was it only so that Richardson would swear eternal loyalty to anyone named Clinton in the future?)

Posted at March 25, 2008 4:40 PM in response to If She Thinks Richardson is Judas, What are We?