No comment
Well I do feel the aura of transracialism floating over by black ass. So I guess that this is the beginning of the wonder times. Before I know it Jesus will be back too.
Of course we all know what really counts in this race: the number of "L"s in your name.
How many does Barak Obama have? That's right, haters -- 0
How many does Hillary Clinton have? 3 BABY!!!
I think I made my point...
I wish you would call him "Bircher" Ron Paul instead of racist Ron Paul. You see the Birchers aren't really racist they were just let in on the secret that all black people are Communists. And since these black Communists are very concerned with stealing the profit of hard-working White people by means of the government, Birchers can't help but oppose the welfare queens.
It's Ron Paul's Bircher views in a nutshell. Though I have entertained the thought of Paul immediately withdrawing the troops from Iraq, and then the Congress passing every single necessary bill with a veto-proof majority. Though I suppose Paul would find a way to gut what he could in the executive branch.
I have to say, this line of Obama posters (I've seen "Hope" and "Progress", are there more?) is stylish. I like this classic look. Hmm, the only problem I see is, why is Obama half red? That's symbolizing unity?
:D
"I wish you would call him "Bircher" Ron Paul instead of racist Ron Paul."
Interesting point, Wengler, there's something to it...
Comments of this thread still don't show up when clicking the link...
:-(
wow why did Gray cralw out of the woodwork....your girl lost..she would need 104% of hte delegates left to get the nomination
On other things Gray might be okay, its' just on issues dealing Obama & Hillary everything for him is black & white with no shades of grey. 
"your girl lost..she would need 104% of hte delegates left to get the nomination"
Not yet! Still time 'til the convention. It only takes one unguarded moment by Obama, for instance a "Muskee letter" style fraud by some GOP crooks, and the tables could turn. His recent reaction on the right wingers smearing Michelle showed that he's emotional vulnerable when it comes to his family (totally understandable, but still a weakness). And just remember what the Rove hit squad did to Siegelman only a few years ago, and how they distorted Kerry's totally honorable military record. Don't get fooled into false confidence, the nomination is still undecided, and the presidency even more so.
Btw, with a net win of 150000 votes this round, Clinton now leads the popular vote count in two out of six ways, with good chances to win even the "all inclusive" count:
http://themoderatevoice.com/poli...minds-epiphany/
Hmm, Obama was only the second winner regarding popular votes on every primary day recently. That's not exactly supporting the view that he is the "inevitable" nominee.
Of course, not the popular vote, but the delegate count will decide the nomination, but for the superdelegates, this makes their decision even harder. They may want to support the winner, the candidate with the biggest support, but who is it? In the light of the 2000 trauma, the Dems can't simply ignore the majority of the voters. One way or the other, it increasingly looks like it will be very dificult to reunite the party at the convention.
"His recent reaction on the right wingers smearing Michelle showed that he's emotional vulnerable when it comes to his family (totally understandable, but still a weakness)."
I read his tone as more warning than vulnerable. If any Dem knows where Vicki Iseman is right now, it's Obama.
And yes, Gray, it's over. But it's nice to see you express optimism that Hillary can still turn the tables with Rovian ratfucks and rules lawyering ("2 out of 6 ways" woo-hoo! ): it's a great illustration of the mentality of her supporters.
"But it's nice to see you express optimism that Hillary can still turn the tables with Rovian ratfucks"
Aw, come on, OTD, this spinning of what I wrote is really lame. I didn't express much optimism in the last weeks, not here nor at other blogs (actually, my lack of it is part of why I didn't post recently), and I certainly didn't support anywhere, ever, that elections should be decided by swiftboating or even criminal tricks. Without any big surprise happening, Clinton's only serious chance left is turning around superdelegates by winning the popular vote, and it's really a snowball chance. And I don't like surprises.
"on issues dealing Obama & Hillary everything for him is black & white with no shades of grey"
Quite to the contrary, tenacitus! For instance, I'm well aware of this campaign issue, which shows a lot of grey shades:
http://cgi.ebay.com/ITALIAN-
GREY...3QQcmdZViewItem
:D
"I certainly didn't support anywhere, ever, that elections should be decided by swiftboating or even criminal tricks."
No, you only suggested that it wasn't over for Hillary yet because the GOP might pull a Muskie on Obama before the convention.
Then you suggested some other ways she might "win" by spreading McAuliffe-like BS about the popular vote.
"Clinton's only serious chance left is turning around superdelegates by winning the popular vote"
But apparently the popular vote isn't the only way Hillary's supporters think they can get superdelegate votes: 
"One of Sen. Hillary Clinton’s top financial supporters offered $1 million to the Young Democrats of America during a phone conversation in which he also pressed for the organization’s two uncommitted superdelegates to endorse the New York Democrat, a high-ranking official with YDA told The Huffington Post."
(via Huffpo)
So tell us this, Gray: if your candidate's ability to win now depends on the opposition party's ratfucks, racist dog-whistle calls, rules lawyering, attempted bribery, or backroom dealing, why should she continue to stay in the race and waste time and resources until August?
(I would have added voter suppression, but Hillary's buddies at Women's Voices Women's Votes have had to be on good behavior since they got caught red-handed in NC)
Our German friend made a funny.
Regarding that HuffPo story: Anonymous sources at YDA, most probably based on hearsay, vs. a denial by Saban. Even the scandal hungry media didn't touch the story. Zzzz...
"why should she continue to stay in the race and waste time and resources until August?"
Because she might win the popular vote, and even if she won't get the nomination won't leave the race as a total loser. Forget the lame spinning by McAuliffe, but the numbers can't be discussed away, and the vote count is becoming increasingly tight for Obama. Well, not a very convincing finale by the "inevitable" nominee, losing momentum within sight of the finishing line.
"Our German friend made a funny."
I tried to, although it's difficult in a foreign language. Thx for noting it!
"Even the scandal hungry media didn't touch the story."
The American MSM is only hungry for one kind of scandal during the primaries, Gray. Gotta keep up.
"Because she might win the popular vote, and even if she won't get the nomination won't leave the race as a total loser."
So Hillary's wasting the Dems' time and money so she and her supporters will come out of this with a little self-esteem?
Oh, and in the eyes of liberals and progressives her sleazy tactics, Boomer BS, and pandering policy positions made the formerly "inevitable nominee" a "total loser" a long time ago. The popular vote reflects that.
"So Hillary's wasting the Dems' time and money so she and her supporters will come out of this with a little self-esteem?"
It's as good an explanation as any other. Or she may want to build a strong bargaining position for the VP ticket. Who knows. Got any better idea, OTD?
"Oh, and in the eyes of liberals and progressives her sleazy tactics, Boomer BS, and pandering policy positions made the formerly "inevitable nominee" a "total loser" a long time ago."
Yeah, I know, you were against "inevitableness" before you were for it...
"The popular vote reflects that."
Where did you get that idea???
"It's as good an explanation as any other. Or she may want to build a strong bargaining position for the VP ticket. Who knows. Got any better idea, OTD?"
It's only as good an explanation as any other if the others are bad explanations. For example, she doesn't want the soon-to-be powerless VP position, since she's all about the power.
The best idea would be for her to get out of the way.
"Yeah, I know, you were against "inevitableness" before you were for it..."
Exactly: before New Hampshire and Iowa. Unlike Hillary's supporters, who believed it then and still believe it now
The popular vote numbers are trending very differently now, and at a certain point (which arrived last week) you can't argue with their "inevitableness."
"Where did you get that idea???"
The "inevitable" Clinton was expecting a coronation, which calls for a lot more 47.7% of the popular vote.
It's sort of like a certain "cake-walk" war your candidate supported.
"The best idea would be for her to get out of the way."
Well, actually I meant, "got any better explanation?"...
"The popular vote numbers are trending very differently now, and at a certain point (which arrived last week) you can't argue with their "inevitableness.""
Huh? I don't understand what you're hinting at. Confused the popular vote with the delegate count? Or what?
"It's sort of like a certain "cake-walk" war your candidate supported."
Uh huh. When the media was in a frenzy about Clinton being inevitable, I was still stomping for Edwards.
"Well, actually I meant, "got any better explanation?"..."
On Hillary's part, just a grotesque sense of entitlement, Gray. A level of Hubris that's only seen in Greek tragedy.
On her supporters' part, it's a split between DLCers desperate to keep ahold of the party no matter the cost, and some first-wave Boomer feminists and wannabes desperate to have a woman as President even if it's the wrong woman.
"Huh? I don't understand what you're hinting at. Confused the popular vote with the delegate count? Or what?"
I was referring to the total popular vote (Obama 49%, Clinton 47.7%). But looking at the total delegate count (Obama 1959, Clinton 177
, we don't exactly see coronation numbers that Ms. "Invevitable"'s supporters were predicting.
"Uh huh. When the media was in a frenzy about Clinton being inevitable, I was still stomping for Edwards."
So was I. I'm referring to Hillary's die-hard supporters who, then and now, think she's inevitable and entitled to the nomination.
OTD - What happens after the voting is over and things return to the pre-voting coronation puffed up media bs? Our voices will be but a whisper, as before the voting, and Hillary will continue to promote this insanity and people will start to mindlessly repeat it then at the convention she'll be the nom.
Don't forget just how out of touch the media reports were prior to the voting. When all the "Support THE candidate" crap was being spread. Where are the "Support THE Candidat"ers now? Why are we NOT hearing from them now? I'll tell you why. Because they plan to lie like dogs till flmi is a done deal then spin in the media till the convention.
No Obama will not be the candidate. They will manufacture some "news" like wright and we'll have no more stfu primary votes to shut it down with. Then what we gonna do?
These are the clintons we're talking about here. And we've got joe liarman coming out saying Obama won't stand up to the left. Clinton/liarman/bush/mccain..... all the enemy. I really have to question who Hillary's voters are? Democrats don't do racism and yet here's a party leader exploiting this. This is the general right now. Here's where its won or lost. Obama needs to not take clinton at their word on anything..... and so do we.
Since the clintons see fit to change so many rules, I say Dean should make some sudden and sweeping changes to the rules rather than let her linger in the background till August. No lingering for the clintons. In fact she and Joe need to go be republicans.
Commenting by HaloScan
