Word is the Democrats may end up with 60 (count 'em) seats in the Senate. Even accounting for that little worm Lieberman that’s a strong working majority. Similar control of the House is predicted. McCain really botched it. And as I predicted, he’s proving to old to campaign hard. He’s just sending his little attack poodle out to deal his dirt for him.
As importantly, a number of liberal judges have been getting on in years and hanging on. Obama will be able to replace them with right-thinking individuals. Given the control of congress, I think those nominations should sail along quite smoothly thank you very much.
In conclusion, I’ve been listening to my man Puffy…
"I thought I told you
That we won’t stop
I thought I told you
That we won’t stop
I thought I told you
That we won’t stop
I thought I told you
That we won’t stop
Unh-unh, unh-unh
…
(my next prediction: Republicans are poor losers. Get ready for lots of pissing and moaning about unfair this and unfair that. Anyway, thought a little pre-emptive poor-winner was in order. They’ve had their 8 years and they’ve f*cked up on a historic scale. I laugh in the face of their whining.)
Hey, ToeTag, this is one Republican you won’t find whining. I want them to lose, and to lose big.
The last 8 years have seen the worst excuse for an administration. And whatever happened to those fucking sellout Repubs that signed The Contract with America, back in 96. I had high hopes back then.
Absolute power corrupts. Seems like I recall when I was younger, The Presidents party was usually in opposition to the congress. Republican President, Democratic Congress. or vice-versa.
I think that is a good thing. I don’t think it should be a requirement of law, but the voters used to do that themselves. Voters, go back to the old way.
[quote=“bobl”]Hey, ToeTag, this is one Republican you won’t find whining. I want them to lose, and to lose big.
The last 8 years have seen the worst excuse for an administration.[/quote]
It’s good to see that sometimes party affiliation doesn’t blind one to reality. In general (and I mean both parties) I think that affiliating yourself with a party can lead to clouded judgment.
This is key, and is the reason I am hoping for an Obama victory strong Dem gains in congress: we need to rescue the Supreme Court from being packed with judges who would shred American freedom.
[quote=“bobl”]Hey, ToeTag, this is one Republican you won’t find whining. I want them to lose, and to lose big.
The last 8 years have seen the worst excuse for an administration. And whatever happened to those fucking sellout Repubs that signed The Contract with America, back in 96. I had high hopes back then.
Absolute power corrupts. Seems like I recall when I was younger, The Presidents party was usually in opposition to the congress. Republican President, Democratic Congress. or vice-versa.
I think that is a good thing. I don’t think it should be a requirement of law, but the voters used to do that themselves. Voters, go back to the old way.[/quote]
Well said. I’ll welcome you back bobl. Not sure I’ll welcome Lieberman back.
“Barack Obama has risen to his highest-ever level in both our electoral college and popular vote projections, principally on the strength of his commanding lead in the national tracking polls. Gallup, Rasmussen and Hotline each have Obama ahead by 7 points, and Research 2000 has him up by 12” fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/ … s-105.html
And you wonder why the Dims have only won 3 of the last 10 elections? It’s because they’ve decided to nominate a crack-smoking, Chavez-hugging, [color=#008000]bleep[/color], McGovernite-believing, corrupt Chicago pol instead of a Scoop Jackson, Joe Lieberman, or even Hillary Clinton type of Democrat. In the 60s and 70s, Scoop Jackson was shocked at the ani-Americanism of the “New Left.” If he were alive today, he’d be shocked at the Obama-Ayers links, the anti-Americanism of Obama’s wife, and Obama’s dovish foreign policy views. They don’t seem to make respectable Democrats in the Jackson-Lieberman mold any more.
Lie-berman can go eff himself. He should join the Republican Party. But I repeat myself…
[/quote]
And you wonder why the Dims have only won 3 of the last 10 elections? It’s because they’ve decided to nominate a crack-smoking, Chavez-hugging, [color=#008000]bleep[/color], McGovernite-believing, corrupt Chicago pol instead of Scoop Jackson, Joe Lieberman, or even Hillary Clinton type of Democrat. In the 60s and 70s, Scoop Jackson was shocked at the ani-Americanism of the “New Left.” If he were alive today, he’d be shocked at the Obama-Ayers links, the anti-Americanism of Obama’s wife, and Obama’s dovish foreign policy views. They don’t seem to make respectable Democrats in the Jackson-Lieberman mold any more.[/quote]
He snorted Coke. Never smoked Crack
He’s not a “corrupt Chicago pol.” Read about Chicago politics before you start yelping all over the place about who’s corrupt and not in this city. :no-no:
Yes, but still disingenuous and stupid. Odd that my entire post was deleted while only part of Chewy’s troll line was cut. I suspect the “objective” moderator who routinely refers to Obama as “Obamessiah” is at work.
He’s not a “corrupt Chicago pol.” Read about Chicago politics before you start yelping all over the place about who’s corrupt and not in this city. :no-no:[/quote]
Nama,
He supported the Daley faction every time over the reform faction. As far as I’m concerned, you’re either part of the problem or part of the solution when it comes to confronting endemic corruption. In the Chicago context of things, Obama was part of the problem. Like its sister New Orleans, most politics in Chicago is tainted with endemic corruption. They’re two of the dirtiest cities in the US. And they’ve been run by the Democratic machine for years? Any trend we are seeing here? :beatnik:
Chewy, the only trend I see is each side tending to overlook scandals in their own house. The Republicans are happy to overlook Keating-Five McCain’s dirty nose and the ongoing abuse-of-power investigation involving Palin, for instance, and the same thing happens on the other side.
It depends. Do you know what the word “trend” means?[/quote]
A general tendency or direction. Trend or pattern is an acceptable word usage in this context is it not? Since with long term Democratic control of a city [Chicago and New Orleans come to mind), we often see such endemic corruption. Does this meet the grade, Professor?
As far as I know, none of the Democratic nominees are under investigation for abuse of power. The only “scandals” they’re “involved” in are those imagined by rightwing moonbats. Or does having a passing acquaintance with someone who was involved in criminal activity when you were 8 constitute a “scandal”? Despite Chewy’s droolings, there are no serious claims that Obama has ever been involved in criminal and corrupt activities.
The Keating Five scandal happened early in McCain Senatorial career. The Ethics Committee ruled that the involvement of McCain in the scheme was also minimal, and he too was cleared of all charges against him. McCain was criticized by the Committee for exercising “poor judgment” when he met with the federal regulators on Keating’s behalf. On his Keating Five experience, McCain has said: “The appearance of it was wrong. It’s a wrong appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators, because it conveys the impression of undue and improper influence. And it was the wrong thing to do.”
Has Obama acknowledged anything wrong about his association with Ayers? Nope. And yes, there definitely was an association.
[quote=“GOP”]The Relationship Between Barack Obama And Bill Ayers Is Much More Extensive Than Obama’s Campaign Is Willing To Admit
Obama’s Top Campaign Staff Have Attempted To Downplay The Relationship Between Obama And Bill Ayers:
Obama Spokesman Robert Gibbs Said That Obama And Ayers Weren’t Close And That Obama Was Only 8 Years Old When Ayers Was Bombing Buildings. Robert Gibbs: “If you read the article … it says these two men weren’t close, this man isn’t involved in our campaign. Bill Ayers is somebody that Barack Obama said his actions were despicable and these happened when Barack Obama was 8 years old.” (FOX News’ “FOX & Friends,” 10/6/08)
Gibbs Has Also Limited The Relationship Between Obama And Ayers To Serving On Two Boards Together. John Roberts: “Barack Obama knew Bill Ayers and had contact with him between 1995 and 2005. Exactly what was the nature of the relationship?” Robert Gibbs: “Well, John, as The New York Times reported this weekend, they served on two boards together during that time period.” (CNN’s “American Morning,” 10/6/08)
Even Obama Has Previously Referred To Ayers As “A Guy Who Lives In My Neighborhood” And Not Someone He Exchanges Ideas With “On A Regular Basis.” Obama: “George, but this is an example of what I’m talking about. This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who’s a professor of English in Chicago who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis. And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values doesn’t make much sense, George.” (Sen. Barack Obama, ABC Democrat Candidates Presidential Debate, Philadelphia, PA, 4/16/08)
But Obama’s Connections With Bill Ayers Are Much More Extensive Than He Or His Campaign Staff Is Willing To Admit:
In 1995, During Obama’s First State Senate Campaign, William Ayers And Wife Bernadine Dohrn Hosted A Meeting Of Chicago Liberals At Their Home For Obama, Which One Attendee Said Was Aimed At “Launching Him.” “In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district’s influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. While Ayers and Dohrn may be thought of in Hyde Park as local activists, they’re better known nationally as two of the most notorious – and unrepentant – figures from the violent fringe of the 1960s anti-war movement. … ‘I can remember being one of a small group of people who came to Bill Ayers’ house to learn that Alice Palmer was stepping down from the senate and running for Congress,’ said Dr. Quentin Young, a prominent Chicago physician and advocate for single-payer health care, of the info rmal gathering at the home of Ayers and his wife, Dohrn. ‘[Palmer] identified [Obama] as her successor.’ … Dr. Young and another guest, Maria Warren, described it similarly: as an introduction to Hyde Park liberals of the handpicked successor to Palmer, a well-regarded figure on the left. 'When I first met Barack Obama, he was giving a standard, innocuous little talk in the living room of those two legends-in-their-own-minds, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn ,’ Warren wrote on her blog in 2005. ‘They were launching him – introducing him to the Hyde Park community as the best thing since sliced bread.’” (Ben Smith, “Obama Once Visited '60s Radicals,” The Politico, 1/22/08)
From March Of 1995 Until September Of 1997, Obama And Ayers Attended At Least Seven Meetings Together Relating To The Chicago Annenberg Challenge. (Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Board Of Directors Meeting, Minutes Of The Board, 3/15/95, 3/31/95, 4/13/95, 6/5/95, 9/30/97; National Annenberg Challenge Evaluation Meeting, List Of Participants, 5/24/95; Chicago Annenberg Challenge, Chicago School Reform Collaborative Meeting, Minutes, 10/23/96)
NOTE: Bill Ayers Was Asked To Help Obama Formulate The Chicago Annenberg Challenge By-Laws. (Chicago Annenberg Challenge Board Of Directors Minutes, 3/15/95)
In 1997, Obama Praised Ayers’ Book On The Juvenile Justice System. “The two men were involved in efforts to reform the city’s education system. They appeared together on academic panels, including one organized by Michelle Obama to discuss the juvenile justice system, an area of mutual concern. Mr. Ayers’s book on the subject won a rave review in The Chicago Tribune by Mr. Obama, who called it ‘a searing and timely account.’” (Jo Becker and Christopher Drew, “Pragmatic Politics, Forged On The South Side,” The New York Times, 5/11/08)
Obama On William Ayers’ “A Kind And Just Parent: The Children Of Juvenile Court”: “A searing and timely account of the juvenile court system, and the courageous individuals who rescue hope from despair.” (Chicago Tribune, 12/21/97)
“[Obama And Ayers] Have Also Appeared Jointly On Two Academic Panels, One In 1997 And Another In 2001.” (Russell Berman, “Obama’s Ties To Left Come Under Scrutiny,” The New York Sun, 2/19/08)
From 1999 To 2002, Obama Served With Ayers On The Board Of Directors For Woods Fund Of Chicago. “[Ayers] served with [Obama] from 1999 to 2002 on the board of the Woods Fund, an anti-poverty group.” (Timothy J. Burger, “Obama’s Chicago Ties Might Fuel ‘Republican Attack Machine’,” Bloomberg, 2/15/08)
During The Time Obama And Ayers Served Together On The Woods Fund, Ayers Was Quoted Saying “I Don’t Regret Setting Bombs … I Feel We Didn’t Do Enough.” “‘I don’t regret setting bombs,’ Bill Ayers said. ‘I feel we didn’t do enough.’ Mr. Ayers, who spent the 1970’s as a fugitive in the Weather Underground, was sitting in the kitchen of his big turn-of-the-19th-century stone house in the Hyde Park district of Chicago.” (Dinitia Smith, “No Regrets For A Love Of Explosives,” The New York Times, 9/11/01)
NOTE: Obama, Born August 14th, 1961, Was 40 Years Old When Ayers Was Quoted. (Obama For America Website, barackobama.com, Accessed 10/6/08; Dinitia Smith, “No Regrets For A Love Of Explosives,” The New York Times, 9/11/01)
While Obama And Ayers Were Serving On The Woods Fund Together, Ayers Posed Standing On An American Flag For An Article In Chicago Magazine Entitled “No Regrets.” (Marcia Froelke Coburn, “No Regrets,” Chicago Magazine, 8/01)
Obama And Ayers Are Neighbors In Chicago’s Hyde Park Neighborhood. “Twenty-six years later, at a lunchtime meeting about school reform in a Chicago skyscraper, Barack Obama met Mr. Ayers, by then an education professor. Their paths have crossed sporadically since then, at a coffee Mr. Ayers hosted for Mr. Obama’s first run for office, on the schools project and a charitable board, and in casual encounters as Hyde Park neighbors.” (Scott Shane, “Obama And '60s Bomber: A Look Into Crossed Paths,” The New York Times, 10/4/08)
Obama Spokesman Ben LaBolt Told The New York Times That Last Year Obama And Ayers “Bumped Into Each Other On The Street In Hyde Park.” “[Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt] said they have not spoken by phone or exchanged e-mail messages since Mr. Obama began serving in the United States Senate in January 2005 and last met more than a year ago when they bumped into each other on the street in Hyde Park.” (Scott Shane, “Obama And '60s Bomber: A Look Into Crossed Paths,” The New York Times, 10/4/08)
Neighbors Have Said “It’s Only Natural” That Obama Would Know Ayers, Who Often Opens His Home For Gatherings, As Obama And His Wife “Are A Part Of Our Neighborhood And Part Of Our Social Circle.” “Since coming out of hiding in 1980, the couple have raised three boys in Chicago and become part of the fabric of their liberal South Side neighborhood. Neighbors said it’s only natural that Obama would know Ayers and Dohrn, who often open their homes for gatherings filled with lively discussions about politics, arts and social issues. Obama and his wife ‘are part of our neighborhood and part of our social circle,’ said Elizabeth Chandler, a neighbor of Ayers’.” (Trevor Jensen, Robert Mitchum and Mary Owen, “Bill Ayers’ Turbulent Past Contrasts With Quiet Academ ic Life,” Chicago Tribune, 4/17/08)
Ayers’ Organization, The Weather Underground, Was A “Violent Left-Wing Activist Group”:
“William Ayers … [Was] A Founding Member Of The Group That Bombed The U.S. Capitol And The Pentagon During The 1970s.” (Russell Berman, “Obama’s Ties To Left Come Under Scrutiny,” The New York Sun, 2/19/08)
Ayers’ Group, The Weather Underground, Is A “Violent Left-Wing Activist Group.” “Senator Obama’s ties to a former leader of the violent left-wing activist group the Weather Underground are drawing new scrutiny as he battles Senator Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination.” (Russell Berman, “Obama’s Ties To Left Come Under Scrutiny,” The New York Sun, 2/19/08)
The Weather Underground Produced A Manual Which Begins, “We Are A Guerrilla Organization. We Are Communist Women And Men, Underground In The United States For More Than Four Years.” “The coalition was said to be a violence-prone faction inspired by the Weather Underground’s ‘‘Prairie Fire,’’ a guerrilla warfare manual published in 1974. The manual begins, ‘We are a guerrilla organization. We are Communist women and men, underground in the United States for more than four years.’” (Paul L. Montgomery, “2 Women In Brink’s Case Identified With Weathermen From Start In '69,” The New York Times, 10/ 22/81)
[/quote]
Good grief, man, you have the most amazing capacity for sticking to ridiculous points and [color=#008000]ahem[/color] repeatedly milk them. Still, it’s a skill of sorts, I guess.
It’s good to see that sometimes party affiliation doesn’t blind one to reality. In general (and I mean both parties) I think that affiliating yourself with a party can lead to clouded judgment.
:beatnik: