Hillary Clinton vs. Barack Obama: Of the two, who do you like?

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

. . . But I think it's unfair to characterize all of them as being of the radical white-resenting Farakhan preaching left . . . .

I did not mean to do that. You are correct. I was trying to say that the polls demonstrate that the vast majority of black voters (mostly D) are voting for Obama, seemingly with little care or regard to Wright's statements. That indicates to whatever degree that these same voters may give him the same pass when it comes to Michelle Obama's statements. I know many of my black friends might view the term "whitey" as part of the black culture and not something white people can really realte to. Note - I am speculating here and not saying all black people are like this, though I think many are likely to be more willing to give Obama a pass on this.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by David

. . . It's time that each individual stood up on his own accomplishments (or lack thereof).

I agree. But, when you tell the black community that, they cry foul and never want Federal programs, like Affirmative Action, to end. They want the leg up on other groups all in the name of correcting the ills of the past. I think that is wrong and the test for eligibility for the leg up should be poverty instead of race. But, I have been branded a horrible racist for even suggesting that. Interestingly, no one branding me as such can give any coherent answer for what future generation will have to stop paying for or benefiting from the sins of the past.

Originally Posted by David

The single exception to all this identity politics **** is THE RED-HEADED LEAGUE by Conan Doyle. That's just plain funny.

As a brunette : American, I object.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

She was totally robbed for the following reasons:

1. Under the rules of the DNC, states that are in violation may have 100% of their delegation restored if they repaired their violation, i.e., a revote. Obama staunchly refused to allow this to happen despite attempts by MI and Hillary to conduct a revote. Here he is yet again exploiting an arcane loophole in the process for his own personal gain at the expense of the will of the voters.

2. Obama intentionally removed his name from the MI ballot; it was there initially. He did this to appease voters in Iowa, who were peeved that MI moved up their primary (even though four other states moved up their primaries without any penalty). I would also venture to guess that he did this to help ensure that, in view of his catastrophic loss in MI, he sought to invalidate the primary by making it look like Hillary was running unopposed.

3. The RBC on Saturday apportioned 59 "uncommitted" delegates to Obama, even though the DNC rules explicitly indicated that "uncommitted" votes should be treated just like an actual candidate and should not be divied up/allocated to any candidate. The DNC had the utter gall to impute the will of the people by giving votes that were not cast for Obama to Obama. Their rationale for doing this was based on exit polling. This is absolutely unprecedented in the history of the United States. This is what has become of the (un)Democratic party.

4. This type of "punishment" is unconstitutional. I understand that Arlen Specter (R) is actually mulling a legal challenge to the DNC ruling on the grounds that every vote, even in primaries, equals one vote. Although there is probably a GOP-centric reason for doing this, e.g., prolonging the primary fight, I think Specter, as a legal scholar and a citizen of the U.S., is appalled by these banana republic-like antics.

In a nutshell, it is so blatantly obvious that Dean/Pelosi/Reid/Brazille all worked in collusion to ensure that the so-called "rules" were twisted, re-interpreted and bent so that their golden boy walked out of there almost unscathed. And to add insult to injury, they actually removed 4 of Hillary's won pledged delegates and handed them to Obama because they felt that would be "fair." Arbitrarily, of course! They applied one line of reasoning for MI, but used another for FL. Hillary has every right to have this nonsense appealed and end this with a floor fight in August. It's not like this party can be any more divided.

All true - but I think MI and FL knew that the D threatened to strip them of the votes and they did it anyway. So, they knew before. I could be wrong though.

[BombaySapphire3]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

By the way, I just read that the Michelle Obama "whitey" bombshell may stay in the vault a little longer- possibly until Obama becomes the undisputed presumed nominee or the general election. But I just read that this tape is from a TUCC panel session starring Michelle and Louis Farakhan! An inside source who has seen the tape described it as "stunning." The rumor is that FOX definitely has it (Sean Hannity), and that ABC may have it as well. The thing that worries me is that the Obama campaign, flush with gazillions in cash, may have the wherewithall to bribe the owner of the tape.

Come now and you think that the Clinton's would not have mortgaged the house and Chelsea's first born to get their mitts on such a tape if it does indeed exist.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by BombaySapphire3

Come now and you think that the Clinton's would not have mortgaged the house and Chelsea's first born to get their mitts on such a tape if it does indeed exist.

The far more interesting question is "Is the tape relevant?" I think it is because to me, the content shows Michelle Obama is prejudiced against white people. Now, the question will become "Is it okay for her to be so?" In other words, is it okay for black people to be prejudiced against, or really even suspicious of" white people. Certainly the popular trend is that all black people have have some sort of race related issue against them caused by white people - many suggest that they cannot escape it. Is that enough to validate Michelle Obama's comments? Moreover, is it enough to tip people toward Hillary (and for that matter Bill), who to my knowledge has never made a racist statement, a position seemingly loftier than the alleged one Michelle Obama is in now.

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

The far more interesting question is "Is the tape relevant?" I think it is because to me, the content shows Michelle Obama is prejudiced against white people. Now, the question will become "Is it okay for her to be so?" In other words, is it okay for black people to be prejudiced against, or really even suspicious of" white people. Certainly the popular trend is that all black people have have some sort of race related issue against them caused by white people - many suggest that they cannot escape it. Is that enough to validate Michelle Obama's comments? Moreover, is it enough to tip people toward Hillary (and for that matter Bill), who to my knowledge has never made a racist statement, a position seemingly loftier than the alleged one Michelle Obama is in now.

Well, the fact is that the full gravity of the Wright tapes has not truly been put to the test; most of Obama's victories occurred pre-Wright. Anecdotally, the argument could be made that post-Wright, Obama lost most of the primaries and earned far fewer pledged delegates and popular votes than Hillary. I definitely think that America in general is fearful of an "angry ____ bitch," which is part of the reason why Hillary doesn't poll very well. And if they perceive that Michelle is that, and a militant racist to boot, then Houston, we have a problem. So what can Barack do after something like this? Although he has thrown every other of his shady associates under the bus, I don't think he can do that to his own wife. If the tape is indeed as sensational as it sounds, there is no way he will recover. Fox News will have that playing in perpetuity until November.

The latest anti-spin I'm hearing now is that Michelle is actually saying "why'd he" instead of "whitey." Still, "whitey" or not, it's going to be impossible for them to justify her general condemnation of white people for all of society's problems. Of course, that is if this tape actually exists.

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by BombaySapphire3

Come now and you think that the Clinton's would not have mortgaged the house and Chelsea's first born to get their mitts on such a tape if it does indeed exist.

My hunch is that since this tape supposedly was originally sold by the Trinity Church to its members, there must be dozens of copies in existence. I'm sure that they have vowed not to give it to the media, but I'm surprised that nobody has sold out. I know that if someone was offering me some major coinage to hand over the tape, I'd say "Obama who?" "What has that fool done for me lately?"

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

My hunch is that since this tape supposedly was originally sold by the Trinity Church to its members, there must be dozens of copies in existence . . . .

That alone negates the existence of the tape in this instance IMO. No one could resist the millions thrown at them and I am sure that more than one person on that church now hates Obama. In fact, I could see Wright selling it himself. Like you, I'd be looking at a two bedroom co-op with outdoor space or perhaps a townhouse about now if the tape were mine

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

That alone negates the existence of the tape in this instance IMO. No one could resist the millions thrown at them and I am sure that more than one person on that church now hates Obama. In fact, I could see Wright selling it himself. Like you, I'd be looking at a two bedroom co-op with outdoor space or perhaps a townhouse about now if the tape were mine

Or how about a white Georgian colonial in Chappaqua?

If that is indeed the case, then how can you account for the fact that the original Wright and Pfleger videos have not surfaced? All we have now are those pixelated hurky-jerky clips from YouTube. Perhaps it's the same person who uploaded those clips on YouTube who just realized that he/she could start getting paid for these little bombshells.

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

All true - but I think MI and FL knew that the D threatened to strip them of the votes and they did it anyway. So, they knew before. I could be wrong though.

Oh, they definitely knew. But in the case of FL, the republican-lead state senate voted to move up the primary, penalty or not. The general feeling is that the GOP did this intentionally to screw with the DNC (and it worked!). Basically there was nothing anyone in the DNC could do to stop the trainwreck. I believe a similar thing happened in MI, but I'm no 100% sure. I think MI wanted to get permission to move up their primary, like SC, NH, IA and NV, but ultimately they were told "no," but they did it anyway for some reason.

Anyway, now the rumor is that Hillary's speech in New York on Tuesday night is either going to be a concession speech or a joint announcement with Obama (who will also be in New York) regarding a dream ticket. I hope it's NEITHER!

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

Or how about a white Georgian colonial in Chappaqua? . . . .

A Richardsonian Romanesque in Westport!

Me in a blousy smock most of the time and you in a Nehru jacket and tam. To quote Hepburn as Eleanor of Aquitaine:

I'd hang you from the nipples,
but you'd shock the children.

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

. . . I hope it's NEITHER!

Maybe Obama will utter the single word "present" while Michelle in the back ground and with a manical laugh sticks pins in a white doll resembling Hillary.

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

A Richardsonian Romanesque in Westport!

Me in a blousy smock most of the time and you in a Nehru jacket and tam. To quote Hepburn as Eleanor of Aquitaine:

I'd hang you from the nipples,
but you'd shock the children.

Why, that would just rip those pencil erasers right out of their sockets!

[strandinthewind]

Originally Posted by HejiraNYC

Why, that would just rip those pencil erasers right out of their sockets!

Well, they've supported your weight Baby Ruth

[HejiraNYC]

Originally Posted by strandinthewind

Well, they've supported your weight Baby Ruth

As well as poking out the eyeballs of those who dared enter my personal space!