Hey, bt.  Ditto on McCain.  I can't believe the lengths he goes to distort his past actions to make them appear to not be what they were.  He has "seen the light"?  BS!  McCain-Feingold, education, illegal immigration, moving Gitmo to the U.S. and lawyering up the islamofascist illegal combatants, yada, yada.  He is as much a conservative as Barry Ubama.

Mark Levin has a good one for Shrillary too:  Her Thighness.

"The future is not set.  There is no fate but what we make for ourselves."

michaelyon-online.com

ZS,

I'm not sure which candidate -- Billary or Obama -- will be easier for us to beat in November. I know there are many that feel Billary will so galvanize the GOP that this will make them more defeatable. However, I'm not sure I buy it.

In the end, both of these candidates represent socialism and BY FAR the largest movement to the left since Jimmy Carter -- maybe since FDR. If we as Republicans can't mobilize against socialism -- regardless of the gender of the person advancing it! -- we are in serious trouble as a Party. ns

zs:  It matters not to me if you love the site or if we are on the same side.  I don't buy your premise.  Blacks in South Carolina voted for Obama because they are democrats, but also because he is black and has a vision for the future, no matter how scary and socialist it appears to conservatives.  In fact, that probably makes him more appealing.  The fact that those same people voted for Clinton and Kerry in past primaries just proves that they 1. are not racist, but rather democrat, and  2. don't think very deeply about the issues(imho) and, anecdotally, also in the opinion of BigShaftScore (further down in the comments):

"Truth four: As a young black person, I am NOT voting for him at all. I like my freedom, I don't like the socialist brand of Kool-Aid."

Bill & Hill have been very subtlely slicing and dicing Obama in a racial way for months now in an attempt to pit latent anglo and hispanic fear and suspicion of having a black run the country.  It is so subtle that evidently many are missing it, especially those in the Clinton camp, probably purposely (see the post Mark linked for us to read), and evidently some self described conservatives.  But the MSM and the Kennedy's are having no trouble seeing it and they are wanting it to stop.  It has become apparent to the old guard and many of the young lefties that the Clinton's are trying to destroy Obama personally, in order to defeat him politically.  And the tactics they are using are the same tried and true Clinton Inc. tactics, using the Saul Alinsky school of political activism, that worked so well against the conservatives and Republicans for so long.  Only now it is being used against a young, good looking, left leaning, visionary black candidate (See the link to the Kyle-Anne Shiver article in my reply to bigtimer, above).  And they are not liking, as Senator Swimmer said, quote: "the politics of personal destruction" in his endorsement speech for Obama Osama.  Kennedy, and JFK's daughter too, used not too veiled attacks on what the Clinton's have been doing lately. 

You know, one of Barack's main themes, when I listen to him, is the overcoming of the racial barriers that have held us back for so long.  While I don't agree with him on anything else I have heard from him policy-wise, and fear that if he wins, they will institutionalize that lofty goal, I cannot agree with you that "Instead of asking Hillary about Bill's alleged white racism, the GOP can validly ask Hillary and John Edwards if they lost because of Obama's black racism."   While nearly everything in a policy sense strikes me wrong about Obama, in a personal sense, he does not strike me as being a racist, and as far as I can tell, he has avoided playing the race card so far, other than to respond to Clinton Inc. jabs that he has done so, and the idiotic questions about his alleged race baiting that they feed to their whores in the MSM.

So I can't agree that "This political pile-on we are doing against Bill Clinton is nuts."  Bull Connor was a KKK'er who turned the fire hoses and dogs on blacks, and was a committed segregationist who, like J. William Fullbright, Clinton's mentor, worked to keep the black population "in it's place".  While Clinton is not using dogs and chains, or Jim Crow laws, he and Hillary are using subtlety and nuance to try and set the races against one another.  Rush was absolutely correct:  Bill Clinton is now Bull Clinton.

P.S.  A major ht to Rush for feeding me my marching orders daily.  It makes my life as a mind numbed robot so much easier.  This way I don't have to strain and think for myself.  Thanks, Rush. 

"The future is not set.  There is no fate but what we make for ourselves."

michaelyon-online.com

Hey, bt, here's some backup from a very sharp woman over at American Thinker.  "To Alinsky, in the march to nonviolent revolutionary power transfer, identifying one's genuine enemy was entirely secondary to merely pinning the enemy tail on one donkey or another, just as long as it served to rally the Have Nots.  Targets needed to be specific, but they didn't need to really be your enemy.  A target simply had to be seen as a vile enemy in the minds of one's followers."

These two are a tag-team.  It's not about getting Hillary elected, it's about getting the power back.

By attacking Obama's authenticity as a new icon for African-Americans, the Clintons understand full well, I believe, that the black community will rally to Obama, thereby demonstrating to the broader electorate that it's been about race after all....

Having instigated this quite uncivil conflict, Hillary has gone on to campaign in states with bigger-bang delegate counts, (and, just speculating here, where blacks have a lower percentage of the total vote) and left tag-team champ Bill behind in South Carolina to schmooze the black citizens, whom they have both done all they could to alienate...

Somehow Riady, Johnnie Wang, the Lippo's, Norman Schu and all the others continue to be "overlooked" by the whoreish MSM.  Shameful on so many levels. 

And, in a different vein, but using the same Alinsky inspired strategy, here is a take on their approach to McCain (although I don't agree with her premise that Bill is afraid of McCain, at least politically, although personally I'm sure somewhere deep down, he feels inadequate in comparison): 

 

Murphy, one in a crowd of thousands, completely by happenstance, caught the eye of Bill Clinton because he was wearing a military veteran's cap.  In a moving moment, with cameras rolling, Murphy embraced Bill Clinton as they both wept, while Murphy told Bill, "I would rather have your name on the presidential ballot than on the Vietnam wall."

The media response to this emotional scene was predictably overwhelming and positive.  Murphy was depicted as a former POW and Vietnam veteran, who had been wounded in action.  And just as predictably, Bill Clinton's draft dodging slipped into the annals of forgotten issues.

Only problem was that Murphy's actual military record showed a different story.  He was never a POW.  He was never wounded.  And rather than being involved in combat, he was a data processing repairman, serving in a secure, air-conditioned building.*

Our watchdog media, however, failed to unearth this truth before Bill Clinton was ensconced in the White House.

Well, there's a surprise!

When Hillary turned down a job offer by Saul Alinsky and opted for Yale Law School, she wasn't rejecting the socialist doctrine, she was simply opting for a different method of pursuit.  While at Yale, Hillary didn't write for the traditional Yale Law Journal.  Instead, she served as one of the initial editors of the newly formed Yale Review of Law and Social Action, a now-defunct publication committed to showing how the law could be used as a vehicle for dramatic social change.

One of Hillary's progressive social-change causes became the Black Panthers, some of whom were on trial in New Haven for an especially brutal murder of one of their own.  During the trial, Hillary's journal published cartoons depicting the police as pigs with wet snouts, who uttered extreme racial slurs.  One cartoon asked the question, "What is a pig?" with the answer, "A low natured beast that has no regard for law, justice, or the rights of people; a creature that bites the hand that feeds it; a foul depraved traducer, usually found masquerading as the victim of an unprovoked attack." 

Alinsky again.  Has the MSM ever mentioned that?  Or explained to the millions of loyal libs what the import of that connection is?  Doubtful.

Nice to talk with you again bt.  I just don't have time for this anymore, I have to try mightily to keep my fingers from jumping in here, today I couldn't help it.  Still reading, though. 

"The future is not set.  There is no fate but what we make for ourselves."

michaelyon-online.com