Interviewing Tim Russert, Matt Lauer kicked off the kicking around of Hillary's idea.
MATT LAUER: Let's talk about this idea. Is it being floated seriously? Is this light-hearted, and who's behind it?You don't have to read too far between the lines to see what Russert was getting at. Mississippi is "an area that's friendly to Barack Obama" in important part due to the large proportion of African-Americans among Magnolia State Dems. When Russert speaks of Dems there seeing Hillary's suggestion as "condescension," the ostensible implication is that she's telling Obama to get to the back of the presidential bus.
TIM RUSSERT: Well the Clintons are behind it, and New York Daily News columnist Michael Goodwin said today that he talked to a Clintonista who said it's an attempt to belittle Barack Obama, that if they can suggest that he can be Vice-President, it's an indication that who should be President?
LAUER: Yeah, but couldn't it backfire? I mean, he's ahead in the delegate count, she needs a miracle. Might it not come off as ignorant, or arrogant, not to be too harsh?Story Continues Below Ad ↓
RUSSERT: Well it's an indication, I think, of the state of the Clinton campaign. They're down in Mississippi, an area that's friendly to Barack Obama, and they're trying to indicate it as a sign of respect. Some Democrats are concerned it is seen as condescension.
Russert continued . . .
RUSSERT: And the most important point, Matt, is the point Andrea [Mitchell] showed in her piece: there's been a sustained campaign by Hillary Clinton over the last few weeks, saying she has the life experience, John McCain has a life experience for the Oval Office: Barack Obama has a speech. If he doesn't measure the Commander-in-Chief threshold, then how can he possibly be considered to be one heartbeat away, as Vice-President? It's illogical. And I think the Clinton campaign has to deal with that.Matt certainly saw the logic of Russert's analysis.
LAUER: And has she been pressed on that very question, yet?To judge by the early MSM reviews, this is one play that won't make it to Denver.
RUSSERT: No. I think yesterday [on his Meet the Press] certainly with Senator Daschle and Governor Rendell, and the other programs, it really did rise up as a legitimate issue to debate: you can't have it both ways.
—Mark Finkelstein is a NewsBusters contributing editor and host of Right Angle. Contact him at mark@gunhill.net.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
This is why it seems to me
March 10, 2008 - 08:10 ET by motherbeltThis is why it seems to me that a pairing of these two simply cannot work. By suggesting on her own that Obama could be VP, Her Royal Clintoness made it very plain: that is the only scenario she would accept.
Columnist Andrew Sullivan put it very well in a recent piece in TimesOnline:
They endure all sorts of humiliation – remember the taped Clinton deposition in the Ken Starr investigation....[ ]... Hillary’s dismissal of the Lewinsky matter as an invention of the right-wing conspiracy? – because they know no other way to live. They have been thinking of this moment since they were in college and being a senator or an ex-president or having two terms in the White House are not sufficient to satiate their sense of entitlement. Even if they have to put their own party through a divisive, bitter, possibly fatal death match, they will never give up. Their country, their party . . . none of this matters compared with them. (emphasis added)
And I think that's what it will come down to.
There have been examples..
March 10, 2008 - 14:41 ET by celatorMB: You might be absolutely right. It seems clear that these two loath other (publically, at least, and probably for real).
The general craziness of US politics, though, has gifted us with some P/VP tickets where both people really couldn't stand each other, but "for the good of the party" the presidential candidate was pressured to pick someone he hated. Some examples: Eisenhower-Nixon, Kennedy-Johnson, Reagan-Bush 1, Bush-Quayle, Clinton-Gore. Yikes, that's almost all of them recently ;+}. I'm reminded too that John Kerry distrusted Edwards, whom he considered a lying fraud, but was "talked into it" (picking him as running mate) by some high level D's in the party and some international interests (yep, it happened), but that's a tale for another day.
At any rate, tis fun to watch the D's jitterbug around the dance floor, isn't it?
What I take away from all this is: If they can't run a campaign effectively, how in the world can they run a country?
Typical arrogance of a
March 10, 2008 - 08:24 ET by dscottTypical arrogance of a divisive liberal elite to suggest the challenger, who has run a fairly clean campaign, is the one whose experience set is not good for being POTUS. Divisiveness is not a quality for being POTUS, a uniter is. I don't know how the Clintons could make this any clearer to Obama and all African Americans...GET back to the plantation, NOW!
Lord Sidious / Darth Vader 2008 Long Live the Empire! Come to the Dark Side, it is your Destiny.
When Will They Say It?
March 10, 2008 - 08:37 ET by Joann JansenWhen will the MSM finally say it? Bill & Hill own the plantation and they expect Barack to work on it? That is what she meant by "Of course I'll be on TOP of the ticket." If that was not the MOST racist comment to date I don't know what was! The only reason she is on TOP is because she is WHITE and as far as she is concerned it is her rightful place - she owns the plantation doesn't she?! How dare her?! How can the MSM not call her out on this and why is EVERYONE not crying foul?! It is time to call them what they really are - Racist in every sense. Finally the Clintons will show their true "colors". There would be absolutely NO reason for her to be on top of the ticket - I think this is unbelievable!
I don't think their
March 10, 2008 - 08:38 ET by motherbeltI don't think their put-down has anything to do with his color (or half-color). I don't think it is aimed at all African-Americans, just the one who is interfering with their plan.
She just has this sense of entitlement. She is furious that what should have been a cake-walk, like her two Senate runs, is actually a contest...and she is losing. I think the feeling is that Obama hasn't paid his dues; he should wait his turn. and there he goes, jumping the line!! I keep waiting for one of them to call him "uppity" LOL.
in lieu of alimony
March 10, 2008 - 10:09 ET by mom_roxmb - agree. We would be seeing this if her challenger were another woman, Hispanic, etc. Obama just happens to be the one in her way of her 'in lieu of alimony' coronation as the nominee.
I think this is a brilliant political ploy on the Clintons' part. By stating that Obama might be her VP, Hillary is merely hedging her bet to be on the ticket.
If Obama is the nominee, he will be under HUGE pressure by the DNC Clinton supporters (currently Clinton 139 to Obama 102) to put her on the ticket. The media will parrot this shared ticket idea to the point that it is a given.
If Obama then chooses a different VP, he will have to very, very carefully explain why he didn't choose Hillary. I think Obama should NOT choose Hillary as VP for reasons too numerous to list here.
Yet, I just watch this maneuvering from afar, being amazed - but not really - at the gall, yet impressed by the political genius of it.
A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
- George Bernard Shaw, 1944
If Obama is so foolish as to
March 10, 2008 - 10:23 ET by NL207If Obama is so foolish as to name that woman his running mate then I have no sympathy for him. His heartbeat would be all that stands between that unscrupulous, ambition-crazed woman and the Oval Office.
#1 (dare I say with a _____? oh, I better not)
March 10, 2008 - 10:40 ET by mom_roxNL - as I mentioned before, the reasons are numerous, but you listed the #1 reason.
How many times has the media (especially the morning shows) salivated over this supposed 'dream ticket'. I'm glad that Russert, et. al., are looking at this from a different angle.
A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
- George Bernard Shaw, 1944
I've said before, and still
March 10, 2008 - 15:34 ET by motherbeltI've said before, and still believe, that Her Royal Clintoness would not accept the #2 spot, because she knows that's her ticket to the dustbin of politics. She will be too old to run in 8 years, were Obama to win. There will probably be another young upstart elbowing his/her way in then too, and she will really look old (I mean that in both senses). The Republicans gave the nomination to Dole, and to McCain, out of a sense of "they deserve it." The Democrats are not that sentimental.
She will probably say that she can "do more good" in the Senate, in helping to pass legislation, and go back and attempt to be a female Ted Kennedy (or, heaven forbid, Robert Byrd).
Everyone is forgetting about Edwards - - he has delegates
March 10, 2008 - 17:43 ET by JayTeeThrow in Florida, Mich., and if Edwards "pledges" his Delegates to Hillary.....we will have some ACTION...of course some $$$'s and promises will have to change hands.
Never been in a contest
March 10, 2008 - 13:21 ET by docbBill called Barack 'uppity' when he called him 'kid'...That was the code that the BLK congressman was talking about.
I am pleased to see someone on the MSM tell it like it is with the clintons. Entitlement and arrogance show themselves in the lack of management skills with her campaign, in the belief that they could spend $140 million to take the nomination by SuperTuesday, in the exhaustive lying about her experience[ IHT-Yahoo,Chicago Trib, Newsweek, all have articles about her eggregious lies], in the union splitting in NV, in the way they are beholding to Big Pharma, Corporations, Big Oil, and Lobbyists, in their use of fear mongering to get votes from the under informed or using tears[almost] to get sympathy from females.
Yes, it is racist for them to assume that he would entertain such a proposal when they have not one thing in common...He has character, integrity and vision---she has no character, blind ambition, and is a liar and presumtious beyond belief.
Clinton calling Barack
March 10, 2008 - 22:46 ET by Scout FinchClinton calling Barack "kid" is just like calling him "boy".
As, "go awn, nah, boy, get on back to the plantation, where y'all b'long!"
How any self-respecting African American can vote for Hillary is beyond me.
The Clintons ARE Ignorant
March 10, 2008 - 08:35 ET by Melodic_MetalThe loser 'offering' the VP slot to the WINNER? How Narcissistic can these people get? Please, Barack. Tell the political mafia, aka Clintons to get stuffed! How condescending can they be? We haven't seen anything yet. Hillary is trying to STEAL, yes you read correctly STEAL the nomination from Barack. Trying to get the states FL, and MI to count the delegates that their entire party said would NOT COUNT IF THEY PUSHED UP THEIR PRIMARIES. But hey, they're the Clintons. Rules don't apply.
"To beat Violence, You must ignore the focus groups. You must send in the Mossad, turn off the BBC, CNN, and don't look back."
But hey, they're the
March 10, 2008 - 08:40 ET by motherbeltBut hey, they're the Clintons. Rules don't apply.
I coined a phrase for the Clintons here: "Rules are just tools." (to be used and abused to their advantage.)
VP slot will "Censored" Obamarama's "Censored"
March 10, 2008 - 12:55 ET by JayTeeCensored by JayTee . . . . No trees or Horses were injured in this post.
B-HO won't "Censored" the Presidency, this is an Clinton "Censored" Mafia "Offer he can't "censored"" . He should take it. . . . or he may not "Censored" to see Denver.
The REAL Situation for Democrats. Delicious!
March 10, 2008 - 09:20 ET by Melodic_MetalFrom Jay Severine. My personal Civics Samurai
"1. THE DEM RACE IS NOW OUTSIDE THE HANDS OF VOTERS.
Because of
Clinton's Texas-Ohio-Rhode Island success - again establishing presence
for her - no single or group of primaries/caucuses is capable of
"breaking the race open", for either candidate.
THIS MEANS THE DEM NOMINATION IS NOW VIRTUALLY CERTAIN TO BE SETTLED NOT BY VOTERS, BUT IN COURT OR BY SUPER-DELEGATES.
And
that is almost surely going to cause a historic and greatly problematic
split in their party; it could cost them the election.
2.
SUPER-DELEGATES NOW HAVE A STARK CHOICE: ATTEMPT TO SETTLE THIS RACE
"FROM THE INSIDE", OR LET IS FESTER, LINGER, TWIST IN THE WIND FOR
MONTHS.
Without forceful - and probably hugely unpopular -
intervention from party leaders, the dem race isn't going to swerve al
over the map merely until the Pennsylvania primary (7 weeks distant,
April 22) - but until at least the June 7 Puerto Rico primary...and
quite possibly until after the re-do of both Michigan's and Florida's
primaries, which could push this up to the convention.
3.
PENNSYLVANIA IS A STATE DEMOCRATS MUST WIN IN NOVEMBER - AND NOW THEY
ARE GUARANTEED MONTHS OF UGLY, BLOODY CARPET-BOMBING OF BOTH DEM
CANDIDATES, BY EACH OTHER.
Clinton(s) and Obama are now going to
spend - what, 40 million dollars? - trashing each other to win their
party's voters...but when they leave, the loser will have been savaged
so badly that he/she may not be able to win Penn in November.
4. CALENDAR GUARANTEES DEMOCRAT MUTUAL ATTACK, ATTACK, ATTACK.
Q: What kept the dems on page 1 every day since Christmas?
A: weekly election events.
Now there is Nothing until 7 weeks from now.
Q: So, how will Clinton and Obama stay on page 1
A: The only way they can: by making, in the absence of primaries, the only kind of news
that guarantees coverage: attacking each other, leaking into the media bad rumors about each other, etc.
EVERY WEEK WITHOUT A PRIMARY THIS CAMPAIGN GOES ON WILL BE AN UGLY WEEK.
For Dems.
For us, BEAUTIFUL!
Excelsior!"
"To beat Violenc, You must ignore the focus groups. You must send in the Mossad, turn off the BBC, CNN, and don't look back."
I have a difficult time
March 10, 2008 - 10:42 ET by Chris NormanI have a difficult time working up a lot of sympathy for Obama. He has been espousing the message that "He" is the only candidate to offer "Hope" and "Change" - a pretty arrogant message too, if you ask me. The Clintons are merely being the Clintons. I wouldn't expect that they had suddenly developed any class. Besides, I love this. Let the Democrats tear themselves apart in their lust for power - like wolves killing each other in a greedy fight over some carcass.
In terms of media bias, Today's reaction to the latest Clinton antics again shows the media is rooting for Obama. If a similar occurance happened in the general election, do any of us think - for one minute - Today would be attacking or Obama or Clinton and defending McCain?
NOTE TO ALL
March 10, 2008 - 10:52 ET by Mark FinkelsteinPlease do not post any comments suggesting felonious foul play might be employed by the candidates.
But Mark!!! There
March 10, 2008 - 10:59 ET by bassndudeBut Mark!!! There Democrats!!! :-)
Save a SeAL, club a liberal!!
The Differences Make the Site
March 10, 2008 - 12:28 ET by CGattonThank you, Mark, for finally asking for an end to the kinds of comments that make the liberal sites what they are. More and more lately I see the same type of derangement syndrome here, on Newsbusters. We're supposd to be able to discuss and debate with class, and without resorting to libel and/or slander. (Yes, I do know the difference, but they always go hand in glove. Someone who does one, will most likely do the other.) I see even more reason to remove all immunity from the libel/slander laws for the media.
One of my favorite dreams is Olbermann on the losing end of slander trials for everytime he has opened his mouth. :o)
V/R
Clyde
"...the aspirants to tyranny are either the...men of the state, who in democracies are demagogues,... or those who hold great offices, and have a long tenure.." - Aristotle, Politics, c350BC
Sorry Mark F....did not read the "lay off" notice in time
March 10, 2008 - 12:50 ET by JayTeeThere I go, letting Historical precedent getting in the way of my thinking.
I'll have to start drinking different Beer, something other than Foster's.
oh Jeez.... Fight fire
March 10, 2008 - 13:32 ET by Melodic_Metaloh Jeez.... Fight fire with kindness. THIS is why we LOSE. Nobody stands up and says what needs to be said for fear of being labeled a (insert liberal knee jerk reaction here.) It's a nice dream to want civility from both sides, but we are talking about the future of our country. Personally, I couldn't care less how the Dems are brought down. I just want them brought down. They are the most hypocritical buffoons in the country. Alas, it's always the way. The republican get their faces kicked in, but we can't possibly fight back because we'd be 'stooping to their level'. How unfortunate.
"To beat Violence, You must ignore the focus groups. You must send in the Mossad, turn off the BBC, CNN, and don't look back."
People are welcome to be as
March 10, 2008 - 13:37 ET by Mark FinkelsteinPeople are welcome to be as tough as they want here. Got strong, substantiated arguments? Great. But flinging wild accusations isn't effective with anyone but the already-convinced.
Good point
March 10, 2008 - 14:04 ET by Melodic_MetalGood point
NOTE TO BAYSHOREMAN AND ALL
March 10, 2008 - 11:09 ET by Mark FinkelsteinI REPEAT: LAY OFF THE VINCE FOSTER, ETC. ANALOGIES NOW. THERE IS NOTHING CLEVER OR ORIGINAL ABOUT THIS. ENOUGH ALREADY.
Nor is there anything
March 10, 2008 - 11:41 ET by NL207Nor is there anything clever or original about the Clintons. How they have avoided felony prosecutions over the years for their questionable business dealings has been a mystery to me. In particular, they were co-equal 25% partners in both Castle Grande and Whitewater real estate development Corprations. All 4 of their partners in these enterprises found their way into prison in accountability for the actions of these partnerships.
It is a more than legitimate question to ask: "If the Clintons were equal partners, then why did they not share equal blame for the actions of their partnership?"
It is also legitimate to ask, "If the Clintons have in their pasts demonstrated ruthless and unscrupulous behavior at lhe least, bordering on criminality, if not simlpy criminal, and have escaped accountability, why should anyone not expect or be surprised by, such conduct in the future?"
NL207: I don't disagree. I
March 10, 2008 - 11:58 ET by Mark FinkelsteinNL207: I don't disagree. I am asking people, though, to eschew the more colorful suggestions along such lines.
Colorful Suggestion?
March 10, 2008 - 12:10 ET by BayshoremanMark,
Is it too colorful to suggest that The-Person-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named is trying to position herself so as to force Obama to place her on the ticket as VP...and that as VP we can expect the same modus operandi that has chactorized her 30+ years of experience, a point that Russert and the MSM are not discussing?
Suggest away. I'm sure
March 10, 2008 - 12:16 ET by Mark FinkelsteinSuggest away. I'm sure everyone understands the sort of speculation I'm asking people to avoid.
»→ Obama/Clinton
March 10, 2008 - 12:24 ET by Cool ArrowThere's at least one political arena in which Hillary already has experience. Impeachment, the Nixon procedings and the Clinton impeachment.
I'm just sayin' . .
♣ a seal
Mark... This is an
March 10, 2008 - 13:44 ET by Clear thinkerMark...
This is an interesting stand you are taking. Could you elaborate more as to why?
"Abstain from McCain"
Conspiracy theories like
March 10, 2008 - 13:56 ET by dscottConspiracy theories like those surrounding Vince Foster's death are akin to the 911 Truthers. Unless you have some proof that he was indeed murdered and it was covered up to look like a suicide, it's just a taudry accusation which Mark would rather not have NB associated with. There are standards, do we lower ourselves to the 911 truthers or have higher standards that require plausible evidence? It may be dark sarcasm to hint at Vince Foster's death as murder, and I have done it myself on occasion, but that isn't really where they want to go with the site.
Lord Sidious / Darth Vader 2008 Long Live the Empire! Come to the Dark Side, it is your Destiny.
Is it really that puzzling
March 10, 2008 - 13:56 ET by Mark FinkelsteinIs it really that puzzling that I would prefer people not throw around unsubstantiated murder allegations?
But murder allegations are
March 10, 2008 - 14:01 ET by balboaBut murder allegations are so much fun!
Mark... Not puzzling, I
March 10, 2008 - 19:10 ET by Clear thinkerMark...
Not puzzling, I just wanted to hear your reason. As much as I understand your wanting to keep this site a class act, I get nervous when anyone asks others to NOT post something. Sure we will get some conspiracy crap now and then, but it's part of what we have to endure for the sake of free speech.
This is one of the last places on earth where I would expect anyone wanting to limit free speech. If it's part of the site rules, that's different and should be respected. If it's not...
"Abstain from McCain"
Right On CT
March 10, 2008 - 20:29 ET by BayshoremanRight on CT. The original posting that I did in this thread was deleted by Mark. It contained my earlier point about a possible real motive of Hillary offering the VP slot to Obama was to set up a scenerio to force Obama to accept her as VP. I then suggested, based on her and Bill's past modus operandi that strange things could happen as had happend to so many of their former associates. Is that speculation? Aboslutely. Is there a factual basis for that speculation? Absolutely.
BTW, I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong but could not a credible argument be made that many of the articles appearing in NB are based in fact and the author then offers some speculative questions to generate honest and open debate, even if such speculation contains "NOTHING CLEVER OR ORIGINAL"?
Hillary reminds me of the
March 10, 2008 - 11:30 ET by bacher468Hillary reminds me of the Black Knight in Monty Python's Holy Grail, who should have quit when his first arm was cut off and when all four limbs were gone "sat" there on the ground and said, "All right... we'll call it a draw."
Big Mistake
March 10, 2008 - 11:58 ET by AndanteAn African American Obama fan said it's a slap in the face to many people of color. He said "She's offering him a job as (White) House N-word". Maybe Obama needs a White House Cracker. (There's a straight-line in there somewhere ;)
"We are going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."... Karl Marx? Nope, it was Hillary Clinton.
Hillary needs Obama more
March 10, 2008 - 12:14 ET by goldbarHillary needs Obama more that he needs her, and him offering the VP slot to her simply won't happen. She's living in a dream world to think that after the way she's treated him that he would even consider asking her to be on the ticket. The math is on his side yet she is talking like she's already the nominee. I supported Hillary for about a nanosecond after Edwards dropped out of the race, but when she started her blatant campaign of lies, I had to go with Obama. I'll take the inexperience over deception any day of the week.
It's Hillary's entitlement, you see..
March 10, 2008 - 12:21 ET by celatorIt's no great mystery. Hillary has been groomed, programmed to be president since her college days. Being bowed and scrapped to as president is at the very center of her ego. She is righteous about it, insulted when an upstart like Obama challenges her for the Oval Office. When the upstart, in fact, is whipping her butt (and the entire Clinton machine's butt) in the popular vote, she is beyond furious. The fact that he is black only adds fuel to the fires of her indignation.
She will do anything, say anything, pander to anyone, accept money from the Chinese, Saudi Arabians and any Martians willing to donate to her campaign (as well as any other shadow groups) to be able to sit her hinny in the chair behind that big desk. In a sane world, she would be locked behind bars for 50 years for the crimes she has committed in the past.
Hillary /.Obama ticket
March 10, 2008 - 12:22 ET by merlin61You are right, Hillary only wants to be President and believes she's entitled. Has nothing to do with
race. Only the Sharptons, Jacksons, etc. will make
it racist. She is arrogant and assuming and will
stop at nothing to find a way to win presidency.
Sharpton and Jackson are
March 10, 2008 - 13:16 ET by dscottSharpton and Jackson are the modern day Uncle Tom's in the Dem Party. Their message essentially to Obama is we must do what masta says so's "we" can keep liven the lifestyle we have always known. They feed us, cloth us and give us a roof over our heads, it is very ungrateful of you to go against the masta's wishes. You owe the masta your welbeing. Be a good boy and accept the VP position so everything will go on as before. We are one big happy family in the Dem Party, all of our needs are taken care of and we don't have to make any hard decisions because masta takes all the responsibility. Don't be stubborn Obama, you must do what's best for all of us, stop thinking for yourself, that's very selfish of you.
Lord Sidious / Darth Vader 2008 Long Live the Empire! Come to the Dark Side, it is your Destiny.
»→ but dscott
March 10, 2008 - 13:23 ET by Cool ArrowIsn't it time for an African American President? I mean, White women have been giving birth to American Presidents for over 200 years.
♣ a seal
Only masta knows when it's
March 10, 2008 - 13:48 ET by dscottOnly masta knows when it's the right time for an African American President. Miss Daisy needs her driver, they must know their place and build the relationship. They must wait their turn, women are the greater victim group, therefore it's their turn. Mind the Party Bosses or I'll get the switch out for some unpleasantness.
Lord Sidious / Darth Vader 2008 Long Live the Empire! Come to the Dark Side, it is your Destiny.
Cool... "Isn't it time
March 10, 2008 - 13:51 ET by Clear thinkerCool...
"Isn't it time for an African American President?"
Nope! At least that what southern dems are telling me.
"Abstain from McCain"
»→ Southern Dems
March 10, 2008 - 19:14 ET by Cool ArrowI don't see Obama getting under the sheets with Robert Byrd either
♣ a seal
-
March 10, 2008 - 23:25 ET by dahliatraversSenator Byrd, a Democrat, is a former member of the KKK.
[Pardon me. Just making up for all the times the msm didn't say it.]
Now here's a dark sarcastic
March 10, 2008 - 14:20 ET by dscottNow here's a dark sarcastic Machievellian thought, instead of McCain tapping Lieberman to be his VP, if Obama loses the Dem nomination as I predict he will, McCain should tap Obama instead. What's a little poke in the eye among enemies?? For McCain it would be a three-fer, 1. he guarantees himself the victory in November, 2. the Dem Party Bosses go absolutely nuts over McCain and Obama being "Uniters" since at that point they lose any possible claim to the Black vote and no one in the Dem Party structure would dare go against the GWOT after that without any leverage for the future and 3. the conservatives would have to suck wind for at least 4 years. Obama's usefulness in the Dem Party may soon come to an end but he just may pull a rabbit out of the hat...
Lord Sidious / Darth Vader 2008 Long Live the Empire! Come to the Dark Side, it is your Destiny.
Birth of a Novel
March 10, 2008 - 14:32 ET by CGatton"...here's a dark sarcastic Machievellian thought..."
Yes it is, lol. Of such thoughts is great science fiction born.
V/R
Clyde
"...the aspirants to tyranny are either the...men of the state, who in democracies are demagogues,... or those who hold great offices, and have a long tenure.." - Aristotle, Politics, c350BC
I'm reminded...
March 10, 2008 - 14:57 ET by celatorYour signature quote reminded me of a statement made by St Augustine in (I think) his "City Of Man": To wit--"All politicians are thugs and robbers".
I don't think Obama is
March 10, 2008 - 15:32 ET by R D HelmI don't think Obama is interested in the "dream ticket."
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
-
March 10, 2008 - 23:27 ET by dahliatraversLove your tag line.
Thanks, dahlia.
March 10, 2008 - 23:45 ET by R D HelmLOL-Been wondering when someone was going to notice.
Theme for Election '08: I want my mommy!
Lauer vs. Lauer
March 10, 2008 - 21:47 ET by seanrobinsOnce and for all, I would like to see the inevitable end game played out with these MSM dopes:
Let's just have Matt lauer interviewing Matt Lauer.
sean robins
www.seanrobins.com