Talk radio host Rush Limbaugh crowed this week about the number of Republicans he convinced to vote for Hillary Clinton in Tuesday’s primaries in order to “bloody up” Barack Obama and prolong the Democratic presidential contest. This is something he is proud of?
It doesn’t appear that Limbaugh’s “Operation Chaos” had much impact, though it may have helped Clinton eke out a win in Indiana. Clinton won that primary by only 14,000 votes, and 10 percent of Democratic primary voters described themselves as Republicans. Some of those Republicans voted for Obama, and some of those who voted for Clinton did so because they really supported her. However, 6 in 10 Republicans who voted for Clinton said they would vote for John McCain over Clinton in the fall, if that were the matchup, the Washington Post reported. Still, even if those voters were enough to tip the race to Clinton, she needed to win decisively in order to “bloody” Obama, and she didn’t do that.
148 Comments
“6 in 10 Republicans who voted for Clinton said they would vote for John McCain over Clinton in the fall, if that were the matchup, the Washington Post reported”
I’m sure the ’supers’ will notice that number and further discount her win in Indiana. She lost ground to Obama Tuesday from a position already significantly behind him. The race is over – obama will be the nominee.
6 in 10, wow. That’s downright fraud.
There is NO justification for this kind of thing. Its evil and deceptive and WRONG.
Now Rush is calling for voters to support Obama. There has got to be a law against this.
Didn’t Operation Chaos really begin in 2001 when the S.C. selected GW?
I doubt the goober had anything to do with Republicans switching sides and voting dem.
The writing was on the wall, and he just thought he might make himself look relevant, even though everyone could envision the sea change coming (except the ditto heads).
His Operation Chaos will go on through election night!
Yes. It did what the RePUKES do best, thwart the will of the majority.
http://www.geocities.com/electionmodel/OperationChaos.htm
This link breaks it down:
Final Exit poll data shows that since Operation Chaos began on March 4 in OH and TX, the percentage of Republican crossover voters has risen from 6% to 9%. The increase has been almost totally to Clinton’s benefit.
Prior to March 4 (before Operation Chaos), 7 primaries allowed Republicans to participate. Obama won their vote by an average of 59-28%. He won all 7 primaries by an average 58-37% share.
Since Operation Chaos began on March 4, 5 primaries have been open to Republicans. Clinton won their vote by an average 57-41%. Obama won 2 of the 5 primaries (but should have won 4). He had an average 51-47% share in the 5 primaries.
*****
The latest numbers show Clinton “ahead” in Indiana by only 1.1 percent, not 2 percent as the media keep saying. After all the provisional ballots are finally counted, Obama may actually win Indiana.
Pmom why don’t you email your congess about this. I heard they were hard up for something to investigate. Lets have a new law!
We could call it the Truth In Voting law. Along with ID a blood sample could be taken to see if you had red or blue blood. You just drop a drop on the ballot and your vote is in. Lets keep those fakes out of the polling places. No more of this purple business either.
I second that!!
Yep Cap those reliable exit polls tell the tale. I say off with his head!
I think the mere fact that Rush Limbaugh was doing this caused plenty of chaos amoungst people regardless of the actual outcome of the election.
You need look no further than how riled up some of the liberals are here over it to see that.
Rush Limbaugh is old news – a legend in his own mind – who gives a damn?
WS with the millions he makes you could only hope to be half the ledgend he is. As far as who cares – that would be Phillip Brownlee who brought up the subject I guess.
“WS with the millions he makes you could only hope to be half the ledgend he is”
To some money is more important than integrity – witness Rush Limbaugh.
There is not enough money in the world to get me to trade places with the Vulgar Pigboy.
Mega dittos………………..
Oh I forgot it is getting the money that you ‘don’t’ work for that is important to liberals. We crass conservatives that admire workers are wrong!
“Oh I forgot it is getting the money that you ‘don’t’ work for that is important to liberals.”
I’ve earned every penny that I have – so WTF are you talking about?
But as for Limbaugh, ask him about his alter-ego, Jeff Christie……………..
WS you are indeed pathetic. I looked up your cleverly dropped slur against Limbaugh. I really don’t care what he did before or what he does now. What happened to the ‘personal business’ that the left is so concerned with.
I saw nothing that was note worthy. Did you?
“WS you are indeed pathetic.”
And you said “Clinton was too busy lying to the Grand Jury and Hillary to do anything (about the USS Cole attack.)
Who’s pathetic?
Operation Chaos worked as intended.
It was not just republican votes for Hillary, but also conservatives and/or republicans who so dislike the Clintons they wanted to vote for Obama to get her eliminated regardless on which candidate could be McClame. (The later would be me.)
So with republicans voting for Hillary or voting for Obama in the democratic primary/caucuses – I imagine we created so much havoc and confusion no one will ever really figure it out. Sounds like chaos to me.
Mission Accomplished.
WSC – who is Jeff Christie?
” it is getting the money that you ‘don’t’ work for that is important to liberals”
I know what you mean ksgrm. It’s not just the direct redistribution of wealth (robbing from rich to give to the poor), but also stealing the money for social programs and causes – even if not for any one liberals personal gain.
It’s the attitude of we can take your money for our “higher moral society” causes…..
Talk jocks, like rush, would be liberal if there were any money in it. The real reason people listen to rush is for the humor: his views on politics are funnier than any comedy show in tv.
As for operation chaos: this from a drugged-out, multi-divorced, one night Monday Night Football commentator. Real clear credentials there.
“WSC – who is Jeff Christie?”
Rush Limbaugh used the “stage name” Jeff Christie when he worked as a disc jockey in Pittsburgh in the Seventies.
Jeff Chrstie was one of Jeff Gannon’s aliases. He’s the gay porn star who had white house press credentials for no other reason than to lob softballs at the preznit.
When the Abramhof scandal broke and white house sign in and out records were released, it turns out there were 200 ? I think times when he spent the night at the white house, but it doesnt say why. Suspicion was scotty mcclellan or karl rove, but nothing was ever proven. As usual.
Google him or wiki him.
AmWay–
“It’s the attitude of we can take your money for our “higher moral society” causes . . .”
Are you really a dumb ass or do you just play one on the blog?
Let’s take property taxes–I just paid mine today in fact.
Most of it goes to schools. Another big chunk goes to police and fire protection. What’s left over fixes roads and bridges.
Which one of these “higher moral causes” would you eliminate?
Heh. I didnt know rush used it as his on air name. James Guckert was one of Jeff Gannon’s alias also.
Ben, Rush was “Jeff Christie” when he was at KQV radio in Pittsburgh in the early 70s. There are “rumors” that after being arrested for soliciting a gay man in Pittsburgh, Limbaugh was fired from KQV
radio.
Rush may have led quite a colorful life if all the rumors are true.
Sorry for the post that had already been covered. My internet connection is crawling today and takes a long time to do anything.
As far as government “robbing from the rich to give to the poor,” WRONG AGAIN!
The amount of money we spend on welfare is nothing compared to the welfare-for-the-rich. A good example is Halliburton in Iraq. We spend two BILLION a week there, and private contractors are sucking down hundreds of millions of that with no oversight.
GI’s tell of being forced to let Halliburton do a bag of laundry, for which the American taxpayer is charged the staggering price of $99, and the clothes aren’t even clean. They tell of a 20 oz. bottle of Coke, produced in Iraq, costing the taxpayer $6.
But you’ll never hear the CONs complaining about their tax money confiscated for the already rich. They’re too outraged about the welfare queen driving her non-existant Cadillac and buying non-existant cigarettes and booze on the non-existant taxpayer largesse.
PC’s should come with an attached box of kleenex. That way, wheneveer a blogger posts on a particularly whining crying thread such as this one, it could automatically dispense a Kleenex.
So instead of complaining and -itching about the republican crossovers, I will add a solution.
This idea could apply to both parties. Simply replace “democrat” with “republican”.
It is ridiculous to let me register as a democrat at the polls. I know for the party it is all about having the most people registered. But sometimes that hurts more than it helps, and also quick registration could invite voter fraud.
To vote in a partisan election:
1. You must be registered sixty days in advance of the election.
2. If you want to still allow registration at the door, you must not have been previously registered as an opposing party previous to the election.
3. If you vote in one party’s caucus/primary election, you cannot by law switch parties in the same election cycle and vote in the other.
This will never stop a citizen who votes strictly for one party, from changing sides just to help vote in the worst candidate for the other side. But it would prevent last minute pushes by radio talk show hosts, or last minute efforts organized by any group from bombing the others party.
Capn are you really a dumb ass or do you just play one on the blog?
Of course most conservatives recognize that some taxation for basic services are necessary. The difference we draw the line somewhere short of direct redistribution of wealth.
We could spend hours on that subject, as you full well know.
But I’m sure your post was not meant to be as stupid as I think it was.
Oh I forgot it is getting the money that you ‘don’t’ work for that is important to liberals.
KSGrm must mean CONs. After all, it was George W. Bush who got bailed out of his failed companies by his connections with Vice-President Daddy.
It was George W. Bush who confiscated land like that belonging to a mechanic and his wife so that it could become the lawn of the Texas Rangers stadium, for which he did nothing except be at the right place at the right time to make 14 million dollars.
It was Paris Hilton who never worked a day in her life–unless you call the hard-core pornography that circulated on the internet “work”–who saved millions thanks to Bush’s tax cuts for the rich.
No, you CONs say you value work and workers, but really what you value is wealth that is filthy mammon.
How one gets it makes no difference to you.
“As far as government “robbing from the rich to give to the poor,” WRONG AGAIN!”
I love your “wrong again” posts. Pigs love to wrestle in the mud, regardless of a cause.
As you also know I have posted many many times that I agree with elimination of “corporate” welfare. Using the general term “corporate” to represent any government “payments” to rich or wealthy individuals or corporations.
I am an equal opportunity tightwad, borderline libertarian. I don’t like any of my money going to fund ANYone’s “higher calling social welfare”.
“The difference we draw the line somewhere short of direct redistribution of wealth.”
Hmmm, so you are against a progressive income tax? Against capital gains taxes?
Who the Hell do you think should pay for the military, services, roads, etc.?
No one?
When do you “no new taxes” conservatives plan on paying our debt?
After you die?
AmWay–
If my post was so “stupid,” give me one example of government redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor, a specific example, with actual numbers.
Good luck.
Because I wrote a check this morning to government for over a thousand dollars, and as far as I can tell not a single penny of it went directly to help the poor . . .
However I’ve spent hundreds of dollars over the years on a city tax to help the rich subsidize their arena, which I didn’t want and voted against.
I wonder if Rush Limbaugh had anything to do with about 1/3 of the Republicans voting for Huckabee, Paul or Romney?
No surprise — the GOP continues to use the campaign of fear and lies perpetrated by George W.P.E. Bush and his band of merry thieves — it’s fun to watch the cons in here squirm deflect and deny any responsibility for anything they’ve done. Can’t wait til the Johnny Mac is handed his walking papers — have a fun retirement you old goat ………
Unearned Income Credit (EIC).
At the same time most workers are paying in to meet the 15 April tax deadline, there is a line at the other side of the mailbox waiting for checks from the government FOR MORE MONEY THAN THEY PAID IN taxes. So, as we pay money in, the Treasury is writing checks out to other citizens. There is no funding source to make those payments. It all adds to that national debt you are so concerned about.
I won’t do your homework (I don’t care if it’s only ONE dollar – it is still wrong. Ditto corporate welfare).
WS let me tell it to you like this.
My husband and I worked hard to raise our family with no help from the government. We lived within our means and put back money to invest in our retirement. We are now living off the fruits of our labors. You and Cap call them ‘capital gains’. We call them dividends.
The government does not have the right to come in now and raise my taxes to pay for some lazy jerk who doesn’t want to work ‘for the man’ and take care of his own family. If you think this is harsh then so be it – it is harsh.
But the gov doesn’t have the right to redistribute my ‘wealth’ and the libs needs to learn this.
AmWay claims, “I am an equal opportunity tightwad” [against both welfare-for-the-rich and -the-poor].
Strange.
I’ve never heard you whine about corporate welfare like you whine about “government robbing from the rich to give to the poor,” even though corporate welfare is much more costly to you.
I’ll believe you when you actually complain about the people who are really robbing you — the rich.
“not a single penny of it went directly to help the poor . . .
However I’ve spent hundreds of dollars over the years on a city tax to help the rich subsidize their arena, which I didn’t want and voted against.”
So you are certain some of your money DID go to pay the rich subsidy for the arena………..?
Just as certain as I am that some of my money (and yours) went for EIC.
Thanks for the example.
PS: I’m opposed to the arena “higher calling” too.
“The government does not have the right to come in now and raise my taxes to pay for some lazy jerk.”
Is that where you think your taxes are going, Ksgrm? To lazy people who simply refuse to work?
Show me this lazy man who makes money not working from the government.
And I’ll show you George W. Bush (see above), Ken Lay of Enron who made millions from de-regulating electricity that allowed him to price gouge, and millionaire “farmers” farming gov’t subsidies.
They’re the ones who get something for nothing from the taxpayer. The welfare queen is a myth whose only function is stop you from not seeing who is robbing you blind.
“call them ‘capital gains’. We call them dividends.”
Actually KSgrm those are two different things and our wonderful IRS provisions make sure the gubermint gets a share of each.
But I agree with your post!
AmWay–
I know that my taxes went to pay for the arena because I bought a new car that cost roughly 20 grand. I paid 200 dollars on that transaction alone for the arena I did not want so that the Koch family can have cheap skyboxes.
You on the other hand have no idea what you pay for EIC out of your taxes. It’s probably a few pennies, if that.
ksgrm – how about the government raising my taxes (and borrowing for my grandkids to repay) to finance Bush’s endless wars?
KSgrm,
I think Capn, like many liberals on this blog, is focused on what could be called “higher calling” socialist programs. Where some believe in tithing at church, due to religious convictions, liberals believe in taxing to the federal government for their “higher calling” programs. One looks to God for a return on investment, and the other looks to the Federal Government. They actually BELIEVE government exists to provide social programs for the less fortunate. He is angry because other citizens have to him, diluted the sanctity of his “higher calling” programs and have peversed it by also giving money to causes he does not support. In fact, it is “sinful” to Capn that government help ANYone other than whomever “the truly needy” are.
Capn wants to quibble over those unholy social programs.
I don’t know why he is shooting at me: I think they are ALL wrong.
Afterall, who am I to judge one government social program over another? It all involves stealing MY MONEY to support causes OTHERS feel are HOLY and JUST.
Sorta like the religious right. Only it’s the government right.
“how about the government raising my taxes (and borrowing for my grandkids to repay) to finance Bush’s endless wars?”
Where were you on the national debt BEFORE Bush II took office?
Eh Gads man! We were trillions in debt BEFORE Bush. Even Clinton added 1.5 trillion to the debt.
But more to the point: WHAT WILL YOU CUT TO REDUCE THE SPENDING AND THE NATIONAL DEBT?
“You on the other hand have no idea what you pay for EIC out of your taxes. It’s probably a few pennies, if that.”
WHich is it Capn?
“Did ‘Operation Chaos’ cause any chaos?”
In terms of actual votes, who knows. In terms of getting teh dem nomination process confused and questioning it’s candidates, absolutely. The existance of this thread is proof enough of that.
Oh, and BTW: “Raiding” the other party’s primary has a long history in this country. It’s neither illegal nor immoral. It’s just politics. This is not piddlywinks, ya know.
“This is not piddlywinks, ya know.”
Perhaps it is actually part of democracy?
Ben I agree with your post to a point but have a different view of what you call Bush’s war. He was unlucky enough to be in office when 9/11 happened and whether it was right or not our world changed on that day.
Iraq didn’t invade us but the intelligence said they were culpable in the invasion. The left says the intel was cooked and I really don’t know. What I do know is that all of the powers to be right and left thought it was a justified invasion at the time. In retrospect maybe not. Who will ever know?
If the dems take power with the next election we might have a chance to see what would have happened in a smaller way. I hope that we keep a strong military. This isn’t where we should cut the budget.
Cap thinks I have the wrong idea about welfare, socialized medicine and the like but we all know that we have people on this very blog who refuse to work for a corporation that would furnish insurance or have bad habits that drain hundred of dollars a month from their family. Those are personal choices. They make them not me. Why should my taxes go up or the deficit be increased to pay them for a lack responsibility.
Sounds hard – well sometimes hard times call for hard decisions.
Oh – I should point out:
Were the roles reversed, and the Republican nomination process closely divided and extended while the Democratic nominee was certain, would Democrats be crossing over to influence the Republican primaries in order to increase their chances in the fall?
Absolutely. No doubt about it whatsoever. Only a fool would think otherwise.
“Where were you on the national debt BEFORE Bush II took office?”
I wanted to see us make additional progress in dealing with it.
“Even Clinton added 1.5 trillion to the debt.”
Peanuts compared to what the Bushes and Reagan ran up. In fact, if you havce your accountant examine the numbers he can tell you that the increase in debt under Clinton was less than the accrued interest on the debt he inherited from Reagan-Bush.
“WHAT WILL YOU CUT TO REDUCE THE SPENDING AND THE NATIONAL DEBT?”
How about we start with the hundreds of billions/trillions we are spendign on the never-ending wars the Republics love so much.
“intelligence said they were culpable in the invasion.”
There was NEVER any evidence linking Saddam with 9/11. Even Bush admits that.
“all of the powers to be right and left thought it was a justified invasion at the time”
FALSE. They said that pressuring Saddam into allowing inspectors in made sense.
“start with the hundreds of billions/trillions we are spendign on the never-ending wars the Republics love so much.”
Sorry. No go. The war is being financed by debt.
If you simply stop financing MORE debt – you will not reduce the debt one dollar.
Some have argued those same dollars COULD finance new social programs. Again, it is all borrowing.
“FALSE. They said that pressuring Saddam into allowing inspectors in made sense.”
REally?
“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.”
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.
“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.”
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
“The war is being financed by debt”
And I guess that is a good thing?
Go back to the chalk board bth.
Pick up the chalk and find something to cut.
Hmmm…
Have we ever fought a war that was not financed by debt to some degree?
Nathaniel
Posted May 8, 2008 at 3:23 pm | Permalink
Hmmm…
Have we ever fought a war that was not financed by debt to some degree?
Don’t you remember Nathan. On the shores of Tripoli?
The Marines took provisions from the conquered lands to fund their expedition.
Not on the new BST test heh? New Corps. Miss the EST.
Ksgrm writes: “we all know that we have people on this very blog who refuse to work for a corporation that would furnish insurance or have bad habits that drain hundred of dollars a month from their family.”
Anecdotal evidence is just a random example pulled out from here or there that does not justify a logical conclusion.
This example doesn’t even rise to the level of anecdotal evidence.
You have to quantify this in terms of how much you spend in taxes and how much people like this cost you in taxation.
You and AmWay don’t have a clue. You think there’s a big underclass out there living large on your dime.
But you can’t prove it. In fact, you can’t even give an example of it. J R’s refusal to work for a corporation isn’t costing you any tax money, which even you admit. You say it might cost you something.
Meanwhile you ignore huge gov’t payouts to “defense contractors” that don’t defend anything except their bloated bottom lines. You ignore massive taxation on the poor in Wichita to fund the rich man’s arena.
“the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs”
Which inspections showed to be non-existent.
“the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein”
And, since it was determined that Saddam did not have the arms in question the “if necessary” phrase is all-important. It was NOT necessary to invade.
The Libs don’t SEE the redistribution of wealth – Because They Are Not Paying The Tax!
Oh, we all share in the benefits of public schools, roads, fire, and police. BUT THE BOTTOM 50% only pays 3% of the Income Tax!
You look at the Federal, State, or Local budget and don’t see the REDISTRIBUTION of wealth on the EXPENSE side, except for the welfare items.
What you dumb a**es DON’T SEE, is the Tax Revenue side and where that money COMES FROM! It doesn’t come from money trees – Suprise!
97% of it comes from 50% of us!
DOPES.
I grew up around a bunch of people living on tax money.
They lived in nearly completely free housing, were given food stamps, were given state medical care to some degree, had their electricity cheaper, many were on disability to some extent because their doctors would say they were so that they could get more money for SSI.
Yet, they all could afford cable, had cars, had enough money to drink every weekend and go to the bars…
That is just what I can think of off the top of my head.
You want more examples CapnAmerica?
Ben,
In Hindsight, it was arguably not necissary to invade.
IN HINDSIGHT
(chortles)
“In fact, you can’t even give an example of it.”
It really hurts doesn’t it Capn. It would steal all your glory and thunder if it could be believed that
some republicans and conservatives DISLIKE Corporate welfare as much as individual welfare.
Yes, from my walk in life I could give examples of personal situations where I believe people are “milking” the system.
But that is such a small part of the program. (At least we don’t DENY it is happening.)The issue of a bankrupt government trying to continue to provide life support to so many is the real issue.
You are so hard nosed in your beliefs, you skipped over where I agreed with you.
Governments role cannot continue to be all things to all people.
And please don’t lump us all together. You attribute statements made by others to me, and by me to others, and throw us all off the deck.
“provisions from the conquered lands”
should read, “provisions from the conquered pirates”.
I failed. Dang it. Now I gotta go back through the line again. Life support steps. Argh! And oh no, not my sixth general order again~!
Iraq War cost 2007: $133.2 Billion
National debt: $355 Billion
US Federal budget 2007: $2,784 Billion
That’s 4.7% on Iraq.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0933935.html
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0908462.html
The Libs NEVER want to decrease the Spending side of the equation – Their answer is always Tax Increases!
Cause they ain’t paying the tax!
Those bottom 50 per centers, pay 3% of the income tax.
That Max, is why they refuse to answer my question.
They also express ignorance of the budget and its components with their wild posts.
Rush as usual overestimates himself.
But he is one person I could waterboard and feel NO remorse.
Senator Clinton needs no help from him. The process continues.
Rushbo is just trying to make lemons of lemonade. He KNOWS the cons will lose in the fall.
If Senator Clinton gets the nomination, I wonder if his dittoheads will hang him?
I’d like that.
Old lady?
(who probably smells like the lining of an old ladies purse}
ksgrm if you are talking about me, your conservatism must be slipping.
It is eminently American to go it alone and not work to make money FOR some old bat like you. It is also eminently American for people to help each other out.
As opposed to exploiting them for fun and profit like you do?
Bust another flipper why dontcha?
“But he is one person I could waterboard and feel NO remorse.”
So here it is again, a liberal with double standards. And here I thought waterboarding was so revoluting to the libs…
“If Senator Clinton gets the nomination, I wonder if his dittoheads will hang him?”
Give it up JR, Hillary is history!
Unless you support her stealing the nomination.
Or changing the laws of mathematics.
Anyone ever notice how a lot of the regular posters here disappear for a couple of hours this time of day. They post all morning and afternoon then are gone from around 4PM to say 6PM.
Could it be they are driving home from work?
Katrina when it hit NO exposed one of the biggest welfare scams ever and when I talked about it here it was poopooed because my observations were from 30 years ago.
After all was said and done ‘The Projects’ in NO proved to be just what they were 30 years before. A government built nest of welfare milkers where even service men would not go in. Where tourists were warned away from. Where 4th and 5th generation welfare recepients lived on the taxpayers dime.
The government didn’t do these people any favors by continuing to hand out enough dollars to keep them dependent but not enough to give them pride in their own abilities to take care of themselves.
These were the hangerson who over a year later were living in hotels on our dime, trashing these same hotels, not looking for jobs, refusing to take jobs offered them, spending their gov money on breast enhancements and Vegas trips, etc…
That is what increased welfare programs fosters. It is a boil on society and the only ones saying enough are the conservatives. Those who want to reduce the deficit look at more social programs and say bring them on while looking at national security and saying trash it.
History will tell the story. I probably won’t be here long enough to see the impact on my grandkids but any student of history will look at the American culture of today and say that no culture which has trashed family values and elevated laziness to a new artform will long exist. Study the Roman Empire.
Off my soapbox and gone for the day. Life calls.
AMWay as I leave – it is to leave home and not to get there. That is funny though.
JR is an equal opportunity lib. Waterboarding is only bad if done by conservatives to terrorists. It is ok if done by lib to conservatives.
JR please don’t flatter yourself.
“Unless you support her stealing the nomination.”
No stealing to it. The super delegates have their purpose.
ksgrm,
I was stationed with a guy who grew up in New Orleans in the 40s,50s and 60s. He relayed to me how the old “food stamp” days was the biggest and well known scams in New Orleans.
He even bragged that a brand new car could be purchased with food stamps, if one knew the right connections.
Evidently, back then, food stamps were a commodity more valuable than real money.
As evidence, he showed me a photo of his three bedroom house in the ‘burbs’ and his abode in the projects. He actually lived in his house, but the project apartment was used to collect food stamps and other goodies.
The other scam he described was a bit more complicated and not sure I understood him correctly. People with kids would qualify for SSI payments if they met special emotional or educational challenges. Since payment for each child would be about 500 dollars, having three or more children (even if they weren’t yours) could result in a tidy sum for a monthly income.
He said that the New Orleans folks were well ’schooled’ in the fine art of scamming the government for benefits and even had coaches that would help you along for a fee.
I didn’t even ask him about Medicare, not sure if it was fully implemented back then.
er Medicaid, not Medicare
You know, the left is what makes Rush thrive.
He loves the attention you give him. He makes more money the more you talk about him, post about him (yep, web search), and politicians speak about him.
In short, you guys feed this entertainer.
Nathaniel
Posted May 8, 2008 at 3:35 pm | Permalink
Ben,
In Hindsight, it was arguably not necissary to invade.
IN HINDSIGHT
nathan – for SOME of us (the ones with intelligence) it was FORESIGHT!
Year % Over
1913 7 500,000
1914 7 500,000
1915 7 500,000
1916 15 2,000,000
1917 67 2,000,000
1918 77 1,000,000
1919 73 1,000,000
1920 73 1,000,000
1921 73 1,000,000
1922 58 200,000
1923 43.5 200,000
1924 46 500,000
1925 25 100,000
1926 25 100,000
1927 25 100,000
1928 25 100,000
1929 24 100,000
1930 25 100,000
1931 25 100,000
1932 63 1,000,000
1933 63 1,000,000
1934 63 1,000,000
1935 63 1,000,000
1936 79 5,000,000
1937 79 5,000,000
1938 79 5,000,000
1939 79 5,000,000
1940 81.1 5,000,000
1941 81 5,000,000
1942 88 200,000
1943 88 200,000
1944 94 200,000
1945 94 200,000
1946 86.45 200,000
1947 86.45 200,000
1948 82.13 400,000
1949 82.13 400,000
1950 84.36 400,000
1951 91 400,000
1952 92 400,000
1953 92 400,000
1954 91 400,000
1955 91 400,000
1956 91 400,000
1957 91 400,000
1958 91 400,000
1959 91 400,000
1960 91 400,000
1961 91 400,000
1962 91 400,000
1963 91 400,000
1964 77 400,000
1965 70 200,000
1966 70 200,000
1967 70 200,000
1968 75.25 200,000
1969 77 200,000
1970 71.75 200,000
1971 70 60 200,000
1972 70 50 200,000
1973 70 50 200,000
1974 70 50 200,000
1975 70 50 200,000
1976 70 50 200,000
1977 70 50 203,200
1978 70 50 203,200
1979 70 50 215,400
1980 70 50 215,400
1981 69.125 50 215,400
1982 50 85,600
1983 50 109,400
1984 50 162,400
1985 50 169,020
1986 50 175,250
1987 38.5 90,000
1988 28 29,750
1989 28 30,950
1990 28 32,450
1991 31 82,150
1992 31 86,500
1993 39.6 89,150
1994 39.6 250,000
1995 39.6 256,500
1996 39.6 263,750
1997 39.6 271,050
1998 39.6 278,450
1999 39.6 283,150
2000 39.6 288,350
2001 39.1 297,350
2002 38.6 307,050
2003 35 311,950
http://www.truthandpolitics.org/top-rates.php
=============================================
Seems to me, while top percentage is going down, taxable minimum for top percentage is going up.
=============================================
Wisconsin’s rich keep getting richer much faster than poor and middle-income households, according to reports released today.
And while the gap between the rich and poor isn’t as wide in Wisconsin as in the country overall, the disparity is growing, according to the Center on Wisconsin Strategy and the Wisconsin Council on Children & Families, both based in Madison.
Households with the highest incomes in Wisconsin increased their wealth by 36% between the late 1980s and the mid 2000s, compared with a 7% growth in income for the poorest households and 14% for middle-income households, the report says.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=737022
=============================================
So, if the rich are getting richer, while their ranks are expanding, while the lower and middle class are either losing ground, or staying the same, it stands to reason the upper crust should be paying more. They used to pay at a high of 94% (not including deductions), so I really think they have nothing to complain about if loopholes are closed, and tax rates increased.
Inflation, from 1997 to 2007, increased 25.5%, so if the middle class wage increase was 14% from mid 80’s to mid 2000, they lost money. The only income bracket making money was the top wage earners.
Still no problem taxing the rich more.
http://www.inflationdata.com/Inflation/Inflation_Rate/HistoricalInflation.aspx
Much is made about JFK lowering marginal rates as though that is relevant to today’s levels. Note that he lowered it from 91 to 77; not way below. (Then LBJ lowered it a bit more)
1958 91 400,000
1959 91 400,000
1960 91 400,000
1961 91 400,000
1962 91 400,000
1963 91 400,000
1964 77 400,000
1965 70 200,000
Annual Average Domestic Crude Oil Prices
1949-Present
U.S. Average (in $/bbl.)
Year Nominal Inflation Adjusted 2007
1946 $1.63 $17.26
1947 $2.16 $20.29
1948 $2.77 $24.21
1949 $2.77 $24.44
1950 $2.77 $24.18
1951 $2.77 $22.42
1952 $2.77 $21.91
1953 $2.92 $22.88
1954 $2.99 $23.39
1955 $2.93 $22.94
1956 $2.94 $22.74
1957 $3.14 $23.46
1958 $3.00 $21.83
1959 $3.00 $21.62
1960 $2.91 $20.69
1961 $2.85 $20.03
1962 $2.85 $19.79
1963 $2.91 $19.97
1964 $3.00 $20.32
1965 $3.01 $20.05
1966 $3.10 $20.06
1967 $3.12 $19.65
1968 $3.18 $19.17
1969 $3.32 $19.02
1970 $3.39 $18.35
1971 $3.60 $18.68
1972 $3.60 $20.03
1973 $4.75 $22.29
1974 $9.35 $39.77
1975 $12.21 $47.63
1976 $13.10 $48.36
1977 $14.40 $49.88
1978 $14.95 $48.17
1979 $25.10 $71.96
1980 $37.42 $95.50
1981 $35.75 $82.70
1982 $31.83 $69.33
1983 $29.08 $61.34
1984 $28.75 $58.14
1985 $26.92 $52.56
1986 $14.44 $27.66
1987 $17.75 $32.81
1988 $14.87 $26.45
1989 $18.33 $31.05
1990 $23.19 $37.17
1991 $20.20 $31.15
1992 $19.25 $28.81
1993 $16.75 $24.36
1994 $15.66 $22.19
1995 $16.75 $23.09
1996 $20.46 $27.38
1997 $18.64 $24.40
1998 $11.91 $15.35
1999 $16.56 $20.83
2000 $27.39 $33.39
2001 $23.00 $27.29
2002 $22.81 $26.61
2003 $27.69 $31.62
2004 $37.66 $41.84
2005 $50.04 $53.77
2006 $58.30 $60.73
2007 $64.20 $64.92
http://inflationdata.com/inflation/Inflation_Rate/Historical_Oil_Prices_Table.asp
=====================
2008? $200???
Nathan,
I find it difficult to believe you stated the invasion of Iraq may have been the wrong decision. If it turns out Bush and his team (the dog ate my homework:-)), falsified intel data to further their plan to invade Iraq, how would you express that?
Max writes–The Libs don’t SEE the redistribution of wealth – Because They Are Not Paying The Tax!
What part of “I paid over a thousand dollars for six months of my property tax this very morning” did you not get, freaking idiot?
Nathan and Regular give us some BS “anecdotal evidence” which means nothing. Hey, here’s some more: Rush Limbaugh was on welfare for two years. And I’ll bet he never paid it back either, the POS.
Followed up by AmWay who claims that bilkers are a far worse problem than corporate welfare — so wrong, it’s almost physically crippling to contemplate — and Kgrm who gives us more unsubstantiated anecdotes of the kind Readers’ Digest loved so dearly in the 80’s.
There’s only one way to prove your point. Quantitative data–the kind that JM Walker provides where he shows beyond a shadow of a doubt that far from the “government redistributing wealth from rich to poor” as Max and AmWay so fear, the rich are just getting even more stinking, filthy rich than they used to be.
CONs should ask themselves, if gov’t really is redistributing wealth, why is it doing it so badly?
Paul Krugman writes, “What’s really remarkable, however, is that four years of economic growth have produced essentially no gains for ordinary American workers.
“Wages, adjusted for inflation, have stagnated: the real hourly earnings of nonsupervisory workers, the most widely used measure of how typical workers are faring, were no higher in July 2007 than they were in July 2003.
“Meanwhile, benefits have deteriorated: the percentage of Americans receiving health insurance through employers, which plunged along with employment during the early years of the Bush administration, continued to decline even as the economy finally began creating some jobs.
“And one of the few seeming bright spots of the Bush-era economy, rising homeownership, is now revealed as the result of a bubble inflated in part by financial flim-flam, which deceived both borrowers and investors.”
http://select.nytimes.com/2007/09/10/opinion/10krugman.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
“Followed up by AmWay who claims that bilkers are a far worse problem than corporate welfare”
Capn when did I say that? I know I’m getting old, but I’m not blind. I don’t see that in any of my posts.
INEQUALITY has always been part of the American economy, but the gap between the rich and the poor has recently been widening at an alarming rate. Today, more than 40 percent of total income is going to the wealthiest 10 percent, their biggest share of the nation’s pie in at least 65 years.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/25/business/yourmoney/25view.html?scp=2&sq=graph+rich+get+richer&st=nyt
There is none so blind,
as those who cannot seeeeeee.
This is where you said it, AmWay:
The issue of a bankrupt government trying to continue to provide life support to so many is the real issue.
“percent of total income is going to the wealthiest 10 percent, their biggest share of the nation’s pie in at least 65 years.”
Go God Bless those wealthy people who are smart, work hard and gain more. God bless them one and all.
To the lower percentile: The green monster jealousy will not help you share in the take.
The only way you will get part of it – is to steal it.
2008? $200???
—————-
Good for the oil patch, landowners, leaseholders etc…
Not so good when you buy gas.
My idea of “life support” includes corporate welfare.
You would know that if you wouldn’t keep reading what you want to believe and instead read what I have posted in total context.
Hint: I said it is ALL wrong…
Conservatives – corporate welfare is great, creates jobs (none that we can see) and promotes investment (none that we can see) and it is all good.
Conservatives – war is good, we need war, kill bad guys (not the ones that attacked us) kill good guys (whoops!, collateral damage) and it is all good.
Conservatives – no “welfare” for Americans, they are just lazy socialists, dead enders (might be French), can’t afford it, and they are all bad.
Any questions?
Well Cap glad I got off that soap box because you obviously need it more than me.
No question WS but you had better check your answer book because yours are all wrong.
The answers are all wrong WS and I don’t play your stupid childish games anymore. If you have a bad memory maybe you could have a substance abuse problem from what you have told us.
ksgrm – off topic – bringing the grandkids to river festival? If so bring them for the canoe rides this weekend.
Plan to get down. Not sure when. Are you running the canoe rides?
http://www.nationalpriorities.org/taxchart2008
Here’s what I’m talking about–
Let’s say you made about 50 grand and took the standard deduction. You paid about 15 percent or 7,500 in income taxes.
This is where it went:
$3,150 goes to Past and Current Military
$1,650 goes to Health (actually Medicare)
$750 goes to Interest on Non-Military Debt
$675 goes to Anti-Poverty Programs
$300 goes to Education, Training & Social Services
$300 goes to Government & Law Enforcement
$225 goes to Housing & Community Development
$225 goes to Environment, Energy & Science
$150 goes to Agriculture, Commerce and Transportation
$75 goes to International Relations
So when you add up all the big corporations benefitting in military expenditures (Raytheon, Boeing, Bechtold, Halliburton, CACI, Blackwater etc) plus the big Ag giveaways under “Agriculture Commerce and Transportation” plus the “International Relations” which are really when we give them money to buy our military $hit and you substitute the interest because of CON deficit spending, you can see that the YOU the average taxpayer subsidizes far more to corporations than poor, blind, and crippled people.
Yes – weather and river permitting. West bank at 2nd St bridge. Sat and Sun noon-6 PM. Tell the little ones we are feeding the alligators …
Ksgrm says, “I don’t play your stupid childish games anymore.”
Translation: you caught me in a blatant lie last time, and I’m not going to get caught out again.
Sat we have softball and baseball going on. The Riverfest always has lots of these. But hope to make it on Sunday. Alligators hum?
How little do they gotta be ben?
My son turns 14 tomorrow.
Phil says…
“she needed to win decisively in …”
Senator Clinton WILL win decisively in West Virginia.
I will be the first to say that was not what she meant, it just kind of came across that way. I knew what she meant as much as I knew what Obama meant by his statement. BUT LETS PLAY THE SPIN GAME!
On USA today Hillary in an interview when asked how Hillary Clinton becomes the nominee? Pointed out that Obama was once again losing the support of the hard working Americans The hard working WHITE Americans. And in both state lost the support of less then College educated Whites.
So how can we spin that? I know,
“She can count on dumb white people to vote for her!”
Yeah I know… I know that is not what she meant! Can that be called a gaffe though? Well that may not be any better considering I understand the definition of a Gaffe is when a Politician accidentally tell the truth.
But it could help to understand why Rush would support voting for her!
Wow.
Present the CONs with the facts and they scatter like mice.
Don’t worry, though. Next week they’ll be back whining and moaning about how “the gov’t wants to give all my money to the poor.”
The myths of the reich-wing are faith-based, so they can’t be killed with simple reason . . .
What faith you using Capn that justifies stealing money from one person and giving it away to another?
What moral compass are you following?
Is that judgemental ability a gift from the tadpole you crawled up from?
Sounds so much like your own style of religious faith to. Government, Country, and apple pie.
“the interest because of CON deficit spending”
of course that ignores decades of deficit spending before, but hey it’s Capn’s fantasy.
“money to buy our military $hit”
Seems to libs you want it both ways. Whine and scream when the troops don’t get the best protective gear and vehicles – but when you want to justify the poor, it’s now all just “military $hit”. Yep nothing but the best for our military, until I change my position.
“subsidizes far more to corporations than poor, blind, and crippled people.”
Who are you arguing with? It’s all wrong to me.
But it appears it’s a percentage game to you Capn. Maybe America should give every poor, blind, and crippled person one billion dollars to even things up? Is that what this is all about?
Your angry because corporate handouts exceed individual handouts? The individuals each need a billion dollars, would that make you feel more compassionate?
It’s all a numbers game? Not about what the real need is?
Maybe you can’t understand it, but just as passionate you are about taking care of the poor -there is SOMEone (not me) passionate about the federal government handing out money to big business.
Can’t you see? It is ALL wrong.
Your passion is no better or morally superior to the other guys.
You want to reach into my left pocket, the other guy wants to reach into my right.
And you STILL are spending more than you are stealing AND more than you can ever take to pay it back.
And you want more?
“Senator Clinton WILL win decisively in West Virginia.”
Wow! If she takes 100% of the vote, those 28 delegates will give her, what 1,713? Why that’s almost an equal number with Obama’s 1,846!
Of course she won’t take the entire state and will split those 28 WV delegates with Obama.
But if the math works for you, keep on keeping on.
Hillary is in it now only to pay off her 11 million dollar campaign debt.
The sooner JR you write her a check, the sooner we can color her officially gone.
What true patriotism Rush displays…he loves his country so much he stops at nothing to keep it divided. He is a narcisstic sociopath if ever there was one.
Obama has it…I’m starting to feel a small glimmer of hope for our country.
Honestly, how can any of you support Hilary after her outrageous statement about “obliterating” Iran…the last thing we need is a whiskey gulping, gun shooting, chest thumping liar…we’ve had one of those for the last 8 yrs…haven’t you all had enough already?
Rush is an entertainer. The more attention people give to him, the stronger he becomes.
If you treat him more like professional wrestling, instead of as a radio reporter, we’d all be better off.
He is a radio personality. His reputation (whatever that is) grows with all the attention he gets.
Whether his talkshow has been responsible for any voting is questionable. But Operation Chaos has been successful, if only for the apparent chaos discussion of it has caused.
Operation Chaos, therefore continues…..
You convinced me Mary. I withdraw my support for Hillary.
I used to think that Obama would be harder to beat than Hillary, but I’ve changed my mind. The star is tarnished now and his weaknesses can and will be exposed. Obama is a great speaker, which would be nice after listening to President Bush for 8 years. But I see little else to recommend the jr senator from Illinois, who is still in his first term in Congress. And he has spent most of that time campaigning in one form or another.
McCain vs Obama
Substance vs Tarnished Mystique
“Hillary is in it now only to pay off her 11 million dollar campaign debt.’
You don’t know Senator Clinton very well.
It aint over. And I don’t care what it takes to beat that panderer.
“
No, it’s not the experience that’s important. It’s the way Obama approaches the issues. He has a common sense and intelligence that is lacking in the other two candidates. I think the country is ready for someone who thinks outside the box and isn’t your typical politician. His “lack” of experience may be a real plus for us, it gives him a fresh way of looking at the mountain of problems that we face.
I know he’ll be the next president..and I think he has a real chance of turning things around.
McCain is too old, too much of a Washington “do business like always”, run of the mill, Bush look alike. We don’t need 8 more years of “business and usual”
You’re not in charge, JR. Obama will be the one one to run against McCain, whether you like it or not.
“panderer”? Hilary’s the one hanging out with the boys in the bar, riding to the gas station with the truck drivers to watch them fill their tanks, bragging about her ability to shoot a gun, and threatening to kick Iran’s ass….now who’s the panderer?
” You’re not in charge, JR”
Of my own vote I am. And it doesn’t go for the panderer Obama.
“Obama will be the one one to run against McCain, whether you like it or not.”
Excuse me? I don’t believe you’ve been personally endowed with such power.
We have a process. It is going normally.
The purpose of the super delegates was to prevent a nomination mistake.
It is my opinion (and I am not alone) given what I know, that Obama is not electable.
This will be PARTICULARLY true if Obama and his supporters continue to reach out to the enemy while giving Clinton supporters the back of the hand.
of course that ignores decades of deficit spending before, but hey it’s Capn’s fantasy.
Fantasy?
See http://bp2.blogger.com/_2tKy41JwuQQ/RqP3atDPh-I/AAAAAAAAAM4/8_xg12hOZ3A/s400/deficit.gif
Notice the hugest dips just happened to be when the Republican controlled the White House and at least one house of Congress.
It’s not only not fantasy, it was done quite deliberately, as a perfect method to (1) demand draconian cuts in programs conservatives don’t like and, (2) to appeal to the selfishness and greed and, most of all, rank studipidity of taxpayers, all while saddling the imbeciles with trillions of public debt.
BlueJay – 14 is fine. The gators aren’t picky!
;)
At 14 he can paddle instead of just riding.
You really think the super delegates will override the will of the voters – and not support the first black man to be the democratic candidate for election?
Just wait and see what the backlash of the minority if they even DARE try that one.
(First to put it into print)
“(First to put it into print)”, Because anyone who has read any of my posts fully knows, I have no abilty to experience shame. [Finishing the AmWay message, for him].
**********
WSClark
Posted May 8, 2008 at 5:45 pm | Permalink
Conservatives – corporate welfare is great, creates jobs (none that we can see) and promotes investment (none that we can see) and it is all good.
Conservatives – war is good, we need war, kill bad guys (not the ones that attacked us) kill good guys (whoops!, collateral damage) and it is all good.
Conservatives – no “welfare” for Americans, they are just lazy socialists, dead enders (might be French), can’t afford it, and they are all bad.
Any questions?
*********
Just one. Did Max say you could take over his job. And, maybe another, who outsourced it to you, Clark?
First to state the obvious – if the super delegates even DARE to take Obama’s nomination away from him the party will suffer very public humiliation from black Americans.
Since I don’t listen to Rush, can any of you who do tell me if he’s mentioned the following?
WASHINGTON – Cindy McCain says she will never make her tax returns public even if her husband wins the White House and she becomes the first lady.
“You know, my husband and I have been married 28 years and we have filed separate tax returns for 28 years. This is a privacy issue. My husband is the candidate,” Cindy McCain, wife of Republican presidential nominee-in-waiting John McCain, said in an interview aired on NBC’s “Today” on Thursday.
Asked if she would release her tax returns if she was first lady, Cindy McCain said: “No.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080508/ap_on_el_pr/cindy_mccain_taxes;_ylt=AtLM1y01XFYCFxhzlagq1R9h24cA
As Arte Johnson used to say, “Velllllly interesting.”
bth
Posted May 8, 2008 at 3:14 pm | Permalink
“all of the powers to be right and left thought it was a justified invasion at the time”
FALSE. They said that pressuring Saddam into allowing inspectors in made sense.
——————–
He was pressured. And he cracked… As did his neck!
AmWay – actually I think a number of people have already made the same observation. For example, Rep. Rabin Emmanuel (D-IL) made such an observation on the Charlie Rose show some time back. He is a friend of both Senators.
“if the super delegates even DARE to take Obama’s nomination away from him the party will suffer very public humiliation from black Americans.”
My response is …
SO?
This comes under the heading of someone has to say it.
Fine, I volunteer.
Let’s be honest. There are people who will not vote for Obama because he is black. I wish it were not true but there it is.
But there is another side that “American way” brings up.
There is no shortage of black Americans who will vote FOR Obama….
just because he is black.
Well I’m sorry. It is just as wrong to vote FOR someone because of race as it is to vote against them for that reason. It is just the flip side of the same coin.
Barack Obama does not get to be the Democratic nominee just because he is black. Black self interest notwithstanding.
And as far as black people being unhappy if he is NOT the nominee?
They will be just as unhappy if he is the nominee and loses.
No compromises for racism. No matter where it comes from.
The Super Delegates will vote with the people. The candidate who received the most votes from the people will also receive the most votes from the Super Delegates.
If they don’t then there are problems that won’t be solved this election cycle and McCain will be the next POTUS.
“The candidate who received the most votes from the people will also receive the most votes from the Super Delegates”
Well.
The vote of the people is not entirely in yet.
And it is fair to say that that vote is somewhat tainted at this point.
Because of the media love affair with Barack Obama, many people voted for him knowing very little about him.
This is what the super delegates were created for. It is their job to pick the candidate they best feel can win the general election.
Just my opinion, that is NOT Barack Obama.
I think most people cast their votes without knowing enough about the candidate.
I’m not talking about the people who post here and make attempts to be informed (in spite of the media!), but those who wake up on election day and think about voting for the first time since the last election day.
Even those uninformed voters are in the minority because the majority of Americans don’t vote.
I can’t tell you whether that is a disappointment or something to celebrate. A best case scenario would be everyone votes after making every effort to be informed. That isn’t reality.
I do think if the Super Delegates make a decision different than the voters the media will run that sensational news non-stop and some of those uninformed will hear just that and that might well be enough to change votes. Perceiving corruption they will vote against that party.
And, if we allow those who are Super Delegates to pick the candidate for whatever good or bad reasons, why do we make the pretense of voting? It’s bad enough the way it is, why make it worse?
To be fair Linda.
We have the super delegates for a reason.
If we have decided that reason is not valid, then the rules should be changed and the super delegates dissolved.
But for now, the rules are the rules.
I for one am thankful for them.
John McCain could be caught naked with a kangaroo. And he would STILL be the con nominee.
We still have two viable candidates from which to select our best nominee.
You can state, “the rules are the rules” when discussing Super Delegates but feel differently when discussing Florida and Michigan?
I know the rules and understand them. I also know too many people don’t know the rules and will only hear what the media tells them. The media will not report fairly or completely, their emphasis will be the sensational. That’s how they get listeners.
Ya see, once again, the Democratic Party screwed the pooch.
The leaders and decisions makers set us up! And the only way we can avoid finding defeat in victory is to be united. But, we aren’t, are we? Take you as an example. If the candidate you support doesn’t become the nominee, you split. So do others. Some split because Senator Clinton isn’t the nominee and others because Senator Obama isn’t. So, without unity, we’re screwed. Is that what the leaders of the party want? Maybe. Because the next president has a better than even chance of being a one-term president. It might all be planned. And we aren’t smart enough to be united.
You do know who will be united, don’t you?
Interesting you should mention Florida.
GUESS what I heard the other night?
Lanny Davis (a Clinton supporter) got the chance to tell the truth about Florida. I don’t have the time now but I have been meaning to go looking for this story.
Here’s the gist of it.
Barack Obama ran ads in Florida prior to the primary that was not supposed to count.
Had you heard that? I hadn’t.
More?
Some Florida Democrats had a plan for a re vote in Florida. It would not have been paid for by the Florida taxpayers and would have used firestations as polling locations.
Obama said no.
Just yesterday, Senator Clinton sent a letter to Obama in another attempt to give Florida voters a voice.
Obama remains silent. And the media lets him.
Sorry Linda. I like Obama less every day.
Linda in Kansas my vote doesn’t matter anyway.
I have to go for now.
YOU linda, have been eminently reasonable as to this.
You switched from Clinton to Obama because you thought Clinton was playing dirty about Florida and Michigan. I respect that.
But Maybe Obama is playing just as dirty but in a different way. Would that change your feelings?
And how much more do you not know about Obama?
Stay in favor of the process playing out.
What I hear loudest from you is that if the party leaders haven’t done a good enough job, you’ll allow the media to finish it off.
Yes, I heard / read those stories you mention. I don’t know the truth and probably never will. I know there are enough fabrications, lies, stories taken out of context… to keep the truth well hidden.
And here’s what else I know: I want this war ended sooner rather than later. I actually think we have a better chance of that under a President Obama than a President Clinton. I want affordable health care available for every American. I want Supreme Court Justices nominated by a Democratic president. I want science respected and supported. I want No Child Left Behind thrown out before more children are left behind. I would prefer my tax dollars go to Americans rather than corporations. Neither party can claim fiscal responsibility so it’s really just a matter of where and how they spend the money they take from us.
I want Republican members of Congress to be of little consequence. They’ve earned some karma and paybacks are hell. For most of bush’s presidency the Congress was majority Republican and they allowed him free reign with his neocon cabinet, free reign in rewarding the haves and have mores. There was ZILCH accountability! In fact, they drug their feet to keep facts covered up (i.e. Roberts on not allowing the truth of the lies that got us into Iraq to be made public!). Even when the Democratic Party won a small majority they set up effective blockades. I want them marginalized!
If McCain is elected this fall he won’t have as easy a path because I do think the Democrats will have a larger majority in Congress. Maybe that’s the best we can hope for unless our party somehow unites behind whoever is the nominee.
We the people will get exactly what we deserve!
Right now, even including MI and FL Obama has more popular votes than Clinton. It will likely end up that way after the remaining primaries – so in many ways MI and FL become moot. This then leave the Democrats with a surpringly easy way out. Seat the two delegations. In the state that had Obama’s name on the ballot (FL?) seat a delegation that reflects the split as voted in that state. Advantage Clinton but not a whole lot. In the other state seat a delegation that gievs Clinton her % and Obama the ‘uncomitted’ %. Again, advantage Clinton but not a lot.
This would narrow the delegate counts by about 50 but have no real impact. It would also allow all parties involved to save face.
Blue Jay,
I will remain in favor of the process playing itself out. I want each of those states that scheduled primaries within the rules agreed on to have their say. The only part of it that makes me sad is the bulk of the money spent goes to media. I’m more than disappointed with the media.
When the primaries are finished I hope the parties nominee is chosen fairly with no hint of impropriety. I might hold my breath on this one.
Ben, do you think that would leave the door open for more rule breaking next time around?
If not, I think your proposal sounds fair and doesn’t smack of dirty tricks.
Maybe it would help those two states voters feel a part of the process they should have been part of sooner! By that I mean they should have been involved when their legislators set primary dates against the rules agreed to.
Michigan and Florida were both told what would happen if they moved their primary dates… They moved them anyway… And now they are hollering that their voters are disenfranchised?? BOGUS!!!
They did it to themselves!! Why are we not remembering this??
What are the rules regarding delegates who were elected before, say, John Edwards bowed out? Are they committed to vote for Edwards on the first ballot? Or can they go their own way?
As I understand the Republic Party rules, the entire Kansas delegation to St. Paul will be Huckabites. Talk about being irrelevant!
But that’s the soft underbelly of the McBush coalition. Even the the candidate a foregone conclusion, a full 25% of Republics in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Indiana traipsed to the polls to vote against McSame.
Those are the “baboon Republicans.” They’ll flock to the polls to vote against Hillary. Against Obama, not so much.
“Chas” offers –
“Michigan and Florida were both told what would happen if they moved their primary dates… They moved them anyway… And now they are hollering that their voters are disenfranchised?? BOGUS!!!
They did it to themselves!! Why are we not remembering this??”
Florida is a little murkier in that the state-financed primary election was forced by the Republic-dominated Florida legislature. The bill included some long-needed election reforms pushed by the Democrats and they voted for those, hoping to get leave from the DNC for the earlier election day.
OK thanks Monkey!! didnt know about that other stuff…
2 Trackbacks
[...] to vote for Hillary Clinton in Tuesday??s primaries in order to ???bloody up??? Barack Obama andhttp://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/05/did-operation-chaos-cause-any-chaos/Did Rush Limbaugh tilt results in Indiana? Miami HeraldEven as Barack Obama’s campaign celebrated [...]
[...] to vote for Hillary Clinton in Tuesday??s primaries in order to ???bloody up??? Barack Obama andhttp://blogs.kansas.com/weblog/2008/05/did-operation-chaos-cause-any-chaos/You Decide 2008 ? Obama camp blames Limbaugh??s ???Operation Chaos …Limbaugh has said his scheme [...]