WE Blog

43 percent of Kansans saying Bush is doing a good job shows just how stupid of a state we really are.

From the poll results it appear if Obama chose Sebelius as a running mate he would lose support, 28% for/34% lost, not gain it. Wow…Kansans are brighter than some give us credit for.

I regard Obama as a communist wanta a be with a Muslim background. For me he wants bigger and more social programs, which we will pay higher taxes on. I also think he is a wimp on terrorism. He is also too much for appeasement. Kathy is also a downer in my book. Don’t want their changes.

kansas probably makes up 75% of the 29% [and dropping] of whats left of the bush supporters.

2FCK posts,
“And I regard YOU as a racist, mouth-breathing Nazi.”

2FCK, you regard everybody as a “racist, mouth-breathing Nazi”, ha….and NOBODY care what you think at all.

lindainks55
Posted May 25, 2008 at 9:27 am | Permalink
“kansas probably makes up 75% of the 29% [and dropping] of whats left of the bush supporters.”
————–

Now that’s a scary thought! Terrorists seem friendly and rational when compared to this bunch, AND terrorists have done less harm and killed fewer than bushco and his 29percenters. They walk among us. Shiver.

———————————

Ms Linda that is indeed a scary thought if you are stupid enough to believe the statement you just made about terrorists and Bush.

Race has nothing to do with it. Most of us oppose Obama because we’re not socialists and don’t want to pay even higher taxes.

43% still think bush is doing a good job?

That is suprising and disappointing, even for Kansas. What a hole.

Well we can be thankful that Kansas and its vote means absolutely nothing at all.

I’d like to see though, how Senator Clinton stacks up against McCain in Kansas.

(The editors kind of like to pretend she isn’t still in the race.)

You guys are forgetting the part about Obama being the Anti-Christ. I got an e-mail about it, so it must be true, otherwise they couldn’t print it, right?

The real truth of Obama was revealed in a one word slip up from Maxine Watters the leader of the Black Caucus. I posted a link on open 5/25 for those open minded enough to view it. Unfortunately it was ignored by the mainstreams on the left but was played by FOX.

The new America. Writerdog you might need to read both sides of issues and not just the one that agrees with you.

Well Moe it will take those of us who saw through the veneer to reveal it to others. We will have to drag the left kicking and screaming to the finish line but I have faith that most will see through him. His statement last week about giving up our cars, not air conditioning, not heating and not eating more than our share should speak to the smartest among us and the rest will just remain blissfully ignorant.

HerbertWestIII–way off topic. Rant on open thread. Give the Obama haters more space to type in their opinions.

Okoserver you are talking about socializing big oil right? I saw it on Fox too and even she admitted it an’t happening. I do understand her thoughts as to why, this country is so depended on oil that it is a matter of National defense and the economy. But I will shoot at the easy target, the government can screw up even the simplest program and not sure I would want them to be in control of something that important.

But that too is where the Republicans should come in, balance if they remember how to balance. For the last eight years the Republicans have had the same balance as the last drunk at closing time at the bar.
Both against the Democrats and for the country. I do find it ironic that there is a fear of socialists controlling the country consider that the Bush administration had been populated by Socialists i.e. the Neoconservatives.

Writerdog I will go back to asking you to read something outside your comfort zone. You can’t honestly believe what you just wrote or you are truly a sheep willing to follow the dumbest among us.

Socialism is never the answer in a republic/democracy. Look at recent countries where this is happening and calling the current administration socialistic is just crazy on your part.

You can have your own opinions all day long but you can’t make up your own facts.

“ Socialism is never the answer in a republic/democracy”

I agree OKo but I will return the favor and ask you to read outsider your comfort level.
If you do not know what I meant about the socialists are already in control of the administration. search out the history of the founding members of the Neoconservatives movement.

But as to the oil, under the capitalist system it is profit and not national welfare that is the concern of big oil. And as a capitalist I believe that is a good thing as only through the drive of profit is innovation. The bigger, better mouse trap and all is what bring us out of the stale status quo. Under socialism the only drive would be national welfare and that would limit it to status quo. If it is not broken why fix it? Would be the guiding theory, as such there would be not desire for a balance in production and the environment.

In case you are pointing to my statement about the last eight years, the party has been more concerned with giggling Democrats than the best interests of the country.
Mc Cain was right in the beginning to stand against the Bush tax cuts in that the logic does not follow reality. It does not take into account the nature of human nature and big business. If my goal is to make more money as points in a game being played. How much sense would it make to expect me to pass it on?

Capitalism aint exactly working out so great either. ONE thing is moving gas prices higher. And that is greed.

I would not want a totally socialist system either. But what he are headed toward resembles feudalism. With CEOs and corporate boards as the lords and vassals.

Next to that, socialism looks very appealing.

Bluejay you must be one of those Al Gore democrats. This is what the democrat party has been calling for almost twenty years. They finally got it and now listen to them holler. No drilling in our own patches. Don’t build any new refineries. Let the old one go to rack and ruin so they can’t be rejuvenated. Block new wind mills. Shut down all of the coal plants.

Well for heaven’s sake what did you guys think was going to happen or were you even thinking?

“okobserver” –

I’m curious about your nym.

Somehow I suspect you are not Frosty Troy or anyone in any way associated with the populist progressive “Oklahoma Observer” newspaper.

Why would you assume such an on-line identity?

STOP THIS LIE IN ITS TRACKS PLEASE:
The lie: Barry Obama does not put his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance. See http://www.tinyurl.com/3ngrg3

The famously misrepresented photo of Obama standing with his hands to his side was taken NOT during a Pledge of Allegiance, but during the playing of the National Anthem.

Like he was taught, I sing the anthem and hold my liberal hand over my liberal heart during the Pledge.

It will be impossible for me to keep up with all the lies presented here… but I will do what I can…
Here is a musical treatment of this issue you may enjoy… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_03IRTw3Bag&feature=related

And here is Snopes on the matter: http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/anthem.asp

Monkeyhawk I picked a name which matches my origin and my nature. From your name can I assume you are a monkey from Kansas?

davidB – unfortunately these sort of lies will only multiply as the MSM unquestionably spreads them.

lucee
Posted May 25, 2008 at 1:18 pm | Permalink
I am always amazed when Republicans say they despise socialism and government handouts but yet these same Republicans have their hands out at the government trough for their corporate welfare, business tax cuts, tax cuts for the wealthiest, farm subsidies, Section 8 subsidies for landlords and any other government program they qualify for.

Lucc you might be a little confused with your view of socialism. Corporations get tax breaks for creating jobs, farmers needs the government subsidies in those years when acts of nature wipe out a good crop and thus their entire annual income, and section 8 subsidies are in place to give those who can’t afford to pay the going rate for rent. If a landlord can rent his property for $500 a month and the unemployed mother of 4 can only afford to pay $150 who is being helped here?

Repubs. loved that tax rebate advance on their childrens’ taxes.

BlueJay posted May 25, 2008 at 12:37 pm

“The answer starts with Senator Clinton. Windfall profits taxes will fund the alternatives that will supplement fossil fuels. Until those fuels are no longer needed.”

Those taxes are insufficent to fund the needed changes.
Oil companies will probably respond by raising their prices.

Solutions,
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/

Cosmos originally you seem to have a science background so I would like to pull you into the real world of modern vehicles. I am all for what Obama says he wants. We have to move to renewable fuels just as hardwoods have moved to bamboo as the new hardwood floor material. It renews itself every five years. This is great.

My problem with his fuel solution is that we have many gas guzzlers on our highways. The owners of these cars will not be able to invest in new cars with the new technology all at once. What do we do about those cars and their owners that will be phased out over the next twenty years. Obtaining cheaper fuel is a problem that won’t go away with new technology. This is a reality we have to face.

“It is strong despite the democrats attempt to protray it otherwise.”

The economy over the last two quarters grew at less than 1%, barely above recession. Gas prices are at record highs, foreclosures are the same and REAL economists predict a long period of slow or no growth.

So how do you figure that the economy is strong?

WS I agree with you that on first glance the economy appears bleak but when you look at all of the factors you see another picture. Fuel prices are driving increased food prices. These two items are very much a part of mix. Families see both of these as astronomical. I know I do. But on the other hand we have a strong job market, low unemployment rate, lots of help wanted signs out, number and rate of home foreclosure slowing. Low interest rates for those homeowners still wanting to buy. These are all good signs.

The economy while growing slowly is indeed still growing.

“okobserver” asks –

“What do we do about those cars and their owners that will be phased out over the next twenty years.”

Well, for one thing, it’s gonna take 20 years.

Got that?

And for another thing, there has to be a shift of paradigm from the current corporate quarter-to-quarter mindset.

I read a piece today (I think it was the Minneapolis or St. Paul paper in Minnesota) about how Exxon/Mobil is so locked in to retailers’ sales that if a gas station raises its prices of gasoline by a penny (to cover the retailers’ cost of doing business) Exxon immediately raises its wholesale price to the gas station.

Corporations have crafted a system that ignores longterm consequences of today’s decisions just so they can meet profit projections for the end of June. I’ve dealt with clients that I know will not pay their May and June invoices until July 1st, just to pad their quarterly profits. It might not be “company policy,” but that’s how the drones in middle management handle their projects and vendors.

Underlying (emphasis on the “lying” part) this way-out-of-whack economy is an approach based on corporate greed that’s like a puppy chasing its tail.

As we learned with Enron and saw most recently with quarterly reports of 0.1% “growth” which prevented the “official” declaration of a Recession, the bean counters can torture the numbers ’til they confess to anything. And that’s how corporations operate.

They’re building not a house of cards, but a skyscraper of cards. And they’re pretty good at adding yet another story before the whole thing collapses. But it will, you know. Always has. And it will.

Interesting, “okobserver,” that you ask a “twenty-year” question. Because I don’t think you really want the answer. The current corporate model certainly doesn’t consider it.

So the answer (unless you can come up with something better) is inevitably going to fall to government through subsidies for those buying fossil fuel cars, or incentives for non-fossil fuel-powered transportation and industry.

And that will draw out the reactionaries bitching about “socialism” or “communism” or other red herrings that contribute only to small-minded people who only think about the here and now or the next quarterly report.

Maybe we have to go back to the 1929 Model and watch business implode. I dunno. ‘Cause that’s where we’re headed.

“bth” offers –

“…they knew when they bought their Suburban Assault Vehicles that they were gas hogs. Gee, ok, aren’t you a proponent of personal responsibility? I suppose they will have a difficult time adjusting. They had ample opportunity to buy an American-made Honda Civic years ago.”

And that, “bth” is the CONservative mindset that we have to get out of.

Yeah, a lot of fools are buying gas-guzzling SUVs on their own accord because the Cons will bail themselves out. Maybe.

But there will be a lot of people who are forced to buy devalued used cars (i.e., the gas-guzzlers) which will perpetuate American gas-guzzling.

And as long as Big Oil can enjoy record-breaking corporate profits (and get subsidies from taxpayers via the corporate-owned Congress!), the economy will be like the guy jumping off the Empire State Building. “86th floor, 53rd floor, 24th floor… so far, so good!”

High gas prices have gotten a lot of media attention.

Hillary and McCain wanting to eliminate the federal gas tax for the summer, and Obama opposing it, also got MSM coverage.

Note the answers from about 1/2 of the 500 Kansans in the poll,

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/state_toplines/kansas/toplines_kansas_general_election_may_13_2008
“6* Two of the three major Presidential candidates favor ending the federal gas tax for the summer.
One opposes the federal gas tax holiday. Which candidate is opposed to eliminating the federal gas for the summer?

8% Hillary Clinton

13% John McCain

51% Barack Obama

28% Not sure “

Monkeyhawk and bth I’m not talking about those able to trade up to a more fuel friendly car. There is that fringe that always buys the outdated cars we see rusting in driveways today. This is a socio/economic class that hasn’t been able to buy Honda Civics.

As a conservative I have compassion for this class. Why am I explaining this to a liberal? Seems a little out of wack. When anything this massive is implemented then there has to be a break in period. Tree huggers aren’t putting this in the equation.

Fossil fuel won’t go away with the next election. We should be right now making contingency plans for this reality instead of bulldozing on as if all is well with the chaos we are leaving behind.

okobserver posted May 25, 2008 at 1:52 pm

“… I would like to pull you into the real world of modern vehicles.”

I am very aware of the “real world” problem of phasing out low-mpg vehicles.

There are ways of speeding up the removal of low-mpg vehicles, such as,

http://www.oilendgame.com/ReadTheBook.html
“A scrap-and-replace program can lease or sell super-efficient cars to low-income Americans — on terms and with fuel bills they can afford — while scrapping clunkers. This makes personal mobility affordable to all, creates a new million-car-a-year market for the new efficiency technologies, and helps clean our cities’ air.”

I am very aware of the many long-term problems Reagan caused by rolling back CAFE standards in 1985.

Written in 1990, 16 years ago,
‘Make Fuel Efficiency Our Gulf Strategy’
http://www.rmi.org/images/other/Security/S90-26_MakeFuelEffGulf.pdf
“Are we putting our kids in tanks because we didn’t put them in efficient cars? Yes: we wouldn’t have needed any oil from the Persian Gulf after 1985 if we’d simply kept on saving oil at the rate we did from 1977 through 1985.” (continues)

Toyota just came out with a car called a “Larus” (I think that’s how it’s spelled), that gets about the same gas mileage as a hybrid, but it’s half the price. I think in 5 yrs the US will look like Europe, with mostly small cars on the roads.
I must admit everytime I see someone in a Hummer, I laugh…those vehicles have always been the height of gluttony and obnoxiousness. I just smile when I pass one in my little, 40 mpg Toyota!

“….I don’ty know about you guys, but saving $2 everytime I fill up isn’t going to make any differce to me…yet it will cost the government billions in revenue. ”

$2 makes a difference to me.

And I’d like to inform here.

As I thought I made clear, Senator Clinton’s plan would NOT cost the government any revenue.

That revenue would be recaptured from the record profits of the oil companies.

Things are going to have to change in MANY and fundamental ways as we go forward.

All this urban sprawl. That has to stop. Individuals may still be able to afford long commutes. But the nation at large cannot.

We DID have tax credits for energy efficient vehicles. Last I knew, they were being phased out under george bush and HE was giving credits for the purchase of SUVs! That’s gotta be reversed.

It may even be prudent in the short term to institute some limited form of rationing. This would enable those who conserve to trade their fuel credit for needed money.

The only way we can kick the problem down the road this time is with permanent occupation of much of the mideast.

And that of course, has its costs.

This is the country that went from rockets blowing up on the pad to landing on the Moon in about 8 years. We CAN evolve beyond fossil fuel dependence.

“Why am I explaining this to a liberal?”

Perhaps because I am a forward-thinking pragmatist? We knew this was coming. So, I am not enthusiastic about helping SAVs. Massive subsidies for transit yes. For assault vehicles? NO.

“A leader has to adapt.”

in that case BlueJay, let’s adapt and come up with a solution that is fair to BOTH SIDES. I think the approach I have delieneated before would do that.

In a sense I don’t have that much of a dog in this fight. I am perfectly happy supporting EITHER Obama or clinton against McBush and his coterie of religious nutcases.

BlueJay,

So does Hillary Clinton also want to “count the votes” of all those in Michigan and Florida who DIDN’T vote because they took her at her word that the primaries wouldn’t count? What about them? Are THOSE voters to be “disenfranchised” because Hillary Clinton’s campaign can’t stay afloat without the votes that were cast for her in those two states?

Her argument is as intellectually dishonest as can be. And it is beneath you, BlueJay, to repeat it.

“So does Hillary Clinton also want to “count the votes” of all those in Michigan and Florida who DIDN’T vote because they took her at her word that the primaries wouldn’t count? What about them? ”

How could you even begin to determine the number of such people? I should think the number is not significant.

This is similar in a way to the argument that the media calling Florida early in 2000 caused voters for bush in the Florida pan handle to go home without voting.

Well? I stood in line for more than 3 hours with a 7 year old in tow to vote in Kansas in 2000 for Al Gore. And I knew the whole time I waited in line that my vote would not matter at all.

No solution is perfect. I’ll stand with disenfranchising the fewest voters possible.

I opine that those who did not vote in Michigan or Florida were not very motivated if they let the National party keep them away from the polls. Certainly many people DID show up and vote.

“Well? I stood in line for more than 3 hours with a 7 year old in tow to vote in Kansas in 2000 for Al Gore. And I knew the whole time I waited in line that my vote would not matter at all.”

Your vote did matter — it increased the popular vote count.

The voters in Florida and Michigan were told that their vote would not affect the delegate count.

‘Disenfranchising Non-Voters in Florida and Michigan?’
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/03/19/disenfranchising-non-voters-in-florida-and-michigan/?mod=googlenews_wsj
“Sen. Hillary Clinton maintains that excluding Michigan and Florida from the Democrats’ national convention this summer disenfranchises 2.3 million people who voted in the two states’ Democratic primaries in January.
But a new study suggests that counting the two states’ results would disenfranchise almost as many people who probably would have voted in a party-approved primary, but didn’t go to the polls because they figured their ballots wouldn’t be counted.”

“okobserver” says –

“…I’m not talking about those able to trade up to a more fuel friendly car.”

Nor did I, if you’ll refer to my post.

Yeah, for the next 20 years there will have to be options for people who are stuck with SUVs and other gas guzzlers. But it will (by your assessment your post that I responded to) take 20 years.

It will take an attitude shift, not just by consumers but for corporations and government, too.

We can achieve that attitude shift this year, or next or in five or ten or twenty years. But Americans will reach that point when there are no other alternatives.

If I recall correctly, the last financial panic in America before the 1929 stock market crash took place in 1905 or 1906. Conservatives created a stop-gap “solution” that lasted a couple of decades, but where did it get us?

Well, Prohibition was the CONservatives’ solution to all of America’s problems as far as “Values Issues” worked back then. How’d that work out?

And Warren Harding and Calvin Coolidge fueled the Roaring 20s with “Capitalists Gone Wild!!!” How’d that turn out?

It got us to 1932 when fascists and communists had what seemed at the time to be legitimate options to Constitutional America.

Read William Manchester’s “The Glory and the Dream” sometime and you’ll realize Franklin Delano Roosevelt saved this republic.

“okobserver” claims –

“…I have compassion for this class [of people who can afford only rusty old cars].

Yeah, right. I’m overwhelmed by your “compassion.” We’ve all seen where “compassionate conservatism” has got us since 2000.

You’re really shameless, aren’t you, “okobserver?”

“Fossil fuel won’t go away with the next election.”

Nope. But the 20-year scenario you yourself presented has to begin somewhere and sometime.

And the very survival of our standard of living, our economic health, business and frankly, the concept of a democratic republic demands that sooner or later we’ll have to go to work on such issues.

Your position is worse than NIMBY, it sounds like “Not In My Generation.”

“We should be right now making contingency plans for this reality….”

DING! DING! DING! DING! DING!

TELL HIM WHAT HE’S WON, JOHNNY!!!!

Somehow (on the order of a broken clock that’s accurate twice a day) you have tripped over the real problem we, here, today, face and need to address.

And you don’t seem to realize it.

In 1980, John Anderson (R-IL) ran for president and advocated a 50-cent per gallon gasoline tax with all the revenue dedicated toward developing alternative energy technologies. CONservatives rejected that rational approach in favor of Ronald Reagan who spent eight years dismantling just about every alternative energy program proposed by the Carter Administration.

And it is a Conventional “Wisdom” given among CONservatives that Carter’s presidency was somehow a failure.

“okobserver” indulges in political masturbation as he proclaims his only concern is for the low-income people who are driving a rusty ‘76 Torino because they can’t afford a better car.

Try a better argument, “okobserver.” Piss on me and try to tell me it’s raining.

“NO ONE could have foreseen the nomination race would be so close so far into the process.”

If your word is not good, then you have no business being president.

Sorry it took so long had my granddaughters birthday party to attend, when did they put a Mc learn entrance to Watson park?

Anyway, Okobserver the Bush taxes cut like trickle down economic on paper had some logic. The problem is that you do not simulate the economy and increase production i.e. jobs by giving a blanket tax break to the top 16 % of wage earners. Maybe if you were to tie them to the stick of making them depending on the company actually doing something to increase their manufacturing in the United States. But Bush did not attach any sticks to his carrot and his job as President of the Untied States is the United States.

If I save you money you may come back to me in the future, but it is your money I am saving not someone’s. It would be nice if you get more money that you would feel like passing it around.
But that is not the nature of business nor the game that is played by the top 16 %. Lets see if I can explain this so you will understand. After a point money stops being money it becomes game points on the board.
The more points you have the more you are a winner in the game. J. P. Morgan was asked how much he was worth? He answer said a lot as to the game played, he said “If a man knows just how much he is worth he does not have enough!”. I guess that means for me I have enough as I have no idea how much I am worth.

OKo it is a illusion, the real indicators of the economy is the strength of the U.S. dollar, the GNP compared to the trade balance. And the earned income of those working and not the number of those employed. You referred to the unemployment rate as a indicator it is a hint and not a true indictor of the strength of the economy. The wages are not the same between a employee of Spirit and that of Wal-Mart, both are employed but one’s buying power and their ability to contribute to the national’s economy is far greater then that of the other. Its like if one hundred consumers spend a dollar a piece in your store. OR one consumer spend one hundred dollars in your store. in which case would you make more money?

Our trade policy is too lop sided, it is set up to benefit imports and not exports. The heart of a economy is manufacturing and not sales. Having a value added product to trade is better then a value added product to import. Why? the value added product has a open market for it while the value added import is limited to one buyer. Took a look into the future, the U.S. workers wages are being driven down in their buying power. While the overseas workers wages are going up in their buying power. The end result will be that both wages climb towards each other till a medium wage is met. That is one of the meanings of “Globalization”. The draw back is that as the U.S. workers wages go down so does his buying power and prices either have to be reflective of that down turn or remain high with no consumer to pay that price.
Where will that cut in prices come from? You either have to find a cheaper way of manufacturing the products of take a cut in your profits. But if the momentum is in favor of imports that leaves only your profits. I could go on but unless you are truly interested you may have already stopped reading.

So I will touch on the other point, Neoconservatives and Socialism, Irving Kristol is credited with being the father of modern Neoconservatism. His parents were both avowed Soviet Communists and Irving is a admitted Soviet Socialist. In fact the founders including Irving Kristol often argue with the American Communist party as to whom is the real Socialists in America. They migrated from the Democratic party once the party started moving to far toward social liberalism for the Neoconservatives tastes.
Many confess to being Trotskyites or followers of Leon Trotsky the founder of the Red Army.
Now those are the beginnings of the Neoconservatives movement and their ideology inspirations.
But please do not take my word for it, search out Irving Kristol, Leo Strauss, Richard Pearle, Project for a new American century and the full title of “Neoconservatives”. If you like videos, go to yourtube and search out “the Power of nightmares” (LOL I am doing it again huh Linda?) If you please compare the list of members of the PNAC to the list of names of the Bush administration.
In a sense I doubt you bother few do as ignorance is bliss and once you make the conclusion there is little bliss in it.

I do not know what you think of Ron Paul but I can tell you much of what he is saying I found out independently before I ever heard of him.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4df1soW7Dho

BlueJay,

You’ve marshalled quite a number of disingenuous arguments in order to keep moving the goalposts in a way that keeps Hillary Clinton in the race. Let’s just take a couple of points from your last post.

“You know cosmos. as well as I do, the primary votes that WERE cast in Florida and Michigan would be very reflective of the vote that would have been cast there even if there had not been “issues”. There might have been many more votes, but the percentages for each candidate would not change much.”

Nonesense. We know absolutely no such thing. Barack Obama wasn’t even on the ballot in MI. And this would have been “reflective” how, precisely?

“If you want to deny votes, you shouldn’t be President either.”

Well, Hillary Clinton was FINE with “denying” (what does that even MEAN, in the context of a party primary, anyway?) the votes of Michigan and Florida as long as she didn’t think she’d need them to earn the nomination. But once her position as front-runner slipped through her fingers, she did an about face and started invoking the specter of every conceivable nightmare vote-denying scenario in order to legitimate those votes she got in Michigan and Florida.

In a battle between staving off elimination and standing by her word, elimination won out–though, of course, she has wrapped it in the mantle of “principle.” But as I said above, BlueJay, she seems PERFECTLY willing to “disenfranchise” large numbers of people who either a) didn’t vote in the primaries or b) didn’t vote for her. Some “principled” stand.

Whoever earns the necessary number of delegates will, of course, win the nomination. And you are, of course, correct that the superdelegates have many different pressures on them. But given Jimmy Carter’s weighing in today, and Hillary Clinton’s meltdown since Friday, it is going to be VERY interesting to see what happens with both the uncommitted Supers (including Dennis Moore and Nancy Boyda, by the way) as well as with those who already have committed to Clinton.

This thing should continue as long as it actually is a race. Personally, I think it hasn’t been for some time, but I’m perfectly willing to wait until the last primaries are done. Let’s just say I’ll be interested to see the polling this week regarding whether or not a majority of Democrats really want Hillary Clinton’s scorched-earth vanity campaign to continue in perpetuity.

But BlueJay: the metric isn’t whether “half the party isn’t sold on you”; the metric is the delegate count. Them’s the rules. And neither you, Hillary Clinton, or anybody else gets to make up new ones to get the result you want.

“You’ve marshalled quite a number of disingenuous arguments in order to keep moving the goalposts in a way that keeps Hillary Clinton in the race. ”

Kind of accusatory don’t you think?

I plead guilty. Though I didn’t know I was now in the position of having to defend myself from Obama supporters.

Yup I want Senator Clinton in the race as long as possible. I want her to win. Later, you are brutally honest so I will be here.

I do not trust Barack Obama because of words he himself has spoken and because of what I DON’T know about him. Increasingly, I do not even like Barack Obama. Though this may have to do more with SOME of his supporters, I also do not appreciate his smug attitude and goofing for the audience.

You say a lot that basically reduces to, “she wants to win and will do what it takes to do so.”

GOOD! I want a determined fighter. In his few moments of unpleasantness during the Pastor Wright deal, Obama often looked like a whipped puppy and SOME of his supporters seemed to be on suicide watch. The candidate that is picked is going agains the most powerful and unprincipled force on the planet. The Republican party. I don’t pick a missionary for a bar fight.

And of course you HAD to bring up

“Hillary Clinton’s meltdown since Friday,”

Which I’m afraid you and many Obama supporters have exactly wrong in its effect.

There was no “meltdown”. Senator Clinton made an innocent remark and elements of the Obama media AND the con media jumped on it and spun it into a flight of imagination.
THIS has had the effect of really pissing off people that were in the middle or leaning Clinton. Even if he is the nominee, pursuing this nasty attack and it is nasty even compared to con standards, will doom Obama in the fall. Obama supporters do him no good running with this I promise you.

“This thing should continue as long as it actually is a race. Personally, I think it hasn’t been for some time,”

I argue it was never a fair race in the first place. You were an Edwards man yes?

What if Obama’s problems had come out in January? We might have a Clinton/Edwards nail biter now.

” the metric is the delegate count. Them’s the rules. And neither you, Hillary Clinton, or anybody else gets to make up new ones”

Agreed provisionally. Obama cannot win the delegate count either. But to NOT address Florida and Michigan in some way is death in the fall for whoever the nominee is.

SO that leaves the supers. And the convention.

I’ve been listening to the right savage Hillary Clinton for 15 years. I’ve seen a media give an absolute pass and love affair to Obama.

And STILL, Obama can’t

close

the

deal.

It reminds me of the scene in Rocky II. Appollo Creed wants to fight Rocky again. Because his victory over him in the first fight was not clean or clear.

Creed’s trainer advises him against the fight.

“I saw you beat that man, like I never saw any man beat before. And the man kept coming after you.”

That’s the candidate I am supporting. And that is the President that I want against the cons.

“You know cosmos. as well as I do, the primary votes that WERE cast in Florida and Michigan would be very reflective of the vote that would have been cast there even if there had not been “issues”. ”

No, I do NOT. Not having his name on the ballots, and not campaigning had an impact. As one source said, those were “beauty contests”.

But I do know that “ideas” does not = “good ideas”.

And I know that lowering child health insurance costs in the future, so that parents can afford it, is not calling parents today who can’t afford the HUGE costs “irresponsible”.

SEMPERFIGUY, are you a Marine as your “nic” indicates? Have you been deployed recently? Were you near large explosions? Since relocating here from the NE, have you located the Bob Dole Veterans Hospital out on East Kellogg?

Well, we are dumber, that’s not a shot being taken at anyone, we just are. I’m from the NE, and after moving here, I can tell you I’m way smarter than those who went through the Wichita School system. That’s not to say I’m all that bright either!

I’ve recruited quite a few who were struggeling along back home to move here, and they all immediately floated right to the top in Kansas. It’s like shooting fish in a barrel!

Only one problem with your methodology of determining who is smarter there SEMPERFI. Your sample size is too small.

I get the impression that you were a recruiter? If you use raw tests scores from 18-24 year olds from a mostly rural area and compare that to a much larger population of scores from an urban area, correlation cannot be direct, because it is from two different population sets of different size.

e.g. The lower sample size from rural Kansas has fewer opportunities at the target because the population size is smaller and can’t represent the population size of let’s say of an inner city school.

Also, the rural population represents several different school systems across a broader area which is even more problematic for comparison.

My own theory about Christians and literacy is that those who attend Sunday School and Church have a higher liklihood to be more literate than those who do not?

Why you ask? It’s because they have to read more and are exposed to more types of reading. They hear words spoken by more adults and read by more adults than the average kid who just goes to public school.

My grandfather was a farmer-however, a very smart man. He could add up six digit numbers as fast as you could give them and have the total with 100 percent accuracy by the time you reached the bottom of your list of numbers.

Aside from that, the practical knowledge of knowing every day math from things needed on a farm, carpentry, prices of grains and the calculations of seed to harvest, amortizing lease land and etc.

It’s a matter of perspective on what is considered smart.

Thanks for your service SEMPERFI and ain’t America grand!

I should have put crime in quotes.

It is not a crime for people to take food and shelter in the current incarnation of America.

Kansas is not John McCain country!

“Now that’s a scary thought! Terrorists seem friendly and rational when compared to this bunch, AND terrorists have done less harm and killed fewer than bushco and his 29percenters. They walk among us. Shiver.”

You are soooo very stupid! Statements like that kill more of our soldiers, than terrorist! I think you should be sought out and exiled, or better yet put in front of a firing squad. If you said that in front of me, it would be the last thing you ever said you despicable B*i*t*c*h!

“Strictly on grounds of his Iraq body count and the toll on innocent life, I’d say lindainks44 can make a strong case that George Bush is a greater threat to human life than terrorists.”

Most of the innocent life lost, in Iraq has come by the hands of the TERRORIST! The lives we take are the ENEMY who are the TERRORIST. It is war, and I think a lot of you people should have quit thinking you were so grown up and actually went to school and tried to learn something. We have a society of morons, who know nothing about world history. They try to judge everything by western standards, without regard for the fact that other cultures look at things completely different. Well I got news for you! If someone like the inexperienced Marxist black supremacist terrorist supported Barack Hussein Obama gets elected, you will find out what it is like in the rest of the world. Only the strong will survive! People like lidainks55 and CF2K will be the first ones gone. They are too stupid and too weak to survive.

You like sticking your nose in where it doesn’t belong don’t you ‘Blue-Jay’ (should be red-bird because you are a commie’ I never addressed a post at you punk! If you want a piece of me just name the time and place P^U^S^S^I^E!!!!!

Hoo hoo I got myself a live one!

I don’t know what you are on guy.

But you probably had to pay for it.

Use a ball peen hammer to the middle of your forehead next time. It’s cheaper and you’ll get the same effect.

“I’d like to see though, how Senator Clinton stacks up against McCain in Kansas.”

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/state_toplines/kansas/toplines_kansas_general_election_may_13_2008

Boy that was hard. You can read can’t you sonny?

“Especially on the day meant to honor those who have made the ultimate sacrifice.”

Giving up golf?

redandgoldroom,

In case you haven’t already figured this out, BlueJay, and most of the other DemLibs are what we conservatives call; ‘IGNORANUSES’
That’s a person who’s BOTH STUPID and an ASSHOLE.
You’ll find the term fits them perfectly.
They can’t seem to help it. I’m not sure if they were genetically born that way, or more likely it is a result of some major arrested development problem.
Anyway…they are very sick, rude and obnoxious, with limited understanding.
In time you adjust somewhat to them, like working around a stockyard or sewage lagoon.

“I’m sorry, but looting the Treasury of the United States really isn’t any different than robbing me at gunpoint. I’d rather be robbed at gunpoint”

Do you mean like Reagan. Bush I and Bush II who are collectively responsible for 75% of the National Debt?

I bet Grandma ate dirt too.

And she was HAPPY to eat that dirt.

“It’s supposed to hurt to be poor! It doesn’t anymore”

Wanna bet? You make a real good Republican. It was people like you ran me outta the party.

Uh yeah “shadow”?

Dream big. But don’t hallucinate.

“A recent Rasmussen Reports poll showed John McCain favored to win the state 55 to 34 percent ”

That’s Kansas. Red Kansas.

And even if Obama can fart rainbows, he can’t make Kansas blue.

Boxlock posted May 26, 2008 at 10:21 pm

“What has Obama done to prove he can be President. All he has advocated is “Change” (?), with absolutely no detail of what that is.”

That is Boxlock’s opinion, after carefully reading everything at,

http://www.barackobama.com/issues

Boxlock, how long did it take you to read the 60+ page “blueprint”, and all of the “more information” plans and speechs?

Oh yeah and the same pollsters have democrats winning the elections nationwide due to all the RE -PUBLICAN ( check bible for Publican and add the RE-)corruption and sex scandals.
Even more each day are switching parties just like the democrats did for their scandals decades ago.
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/mood_of_america/party_affiliation/partisan_trends