On Sat, 11 Apr 2009 18:03:23 -0500, Ken Fortenberry
wrote:

DaveS wrote:
Rick, after 8+ years of your political ****, ass kissing each and
every move of Bush/Cheney and the Greed Interregnum, ignoring the
substance of every move of these clowns against the Constitutional
foundations of the country, putting the most ridiculous
interpretations on the most despicable venal moves and defending
slavishly each and every theft of taxpayer money and trust. . . why in
heaven's name do you think you have any credibility whatsoever in
pretending that yours is an objective or useful assessment of Obama?

The thing most people get, which apparently you do not yet
understand, is that the people, the voters have decided that the
choices you advocated were incompetent crooks and the voters decided
to give the "Ds" a chance to clean up the mess that your team created,
and the mess that you are unwilling to take any responsibility for.
The least you could do is to re-examine your thinking and consider
where you went wrong. Do that for a bit, and maybe you would have some
credibility in this off topic area. Until that happens your stuff
reads "stubborn loser/learning unlikely."

Well and rightly said

Actually, incorrectly said. I defended Bush and/or Cheney on a limited few
things, particularly the Katrina response and "weapons of mass destruction" in
Iraq, both about which I had direct, personal knowledge (not to mention, since
Saddam had undeniably _used_ such weapons, it's pretty hard to say they didn't
exist). Further, I did say, and still feel, that Bush was a better choice than
either Gore or Kerry (but I never said, nor have I ever felt, that he was the
best possible choice).

but our friend Rick Bean Dean lost all
credibility a long time. It was Rick who assured us that Obama
and his team were naifs, babes in the woods, inexperienced,
amateur neophytes who had no chance in hell against the Clinton,
heir apparent juggernaut. Obama trounced them and won the
Democratic nomination going away.

Er, nope.

It was Rick who told us in no uncertain terms that Obama and his
team were rank amateurs who hadn't the sense or experience to
take on the best of the best of the GOP. Obama won in an electoral
landslide.

Er, nope. That was his now-Veep and his now-Secretary of State and her husband
that saying stuff like that...

And "an electoral landslide"...hmmm....aren't you among those who claim Gore
really won...? IAC, an "electoral landslide" is meaningless in practical terms
- every eligible voter in the US could vote, and a very small fraction of the
popular votes could create "an electoral landslide," or, a relative few could
vote in certain areas and the winner of an "electoral landslide" could lose the
popular vote by 30-plus%.

IIRC, I called the popular vote within a point or two - it was, what 53-46, and
again, IIRC, I predicted 51 to 49, plus or minus a point or two, with minority
voters being a wild card. And no, I didn't pick McCain as the certain winner.

Now it's Rick Bean Dean spouting the same old bull****, (he's
really big on bull**** ;-), about how Obama and his team have no
smarts, experience, common sense or savvy. Yeah, your label fits
perfectly, "stubborn loser/learning unlikely". As for credibility,
well maybe if you borrow the tinfoil hood when the antenna works. ;-)

HTH,
R