Um, Ken...DANGER, FRED ROBINSON, DANGER!!!

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:45:52 GMT, "Tom Littleton"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
If the election were next week, no way, no how.

However, it isn't....hence, my wager. This campaign runs for a while, which,
I think you will find, will play to Obama's favor. Mostly, for reasons no
specific to him, but which he will be able to articulate, regarding McCain's
ideas for moving the nation ahead.

And there is something Hillary is right about - she and McCain have been
pretty thoroughly vetted, plus, most anything short of bestiality or
kiddie porn that comes from even slightly partisan sources, however
true, looks, well, partisan, and won't effect the true believers, but
Obama isn't all that vetted and has made some pretty amateurish moves on
his own. Plus, while Hillary and her minions (not all of her
supporters) are as vicious a pack of political jackals as anything GOP,
they have had to show _some_ restraint in attacking one of their own.
OTOH, I saw Carvelle in the last couple of days, and his smirk alone
told me this thing ain't over even after it's over. IAC, what Hillary
has thrown at him will pale at what's coming if he's the nominee. And
it won't be just from the GOP (or even "surrogates") - he's a black guy
who admitted he did pot and coke, he's from Chicago, he's a "liberal,"
and the "elitist" thing is probably at least a little true. He's not
some white war hero married to a beautiful gal who sets fashion trends
whose daddy is hooked up with the mob and whose biggest public hurdle is
being Catholic.

I'm not so sure how much, and he will likely lose some play that a more
solid-appearing Dem with some real chops might get - Richardson, for
example.

I like Bill Richardson, too, but let's face it. He has the charisma of
oatmeal.

Plus the whole race and religion (both the real, ala Wright,
and the horse****, ala Islam) thing is too wild a card to speculate
upon. The Wright thing has hurt him and the "elitist" thing all the
more so

really? The poll numbers, plus casual conversation here in East Central PA
say otherwise.

And if East Central PA were the only voters for the POTUS, that would be
significant. However, they don't, and IAC, this isn't the election. I
suspect that things will shift back and forth before it's over and it'll
just be a question of who gets the chair when the music stops.

Most real folks know the smell of bull****, and seemingly,
are less tolerant of it this season.

Uh-huh...that's why no "news" show even mentions what Britney Spears did
yesterday, no one knows what Paris Hilton thinks of some girl's ass,
what pop tart is pregnant (or not), or who's leading the pack on
American Idol...

What 'pundits' opine, and columnists
write, seems to convey less momentum to a campaign than it once did.

Bull****. Media, traditional and otherwise, is what got a nobody one
term senator who really hasn't done anything but be black(ish) and have
some stage presence into a horserace for the Dem nomination.

Strange phenomenon: we live within a world where 'everything' becomes
newsworthy, yet, most folks filter out more and more of it.

See above Britney's **** and Paris' opinion...

Would you bet me $100,000.00USD, publicly, now, that a ticket consisting
of Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich can beat any other ticket you can
imagine by every single electoral vote?

I'd wager that much that the pairing in question might have trouble beating
a traffic ticket.....and, yes, I see where your suspicions lie in my
original wording. Let me restate it(at the lower buy-in level of a couple
brews): Obama WILL beat John McCain by 60 electoral votes in the 2008
election. Sorry to infer an attempt at a dubious bet.

Hell, I'd have bet the brews on the dubious bet, so sure, what the
hell...but are you sure enough to bet some serious coin - say 5 grand?
I'm not.

I don't know about that. And that's another thing Obama has to face -

he'll deal with your not knowing alright, I figureg.

Actually, that's the issue - what's he gonna do? How's he gonna deal?
Who's he gonna deal with? Look, all BS aside, I think this guy is still
a big unknown - not bad, not good, unknown. And in politics, unknown is
very, very bad - one name: Eagleton. The next thing you know, Tricky
Dick wins by a landslide...

he's spending, what, 12 mil in Penn alone - that ain't change, brother.

he's picking up 40 mil a month in contributions, largely small sums from
people he can return to for more, if/when he needs it.

Hardly. Oh, I'll accept that the majority, in number of contributors,
are smallish sum individuals who more-or-less believe in Saint Obama,
but he's getting money (and help) from folks that will come someday and
ask for a favor...and he better have his lips all puckered up for a
little ring-kissing when they do...

I'd offer as a possible that both have slammed a little too much dick to
be second fiddle, but neither really has a clear choice as running mate.
To make matters worse, one choosing the other might be seen as the best
hope (ala Billy's little "unstoppable force" shtick) but also the
biggest risk.

this part, I generally will agree with. Not with the explaination which you
gave about the party, however. The Dems will be just fine. Only if the
primary ugliness runs into the actual convention, will they have a problem.

Um, they have a problem. Unless Hillary loses by something like 639% to
0% tomorrow, everything seems to indicate she's gonna fight
Clinton-style until it's way past over.

It won't.

Uh, perhaps you've heard of his opponent - Hillary
somethingoranother...hell, the bitch whacked Vince Foster on a whim...

Obama will be the nominee-apparent within 45 days, I will guess.

Heck, depending on who you talk to, he was that back in Iowa, so...

After that, the party love-fest will heal most of the wounds, the Clintons
will fade to elder-statesmen/ Teddy Kennedy type past-tense status, and,
with hope, Obama picks a running mate slightly less controversial than
William Ayers.

Maybe Al Sharpton or Michael Moore would be interested...

Lieberman can, and will, get painted with the same pro-war,
pro-Israel brush as McCain, maybe in worse fashion,

Yeah, having a semi-conservative pro-war Jewish veep is gonna keep money
away from McCain big time...for a whole lot of serious power (and money)
people, if it's a choice between pro-Israel and some dude that wants to
meet with Ahmadinejad, pro-Israel wins, and I'm not just talking about
US-based Jews. OTOH, for a whole lot of other serious power (and money)
people, screw Israel. Again, it's pretty hard to tout the winning horse
in a race with the sheet so blurry...

and that pairing would
lose out of just sheer fear of the consequences of them in charge.

See above.

TC,
R

It would,
however, temper McCain a bit to have Joe out on the trail with him to
whisper corrections in his ear, and calm down the temper tantrums. He has
that job down pretty damned well!

Tom

On Apr 21, 8:03*pm, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:45:52 GMT, "Tom Littleton"
wrote:



wrote in message
.. .

What I do not get is that some folks on this group, whose political
preferences have led this country into the ditch, whose support for a
blatantly corrupt, unpatriotic and incompetent administration, an
administration which has yet to capture or kill Ben Laden, an
administration which has run the finest military in the world into the
ground, and whose understanding of foreign affairs remains puerile,
persists in thinking that they have anything to say worthwhile on the
subject of who should lead this country out of the mess that their
votes helped create, and apparently these folk even lack the personal
self discipline to learn from their mistakes or at least keep their
f-----g mouths otherwise occupied. It is truly amazing that said folk
are still saying the same bankrupt ****.

Dave
Go Brandt

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 23:51:47 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Apr 21, 8:03*pm, wrote:
On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 00:45:52 GMT, "Tom Littleton"
wrote:



wrote in message
.. .

What I do not get is that some folks on this group, whose political
preferences have led this country into the ditch, whose support for a
blatantly corrupt, unpatriotic and incompetent administration, an
administration which has yet to capture or kill Ben Laden, an
administration which has run the finest military in the world into the
ground, and whose understanding of foreign affairs remains puerile,
persists in thinking that they have anything to say worthwhile on the
subject of who should lead this country out of the mess that their
votes helped create, and apparently these folk even lack the personal
self discipline to learn from their mistakes or at least keep their
f-----g mouths otherwise occupied. It is truly amazing that said folk
are still saying the same bankrupt ****.

Yeah, you'd think the first Clinton would have taught you girls
something...

Now this has just gotta help,
R

Dave
Go Brandt