Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Democratic Convention’

Well I managed to sit through Michelle’s speech last night and a bit more of the proceedings as well though I had to miss some of it due to well, life. I think James Carville was right on the money when he said there was no message.

Sure they tried to make it all about humanizing the Obamas and how they supposedly personally suffered so greatly to get where they are. (Eyes rolling) I don’t doubt they are real, human beings but I hardly believe their “single mom and working class grandparents raised Barrack” line of crap. Grandma was VP of the bank, Gramps managed a big furniture store, they sent him to private schools then Harvard for cying out loud! Hardly qualifies as typical working class roots.

What I did notice was the body language during Michelle’s speech. It was not warm, open or inviting but was more along the lines of her proffession. It seemed far more like an attorney making her closing arguments than a potential first lady welcoming Americans into her world. Maybe it’s a carry over from her proffession. Maybe it was intentional and she really was making a closing argument. They did call her “The Closer”.

She didn’t do it for me though. I can’t be argued into something I don’t believe in. Perry Mason himself would not change my mind or those of many disenchanted voters.

Also loved all the talking heads and delegates saying how Obama needs to have some actual policies and solutions to woo voters now and get his head out of the clouds. You know get real and talk to the common folk. I couldn’t help being reminded of my still un-finished

https://caffinequeen.wordpress.com/hansel-and-gretel-tale-of-the-lost-children-a-primary-parody-pt-1-4/ 

story about the primaries and how part of the theme was that Gretel wanted to lead the children home with the proven path of policies and solutions that she had left for them on thier way into the forest. Got quite a chuckle out of that one! I’ll be writing the final chapter after the convention but I already know one line that will ring out loud and clear.

No Barrack Hansel, it’s not about you. It’s about the children and getting them home safely!

Here is a quote from an email my mother sent me yesterday. I don’t know where it came from originally if someone does please let me know.

Always remember: Today’s mighty oak is simply
yesterday’s nut that held its ground . . .

Appropriate no? Take heart PUMAS! Patriots! Hold steady and we WILL stand tall and proud like the mighty oak!

As an aside to those who insist that I have to post their comments here’s all I can say. WHAAAAA! TOOO BAD! I will not publish any remarks that are nothing more than Hillary Hate and threats, shaming and calling me names won’t sway me one bit. I have never gone to Pro-Obama blogs and made comments period let alone the kind of crap they do on every Pro-Hillary blog or forum that they can find. I will not post anything with racist or porn links and I will not be changing that policy no matter how many times you scream censorship. It’s MY blog I post what I choose. End of story.

I do post comments from people with diffent opinions than my own just not nasty, hateful comments from anybody. ‘Nuff said!

 

CQ

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

I’m so tired of all the sore loser and bitter dead-ender comments out there. They want to spin this party implosion as being all about Hillary Clinton’s supporters being “spiteful”.

I know you’ve seen it. It’s everywhere. According to these commenters we are voting against Obama only to spite him because he “won” and Hill “lost”. I guess they got tired of calling us racists and republicans. Maybe it was getting old and not sticking. Now they’re on a “spoiled brat, spiteful, sore loser, bitter, old hag” stchick.

When will these people ever figure out that name calling, guilt trips, scare tactics, threats and intimidation is NOT the way to win votes or recruit support? Did they ever hear the phrase “You will catch more flies with honey than vinegar.”? Guess not.

Here’s the truth. Are we pissed off that Hillary Clinton the distinguished Senator from New York, former First lady of the USA and the best candidate to come along in years is not our party’s nominee? Damn right we are! Are we voting against and refusing to support Obama soley because of that anger and dissapointment? Hell NO!

There may be a few Clinton supporters who would disagree with me and say it’s their only reason but truthfully there are very few who feel that way. Sure we’re all bummed but I was bummed when Kerry won the nomination in 2004 as I have been bummed many other times but I still voted for him.

Recently I had some coment made asking me whether I would have voted for George Bush out of spite if it had been Hillary who lost the nomination to Kerry. Answer? NO and Hell NO! He wasn’t my choice and I didn’t like it but I voted for him. Why? I trusted him more than I would ever trust Bush. I didn’t like him that much but he was by far the lesser of two evils in that situation. This is NOT the case in this election cycle. Far from it in fact.

People who try to tell me that Obama’s policies are “nearly identical” might as well save their breath because it’s bullshit. His policies, are a parade of ever changing pandering that even some of my far left friends who supported him are having a hard time keeping up with. Whatever they are today you can rest assured they will be different tomorrow or as soon as it becomes politically expedient that he change them. Again.

Pure and simple, straight from this horse’s mouth, so to speak. We will not vote for him because he is not the right person for the job.  He is not even close. No choice for VP, not even Hillary would have ever made up for that. We don’t think he’s up for the job and more important than that we DO NOT TRUST HIM!

He has proven to be naive at best in his reaction to the current Russia/Georgia conflict as well as incompetent on almost every other major issue. Were he to become the POTUS it is my sincere belief that the country would be in complete economic chaos within the first year of his administration.

Then we have his ideas on foriegn policy (again naive and foolish), National Health Insurance (don’t even get me started on this one) and taxes (raising the Capital Gains Tax has been tried before and proved ineffective and unsucessfull).

The we have the issues of his dangerous associations and all the endorsements from people like Louis Farrakan, NOI, Black Panthers, Hamas, Kim Jong Il, Osama bin Laden. He may not have asked for those endorsments but the fact that people like this support and endorse him is very telling indeed.

Let’s see Rezco (set to be sentenced a week before the November election), Ayers (flag burning, fire bombing, self admitted terrorist who wishes they had done more), Auchi, Odinga, ACORN, Rev. Wright (God Damn America Rev. Wright) and the list goes on and on and on. Why is this guy associated with so many radical, terrorist types? Not to mention convicted criminals. How come they all seem to love Obama so much? Why do they flock to him in droves? You think maybe they recognize a kindred spirit?

To the person or persons who keep sending me comments threatening me and telling me to shut the fuck up: Dream on ! I will not shut up! If it was only that easy! In the words of the famous Tweety Bird “You don’t know me vewy well now do you?” Oh, and BTW, I am self employed so there goes that threat too! Tough day for you huh?

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

If you have not yet read this I will warn you! Do not read while you are drinking or eating as it may cause you to choke, spit your beverage onto your keyboard or puke!  Here you go:

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2008/aug/19/democratic-delegates-reveal-thug-tactics-hillary-s/?feedback=1#comments

“It’s downright nasty,” said Memphis superdelegate and City Council member Myron Lowery, who has shared dozens of the messages he’s received with The Commercial Appeal.

“I think it’s divisive for the ‘Support Hillary’ campaign to continue at this time. She made the decision to fully support Mr. Obama,” said Lowery. “I don’t know why they’re not taking their cue from Hillary and falling in line.”

Lowery said he does not believe Clinton herself is behind the effort, but that it’s “her supporters, acting on their own because they’re proud of what they have done for her.”

Damn straight we’re proud of what we’ve done for her! We’ve had to fight tooth and nail for her to get the traditional roll call vote that every other candidate has always been given as a matter of common practice. We’ve had to fight for every tiny bit of respect the Obama campaign and supporters have grudgingly paid her and her historic campaign.

We are proud of our candidate and our efforts for her. So what? Since when is that a crime? 

 BTW if I hear one more democratic official ask why we don’t just “fall in line” I may start a “mail your shit to the idiots” campaign! Wouldn’t that be fun! OK! I promise not to crap into an envelope and mail it if only for the sake of the poor postal workers who would have to deliver it but you see where I’m coming from. (No fun! No fun at all!)

Most of the messages Lowery has received from across the country come from Hillary supporters making the case that she won more voters’ votes in the primaries, she won bigger states, that Obama won states that won’t vote Democratic in November and that she is the only “elect-able” Democrat.

“Obama could not ‘seal the deal’ with voters during the primaries,” said one message Lowery received Tuesday from a Sacha Millstone, a Colorado delegate to next week’s convention. “The more voters got to know him, the more voters chose Hillary Clinton…

“Democrats must offer voters the candidate with the best chance of winning in November, the experienced candidate who understands the problems we face and the solutions we need — Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton.”

Hmmmm…so these are the “Thug tactics” the article was complaining about. So I take it voting for the person you think is the best for the job and asking for the delegates to vote according to the votes that were cast is thuggery. Apparently it is according to this author.

I suppose that Bartholomew Sullivan, the author of this utterly and completely biased piece of so called journalism thinks that these “Thug Tactics” he talks about are worse than the intimidation, harassment, threats to people’s businesses, reputations and physical well being pale in comparison? The tendencies of Obama supporters to portray all dissenters as “Racists” and “Closet Republicans” as well as bitter, typical, white, old, female, bitter, dead-enders, holdouts, menopausal hysterics is not thuggish at all?

I guess he thinks that Obama supporters who make threats and use other people’s screennames and email addresses to make false comments on sites and sign people up for MyBarrackObama blog accounts without their knowledge or consent is not underhanded in any way either? How about when they try 50 – 75 times per day to change a Hillary supporter’s password on a site that they post at? (Does the word Hack mean anything?) Or when they coordinate attacks on anti-Obama blogs and forums causing them to shut down, get locked or simply cause an error message I guess that’s supposed to be “friendly and civil”?

In a PUMA (which stands for “party unity my ass” to some but for the official organization it stands for People United Means Action) statement sent to Lowery last Friday, the group wrote that it was “ashamed of the strong-arming, political threats and thinly-veiled ‘suggestions’ that have been sent to Democratic delegates and superdelegates’ during this primary season. These ‘thug’ tactics appear to be increasing as Senator Obama begins the downward slide in the polls and Senator Clinton’s support grows.”

Michael Gordon of Parker City, Ind., wrote Lowery Tuesday as representative of PUMA, noting that the Obama campaign spent $56 million in July “only to lose ground to (John) McCain…

“Where Obama once got a free pass on such despicable relationships with anti-American people such as Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Ayers, Rezko, Soros, Pfleger, Farakkhan — the American voters are beginning to realize what a questionable and shady past this man has led,” Gordon writes.

Wow! How thuggish! They actually expect the DNC to consider whether or not this guy can get elected? I mean that is so not the point right? I mean how bad of us PUMAS to point out the obvious! Like how he’s not polling well when you consider it should be a slam dunk for Dems this year.

Wow! That’s like, so racist and MEAN! I mean, like who cares if he’s more fake and crooked than Nixon and more wishy washy than Carter? Right? It’s definitely racist to pick the person who could actually win right?

This is all about Obama and getting an African American the nomination so we can say we’re the most progressive right? Winning in November is, after all, not the important thing right? ( OMG even when I’m trying to spoof them I almost puke from writing those words!)

The good news as I see it is the word is getting out and that this idiot just gave PUMAS more free publicity! Thanks Bartholomew Sullivan! We need all the publicity we can get! I guess we should have pissed off the Kool-Ade drinkers sooner!

I recently ran into an old on-line friend in another forum that is totally unrelated to politics. We have a lot in common. We’re both former residents of the same “fly-over” state, both feel strongly about many of the same issues, especially on issues regarding children, women, human rights, protecting our environment and many other things.  She recently graduated college, got a new, exciting job and moved to another state.

I was thrilled to hear from her after such a long time. She posted something about Veep-stakes and I responded. (It’s not a political forum but people still do mention politics occasionaly.)

The response I got back stunned and disspaionted me. Same ‘ol, same ‘ol lines we get from the Obamabots as well as the supposed “converts” after the primaries.

UPDATED: i REMOVED THE COMMENTS FROM MY cONVERT FRIEND AT HER REQUEST. hOWEVER I WILL NOT BE REMOVING MY COMMENTS AS I FEEL THEY ARE MY OPINONS AND ARE IN LINE WITH THE GENERAL FEELING OF THE POST.

I guess we all know friends and family who feel this way but I still find it rather sad that they cannot look at the bigger picture here. 1. Who can actually win. 2. Country before party. 3. This guy is a fruad and has not been vetted. Below is my response to her. I tried not to be too harsh as I really do value her friendship and intellect.

XXX (Name deleted by CQ);

I read your response yesterday and to be honest I had to think about it before I replied.

I’m really saddened that you feel Clinton lost because she “ran a crummy campaign” as I think she ran the only campaign she could. IE; One with both hands tied behind her back, If she had really gone after Obama on the things that will sink him, she would have been crucified and hung out to dry by the party for attacking a fellow dem on such things.

They would rather ignore those things and wait for the repubs to jump on them instead of actually vetting the candidate ahead of time.

We will have to agree to disagree because I don’t believe that Hillary ran a crummy campaign or that she lost fair and square and besides that this is about far more than Hillary. We’re (PUMAS) still upset that the party totally screwed Michigan and Florida and then they gave uncommitted votes to a guy who’s name was not even on the ballot not to mention the 4 delegates that were taken from Clinton that were earned based on actual votes counted for Clinton because the wanted to reflect the will of the voters who did not do thier duty and get off their asses to actually vote. In my recollection the fair reflection rule was meant to reflect the will of the voters not those who didn’t vote.

More than even that is the fact the DNC leadership has been deeply biased from day one. Every time he lost big (West Virginia anybody? He got handed his ass.) a parade of supers came out to bolster him and in particular Edwards the big fraud who went on about family values and poor, working class folks and said he would not endorse before the end of the primaries came out immediately after WV to say the voters had spoken and so had he. Yes the voters spoke alright 46 point win for your opponent does not translate into voter support of your candidacy.

The thing that pisses me off most is the dismissiveness from Obama and his supporters as if not counting votes as cast is perfectly allright this year even though we were all screaming about it the last two elections. I guess it’s ok as long as it’s dems suppressing the vote.

Then we have the assumption that there are only a few holdouts and they’re mostly older, white, bitter women. I know for a fact there are a lot more than a few of us who will not vote for Barky and I also know that many of us are not gerriatric, menopausal and on our last, bitter, racist legs. It really pisses me off that half the party is being dismissed and dissed this way and they expect us to “come around”. Give me a break! If they were to actually try treating Hill’s supporters with any measure of respect they might have half a chance.

I actually thought very highly of the senator before this race started and I saw how he treated not only Hill and her supporters but the disdain he has for anyone who dares to question him. The conclusion put out by his camp that any and all critics are absolutely racist as they don’t believe anyone could possibly have any other reason to not vote for him. This is an insult!

Turn it around and ask an Obama supporter if they made their decision soley based on race see how offended they get. It’s just as stupid to believe on either side. Are there people who will vote or not vote Obama based soley on race? YES on BOTH sides. Does that mean everybody that will/won’t vote for him is doing so based soley on race? OF COURSE NOT!

I have been threatened, had my personal info published on the net (outed if you will),had horrible emails and comments made in my name by Obama supporters impersonating me, I have had them contact the Board of Realtors in my state and try to defame me, they have threatened my business, contacted proffessional organizations in my name and many other atrocities simply because I don’t agree with and will not vote for Obama. His thugs are more than enough reason for me.

So XXX (name deleted by CQ), I respect you and your opinion as well as your right to hold one different from my own but I respectfully disagree with your assesment.

I totaly agree about him picking a female VP that is not Hillary will be political suicide though and I would hope that he knows it too.

All I can say is this:
It ain’t over until it’s over! I promise if I turn out to be right about the convention or November I will do my best not to say I told you so!

Also people who claim Hill is doing this because she’s power-hungry or feels entitled are wrong. She is doing this as are many of us because we feel strongly that country comes before party and obama is a threat to both. She is doing everything she can to try and save the party and the country.

I do not want McCain either but if it is close in my state I may have to vote republican for the first time in my life because I feel that strongly that Obama must be defeated for America’s sake.

CQ

Something tells me she won’t be happy with my response any more than I was with hers but I have to honest about my feelings. I don’t believe in fake, pandering quasi-agreement. EDITED BY CQ TO ADD SHE WASN’T HAPPY ABOUT IT AT ALL AND AS YOU CAN SEE SHE ASKED TO HAVE HER COMMENTS REMOVED. i HAVE DONE SO. HOPEFULLY SHE AND I CAN REMAIN FRIEND BUT IF SHE NO LONGER WANTS TO THEN I WILL CONSIDER IT A LOSS BUT HER DECISION NOT MINE.

Discuss.

CQ

Read Full Post »

Very interesting post on   http://obambi.wordpress.com/2008/08/13/payoffmedia/ makes one wonder if this is all bought and paid for. As in The One must have the best agent money can buy. Hollywood probably hand picked for him. If anybody knows how to fool the public it’s Hollywood right? It’s not to far a stretch to specualte this after all The One was taking acting lessons from George Clooney too.

Listen I have nothing against Hollywood in general. I like that they produce entertainment even if I don’t like everything produced. I simply excersise my right to free choice and change the channel/DVD/CD or whatever. Problem solved. Crisis averted.  I’m not one  who believes in restricting artists just what I choose to view/hear ect. (I confess I really, really wish the Reality TV folks would just get their own channel so I didn’t have to surf past them but I digress.)

I’m also not one who believes in restricting what news does/does not get reported with a few exceptions for National Security and such. I don’t think it’s smart to report that you are in such and such place with the troops getting ready to attack …or such and such precautions have been taken to prevent access from terrorists. You know I understand we have to censor things like that to protect ourselves but should that extend to protecting political candidates from scandals of their own making? Isn’t that helping to create a false image? Is that even ethical by any standard of journalism?

Yes, I do want to know if someone paid the media to keep the Edwards fiasco under wraps. I want to know if someone is being paid NOT to vet Obama in a serious manner. Are the Media being paid to keep the Larry Sinclair story under wraps? How about the Odinga, Rezco, Auchi and Ayers stories? George Soros’ real connections to Obama and the coup of the Democratic Party? How about ACORN and the falsified voter registration scandal? Um…. the (fake) birth certificate?

We know that the media has colluded with the DNC in protecting The One for their own reasons. The question is what are those reasons and/or are they related in any way to money and/or special considerations?

We know that most of the media refuses to report that the PUMA and JSND movement is real, headed by real democrats who are fed up not closet republicans and that they are gaining any traction. They are for the most part participating in the DNC created myth that the party is unified. Paid for?

How about the latest article from the “Seriously You’re Still Calling Yourselves A News Network?” folks at CNN.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/12/clinton/index.html

But it would be the first time in the modern era of presidential primaries that a losing candidate has so visibly endorsed an opponent so many months before the convention, and then gone on to have his or her name placed in nomination.

According to this phony bit we are supposed to imagine that it is not customary to have a traditional roll call vote at the Democratic Convention. No, of couse it’s not! That’s why it’s always refered to as TRADITIONAL. Because it’s not CUSTOMARY right? Cheeeez and Crackers! Who is paying for this tripe might we ask? Who indeed?

This couldn’t possibly be a smoke screen to hide the fact that The One is afraid, yes VERY AFRAID of his former opponent could it?

CQ

Read Full Post »

This information is coming to light through the blogger’s network. I think it is extremely important that we get the word out about this. We are NOT saying that Barrack Obama himself is involved although we don’t know either way I would highly doubt it. I don’t think he would be so stupid as to be personally involved in this kind of thing.  Having said that what is being said is that at least three seperate IP’s linked to the Blogger accounts that were shut down by a coordinated spam flagging attack were traced back to mybarrackobama.com by law enforcement and are currently being investigated.

Citizen Wells has an excellent post on the matter:

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/08/03/obama-camp-stops-free-speech-democrat-party-left-wing-brown-shirts-nazi-germany-revisited-barackobamacom-fairness-doctrine-nancy-pelosi/#comment-3064

Here is another from bloggasm:

http://bloggasm.com/whos-responsible-for-shutting-down-a-number-of-anti-obama-blogspot-accounts#comment-77765

Finally here is a link to macsmind where the proof was uncovered:

http://macsmind.com/wordpress/2008/08/02/macsmind-hacking-update/#comment-47531

Truthfully I believe Senator Obama though he is not personally responsable, SHOULD DENOUNCE THIS KIND OF ABUSE OF THE INTERNET! I believe he should come out publicly and denounce this sort of behaviour and let people know it will not be tolerated on his official website. If he does not then he is by proxy condoning such behaviour!

This country was founded on the principals of freedom and justice for all. These freedoms include the right to free speech. If we have come to the point where free speech has become a luxury only to be enjoyed by those in power or those who can intimidate, harass, threaten and over-power the voices of the rest then we must act now to restore freedom before it’s too late!

It’s a very thin line these folks are walking. One blog, who shall not be named as I refuse to give them any more free publicity for thier disgusting site, makes no bones about the fact they feel they are free to post anything they want. I would agree with them to a point. That point, which they have gone way past, is where they feel they should be allowed this freedom but those who disagree with them are fodder for their jokes and their intimadation tactics, of which I myself have been subjected to and they include hateful and threatening posts, impersonating people I know in real life to send me threats and harassment. Impersonating me in other forums and blogs saying terrible things, claiming I will “never work again” (Funny since I am self employed. I don’t know who they think will fire me.)

They have called me a racist, a republican, bitter, xenophobic (This is really funny because the person posting that one seemed as though that word wuold be out of their normal vocabulary from the rest of the post.). They posted my personal information on their blog and all this because I visit the site of Larry Sinclair who they feel does not have a right to free speech.

As a matter of fact they are so against Larry Sinclair being allowed to express himself they have threatened his life, shut down his blogs with coordinated complaints and attacks, they have gone out of their way trying to have him arrested and have suceeded on one occasion so far, they have taken it upon themselves to call the Social Security Administration claiming that Larry is a fraud, a con man and should have his disability benefits (His only sorce of income. ) and his medical coverage denied.

So this is the rub. They are allowed to freely speak or write what they want but they are not allowed according to the law to stop someone else from excersising their own free speech. Nor are they allowed to try and interfere in someone’s life, job, financial situation or medical coverage! How is any of that OK by any standard?

Yes Obama supporters have the right to free speech. No they do not have the right to silence, harass or intimidate those who disagree!

Yes Larry Sinclair has a right to free speech. Yes Barrack Obama has the right to sue him if it is a lie.

No those idiots do not have the right to harass, intimidate and threaten Larry. No they do not have the right to interfere with his right to free speech, medical coverage and his lively hood just because they don’t believe him.

These people claim to be for freedom and the American way but it is not the American way at all to engage in such a thuggish and un-American behaviour.

We must expose these people/movements for what they really are bfore it is too late! If this kind of behaviour is tolerated even sanctioned by not only those who have the power to do something about it but also by the rest of us allowing this to stand then we will be seeing more of our hard won freedoms going by the wayside! We must stand up to the thugs and bullies and Senator Obama must do so also or he is guilty of condoning it by proxy!

Speak out people! Do not let this stuff stand!

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

I really hope that I’m not the only one bothered by this incident.

 http://www.kwwl.com/Global/story.asp?S=8737712

MADISON, Wis. (AP) – Wisconsin Democrats have told Debra Bartoshevich she can forget about being a delegate to the national convention next month.

Bartoshevich was elected by party activists as a pledged delegate for Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton. But after Clinton dropped out of the race, Bartoshevich told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel she would support the Republican candidate, John McCain, over Barack Obama in the general election.

How dare a delegate not support the great one? I mean it’s not like the best candidate won or like it was in any way, shape or form a fairly won victory. It’s not like he’s some newbie with no idea how to run anything but his huge ego trips!

No, no and it’s certainly not that people feel he’s an elitist because of silly statements he made about “typical white people” or “bitter, religious zealots carrying their guns and racist attitudes”. No, I’m quite sure that has nothing to do with it. And the arugula thing well that’s nothing. It’s a non-issue. People don’t care that Obama whined about the “Brother you’re wearing me out! Can’t I just eat my waffle?” thing either. I mean after all we expect our leaders to lord it over us in America right?

Definitely there is no issue with the fact he went to church and listened to “God Damn America” from his mentor and spiritual guide the Rev. Jeremiah Wright for 20 years! I mean really! The man married Barrack and Michelle for crying out loud! He baptized their children! He brought Obama to Jesus and inspired the title of Obama’s best selling book The Audacity of Hope! How could anyone draw conclusions that he might share those views? Just because he tried to defend this crap as “normal” worship as if all pastors and churches normaly spend their efforts focusing on rage and hate! It’s an outrage! (sarcasm off for now)

It couldn’t be more clear as to why this brave woman stated she would not support Obama. There is certainly no shortage of reasons as you can see above. This is probably a conservative list compared to those of various voters who have problems with “coming to Obama”.

Naturally, those voters have been labled as racists. Thing is it has nothing at all to do with his race and everything to do with the fact that he is a spoiled, whiny, narcissistic, marxist who has decided that the world, not just America, the entire world should fall at his feet! He is running around the globe to bolster his lack of foriegn policy experience as if simply traveling and meeting dignataries will suffice for actual knowledge or experience. He has had to be reminded that he is not the president yet at least twice by, get this, reporters!

It is becoming increasingly more clear that the Obama and his minions will do anything and stop at nothing to silence any and all dissent. First they kick out any dissenters among the delegates then they establish a “free speech zone” for the upcoming Democratic convention to insure that all protesters will be safely out of  the site and earshot of delegates and furthermore they will be detained in this area which is to be surrounded by chicken wire! As if anyone protesting the coronation of the Golden Idiot is a criminal and a danger to society.

Are we still in America? I thought our country was founded on freedom and that one of those freedoms we fought for was the right to free speech! Dissent is patriotic by it’s very nature! What’s next?

If you visit some pro-Obama blogs you’ll quickly find out that they intend to accept nothing less than their “saviour’s” status being officially changed to that of a God. There are lots of nasty people out there claiming they will procecute and punish all who “dare to attack Obama”! I’m not kidding at all. If you go the the Mitch & Nan Show blog ( I refuse to link to it go there at your own risk and be prepared to be completely disgusted if you do.) you will see tons of posts and comments stating exactly that. They say they are not a pro-Obama site yet they constantly refer to sending lists of email addresses and IP’s of people who visit larry Sinclair’s blog to David Axelrod and team Obama for “procecution after he is president” as if it is breaking the law to speak against him, vote against him or apparently even to visit the blog of someone who speaks against the great one.

They have said that Larry Sinclair will go to jail for his “crimes” which amount to daring to say he had a gay encounter with Obama during which they both used cocaine. Apparently they have decided that it is a lie whithout any research or hearing it from their messiah’s mouth and they have also decided that it’s a crime to even say such things whether or not they’re true.

Honestly I expect IF Obama can make it through November, unlikely as that is, he will have us all in brown shirts and combat boots screaming “Hail The Obama” like frenzied lap dogs by next year this time.  Better practice your scream!

 

CQ

Read Full Post »

Entry for May 15, 2008

I just read a transcript of an interview with Hillary Clinton, presidential candidate. I’m trying to find it again so I can post a link but here was what really bothered me. I’m paraphrasing here but the question was put to the Senator.

Do you realize that the convention date, August 31st is the anniversary of the famous “I have a Dream” speech and wouldn’t it be a great thing to announce to the party, the country and the world, especially on that symbolic day, that we have nominated the first African American President? What would you say to those who feel your campaign is an attempt to deny that? What will you say to those who think you should step aside to let that happen?

Here is my question. How is it any more or less historic for either candidate? Granted if we go back in history it would not have been legal for either candidate to run for office much less have a serious shot at winning.

Why is it that we are being pressured to use emotion over the “historic” aspects above all else and why only in reference to Senator Obama but not Senator Clinton? More importantly why are we being told that we “should” vote for Obama because it’s historic and not to do so would be “racist” when in fact we should be considering many other things first above and beyond the Historic, Racial or Gender factors?

Namely, I’m talking about such things as abilities, knowledge, experience and in general the best person for the job. Are we so PC now days that we will base our precious votes on affirmative action style selection? Really? Not who will do the best but who “should” win because it’s “Historic”? Not who we trust? Who we know can win but whoever we deem the “most deserving” because of history?

I’ll be the first to admit that affirmative action is a good thing in many ways. It has made it easier for some to have access to schools, jobs and other things most take for granted and things that some of these people would be otherwise unfairly disadvantaged. That’s what it was set up to do.

Having said that I don’t think it should be given even the smallest consideration when it comes to nominating and electing presidential candidates. I want the candidate that has the best, strongest chance to win and the candidate who is most qualified and will do the best job period. I guess if that makes me a “racist” then I’ll just have to deal with it!

 

Pam

 

OK one more thing here. Can you imagine if things were reversed say for argument’s sake that the convention were to fall on some historic day for women like perhaps, the day they were given the right to vote (it’s not on that day of course but I need an example here to make my point) Now imagine a reporter asking Senator Obama those questions.

Senator do you realize the date of the convention is the on the date that women were given the historic right to vote? Wouldn’t it be great Senator for the party, the country and the world if we could announce at the convention that we have just nominated the first Woman for President? What do you say to those who say your campaign is an effort to deny that? Would you be willing to step aside to allow this historic, symbolic victory for women’s rights to take place?

Please! Do you think for one second anyone would even try that? Or that it would fly if they did? Do you think Senator Obama would consider stepping down for those reasons? Of course not and he shouldn’t. Would he be called a sexist for not backing down to this pressure? No.

People want Hillary to back down exactly because she does have a chance at beating him. If they didn’t think so they wouldn’t be trying to guilt her into giving up! Remember folks Ron Paul is still in the race with his 19 delegates and heading to the convention floor. Nobody is screaming for him to get out or calling him “divisive”. They would never tell a team to walk off the field because they were ‘going to lose anyway” and the only reason they think they can get away with it now is because they expect Hillary to “get in line and do as she is told like a woman should”.

All I can say is this they are not very realistic on that one! Hillary Clinton is no shrinking violet no not your typical “girl” at all! She’s a fighter and a winner!

And oh by the way, she’s not going anywhere!

Read Full Post »