Thursday, January 31, 2008

Peas in a pod

Must be something in the water in Chicago.
Posted by at
Labels: , , , ,

11 comments:

Tecumseh said...

In 2007, Obama's composite liberal score of 95.5 was the highest in the Senate. Rounding out the top five most liberal senators last year were Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., with a composite liberal score of 94.3; Joseph Biden, D-Del., with a 94.2; Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., with a 93.7; and Robert Menendez, D-N.J., with a 92.8.

At least Bernie is an up-front, in-your-face, card-carryingpinko. A bit surprising to see he got passed on the left by two would-be presidential candidates, one of whom is now in the semi-finals.

1/31/2008 2:27 PM
Mr roT said...

Sickening. Just sickening. As Taranto also points out (point taken about McCain in the other thread though I didn't watch the debate, AI), folks nod yes dreamily at Obama though he is wa out of the mainstream, politically. I wonder if in a general election, anyone would actually ask him a question that he wouldn't be able to brush off with some empty blather about healing and bringing us all together...[barf, incidentally].
I must say, I prefer the Italian communists. They say what they are.

1/31/2008 5:45 PM
Tecumseh said...

Right -- that empty blather is barfy. From a purely stylistic viewpoint, it's better than Hill's cackles alternating with deadening droning.

1/31/2008 6:17 PM
Mr roT said...

I guess agree. It's not that Hill is saying anything either. Mostly we know what she's about from the Krauthammer article I posted a long time ago. Not much to fear, the Clintons don't believe in anything. That's better than believing in the wrong thing.

1/31/2008 6:28 PM
Tecumseh said...

Say Hinderaker and Steyn (see the other post): I think we should recognize that professional politicians bring important experience and skills to the table, and that one of those skills is the ability to knee an opponent in the groin and get away with it.

Maybe. But it's a wee bit similar to the case for Hillary: She thinks nothing of having Elizabeth Edwards whacked with a tire-iron in a dark alley, so she'll do the same to the mullahs.

1/31/2008 6:46 PM
Mr roT said...

Back to the point of this fight, AI. Gotta beat Obama for sure, so why risk it with a guy like Romney? Imagine it, Romney's church wouldn't have let Obama in just to get baptized. That's it, baby, we've lost the WOT.

1/31/2008 7:04 PM
Tecumseh said...

I keep hearing this from you guys -- that Romney is a Mormon, that that's a weird thing, etc. But is that fair? He's running for Pres, not for Pope of Salt Lake City, for Chrissakes. I don't understand all those refs to the Church (or churches) in this context. What does it have to do with anything?

1/31/2008 7:15 PM
Mr roT said...

It's a character thing, AI. The current US religion isn't Christianity or anything else like that. The prevailing religion holds that the civil rights era was greatest (not WWII, btw) and that all its precepts are those by which to browbeat others. That's why communist Obama is getting 32M bucks to fight Hillary. Nothing to do with his ideas. He doesn't have any. 'We' need to consumate the healing that started in Selma (or whatever).
Decisively on the other side is Mitt Romney. He has a funnier name than Obama if it's possible in English, he's a corporate fuck, probably fired all the blacks somewhere or another. A real Jesus freak from a religion that has nothing to do with the idea that we're all equal and it's time to dump dead white westerners (like Dr Rowan Atkinson's) in favor of anyone wanting to make more dead white westerners.
He's out of fashion to everyone bought into this religion and he's suspect to the right since he's about like Hillary in what he's done in government. He's our Kerry.

1/31/2008 7:29 PM
Mr roT said...

In my post of 7:04, it's not I that care about the religion. It's the voters. It will be all too easy to make hay out of the fact that Obama couldn't've gotten baptized in Romney's own church and that would be the end of it.

1/31/2008 7:31 PM
Tecumseh said...

Hey, man, isn't Obama railing against "cynics". Sounds like a pretty cynical view you got here. Not saying it's not correct -- to some extent. But there are other factors in a national election besides all the media BS, and the spinmeister's dumb tricks. No?

1/31/2008 8:32 PM
Mr roT said...

Obama's railing about cynicism is cynical.

1/31/2008 10:17 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)