Go Away You Horrible Human Being

[danb]

This might make me consider reading some of these left-wing blogs. From something called americablog. Pretty hilarious.

IT'S NOT CLOSE. YOU FREAKING LOST THE NOMINATION, WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH YOU?

Good God. What is wrong with her? The Clintons and their campaign staff don't give a damn that they are now hurting our electoral chances in the fall against McCain and against the Republicans in Congress. Their campaign isn't happening in some vacuum, and they know it. Our candidates can't fundraise because of her. Obama can't focus on McCain because of her. Obama is wasting money on HER, rather than spending it on McCain, because of her. EMILY's List, and AFSCME, and the American Federation of Teachers and others are wasting their members' money on her now-failed race - money that they could be spending, should be spending, on other real races, races that haven't already lost. She can't win, the math says she lost the nomination, but she doesn't give a damn. She's going to stay in the race like some spoiled hateful egotistical brat.

Why is the media even covering her? The only stories that should be written about Hillary Clinton is how much damage she's causing our party. How she's hurting fundraising at the DNC - they even admitted it, they're not raising the money they need to fight John McCain because of this woman. Why don't you write some stories about how she is hurting our candidates who can't fundraise because of her? How she has forced EMILY's List and AFSCME and the AFT to waste their money because of her. How she has caused a civil war in the Netroots. Five months ago we all felt that we had 3 great candidates. Now, far too many of us loathe Hillary Clinton, and she has done her racist best to ensure that her supporters can't stand Barack Obama either.

The Clintons don't give a damn about our party. Their party, their church, is themselves. To hell with everyone else. I actually liked Hillary up until a few months ago. Other bloggers used to tell me that Joe and I were too nice to Hillary. People just assumed that we were endorsing her. Now I actually loathe her. She makes me yell at the TV like she's George Bush, and no one other than George Bush makes me yell at the TV - until now. I actually can't stand her or her husband any more. I defended her. I defended her husband. And now I'm actually wondering if the Republicans weren't right about them. That's how bad she has damaged her reputation. People who actually liked you, who actually helped you, who actually defended you, LOATHE you now. Call me a Clinton-hater all you like, but people like me were the ones who had your back. And we never will again.

Let me close with what Mike Huckabee just said on MSNBC:

"The happiest person in America tonight is John McCain."

[lars]

Originally Posted by danb

This might make me consider reading some of these left-wing blogs. From something called americablog. Pretty hilarious.

Funny that republicans actually understand the Clintons better than Demms ever did. Demms are just now starting to see..they are in it for the Clintons and the Clintons only.

I don't think that they still understand why she is staying in the race. She is onto plan B which is to damage Obama so he loses in Nov. Then she can begin making her case for 2012 and her message will be 'See...I told you so. I was the better candidiate for the general election"

Demms will likely be fooled again and put her up in 2012. (that is so long as her plan works and Obama goes down in Nov).

[ninowesco]

Bill Clinton is a great American.

[TurboSpartan]

Originally Posted by lars

Funny that republicans actually understand the Clintons better than Demms ever did. Demms are just now starting to see..they are in it for the Clintons and the Clintons only.

I don't think that they still understand why she is staying in the race. She is onto plan B which is to damage Obama so he loses in Nov. Then she can begin making her case for 2012 and her message will be 'See...I told you so. I was the better candidiate for the general election"

Demms will likely be fooled again and put her up in 2012. (that is so long as her plan works and Obama goes down in Nov).

I think the lesson is how quickly hardcore partisans will turn on someone who was supposedly infallible if you had asked a couple years ago. In 1998-2007, the Clintons were great. They could do no wrong. Now they're just "in it for themselves". In reality, they're the same people now that they were then. There's just another guy they like a little better so we have be sure to demonize our new opponents, the Clintons, to get them out of the way.

Similarly, circa 2004 all the hardcore dems loved the idea of a Kerry McCain ticket, what a great moderate to bring balance to the ticket and get us into the whitehouse. Now he's in the way, so he's become McBain, the older-than-moses death risk who would bring a 3rd Bush term.

[danb]

Originally Posted by TurboSpartan

I think the lesson is how quickly hardcore partisans will turn on someone who was supposedly infallible if you had asked a couple years ago. In 1998-2007, the Clintons were great. They could do no wrong. Now they're just "in it for themselves". In reality, they're the same people now that they were then. There's just another guy they like a little better so we have be sure to demonize our new opponents, the Clintons, to get them out of the way.

Similarly, circa 2004 all the hardcore dems loved the idea of a Kerry McCain ticket, what a great moderate to bring balance to the ticket and get us into the whitehouse. Now he's in the way, so he's become McBain, the older-than-moses death risk who would bring a 3rd Bush term.

In the case of the Obamaniacs, they learned from their parents and now they are eating them. The Clintons are the victims of their own spawn.

[Jack's Smirking Revenge]

Originally Posted by TurboSpartan

I think the lesson is how quickly hardcore partisans will turn on someone who was supposedly infallible if you had asked a couple years ago. In 1998-2007, the Clintons were great. They could do no wrong. Now they're just "in it for themselves". In reality, they're the same people now that they were then. There's just another guy they like a little better so we have be sure to demonize our new opponents, the Clintons, to get them out of the way.

Similarly, circa 2004 all the hardcore dems loved the idea of a Kerry McCain ticket, what a great moderate to bring balance to the ticket and get us into the whitehouse. Now he's in the way, so he's become McBain, the older-than-moses death risk who would bring a 3rd Bush term.

This isn't about hardcore partisans turning on the Clintons. It's about a candidate who pissed off many Democrats by campaigning like a Republican. She's resorted to pandering, fear-mongering, race-baiting, and peddling fake outrage.

You're a righty, so it's probably difficult for you to understand. Just imagine how pissed you'd be if a Republican candidate actually ran a campaign of ideas, issues, and reason.

[chriswyse]

Originally Posted by lars

Funny that republicans actually understand the Clintons better than Demms ever did. Demms are just now starting to see..they are in it for the Clintons and the Clintons only.

I don't think that they still understand why she is staying in the race. She is onto plan B which is to damage Obama so he loses in Nov. Then she can begin making her case for 2012 and her message will be 'See...I told you so. I was the better candidiate for the general election"

Demms will likely be fooled again and put her up in 2012. (that is so long as her plan works and Obama goes down in Nov).

I also find it funny how quickly the Dems will turn on one of their own. The Clintons were Gods on Earth not that long ago in the eye's of the Democrats. I never thought I would say it but I think Hillary is a more electable candidate than Barrack. Barrack is not electable. The mainstream media wanted the Dems to win so bad that they forgot to do their job with your candidates. When negative stuff about Barrack started to pop up it was to late to get rid of him. Now you're stuck with an unelectable candidate who's running against the worst Republican in History but someone that truly can say he is non-patisan. Hell he's a democrat. I'm not going to vote for McCain but I bet a bunch of Hillary's Democrats will. Everyone says they want middle of the road. Barrack is far left. McCain is a right leaning Democrat and the most middle of the road candidate in history.

I wish we conservatives had a candidate. You libs have 3.

[GRR Spartan]

lil wolfy just can't stop being wyse.

[TurboSpartan]

Originally Posted by Jack's Smirking Revenge

This isn't about hardcore partisans turning on the Clintons. It's about a candidate who pissed off many Democrats by campaigning like a Republican. She's resorted to pandering, fear-mongering, race-baiting, and peddling fake outrage.

You're a righty, so it's probably difficult for you to understand. Just imagine how pissed you'd be if a Republican candidate actually ran a campaign of ideas, issues, and reason.

I've posted about this before on here. Whenever you don't completely agree with a hardcore partisan (80% of whom are dems on WH), they go into the black and white "you're either with us or against us" mode. Nothing more ironic when than when a dem performs a true Bushism.

Message for hardcore pubs and dems: none of you is any better than the other. You're basically the same people. Just because the dems are turning on Clinton and McCain who they used to love doesn't mean pubs wouldn't put a knife in the back of someone in their way just as quickly. You're all hypocrites. Especially the WH propagandists (take note greenjoker, #1, GRR).

[kaiserpete]

Originally Posted by Jack's Smirking Revenge

This isn't about hardcore partisans turning on the Clintons. It's about a candidate who pissed off many Democrats by campaigning like a Republican. She's resorted to pandering, fear-mongering, race-baiting, and peddling fake outrage.

Oh please.

Yeah, the Democrats never pander, fear-monger, race-bait or peddle fake outrage.

[Cym Jim]

Originally Posted by kaiserpete

Oh please.

Yeah, the Democrats never pander, fear-monger, race-bait or peddle fake outrage.

Ah-ha! - moral equivalence! Gotcha!

(kinda).

[Jack's Smirking Revenge]

Originally Posted by TurboSpartan

I've posted about this before on here. Whenever you don't completely agree with a hardcore partisan (80% of whom are dems on WH), they go into the black and white "you're either with us or against us" mode. Nothing more ironic when than when a dem performs a true Bushism.

I didn't say you're with me or against me. I merely acknowledged the reality that righties don't seem to care when politicians pander, fear-monger, race-bait, or peddle fake outrage.

Also, you're really into the phrase "hardcore partisan". Have you been watching the kind of movies where the actors shove their ideologies down each other's throats?

Message for hardcore pubs and dems: none of you is any better than the other. You're basically the same people. Just because the dems are turning on Clinton and McCain who they used to love doesn't mean pubs wouldn't put a knife in the back of someone in their way just as quickly. You're all hypocrites. Especially the WH propagandists (take note greenjoker, #1, GRR).

I don't see Democrats "turning on" Clinton or McCain. Hillary has used Republican tactics, and McCain has gone from "maverick" to Bush's boot-licker. I didn't love either of them, but I used to have respect for both.

[Jack's Smirking Revenge]

Originally Posted by kaiserpete

Oh please.

Yeah, the Democrats never pander, fear-monger, race-bait or peddle fake outrage.

Since I accused Hillary Clinton (a known Democrat) of using those tactics, your sarcastic response missed the target. For someone who constantly reads lengthy articles about the dangers of brown people, you don't seem to have strong comprehension skills.

[TurboSpartan]

Originally Posted by Jack's Smirking Revenge

I didn't say you're with me or against me. I merely acknowledged the reality that righties don't seem to care when politicians pander, fear-monger, race-bait, or peddle fake outrage.

Well let's see, you spewed a bunch of left wing propaganda and then called me a righty...

[Jack's Smirking Revenge]

Originally Posted by TurboSpartan

Well let's see, you spewed a bunch of left wing propaganda and then called me a righty...

Do you claim that you're not a righty? If you do, your posting history undermines that claim.

[TurboSpartan]

Originally Posted by Jack's Smirking Revenge

Do you claim that you're not a righty? If you do, your posting history undermines that claim.

Since about 80% of the posts on WH are from lefty zealots (Greenjoker, GRR, BobSak, #1, Jack's Smirking Revenge), guess who's going to get picked on most of the time.

I don't think I've ever promoted right-wing ideology on here, just ripped on some fanboys. If anything, I've focused on how unfair some of the things said about Clinton are in the last few months.

[Jack's Smirking Revenge]

Originally Posted by TurboSpartan

Since about 80% of the posts on WH are from lefty zealots (Greenjoker, GRR, BobSak, #1, Jack's Smirking Revenge), guess who's going to get picked on most of the time.

I have no problem being included in that list of posters, all of whom I consider bright people who have independently come to the conclusion that conservatism has failed. If you can't take being picked on, don't post anything stupid.

I don't think I've ever promoted right-wing ideology on here, just ripped on some fanboys. If anything, I've focused on how unfair some of the things said about Clinton are in the last few months.

Rush Limbaugh has also complained about the treatment of Hillary, after about fifteen years of attacking her. It's good that America has non-partisan watchdogs like you and Rush.

[TurboSpartan]

Originally Posted by Jack's Smirking Revenge

I have no problem being included in that list of posters, all of whom I consider bright people who have independently come to the conclusion that conservatism has failed. If you can't take being picked on, don't post anything stupid.

I meant I pick on them, not vice versa.

Rush Limbaugh has also complained about the treatment of Hillary, after about fifteen years of attacking her. It's good that America has non-partisan watchdogs like you and Rush.

See, now I'm rush limbaugh. You NEED to demonize me. If I don't see things your way I have to be the Skeletor to your He-Man. It's pathetic.

[Jack's Smirking Revenge]

Originally Posted by TurboSpartan

I meant I pick on them, not vice versa.

I hadn't noticed; you should try harder.

See, now I'm rush limbaugh. You NEED to demonize me. If I don't see things your way I have to be the Skeletor to your He-Man. It's pathetic.

You seem to have an inflated sense of self-importance. What I'm doing is mocking you, not demonizing you. But if you want to believe you're the love child of Rush Limbaugh and Skeletor, knock yourself out.

[TurboSpartan]

Originally Posted by Jack's Smirking Revenge

You seem to have an inflated sense of self-importance. What I'm doing is mocking you, not demonizing you. But if you want to believe you're the love child of Rush Limbaugh and Skeletor, knock yourself out.

You seem to overestimate your comedic abilities.

[Spartytruth]

Originally Posted by lars

Funny that republicans actually understand the Clintons better than Demms ever did. Demms are just now starting to see..they are in it for the Clintons and the Clintons only.
.

that's because Republicans have superior intelligence. Just look at the high*quality individuals who lead their party.


YOu offical leader is GW now John McCain, your inteelctual leadrs are Dick Cheny and Karl Rove and your spirtual leaders are guys like John Hagee.

Yeah Republicans got it all figured out....