Rezko Convicted: Obama Once Again Shocked to Learn What His Friends Are Actually Like
The Chicago Tribune reports:
A federal jury today convicted developer Antoin “Tony” Rezko of corruption charges for trading on his clout as a top adviser and fundraiser to Gov. Rod Blagojevich.
Rezko’s guilty verdict on 16 of 24 corruption counts could . . . prove a political liability for U.S. Sen. Barack Obama, who once counted Rezko as a friend and fundraiser, as the likely Democratic presidential nominee heads into the general election campaign against Republican John McCain.
“I’m saddened by today’s verdict,” Obama said Wednesday. “This isn’t the Tony Rezko I knew, but now he has been convicted by a jury on multiple charges that once again shine a spotlight on the need for reform. I encourage the General Assembly to take whatever steps are necessary to prevent these kinds of abuses in the future.”
“This isn’t the Tony Rezko I knew.” Reminds me of what Obama said about Rev. Jeremiah Wright:
The person I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago.
Weird how that keeps happening, huh?
For a man with “Judgment to Lead”, he seems remarkably ignorant of the character of his acquaintances … and of rather poor judgment in friends.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/4/2008 @ 6:21 pmI think we need someone who’s a far better assessor of character than this guy Obama. I’m voting McCain.
Michele (b8eee8) — 6/4/2008 @ 6:38 pmObama is more of the old. Chicago machine politics, using the Kennedy family to select he VP, and on and on.
Rezko and Wright speak directly to who Obama is.
Mccain has been in power for so long, and the only brush with any scandal was that Keating 5 scandal of which he was relentlessly investigated by democrats (wanting at least one republican to be implicated) who found him to be squeaky clean.
Obama hadn’t even finished a single year of his Senate tern before running for president, and he has all these crooks and monsters around him. Can people run for office after being around so much slime and with no experience? Obama says: yes we can!
Jem (4cdfb7) — 6/4/2008 @ 6:51 pmJune 2010, Tehran
Don (9ca635) — 6/4/2008 @ 7:09 pmThe president of Iran today claimed credit for the recent attack on Tel Aviv, boasting that it was only the beginning of his campaign to “wipe the Zionist entity off the map.” President Obama, his famous furrowed brow revealing deep concern for world peace, said, “I just don’t understand it. This is not the Mahmoud Ahmedinejad that I knew. He seemed like such a nice guy when I went to visit him.” The president is referring to his famous conference with the Iranian leader shortly after his election, in which they shared a memorable meal at a Hooters in D.C.
Well, “Jimmy Carter II” now has his Burt Lance.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/4/2008 @ 7:11 pmFrom the other side, don’t forget “This is not the Scott McClellan we knew.”
DWPittelli (2e1b8e) — 6/4/2008 @ 7:17 pmThough to be fair, it seems NO ONE knew that Scott McClellan…
It seems everyone but Obama knows the shady side of his friends…
Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec) — 6/4/2008 @ 7:28 pmTwo of the convictions were for money laundering. The trick whereby real estate professional Rezko paid the full $650k asking price for adjoining property (soon to be divided and sold in part to the Obamas), while Barack & Michelle simultaneously pay the same sellers a full $300k less than the asking price for their new house — but everyone promises that “Gee, there wasn’t any collusion and it’s just a coincidence that Rezko didn’t even ask for a discount” — that looks to me like one of the collusive evaluation schemes that are commonly used in money laundering.
Congrats, btw, to U.S. Attorney Pat Fitzgerald and his staff on this conviction.
Beldar (25ee73) — 6/4/2008 @ 7:28 pmFitzgerald found something worth prosecuting … imagine that.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/4/2008 @ 7:36 pmIndeed…
Now can Mr. Fitzgerald get to indicting our Govenor for his involvement with Rezko and influence pandering?
Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec) — 6/4/2008 @ 7:38 pmKey question: will Rezko cut a deal.
By going to trial, he’s really put himself at risk for a very significant sentence. The sentencing guidelines for mail and wire fraud are most significantly influenced by the amount of money involved in the fraud. The more money, the longer the sentence.
By going to trial, Rezko lost any chance of a reduction of his sentence based on “acceptance of responsibility.
The money laundering counts will add time to the mail and wire fraud sentences — and in a curious twist, the longer those underlying fraud sentences are, the greater the additional time will be for money laundering.
Using the math from the amounts alleged in the counts for which he was convicted, the total loss — which need not be “actual loss”, it can be “intended” loss — is around $11 million.
The base offense level for fraud is 7.
A loss of more than $7 million but less than $20 million, increases the offense level by +20.
If the offense involved the use of sophisticated means, the offense level is increased by +2.
These guideline provisions result in an adjusted offense guideline of 29.
As for the money laundering counts, it make a difference whether he was convicted under Sec. 1956 or 1957. Given the nature of the case, I’m guessing it was 1956. If that is correct, then his offense level is increased by +2.
That’s a total of 31.
If he has no prior criminal history, the advisory sentencing guidlines call for a sentence of between 108 and 135 months — that’s 9-12 years.
Its possible that it will end up higher. For example, if the Court finds there were more than 10 victims, the offense level would go up +2.
If more than 50 victims, it would be +4
Some of the victims here were institutions such as pension plans. I’m not sure how the Court will approach that question.
The Court could also increase the amount of the loss by looking at uncharged conduct. If there is sufficient evidence that the uncharged conduct actually took place, the Court could add that conduct to the loss amount as “relevant conduct.”
So, assuming Rezko’s ultimate sentence is 10+ years, what does he do? Cut a deal with Fitzgerald to provide info on other politicians in Chicago?
Or does he keep his mouth shut hoping Obama wins in November?
Is there any possible way Obama would do anything to help Rezko if Obama wins? That would be a heck of a way to start out.
WLS (68fd1f) — 6/4/2008 @ 8:00 pmRezko HAS to be hoping for an Obama win, to get the Pardon…
Otherwise, Gov B. is REALLY in hot water, because I suppose Rezko could give info… And that would be a lovely feather for Fitzgerald’s cap – a sitting Govenor.
And I suppose the Daley Machine itself is open for a few shots with this…
Man, If Fiotzgerald manages to clean house, I’m gonna FORCE him to run for the Senate…
Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec) — 6/4/2008 @ 8:10 pmHouse hunting with mobsters is now off my todo list
EricPWJohnson (d2733c) — 6/4/2008 @ 8:32 pmI have a feeling that Hillary, however she words her “suspension ” of campaign, will still be waiting in the wings for another Obama blow-up-like Rezko making a deal with prosecutors and laying out Obama.
gary fouse
fouse, gary c (7b7c7c) — 6/4/2008 @ 8:32 pmfousesquawk
I want someone to ask Obama if he’s elected will he pledge to retain Fitzgerald as US Attorney in Chicago given Obama’s stated desire to week out corruption at all levels of government?
It would really put him on the spot. How can lib dems object to Fitzgerald — he’s the guy who tagged Scooter, and suggested that Cheney was in on the dirty deed.
The fact that he’s got a bunch of Dems in Illinois now in his sights simply means he’s a non-partisan jailer.
Imagine the screams of agony behind closed doors in Chicago if Obama was to say he would keep Fitzgerald in place.
Since Fitzgerald would have to be re-confirmed byt he Senate, it would be interesting to see whether Durbin tried to deep-six his confirmation.
WLS (68fd1f) — 6/4/2008 @ 8:33 pmgary fouse — Hillary will keep her delegates in her corner until the convention. All she needs is a reversal of about 100 superdelegates — and they can change their mind anytime up to the actual vote on the nominee at the convention.
WLS (68fd1f) — 6/4/2008 @ 8:35 pmThe Farrakhan Flunkie has no friends who aren’t criminals, terrorists, traitors, or in some way actively engaged in destroying the US.
If he gets elected, it will be time for a violent counter-revolution.
j curtis (c84b9e) — 6/4/2008 @ 8:48 pmWill Rezko reveal involvement by Obama. Will their be insinuations of involvement, true or false? Will we see Obama facing the possibility of conviction or conviction itself. Swimming with parasitic slime molds does tend to dirty one.
Alan Kellogg (ccd0eb) — 6/4/2008 @ 9:47 pmAfter seeing the utter corruption of the Sandy Berger prosecution, or the dropping of the Jim McDougal investigation, I have a hard time seeing the Bush justice department doing a good job here. I think Rezeko will be offered silver or lead, and keeping his mouth shut about Obama will be key. I think Bush et al will help bury any anti-Obama testimony, and probably discourage it so heavily that it never takes place. Too bad Bush has shown that he is willing to trade away so much for so little.
Prediction:
martin (cd5d90) — 6/4/2008 @ 10:40 pmRezeko will give evidence against Obama the day after Berger submits to the lie detector (never +1). Or he will end up with the same prison Dr. that McDougal had if he shows an inclination to do so. OTW, if Obama gets elected, count on a pardon.
If he gets elected, it will be time for a violent counter-revolution.
No. But after your drivel about McCain the other day, this crap should not surprise anyone.
Patterico – Posts like this are just a distraction from the important work Baracky needs to do, and is not helping Michelle keep fresh fruit in the house for their children.
JD (75f5c3) — 6/5/2008 @ 5:27 amBHO for a short timer in the Chicago Way has impressed many big time Illinois political crooks with his ability to get down with the fixer’s and gin up some serious “campaign” cash. Check out RezkoWatch.com for the 6 part story on the birthing of Bammie and his storied quick study in the Chicago Way….he is as dirty as any scumbag politician.
Moultrie (4c737d) — 6/5/2008 @ 6:08 amToday’s LA Times handles the verdict as follows:
–Page 13;
–Headline refers to Rezko as an “ex-Obama ally” and;
–Absolutely no mention of the weird land deal that occurred between the Obama/Rezko spouses resulting in the transfer of land to the Obama household.
This is not the Tony Rezko that I knew!
Alta Bob (53a695) — 6/5/2008 @ 6:46 amI’m beginning to wonder if there is anything j curtis could say to get himself banned from this site if he wanted to.
Xrlq (b71926) — 6/5/2008 @ 6:50 amI am beginning to wonder why this site has so many crybabies calling for people to be banned/silenced? Were you the sort of kids who ran to your mommy with snot running down your faces every time someone made you mad?
Quite frankly, a debate on what we should do if a real Manchurian candidate was elected would be a good thing, although the closer to tyranny we get in the US, the stiffer the punishment for calling it such.
martin (cd5d90) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:03 amThere’s a punishment involved for calling a candidate a Manchurian candidate?
I mean, to an extent you’re right: the derision of your peers is a form of punishment.
But I hadn’t noticed the arrest and/or illegal detention of people who denounce politicians in those terms.
aphrael (db0b5a) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:12 amDid you guys happen to notice that McCain had to fire like 5 guys from his campaign a few weeks ago because they were doing awesome things like lobbying for oppressive military regimes in Burma?
At least Obama never tapped Rezko to run his campaign, right?
Levi (76ef55) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:13 amAnd that’s the same as being buddies, doing favors, and claiming total ignorance regarding publicly spoken of acts how, oh Tiny Dancer?
At least McCain acknowledged the wrong-doing, as opposed to Obama who seems congenitally incapable of being a decent judge of character.
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:16 amLevi – Will you vote for McCain when Barack drops out?
This sounds exactly like the Barack nobody knows.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:19 amI thought one of the unforgivable things that Obama did regarding Rev. Wright was give him a position on his campaign?
Yeah, but only after a cyclone hits the country and the military dictatorship there starts blocking off aid to their citizens. All of a sudden, it became uncool to have guys running your campaign that used to be the public relations arm for those deuchebags in this country.
Levi (76ef55) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:25 amWhat?
Levi (76ef55) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:26 amI find it interesting that Levi thinks we should talk to all oppressive military regimes regardless of what they do, but that they should not be able to hire anyone to do their talking for them.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:28 amWell, yes. What’s wrong with that?
Levi (76ef55) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:30 amAt least we KNOW John McCain LOVES our great country and almost died defending us! That alone gets my vote!
Obama’s love of our country is in DOUBT based on all his anti-american/criminal associates all these 20 plus years: (Rezco,Ayers,Dorn,Wright,Phlager) And ALL from Chicago!
Go to hellnobama.com Tons of info!
arlan (ef2b65) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:31 amI find it interesting that Levi thinks we should talk to all oppressive military regimes regardless of what they do, but that they should not be able to hire anyone to do their talking for them.
Well, yes. What’s wrong with that?
Levi – Hugo Chavez has hired most of Democrats in Congress. I guess that would be wrong under you philosophy.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:44 amMaybe Barack can blame his relationship with Rezko on staffers who didn’t vet him adequately. It’s not like all Rezko’s crimes occurred after Obama got to the Senate or anything, though. Obama has successfully used this defense many times. He must have shitty judgement in hiring staffers too.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:47 amHugo Chavez isn’t starving his own people in the wake of a freak disaster and leads one of the world’s leading suppliers of oil. McCain’s guy was putting a happy face on a Saddam-like regime.
Do you see the difference?
And remind me, what is it exactly that Republicans hate so much about Chavez anyway? That he makes fun of this retarded President you’ve all done so much backwards bending for?
Levi (76ef55) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:55 amYou ARE judged by the company you keep. Barack Obama WILL be judged on election day.
Thank you for your time.
The Outlander (18f9fc) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:57 amJust shitty judgement, period!
Another Drew (8018ee) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:57 am“this retarded President”
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 6/5/2008 @ 8:58 amAnd where are your degrees from and what accomplishments do you have on YOUR resume again? Model UN club treasurer and assistant towel manager don’t count.
As if the only people who don’t like Chavez are members of the Republican party in the U.S. Last I checked that membership roll didn’t include Juan Carlos of Spain and the majority of the educated and prosperous class of Venezuela who, at least the one’s I’ve met, spit the name Chavez and call him a “dog.”
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:01 amFirst off, Hugo is doing exactly what Dems accuse him of doing domesticly (totalitarian control), and besides that his country’s “oil” is of such poor quality there are few countries that are willing to buy it. We’re one of them, and we’re a big one. He might cut us off, but there are few place to sell that new surplus…
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:02 amColombia isn’t terribly fond of Hugo either, I don’t believe… 🙂
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:05 am“Colombia isn’t terribly fond of Hugo either, I don’t believe… :)”
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:08 amAnd in turn the Democrats in Congress don’t seem to be particularly fond of Colombia.
Funny how that works.
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:10 amThe same shitty judgment that allowed him, a black man, to defeat Hillary Clinton and raise more money than anyone has ever raised in a primary campaign in a completely new, revolutionary way?
Yeah, go ahead and run on ‘shitty judgment.’ That will work.
Levi (76ef55) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:13 amYou first.
Levi (76ef55) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:15 amAnd remind me, what is it exactly that Republicans hate so much about Chavez anyway?
Levi – Unlike you, I usually only claim to speak for myself. We can start off with Hugo’s demonstrated support for terrorism, particularly the terrorists supporting the violent overthrow of his neighbor. Barack had a little gaffe over this last week if you recall. Aren’t there Hezbollah bases in Venezuela as well Levi. Hugo also has a pattern of suppressing free speech in Venezuela and jailing dissidents. I also am not very impressed by his nationalization of various industries.
What do you like about the man Levi, his chewing of coca leaves and use of thuggery to stay in power?
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:15 am“…primary campaign in a completely new, revolutionary way?…”
I suppose Levi has forgotten the internet campaign of Howard Dean in ’04?
Another Drew (8018ee) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:17 amBut then, he was just in HeadStart when that happened.
So, the educated of Venezuela (at least the ones you’ve met) call Chavez a dog, and that’s good enough for you, but the educated of America, holed up in their ‘liberal indoctrination centers’ (colleges) call Bush one of the biggest disasters in our history, and they’ve got no credibility?
Levi (76ef55) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:18 am“The same shitty judgment that allowed him, a black man, to defeat Hillary Clinton and raise more money than anyone has ever raised in a primary campaign in a completely new, revolutionary way?”
And the above says exactly WHAT about his qualifications to be president as opposed to his popularity among a bunch of guilty liberal morons and brain washed America-haters?
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:19 amYou don’t say ?! Brilliant observation there, Levi.
Yeah, go ahead and run on ’shitty judgment.’ That will work.
Too bad Baracky is already running on that, which seems to fly in the face of everyone he has come in close contact with in the past.
Don Rumsfeld (75f5c3) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:20 amYou called the President “retarded”.
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:22 amI asked you a simple question.
You didn’t answer it but instead you say “You first.”
Now you’re doing exactly what you’ve been hemming and hawing about EVERYONE else doing.
The air really is thinner in big sky country, population 1 moron.
Did you guys happen to notice that McCain had to fire like 5 guys from his campaign a few weeks ago because they were doing awesome things like lobbying for oppressive military regimes in Burma?
At least Obama never tapped Rezko to run his campaign, right?
So, it appears you would be extremely harsh on Ted Kennedy for his clandestine attempts to assist Mother Russia while President Reagan was working to tear down that wall…right?
And clearly, the fraud of the Winter Soldier lie-fest bothers you intensely, as does secretly meeting with a brutal and oppressive military regime fighting against us at the time by John Kerry, right?
Because we know you leftists have such deep and abiding loyalty and patriotism…as well as consistently applied principles.
Or…should we expect you to defend every leftist regime over your own country? By the way, what do YOU think of Hugo Chavez? And Castro? And the nut in the pajamas in North Korea? And Hamas? And Ahmadinejad?
If they are against us…how can you be anything but for them…right?
cfbleachers (4040c7) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:26 amHe’s pioneered an entirely new way to finance a campaign that completely blows away all previous methods and that engages an unprecedented number of individual people. Are you telling me that you don’t think that says something about his problem-solving skills, his organization skills, and his ability to appoint smart, creative, competent people to important positions?
Maybe if your measure of what makes a good President was a little more sophisticated than which church someone goes to and how much stupid jewelry they wear on their lapels, you’d appreciate the value of being able to do something like this, but that’s the way the world works, I guess. Republicans want to hold popularity contests, liberals want to solve problems.
Levi (76ef55) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:27 amWe are still waiting for Levi’s proof that we torture people as a matter of routine. Or President Bush mistaking the Constitution for Charmin. Or evidence of one freedom or Right being denied Levi. Or that everyone hates Republicans. Or that Republicans believe all liberals are fags (your words, not mine). Or any evidence of any of his vomit he spews.
Don Rumsfeld (75f5c3) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:28 am“So, the educated of Venezuela (at least the ones you’ve met) call Chavez a dog, and that’s good enough for you”
I made an observation based upon actual interaction with real people from the country in question to counteract the belief that Chavez is the revered man -of-the-people figure beloved by the citizens. I realize up in your one-horse 99% whitebread backwater that you probably meet nobody other than lily white Montanans so you aren’t afforded the opportunity to actually engage with other people besides your lunch room monitor and your fake internet girlfriend.
the educated of America, holed up in their ‘liberal indoctrination centers’ (colleges) call Bush one of the biggest disasters in our history, and they’ve got no credibility?
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:30 amI don’t recall using that term to describe colleges nor do I recall every single member of the educated class in America referring to Bush that way. I wouldn’t make that claim because its a rather sweeping generalization. Maybe when you go to college in 8? 9? years you’ll get past your stereotyping that everyone in college is “educated” and that they all believe the same thing about Bush.
What do you want me to say? I have Ph.D in astrophysics and neurobiology. In my free time I heroically run into flaming buildings to save children’s puppies. I invented the cotton gin. I traveled back in time in a time machine of my own design to tell Christopher Columbus to discover America. That enough?
Seriously dude, asking people for credentials on the internet is utterly pointless. I’m not here to talk about me. I can do that by myself.
Levi (76ef55) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:32 am“his ability to appoint smart, creative, competent people to important positions”
Who are these people? Name them and why they fit these categories. No “well anyone would have to be better than Bush’s appointments.” You made this claim that this is Obama’s strong point. Now back it up.
“Republicans want to hold popularity contests, liberals want to solve problems.”
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:34 amThis is almost as hilarious as the statement about the A’s on the papers on the unread books. Remember simply wanting to solve problems makes you better.
“Educated Americans”?
In the US, liberals have two main sources of support. Those with post-grad education, and those with very little education at all. That would be the slaves/rejects looking for a handout, and the dingbats who had to get graduate degrees because their undergrad degrees are worthless, and who harbor a latent fantasies of being “Philosopher-kings”. Not that I look down on grad degrees, but a M.Ed is useless and easy (probably the #1 grad degree), and I cannot imagine all those liberal arts MA’s have anything like the rigour of a BS in engineering or hard science.
Besides, since when is right and wrong a popularity contest?
martin (cd5d90) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:34 amLevi, do the following:
Take any action proposed by Sen Obama, be it Healthcare, Iraq, tax reform, whatever, and detail for me not only what his stance is, but how he intends to make it happen.
In the case of Iraq, you must also detail his proposed actions should Iraq collapse upon out sudden withdrawl.
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:35 amFrom what I understand, Sen. Obama is half white, and mostly of Arabic descent. He is very little (genetically speaking) African.
I don’t profess to know any more than what I have read…but, I suspect I could get A’s and B’s on any paper I wrote on his ancestry…without having read anything. Or so I have been told someplace.
Sen. Obama, from the way the campaign played out…won…because people didn’t know who he really was, until he had amassed a large lead.
He lost 7 out of 10 of the last primaries. She had a larger popular vote. He lost virtually every state that will be in play. And the vetting process isn’t over yet.
He lost to a weakened candidate who had ZERO chance to win a huge portion of the Democratic base…because the media was in the bag for Obama and because he was going to garner nearly 90% of the black democratic electorate no matter what she did. Two factors that nearly ensured him the nomination…and he limped home anyway.
The rigged game with the media will still be in play in the General Election…but, the voting base won’t turn on those two factors nearly as neatly.
McCain has a shot, in a year that the Democrats would have had to shoot themselves repeatedly in the foot to lose this White House. I believe they may have done precisely that.
cfbleachers (4040c7) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:35 am“Seriously dude, asking people for credentials on the internet is utterly pointless.”
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:36 amSince you so freely declare the President of the United States “retarded” I was just dying to know what it is about you that places you on such a higher level of intellect, as if we haven’t been treated to it already. Of course you have nothing to say on this note because as they say “you ain’t got shit.”
M.Ed?
Mom’s got one of those, Martin, though I’l admit she’s a rare Republican in a sea of democrats…
She taught 5th grade for ages, and has moved on to other teaching/stuff in her elementary school.
And no, I don’t recal it having been all that easy.
Though I suspect all those Post-grad degrees were gotten because actually goingout and working in the real word is, you know, hard…
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:37 amI’m not here to talk about me. I can do that by myself.
And do you answer? I mean, when you talk about you to yourself, what do you say back? Do you ever mistake any of us here for those voices in your conversations?
cfbleachers (4040c7) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:37 amI saw this after my last post: “Republicans want to hold popularity contests, liberals want to solve problems.”
Isn’t this called “cognative Dissonence”(SP)?
The liberal philosophy is that people should be manipulated by the media, then polled, and if the poll results match the socialist agenda, the results of the poll should become law. Liberals are the cowards who “don’t want to make them angry”, with “them” being Nazis (WWII, prior to the attack on Russia), the USSR during the cold war, and now the terrorists and Iran. Liberals are the cowards that gave us the “just give them what they want” plan for dealing with hijackings and robberies.
Levi, you are mentally ill, or a pathological lier to say that it is the right that wants to run the country on popularity contests.
martin (cd5d90) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:40 amLevi’s grasps reality with all the gripping strength of a tadpole.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:44 amLevi – It’s your turn now. Please explain the wonders of Hugo Chavez to us. Please explain wht democrats in this country venerate him. You claim you are here to debate. Let us know why he is one of the left’s idols.
By the way, I have serious doubts that Obama came up with his fund raising scheme himself, moron.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:47 am“He’s pioneered an entirely new way to finance a campaign that completely blows away all previous methods…Maybe if your measure of what makes a good President was a little more sophisticated…”
The ability to get people to unload their wallets because you sell them a lot of lofty rhetoric is “sophisticated?”
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:47 amSPQR – Why do you hate tadpoles? Racists. None of this is helping Michelle keep fresh fruit in her house. For the kids!
JD (5f0e11) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:55 am“My Name is African Swahili” – NOT EXACTLY, your name is
Arabic and ‘Baraka’ (from which Barack came) means
‘blessed’ in that language. Hussein is also Arabic and so is Obama.
Barack Hussein Obama is not half black. If elected, he
would be the first Arab-American President, not the first black
President. Barack Hussein Obama is 50% Caucasian from his mother’s side and 43.75% Arabic and 6.25% African Negro from his father’s side. While Barack Hussein Obama’s father was from Kenya, his father’s family
was mainly Arabs.. Barack Hussein Obama’s father was only 12.5% African
Negro and 87.5% Arab (his father’s birth certificate even states
he’s Arab, not African Negro
(from “Dean” at pajamas media)
cfbleachers (4040c7) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:57 amThe people that ran his campaign. There’s too many of them to even list, which is part of the brilliance of his campaign strategy. Lots of credit goes to David Axelrod, and there’s another guy whose name I can’t remember, for coming up with the sort of grassroots-level organization that exploited locality and the internet to generate such an insane amount of cash and voter turnout.
If Obama recognized the genius in these guys and had the balls to take a risk in trying something new, then that good judgment and intuitiveness will carry over to his Presidency when it comes time to hand out Cabinet jobs, right? There’s not gonna be any horse lawyers running the disaster relief agencies, you know what I mean?
But is what I said not true? Don’t Republicans insist that Barack Obama should not be President basically because of the people that he hangs out with and what he’s wearing?
Levi (76ef55) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:57 am#40, #54
madmax333 (4b7ce8) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:57 amFrom what I have been told by a Venezuelan ex-pat who lives in Miami, the Venezuelans who fled from Chavez’s rule hate him with a passion and refer to him as “monkey”. The one who communicates with me has Jewish family that fled from Hungary in ’56. Chavez doesn’t like Jews; naturally the Hollywood left and Mother Sheehan worship Hugo, as does Jimmuh Carter.
I figure that Obama would try to pull the same crap as Hugo vis a vis govt. control of oil and redistribution of wealth to the “needy” class (the generational welfare complainers).
Btw, Venezuleans refer to Castro as the Gorilla and are aware of how his marxism has destroyed Cuban economy. Of course fatass Mikey Moore would say Cuban has great medical care but won’t himself move, along with Kevin Spacey, Naomi Campbell, et al, to that tropcal paradise.
And those Caracas refugees that hate Monkey Boy are not Bush lovers either. They seem to think Urkel will be the answer to America woes. They, in fact, blame Bush for Chavez’s ascent to power and for later not removing Hugo. Hahaha. As if lefists would vote to remove or interfere with Chavez, who by the way supports all matters of Mideastern terrorists in his provinces near Colombia. I’d be down with seizing Venezulean oil fields, which Hugo’s cronies have run into the ground. I’m sure Venezuelans here and in Caracas would welcome that as would Oliver Stone, Pelosi, reid and the rest of the brain dead left.
Maybe when Levi calls someone a retard, he is complimenting them, as that is exponentially more intelligent than he has shown himself to be.
JD (5f0e11) — 6/5/2008 @ 9:58 amLevi – Who we chooses to associate himself with is most certainly not one of Baracky’s strong suits. the reasons you listed are but 2 of many reasons why we do not support him.
Cfbleachers – it is a racist distraction to even state Baracky’s middle name. It is a racist distraction to even type the words middle and name.
JD (5f0e11) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:07 amThe people that ran his campaign. There’s too many of them to even list,
Read: I don’t know anyone, so I’m blowing smoke to pretend I do…can I get an A or a B from you guys, because it is clear I haven’t read anything.
which is part of the brilliance of his campaign strategy. Lots of credit goes to David Axelrod, and there’s another guy whose name I can’t remember, for coming up with the sort of grassroots-level organization that exploited locality and the internet to generate such an insane amount of cash and voter turnout.
Axelrod is a local yokel out of Chicago and the grassroots campaign wasn’t brilliant, it was a necessity because there was no big money in his pocket. They didn’t do anything that was of geniu;s quality, they knew they had tiny donors, Tiny Dancer…and had to make do with them.
It turned out, that Hillary was asleep at the switch, Sen. Obama didn’t get vetted until the Rev. Wright tapes…and by then, his bandwagon had a lot of people jumping on. It was luck, not skill.
If Obama recognized the genius in these guys and had the balls to take a risk in trying something new, then that good judgment and intuitiveness will carry over to his Presidency when it comes time to hand out Cabinet jobs, right?
Like Malley, Power, Wright, Ayers, Rezco…that kind of intuitiveness? LOL, he’s fired more people BEFORE he even had the nomination than most sitting Presidents do in their first four years. What a joke.
There’s not gonna be any horse lawyers running the disaster relief agencies, you know what I mean?
No, but you can bet there will be anti-Semites running the peace talks with Israel and their enemies in the Middle East. You know what I mean?
cfbleachers (4040c7) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:09 amThe hilarious statement was “Republicans want to win popularity contests. Liberals want to solve problems.”
Oh and “want” they do, don’t they. They do so much “wanting” it truly is a credit to their entire philosophy.
“If Obama recognized the genius in these guys and had the balls to take a risk in trying something new, then that good judgment and intuitiveness will carry over to his Presidency when it comes time to hand out Cabinet jobs, right?”
Again. No. He managed to find people who can shill his rhetoric and get people to give up money. How exactly does this translate into picking good Secretaries of State, Defense, Commerce, Agriculture, Attorney General, etc?
“Don’t Republicans insist that Barack Obama should not be President basically because of the people that he hangs out with and what he’s wearing?”
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:10 amNo.
I pick Iraq.
Obama wants to get out, like 2/3 of Americans want to. Unfortunately it as an entirely un-winnable situation, it was a bad idea to begin with and has only been compounded by hundreds of mistakes over a very long five years. President Obama will have almost nothing to work with. He says he will start moving brigades out but refuses to do so regardless of the whatever the current situation is.
I know that’s not much of a plan, but again, President Bush has set this thing up so poorly that it’s literally impossible to see a good way to end it. But that’s what the important difference will be in having Barack in the White House, he recognizes the Iraq war as a bad idea from the beginning and understands the importance of getting us out of it, whereas Republicans think this is the best idea they’ve ever had and want to just continue it indefinitely.
Hahah, that’s real fair! Nobody was asking George Bush to plan for the contingencies and unintended consequences of starting the war, an oversight that has made this thing entire magnitudes worse than it probably would have been, but you demand that Barack have those things all laid out for you ahead of time because he wants to fix your guys’ screw-ups. And you’re supposed to be the foreign policy experts?
That said, Barack isn’t going to just abandon the country and let a bunch of people die, he’s talking about a phased withdrawal as conditions permit. The key difference here is that he will be focused on finding a way to withdraw, as opposed to focusing on finding ways to stay.
Levi (76ef55) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:11 amThe character’s he got helping his choose his VP are a real prize as well.
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:11 amSorry, JD. However I was QUOTING something I read, since I read it though…can I still get an A or a B, even though I quoted it correctly?
From now on though, I will not write fully ANY of his names, I will simply use some from each.
BA H AMA. BAHAMA. Who knows, maybe he’s Arawak.
cfbleachers (4040c7) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:17 am“Obama wants to get out, like 2/3 of Americans want to.”
How does this making getting out necessarily the best policy?
“Unfortunately it as an entirely un-winnable situation,”
Proof?
“it was a bad idea to begin with and has only been compounded by hundreds of mistakes over a very long five years.”
Why? What are those mistakes?
“President Bush has set this thing up so poorly that it’s literally impossible to see a good way to end it. ”
Hahaha. But…but…Obama is a GENIUS!!!! He can do anything!! His ability to pick amazing people of talent and genius that won’t suck like Bush people will get him through anything! Look how much money he raised!!!
“Republicans think this is the best idea they’ve ever had and want to just continue it indefinitely.”
Where is there any proof to back up this colossally retarded hyperbole.
“Nobody was asking George Bush to plan for the contingencies and unintended consequences of starting the war, an oversight that has made this thing entire magnitudes worse than it probably would have been, but you demand that Barack have those things all laid out for you ahead of time because he wants to fix your guys’ screw-ups.”
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:19 amHaha so in other words, Obama is completely excused from having to make up for the mistakes and make better decisions when he gets the job?
So after all that verbiage, Levi had nothing responsive to the question of “how”.
Typical of the Obama supporters, they’ve lapped up Obama’s vapid rhetoric, can’t find a crumb of substance in it, and can’t figure out how dumb that makes them look.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:19 amJack, the fact that people are judging Bush’s performance in Iraq on standards that every wartime Democratic president of the last 100 years would fail is pretty amusing too.
By Levi’s standards, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson … all utter failures even worse than Bush.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:20 amBBBBBBZZZZZZTTTTTTTT No surprise that Levi leads with a lie, and then builds from there. Baracky’s position is not shared by 2/3 of Americans. Immediate surrender and withdrawal has not even proven to be popular with Congressional Dems. It would have been closer to true that 100 percent of Americans want the troops to come home, when they have finished their job. It is not unwinnable, even San Fran Nan is coming around on that one. To be sure, if your plan is surrender, then it cannot be won. Levi would have surrendered after D-day. Too hard.
JD (5f0e11) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:21 amJD, Levi would have surrendered after Kasserine Pass.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:21 am“I know that’s not much of a plan, but again, President Bush has set this thing up so poorly that it’s literally impossible to see a good way to end it.”
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:24 amObama ’08 — Anything I Can’t Do Is All Bush’s Fault.
You even lie about Baracky’s positions. It is not a conditional withdrawal. He says he will do so even if the Generals recommend otherwise. So, he is going to abandon them, on his time frame, against the advise of the Generals.
JD (5f0e11) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:28 amJD – Didn’t Samantha Power, of the Where Are They Now category, get thrown beneath the bus’s rear axle because (among other things) she suggested that Obama’s stirring, leg-thrill inducing rhetoric, of “ending the war in Iraq” was just a ruse to you know earn money and votes? Thus basically relegating one of his key campaign components to the full of shit bin?
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:31 ambut Jack! That can not be! Sen Obama is not the old-style politician! He’s different!!!
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:35 amJust like he did with NAFTA and the Canadians.
C’mon, Levi. How do you suggest you negotiate with people whose stated objective is the complete destruction of Israel?
JD (75f5c3) — 6/5/2008 @ 10:47 am“…liberals want to solve problems.”
Who you kiddin’! Libber-als are f****** entropy in a
Mad Vlad (a3bbf8) — 6/5/2008 @ 11:12 ampair of pants!
C’mon, Levi. How do you suggest you negotiate with people whose stated objective is the complete destruction of Israel?
You meet with them. You listen carefully to what they have to say. You smile pleasantly and give them your point of view. You reason with them and fully explain that you appreciate their value as human beings, from an ancient civilization, and their worth to the future of this world. Then you drop a couple of dozen MIRVs on them.
nk (be56c0) — 6/5/2008 @ 11:26 ami am disgusted by what the democractic party has done to women -not jkust hilary but hwo they allowed her to be made fun of the sexist jokes innundos -hullo chris matthews– i woudl never vote for obama
woman hear me roar (162e1c) — 6/5/2008 @ 11:31 amnk is a warmonger.
#92 is an idiot.
JD (75f5c3) — 6/5/2008 @ 11:39 amI wish Rezko would buy the lot next to me and allow me to use it as part of my property.
JD (75f5c3) — 6/5/2008 @ 11:42 am“I pick Iraq. Obama wants to get out, like 2/3 of Americans want to. Unfortunately it as an entirely un-winnable situation.”
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 6/5/2008 @ 11:42 amLevi thinks that he can hit-and-run with statements like this and demand that others answer his questions?
The Rezko that Baracky knows raises money, and buys vacant lots next door to his house.
Every single clause of that assertion laden pile of cow dung is premised on a lie. Obama wants to surrender. 2/3 of Americans do not support Baracky’s position. We are winning.
JD (75f5c3) — 6/5/2008 @ 11:54 amNo, JD, she is perfectly right. The Democratic Party totally disrespected Hillary, and all women (who BTW happen to constitute the majority of its base).
nk (be56c0) — 6/5/2008 @ 11:56 amLevi – You haven’t answered the question of why the left venerates Hugo Chavez yet. Are you looking up the answers or have you taken your ball and gone home?
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/5/2008 @ 12:24 pmDemocrats hate WOMYN !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I am womyn, hear me ROWR (75f5c3) — 6/5/2008 @ 12:25 pmSPQR – “By Levi’s standards, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson … all utter failures even worse than Bush.”
Oh no way. You see he KNOWS that Bush is the Worst President Ever. He carefully analyzed the policies and decisions of every President and compared the outcomes and results of the decisions that were made during every administration from Washington to Tyler to Arthur to Taft to Harding to Bush. Just like his assertion on another thread that he KNOWS for a FACT that Mukasey is THE worst Attorney General ever, that every policy decision that has been made at every level by virtue of the fact that they took place in the Bush administration makes them “WORST EVER”. Hamburgers in the Deparment of the Interior cafeteria? WORST ever under Bush. Lines waiting to tour the Capitol? WORST EVER under Bush. It’s a very obvious formula you see. You don’t even have to not-read a book about it and get an A on a test on that book to get it.
Jack Klompus (cf3660) — 6/5/2008 @ 12:41 pmThe entire question is absurd.
It’s patently clear that James Buchanan, the only President to have presided over the dissolution of the Union, is the worst president ever.
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 6/5/2008 @ 12:54 pmNo. Chimpy McHitlerBurton is the worst. He forced womyn into backalley abortions and started a war because his feelings got hurt.
I am womyn, hear me ROWR (75f5c3) — 6/5/2008 @ 1:14 pmNo, it’s Bush, because Olberman told him so…
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 6/5/2008 @ 1:16 pmJack, you are wrong. Lincoln started a war over lies. He claimed he did it over preserving the union and then a few years later slipped in the whole thing about freeing the slaves. Very deceptive. He should have been impeached.
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/5/2008 @ 1:19 pmThank god they killed him. He deserved it, for being a republican…
Scott Jacobs (fa5e57) — 6/5/2008 @ 1:33 pm#102 thank god bush overturned abortion rights and forced women into back alley abortions. The abortion inudustry, like big oil, makes way too much money and some of that comes from neocon taxes paid. At least libs have blacks convinced that abortion is good even though it cuts down on future liberal voters (even the arugula/latte sipping white ones).
Yes, the iraqi war was both bushs’ obsession. We have managed to confiscate all that Iraqi oil for ourselves and been able to flaunt international conventions and human rights by torturing and slaughtering millions aso-called terrorists and innocent children and women. I suspect we have likely stolen many Iraqi body parts for use by the evil worldwide Joo conspiracy. I have it on good Pali authority that Israeli Joos dine on Pali kids. Oh, the horror. And don’t dare tell me Arafish was a terrorist and cared not for his people. Afterall the esteemed Nobel Committee did award him a Peace Prize as they also to perhaps the best President of all time, Jimmy Carter (when you consider all the ramifications of hopeful future dismantling of the Zionist cabal and its influence with the dastardly neocons ruining the USA).
madmax333 (57c80e) — 6/5/2008 @ 1:43 pmWymen who roar as the majority sex have it in their power to change everything and stop the imperialistic warmongering that is harming the planet. Vote for Luap Nor and see the Constitution that Bush II wiped his arse with restored. I also agree about that 1/16 Negro-wannabe Urkel dissing women. I pray that libs will see the light and, if they won’t give Hillary what is rightfully earned and due her, at least put who should have been POTUS for the past 7 1/2 years, the Great Nobel Peace winner/champion of agw/collector of money from apolitical monks where there was no controlling legal authority to dissuade it/Academy award winner/emmy winning and overall awesome inventor of internet and genius Fat Albert Gore. anddon’t forget Tipper too. Remember Al actually did have the most votes in 2000. Too bad those redneck asshats in tenn. prevented an electoral college win and those lameass old Hebrew snowbirds in Palm Beach vote for Pat Buchanan.
I’m hoping the libertarian egotist Barr won’t throw Ga. and N.C. to Urkel’s column though.
Mr. Changey Hope has impeccable judgment. Again.
Vermont Neighbor (2464ca) — 6/5/2008 @ 1:50 pmOh man, what a thread.
Even those on his own side are mocking Mr. “You don’t have to read something to know its contents. I’ve gotten A’s on papers I’ve written and tests I’ve taken about books I’ve never read” Sunny.
Paul (90f626) — 6/5/2008 @ 6:19 pm108 – Forever Changes by Love, More by Pink Floyd, Touch of Evil by Welles, Radical Chic by Tom Wolfe, Live Oak Beer, and that quote by Levi are some of the pleasures in life I can revisit time and again and have them never get old.
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/5/2008 @ 6:23 pmWho is on my side?
Levi (76ef55) — 6/5/2008 @ 6:34 pmHere we go again. more boring talk…..sigh…
love2008 (a6320b) — 6/5/2008 @ 6:44 pmAphreal is qute “Democrat”, and he’s taken you to the woodshed several times. It was hillarious, and it went completely over your head.
As do most things, I’d wager, Tiny Dancer…
Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec) — 6/5/2008 @ 6:51 pmLevi – I’m waiting. Why do democrats venerate Hugo Chavez?
daleyrocks (d9ec17) — 6/5/2008 @ 7:45 pmDaleyrocks, worship of leftwing thugs is the sine qua non of liberalism. They don’t know why, they just know that they do.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/5/2008 @ 7:48 pm113 – throw that one in the ever growing inbox of TPS reports left unanswered like that string of epithets about Bush’s having no respect for citizens, foreigners, taxpayers, the military, senior citizens, minorities, etc. etc., for “wiping his ass” with the Constitution, for the war being “completely unwinnable”, for the magical ability to get A’s on tests on unread books,…
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/5/2008 @ 7:55 pmWho is on my side?
Mr. Sunny, read #101.
You belittled Aphrael’s approach to debate on the most recent Gay Marriage thread…even asking him “Are you sure you are a Democrat?”
In return, he schooled you on several subjects you brought up, and you didn’t even reaize it.
Paul (90f626) — 6/6/2008 @ 3:37 amActually, i’m mocking both sides.
I don’t like the administration of President Bush. I suspect he would be a good guy to go golfing and bbqing with, but I think his presidency has been bad for the country, bad for the republican party, bad for the conservative movement, and bad for the world.
So I can’t really stand with those who think he’s been a good president.
That said, to call it the worst Presidency in the history of the country is beyond pushing it. That’s saying that he’s done a worse job than the guy who would have been impeached for corrupting the political process had he not resigned; worse than the guy who presided over the start of the great depression; worse than the guy who essentially switched parties while in office and almost destroyed the party which had elected him; and worse than the guy who presided over the dissolution of the union.
I suppose it’s possible that fifty years from now historians will look back on President Bush and see his follies as being comparable to those; but I think it’s so unlikely as to not be worth talking about.
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 6/6/2008 @ 10:49 amaphrael – and that’s why you’re a pleasant person to debate, disagree with, agree with, etc. and all that despite being from New Jersey too?! haha oof cheap shot!
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/6/2008 @ 10:51 amJack Klompus: oddly enough, I don’t claim to be from New Jersey. I was born in Texas, lived in New Jersey from the age of about a month through the age of 6, then lived in Texas again, and have been in California since I was 8.
So i’ll freely claim to be both a Californian and a Texan as appropriate, but New Jersey has nothing on me. 🙂
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 6/6/2008 @ 11:15 amSPQR, at #81: technically speaking I’m a supporter of Sen. Obama. I voted for him in California’s primary, and I’m likely to vote for him in November.
But note: my vote for him in February was explicitly a vote against Sen. Clinton; while I had been impressed with her last summer, her behavior throughout the fall and winter convinced me that I don’t trust her to put anything ahead of her own perceived interest, including her integrity. I thought Sen. Obama was a good speaker, but also that I knew not what he believes — something I still think is true today; as far as I can tell, he functions as a bit of a Rorschach test. What people believe he believes says more about them, IMO, than it does about him.
I’m likely to vote for him in November because I think that Sen. McCain — whom I voted for in the March 2000 Presidential primary — is likely to be too aggressive with respect to Iran, and the Islamic world in general, and thereby (a) worsen the impression that parts of the world have that we don’t really care about international rule, which (b) increases the risk that we will convert allies into allies of our enemies. Then, too, I think that the combination of a President Obama and a Democratic-majority House and Senate would create the greatest likelihood of success for liberalism in my lifetime; while I’m under no illusions that everything such dominance would produce would be good, I’d also like to see my side have the chance to advance our agenda in a way which has long been denied.
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 6/6/2008 @ 11:24 am77, Hey, stupid, AlQaeda is losing. The Iraqis are winning and even taking on the Iranian Interlopers.
Iraqis stop Iranian gun runners
PCD (5c49b0) — 6/6/2008 @ 11:25 amAphrael, I would expect you to be able to articulate your reasons for voting for Obama. I don’t agree with your reasons of course. You are largely the exception, I’m afraid.
I’m puzzled by your comment that it was Hillary’s behavior during fall and winter that convinced you not to trust her. With respect, uh, didn’t the ’90’s do that?
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/6/2008 @ 11:39 amSPQR: I spent the 90s mostly hidden away in Santa Cruz; the first half of the decade I was a student with limited to no news access, and the second half of the decade I was a software engineer who spent almost all of his free time intoxicated. While I noticed what *President* Clinton was doing, I didn’t notice what *Senator* Clinton was doing … and it wasn’t until late in that decade that I developed the ability to listen to people on the other side of the aisle rather than ignoring them while condeming them as extremists.
I’m not proud of this period in my political evolution, but I must admit to it. 🙂
aphrael (e0cdc9) — 6/6/2008 @ 11:42 amAphrael, well evolving all the way up to an amphibian is a difficult process ( just kidding my friend ).
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/6/2008 @ 11:44 amWere that all Dems were as reasoned as aphrael. I have no problem discussing policy, but the shouting matches we get now do NO good…
Scott Jacobs (425810) — 6/6/2008 @ 11:52 amUnfortunately a lot of them are like Mark Morford, who is a foul little toad. This column speaks volumes.
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/6/2008 @ 12:25 pmWhat an ass.
A taste of Morford:
Jack Klompus (b796b4) — 6/6/2008 @ 12:28 pm“Many spiritually advanced people I know (not coweringly religious, mind you, but deeply spiritual) identify Obama as a Lightworker, that rare kind of attuned being who has the ability to lead us not merely to new foreign policies or health care plans or whatnot, but who can actually help usher in a new way of being on the planet, of relating and connecting and engaging with this bizarre earthly experiment. These kinds of people actually help us evolve. They are philosophers and peacemakers of a very high order, and they speak not just to reason or emotion, but to the soul.”
Its getting nuttier every day, Jack.
SPQR (26be8b) — 6/6/2008 @ 12:31 pmSPQR – That Morford is nuttier than a squirrels cornhole.
JD (75f5c3) — 6/6/2008 @ 12:54 pmaphrael – and that’s why you’re a pleasant person to debate, disagree with, agree with
I second that motion.
I disagree with you on many issues, but I respect you for your views, because you have core beliefs backed up with reason.
I can’t begin to explain to you how refeshing that is.
Paul (90f626) — 6/6/2008 @ 2:22 pm“This is not the Rev. Wright I once knew.”
“This is not the Tony Rezko I once knew.”
After he meets terrorists without precondition, I’m sure we’ll hear:
“This is not the Mahmoud Ahmadinejad I once knew.”
Red (b6964f) — 6/12/2008 @ 12:52 pm“This isn’t the (insert name of left wing socialist radical/convicted felon here) I knew.”
Barack Obama
Bill C (8c6170) — 6/17/2008 @ 1:35 pm