?

Log in

No account? Create an account
Ten questions for Hillary supporters. - Adventures in Engineering — LiveJournal
The wanderings of a modern ronin.

Ben Cantrick
  Date: 2008-03-07 17:18
  Subject:   Ten questions for Hillary supporters.
Public
  Mood:usa not worth saving
  Tags:  reddit, usa not worth saving

1. When did Sen. Clinton cross the Commander-in-Chief threshold?

2. Was it before or after October 11, 2002 when she flunked the biggest foreign policy test of her career and voted to authorize the war in Iraq?

3. How can a candidate claim to be ready on Day One when on Day 646 of her senate career she voted for a war without reading the 90-page National Intelligence Estimate that so convinced senate colleague Bob Graham the war was a mistake?

4. Are you okay with the Clinton campaign darkening Sen. Obama's complexion in its ads and would you be okay with it if that's what it took to win the nomination?

[...]

10. Are you looking forward to another I-was-for-the-war-before-I-was-against-it general election campaign?


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kevin-hench/10-questions-for-hillary-_b_90468.html

I don't contest Hillary's (or anyone's) right to run. What I do question is the IQ of the people who are voting for her. I simply do not understand what you people see in her. In every way that I can think of, she's an inferior candidate to Obama. Even the Republicans know it - Rush has asked Repubs to cross party lines and vote for Hillary in order to weaken Obama, because he knows that Obama will kick McCain's tail all over the map. Is the fact that the Repubs are deathly afraid of Obama not good enough for you people?? I know, I know - you can't reason someone out of a position that they didn't reason themselves into in the first place...

BTW, the darkening Obama thing? Go for it! Everyone knows Obama is black, and nobody cares. Make him coal black if you want. Seriously, no one gives a damn. You're just making yourself look like a washed-up old racist idiot who's so dumb and out of touch that you still think that kinda stuff matters. Also, though the final counts aren't in, it is very likely that you will narrowly lose to Obama in Texas when both the Primary and the Caucus votes (Texas does both) are all counted up. Drag it out with lawsuits all you want, but you're going down in the Lone Star state.
Post A Comment | 4 Comments | | Link






Willow: Disgust
  User: willow_red
  Date: 2008-03-08 01:03 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
Keyword:Disgust
As a side note, McCain has been advertising on livescience.com, and the ads that show Obama have his complexion significantly darkened. I did a double-take when I first saw it.

(Obama, OTOH, advertises the crap out of space.com, and he doesn't show the other candidates in his ads.)
Reply | Thread | Link



(no subject) - (Anonymous)
Ben Cantrick
  User: mackys
  Date: 2008-03-09 06:23 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
It's not just Texas.

There's also Nevada, which I bitched about before.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



(no subject) - (Anonymous)
Ben Cantrick
  User: mackys
  Date: 2008-03-09 20:08 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
It's numerically impossible for either canidate to win at this point without super-delegates.

I agree. That's been the case for several weeks.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



(no subject) - (Anonymous)
Ben Cantrick
  User: mackys
  Date: 2008-03-09 06:54 (UTC)
  Subject:   (no subject)
don't act surprised when you get a foreign policy disaster.

First, obligatory snark: You're one to talk, Mr. "Iraq has WMD and um-um boy is this koolaid tasty!"

Second, I've already given up on this country and plan to be out of it by the time those chickens come home to roost.

Third, if the implication isn't clear, YES, I agree that Obama stands better than even odds of doing something stupid militarily. (With Hillary or McCain, it's a slam dunk.) I'm trying to think of any of the last ten presidents who didn't undertake some shit-headed foreign policy debacle, and I can't think of a single one. Bush II - Iraq. Clinton - Somalia. Bush I - Panama. Reagan - Iran/Contra. Carter - The Shah of Iran. The list goes on...

If there's one thing I've concluded firmly about the USA based on recent history, it's that the President has way too much power to make war. Depite the founders trying to prevent exactly this. If this country is to get back on track, first we need a Congress that will be serious about enforcing the War Powers act, and second maybe we need to go to a co-president arrangement to divide up the power of president even more. These two things, of course, will never ever happen. Hence why I gave up, and am preparing to GTFO.
Reply | Parent | Thread | Link



browse
May 2015