Thursday, February 21, 2008

Dems Debate

Well, I thought Hillary kicked butt tonight! Obama strikes me as a very untested newbie. He's the easiest target for wingers to exploit as a peacenik, without a defensive leg to stand on. I maintain were it not for his ethnicity, he couldn't get the time of day. He's recent smoker, so I don't buy his health practices knowledge either. Congratulating himself for giving nice speeches is the sound of one hand patting his own back. Very tacky. The reporters and pundits are just blinkered by his mediocrity.

Labels: , ,


Blogger Mark said...

Well Woody, this is true and nowhere is it more evident than in blog forums, because dumb sheep flock in the wrong direction and off the cliff. Don't follow those. That's a where a consensus of wise shepards comes in handy.

7:54 AM  
Blogger Peter L. Winkler said...

I'm not infatuated with Obama, but I'm no fan of Clinton either. However, Obama has been tested in this contest. He's gone up against both Clinton's and their entrenched political machine and resources. Obama has shown tremendous organizational skills in assembling his national campaign organization and fund raising skills in a very short period of time. That is an excellent demonstration of his competency and leadership skills.

He was also outspoken against the war in Iraq when it mattered, while Clinton never bothered to read the NIE and made a calculatedly political vote that displays a lack of courage. If she voted o give Bush his war for political advantage, how will she withstand the constant political pressures of the presidency and hold her ground on any issue?

1:26 PM  
Blogger Mark said...

Well Peter it's a fair point, but I think he's gone to the head of the class too fast for his track record. However the war vote may be all it takes now. After Bush the polar opposite is what people want. That difference could do it. Perception is eveything.

1:31 PM  
Blogger Woody said...

Anyone but a Clinton. There's a reason that we passed the term limits amendment, and we don't need a continuation of "royal families."

12:44 PM  
Blogger Mark said...

Right, now that we've had the Adams's and the Bushes. I don't recall a Rodham in there?

Sounds like more selective amnesia Woody. You should get that checked.

2:40 PM  
Blogger ahmed said...

So instead of electing a leader who you claim will be dubbed a "peacenik" you support someone who voted to authorize a disastrous war and lent her voice to a bill intended purely to provoke a armed conflict with Iran. My slightly overblown hope is that this Democratic primaries will be an end to the putalant traingulation politics supported by Mark's candidate of choice. BTW, it's nice to see that you're as big of an asshole here on your own blog as you were on the numerous ones which gave you the boot.

7:50 PM  
Blogger Mark said...

That's right, Ahmedinanut, I support a woman for president, as opposed to the C___ that you are or the charity case Obama is. Oh happy day!

8:51 PM  
Blogger ahmed said...

It's hard not to pick up on the bitter, white man resentment of our quite ungracious host, Yorkster, when he describes Obama as a "charity case". Whatever else is true of Barack, it's quite clear to anyone of any sense that he is a man of considereable political skill, breathtaking eloquence and compassion. York uses the same raciliased code words which have fuelled the modern right wing movement into power, from Reagan onwards. Notice, too, that he claims some kind of progressive mantle by supporting a woman for president, only to then engage in cursing and using the workd "cunt". People, this is the behaviour of a sad, resentful, impotent little man. Rather pathetic, too

8:52 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

The Environmental Webring
The Environmental Webring
[ Join Now | Ring Hub | Random | << Prev | Next >> ]