[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: When someone is having a meltdown there is no need to kick them or stab then or spit on them. No need. So true. If someone is having a meltdown on Fairfield Life, all one has to do is wait for 24 hours, and they'll be gone for the rest of the week. :-)
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
With regard to the title of the post: JudyQuote1: Deranged. You're deranged. Not just REELY REEELY STOOOPID, although you're that too. JudyQuote2, posted only seconds later: It may have been faulty, in the sense that it wasn't perfectly parallel. But, I repeat, it's DERANGED to think she meant it any other way. Did everyone notice the escalation here? In Judyworld, putting things in all caps is a way of making her specious arguments seem more definitive and authoritative. Recently, she perceived that calling people stupid wasn't really having the full effect she was looking for, so she escalated the term to REELY REEELY STOOOPID. All the difference in the world. Makes it a more powerful and intellectually sound argument, you see. Now she's done the same with deranged. Not powerful enough in lowercase, she escalates it to all caps and SHOUTS it. I think the theory here is that making 48 hysterical, over-the-edge posts in one day and shouting out the word DERANGED over and over in them is, to Judy, a convincing way to prove that she ISN'T deranged. Interesting logic. But, as the thread title suggests, Stupid is as stupid does. Or should that be STOOOPID is as STOOOPID does? H. MUCH more powerful and authoritative the second way. If you think like Judy, that is.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
On May 25, 2008, at 4:32 AM, TurquoiseB wrote: I think the theory here is that making 48 hysterical, over-the-edge posts in one day and shouting out the word DERANGED over and over in them is, to Judy, a convincing way to prove that she ISN'T deranged. And maybe she also knows that Hillary is finished, not just with the campaign but possibly with politics in general. I'll be really interested to see if the good people of NY actually elect her again. I'm betting on no. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
Good observations ! Have you considered sending this to Hillary? God Bless, anatol --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: THE THINGS PEOPLE SAY As we come to the end of the Democrat primary campaign I am proud to see that change has come to America. Barack Obama has succeeded in winning the largest amount of delegates of any Democratic candidate for the nomination. Also the fact that the voters in the states where Senator Clinton has won by large margins have openly stated that the primary reason for their voting for Senator Clinton over Senator Obama is race. When the problem has been identified it is easily confronted and hopefully resolved.Having won these states and the votes of racist America Senator Clinton has gone on to state Remember Senator Robert F Kennedy was killed after winning the California nomination in June of 1968 what a statement for a woman who has just won the votes of the more racist sectors of American Democrats. This statement makes me question the following: Is Senator Clinton that tired that she is not even paying attention to what she is saying anymore? Was Senator Clinton sending a subliminal message to the racist population that she has so proudly won? Was Senator Clinton responding to something she has heard in her travels around America? Or Was it simply wishful thinking? In this age of create your own reality, think and grow rich and reawakening the SECRET. In this case it is hard to know just exactly what the secret is. In the 90's many people associated with the Clintons either died from suicides or were killed in untimely timely circumstances is this an indication of some cosmic plan that Hillary has received from Eleanor? I do not believe it was an accidental anything. I believe and am very sad to say it was intentional and said exactly what she meant. Senator Hillary Clintons said on national television that she is staying in the campaign in the case that something should happen to Barack Obama. She does not leave it to chance she said she believes he can have a tragic experience such as that of Robert Kennedy in 1968. That surely surpasses Mike Huckabee, yet they should definitely start a club. As someone who has been a great fan of both Hillary and Bill Clinton I am very shocked that she would ever express such a thing on national television.I am hurt to think that someone I actually wrote a letter to in 2004 and asked/begged her to run for President in 2004 would actually come to the point that she would be so defeated that she would go on National Television and say maybe the competition will be killed so I can win. I have been hoping that Senator Obama would take Senator Clinton as his running mate, however after this comment any thing might happen makes her a very questionable presence. Why has she done this? She becomes like Linden Johnson to John F Kennedy, this is a grave mistake. I am sorry that this has happened. How can anyone ask a person who has gone on television and said they are banking on their assassination in order to win the nomination to be their running mate? I as an American Citizen who made sure to vote for President Bill Clinton twice am appalled by this whole campaign that the Senator has chosen to run. She has truly shown what not to do in anything in life. Well Senator McCain may not be anything more than a parrot, as he waits to see what the Democrats will say then he creates what he will say, which is some form of twist on what they have said. HE has no other strategy and no independent plans. He will do whatever and say whatever seems to be working. If Barack Obama wants to meet with aggressive leaders and people on the news say it is not a good idea, he will say he will not do. If they say it is a great idea he will take a modified version as his policy. McCain has no policy. Yet he is not one to make a statement like Robert F Kennedy was assassinated in 1968. I pray everyday for Senator Obama. I pray that he actually makes to living in the White House and being President of the United States of America. I pray that when he is President he will do what he claims and not be like so many others before him. I pray that who ever he chooses as his running mate will be a solid person and not ever insinuate in any way that they are waiting for him to be assassinated. GOD HELP AMERICA
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
On May 24, 2008, at 12:00 PM, amarnath wrote: Good observations ! Have you considered sending this to Hillary? I agree with both the sentiment and suggestion above, anatol. From an article on huffpost that came out yesterday: If nothing else, the superdelegates ought to receive this as a blaring, siren-light warning. A giant red flag. Senator Clinton is embarrassing herself and the Democratic Party. She has ceased to be a viable, respectable candidate and has, instead, become a ghoulish, desperate shell of her formerly strong and admirable self. ttp://tinyurl.com/47hqs6 Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: THE THINGS PEOPLE SAY As we come to the end of the Democrat primary campaign I am proud to see that change has come to America. Barack Obama has succeeded in winning the largest amount of delegates of any Democratic candidate for the nomination. Also the fact that the voters in the states where Senator Clinton has won by large margins have openly stated that the primary reason for their voting for Senator Clinton over Senator Obama is race. No, that's not correct. Please find an exit poll where voters were even asked what their primary reason was for voting for Clinton over Obama. snip Senator Hillary Clintons said on national television that she is staying in the campaign in the case that something should happen to Barack Obama. No, that isn't what she said, not even close. She wasn't even talking about Obama. She was pointing out that in the past primaries have often lasted into June, so there was no reason for her to withdraw now. (And it wasn't on national television. It was in an interview with a newspaper, parts of the videotape of which were later broadcast on television.) She does not leave it to chance she said she believes he can have a tragic experience such as that of Robert Kennedy in 1968. She said nothing of the kind! Why are you lying about what she said? What's the matter with you?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 24, 2008, at 12:00 PM, amarnath wrote: Good observations ! Have you considered sending this to Hillary? I agree with both the sentiment and suggestion above, anatol. I'm sorry, but the people who think Hillary was suggesting that Obama could be assassinated are simply deranged. There's no polite way to put it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
yes I have posted many places amarnath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Good observations ! Have you considered sending this to Hillary? God Bless, anatol --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: THE THINGS PEOPLE SAY As we come to the end of the Democrat primary campaign I am proud to see that change has come to America. Barack Obama has succeeded in winning the largest amount of delegates of any Democratic candidate for the nomination. Also the fact that the voters in the states where Senator Clinton has won by large margins have openly stated that the primary reason for their voting for Senator Clinton over Senator Obama is race. When the problem has been identified it is easily confronted and hopefully resolved.Having won these states and the votes of racist America Senator Clinton has gone on to state Remember Senator Robert F Kennedy was killed after winning the California nomination in June of 1968 what a statement for a woman who has just won the votes of the more racist sectors of American Democrats. This statement makes me question the following: Is Senator Clinton that tired that she is not even paying attention to what she is saying anymore? Was Senator Clinton sending a subliminal message to the racist population that she has so proudly won? Was Senator Clinton responding to something she has heard in her travels around America? Or Was it simply wishful thinking? In this age of create your own reality, think and grow rich and reawakening the SECRET. In this case it is hard to know just exactly what the secret is. In the 90's many people associated with the Clintons either died from suicides or were killed in untimely timely circumstances is this an indication of some cosmic plan that Hillary has received from Eleanor? I do not believe it was an accidental anything. I believe and am very sad to say it was intentional and said exactly what she meant. Senator Hillary Clintons said on national television that she is staying in the campaign in the case that something should happen to Barack Obama. She does not leave it to chance she said she believes he can have a tragic experience such as that of Robert Kennedy in 1968. That surely surpasses Mike Huckabee, yet they should definitely start a club. As someone who has been a great fan of both Hillary and Bill Clinton I am very shocked that she would ever express such a thing on national television. I am hurt to think that someone I actually wrote a letter to in 2004 and asked/begged her to run for President in 2004 would actually come to the point that she would be so defeated that she would go on National Television and say maybe the competition will be killed so I can win. I have been hoping that Senator Obama would take Senator Clinton as his running mate, however after this comment any thing might happen makes her a very questionable presence. Why has she done this? She becomes like Linden Johnson to John F Kennedy, this is a grave mistake. I am sorry that this has happened. How can anyone ask a person who has gone on television and said they are banking on their assassination in order to win the nomination to be their running mate? I as an American Citizen who made sure to vote for President Bill Clinton twice am appalled by this whole campaign that the Senator has chosen to run. She has truly shown what not to do in anything in life. Well Senator McCain may not be anything more than a parrot, as he waits to see what the Democrats will say then he creates what he will say, which is some form of twist on what they have said. HE has no other strategy and no independent plans. He will do whatever and say whatever seems to be working. If Barack Obama wants to meet with aggressive leaders and people on the news say it is not a good idea, he will say he will not do. If they say it is a great idea he will take a modified version as his policy. McCain has no policy. Yet he is not one to make a statement like Robert F Kennedy was assassinated in 1968. I pray everyday for Senator Obama. I pray that he actually makes to living in the White House and being President of the United States of America. I pray that when he is President he will do what he claims and not be like so many others before him. I pray that who ever he chooses as his running mate will be a solid person and not ever insinuate in any way that they are waiting for him to be assassinated. GOD HELP AMERICA
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
I think that's exactly what she was suggesting. Olbermann got it right. She was saying that she was sticking around because Obama might get shot, just like RFK was shot in 1968. Can't see any other reason for this weird reference to RFK. The idea is, well, anything can happen, including assassination, so that's why I'm slogging on, waiting to take over if disaster should strike. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On May 24, 2008, at 12:00 PM, amarnath wrote: Good observations ! Have you considered sending this to Hillary? I agree with both the sentiment and suggestion above, anatol. I'm sorry, but the people who think Hillary was suggesting that Obama could be assassinated are simply deranged. There's no polite way to put it.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
http://www.thismuchleft.com/2008/05/23/hillary-clinton-evokes-bobby-kennedys-assassination-to-claim-that-she-should-stay-in-the-race/#respond http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/#KYDEM I can look for this clip but I dont think it is necessary Hillary Clinton says that she is winning the vote of White Hardworking non college educated americans. If she came on Television and said I am staying in the race until Obama is shot she would be close to being shot. She did not say that. Instead she said the next best thing. Considering she is totally pissed with Ted Kennedy she said she was staying in the race until the end because ANYTHING can happen Look what happened to Robert F Kenney she says: So Rocket Science doesn't need much to hear what she was really saying When she said she was a white supremacist you tried to say she did not mean it. When she said she is getting the votes of white hardworking white non college educated voters she is saying what? When she knowiingly accepts these votes from people who when interviewed state that race influenced their decision on who to vote for what is she doing??? authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie wrote: THE THINGS PEOPLE SAY As we come to the end of the Democrat primary campaign I am proud to see that change has come to America. Barack Obama has succeeded in winning the largest amount of delegates of any Democratic candidate for the nomination. Also the fact that the voters in the states where Senator Clinton has won by large margins have openly stated that the primary reason for their voting for Senator Clinton over Senator Obama is race. No, that's not correct. Please find an exit poll where voters were even asked what their primary reason was for voting for Clinton over Obama. Senator Hillary Clintons said on national television that she is staying in the campaign in the case that something should happen to Barack Obama. No, that isn't what she said, not even close. She wasn't even talking about Obama. She was pointing out that in the past primaries have often lasted into June, so there was no reason for her to withdraw now. (And it wasn't on national television. It was in an interview with a newspaper, parts of the videotape of which were later broadcast on television.) She does not leave it to chance she said she believes he can have a tragic experience such as that of Robert Kennedy in 1968. She said nothing of the kind! Why are you lying about what she said? What's the matter with you? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that's exactly what she was suggesting. Olbermann got it right. She was saying that she was sticking around because Obama might get shot, just like RFK was shot in 1968. You're deranged. There's no other way to put it. Can't see any other reason for this weird reference to RFK. The other reason is obvious. She was citing two past primaries that continued into June, as many others have. She mentioned Bill Clinton's primary in 1992 and RFK's primary in 1968 *because those are the ones folks are most likely to remember*--1992 because it wasn't that long ago, and 1968 because we can never forget it. That you can't see this reason is proof of your deranged thinking. Bobby Kennedy's son didn't have any trouble seeing it, nor did the editor of the newspaper that was conducting the interview. Nor did even Andrew Sullivan, the ultimate victim of Clinton Derangement Syndrome, have any trouble seeing it. I think she meant it as a reference that people would remember about a June primary, he wrote. She's not crazy enough to air wishes about Obama's early demise. Even the vile David Axelrod, Obama's campaign manager, has no trouble seeing it: http://youtube.com/watch?v=SfSCLZbRQKA The idea is, well, anything can happen, including assassination, so that's why I'm slogging on, waiting to take over if disaster should strike. And that's something you really believe she would be likely to say in public, right? How come you weren't outraged when she said the same thing, in the same context, back in March, to Time magazine?
[FairfieldLife] re: stupid is as stupid does
Everyone! Especially Judy: THIS IS THE MOST STUPID AND RIDICULOUS REMARK EVER MADE AT LEAST THAT I HAVE HEARD FROM A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE. If he were to be shot the world would believe the Clintons or their supporters were behind it. Just as many wondered about Ron Brown and their other Friend or friends that were killed. The idea that she has been saying this continuously is like a mantra or an affirmation. This goes to show how sick with anxiety a person like Hillary can become... Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:   MSNBC.com Clinton, you invoked a political nightmare Olbermann: Referencing RFK's assassination as a reason for staying in the race is unforgiveable SPECIAL COMMENT By Keith Olbermann Anchor, 'Countdown' updated 8:29 p.m. CT, Fri., May. 23, 2008 Asked if her continuing fight for the nomination against Senator Obama hurts the Democratic party, Sen. Hillary Clinton replied, I don't. Because again, I've been around long enough. You know, my husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. You know, I just don't understand it. You know, there's lots of speculation about why it is. â The comments were recorded and we showed them to you earlier and they are online as we speak. She actually said those words. Those words, Senator? You actually invoked the nightmare of political assassination. You actually invoked the specter of an inspirational leader, at the seeming moment of triumph, for himself and a battered nation yearning to breathe free, silenced forever. You actually used the word assassination in the middle of a campaign with a loud undertone of racial hatred - and gender hatred - and political hatred. You actually used the word assassination in a time when there is a fear, unspoken but vivid and terrible, that our again-troubled land and fractured political landscape might target a black man running for president. Or a white man. Or a white woman! You actually used those words, in this America, Senator, while running against an African-American against whom the death threats started the moment he declared his campaign? You actually used those words, in this America, Senator, while running to break your greatest glass ceiling and claiming there are people who would do anything to stop you? You! Senator - never mind the implications of using the word assassination in any connection to Senator Obama... What about you? You cannot say this! The references, said her spokesperson, were not, in any way, weighted. The allusions, said Mo Uh-leathee, are, ...historical examples of the nominating process going well into the summer and any reading into it beyond that would be inaccurate and outrageous. I'm sorry. There is no inaccuracy. Not for a moment does any rational person believe Senator Clinton is actually hoping for the worst of all political calamities. Yet the outrage belongs, not to Senator Clinton or her supporters, but to every other American. Firstly, she has previously bordered on the remarks she made today... Then swerved back from them and the awful skid they represented. She said, in an off-camera interview with Time on March 6, Primary contests used to last a lot longer. We all remember the great tragedy of Bobby Kennedy being assassinated in June in L.A. My husband didn't wrap up the nomination in 1992 until June, also in California. Having a primary contest go through June is nothing particularly unusual. We will see how it unfolds as we go forward over the next three to four months. In retrospect, we failed her when we did not call her out, for that remark, dry and only disturbing, in a magazine's pages. But somebody obviously warned her of the danger of that rhetoric: After the Indiana primary, on May 7, she told supporters at a Washington hotel: Sometimes you gotta calm people down a little bit. But if you look at successful presidential campaigns, my husband did not get the nomination until June of 1992. I remember tragically when Senator Kennedy won California near the end of that process. And at Shepherdstown, West Virginia, on the same day, she referenced it again: You know, I remember very well what happened in the California primary in 1968 as, you know, Senator Kennedy won that primary. On March 6th she had said assassinated. By May 7 she had avoided it. Today... she went back to an awful well. There is no good time to recall the awful events of June 5th, 1968, of Senator Bobby Kennedy, happy and alive - perhaps, for the first time since his own brother's death in Dallas in 1963... Galvanized to try to lead this nation back from one of its darkest eras... Only to fall victim to the same surge that took that brother, and Martin Luther King... There is no good time
[FairfieldLife] re: stupid is as stupid does
Everyone! Especially Judy: THIS IS THE MOST STUPID AND RIDICULOUS REMARK EVER MADE AT LEAST THAT I HAVE HEARD FROM A PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE. If he were to be shot the world would believe the Clintons or their supporters were behind it. Just as many wondered about Ron Brown and their other Friend or friends that were killed. The idea that she has been saying this continuously is like a mantra or an affirmation. This goes to show how sick with anxiety a person like Hillary can become... Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:   MSNBC.com Clinton, you invoked a political nightmare Olbermann: Referencing RFK's assassination as a reason for staying in the race is unforgiveable SPECIAL COMMENT By Keith Olbermann Anchor, 'Countdown' updated 8:29 p.m. CT, Fri., May. 23, 2008 Asked if her continuing fight for the nomination against Senator Obama hurts the Democratic party, Sen. Hillary Clinton replied, I don't. Because again, I've been around long enough. You know, my husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. You know, I just don't understand it. You know, there's lots of speculation about why it is. â The comments were recorded and we showed them to you earlier and they are online as we speak. She actually said those words. Those words, Senator? You actually invoked the nightmare of political assassination. You actually invoked the specter of an inspirational leader, at the seeming moment of triumph, for himself and a battered nation yearning to breathe free, silenced forever. You actually used the word assassination in the middle of a campaign with a loud undertone of racial hatred - and gender hatred - and political hatred. You actually used the word assassination in a time when there is a fear, unspoken but vivid and terrible, that our again-troubled land and fractured political landscape might target a black man running for president. Or a white man. Or a white woman! You actually used those words, in this America, Senator, while running against an African-American against whom the death threats started the moment he declared his campaign? You actually used those words, in this America, Senator, while running to break your greatest glass ceiling and claiming there are people who would do anything to stop you? You! Senator - never mind the implications of using the word assassination in any connection to Senator Obama... What about you? You cannot say this! The references, said her spokesperson, were not, in any way, weighted. The allusions, said Mo Uh-leathee, are, ...historical examples of the nominating process going well into the summer and any reading into it beyond that would be inaccurate and outrageous. I'm sorry. There is no inaccuracy. Not for a moment does any rational person believe Senator Clinton is actually hoping for the worst of all political calamities. Yet the outrage belongs, not to Senator Clinton or her supporters, but to every other American. Firstly, she has previously bordered on the remarks she made today... Then swerved back from them and the awful skid they represented. She said, in an off-camera interview with Time on March 6, Primary contests used to last a lot longer. We all remember the great tragedy of Bobby Kennedy being assassinated in June in L.A. My husband didn't wrap up the nomination in 1992 until June, also in California. Having a primary contest go through June is nothing particularly unusual. We will see how it unfolds as we go forward over the next three to four months. In retrospect, we failed her when we did not call her out, for that remark, dry and only disturbing, in a magazine's pages. But somebody obviously warned her of the danger of that rhetoric: After the Indiana primary, on May 7, she told supporters at a Washington hotel: Sometimes you gotta calm people down a little bit. But if you look at successful presidential campaigns, my husband did not get the nomination until June of 1992. I remember tragically when Senator Kennedy won California near the end of that process. And at Shepherdstown, West Virginia, on the same day, she referenced it again: You know, I remember very well what happened in the California primary in 1968 as, you know, Senator Kennedy won that primary. On March 6th she had said assassinated. By May 7 she had avoided it. Today... she went back to an awful well. There is no good time to recall the awful events of June 5th, 1968, of Senator Bobby Kennedy, happy and alive - perhaps, for the first time since his own brother's death in Dallas in 1963... Galvanized to try to lead this nation back from one of its darkest eras... Only to fall victim to the same surge that took that brother, and Martin Luther King... There is no good time
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://www.thismuchleft.com/2008/05/23/hillary-clinton-evokes-bobby- kennedys-assassination-to-claim-that-she-should-stay-in-the- race/#respond Yes, a lot of the pro-Obama blogs are in a tizzy over her statement. What does that prove? http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/#KYDEM And this doesn't prove your claim, which was: Voters in the states where Senator Clinton has won by large margins have openly stated that the primary reason for their voting for Senator Clinton over Senator Obama is race. As I pointed out, this isn't what they were asked. In Kentucky--the state this link applies to--they were asked whether the race of the candidate was important to them. Of whites asked this question, 18 percent said yes; of this 18 percent, 81 percent voted for Clinton. We can *infer* from this that for 15 percent of white voters in Kentucky, race may have been *a reason*-- possibly the most important reason, but we don't know that--for their vote for Clinton. That's nowhere near the sweeping claim you made. I can look for this clip but I dont think it is necessary Hillary Clinton says that she is winning the vote of White Hardworking non college educated americans. And that's true. Why shouldn't she say so? Everybody else is. If she came on Television and said I am staying in the race until Obama is shot she would be close to being shot. She did not say that. Instead she said the next best thing. No. That wasn't the point of what she was saying at all. When she said she was a white supremacist you tried to say she did not mean it. She never said she was a white supremacist, as I've pointed out to you umpty times now. When she said she is getting the votes of white hardworking white non college educated voters she is saying what? Just what the words say. Everybody else is saying the same thing. When she knowiingly accepts these votes from people who when interviewed state that race influenced their decision on who to vote for what is she doing??? How is she supposed to *reject* those votes, exactly?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
so including assassination, including assassination , including assassination dont you see Judy this is one of those things she could not ever say. It boils down to I am hanging around in the case ANYTHING can could or would happen.. authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 wrote: I think that's exactly what she was suggesting. Olbermann got it right. She was saying that she was sticking around because Obama might get shot, just like RFK was shot in 1968. You're deranged. There's no other way to put it. Can't see any other reason for this weird reference to RFK. The other reason is obvious. She was citing two past primaries that continued into June, as many others have. She mentioned Bill Clinton's primary in 1992 and RFK's primary in 1968 *because those are the ones folks are most likely to remember*--1992 because it wasn't that long ago, and 1968 because we can never forget it. That you can't see this reason is proof of your deranged thinking. Bobby Kennedy's son didn't have any trouble seeing it, nor did the editor of the newspaper that was conducting the interview. Nor did even Andrew Sullivan, the ultimate victim of Clinton Derangement Syndrome, have any trouble seeing it. I think she meant it as a reference that people would remember about a June primary, he wrote. She's not crazy enough to air wishes about Obama's early demise. Even the vile David Axelrod, Obama's campaign manager, has no trouble seeing it: http://youtube.com/watch?v=SfSCLZbRQKA The idea is, well, anything can happen, including assassination, so that's why I'm slogging on, waiting to take over if disaster should strike. And that's something you really believe she would be likely to say in public, right? How come you weren't outraged when she said the same thing, in the same context, back in March, to Time magazine? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
Sometimes people can be deaf 100% and not hear a thing without hearing aids or sign language, you can shout at them and they hear nothing. The moment you say something about them or about something or someone they feel close to they perk right up and hear every word. No matter if they are directly in front of you or in another room. How can this be? Well Judy if you have not heard this before or even understand why they have this poll about white black as an issue then you have a problem. authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie wrote: http://www.thismuchleft.com/2008/05/23/hillary-clinton-evokes-bobby- kennedys-assassination-to-claim-that-she-should-stay-in-the- race/#respond Yes, a lot of the pro-Obama blogs are in a tizzy over her statement. What does that prove? http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/epolls/#KYDEM And this doesn't prove your claim, which was: Voters in the states where Senator Clinton has won by large margins have openly stated that the primary reason for their voting for Senator Clinton over Senator Obama is race. As I pointed out, this isn't what they were asked. In Kentucky--the state this link applies to--they were asked whether the race of the candidate was important to them. Of whites asked this question, 18 percent said yes; of this 18 percent, 81 percent voted for Clinton. We can *infer* from this that for 15 percent of white voters in Kentucky, race may have been *a reason*-- possibly the most important reason, but we don't know that--for their vote for Clinton. That's nowhere near the sweeping claim you made. I can look for this clip but I dont think it is necessary Hillary Clinton says that she is winning the vote of White Hardworking non college educated americans. And that's true. Why shouldn't she say so? Everybody else is. If she came on Television and said I am staying in the race until Obama is shot she would be close to being shot. She did not say that. Instead she said the next best thing. No. That wasn't the point of what she was saying at all. When she said she was a white supremacist you tried to say she did not mean it. She never said she was a white supremacist, as I've pointed out to you umpty times now. When she said she is getting the votes of white hardworking white non college educated voters she is saying what? Just what the words say. Everybody else is saying the same thing. When she knowiingly accepts these votes from people who when interviewed state that race influenced their decision on who to vote for what is she doing??? How is she supposed to *reject* those votes, exactly? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sometimes people can be deaf 100% and not hear a thing without hearing aids or sign language, you can shout at them and they hear nothing. The moment you say something about them or about something or someone they feel close to they perk right up and hear every word. No matter if they are directly in front of you or in another room. How can this be? Well Judy if you have not heard this before or even understand why they have this poll about white black as an issue then you have a problem. Of course I understand why they have this poll. What's your point?
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
On May 24, 2008, at 1:32 PM, feste37 wrote: I think that's exactly what she was suggesting. Olbermann got it right. She was saying that she was sticking around because Obama might get shot, just like RFK was shot in 1968. Can't see any other reason for this weird reference to RFK. The idea is, well, anything can happen, including assassination, so that's why I'm slogging on, waiting to take over if disaster should strike. I think in her own really clumsy, Hillary-like way, what she was suggesting more was that campaigns can drag on forever, even until June, and that both Bill's and RFK's did, even though RFK was the odds-on favorite. She could still have mentioned him without the reference to his death and it would have seemed somewhat less calculating. And as others point out, primaries were a whole lot different back then. In fact, I think I read that in 1968 there were only 13 Dem primaries, so any comparison is pretty ludicrous. Sal
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
Hillary Clinton is a words marksmen she know s what she is saying. If you said look Hillary feels betrayed by African American Voters, she is betrayed by the super delegates she is even betrayed by her husband and so now that she is just about nuts she is saying things without truly considering the ramifications of what she is saying I would go along with that but to say she did not say what she said give me a break. If Rev. Wright had said well you know Obama should stay in the race till the end because you never know what could happen the chickens could come home to roost as they did with Bobby Kennedy. Do you know people would be ready to lynch him. Sal Sunshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 24, 2008, at 1:32 PM, feste37 wrote: I think that's exactly what she was suggesting. Olbermann got it right. She was saying that she was sticking around because Obama might get shot, just like RFK was shot in 1968. Can't see any other reason for this weird reference to RFK. The idea is, well, anything can happen, including assassination, so that's why I'm slogging on, waiting to take over if disaster should strike. I think in her own really clumsy, Hillary-like way, what she was suggesting more was that campaigns can drag on forever, even until June, and that both Bill's and RFK's did, even though RFK was the odds-on favorite. She could still have mentioned him without the reference to his death and it would have seemed somewhat less calculating. And as others point out, primaries were a whole lot different back then. In fact, I think I read that in 1968 there were only 13 Dem primaries, so any comparison is pretty ludicrous. Sal
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I think that's exactly what she was suggesting. Olbermann got it right. She was saying that she was sticking around because Obama might get shot, just like RFK was shot in 1968. You're deranged. There's no other way to put it. Can't see any other reason for this weird reference to RFK. The other reason is obvious. She was citing two past primaries that continued into June, as many others have. She mentioned Bill Clinton's primary in 1992 and RFK's primary in 1968 *because those are the ones folks are most likely to remember*--1992 because it wasn't that long ago, and 1968 because we can never forget it. [I'm personally tired of and turned off by this whole Dem nomination scene. I've felt uncomfortable about Hillary all along but now have come to dislike her and how she presents herself and can't imagine her in the presidency, or even as VP with Bill hanging around and bumping into Barack. I loved Bill Clinton as president, but even he has disappointed me in how he's been acting lately. The whole thing feels crappy to me. Obama talks a good talk, but... who knows. With JFK, RFK and Bill Clinton I was on fire in support for them - not at all for Hillary. I feel better about Barack. Either of them instead of McCain HAS to be the outcome, however. -jrm] From Open Left: Below Matt blogged about Hillary Clinton's comments about the RFK assassination in June of 1968 which she made to point out that presidential primaries sometimes last into June. This is the part of what she said that will be getting all the attention and rightly so (whether she was thinking hey, Obama could die is just speculation however). But the other part of what she said should also be scrutinized. She said her husband didn't secure the nomination in 1992 until mid-June when he won the California primary. This is wrong. Here are the facts: 1. The 1992 primaries ended on June 2, 1992, a day earlier than this year. Several states, including California, had primaries that day. It was not mid-June. 2. According to wikipedia: Clinton effectively won the Democratic Party's nomination after winning the New York Primary in early April. 3. Clinton's chief rival was Paul Tsongas who dropped out of the race in mid-May, 1992. 4. According to polls, Clinton led in every remaining state except California where Jerry Brown was polling well (his home state). Brown was not going to catch Clinton for the nomination in any scenario. 5. From the May 11, 1992 New York Times: Aides to Mr. Clinton say that in most of the remaining primaries he will ignore the former Governor of California, Edmund G. Brown Jr., and will try to give voters a clearer sense of his own personality and his positions on major issues, in preparation for a general election campaign against President Bush. Summary: Hillary Clinton's reference to 1968 was accurate (that campaign was still in doubt) but tacky. Her reference to Bill's 1992 race was wrong on the facts. Like Tsongas, Hillary Clinton is not (yet) mathematically eliminated. Like Tsongas, Hillary's campaign is out of money. Unlike Tsongas, she doesn't know when it's a good time to wrap it up. FROM: http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=5963
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Even the vile David Axelrod, Obama's campaign manager, has no trouble seeing it David Axelrod is a great and principled man who has done much to help the African American community. Is that why you hate him? Because he helps organize and elect dark folks who you prefer seeing as shine-boys and lawn jockeys? Do you want him dead too like Brother Malcolm, MLK, and RFK.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
Thanks, Do.rflex, for posting this (below), I appreciate the historical pinpoints, and agree with the last paragraph completely: Summary: Hillary Clinton's reference to 1968 was accurate (that campaign was still in doubt) but tacky. Her reference to Bill's 1992 race was wrong on the facts. Like Tsongas, Hillary Clinton is not (yet) mathematically eliminated. Like Tsongas, Hillary's campaign is out of money. Unlike Tsongas, she doesn't know when it's a good time to wrap it up. And as how to determine *when is the good time to wrap up her campaign, Clinton is obviously using a different metric to measure that than the writer's (above). She's clearly not opted for gracious and magnanimous; nor should she, necessarily, but many people (I do), have fond memories of the Clinton presidency and I favor the scenario of a great-hearted Hilary Clinton ending her campaign with some grand, magnanimous gesture, and garnering the approbation and respect of everyone, even if she didn't win the nomination (and accepts some cabinet level appointment -- or Supreme Court justice). But that's just my preference for a particular version of events and it's clear that she has not made her decisions along those lines. And, again, she's doesn't have to. We'll see how her decision plays out. It certainly makes the whole drama that much more interesting. And although it would be a complete bummer if Obama loses in the general election, A McCain presidency doesn't totally freak me out. No matter what John McCain says to pander to his constituency, even a McCain presidency would (overall) result in significant improvements, both in the US and the world (IMO). McCain would be in a weak position relative to Congress; he wouldn't (he doesn't now) have the whole-hearted support of the Republican base; but, he's far more prudent and informed than Bush, and less idealogically (and religiously) informed; and he's pragmatic and used to working for consensus in congressional and senatorial lawmaking, unlike Bush who has only occupied executive positions. Marek ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I think that's exactly what she was suggesting. Olbermann got it right. She was saying that she was sticking around because Obama might get shot, just like RFK was shot in 1968. You're deranged. There's no other way to put it. Can't see any other reason for this weird reference to RFK. The other reason is obvious. She was citing two past primaries that continued into June, as many others have. She mentioned Bill Clinton's primary in 1992 and RFK's primary in 1968 *because those are the ones folks are most likely to remember*--1992 because it wasn't that long ago, and 1968 because we can never forget it. [I'm personally tired of and turned off by this whole Dem nomination scene. I've felt uncomfortable about Hillary all along but now have come to dislike her and how she presents herself and can't imagine her in the presidency, or even as VP with Bill hanging around and bumping into Barack. I loved Bill Clinton as president, but even he has disappointed me in how he's been acting lately. The whole thing feels crappy to me. Obama talks a good talk, but... who knows. With JFK, RFK and Bill Clinton I was on fire in support for them - not at all for Hillary. I feel better about Barack. Either of them instead of McCain HAS to be the outcome, however. -jrm] From Open Left: Below Matt blogged about Hillary Clinton's comments about the RFK assassination in June of 1968 which she made to point out that presidential primaries sometimes last into June. This is the part of what she said that will be getting all the attention and rightly so (whether she was thinking hey, Obama could die is just speculation however). But the other part of what she said should also be scrutinized. She said her husband didn't secure the nomination in 1992 until mid- June when he won the California primary. This is wrong. Here are the facts: 1. The 1992 primaries ended on June 2, 1992, a day earlier than this year. Several states, including California, had primaries that day. It was not mid-June. 2. According to wikipedia: Clinton effectively won the Democratic Party's nomination after winning the New York Primary in early April. 3. Clinton's chief rival was Paul Tsongas who dropped out of the race in mid-May, 1992. 4. According to polls, Clinton led in every remaining state except California where Jerry Brown was polling well (his home state). Brown was not going to catch Clinton for the nomination in any scenario. 5. From the May 11, 1992 New York Times: Aides to Mr. Clinton say that in most of the remaining primaries he will ignore the former Governor of
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I think that's exactly what she was suggesting. Olbermann got it right. She was saying that she was sticking around because Obama might get shot, just like RFK was shot in 1968. You're deranged. There's no other way to put it. Can't see any other reason for this weird reference to RFK. The other reason is obvious. She was citing two past primaries that continued into June, as many others have. She mentioned Bill Clinton's primary in 1992 and RFK's primary in 1968 *because those are the ones folks are most likely to remember*--1992 because it wasn't that long ago, and 1968 because we can never forget it. [I'm personally tired of and turned off by this whole Dem nomination scene. I've felt uncomfortable about Hillary all along but now have come to dislike her and how she presents herself and can't imagine her in the presidency, or even as VP with Bill hanging around and bumping into Barack. I don't think there's the slightest chance she'd accept the VP spot even if it were to be offered. She's been treated too badly by Obama's campaign and supporters. I don't know how she'll be able to crank it up to campaign for him, but she'll find the strength to do it somehow, just as she's had the strength to hold on through all the smears and sexism and false accusations of racism, because she cares about the country too much to let the election go to McCain without giving her all to prevent it. That's what she's doing now, because she doesn't think Obama can beat McCain. But she'll do whatever she can to help him win if he's the nominee. snip From Open Left: Below Matt blogged about Hillary Clinton's comments about the RFK assassination in June of 1968 which she made to point out that presidential primaries sometimes last into June. This is the part of what she said that will be getting all the attention and rightly so (whether she was thinking hey, Obama could die is just speculation however). Deranged speculation. But the other part of what she said should also be scrutinized. She said her husband didn't secure the nomination in 1992 until mid-June when he won the California primary. This is wrong. Here are the facts: 1. The 1992 primaries ended on June 2, 1992, a day earlier than this year. Several states, including California, had primaries that day. It was not mid-June. They're quibbling over two weeks?? 2. According to wikipedia: Clinton effectively won the Democratic Party's nomination after winning the New York Primary in early April. But he didn't *secure the nomination* until June 2, when he won the California primary. People have been saying Clinton should get out of the race since *right after the Iowa primary*, for pete's sake. They weren't saying that about Tsongas. And they weren't saying it about Jerry Brown either. There's no perfect parallel to this primary, of course; each one is different in some respects, but there are similarities in other respects. The point here is that it's *unprecedented* to try to push out the candidate who appears to be losing before the convention, especially when the race is this close.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, okpeachman2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Even the vile David Axelrod, Obama's campaign manager, has no trouble seeing it David Axelrod is a great and principled man David Axelrod is the Democrats' Karl Rove.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that's exactly what she was suggesting. Olbermann got it right. And why *shouldn't* she suggest it? It's the only method she has left of becoming President. She was saying that she was sticking around because Obama might get shot, just like RFK was shot in 1968. Exactly.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thanks, Do.rflex, for posting this (below), I appreciate the historical pinpoints, and agree with the last paragraph completely: Summary: Hillary Clinton's reference to 1968 was accurate (that campaign was still in doubt) but tacky. Her reference to Bill's 1992 race was wrong on the facts. Like Tsongas, Hillary Clinton is not (yet) mathematically eliminated. Like Tsongas, Hillary's campaign is out of money. Unlike Tsongas, she doesn't know when it's a good time to wrap it up. And as how to determine *when is the good time to wrap up her campaign, Clinton is obviously using a different metric to measure that than the writer's (above). She's clearly not opted for gracious and magnanimous; nor should she, necessarily, but many people (I do), have fond memories of the Clinton presidency and I favor the scenario of a great-hearted Hilary Clinton ending her campaign with some grand, magnanimous gesture, and garnering the approbation and respect of everyone, even if she didn't win the nomination (and accepts some cabinet level appointment -- or Supreme Court justice). But that's just my preference for a particular version of events and it's clear that she has not made her decisions along those lines. And, again, she's doesn't have to. We'll see how her decision plays out. It certainly makes the whole drama that much more interesting. And although it would be a complete bummer if Obama loses in the general election, A McCain presidency doesn't totally freak me out. No matter what John McCain says to pander to his constituency, even a McCain presidency would (overall) result in significant improvements, both in the US and the world (IMO). McCain would be in a weak position relative to Congress; he wouldn't (he doesn't now) have the whole-hearted support of the Republican base; but, he's far more prudent and informed than Bush, and less idealogically (and religiously) informed; and he's pragmatic and used to working for consensus in congressional and senatorial lawmaking, unlike Bush who has only occupied executive positions. Marek I appreciate your views on McCain if by some chance he gets elected. I hadn't thought of it as it might be. Besides your very plausible analysis, it IS at least a little comforting to know that he isn't George W Bush. chuckle [snip]
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I think that's exactly what she was suggesting. Olbermann got it right. And why *shouldn't* she suggest it? It's the only method she has left of becoming President. She was saying that she was sticking around because Obama might get shot, just like RFK was shot in 1968. Exactly. Deranged. She *obviously* was not saying that.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I think that's exactly what she was suggesting. Olbermann got it right. And why *shouldn't* she suggest it? It's the only method she has left of becoming President. She was saying that she was sticking around because Obama might get shot, just like RFK was shot in 1968. Exactly. more on why the comment just doesn't make sense in the way she claims to have meant it -- from Mark Shields on PBS I think it was, at the best, totally reckless. I mean, her history is absolutely faulty. Robert Kennedy's first primary, Ray, was in May 7th of 1968. He was murdered four weeks later. She's talking about a long campaign. This campaign began the first week in January. She's still talking about June. So, I mean, it's faulty there.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie ltm457@ wrote: THE THINGS PEOPLE SAY As we come to the end of the Democrat primary campaign I am proud to see that change has come to America. Barack Obama has succeeded in winning the largest amount of delegates of any Democratic candidate for the nomination. Also the fact that the voters in the states where Senator Clinton has won by large margins have openly stated that the primary reason for their voting for Senator Clinton over Senator Obama is race. No, that's not correct. Please find an exit poll where voters were even asked what their primary reason was for voting for Clinton over Obama. snip Senator Hillary Clintons said on national television that she is staying in the campaign in the case that something should happen to Barack Obama. No, that isn't what she said, not even close. She wasn't even talking about Obama. She was pointing out that in the past primaries have often lasted into June, so there was no reason for her to withdraw now. The primaries she mentioned, had started a month or more earlier than the primary she was in, and her husband's nomination was assured, by accounts, in March, not June. (And it wasn't on national television. It was in an interview with a newspaper, parts of the videotape of which were later broadcast on television.) She does not leave it to chance she said she believes he can have a tragic experience such as that of Robert Kennedy in 1968. She said nothing of the kind! Why are you lying about what she said? What's the matter with you? She certainly implied it by brining up the same scenario 4 times in this primary. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On May 24, 2008, at 12:00 PM, amarnath wrote: Good observations ! Have you considered sending this to Hillary? I agree with both the sentiment and suggestion above, anatol. I'm sorry, but the people who think Hillary was suggesting that Obama could be assassinated are simply deranged. There's no polite way to put it. Except that everyone knows that Obama is at greater risk of assassination than any other major political candidate in American history. The Secret Service knows it too, which is why they gave him protection at the earliest date for a new presidential candidate (HRC has always had SS protection since leaving the White House as a former First Lady). And this makes it less deranged to think that she'd tell a roomful of newspaper editors and reporters that she was just waiting around in case Obama got assassinated exactly how? She's used the association several times in the past so it wasn't just because she had Ted Kennedy on her mind. And this makes it less deranged to think that she'd tell a roomful of newspaper editors and reporters that she was just waiting around in case Obama got assassinated exactly how? Also, she had not reason to mention either her husband's campaign OR Kennedy's since those primaries started later in the year than hers did, so her point wasn't valid in the first place. And this makes it less deranged to think that she'd tell a roomful of newspaper editors and reporters that she was just waiting around in case Obama got assassinated exactly how? Finally, after her campaign had indicated they understood the issue with the assassination reference, she ONLY apologized for evoking the Kennedy *NAME*. And later, I understand, she got all wide-eyed when someone explicitly asked her about that, and she claimed she had never even considered the possible implications of it before that particular moment when she was asked the question. OF COURSE SHE DIDN'T. You have to be DERANGED to think that's what she intended to communicate. There's just no other word for it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine salsunshine@ wrote: On May 24, 2008, at 12:00 PM, amarnath wrote: Good observations ! Have you considered sending this to Hillary? I agree with both the sentiment and suggestion above, anatol. I'm sorry, but the people who think Hillary was suggesting that Obama could be assassinated are simply deranged. There's no polite way to put it. Except that everyone knows that Obama is at greater risk of assassination than any other major political candidate in American history. The Secret Service knows it too, which is why they gave him protection at the earliest date for a new presidential candidate (HRC has always had SS protection since leaving the White House as a former First Lady). She's used the association several times in the past so it wasn't just because she had Ted Kennedy on her mind. Also, she had not reason to mention either her husband's campaign OR Kennedy's since those primaries started later in the year than hers did, so her point wasn't valid in the first place. Finally, after her campaign had indicated they understood the issue with the assassination reference, she ONLY apologized for evoking the Kennedy *NAME*. And later, I understand, she got all wide-eyed when someone explicitly asked her about that, and she claimed she had never even considered the possible implications of it before that particular moment when she was asked the question. Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 feste37@ wrote: I think that's exactly what she was suggesting. Olbermann got it right. And why *shouldn't* she suggest it? It's the only method she has left of becoming President. She was saying that she was sticking around because Obama might get shot, just like RFK was shot in 1968. Exactly. more on why the comment just doesn't make sense in the way she claims to have meant it -- from Mark Shields on PBS I think it was, at the best, totally reckless. I mean, her history is absolutely faulty. Robert Kennedy's first primary, Ray, was in May 7th of 1968. He was murdered four weeks later. She's talking about a long campaign. This campaign began the first week in January. She's still talking about June. So, I mean, it's faulty there. It may have been faulty, in the sense that it wasn't perfectly parallel. But, I repeat, it's DERANGED to think she meant it any other way.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie ltm457@ wrote: THE THINGS PEOPLE SAY As we come to the end of the Democrat primary campaign I am proud to see that change has come to America. Barack Obama has succeeded in winning the largest amount of delegates of any Democratic candidate for the nomination. Also the fact that the voters in the states where Senator Clinton has won by large margins have openly stated that the primary reason for their voting for Senator Clinton over Senator Obama is race. No, that's not correct. Please find an exit poll where voters were even asked what their primary reason was for voting for Clinton over Obama. snip Senator Hillary Clintons said on national television that she is staying in the campaign in the case that something should happen to Barack Obama. No, that isn't what she said, not even close. She wasn't even talking about Obama. She was pointing out that in the past primaries have often lasted into June, so there was no reason for her to withdraw now. The primaries she mentioned, had started a month or more earlier than the primary she was in, and her husband's nomination was assured, by accounts, in March, not June. No, it wasn't. It doesn't become assured until the convention. Tsongas and Brown were still in contention in March; nobody was pressuring them to drop out. Nobody *ever* pressured them to drop out. Clinton didn't even have the delegates until he won the California primary in June. (And it wasn't on national television. It was in an interview with a newspaper, parts of the videotape of which were later broadcast on television.) She does not leave it to chance she said she believes he can have a tragic experience such as that of Robert Kennedy in 1968. She said nothing of the kind! Why are you lying about what she said? What's the matter with you? She certainly implied it by brining up the same scenario 4 times in this primary. She never implied it. You're *inferring* it.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] Finally, after her campaign had indicated they understood the issue with the assassination reference, she ONLY apologized for evoking the Kennedy *NAME*. And later, I understand, she got all wide-eyed when someone explicitly asked her about that, and she claimed she had never even considered the possible implications of it before that particular moment when she was asked the question. OF COURSE SHE DIDN'T. You have to be DERANGED to think that's what she intended to communicate. There's just no other word for it. Everyone in the world save you and her is deranged, eh? Lawson
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: [...] Finally, after her campaign had indicated they understood the issue with the assassination reference, she ONLY apologized for evoking the Kennedy *NAME*. And later, I understand, she got all wide-eyed when someone explicitly asked her about that, and she claimed she had never even considered the possible implications of it before that particular moment when she was asked the question. OF COURSE SHE DIDN'T. You have to be DERANGED to think that's what she intended to communicate. There's just no other word for it. Everyone in the world save you and her is deranged, eh? No. Robert Kennedy, Jr., RFK's son, isn't deranged. The newspaper editor who conducted the interview isn't deranged. David Axelrod, Obama's campaign manager, isn't deranged. Andrew Sullivan, of all people, isn't deranged (at least not about this). Lots of others aren't deranged. Reasonable people, in general, aren't deranged.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
You know Judy maybe thats it maybe the combination of people telling her its over even people like BC that plus not wanting to be VP has her out of her mind. So instead of surrendering she prefers to enact political suicide on the world stage. This is a sad thought. The Black vote in NEw york helped her win the senate seat didn't it. If she loses that seat what happens to her political career? authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 wrote: I think that's exactly what she was suggesting. Olbermann got it right. She was saying that she was sticking around because Obama might get shot, just like RFK was shot in 1968. You're deranged. There's no other way to put it. Can't see any other reason for this weird reference to RFK. The other reason is obvious. She was citing two past primaries that continued into June, as many others have. She mentioned Bill Clinton's primary in 1992 and RFK's primary in 1968 *because those are the ones folks are most likely to remember*--1992 because it wasn't that long ago, and 1968 because we can never forget it. [I'm personally tired of and turned off by this whole Dem nomination scene. I've felt uncomfortable about Hillary all along but now have come to dislike her and how she presents herself and can't imagine her in the presidency, or even as VP with Bill hanging around and bumping into Barack. I don't think there's the slightest chance she'd accept the VP spot even if it were to be offered. She's been treated too badly by Obama's campaign and supporters. I don't know how she'll be able to crank it up to campaign for him, but she'll find the strength to do it somehow, just as she's had the strength to hold on through all the smears and sexism and false accusations of racism, because she cares about the country too much to let the election go to McCain without giving her all to prevent it. That's what she's doing now, because she doesn't think Obama can beat McCain. But she'll do whatever she can to help him win if he's the nominee. From Open Left: Below Matt blogged about Hillary Clinton's comments about the RFK assassination in June of 1968 which she made to point out that presidential primaries sometimes last into June. This is the part of what she said that will be getting all the attention and rightly so (whether she was thinking hey, Obama could die is just speculation however). Deranged speculation. But the other part of what she said should also be scrutinized. She said her husband didn't secure the nomination in 1992 until mid-June when he won the California primary. This is wrong. Here are the facts: 1. The 1992 primaries ended on June 2, 1992, a day earlier than this year. Several states, including California, had primaries that day. It was not mid-June. They're quibbling over two weeks?? 2. According to wikipedia: Clinton effectively won the Democratic Party's nomination after winning the New York Primary in early April. But he didn't *secure the nomination* until June 2, when he won the California primary. People have been saying Clinton should get out of the race since *right after the Iowa primary*, for pete's sake. They weren't saying that about Tsongas. And they weren't saying it about Jerry Brown either. There's no perfect parallel to this primary, of course; each one is different in some respects, but there are similarities in other respects. The point here is that it's *unprecedented* to try to push out the candidate who appears to be losing before the convention, especially when the race is this close. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
Judy you have some intense Sungyuma that you know Hillary CLintons deepest feelings, and intentions even better than she does. That is pretty good. You are a true die hard. I admire that. authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 wrote: I think that's exactly what she was suggesting. Olbermann got it right. And why *shouldn't* she suggest it? It's the only method she has left of becoming President. She was saying that she was sticking around because Obama might get shot, just like RFK was shot in 1968. Exactly. Deranged. She *obviously* was not saying that. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
McCain is too old and has been through too much in life. He has no real agenda and he has no chance of presenting the leadership needed by America at this time. Electing McCain would be worst than Jimmy Carter. I like Jimmy Carter but do you remember the gas lines? George Bush beat McCain, Ronald Reagan may well have had Alzheimer's before he left the white house. McCain has already had health problems. Who knows what he might do in the event of a terrorist attack like 9/11 imagine him pushing the red button.. do.rflex [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Marek Reavis wrote: Thanks, Do.rflex, for posting this (below), I appreciate the historical pinpoints, and agree with the last paragraph completely: Summary: Hillary Clinton's reference to 1968 was accurate (that campaign was still in doubt) but tacky. Her reference to Bill's 1992 race was wrong on the facts. Like Tsongas, Hillary Clinton is not (yet) mathematically eliminated. Like Tsongas, Hillary's campaign is out of money. Unlike Tsongas, she doesn't know when it's a good time to wrap it up. And as how to determine *when is the good time to wrap up her campaign, Clinton is obviously using a different metric to measure that than the writer's (above). She's clearly not opted for gracious and magnanimous; nor should she, necessarily, but many people (I do), have fond memories of the Clinton presidency and I favor the scenario of a great-hearted Hilary Clinton ending her campaign with some grand, magnanimous gesture, and garnering the approbation and respect of everyone, even if she didn't win the nomination (and accepts some cabinet level appointment -- or Supreme Court justice). But that's just my preference for a particular version of events and it's clear that she has not made her decisions along those lines. And, again, she's doesn't have to. We'll see how her decision plays out. It certainly makes the whole drama that much more interesting. And although it would be a complete bummer if Obama loses in the general election, A McCain presidency doesn't totally freak me out. No matter what John McCain says to pander to his constituency, even a McCain presidency would (overall) result in significant improvements, both in the US and the world (IMO). McCain would be in a weak position relative to Congress; he wouldn't (he doesn't now) have the whole-hearted support of the Republican base; but, he's far more prudent and informed than Bush, and less idealogically (and religiously) informed; and he's pragmatic and used to working for consensus in congressional and senatorial lawmaking, unlike Bush who has only occupied executive positions. Marek I appreciate your views on McCain if by some chance he gets elected. I hadn't thought of it as it might be. Besides your very plausible analysis, it IS at least a little comforting to know that he isn't George W Bush. [snip] To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
When someone is having a meltdown there is no need to kick them or stab then or spit on them. No need. If so Ted Kennedy would do it. Bill Clinton has been too good to America for any of those people to get into making an issue of her bantering. Before a Kennedy would respond they would usually call someone first like Ted Kennedy and ask what to do. If told to stay silent they would. As for the Kennedies she has just quoted fact for Barack Obama she has sent a death threat. Which if unintentional she should have apologized to him not to the Kennedies. authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: [...] Finally, after her campaign had indicated they understood the issue with the assassination reference, she ONLY apologized for evoking the Kennedy *NAME*. And later, I understand, she got all wide-eyed when someone explicitly asked her about that, and she claimed she had never even considered the possible implications of it before that particular moment when she was asked the question. OF COURSE SHE DIDN'T. You have to be DERANGED to think that's what she intended to communicate. There's just no other word for it. Everyone in the world save you and her is deranged, eh? No. Robert Kennedy, Jr., RFK's son, isn't deranged. The newspaper editor who conducted the interview isn't deranged. David Axelrod, Obama's campaign manager, isn't deranged. Andrew Sullivan, of all people, isn't deranged (at least not about this). Lots of others aren't deranged. Reasonable people, in general, aren't deranged. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
Well Judy it gets boring after a while. authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie wrote: THE THINGS PEOPLE SAY As we come to the end of the Democrat primary campaign I am proud to see that change has come to America. Barack Obama has succeeded in winning the largest amount of delegates of any Democratic candidate for the nomination. Also the fact that the voters in the states where Senator Clinton has won by large margins have openly stated that the primary reason for their voting for Senator Clinton over Senator Obama is race. No, that's not correct. Please find an exit poll where voters were even asked what their primary reason was for voting for Clinton over Obama. Senator Hillary Clintons said on national television that she is staying in the campaign in the case that something should happen to Barack Obama. No, that isn't what she said, not even close. She wasn't even talking about Obama. She was pointing out that in the past primaries have often lasted into June, so there was no reason for her to withdraw now. The primaries she mentioned, had started a month or more earlier than the primary she was in, and her husband's nomination was assured, by accounts, in March, not June. No, it wasn't. It doesn't become assured until the convention. Tsongas and Brown were still in contention in March; nobody was pressuring them to drop out. Nobody *ever* pressured them to drop out. Clinton didn't even have the delegates until he won the California primary in June. (And it wasn't on national television. It was in an interview with a newspaper, parts of the videotape of which were later broadcast on television.) She does not leave it to chance she said she believes he can have a tragic experience such as that of Robert Kennedy in 1968. She said nothing of the kind! Why are you lying about what she said? What's the matter with you? She certainly implied it by brining up the same scenario 4 times in this primary. She never implied it. You're *inferring* it. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well Judy it gets boring after a while. authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie wrote: THE THINGS PEOPLE SAY As we come to the end of the Democrat primary campaign I am proud to see that change has come to America. Barack Obama has succeeded in winning the largest amount of delegates of any Democratic candidate for the nomination. Also the fact that the voters in the states where Senator Clinton has won by large margins have openly stated that the primary reason for their voting for Senator Clinton over Senator Obama is race. No, that's not correct. Please find an exit poll where voters were even asked what their primary reason was for voting for Clinton over Obama. Senator Hillary Clintons said on national television that she is staying in the campaign in the case that something should happen to Barack Obama. No, that isn't what she said, not even close. She wasn't even talking about Obama. She was pointing out that in the past primaries have often lasted into June, so there was no reason for her to withdraw now. The primaries she mentioned, had started a month or more earlier than the primary she was in, and her husband's nomination was assured, by accounts, in March, not June. No, it wasn't. It doesn't become assured until the convention. Tsongas and Brown were still in contention in March; nobody was pressuring them to drop out. Nobody *ever* pressured them to drop out. Clinton didn't even have the delegates until he won the California primary in June. You're living in a time warp judy - you think there is still some suspense at the conventions about who the delegates are actually going to vote for?? Besides no one's pressuring clinton to drop out of the primaries, they're expected her to conduct her remaining (futile) weeks in a way that does not undermine the campaign of the eventual nominee of the party in the general election. There's no precedent in recent history of a candidate campaigning as negatively as clintons against the eventual noominee of their party. (And it wasn't on national television. It was in an interview with a newspaper, parts of the videotape of which were later broadcast on television.) She does not leave it to chance she said she believes he can have a tragic experience such as that of Robert Kennedy in 1968. She said nothing of the kind! Why are you lying about what she said? What's the matter with you? She certainly implied it by brining up the same scenario 4 times in this primary. She never implied it. You're *inferring* it. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, okpeachman2000 no_reply@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote: Even the vile David Axelrod, Obama's campaign manager, has no trouble seeing it David Axelrod is a great and principled man David Axelrod is the Democrats' Karl Rove. Why are you such a hater? David Axelrod is a great and principled man who has done much to help the African American community. Is that why you hate him? Because he helps organize and elect dark folks who you prefer seeing as shine-boys and lawn jockeys? Do you want him dead too like Brother Malcolm, MLK, and RFK?
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip authfriend jstein@ wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig wrote: snip The primaries she mentioned, had started a month or more earlier than the primary she was in, and her husband's nomination was assured, by accounts, in March, not June. No, it wasn't. It doesn't become assured until the convention. Tsongas and Brown were still in contention in March; nobody was pressuring them to drop out. Nobody *ever* pressured them to drop out. Clinton didn't even have the delegates until he won the California primary in June. You're living in a time warp judy - you think there is still some suspense at the conventions about who the delegates are actually going to vote for?? What I meant was that it's not official until the convention. But there hasn't been a primary this hotly contested for this long in quite some time. You really can't go by the recent past this year. The DNC will surely try to get it all cleaned up by August, but they may or may not succeed. Have a look at my posts entitled Obama and the Unmaking of the Democratic Party by Sean Wilentz and Clinton Has the Numbers from the Philly Inquirer. Besides no one's pressuring clinton to drop out of the primaries, They've been pressuring her to drop out since after *Iowa*, Boo. You haven't been paying attention. snip There's no precedent in recent history of a candidate campaigning as negatively as clintons against the eventual noominee of their party. Look, if you've drunk the Kool-Aid, you've drunk the Kool-Aid. But this is not established fact; it's a very ugly fantasy that the Obama campaign and the media want you to believe. The truth is exactly the opposite. I've never seen anything like it in my life (and I'm 66 years old, so I've been through quite a few election campaigns by now). I'm just glad my parents, committed lifelong Democrats, aren't around to see it. It would break their hearts. If you had told me a year ago that I'd be switching my my registration from Democrat to Independent, I'd have laughed in your face. But it is to weep.
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
There will be no VP spot. There will be no appointment for Hellary. No judgeship. No Cabinet post. No ambassadorship. No heading a commission. She will be left to live in the shame of her actions. Perhaps making millions, like Bill, giving speeches. Perhaps writing books for the rubes and the dry pussy demographic and the the women's study set. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You know Judy maybe thats it maybe the combination of people telling her its over even people like BC that plus not wanting to be VP has her out of her mind. So instead of surrendering she prefers to enact political suicide on the world stage. This is a sad thought. The Black vote in NEw york helped her win the senate seat didn't it. If she loses that seat what happens to her political career? authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, do.rflex wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, feste37 wrote: I think that's exactly what she was suggesting. Olbermann got it right. She was saying that she was sticking around because Obama might get shot, just like RFK was shot in 1968. You're deranged. There's no other way to put it. Can't see any other reason for this weird reference to RFK. The other reason is obvious. She was citing two past primaries that continued into June, as many others have. She mentioned Bill Clinton's primary in 1992 and RFK's primary in 1968 *because those are the ones folks are most likely to remember*--1992 because it wasn't that long ago, and 1968 because we can never forget it. [I'm personally tired of and turned off by this whole Dem nomination scene. I've felt uncomfortable about Hillary all along but now have come to dislike her and how she presents herself and can't imagine her in the presidency, or even as VP with Bill hanging around and bumping into Barack. I don't think there's the slightest chance she'd accept the VP spot even if it were to be offered. She's been treated too badly by Obama's campaign and supporters. I don't know how she'll be able to crank it up to campaign for him, but she'll find the strength to do it somehow, just as she's had the strength to hold on through all the smears and sexism and false accusations of racism, because she cares about the country too much to let the election go to McCain without giving her all to prevent it. That's what she's doing now, because she doesn't think Obama can beat McCain. But she'll do whatever she can to help him win if he's the nominee. From Open Left: Below Matt blogged about Hillary Clinton's comments about the RFK assassination in June of 1968 which she made to point out that presidential primaries sometimes last into June. This is the part of what she said that will be getting all the attention and rightly so (whether she was thinking hey, Obama could die is just speculation however). Deranged speculation. But the other part of what she said should also be scrutinized. She said her husband didn't secure the nomination in 1992 until mid-June when he won the California primary. This is wrong. Here are the facts: 1. The 1992 primaries ended on June 2, 1992, a day earlier than this year. Several states, including California, had primaries that day. It was not mid-June. They're quibbling over two weeks?? 2. According to wikipedia: Clinton effectively won the Democratic Party's nomination after winning the New York Primary in early April. But he didn't *secure the nomination* until June 2, when he won the California primary. People have been saying Clinton should get out of the race since *right after the Iowa primary*, for pete's sake. They weren't saying that about Tsongas. And they weren't saying it about Jerry Brown either. There's no perfect parallel to this primary, of course; each one is different in some respects, but there are similarities in other respects. The point here is that it's *unprecedented* to try to push out the candidate who appears to be losing before the convention, especially when the race is this close. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
I will look for the proofs just to show you what is said regarding race. It doesn't take a genius to get the voting thing. We all knew that it would come out sooner or later. America has lots of Bigotry why would it be surprising that a bunch of white people would actually say that their voting for Hillary did have to do with race? Why would it be surprising that she would begin referring to those people as her very hard working white people? I did not like those things they were not good in my view but that was not the same as saying. ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN BOBBY KENNEDY GOT KILLED IN JUNE OF 1968 She was just picking up where Huckabee left off. boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie wrote: Well Judy it gets boring after a while. authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie wrote: THE THINGS PEOPLE SAY As we come to the end of the Democrat primary campaign I am proud to see that change has come to America. Barack Obama has succeeded in winning the largest amount of delegates of any Democratic candidate for the nomination. Also the fact that the voters in the states where Senator Clinton has won by large margins have openly stated that the primary reason for their voting for Senator Clinton over Senator Obama is race. No, that's not correct. Please find an exit poll where voters were even asked what their primary reason was for voting for Clinton over Obama. Senator Hillary Clintons said on national television that she is staying in the campaign in the case that something should happen to Barack Obama. No, that isn't what she said, not even close. She wasn't even talking about Obama. She was pointing out that in the past primaries have often lasted into June, so there was no reason for her to withdraw now. The primaries she mentioned, had started a month or more earlier than the primary she was in, and her husband's nomination was assured, by accounts, in March, not June. No, it wasn't. It doesn't become assured until the convention. Tsongas and Brown were still in contention in March; nobody was pressuring them to drop out. Nobody *ever* pressured them to drop out. Clinton didn't even have the delegates until he won the California primary in June. You're living in a time warp judy - you think there is still some suspense at the conventions about who the delegates are actually going to vote for?? Besides no one's pressuring clinton to drop out of the primaries, they're expected her to conduct her remaining (futile) weeks in a way that does not undermine the campaign of the eventual nominee of the party in the general election. There's no precedent in recent history of a candidate campaigning as negatively as clintons against the eventual noominee of their party. (And it wasn't on national television. It was in an interview with a newspaper, parts of the videotape of which were later broadcast on television.) She does not leave it to chance she said she believes he can have a tragic experience such as that of Robert Kennedy in 1968. She said nothing of the kind! Why are you lying about what she said? What's the matter with you? She certainly implied it by brining up the same scenario 4 times in this primary. She never implied it. You're *inferring* it. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip JUST COME OUT AND SAY I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR OBAMA BECAUSE HE IS A NIGGER JUDY JUST SAY IT. A NIGGER CAN NOT BE PRESIDENT. That is what I am hearing from you. There's something terribly, terribly wrong with your ears. I suggest you consult a physician immediately.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
Please excuse me but I can not hold back any longer. The one thing Obama did wrong the only thing he did wrong was to look more like his fathers side than his mother's side of his gene pool. If he was a blond haired white boy then everyone including old white women young white racist boys and feminist racist women would be elated and READY for Change. What he did wrong was to think that He, A part animal nigger could ever be president of the UNITED STATES. Yes so what Obama did to the GREAT DEMOCRATIC PARTY, IT WAS OBAMA AND HIS CAMPAIGN THAT ABUSED SWEET DEAR HILLARY.. IT WAS OBAMA WHO PLAYED THE RACE CARD. IT WAS OBAMA WHO SHOULD HAVE BEEN FLATTERED THAT BILL CLINTON THOUGHT SO HIGHLY OF HIM TO INSINUATE HIS WIN IN SOUTH CAROLINA WAS NOTHING JESSIE JACKSON DID IT IN 84 and 88. IT IS OBAMA AND LOUIS AND ALL OF THOSE STUPID NIGGERS AND NIGGER LOVERS WHO TAKE EVERYTHING SO PERSONAL AS TO THINK THAT OUR DEAR HILLARY MEANT ANYTHING BY HER STATEMENT WHITE HARD WORKING WHITE PEOPLE. SO AGAIN WHAT DID OBAMA DO WRONG HE IS A NIGGER WHO IS SO ARROGANT TO THINK HE CAN BE PRESIDENT. WEST VIRGINIA JUDY PEOPLE THERE SAID THEY WOULD NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA BECAUSE HE IS TOO ARROGANT. JUST INCASE YOU DONT KNOW WHEN RACIST SAY A NIGGER IS ARROGANT IT IS BECAUSE HE IS REFUSING TO STAY IN HIS PLACE. SO THEY SAY YOU ARE TOO ARROGNAT FOR YOUR OWN GOOD BOY! SO YOU HAVE THE NERVE TO SAY WHAT OBAMA HAS DONE TO HURT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY. OBAMA NEVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF ANYONE BEING KILLED. REV. WRIGHT DID NOT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT KILLING ANYONE. HE MAY HAVE SAID THAT BEFORE THEY WILL LET OBAMA WIN THEY WILL TRY TO KILL HIM. YET AGAIN WHEN HILLARY SAYS IT OH SHE DID NOT MEAN THAT. JUST COME OUT AND SAY I WILL NEVER VOTE FOR OBAMA BECAUSE HE IS A NIGGER JUDY JUST SAY IT. A NIGGER CAN NOT BE PRESIDENT. That is what I am hearing from you. okpeachman2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, okpeachman2000 wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend wrote: Even the vile David Axelrod, Obama's campaign manager, has no trouble seeing it David Axelrod is a great and principled man David Axelrod is the Democrats' Karl Rove. Why are you such a hater? David Axelrod is a great and principled man who has done much to help the African American community. Is that why you hate him? Because he helps organize and elect dark folks who you prefer seeing as shine-boys and lawn jockeys? Do you want him dead too like Brother Malcolm, MLK, and RFK? To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I will look for the proofs just to show you what is said regarding race. It doesn't take a genius to get the voting thing. We all knew that it would come out sooner or later. America has lots of Bigotry why would it be surprising that a bunch of white people would actually say that their voting for Hillary did have to do with race? It isn't surprising. I never said it was. Let's look at your claim again: Also the fact that the voters in the states where Senator Clinton has won by large margins have openly stated that the primary reason for their voting for Senator Clinton over Senator Obama is race. Some voters here and there have said that (including in states that Obama won) to reporters. But to my knowledge there's never been a poll question asked to that effect. The one you cited didn't ask that. Why would it be surprising that she would begin referring to those people as her very hard working white people? It wouldn't be surprising. Everybody's saying that. I did not like those things they were not good in my view but that was not the same as saying. ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN BOBBY KENNEDY GOT KILLED IN JUNE OF 1968 Except she didn't say that, as you know. Why are you lying again? Here's the transcript of that part of the interview: CLINTON: Honestly, I just believe that this is the most important job in the world, it's the toughest job in the world. You should be willing to campaign for every vote. You should be willing to debate anytime, anywhere. I think it's an interesting juxtaposition where we find ourselves. I have been willing to do all of that during the entire process and people have been trying to push me out of this ever since Iowa. EB: Why? CLINTON: I don't know. I don't know. I find it curious because it is unprecedented in history. I don't understand it. Between my opponent and his camp and some in the media there has been this urgency to end this. Historically, that makes no sense, so I find it a bit of a mystery. EB: You don't buy the party unity argument? CLINTON: I don't because, again, I've been around long enough. You know my husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. You know, I just don't understand it and there's lot of speculation about why it is, but . . . EB: What's your speculation? CLINTON: You know, I don't know, I find it curious and I don't want to attribute motives or strategies to people because I don't really know, but it's a historical curiosity to me. EB: Does it have anything to do with gender? CLINTON: I don't know that either. http://www.argusleader.com/assets/doc/DF109229524.DOC? GID=jBFH+726/ZrLbM/YOyv7xau6Xkpk1vBg3C14t7I5i3w%3D http://tinyurl.com/3hyy4u
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/23/clinton.comments/index.html#cnnSTCVideo this clip shows her saying what she said and it shows how other people heard what she said. Maybe I am not hearing them correctly but it sure seems like many people are hearing the same thing I have heard. authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie wrote: I will look for the proofs just to show you what is said regarding race. It doesn't take a genius to get the voting thing. We all knew that it would come out sooner or later. America has lots of Bigotry why would it be surprising that a bunch of white people would actually say that their voting for Hillary did have to do with race? It isn't surprising. I never said it was. Let's look at your claim again: Also the fact that the voters in the states where Senator Clinton has won by large margins have openly stated that the primary reason for their voting for Senator Clinton over Senator Obama is race. Some voters here and there have said that (including in states that Obama won) to reporters. But to my knowledge there's never been a poll question asked to that effect. The one you cited didn't ask that. Why would it be surprising that she would begin referring to those people as her very hard working white people? It wouldn't be surprising. Everybody's saying that. I did not like those things they were not good in my view but that was not the same as saying. ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN BOBBY KENNEDY GOT KILLED IN JUNE OF 1968 Except she didn't say that, as you know. Why are you lying again? Here's the transcript of that part of the interview: CLINTON: Honestly, I just believe that this is the most important job in the world, it's the toughest job in the world. You should be willing to campaign for every vote. You should be willing to debate anytime, anywhere. I think it's an interesting juxtaposition where we find ourselves. I have been willing to do all of that during the entire process and people have been trying to push me out of this ever since Iowa. EB: Why? CLINTON: I don't know. I don't know. I find it curious because it is unprecedented in history. I don't understand it. Between my opponent and his camp and some in the media there has been this urgency to end this. Historically, that makes no sense, so I find it a bit of a mystery. EB: You don't buy the party unity argument? CLINTON: I don't because, again, I've been around long enough. You know my husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. You know, I just don't understand it and there's lot of speculation about why it is, but . . . EB: What's your speculation? CLINTON: You know, I don't know, I find it curious and I don't want to attribute motives or strategies to people because I don't really know, but it's a historical curiosity to me. EB: Does it have anything to do with gender? CLINTON: I don't know that either. http://www.argusleader.com/assets/doc/DF109229524.DOC? GID=jBFH+726/ZrLbM/YOyv7xau6Xkpk1vBg3C14t7I5i3w%3D http://tinyurl.com/3hyy4u To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: stupid is as stupid does I am being stupid now
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: CNN EXIT POLLS KENTUCKY Yes, you're being REELY REEELY STOOPID now. This chart shows that a *majority* (78%) of Kentucky voters said race WAS ***NOT*** IMPORTANT TO THEM. Exactly the opposite of what you've been claiming, just as in West Virginia.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: stupid is as stupid does I am being stupid now
then they voted for Hillary.. Here Judy look what this Deranged white guy has to say. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/24798368#24798368 authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie wrote: Please note that even when they say race was nto so important they voted for Hillary anyway. Denial in nothing new but as they say actions speak louder than words. And it has never occurred to you that they might have voted for Clinton because they thought she was a better candidate, right? In your alleged mind, the fact that they voted for Clinton is proof that they're racists. And your chart, once again, shows the *opposite* of what you've been claiming. A majority of voters (80% in Pennsylvania, 79% in Ohio) said race WAS ***NOT*** IMPORTANT to them. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
[FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/23/clinton.comments/index.html #cnnSTCVideo this clip shows her saying what she said and it shows how other people heard what she said. Maybe I am not hearing them correctly but it sure seems like many people are hearing the same thing I have heard. Here's what you said you heard: ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN BOBBY KENNEDY GOT KILLED IN JUNE OF 1968 She never said that, sorry. I just checked that video against the transcript I posted, and the transcript is completely accurate. Here's the portion in question again: CLINTON: I don't because, again, I've been around long enough. You know my husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. You know, I just don't understand it and there's lot of speculation about why it is, but . . . Nothing about anything can happen. She's questioning why people are trying to push her out of the race when other primaries have continued into June.
[FairfieldLife] Re: stupid is as stupid does I am being stupid now
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please note that even when they say race was nto so important they voted for Hillary anyway. Denial in nothing new but as they say actions speak louder than words. And it has never occurred to you that they might have voted for Clinton because they thought she was a better candidate, right? In your alleged mind, the fact that they voted for Clinton is proof that they're racists. And your chart, once again, shows the *opposite* of what you've been claiming. A majority of voters (80% in Pennsylvania, 79% in Ohio) said race WAS ***NOT*** IMPORTANT to them.
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
Well a very deranged white man N word Lover Kieth Olberman seems to have heard the same thing many people have heard the same thing. authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie wrote: http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/23/clinton.comments/index.html #cnnSTCVideo this clip shows her saying what she said and it shows how other people heard what she said. Maybe I am not hearing them correctly but it sure seems like many people are hearing the same thing I have heard. Here's what you said you heard: ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN BOBBY KENNEDY GOT KILLED IN JUNE OF 1968 She never said that, sorry. I just checked that video against the transcript I posted, and the transcript is completely accurate. Here's the portion in question again: CLINTON: I don't because, again, I've been around long enough. You know my husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. You know, I just don't understand it and there's lot of speculation about why it is, but . . . Nothing about anything can happen. She's questioning why people are trying to push her out of the race when other primaries have continued into June. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: Stupid is as Stupid Does
Fox News Poll Was Hillary Clinton wrong to invoke the assassination of Robert Kennedy in explaining why she stays in the Democratic race? Yes (68%) Louis McKenzie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Well a very deranged white man N word Lover Kieth Olberman seems to have heard the same thing many people have heard the same thing. authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie wrote: http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/23/clinton.comments/index.html #cnnSTCVideo this clip shows her saying what she said and it shows how other people heard what she said. Maybe I am not hearing them correctly but it sure seems like many people are hearing the same thing I have heard. Here's what you said you heard: ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN BOBBY KENNEDY GOT KILLED IN JUNE OF 1968 She never said that, sorry. I just checked that video against the transcript I posted, and the transcript is completely accurate. Here's the portion in question again: CLINTON: I don't because, again, I've been around long enough. You know my husband did not wrap up the nomination in 1992 until he won the California primary somewhere in the middle of June, right? We all remember Bobby Kennedy was assassinated in June in California. You know, I just don't understand it and there's lot of speculation about why it is, but . . . Nothing about anything can happen. She's questioning why people are trying to push her out of the race when other primaries have continued into June. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: stupid is as stupid does I am being stupid now
they said and voted in way that showed that it was. 78% is not 100% I never said ALL WHITE PEOPLE.. anyway here are a few other people who are seeing it like I do http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/24798368#24783360 authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Louis McKenzie wrote: CNN EXIT POLLS KENTUCKY Yes, you're being REELY REEELY STOOPID now. This chart shows that a *majority* (78%) of Kentucky voters said race WAS ***NOT*** IMPORTANT TO THEM. Exactly the opposite of what you've been claiming, just as in West Virginia. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!'Yahoo! Groups Links
