Jump to content

Could this be why Hillary didn't concede


Recommended Posts

This is old news and there was no wrongdoing on Obama's part. To be sure he didn't benefit from the actions of a crook he's donated the funding they said he received and washed his hands of it.

 

None of us ever know when a connection is going to turn out to be a bad apple. Hillary's making a fuss over this would just revive Whitewater....where she took the same position as Obama has in this case. She can't accuse him without re-opening the investigation into herself. I always thought that maybe the Clintons got railroaded over Whitewater ... even so she'd be a fool to go there.

 

When you have such a large circle of friends, acquaintenance, colleagues and hangers-on as these guys - whether they're entertainers, or politicians - this stuff will happen occasionally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's been rumors on right-wing blogs of a video of Michele Obama saying some inflammatory Wright-type stuff. They've been wondering why it still hasn't been released.

 

Maybe it does exist, and Clinton has been waiting for it too. Only now the republican camp has decided that they would much rather face Obama, and want to wait until he has secured the nomination at the convention before dropping the bombshell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iQRxkYT...kGtScAD913GE7O0

 

Maybe she's still holding out for something like this to give the Super Delegates second thoughts

I saw on Drudge and posted another thread about it:

 

Obama tapped JFK's daughter....

 

Normally this would mean big trouble but it is not like the Clinton's can benefit because of Bill's past antics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's right, people are sick of the liberal, Democrat crap.

They're sick of all pin-headed, moronic penny-ante crap. Like "where's your flag pin?". That kind of bull sh-- is the sole property of the wingnuts who cover under their beds, jumping at every sudden noise and scurrying from place to place with their heads down because they think there is a terrorist under every rock.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There's been rumors on right-wing blogs of a video of Michele Obama saying some inflammatory Wright-type stuff. They've been wondering why it still hasn't been released.

 

Assuming it exists, it hasn't been released because the Klintons can't get their hands on it.

 

Why on earth would the GOP drop a bomb like that in June? The term is 'October Surprise' for a reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming it exists, it hasn't been released because the Klintons can't get their hands on it.

 

Why on earth would the GOP drop a bomb like that in June? The term is 'October Surprise' for a reason.

 

That statement alone makes me question whether such a tape even exists, because if anyone can dig up the dirt and get it out it's the Clinton war room

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assuming it exists, it hasn't been released because the Klintons can't get their hands on it.

 

Why on earth would the GOP drop a bomb like that in June? The term is 'October Surprise' for a reason.

Why on earth would they wait until October? Why not pound the Obama with this now and every day until November?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why on earth would they wait until October? Why not pound the Obama with this now and every day until November?

 

:lol: -- are you really asking that?

 

Any message dilutes over time. By releasing it now the shock value would be long since worn off by the time November arrives. A large number of people will not make up their minds until the last few weeks and you want the message fresh at the time those people are making up their minds. This phenomenon was pretty clearly illustrated by the Rev Wright scandal.

 

Also, Pasta Joe is technically right. In the event of a major Obama incident, the super delegates do have the option of giving the nomination to Hillary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol: -- are you really asking that?

 

Any message dilutes over time. By releasing it now the shock value would be long since worn off by the time November arrives. A large number of people will not make up their minds until the last few weeks and you want the message fresh at the time those people are making up their minds. This phenomenon was pretty clearly illustrated by the Rev Wright scandal.

 

Also, Pasta Joe is technically right. In the event of a major Obama incident, the super delegates do have the option of giving the nomination to Hillary.

What about Swiftboat? they aired that in what, July 2004 and kept hammering Kerry months after, dooming his election. Plus, it remains to be seen if the 527s or the conservative media lets go of Wright, Ayers, and all that. I just don't see them waiting if they have such a thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. He is serious. After all, he's the one that said Obama sounded like Ronald Regan and MLK combined the other night. :lol:

He was talking about the way he speaks. Obama's oratory skills. He wasn't saying he was as great as MLK or Reagan.

 

Frankly, I couldn't believe some of the stuff conservative commentators and politicians were saying about "how" he gave that speech, what it looked like on screen, and what a tremendous speaker he is. Most of them were as gushing as their liberal counterparts, and that rarely if ever happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. He is serious. After all, he's the one that said Obama sounded like Ronald Regan and MLK combined the other night. :lol:

did you even watch Obama's speech?

 

I remember clearly Ronald Reagan speaking on many occasions. I didn't agree with him on too much, but he made me smile (a lot) and he had a great vision for America. RR induced confidence, emotion, and patriotism because he was a gifted orator. So even though you didn't like him, you admired his skills and were inspired by his speeches.

 

The other thing that makes him a little like Reagan is the way he walks in into the room and takes control. He has your attention and doesn't have to work for it. Reagan owned the room in exactly the same way.

 

Does he say similar things or is he the same on issues? Of course not. They're just both great communicators.

 

While there's some clear differences, the comparison to MLK is pretty obvious in his cadence and emotion style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

did you even watch Obama's speech?

 

I remember clearly Ronald Reagan speaking on many occasions. I didn't agree with him on too much, but he made me smile (a lot) and he had a great vision for America. He induced confidence, emotion, and patriotism because he was a gifted orator. So even though you didn't like him, you admired his skills and were inspired by his speeches.

 

The other thing that makes him a little like Reagan is the way he walks in into the room and takes control. He has your attention and doesn't have to work for it. Reagan owned the room in exactly the same way.

 

Does he say similar things or is he the same on issues? Of course not. They're just both great communicators.

 

While there's some clear differences, the comparison to MLK is pretty obvious in his cadence and emotion style.

 

 

Right. RR & MLK always had so many of those UUmmm's and aaa's. Sorry, I'll pass on the Kool Aid. Wipe your mouth, its running down your chin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...