Ed Rendell: Obama Coverage Was Embarrassing

[/dev/null]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/michaelcalde...barrassing.html

[DC Tom]

MSNBC is FoxSnooze Lite.

 

And if more than three people watched MSNBC, it might actually matter.

[/dev/null]

And if more than three people watched MSNBC, it might actually matter.

 

Aww c'mon, give MSNBC a break. I know more than three people have to watch it. I mean figure Matthews and Olbertard both have wives and mothers. So there's 4 people right there

[OCinBuffalo]

The responses were so telling about the affected socialists that support Obama. They don't see Ed Rendell for what he is: a very smart guy who speaks the truth more than any other pol I have seen. Nah, they think he's like them: say anything bad about the other guy no matter how untrue, because it's "justified". They can't tell the difference.

 

Here's the deal: Ed Rendell is perhaps one of the best governors PA has ever had. He is certainly the best mayor Philly has had in the last 50 years. He did an incredible job working with every side/interest group(of which there are a ton). It's easy to see how well he did when you consider what has happened to Philly in his absence = Massive Corruption and Massive Failure. This is what happens when an effective Democrat is replaced by a hopeless socialist. The socialist cannot get his worthless ideology out of the way long enough to actually accomplish anything, while cops and civilians are being murdered right and left, and his entire staff is so power-drunk, arrogant, smug, and so filled with the sense of their own entitlement(hmm entitlement and the far-left, what a shocker! ), that all of them get caught by the FBI with their hands in the till and all are in prison now.

 

And, lo and behold, what do we have here? Any reasonable person knows that MSNBC(the "funny feeling up my leg" network) was/is completely in the tank for Obama, and hasn't even attempted to do their jobs properly.

 

All Rendell did was do what he does: tell the truth.

 

Can't wait for an Obama tool to show up here and start trying to attack Rendell.

[YellowLinesandArmadillos]

The responses were so telling about the affected socialists that support Obama. They don't see Ed Rendell for what he is: a very smart guy who speaks the truth more than any other pol I have seen. Nah, they think he's like them: say anything bad about the other guy no matter how untrue, because it's "justified". They can't tell the difference.

 

Here's the deal: Ed Rendell is perhaps one of the best governors PA has ever had. He is certainly the best mayor Philly has had in the last 50 years. He did an incredible job working with every side/interest group(of which there are a ton). It's easy to see how well he did when you consider what has happened to Philly in his absence = Massive Corruption and Massive Failure. This is what happens when an effective Democrat is replaced by a hopeless socialist. The socialist cannot get his worthless ideology out of the way long enough to actually accomplish anything, while cops and civilians are being murdered right and left, and his entire staff is so power-drunk, arrogant, smug, and so filled with the sense of their own entitlement(hmm entitlement and the far-left, what a shocker! ), that all of them get caught by the FBI with their hands in the till and all are in prison now.

 

And, lo and behold, what do we have here? Any reasonable person knows that MSNBC(the "funny feeling up my leg" network) was/is completely in the tank for Obama, and hasn't even attempted to do their jobs properly.

 

All Rendell did was do what he does: tell the truth.

 

Can't wait for an Obama tool to show up here and start trying to attack Rendell.

 

Rendell has a point about the one sideness of MSNBC because Matthews has had a hard on for the Clintons for the last 16 years. That being said, I don't think Matthews is in the tank for O'Bama, just a flat out Clinton hater. I am not sure fully how he feels about McCain and I surely would not make such a monolithic statement. Obermann is an obvious Bush Basher, not there is anything wrong with that. He is just the flip side of oxy boy feel that Rush. So what, take it with a grain of salt and enjoy the humor.

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

The responses were so telling about the affected socialists that support Obama. They don't see Ed Rendell for what he is: a very smart guy who speaks the truth more than any other pol I have seen. Nah, they think he's like them: say anything bad about the other guy no matter how untrue, because it's "justified". They can't tell the difference.

 

Here's the deal: Ed Rendell is perhaps one of the best governors PA has ever had. He is certainly the best mayor Philly has had in the last 50 years. He did an incredible job working with every side/interest group(of which there are a ton). It's easy to see how well he did when you consider what has happened to Philly in his absence = Massive Corruption and Massive Failure. This is what happens when an effective Democrat is replaced by a hopeless socialist. The socialist cannot get his worthless ideology out of the way long enough to actually accomplish anything, while cops and civilians are being murdered right and left, and his entire staff is so power-drunk, arrogant, smug, and so filled with the sense of their own entitlement(hmm entitlement and the far-left, what a shocker! ), that all of them get caught by the FBI with their hands in the till and all are in prison now.

 

And, lo and behold, what do we have here? Any reasonable person knows that MSNBC(the "funny feeling up my leg" network) was/is completely in the tank for Obama, and hasn't even attempted to do their jobs properly.

 

All Rendell did was do what he does: tell the truth.

 

Can't wait for an Obama tool to show up here and start trying to attack Rendell.

I'll yield to you on Rendell's governing skills, but it seems that when he's behind the mic in a political arena, he's likely to shoot himself in the foot more often than not. Talking to young voters ("drinking the kool-aid" comment), the Louis Farrakhan statement, "Obama would make a great vp...he's not ready to be president", etc.

[blzrul]

Ed Rendall is one of the biggest and unabashed Hillary backers on the face of the earth. He's still po'd over her loss and makes no attempt to hide it. I wonder how much THAT plays in his statement? Duh,

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Ed Rendall is one of the biggest and unabashed Hillary backers on the face of the earth. He's still po'd over her loss and makes no attempt to hide it. I wonder how much THAT plays in his statement? Duh,

 

Seeng as you live on the left coast, it's no surprise to me that you haven't the foggiest idea about Rendell. He's a democrat, a party hack and someone who has invariably muscled the Philadelphia Democratic machine to (barely) keep PA in the Blue State column.

 

He'll do the same for BO, don't worry.

 

[OCinBuffalo]

Ed Rendall is one of the biggest and unabashed Hillary backers on the face of the earth. He's still po'd over her loss and makes no attempt to hide it. I wonder how much THAT plays in his statement? Duh,

 

Ignorance: Now's that's change we can believe in!

[OCinBuffalo]

Seeng as you live on the left coast, it's no surprise to me that you haven't the foggiest idea about Rendell. He's a democrat, a party hack and someone who has invariably muscled the Philadelphia Democratic machine to (barely) keep PA in the Blue State column.

 

He'll do the same for BO, don't worry.

 

Shhhh! Don't ruin the fun! The Obamaton is going to explain to us how Rendell doesn't have a record of working with all sides and getting things done, primarily because he starts with the truth and moves on from there. Of course, if PA goes for Obama, she'll have nothing but good things to say about Rendell.

 

/sarcasm

 

I knew I would catch at least one dumbass, hypocritical, socialist hack in this one. Let's see if we get more.

[OCinBuffalo]

I'll yield to you on Rendell's governing skills, but it seems that when he's behind the mic in a political arena, he's likely to shoot himself in the foot more often than not. Talking to young voters ("drinking the kool-aid" comment), the Louis Farrakhan statement, "Obama would make a great vp...he's not ready to be president", etc.

Let's take these in order:

 

1. Kool aid: Are you telling me that there isn't a whole lot of kool-aid being passed out by Obama people? I'm talking method here not Obama's ideas. The whole primary was about soaring ideals with no explanation of how things would be accomplished. I'm not saying that Obama won't have solutions, or that he didn't have them all along, or that some things require more work, none of that, so don't even start. However, his campaign style in the primary was clearly "kool-aid drinking" by anybody's definition. So again, Rendell tells the truth. Rendell 1, you 0.

2. Who cares what anybody says about Farrakhan? As if he cares what he says about anybody else? Seriously? Who cares about him at all? The man pushes himself on everyone, in an effort to make $$$, Obama is just one more sucker who got caught up, why should I hold that against him? Rendell was merely saying that Faradork met with Obama, and this is a political race, so why can't he do what politicians do? As if Obama didn't do the very same thing? Rendell 2, you 0 Edit, and I'm going to subtract a point for you being hypocritical. Rendell 2, you -1.

3. "Obama VP". Well, looking at the very effective ads McCain has run lately, and the fact that this is now anybody's game when there's no way in hell that should be happening, who looks like the bigger fool right now? Rendell or you? A whole lot of people agree that Obama isn't ready to be president. Are you saying that they are all "shooting themselves in the foot" too? Rendell 3, you -1. Edit: and here, here's an "unbiased" link, because it comes from CNN , that proves it CNN poll

 

Looks to me like all Rendell has been doing is being the effective pol he is, and that's because he's more likely to deal with things as they are, instead of letting his ideology cloud his views, and operate based on the way things "should be" or the way he wished or liked them to be.

 

It's par for the course. The MSNBC coverage was embarrassing, any reasonable person knows it, that's why their ratings are where they are, and Rendell simply stated the obvious.

[/dev/null]

He'll do the same for BO, don't worry.

 

BO

 

For all the talk about his funny name and having Hussein as middle name, that's the one thing about Obama's name that really gets me. Maybe it's because I spend so much time on the intarweb where everything is abbreviated and l33t3|)

 

We need to find somebody with the intials FU to run

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

Let's take these in order:

 

1. Kool aid: Are you telling me that there isn't a whole lot of kool-aid being passed out by Obama people? I'm talking method here not Obama's ideas. The whole primary was about soaring ideals with no explanation of how things would be accomplished. I'm not saying that Obama won't have solutions, or that he didn't have them all along, or that some things require more work, none of that, so don't even start. However, his campaign style in the primary was clearly "kool-aid drinking" by anybody's definition. So again, Rendell tells the truth. Rendell 1, you 0.

2. Who cares what anybody says about Farrakhan? As if he cares what he says about anybody else? Seriously? Rendell 2, you 0

3. "Obama VP". Well, looking at the very effective ads McCain has run lately, and the fact that this is now anybody's game when there's no way in hell that should be happening, who looks like the bigger fool right now? Rendell or you? A whole lot of people agree that Obama isn't ready to be president. Are you saying that they are all "shooting themselves in the foot" too? Rendell 3, you 0.

 

Looks to me like all Rendell has been doing is being the effective pol he is, and that's because he's more likely to deal with things as they are, instead of letting his ideology cloud his views, and operate based on the way things "should be".

1. The man is speaking to young men and women about participation in an election. Perhaps more than other audiences, the speaker needs to choose his words carefully or risk losing his audience, or worse. He stupidly said they drank the Obama Kool Aid and thereby committed suicide with these kids. I'm not saying it was or was not true, but that it was a dumb way to make his point, and he paid the price.

 

2. People do care about Farrakhan. HRC lambasted Obama for not doing enough to distance himself from the Nation of Islam leader. Rendell panders to him and it's perfectly ok. You're deluding yourself, as usual...

 

3. Tim Russert beat Rendell senseless when the governor said Obama would make a great VP, and then said foolishly that he wasn't ready to be president, as if being VP didn't require presidential readiness. Rendell paid the price again.

 

I was using these as examples, but of course, you choose the literal, and feel compelled to defend these explicitly. I'm not disagreeing with you about his skills as mayor of Philly or being governor of the great state of Pennsylvania. I'm merely pointing out he has a reputation as open mouth, insert foot on the national stage.

 

But congratulations on luring another dumbass, hypocritical, socialist hack.

[OCinBuffalo]

1. The man is speaking to young men and women about participation in an election. Perhaps more than other audiences, the speaker needs to choose his words carefully or risk losing his audience, or worse. He stupidly said they drank the Obama Kool Aid and thereby committed suicide with these kids. I didn't say it was or was not true, but that it was a dumb way to make his point, and he paid the price.

 

2. People do care about Farrakhan. HRC lambasted Obama for not doing enough to distance himself from the Nation of Islam leader. Rendell panders to him and it's perfectly ok. You're deluding yourself, as usual...

 

3. Tim Russert beat Rendell senseless when the governor said Obama would make a great VP, and then said foolishly that he wasn't ready to be president, as if being VP didn't require presidential readiness. Rendell paid the price again.

 

I was using these as examples, but of course, you choose the literal, and feel compelled to defend these explicitly. I'm not disagreeing with you about his skills as mayor of Philly or being governor of the great state of Pennsylvania. I'm merely pointing out he has a reputation as open mouth, insert foot on the national stage.

 

But congratulations on luring another dumbass, hypocritical, socialist hack.

1. Que? What in the heck makes you think his intended audience was those kids? Where did you get that silly idea? He paid no price, none at all. Those kids were going to vote 99% Obama anyway. What he got was: national media coverage and a lasting image(kool-aid drinkers = Obamaton kids) of making Obama supporters seem lightweight, young, inexperienced in politics...wait....kinda like your response. Score anther for Rendell....and nothing for you.

 

2. Who cares about Farrakan? Show me the #s. Where in the world did you think that Farrakhan would matter anywhere, any time? This is a minor point and nothing compared to Obama's bashing of Hillary on her votes on the Iraq war. Please. Rendell paid no price and once again, his intended audience, his state, gets an image of Obama = Farratool. This is politics 101. Last time I checked Hillary smoked Obama in PA. Remind me what price Rendell paid again? Link here. Wrong again, boy this is getting to be a habit with you, huh? Oh, and explain how I am deluding myself? Does anybody care, besides you(edit: I forgot about Sean Hannity, interesting company you keep ), right now that Faratool was linked to Obama? Is McCain saying that? No and No. Deluded indeed.

 

3. Again, with all due respect for Tim Russert, Rendell used him to obtain his goal. He paid no price, got free airtime to say that Obama wasn't ready, and that's the thing that will stick in people's minds, not Russert's canard = "what if the pres. dies", etc., and delivered his state for Hillary by 10 friggin points. The trap is: the more people talk about it, the more the words "Obama isn't ready" get repeated. Get it? I'm sorry, but now this is simply kicking you when you're down and I won't bother.

 

The major point you are missing: Ed Rendell has enough political capital to fill 10 Walmarts, and he can use any of it any time because it all belongs to him. He earned it, and there are no strings attached. He can spend it anyway he likes, and he will probably run for, and be, President some day. Nobody in the entire Democratic pantheon is better suited, including Obama and Hillary.

 

Thinking that he "paid the price" with the MSNBC comment, or any of the comments you pointed out, or that his actions aren't 100% intentional, is wildly naive. In fact, it was Rendell's activity that won Hillary the last 7-8 major states, y'know, the ones that are actually going to matter in Nov.? How much do you wanna bet there's a seat at the table for Rendell if Hillary runs in 2012? How much do you wanna bet that nobody Fs with Rendell ever in the Democratic party? Edit: how much do you wanna bet that if Obama wins and if Rendell decides he wants a cabinet position, Obama has to give it to him?

 

Perhaps I should add "naive" to the list and take away hypocritical? Can't say dumbass, because you are clearly ignorant of the game here, not stupid<--a choice. And I have no idea if you are a socialist, but I am sure the one I caught is.

[blzrul]

Seeng as you live on the left coast, it's no surprise to me that you haven't the foggiest idea about Rendell. He's a democrat, a party hack and someone who has invariably muscled the Philadelphia Democratic machine to (barely) keep PA in the Blue State column.

 

He'll do the same for BO, don't worry.

 

I know very well who he is. He's also the former head of the DNC. And if people in Pennsylvania are stupid, don't blame him.

[drnykterstein]

What was embarassing about it? It would help if he elaborated? Did someone get pantsed while on stage?

[OCinBuffalo]

I know very well who he is. He's also the former head of the DNC. And if people in Pennsylvania are stupid, don't blame him.

So let me get this straight: The people of Pennsylvania were stupid when they voted for Hillary, but they will suddenly be smart if they vote for Obama in the general? Or is it: the people were smart for voting for Hillary by 10 points and not Obama, and stupid if they vote for McCain and never vote for Obama in either race, but regardless, it won't be Rendell's fault? I wonder if anybody has bothered telling them whether they are supposed to be smart or stupid yet?

 

FTW!

 

The rampant hypocrisy on the far-left astounds me at times. This is why I like real Democrats and not socialist fools. I also like being able to tell the difference.

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

1. Que? What in the heck makes you think his intended audience was those kids? Where did you get that silly idea? He paid no price, none at all. Those kids were going to vote 99% Obama anyway. What he got was: national media coverage and a lasting image(kool-aid drinkers = Obamaton kids) of making Obama supporters seem lightweight, young, inexperienced in politics...wait....kinda like your response. Score anther for Rendell....and nothing for you.

 

2. Who cares about Farrakan? Show me the #s. Where in the world did you think that Farrakhan would matter anywhere, any time? This is a minor point and nothing compared to Obama's bashing of Hillary on her votes on the Iraq war. Please. Rendell paid no price and once again, his intended audience, his state, gets an image of Obama = Farratool. This is politics 101. Last time I checked Hillary smoked Obama in PA. Remind me what price Rendell paid again? Link here. Wrong again, boy this is getting to be a habit with you, huh? Oh, and explain how I am deluding myself? Does anybody care, besides you(edit: I forgot about Sean Hannity, interesting company you keep ), right now that Faratool was linked to Obama? Is McCain saying that? No and No. Deluded indeed.

 

3. Again, with all due respect for Tim Russert, Rendell used him to obtain his goal. He paid no price, got free airtime to say that Obama wasn't ready, and that's the thing that will stick in people's minds, not Russert's canard = "what if the pres. dies", etc., and delivered his state for Hillary by 10 friggin points. The trap is: the more people talk about it, the more the words "Obama isn't ready" get repeated. Get it? I'm sorry, but now this is simply kicking you when you're down and I won't bother.

 

The major point you are missing: Ed Rendell has enough political capital to fill 10 Walmarts, and he can use any of it any time because it all belongs to him. He earned it, and there are no strings attached. He can spend it anyway he likes, and he will probably run for, and be, President some day. Nobody in the entire Democratic pantheon is better suited, including Obama and Hillary.

 

Thinking that he "paid the price" with the MSNBC comment, or any of the comments you pointed out, or that his actions aren't 100% intentional, is wildly naive. In fact, it was Rendell's activity that won Hillary the last 7-8 major states, y'know, the ones that are actually going to matter in Nov.? How much do you wanna bet there's a seat at the table for Rendell if Hillary runs in 2012? How much do you wanna bet that nobody Fs with Rendell ever in the Democratic party? Edit: how much do you wanna bet that if Obama wins and if Rendell decides he wants a cabinet position, Obama has to give it to him?

 

Perhaps I should add "naive" to the list and take away hypocritical? Can't say dumbass, because you are clearly ignorant of the game here, not stupid<--a choice. And I have no idea if you are a socialist, but I am sure the one I caught is.

Gee I coulda sworn the reason for talking to these young voters was to educate them and instill values. But maybe you're right, it was really about using them to get his message about kool aid drinkers to adult voters. Yeah, that's it, of course.

 

Farrakhan doesn't matter to anyone, because it's really about Ed delivering PA for Hillary.

 

The late Tim Russert hangs him out to dry on national tv, and that doesn't matter, cuz Ed is really playing TR like a piano.

 

With all his political capital, he can keep opening his mouth, stepping in it deep, and come out smelling like a rose, cuz that was his intention all along.

 

This is too freaking funny. Do you have enough of those drugs for everyone? The only one you "caught" is yourself, making schit up to disguise your man love for Ed Rendell.

[OCinBuffalo]

Gee I coulda sworn the reason for talking to these young voters was to educate them and instill values. But maybe you're right, it was really about using them to get his message about kool aid drinkers to adult voters. Yeah, that's it, of course.

 

Farrakhan doesn't matter to anyone, because it's really about Ed delivering PA for Hillary.

 

The late Tim Russert hangs him out to dry on national tv, and that doesn't matter, cuz Ed is really playing TR like a piano.

 

With all his political capital, he can keep opening his mouth, stepping in it deep, and come out smelling like a rose, cuz that was his intention all along.

 

This is too freaking funny. Do you have enough of those drugs for everyone? The only one you "caught" is yourself, making schit up to disguise your man love for Ed Rendell.

Wrong. The simple fact is you don't understand what's happening here. Why are you trying to play off your naive notions by attacking me? You don't even know what you don't know here. You are eating the cheap ploy that was prepared by Obama's campaign people and read verbatim by their media lapdogs. Rendell has a bad rep for "foot in mouth?"....hysterical. They probably took 5 minutes to make up that crap and you are buying it? Why?

 

If Rendell "paid the price" why is it that literally every news network has had him on 2-3 days this week? If he "lost" something, what was it exactly? Get it yet? Hint: he doesn't care what you think because the far-left is quite literally irrelevant to him. He has consistently won elections by 20-40 points while consistently ignoring the far-left. They have little influence = vote for him or stay home, it won't matter, because Rendell owns the center, just like Clinton did.

 

I'm just telling you the truth about what happened. Sorry if you don't like it, but not everything you see is as you see it. Clearly you simply lapped up the crap that the Obama-biased press fed you. Sorry, dude. The reality is: Rendell delivered his state by 10 points. Deal with it, and stop bitching at me, it's boring.

 

Do you honestly believe that lightweight Obama doesn't have to give heavyweight Rendell whatever he wants if he has any inkling of winning PA? Seriously? Why do you think Rendell could afford go out as far as he did, even though his candidate was losing? In a hotly contested primary like that normally the smart play is to hedge your bet and pick up some influence, especially if you are a swing-state governor. But Rendell, then and now, gets to do whatever he wants, because he already has all the influence he will ever need.

 

Obama can talk about "change" all he wants, but he depends on "more of the same" thing going on in PA infinitely more than McCain = Democratic Machine politics. He needs to pay off Rendell or he loses the election. And yes, I mean literally in terms of $$$, jobs and appointments. That's how things work in Philly and Pittsburgh. If Obama loses/ties in Pittsburgh, it's over, not just the state, the whole election. Pittsburgh? Put it this way: I knew/heard of many, many Steelers season ticket holders wouldn't attend games while Cordell Stewart was the starter. Get it? It wasn't because he sucked. It's literally the least integrated place I have ever been, and I have been all over the South. There are NO interracial marriages, and you will hear people being openly racist out loud, even at work. Edit: and yeah, the racists were ALL Democrats.

 

I'm just sayin': without a significant ground effort there, it's not going to be pretty. Polls mean nothing regarding this issue in that town. They are UNION Democrats, not liberals. When it's pull the lever time, without Rendell facilitating/greasing, it's over. Obama cannot win without PA. No amount of Obama people will get anywhere with anyone in that state if Rendell pulls the plug. Even if he keeps his organization on the sidelines or only half-asses it, PA goes Republican, no ifs about it.

 

So, its academic: Rendell pays no price, does what he wants, supports the Clintons(which is the much smarter long-term play anyway), and remains in a vital position such that Obama needs him infinitely more than he needs Obama. He never had anything to lose, and he still has everything to gain. But, yeah, your explanation is probably more accurate and he should be worried about the wrath of a bunch of piss-ant Obamatons because they are going to make him "pay the price".

 

You can attack me all you like, but everything I have written here is factual. Tough schit if you don't like it. Call me names, make up crap, whatever. Do it for a day, a month, a year. Whenever you get done, everything I wrote here will still be true, has nothing to do with whether I like Rendell or not, and is the serious challenge that Obama must expend tremendous resources on. And yeah, if Bill Clinton isn't placated, or if he decides he wants Hillary to run in 2012, one phone call to Ed Rendell and it's all over for Obama. Just sayin', Clinton didn't campaign for Kerry, are you telling me that wasn't so Hillary could run?

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

Wrong. The simple fact is you don't understand what's happening here. Why are you trying to play off your naive notions by attacking me? You don't even know what you don't know here. You are eating the cheap ploy that was prepared by Obama's campaign people and read verbatim by their media lapdogs. Rendell has a bad rep for "foot in mouth?"....hysterical. They probably took 5 minutes to make up that crap and you are buying it? Why?

 

If Rendell "paid the price" why is it that literally every news network has had him on 2-3 days this week? If he "lost" something, what was it exactly? Get it yet? Hint: he doesn't care what you think because the far-left is quite literally irrelevant to him. He has consistently won elections by 20-40 points while consistently ignoring the far-left. They have little influence = vote for him or stay home, it won't matter, because Rendell owns the center, just like Clinton did.

 

I'm just telling you the truth about what happened. Sorry if you don't like it, but not everything you see is as you see it. Clearly you simply lapped up the crap that the Obama-biased press fed you. Sorry, dude. The reality is: Rendell delivered his state by 10 points. Deal with it, and stop bitching at me, it's boring.

 

Do you honestly believe that lightweight Obama doesn't have to give heavyweight Rendell whatever he wants if he has any inkling of winning PA? Seriously? Why do you think Rendell could afford go out as far as he did, even though his candidate was losing? In a hotly contested primary like that normally the smart play is to hedge your bet and pick up some influence, especially if you are a swing-state governor. But Rendell, then and now, gets to do whatever he wants, because he already has all the influence he will ever need.

 

Obama can talk about "change" all he wants, but he depends on "more of the same" thing going on in PA infinitely more than McCain = Democratic Machine politics. He needs to pay off Rendell or he loses the election. And yes, I mean literally in terms of $$$, jobs and appointments. That's how things work in Philly and Pittsburgh. If Obama loses/ties in Pittsburgh, it's over, not just the state, the whole election. Pittsburgh? Put it this way: I knew/heard of many, many Steelers season ticket holders wouldn't attend games while Cordell Stewart was the starter. Get it? It wasn't because he sucked. It's literally the least integrated place I have ever been, and I have been all over the South. There are NO interracial marriages, and you will hear people being openly racist out loud, even at work. Edit: and yeah, the racists were ALL Democrats.

 

I'm just sayin': without a significant ground effort there, it's not going to be pretty. Polls mean nothing regarding this issue in that town. They are UNION Democrats, not liberals. When it's pull the lever time, without Rendell facilitating/greasing, it's over. Obama cannot win without PA. No amount of Obama people will get anywhere with anyone in that state if Rendell pulls the plug. Even if he keeps his organization on the sidelines or only half-asses it, PA goes Republican, no ifs about it.

 

So, its academic: Rendell pays no price, does what he wants, supports the Clintons(which is the much smarter long-term play anyway), and remains in a vital position such that Obama needs him infinitely more than he needs Obama. He never had anything to lose, and he still has everything to gain. But, yeah, your explanation is probably more accurate and he should be worried about the wrath of a bunch of piss-ant Obamatons because they are going to make him "pay the price".

 

You can attack me all you like, but everything I have written here is factual. Tough schit if you don't like it. Call me names, make up crap, whatever. Do it for a day, a month, a year. Whenever you get done, everything I wrote here will still be true, has nothing to do with whether I like Rendell or not, and is the serious challenge that Obama must expend tremendous resources on. And yeah, if Bill Clinton isn't placated, or if he decides he wants Hillary to run in 2012, one phone call to Ed Rendell and it's all over for Obama. Just sayin', Clinton didn't campaign for Kerry, are you telling me that wasn't so Hillary could run?

I'm gonna respond once more and then I'm done, cuz it's a waste of bits trying to tell you anything, as you continually win the most closed minded, holier than thou prize on this board....

 

my statements on Rendell have nothing whatsoever to do with any Obama or democratic or liberal or left wing talking points and/or viewpoints. I've never even heard or read what they had to say about him. They are based on my own opinions from watching him, admittedly not throughout his career. He says STUPID things to his audiences and then gets blasted for it. You seem enamored with twisting it around to be some sort of positive or intended result. It's not about how many votes he gets, what states he delivers, how many times he is on tv, or how much political capital he has, or anything else besides his lack of ability to consider the repercussions of his (verbal) actions. That's my viewpoint, nothing more, nothing less.