Obama’s Path to Victory: Divide and Conquer

Did you listen to the sermon, I did. Context man, context! 

Aman to that,,anyone who listen’s to anti-,,people surman,,or put God down needs to sit and ask him self,,is this positive,,or reckless thinking,, like being a reckless ocupire,,to move to reckless behavor..All u have to do is look at the economy,,State of the Union..And people getting there bang for there buck in foodstamps,,instead of saving to buy a new car,,or take them family to a movie,,or resturant to move the economy forward..But if we did that we have happer people..and we can’t have that..to much happyness might kill u…  

ive heard enough putting people down on tv in his sermons,, that if I had to here 2 more minutes,, more of his garbage,, i turn into ,,this so called Pres..   20 years,,of that garbage,,would put nuts into there brains..look what it’s done to this so called Pres..Then he’s all ways been involed in side shows,, Acorn the price of gas,,bowing to our enemys,,  high unemployment..Ya,,20 years of those sermons has seeped into egotistic mind..I wonder if he called in present when he went to college… Is’nt that were u learn economics..High unemploment high gas prices,,wants abortions,,heath care were they pick and chose who gets help and who dose’nt..Ya,,he is well in speach,,look what he’s done with it… 

If you actually believe that Republicans don’t fight dirty, I’ve got real estate on the moon to sell you.  Granted, Republicans are generally more clever in their tactics.  You’re much too partisan to think critically about your “team.”

President Obama’s ’08 campaign was not responsible for ACORN’s activities. 

Some ACORN canvassers pulled the stupid trick of padding their voter lists with fictitous names, even Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck made a list.  But there is NO evidence that anyone tried to vote under any of the fictitious names. 

Think about it.  To vote under a fictitious name, first you have to make sure that name gets on the voting roster at a given voting poll.  Then the imposter has to get a fake ID with that person’s name on it, or at least produce a utility bill with that person’s name on it.

Enlighten me.  How did Gore fight dirty in the 2000 campaign? 

No, Gore did not move to exclude overseas military votes.  He wanted the absentee votes examined for counting errors.  That was a dirty allegation.  I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it was based on ignorance.

You’re stretching dredulity by saying the Gore campaign’s calling for recounts only in heavily Democratic precincts was dirty. That’s what any competent advocate would do.  You’re supremely naive if you think the Republicans would do any differet? 

Before the election, the Bush campaign’s legal team was preparing to argue that the popular vote should override the electoral college in the event the election went the other way.

Gore did NOT continue past the mandated deadline. The deadline occurred shortly after the activist decision in Gove v. Bush. The Florida SC gave a well-reasoned opinion as to which vote should be counted and which should not (remember the hanging chads, etc.) and that the re-count should proceed.

If the shoe were on the other foot in the 2000 election, you would be singing exactly the opposite tune.  And, in that event, the SCOTUS in Bush v. Gore would probably have allowed the recount to continue.

What about Rush calling Sandra Fluke a slut, wondering aloud where she got her birth control when she was in junior high and publicly requesting her to send him videos of her having sex?  And this was before she was a public figure.

What about all the nasty things Rush says on a regular basis.

What about the Republican machine showing ads associating Max Cleland with Osama Bin Laden?  In case you forgot, Cleland lost three limbs while fighting in Vietnam

What about the Bush administration associating members of Comngress with France and French ways just because they wanted a compromise tax cut plan? This was at the time that anti-France fervor was at a fever pitch and when France was considered anti-American.

The list goes on and on and on.  Books have been written about Republican tactics that have gone far beyond mere partisanship.  The Republican Congress is so hostile that Senator Snow is leaving.
 
BTW, Newt Gingrich hired me to sell  the prime real estate on the moon.  He suggested that I contact you to give you the privilege on getting in on this deal.  You don’t want to miss out. 

You repeated a lie about Max Cleland.  The truth is that he was getting off a helicopter with other soldiers in a combat mission and covered a grenade with his body to protect the others.  I think that dirty lie came from Ann Coulter.

Associating Cleland with Osama Bin Laden and insinuating that those prefering a compromise tax cut plan are anti-American is not merely uncivil.   It’s downright dirty.

Gore’s challenge of overseas  ballots went through proper channels and was granted by authorities.  

Gore’s request for a recount only in heavily Democratic precincts was not a key factor in the SCOTUS’s decision in Gore v. Bush.   Read the decision again -carefully.

Give examples of the bile from Democratic politicians that far surpasses the dirtiness of Coulter, Savage or Rush.  Let’s see you scrape the barrell on this one.

Whoever sold you the Brooklyn Bridge must have told you that doing so would help the Republicans. 

“… a litany of crass statements by Rush, Ann Coulter, Michael Savage, and any other commentators would still be dwarfed by the bile we get from liberal POLITICIANS before getting to people like Dan Savage and Ed Schultz ”

Those are your words, not mine.  Not only do you need to stay focused, but you also need to pay attention.  It’s hard to have a meaningful discussion with someeone who keeps changing the subject and then denies that he did.

The ad on Cleland was showing a video of terrorists at the same time the voice over was insinuating that Cleland was soft on terrorism.  Any good propagandist (e.g. Karl Rove)  knows that visual imagery and repetition can eb much more powerful than logic and facts.  The association is clear.

Yes, Gore went through the channels (i.e. the election law).  The authorities made the decision.  So, you’re saying the election law and the authorities were dirty. 

Oh, and Cleland did thinkl the grenade on the ground might have been his.  He was beginning a combat mission and he was trained not to let a grenade lie about.  He instinctively rushed it. 

BTW, Cleland was in Vietnam fighting a war.  He didn’t go there to kick-back.

I pointed out that Rush’ calling Miss Fluke a slut and a prostitute, asking where she got her birth control in junion high and asking her to provide him with videos of her having sex, along with the other comments in his three day rant, crossed the line from merely uncivil to dirty.  He was talking dirty and his blather was dirty, especially since Miss Fluke, at that time, was not a public figure.

Your analogy of car theft was way off.  If someone has my car and I think they have it illegally and then I take them to court and lay all the facts and the pertinent law to the court, and if the court rules that he has my car legally and I do not appeal the decision, then the car is legally his – even if I disagree with the ruling.  Apply that to certain overseas ballots being discounted.

I disagree with those who say that Bush and the SCOTUS were complicit in stealing the 2000 election.  Even though i disagree with Gove v. Bush, the decision was made pursuant to the SCOTUS’ constitutional duties.  Similarly with certain overseas ballots being discounted in the 2000 election.

We are a nation of laws.  The SCOTUS’ decisions set forth the supreme law.   You can say that law was wrong or that the authorities made the wrong decision all you want.  The law and the authorities that decided to discount certain overseas ballots was just that: the law.

U.S. troops were sent to Vietnam to fight a war.  All the other things that happened involving them is secondary.  Yes, a lot of other things happened.  What’s your point?

Oh, and I wouldn’t talk about not being smart if I were you.  It calls attention to yourself.  One might wonder what a deficit of smarts it takes to have rerpeated trouble deciphering the word crook.  This is just one example.

You are living in the twilight zone.

Prove it!

It’s not the religion that’s the problem, its the believers.