What a bunch of dumbasses. Especially her. I fuckin' hate that lady.

I don't understand why anyone is covering her campaign anymore. Get thee behind me, devil.

Reposted from other threads, and in the Liberal Politics group.

Keith Olbermann says it all.

The thing that frustrates me is that a good friend of mine, who's nominally a Clinton supporter but a Democrat first, would argue with me a lot about how Obama supporters are only out for Obama and they've never voted before and they're not going to vote if he's not running. While it is true he turned out a lot of new voters, guess what, a lot of them are first time voters who couldn't have voted before anyway, so that's not fair. And what do you know, it turns out that it's all Clinton backers who are like "Screw Obama, I'm not voting for him in November."

The true test will be how she deals with the loss. Is she going to mobilize her support base in support of him or will she let them run their write-in campaign or whatever the hell they're doing? She does have the right to continue, but instead of pretending she can still win, she should be trying to start getting her base prepared to take down McCain.

Dude, I'm scared of Bobby Jindal (governor of Louisiana) as the Republican VP candidate. He's like Mecha-Obama, pretty conservative, but young, brilliant, and dynamic. The only thing that may make him a safe pick from a Democratic perspective is that a lot of the far right can't tell the difference among all the ethnicities between South Asia and the Fertile Crescent and will just think Terrorist or Job Taker, or sometimes fantastically, both.. It would be kind of fantastic to have a Black candidate for President on one side and an Indian candidate for VP though, just to watch the rash of spontaneous Klansman head explosions that result.

I think she's torpedoed her own chances to win the veepstakes with this one.

Good . One of the things I would like Obama to do is pick a running mate who hasn't been a fixture in the Whitehouse recently . I'd like him to pick someone who might bring some newer ideas with them . Not just more of the same pleeze .

You left out that Robert F kennedy Jr. Has defended Clinton's remarks:

RFK Jr. Says No One Should Be Offended:

But, I guess one misses something like that when one is all frothed up in a ridiculous, superficial circle jerk of non-objectivity, and hypocritical hate.

RFK Jr. endorsed Clinton and has appeared in ads on her behalf. He's also said that he'd run for her Senate seat if she were to become President.

That's not to say his statement is invalid, of course. I just think it should be taken in the context of all the other support he has given her rather than being seen as a statement from a man whose only relevance to the issue is his relationship to the man who was referenced. In short, it's to his advantage to not be offended, and you cannot ignore that.

In any case, the comment is also offensive because it refers to the possibility of Obama being killed and almost directly cites that possibility as a reason for Clinton to remain in the race. RFK Jr.'s comment doesn't address that, and unless Obama says that he himself isn't bothered by the possibility of his own premature death being raised, especially in light of the death threats he's received (which is why he was given Secret Service protection so early), I don't think you can say that no one should be offended.

No, I just realized one of her biggest supporters was named Robert Kennedy, Jr. - and that's who got the first call to stop the bleeding. When I hear a comment from Ted, then I'll take it seriously. Also, it's not up to Robert Kennedy to tell people whether or not they should be offended. Oh, and another guy, named, BARACK OBAMA also gets to be offended.

Try looking beyond your knee jerk defenses and take a look at the actual situation.

I could be wrong here, but considering that many states held their primaries and caucuses at an earlier date, doesn't that make this June much later in the process than it was for Bill or RFK?

Try coming up with a more analytical response. Or not. I don't mind either way.

I would like to add that I don't have knee-jerk responses to anything, thank you. I rather like thinking for myself.

Man, those are some real asshole fuckfaces alright.

Though it would be cool if you could inflate toddlers and fly them like kites. Going to the beach would be so much more fun!

You're reading into the situation something I don't. I have no animus towards either candidate, and don't buy most of the hyperbolic attacks made against either candidate.

I did. Try showing the part in my original post that in any way relates to your first mound of bullshit post.

"frothed up?" Please, show me where I was frothed up. Thanks.

"Superficial circle jerk of non-objectivity" - now why would someone respond to that in a "analytic" manner, sweetie?

"Hypocritical hate" - Please let me know how my hate is hypocritical and I will respond. Otherwise, you have just made baseless accusations.

You're reading, in my comment, something that isn't there. Truth is, I didn't see any animosity in her words either.

Doesn't mean it wasn't offensive, though, even if RFK Jr. says it isn't.