Obama hides behind DNC decision day to quit church

[Sister Fracas 5]

So again Dev, what was it exactly, in your own words (without links to articles or wikipedia or other vj threads) that you mean by Obama supporters "drinking koolaid"?

I'm waiting for this answer as well.

Well, I gotta run, to go celebrate hubster's b-day....so I may never know....

[HAL 9000 96]

Speak your mind (against the O-blam-a-ites) & get labelled a whiner.

Well at least you do it with good grammar. How being nearly identical on the issues makes for not wanting to support the probable nominee is beyond any of us other than having a clear problem with the substance of whining.

Please, do tell - would you vote for HC if she was the nominee? I doubt it.

Um.. yeah. I've said so a plenty before.

Like in post #9 of this very thread... so your doubts are wrong.

Edited June 2, 2008 by maviwaro

[HAL 9000 96]

So again Dev, what was it exactly, in your own words (without links to articles or wikipedia or other vj threads) that you mean by Obama supporters "drinking koolaid"?

I'm waiting for this answer as well.

Well, I gotta run, to go celebrate hubster's b-day....so I may never know....

Yayy!

For the B-day!!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Steven, shockingly enough, I *can* read. I also am not aware I was under oath when I signed on to VJ. I don't appreciate being called a liar when a.) I am not under oath & I can indeed change my mind, and b.) it's lame personal attack that serves no purpose.

Fair enough on changing your mind, but I think it's also fair to call you on what you said because the original implication was - whoever is chosen by the Party as the nominee at the Convention in August, you would support them, and you asked me pointedly if I could also make such a commitment. I couldn't make such a commitment without conditions, so if you also had certain conditions, that's fine.

IMO, not voting for Obama out of bitterness of defeat is lame. I'm not saying that's one of your reasons, but I sure hope it isn't.

but yet, you did say it, implying it is my (only) reason. ####### Steven?

Based on what you said, I wouldn't think it is your only reason, but it is pausible that it is one of them. This was a hard fought race to the bitter end...lots of things were said. In all the years I've followed politics, I've never seen anything like this.

[HAL 9000 96]

Bitter is a good choice of words, Steven.

[Sheriff Uling 3]

Speak your mind (against the O-blam-a-ites) & get labelled a whiner. Above point(s) proven!

It's not that... At the least, you have to do it with flair and great rhetoric that amounts to nothing like Sen. Obama or people won't get it.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

Steven, shockingly enough, I *can* read. I also am not aware I was under oath when I signed on to VJ. I don't appreciate being called a liar when a.) I am not under oath & I can indeed change my mind, and b.) it's lame personal attack that serves no purpose.

Fair enough on changing your mind, but I think it's also fair to call you on what you said because the original implication was - whoever is chosen by the Party as the nominee at the Convention in August, you would support them, and you asked me pointedly if I could also make such a commitment. I couldn't make such a commitment without conditions, so if you also had certain conditions, that's fine.

IMO, not voting for Obama out of bitterness of defeat is lame. I'm not saying that's one of your reasons, but I sure hope it isn't.

but yet, you did say it, implying it is my (only) reason. ####### Steven?

Based on what you said, I wouldn't think it is your only reason, but it is pausible that it is one of them. This was a hard fought race to the bitter end...lots of things were said. In all the years I've followed politics, I've never seen anything like this.

Steve - before the primaries started you were one of those that suggested if HRC were the candidate you would not vote for a Democrat. In fact, you seemed to favor Guiliani (I believe Gary had it quoted in his siggy at one point), who is far to the right of even McCain on many issues. Clearly people vote for reasons that have nothing to do with policy.

[no name 1]

Steven, shockingly enough, I *can* read. I also am not aware I was under oath when I signed on to VJ. I don't appreciate being called a liar when a.) I am not under oath & I can indeed change my mind, and b.) it's lame personal attack that serves no purpose.

Fair enough on changing your mind, but I think it's also fair to call you on what you said because the original implication was - whoever is chosen by the Party as the nominee at the Convention in August, you would support them, and you asked me pointedly if I could also make such a commitment. I couldn't make such a commitment without conditions, so if you also had certain conditions, that's fine.

IMO, not voting for Obama out of bitterness of defeat is lame. I'm not saying that's one of your reasons, but I sure hope it isn't.

but yet, you did say it, implying it is my (only) reason. ####### Steven?

Based on what you said, I wouldn't think it is your only reason, but it is pausible that it is one of them. This was a hard fought race to the bitter end...lots of things were said. In all the years I've followed politics, I've never seen anything like this.

We all know what happens when you assume.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Steven, shockingly enough, I *can* read. I also am not aware I was under oath when I signed on to VJ. I don't appreciate being called a liar when a.) I am not under oath & I can indeed change my mind, and b.) it's lame personal attack that serves no purpose.

Fair enough on changing your mind, but I think it's also fair to call you on what you said because the original implication was - whoever is chosen by the Party as the nominee at the Convention in August, you would support them, and you asked me pointedly if I could also make such a commitment. I couldn't make such a commitment without conditions, so if you also had certain conditions, that's fine.

IMO, not voting for Obama out of bitterness of defeat is lame. I'm not saying that's one of your reasons, but I sure hope it isn't.

but yet, you did say it, implying it is my (only) reason. ####### Steven?

Based on what you said, I wouldn't think it is your only reason, but it is pausible that it is one of them. This was a hard fought race to the bitter end...lots of things were said. In all the years I've followed politics, I've never seen anything like this.

Steve - before the primaries started you were one of those that suggested if HRC were the candidate you would not vote for a Democrat. In fact, you seemed to favor Guiliani (I believe Gary had it quoted in his siggy at one point), who is far to the right of even McCain on many issues. Clearly people vote for reasons that have nothing to do with policy.

Sure, character does count in addition to policy. Hillary, IMO, demonstrated substantial character flaws during this campaign that even further pushed me to consider voting for another candidate (Giuliani), however, the landscape of the race changed, and surprisingly, IMO, the best candidate (Obama) the Democrat Party had running is going to be the nominee...and I'm ecstatic. In 2000, I voted for Nader over Gore. In 2004, I was pulling for Howard Dean and reluctantly voted for Kerry only because another 4 years of Bush was the alternative. So it's been a long time coming for me to actually be happy about the Democratic nominee...I'm sure that's true for many Democrats who are supporting Obama as well.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

Sure, character does count in addition to policy. Hillary, IMO, demonstrated substantial character flaws during this campaign that even further pushed me to consider voting for another candidate (Giuliani), however, the landscape of the race changed, and surprisingly, IMO, the best candidate (Obama) the Democrat Party had running is going to be the nominee...and I'm ecstatic. In 2000, I voted for Nader over Gore. In 2004, I was pulling for Howard Dean and reluctantly voted for Kerry only because another 4 years of Bush was the alternative. So it's been a long time coming for me to actually be happy about the Democratic nominee...I'm sure that's true for many Democrats who are supporting Obama as well.

Hillary has stronger character flaws than Guiliani in your view? Interesting. I can appreciate you didn't like the way she campaigned during the primaries, which happened after you said that, but that statement is really interesting.

[HAL 9000 96]

Sure, character does count in addition to policy. Hillary, IMO, demonstrated substantial character flaws during this campaign that even further pushed me to consider voting for another candidate (Giuliani), however, the landscape of the race changed, and surprisingly, IMO, the best candidate (Obama) the Democrat Party had running is going to be the nominee...and I'm ecstatic. In 2000, I voted for Nader over Gore. In 2004, I was pulling for Howard Dean and reluctantly voted for Kerry only because another 4 years of Bush was the alternative. So it's been a long time coming for me to actually be happy about the Democratic nominee...I'm sure that's true for many Democrats who are supporting Obama as well.

Hillary has stronger character flaws than Guiliani in your view? Interesting. I can appreciate you didn't like the way she campaigned during the primaries, which happened after you said that, but that statement is really interesting.

In lighter words its not the Hilbots that should be complaining about campaign style... but rest assured... the whining is limited to not that many die hards.

[no name 1]

Sure, character does count in addition to policy. Hillary, IMO, demonstrated substantial character flaws during this campaign that even further pushed me to consider voting for another candidate (Giuliani), however, the landscape of the race changed, and surprisingly, IMO, the best candidate (Obama) the Democrat Party had running is going to be the nominee...and I'm ecstatic. In 2000, I voted for Nader over Gore. In 2004, I was pulling for Howard Dean and reluctantly voted for Kerry only because another 4 years of Bush was the alternative. So it's been a long time coming for me to actually be happy about the Democratic nominee...I'm sure that's true for many Democrats who are supporting Obama as well.

Hillary has stronger character flaws than Guiliani in your view? Interesting.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Sure, character does count in addition to policy. Hillary, IMO, demonstrated substantial character flaws during this campaign that even further pushed me to consider voting for another candidate (Giuliani), however, the landscape of the race changed, and surprisingly, IMO, the best candidate (Obama) the Democrat Party had running is going to be the nominee...and I'm ecstatic. In 2000, I voted for Nader over Gore. In 2004, I was pulling for Howard Dean and reluctantly voted for Kerry only because another 4 years of Bush was the alternative. So it's been a long time coming for me to actually be happy about the Democratic nominee...I'm sure that's true for many Democrats who are supporting Obama as well.

Hillary has stronger character flaws than Guiliani in your view? Interesting. I can appreciate you didn't like the way she campaigned during the primaries, which happened after you said that, but that statement is really interesting.

No - I didn't say that. I didn't vote for Al Gore in 2000 mainly because I felt the Democratic Party had lost it's credibility among Democrats because of Bill Clinton - Al Gore being part of that Administration. I thought Howard Dean in 2004 was a much stronger candidate than John Kerry, but in terms of actually measuring which one has more character flaws than another would be an exercise in futility.

If this were a race between Giuliani and Hillary right now, I'd be certainly looking at both candidates...and FWIW, Giuliani is much closer to Hillary in terms of political views than any of the other Republicans who were running.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

Sure, character does count in addition to policy. Hillary, IMO, demonstrated substantial character flaws during this campaign that even further pushed me to consider voting for another candidate (Giuliani), however, the landscape of the race changed, and surprisingly, IMO, the best candidate (Obama) the Democrat Party had running is going to be the nominee...and I'm ecstatic. In 2000, I voted for Nader over Gore. In 2004, I was pulling for Howard Dean and reluctantly voted for Kerry only because another 4 years of Bush was the alternative. So it's been a long time coming for me to actually be happy about the Democratic nominee...I'm sure that's true for many Democrats who are supporting Obama as well.

Hillary has stronger character flaws than Guiliani in your view? Interesting.

I was gonna ask Steve, if he is so big on character why has he chosen the least well known. On top of that, how do you determine anybodies character that you have never even met? The Internet, I suppose? Or by associations the ppl hang with The Rev. Mr.Ayres?

Edited June 2, 2008 by ={Rogue}=

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

No - I didn't say that. I didn't vote for Al Gore in 2000 mainly because I felt the Democratic Party had lost it's credibility among Democrats because of Bill Clinton - Al Gore being part of that Administration. I thought Howard Dean in 2004 was a much stronger candidate than John Kerry, but in terms of actually measuring which one has more character flaws than another would be an exercise in futility.

If this were a race between Giuliani and Hillary right now, I'd be certainly looking at both candidates...and FWIW, Giuliani is much closer to Hillary in terms of political views than any of the other Republicans who were running.

Maybe on certain social issues, but very different views on the economy, healthcare, national security and Iraq.

I am not sure if you were suggesting that if "character mattered" Guiliani would be a more attractive candidate in your view.