Looks like Obama just took Virginia by a large margin.
Well, at least he didn’t take the entire day off, like Clinton. Both candidates have claimed that they oppose telecom amnesty.
Is there any evidence of Clinton doing more than talking the talk? I’ve not seen it.
Wait a minute? Isn’t it as unacceptable for Obama to skip a vote as it is Clinton? This is precisely the problem I’ve had with Obamaniacs: mindless Hillary bashing and glazed eyes adoration of Obama.
The two candidates are not meaningfully different. One just constantly gets smeared and the other Canonized.
That’s cuz one is a nice guy the other is an asshole. Their positions are substantively different, but you’d have to actually read positions.
Who you calling an Obamamaniac, fuckwit? I’ve been defending her here for weeks. Now she’s shown me that she can’t be bothered to make even a token effort on an issue I care about. Screw her and the horse she rode in on.
Sure, she’ll get my vote over McCain/Huckabee if it comes down to that, but she sure isn’t worth fighting for in the primaries.
I’m calling the hypocrite who thinks it’s unacceptable to not show up for a vote on FISA when it’s Clinton, but when it’s Obama, it’s okay because he didn’t take the “entire” day off, an Obamaniac. It certainly was an Obamaniacal bit of contortion you engaged in just there.
When I was young my father and I were discussing the benefits of being likable (not that I wasn’t; it was just general conversation 
). He commented that if people like you they’ll forgive you anything, but if they don’t like you nothing you do will make them happy.
As we all know, a great many people dislike Hillary (and really, she has only herself to blame), and most people like Obama (even a considerable number of us tighty-righties - not that I’d vote for him or anything ;)), thus Hillary sometimes gets grief for things that Obama gets a pass on.
Yeah, nobody at all had anything to do, in any way, with an organized effort to attack the Clintons. Nobody made a cottage industry out of hating Hillary as well as Bill Clinton.
Sell it to someone who’s ignorant of the 90’s; I live in Pittsburgh. Scaife and I are (figuratively) neighbors. But she only has herself to blame.
If we could only stop deciding who to vote for by figuring out who’s “nice”, maybe we wouldn’t regularly end up in the shit, as a country.
You’ve gotta get your argument straight, Hentor. Are people just voting for Obama because he’s nice? Or is is just because he gives a speech? By all means, continue to reduce the man to a caricature. But, if we’re going to undermine the man for the general election, let’s at least do it consistently.
It’s OK because he actually voted on the critical ammendment. The passage of some sort of bill today was a given.
If it helps you out any, just think of me as a Clinton supporter, who will henceforth show his support by not defending her, or voting for her.
Hey, I just realized, by the standard of Clinton’s support for the Dodd ammendment, Obama’s a Clinton supporter too.
I retract this. It was uncalled for. I’m just tired of hearing the line that Obama is winning just because he’s nice or eloquent. On re-read, I don’t think that’s exactly what you were saying.
I didn’t make the argument that he was nicer, did I?
None of those votes was any more critical of any other. It was all predetermined. I wish they both voted on all of the amendments and the bill, but I don’t pretend that it would have mattered, or that it is better or worse for one or the other.
He shouldn’t - although it should be pointed out that many journalists don’t cover politics at all, and therefore those things couldn’t realistically be said to bias their coverage. I was just saying there’s some precedent for jobs restricting political expression.
They are both blatant, unmitigated liars whose sense of right and wrong is defined almost solely by what they can get away with. Add to that, in Hillary’s case, smugness; superiority; blatant pandering and evasiveness; and an arrogant command-and-control personality determined to cram her version of what people need down their throats (whether she’s been elected to do so or not), and you have a person who is imminently unlikable, even around here.
The thing about people like the Clintons is that they virtually manufacture enemies through their own arrogance, dishonesty and blatantly offensive behavior. Their problems have nothing to do with “cottage industries” – unless by that you mean focusing on their perfectly obvious shortcomings rather than ignoring them.
Further…and this may or may not be how you interpreted my remarks…but I didn’t suggest that people vote for Obama because he was “nice” (or more accurately, likable); I said it helped explain why he seems to get a pass on things like the telecom vote whereas Hillary doesn’t.
That’s an interesting theory. Do you have many such theories?
What do you mean by that? I don’t understand what “theory” you are talking about.
And that Pez dispenser smile, egads. I think the top of her head is going to fall off whenever she smiles. And I keep picturing that when it does we’ll see a little person in there pushing buttons and pulling levers.
Your theory that “None of those votes was any more critical of any other.”
Or is that a statement of truth for you?
Yet another reason I can’t stand the hypocritical bitch. . .
Really? Seems what was good for the gander doesn’t appear to be good for the goose when the shoe is on your webbed foot, hmm.
I hate her more every day.