Dinger
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-28-05 10:55 PM
Original message |
Tweety & Panel Apparently Deem Dem Primary In 2008 Unnecessary |
|
Edited on Sun Aug-28-05 11:04 PM by Dinger
Talking about "Who can Beat Hillary?" and other bullshit. Boy, the pugs want her BAD!
Panelists: Clarence Paige, Kathleen Parker, Howard Fineman, and some British bitch (Katy Kay).
|
AspenRose
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-28-05 10:56 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Yes, they certainly do |
|
Edited on Sun Aug-28-05 11:38 PM by DesertedRose
On edit: Katty Kay from the BBC?
I've long held her conservative views suspect when watching BBC World. Maybe this explains why she's not currently anchoring the broadcast.
|
fob
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-28-05 11:02 PM
Response to Original message |
2. I only had to get to "kathleen parker" to get the full puke value of that |
|
"panel".
BTW, it's Clarence, not Clearance
|
Dinger
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-28-05 11:05 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
3. Thanks, I Fixed It (nt) |
bobbieinok
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-28-05 11:06 PM
Response to Original message |
4. like in 1999 media had crowned W candidate and president |
|
I wondered why 'we' 'needed' an election
of course, we didn't get an election; we got a sElection
|
senseandsensibility
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-28-05 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
the selected candidate for the Dems will be a stooge to lose to the repuke. * was the crown prince of the haves, and installed into the presidency. Hillary is the opposite.
|
Poiuyt
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-28-05 11:13 PM
Response to Original message |
5. They said the same thing about Howard Dean until the elections |
FreedomAngel82
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-28-05 11:13 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Why they want her bad? |
|
Beats me. They think they can beat her easily. I think they underestimate her personally, but it really is quite interesting how they're obsessed with this. I haven't heard anybody on the left side talk about 2008 much. :shrug:
|
CityDem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-28-05 11:26 PM
Response to Original message |
8. Can I attend the coronation |
|
We need a real debate in 2008 -- not some bullshit coronation. Those who voted for the Iraq war resolution need to explain to the party and to the american people how over 2000 service men and woman were sent to an early grave without a threat to our national security.
|
wisteria
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Aug-28-05 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
9. The intelligence they were briefed on at the time stated there |
|
was definitely WMD-Tennant said it was a "slam dunk". Voting on the Resolution just allowed Bush the right to make the decision to go to war. Many Dem's passionately voiced their concerns and pleaded with Bush about going to war without further inspections and without a strong coalition. Ultimately, Bush and company lied to our party leaders just like they lied to the American public. Suppose it was proven that Saddam actually had WMD and there was a plot to attack America. Suppose it did turn out that he did indeed have a hand in the 9/11 attacks. And just suppose, under those circumstances, our Dem leaders had voted to not allow Bush the authority he needed to wage a war, how do you think the American people would have reacted to our failure to help protect our country?
|
DontBlameMe
(889 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Aug-29-05 12:06 AM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. Uh, he'd be reelected? |
|
Oh, shit! He was reelected! And none of your supposition's were true.
Go figure.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 05:19 PM
Response to Original message |