|
Latest Stories
Recent blog posts
|
May 22, 2008 - 4:37am.
![]() (AP Photo) Hillary Clinton's vaunted "nuclear option," a last-ditch hail-mary pass that she hoped would give her the Democratic Presidential nomination over the will of voters, is turning into a dud. As with the votes, the numbers are against her,. But shrill Hill isn't giving up. Reports Thomas B. Edsall in The Huffington Post:
Capitol Hill Blue's columnists, blogs and reader comments Capitol Hill Blue is an independent, non-partisan news site that belongs to no political party and subscribes to no political or philosophical point-of-view. Our columnists are welcome to their opinions but readers should understand that their views do not necessarily reflect the editorial policies of this web site. We also welcome comments to selected opinion columns and in our popular ReaderRant discussion forum. Please remember, however, that we believe in civility on this web site and comments may be reviewed, moderated or removed if we feel they contain obscenities, racism, bigotry, anti-Semitic remarks or attack other posters. Our goal is reasoned discussion on issues facing this nation and we do not feel that goal is served by personal attacks and by seeing how many cute adjectives you can attach to an elected official or politician's name. Copyright © 2008 Capitol Hill Blue
|
User login
|
Irony Alert! All of the
Submitted by Elmo on May 22, 2008 - 8:59am.Irony Alert! All of the states were rushing to hold their primaries early because they expected that the matter would be settled by mid February. They'd have been just as well off if they had left them on whatever original dates they had chosen.
Maybe it's time to forget the neurotic need of Iowa and New Hampshire to be first in line and let anyone hold their primary whenever it suits them -- as long as it isn't before March 1st.
Better yet, how about they
Submitted by JerZGirl on May 22, 2008 - 12:04pm.Better yet, how about they all hold their primaries on the SAME DAY! Since it IS, after all, a NATIONAL election, why not have the NATION vote at the same time like they do in November? That would definitely eliminate the Super Tuesday nonsense of a presumed nominee, which makes all remaining votes unnecessary (and doesn't THAT disenfranchise voters more than this Florida/Michigan fiasco?)
--------------------------------------------------
"Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness." -Mark Twain
NY Enough of referring to
Submitted by Alexandria Lupu on May 22, 2008 - 3:18pm.NY Enough of referring to Senator Clinton as "Shrill Hill." If you're going so low, why don't you refer to Senator Obama as "Shouting Obama" or "Grammatically Incorrect Obama" or "Sexist Obama?" I'n sure there are even more fitting words to apply to him.
Yes there are: decent,
Submitted by knockknock on May 23, 2008 - 12:45am.Yes there are: decent, forthright, courageous.
If you want more, just let me know.
If the Rules Committee would
Submitted by Hoosier_CowBoy on May 22, 2008 - 3:20pm.If the Rules Committee would act in fairness, they would at least have to give Obama the Michigan delegates where he was not on the ballot in proportion to his national performance.
Bottom line: Clinton still loses.
If Obama would really demand fairness, he would ask that all the Rush Limbaugh Republican cross over voters be taken out of Clintons total delegate count.
In places like Indiana and Kentucky, I would bet that a substantial proportion of Clinton delegates were won because of people that have followed Rush Limbaughs' cue to cross over and vote for Clinton. The idea being she would be easier to defeat in November.
Those voters would have no intention of voting for her in
November if she is the nominee.
Obamas near defeat in Indiana shows that despite all the support from Indiana Democratic establishment and the Limbaugh crossover vote, Clinton was only able to win by less than 2%.
In a regular election in Indiana, Clinton would go down in flames.
It's disrespectful, if not
Submitted by knockknock on May 23, 2008 - 12:51am.It's disrespectful, if not downright insulting, for the Democratic Party to allow this charade to continue.
Hillary getting busloads of her supporters, poor saps, to put pressure on the superdelates is the last straw.
I'm done with this crap. It's frustrating and, well, undemocratic. Besides, a Party that operates like it's still in high school is really unworthy of further attention until it grows up and undoes the mess the Clintons have fostered.
The Clinton family is a disgrace to the nation. It's obvious they don't give a damn about anyone or anything except themselves.
Wake me up when Obama is officially nominated.
Methinks this woman bandies
Submitted by Carl Nemo on May 23, 2008 - 2:05am.Methinks this woman bandies about the "nuke" term all too much and in a trivial fashion...!
Whether it's insinuating we'll nuke Iran if they attack Israel or if she's dealing with campaign opponents, she or her campaign handlers are everso eager to use the world "nuke"...!
I do have first hand knowledge of the mind-numbing damage that nukes can do for not only civilian populations; but the grave implications concerning people that simply say nuke'em when they can't handle a situation or confrontation.
They need to take a trip to Japan and visit the Hiroshima and Nagasaki Memorials and let it sink-in to their consciousness, the horror implied by their off-handed, flippant comments.
The world is far too dangerous to have such an emotional, self-aggrandizing individual as our leader.
"We the People"... do not need someone as emotionally immature as "Shrillary" for president...!
Carl Nemo **==