Questioning whether Hillary will be the October surprise
Bookworm on Sep 20 2008 at 11:03 am | Filed under: Barack Obama, Sarah Palin
It’s Saturday and I’m posting at McCain-Palin 2008. As always, since I think it’s a wonderful cooperative blog, I’d like to get more traffic headed its way and, therefore, I’m publishing the beginning of my post here in the hope that you finish reading the rest of it there:
Biden is a never-ending source of delight — for those who don’t like Biden. Whether he’s chastising reporters for being out of shape, demanding that the wealthy show their patriotism by transferring their money to the middle class, making bizarre and ill-informed pronouncements regarding Catholic doctrine and abortion, or offending Ohioans en masse, you can really count on the guy to get it done (or, should I say, to get it done wrong). Nothing about this is new; it’s just Biden being Biden.
If gravitas means being old, gray, and a Congressional seat warmer, Biden is the ticket. However, if gravitas means being thoughtful, informed and wise, Biden is, and always was, the comedy man in this straight man’s role. Although Obama must have known going in what he was getting with Biden, you can’t help wondering if he’s suffering from buyer’s remorse right now. That’s especially true given the legions of women who took umbrage at the way he cavalierly insulted Hillary and who, in response, fled to McCain.
The question then, at least in the blogosphere, is whether Obama is going to pressure Biden to withdraw for some sympathetic reason, such as health or a family crisis, enabling Hillary to come in and save the day. While everyone with any sense will know that Biden’s withdrawal is manufactured, some women may be so glad to see Hillary back on the ticket that they’ll yield to the Democrats’ siren song. Frankly, I’ve been one of those worried about this.
So, if you want to read more, you’ll find the rest here.
Email This Post To A Friend
16 Responses to “Questioning whether Hillary will be the October surprise”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
This is interesting. I don’t know how true it could be but judge for yourself.I think that the states with the largest cities such as these always go democratic during the elections.NY,PA. and so forth.
What do the top ten cities with the highest poverty rate all have in common?
Detroit, MI (1st on the poverty rate list) hasn’t elected a Republican mayor since 1961;
Buffalo, NY (2nd) hasn’t elected one since 1954;
Cincinnati, OH (3rd)…since 1984;
Cleveland, OH (4th)…since 1989;
Miami, FL (5th) has never had a Republican mayor;
St. Louis, MO (6th)….since 1949;
El Paso, TX (7th) has never had a Republican mayor;
Milwaukee, WI (8th)…since 1908;
Philadelphia, PA (9th)…since 1952;
Newark, NJ(10th)…since 1907.
Einstein once said, ‘The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.’
It is the disadvantaged who habitually elect Democrats — yet are still disadvantaged.
If the Democrats were full of self-sacrificing virtuous sorts, then BIden would step down for the good of a higher calling.
But they ain’t. THey are self-serving first, foremost, and only.
4. Bombs Away. McCain picked Palin for a number of reasons–youth, pizzazz, energy, appeal to the base and to middle-class women, to the West and to blue-collar voters–but it may turn out that the main contribution she makes to his effort is in goading the Democrats into spasms of self-defeating and entirely lunatic rage. Somehow, every element of her life–the dual offense of being a beauty-queen and hunter; the Down syndrome baby who wasn’t aborted; the teenage daughter about to get married, whose baby also wasn’t aborted; the non-metrosexual husband working the nightshift; the very fact of five children–touched a nerve on the liberal template, and sent the whole beast into convulsions, opening an intriguing and somewhat frightening window onto the turbulent id of the left.
That Weekly Standard analysis is pretty good, Book.
The truth is always interesting, Mike, and not least of all because it challenges our perception of the world as we see it.
Challenges are good; the human race could never have achieved what we have without challenges and obstacles to overcome.
In relation to how poor people keep electing Democrats because Democrats will do good things for the poor, yet the poor that elected the Democrats are doing the worse while the poor in Republican zones are doing better, provides us an interesting contrast on power and how it works.
Most people in America were brought up with the notion that power is to be shared: as is proper in a democracy. However, there are other expressions of power, other means of control that people may use. Feudalism is another political system that allows people to focus, funnel, and maintain power. In feudalism, there is no way for the poor to decide who their lords are. Lords and aristocrats come from families, wealth, and political power. No lowly peasant can decide the lives and choices of such an upper class. Nor can the poor leave his lord and go to another place, for the poor are locked to their land because of their lack of wealth.
So this is a good thing to remember when conservatives or Republicans, and they do exist, if only in their minds, say that by electing Democrats we will be able to make the Republican party come back in a Reagan esque drive.
These people are victims of the Democrat academic re-education camps known as colleges and universities in America. These people never learned that the Democrat political machine is built around a feudal premise, not a democratic one. Count all the votes is a primary Democrat belief, right? Then why do they have super delegates voting for Obama, contrary to what the popular vote in the Democrat primary decided? And in the end, they didn’t even count all the delegate voices either; Obama was nominated by acclamation, like most popular dictators were selected in Rome and Greece.
When you elect a Democrat into office, the chances are likely that it is until their death. We got Kennedy, Byrd, and various other Democrats like this in existence. They keep getting re-elected because the people in their states don’t give a damn about term limits or buttering up feudal dynasties.
How many terms would FDR have been re-elected to, had he not died? How many terms would JFK had been re-elected to, had he not died? How many terms would Bill Clinton have been re-elected to, had there been no term limits?
Reagan might have been elected for just as many. Except that Republicans like him do not want power forever. They voluntarily give it up. Just like Teddy Roosevelt did. This is because the power and virtue of the Republican party is in the quality of the people in it. Thus it goes up and down depending on who is leading, following, and what not.
The Democrat party has historically been able to recover from the Civil War, WWII, Vietnam, and The Cold War. What do I mean by recover? I mean that they hid the bodies of their crime, almost like Ted Kennedy, and blamed it on their political opponents. Successfully, I might add.
A party that can convince the current generation that Lincoln was a Democrat, that Democrats fought for Civil Rights against Republicans, and that Republicans are party of racism, foreign adventurism/war, and corruption, is not a party that you can simply elect into power and then replace as casually as you choose toothpastes.
When the Democrats gain power, their intent is to hold it for life.
I’m pretty sure the British just wanted to hold unto the WWII sense of solidarity, purpose, and patriotism for a little bit longer when they dumped Churchill and elected a Labour majority government. But when you look at Britain today, remember what the people who started their nation on the road of Leftism and social revolutionary justice thought and intended.
Even the people who dislike the Democrat party more than they dislike the Republicans, are still following Democrat propaganda on this score. They still talk about how the Democrats have turned their backs on JFK and FDR. But the fact of the matter was, JFK and FDR were not true to the roots of the Democrat party in several ways. In other areas, like race and sacrificing the Cuban patriots at the Bay of Pigs for convenient political points, they were more true to the Democrat party’s roots than the current crop of leaders are.
The Democrat party of today is just going back to their roots pre Civil War. Back when they were going to use character assassination, rumors, and innuendo, to weaken their opponents.
Back when people like McClellan thought he could run foreign policy and sabotage the war effort just because his sympathies were with the Democrat of the South.
Back when the Democrats thought the North would never sustain an effort to wage war just to prevent balkanization and a division of America into the Kurdish North, Shia South, and Sunni middle. This obviously meant to the Democrats that they could provoke Lincoln and the Union and get away with it. What ended up happening was that they sent good men, loyal to the South, to die in the war the Democrats started and believed would be a short and victorious one.
Every time a national crisis appears on the horizon, whether it be the Civil War, WWII, Vietnam, or the Cold War, the Democrats act in the same fashion as they have always acted. For they are just staying true to what has worked for them. Their roots.
**************
A curious thing happened during Reagan’s campaign. Southerners finally found the moral character and strength to break away from the serf bonds of the Democrat party. The sin of the Democrats can no longer be born by Southerners. The South has redeemed themselves past beyond all possible expectations. But the Democrats have not. Have the Democrats promised that they would treat the people they once shackled and abused, that things would be better? Have the Democrats proven that their promise has actual merit by demonstrating a true change of heart and methods?
Or have they continued to treat people like tools, to be discarded when they are no longer of use?
**************
There is a clear and sharp difference between partisanship and recognizing the historical roots and trends of the American Democrat party. Partisanship is about using minor or major differences between Democrats and Republicans in order to make the opponent party look bad. It is like when Kennedy character assassinated Bork on the Senate floor and then afterwards said “it is just politics, nothing personal”. Partisanship is nothing personal. It is just doing what you have to do to make sure your side comes out smelling like roses and the other side ends up coming out missing a leg or arm or two. In that sense, it is just like war. And just like war, even combatants on either side can get sick of it, not to mention the civilians caught inbetween.
When you recognize the historical roots and trends of the American Democrat party, however, you are not using immediate differences to affect a local change in political fortunes for your party.
That is the difference. Historical trend are either true or false. But partisanship can be true and yet still be partisanship. Your political opponent may be everything you say he is, but the fact that you are saying it in an ad is designed to help you and your party at their expense.
What the history of the Democrat party and their crimes against humanity demonstrates to us is not that the Republican party is superior or virtuous. What it demonstrates to us is just how people can be convinced to vote for Democrats that continue to keep them in poverty and misery, generation after generation.
It can be done. It has been done. Bill Clinton may be able to slap a silly happy face on the Democrat party, for awhile, but it always devolves to its roots. Kos and MoveOn/CodePink are not “new things”. They are just more organized than their counter-parts in history. The New York Times is just as bad now as it was back then. There has been no change in their fundamental philosophies. What there has been a change in is the fact that the people have gotten a clue or two as to the going ons of the powerful and wealthy.
The solution to stopping the abuse of human beings by the Democrats is not to elect Democrats and hope they will burn enough villages and towns of their economy and lifeblood to make electing Republicans a must do thing. That is neither ethical nor honorable.
The solution is to help the Sunnis of Al Anbar switch to a different path. A path devoid of unjust poverty and violence against the innocent. Even though the Sunnis created this problem on their own by inviting in AQ to their towns in order to fight against the corrupt and nasty invader, the Republican dominated US Marine Corps, they have suffered the consequences of their own actions. We cannot call ourselves just when we have the power to help them, but don’t, simply because some of us believe that they need to suffer a little bit more before we can more easily move into power there.
Now do you see why Iraq is so hideous to the Left and the Democrat party? Showing that the weak, the poor, and the disenfranchised can, with the help of America and other just people, overthrow their aristocratic rulers, is a dangerous precedent to set: dangerous for Democrat control of minorities.
The tools Americans have learned in Iraq is the solution to ending the eternal chain of organized criminal violence, poverty, resentment, discrimination, and injustice here in America. You may not be able to use snipers, J-Dams, and M1A1 Abrams tanks against Democrats, but the principles of counter-insurgency apply the same whether that insurgency is a Sunni population controlled by AQ terror or an American urban population/minority controlled by Democrat power and lies.
Once the people under the Democrat yoke see that there are better alternatives, the Democrats will be forced to either release their hold or tighten it. And when Democrats tighten their grip, like they tried to do with Sarah Palin, all of us will finally be able to see the Democrats for what they truly are.
Greetings:
I had a professor back in the last ’70s who used to talk about “moments of truth” in his business management class. One was, as a manger, would you accept that part of your responsibility was to work yourself out of a job, by which he meant that you would improve organizational performance to the point were you were no longer needed. Another was, again as a manager, would you hire a subordinate you knew or thought was more talented than you.
Something to think about.
Ymarsakar thank you for the lesson here.Really good points and I am going to copy it and paste it somewhere I hope. Not in a blog or anything like that.Could you post your blog on here so I could view it?? I have a blog and web page but am nowhere as good as you people here on Book’s blog.You can view my blog at this addy. It’s being coded here so as to not let bots and so forth find and abuse it.You know how to do this.
miketrani dot com slash blog or just miketrani dot com will get you to the web site.
Mike
>>One was, as a manger, would you accept that part of your responsibility was to work yourself out of a job, by which he meant that you would improve organizational performance to the point were you were no longer needed.>>
Funny…that’s a Mom’s job too. And you know what? It’s _hard_ when you realize that you’re “no longer needed”. And as you already know….some Moms, like some managers, need to be needed, find their purpose in life in being needed, and _won’t_ let go. I guess you call them Democrats at heart!
Mike….
Ymar’s site is on the blog role on the right… Sake Light
http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/
I’m still awaiting the outcome of the demand for the proof of “natural born status” for Obama. I have no idea what the results will be…but….
What happens if he is deemed ineligible to be president…before the election? after the election?
I find it very difficult to believe that Hillary would accept the vice-presidency. She’d be much better off to wait until 2012 and try again…but what if Obama is out before the election? The DNC would have the responsibility of designating another nominee…Biden? Nah. Hillary? I think probably so.
Only 45 days…!
Thank you Suek. Sometimes I can’t see the forest for the trees.At one time I happened upon Ymar’s site and saved the http to a word document. When I remembered that I then copied and pasted into the browser and even thanked her on her site.A little thick in the head I am as someone once said.
“Thank you for showing up today to my press conference. Thank you, gentlemen. Oh yes, and you, too, sweetie.”
“As you know, yesterday, Senator Biden put his foot so far into his mouth that we can’t even see the ankle. There’s no hope, the doctors say, of being able to remove it anytime before 2012, just like there’s actually no hope that I’ll be removing the troops from Iraq before then either. Damn, I didn’t mean to say that. Where’s my teleprompter? The doctors alerted me to this late last night, so I put in a call at 3 A.M. to Hillary Clinton. Play the audio.”
Sleepy voice: “Hello?”
“Hillary, this is Barack, the Anointed One. Joe’s done it this time… we can’t save him. I need you to be my VP.”
“We’re not here right now, but if you’d like to leave a message, please leave your name and teleph – STOP it, Bill! – phone number and a brief message and we’ll – giggle – I MEAN IT! – get right back to you. We promise, oh ho ho, yes we do! BEEP! Giggle.”
——
“So as you can see my search has begun for the right man or woman to stand in my Mighty Shadow – all the better to Behold It, heh – and gaze in reverence as I cause the oceans to drop, and the earth to heal. I ain’t goin be talkin’ much longer heah now, ya see… oops, wrong audience. I won’t belabor the point for any further time here, so let me just say, if there’s a great politician and speaker from Ohio, or West Virginia, or Minnesota, who’s not too busy clinging to his guns or religion right now, and is willing to outright lie and intimidate for me, I’ll be waiting by my phone. 1-800-Messiah. You know the drill.”
Mike….
I checked your website. You use Foxfire. Foxfire has _bookmarks_! Use them! No only that, but occasionally export the file to a Word file, and if you’re _really_ paranoid either back up your computer or send your file of bookmarks as an attachment to you yahoo email address. If you don’t have a yahoo email address, get one. That way, you can access your bookmarks from anywhere. Bookmarks are _good_!
Although it’s also a good thing to clean out your bookmark files every now and then! Mine have gotten a bit stale – I probably only use about 20% of them on a regular basis. Sometimes it’s a bit of a search to find what I’m looking for, but it’s still easier to find an old bookmark than it is to search the internet for something I found years ago, don’t use much but want to find again. If you don’t remember the same search terms, you might _never_ find the same site again!
And I think Ymar is male. I’m virtually certain…but I don’t remember why. Oh well…we’re online…everything’s “virtual”!!
Aside from that odd dance by the Democrats in New Jersey a few elections ago I can’t remember too many switcheroos just before an election. I can’t recall any with regards to a Presidential campaign. Hillary would never accept second fiddle to The One. But then, odder things have happened.
What would be the stance of the FEC on such an occurrence? Is it legal?
Sorry, Mike, was busy with real life in the last few days, so I’m catching up.
http://ymarsakar.wordpress.com/
I believe Mike was referring to you, suek, when he said “thanked her”.
Btw, don’t copy and paste that comment of mine just yet; I still need to proofread it, again, and correct several mistakes.
Rough drafts are rather rough when you are dealing in 1. length and 2. complexity.
I wish I could just write stories about evil: that way I can do what the Democrats do about Sarah Palin and just write her as I would want her to be. However, I am interested in the truth and the truth has higher standards than simple narration.
Mike, try out Google’s Reader. It’s a convenient RSS program. I hook up Neo-Neocon’s blog and Bookworm to it, in addition to some others.
All wordpress blogs should have a RSS link to it and its comments, including mine.
Oh ya, the reason why RSS is convenient is cause you only have to load one page to see the posts of all your favorite blogs. It saves a rather large amount of time. And nothing stops you from clicking on the link to open a new tab if you want to actually go to the site.