Ferraro v. 2.0: "I really think they're attacking me because I'm white"

I think they are part of something larger .. I always have.

The Clintons are plutocrats and it wasn't just bad judgement that drove Hillary to support the war on Iraq and sign onto saber-rattling against Iran.

They are part of the same corporate machine that George Bush is part of.


Or Goofycrats.
 
You don't remember 1984 then? It isn't the 60s, can't be youthful indiscretion. As for "your" it was the collective "your" as in the Party which you are a member of.

You have to realize that Democrats have blocked 1984 from their collective memories. That ass kicking Reagan gave Mondale is just too painful to recall for them. Whether he had the first female VP on his ticket or not.... it must be forgotten. ;)
 
Honestly bac, I think it's just that they are ruthless, bad people, who don't care about anything or anyone but themselves.

You have to be ambitious to try for the Presidency.

At some point, however, cooler emotions - both in you & your staff - have to take over. It is as clear as day that what Hillary is doing right now, and what her campaign is doing, is damaging the Democratic Party in a way that could go well beyond just this election, which is an important one in itself.

A McCain Presidency completely changes the next 4-8 years in terms of healthcare, Iraq & other areas of foreign policy, stem cell research, the environment, education, etc.; as far as domestic plans, McCain doesn't even have 'em for most of the issues.

No matter how ruthless you are, at what point do you realize that you're not only destroying the Dem party and your own legacy, but also laying waste to so much of what you claim to care about? They can't be so insulated in the Clinton campaign that they fail to realize this...
 
You have to be ambitious to try for the Presidency.

At some point, however, cooler emotions - both in you & your staff - have to take over. It is as clear as day that what Hillary is doing right now, and what her campaign is doing, is damaging the Democratic Party in a way that could go well beyond just this election, which is an important one in itself.

A McCain Presidency completely changes the next 4-8 years in terms of healthcare, Iraq & other areas of foreign policy, stem cell research, the environment, education, etc.; as far as domestic plans, McCain doesn't even have 'em for most of the issues.

No matter how ruthless you are, at what point do you realize that you're not only destroying the Dem party and your own legacy, but also laying waste to so much of what you claim to care about? They can't be so insulated in the Clinton campaign that they fail to realize this...

Why can't they be? The clintons have always been about themselves first.
 
Throes.. she's in the last throes.

Mostly you can tell this by her push to be on his ticket as VP. You don't really think all this mention of a dual ticket really meant she thinks she still has a real shot do you?

Were I he, I'd not have her as a VP. I would not want her standing behind me...

She has too many loyalists and toadies. She could pull a lot of strings in the background. She is not to be trusted.
 
Number one brings up an interesting question.... has she pissed off/embarrased enough New Yorkers to make her vulnerable in her next Senatorial election?
No, they'll do the Pavlov's dog routine and pull the lever for whomever the Dems put on the ticket.
 
1984! I wasn't old enough to vote, hello.

Do I remember that year? Yeah, what I remember most is Josh, the soccer player. Do you want to hear about it?
I was younger than you and remember who was running in the election. (I know I was younger than you because I am now younger than you... :D)

Wait. I shouldn't mention that as I am supposedly trying to get you in bed...

Anyway, again, "your" was the collective "your" and was actually aimed at somebody who did vote for Mondale.
 
No, they'll do the Pavlov's dog routine and pull the lever for whomever the Dems put on the ticket.

Sorry, I should have been clearer... would she be vulnerable to another Dem or would they just continue on with her because she is the incumbant? As you stated, they will vote for the Dem... so would it matter if she weren't the Dem? They would be able to put just about any Dem up for the seat and win it.
 
Sorry, I should have been clearer... would she be vulnerable to another Dem or would they just continue on with her because she is the incumbant? As you stated, they will vote for the Dem... so would it matter if she weren't the Dem? They would be able to put just about any Dem up for the seat and win it.

She'd still have the jews, the Italians, and the unions in her base.
 
I was younger than you and remember who was running in the election. (I know I was younger than you because I am now younger than you... :D)

Wait. I shouldn't mention that as I am supposedly trying to get you in bed...

Anyway, again, "your" was the collective "your" and was actually aimed at somebody who did vote for Mondale.

Well you obviously were a total nerd. I was actually cool. And far too busy having furtive assignations with the soccer player between classes, by our respective lockers.

Just kissing though. It was all very sweet.
 
xxxxxxxxxx

Anyway, again, "your" was the collective "your" and was actually aimed at somebody who did vote for Mondale.

I already told you, I voted for Reagan, as a naive college kid.

First, you can issue a retraction of the LOL, Let's see if democrats slam one of their own comments from yesterday.

Second, you and superfreak can drop the pretense and protestations that you aren't bush and republican apologists. As charter members of the "I'm not a republican apologist - I might even vote for a Democrat!" club, both of you have either been conspicuoulsy absent on numerous threads documenting Reagan's racist comments. Or miniminzing and making apologist statments for reagan's racism. And neither of you, to my knowledge, has ever started a thread calling attention to the racist comments of Trent Lott, Tom Delay, or Glenn Beck.

So, your spiking the ball in the end zone, when liberal posters call out a racist in the midst of their own party, pretty much destroys any credibility you have left as an alleged, fair minded, non-republican apologist posters.

Liberals have posted more threads slamming members of their own party, by orders of magnitude, than you, WRL, Dano, and superfreak ever have.
 
All McCain, who has an adoptive black child, has to do is position himself as less racist than Ferraro and others who support the Clintons and there could be a backlash against the democrats by voters that may ultimately cause the overthrow of Roe vs Wade.

Way to go Ms. Feminist Ferraro.
 
I already told you, I voted for Reagan, as a naive college kid.

First, you can issue a retraction of the LOL, Let's see if democrats slam one of their own comments from yesterday.

Second, you and superfreak can drop the pretense and protestations that you aren't bush and republican apologists. As charter members of the "I'm not a republican apologist - I might even vote for a Democrat!" club, both of you have either been conspicuoulsy absent on numerous threads documenting Reagan's racist comments. Or miniminzing and making apologist statments for reagan's racism. And neither of you, to my knowledge, has ever started a thread calling attention to the racist comments of Trent Lott, Tom Delay, or Glenn Beck.

So, your spiking the ball in the end zone, when liberal posters call out a racist in the midst of their own party, pretty much destroys any credibility you have left as an alleged, fair minded, non-republican apologist posters.

Liberals have posted more threads slamming members of their own party, by orders of magnitude, than you, WRL, Dano, and superfreak ever have.

Ahh... Gumby... one day you will learn that you do not indeed know my positions better than I do.

You just ignore the times when I am critical of Bush and Republicans because it is convenient for your "superfreak is an apologist" line of rhetoric. You take ANY support and equate it to TOTAL support.

You are a fucking moron. Live with it or educate yourself.
 
Movie mogul David Geffen who was once close to the Clintons .. but no more .. once said, "All politicians lie, but the Clintons do it with such ease that it's troubling."
 
Will someone please remove the shovel from Ferraro's hands? Today on Fox:

"“Every time this comes up, every time there is something to — some opportunity to play the race card — and this is being done by David Axelrod, who knows better, he’s his (Obama’s) campaign manager — every time they have an opportunity to do it, they do it. They did it against Bill Clinton, and it worked. They shut him up. They did it against (Pennsylvania Gov.) Ed Rendell, it didn’t work. And now they’re doing it against me.”"

Hey, Gerry - when you say that Obama wouldn't be where he was if he wasn't BLACK, that is an inherently racial comment. Same with what Bill Clinton said in SC.

Fuck her. I have so had it with the idiots on that campaign.
 
I already told you, I voted for Reagan, as a naive college kid.

First, you can issue a retraction of the LOL, Let's see if democrats slam one of their own comments from yesterday.

Second, you and superfreak can drop the pretense and protestations that you aren't bush and republican apologists. As charter members of the "I'm not a republican apologist - I might even vote for a Democrat!" club, both of you have either been conspicuoulsy absent on numerous threads documenting Reagan's racist comments. Or miniminzing and making apologist statments for reagan's racism. And neither of you, to my knowledge, has ever started a thread calling attention to the racist comments of Trent Lott, Tom Delay, or Glenn Beck.

So, your spiking the ball in the end zone, when liberal posters call out a racist in the midst of their own party, pretty much destroys any credibility you have left as an alleged, fair minded, non-republican apologist posters.

Liberals have posted more threads slamming members of their own party, by orders of magnitude, than you, WRL, Dano, and superfreak ever have.
I don't need to retract I participated in the conversation. As for what you told me... It was still "your" in "democrats".

Was my statement inaccurate in that sense? If not, get judged.

As for what the R party would do, yeah. This would be all over in about a billion threads. Shoot, if there was a remark made in 1990 that was no longer available (as with BAC) there would be thread after thread after thread about how horrible the person was. So far there is one.

I'm hoping for more.
 
Back
Top