1 posted on
12/06/2003 8:44:29 AM PST by
OESY
To: Senator Kunte Klinte
In a bit of British understatement, let me say Kristof is not my favorite pundit, but I love to see this McGovernite and Clinton-lover agonize over the fate of his party.
In a bit of down home humor, let me say I thought Kristof's squealing like a stuck pig was worth sharing.
Obviously, I was inspired by Bill Clinton, the former Tyson's beneficiary who while oozing charm from every pore, oiled his way across the floor and famously uttered: "Even a blind hog can find an acorn"
2 posted on
12/06/2003 8:45:17 AM PST by
OESY
To: OESY
3 posted on
12/06/2003 8:45:23 AM PST by
Charles Henrickson
(Howard Dean, Angry White Metrosexual.)
To: OESY
"It is, of course, the Democrats' privilege to stand on principle" It is their privilege but not their practice.
To: OESY
In his first race for President, William Jennings Bryan actually did very well. William McKinley won in 1896 by 51% to 47%.
To: OESY
. But as I handed out McGovern leaflets in Yamhill County, Ore., I was greeted as if I were the Antichrist. Soon afterward, Mr. McGovern was defeated in a landslide.ROTFLOL!!!!!
ROTFLOL
I can't believe the rats are actually going to nominate this nasty little psychotic leftist moron.
And I thought no rat Presidential canidate could ever be more unelectable than Dukakis!!
The rat convention will be a scream
GO DEAN GO!!!!!!!!!!
6 posted on
12/06/2003 8:50:37 AM PST by
Rome2000
(McCarthy was right!)
To: OESY
Surprisingly honest stuff from the toilet paper of Manhattan.
8 posted on
12/06/2003 8:51:43 AM PST by
nwrep
To: OESY
>>>>>>>>>If the Democrats are serious about governing, they should remember the words of one of their nominees, Adlai Stevenson. After one of his typically brilliant campaign speeches, someone shouted out to Stevenson from the crowd that he had the votes of all thinking Americans.
Proving that the Democrats of his era were arrogant jerks, just like today's.
>>>>>>>>>>>Stevenson shouted back, saying that wasn't enough: "I need a majority!"
That shows what a typical Democrat thinks of the average American. Dean is no better. That attitude, right there, is why I detest the Democrats and want them to lose every electoral vote that's out there.
9 posted on
12/06/2003 8:52:13 AM PST by
.cnI redruM
( l = w + w. Two wrongs equal a left.)
To: OESY
If the Democrats are serious about governing, they should remember the words of one of their nominees, Adlai Stevenson. After one of his typically brilliant campaign speeches, someone shouted out to Stevenson from the crowd that he had the votes of all thinking Americans. Stevenson shouted back, saying that wasn't enough: "I need a majority!"Dean will get all the votes of the wrong-thinking voters.
Those voters that think with their hearts, souls and purses will vote for Bush!
10 posted on
12/06/2003 8:53:26 AM PST by
CROSSHIGHWAYMAN
(so it is written, so it is done)
To: OESY
I seriously doubt that anybody who publicly uses the word "contretemps" can ever be elected president. LOL!!! I never thought I'd enjoy reading anything written by Krugman-lite, but here it is!
To: OESY
bttt
15 posted on
12/06/2003 9:07:09 AM PST by
EggsAckley
(..................."Dean's got Tom McClintock Eyes".........................)
To: OESY
Dean '04 landslide bump
17 posted on
12/06/2003 9:16:04 AM PST by
Drango
(A liberal's compassion is limited only by the size of someone else's wallet.)
To: OESY
wowiee - even Kristof is worry about the prospects of a Dean nomination -
the trouble is -
1) who else can replace Dean - with credibility in the South - so to speak - Kerry (C'mmon); Lieberman (call him big Fizzle); Clark (can't wait those Pentagon Brasses coming out with the dirt on the Perfumed Prince); Edwards 9Senator Bubblegum - can he even win in NC); Gephardt (he is as fresh as my xmas fruitcake I got from Grandma ten yrs ago..)
2) even if they find a replacement, can the candidate capture the votes of the Deanaics?? especially if the Deaniacs see the mainstream DNC trying to elbow them out of the way...
The most positive development for Bush 04 is not the 1) improving economy 2) general stablization in Iraq 3) passage of medicare blah blah - but rather the "Anger" factor the left, such anger will carry 20-30% of the votes, and will scare off the 10-15 middle votes - and if Bush can get 60% of the swing votes, he will win by 52-55% popular vote in 04 regardless the rest of macrofactors ex-the "Anger" factor...
22 posted on
12/06/2003 10:13:01 AM PST by
FRgal4u
To: OESY
the cafe crowdThe column is perfect, except for that one Timesism. Only in Timesworld, do smalltown, Missouri famers congregate in cafes.
23 posted on
12/06/2003 10:28:49 AM PST by
mrustow
(no tag)
To: OESY
Translation: Only Hillary! can save us now.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson