This just in...

Daily KOS has posted a story accusing the Clintons of making Obama's face look darker!  See http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3 /5/14345/50395/126/469746.  One of Obama's top aides, a Samantha Power, has called Hillary a "monster."   While all decent American are justifiably shocked at this latest horrific act by Horrible Hillary, it is only the last in a stream of unsurpassed evil by this woman.  Let's look at the record:

As we all know, she killed Hoffa.  The body is buried near Maine High School, which she attended, according to a diary that was recently discovered, and then lost; but a lot of people have seen the actual diary and can verify the truth of what it says.

And then there is the Kennedy assassination.  For this one we have absolute proof.  There is a photograph of the grassy knoll in the Warren Commission archive that shows her in the background with a rifle.  It's hard to see, but if you enhance it and then increase the contrast and outline the third tree, and then run a noise-suppression algorithm and use a line-drawing subroutine, you can clearly see the outline of her left eyebrow, and that stick thing next to it is the rifle.

And let's not forget that Hillary was responsible for the Holocaust.  She killed millions in Europe in the 1940s, and it was all the more monstrous because she did it before she was even born!  

More recently, reliable sources say that people associated with her campaign were caught asking voters to take a careful look at Obama's record and see if it lines up with his rhetoric, and they have even pointed out some of the stupid things he has said and done, such as admitting that he does not have the experience to answer that "3am call."  

To top it all off, Hillary supporters had the nerve to point out that Obama's voting record on the war is the same as hers, and they even got Joseph Wilson, the guy who called Bush on lying about WMD, to write that "Obama's gyrations on Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran are ... the machinations of a political opportunist looking to avoid having his fingerprints on any issue that might be controversial, and require real judgment, while preserving his freedom to bludgeon his adversary for actually taking positions..."  We know that Hillary had to be behind Wilson's remarks, because ... she just is.  It's a fact that she herself has stooped to trying to get people to compare Obama's actions to his words.  And she has thick ankles.  She is a mean and evil monster, and we hate her.  And she should stop trying to be President.



Display:


But... (2.00 / 1)

We all do agree that Hillary is a monster, right?


by Bargeron on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 10:57:43 AM EST

Re: But... (2.00 / 5)

She's not a monster.  But you people are afraid because she has bigger balls than most men.


by JoeySky18 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:17:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

factcheck.org says this is FALSE (2.00 / 2)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/dis cuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum= 132&topic_id=4919262&mesg_id=491 9262


by earthoat on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:19:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: factcheck.org says this is FALSE (2.00 / 2)

Do you think there will be a public apology over at Daily Kos?  lol


by JustJennifer on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:28:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: factcheck.org says this is FALSE (2.00 / 5)

Well, I don't know if there will be, but there should be an apology at KOS.  This is just more of the race-baiting by some Obama supporters.  The Factcheck piece at http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/ did_clinton_darken_obamas_skin.html is very good.  They say:

" We're not mind-readers, so we can't say whether or not the makers of this ad intended to engage in "race-baiting" or were "using racism to win" as some Obama partisans are claiming. Based on evidence at hand, we find those claims to be unsubstantiated. And the many potential differences between source footage, encoding manipulations, and other variables only make it less likely that any such attempt could be proven."

Anyway, why do Obama supporters think it would be horrible if he had dark skin, or that it's good if he doesn't?  Should we care what color his skin is?  Is his race a secret?  Do they think race is the only reason someone would choose not to vote for him?  

It's ridiculous.  Some of his supporters are really desperate now if this is all they've got.


by PlainWords on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:05:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The idea that a public blog (2.00 / 1)

would ever have to issue a public apologie for a diary of one of its end users, is absurd.
In my semi-professional opinion.
by Trey Rentz on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:00:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The idea that a public blog (none / 0)

but it was posted by Kos. Twice I think. And after someone posted a blog about the factcheck results.

There is room for doubt as anyone who makes videos or edits images knows. Kos says no room for doubt at all.


by barbeck on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:51:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The idea that a public blog (none / 0)

Not only that, but because of Kos, this ridiculous story made it into newspapers (interestingly, mostly Murdoch publications) from New York City to Australia.

Markos must be awfully proud of himself.


Fortune strums a mournful tune for those whose campaigns peak too soon. --Bored of the Rings
by Inky on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 12:15:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: factcheck.org says this is FALSE (2.00 / 1)

The HRC campaign acknowledged they did it.  They said it was normal processing.

You can believe them if you like.  I'm suspicious of any campaign that would invent and plant the madrassa lie.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/o bama.madrassa/


--1jphusseinb-- she's not a monster, as far as I know--diplomat Sinbad, making the world safe--all bluster, no cattle--
by 1jpb on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:12:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: factcheck.org says this is FALSE (2.00 / 2)

"The HRC campaign acknowledged they did it.  They said it was normal processing."

Your statement is an oxymoron.


by PlainWords on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:40:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: factcheck.org says this is FALSE (2.00 / 1)

How about: The HRC campaign acknowledged darkening the photo, they claimed that the darkening was the result of a "saturation-desaturation process typical in commercial production."


--1jphusseinb-- she's not a monster, as far as I know--diplomat Sinbad, making the world safe--all bluster, no cattle--
by 1jpb on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 06:01:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: factcheck.org says this is FALSE (2.00 / 3)

I'm not even going to ask if you have a link for this because it doesn't matter.  Don't you get it?:  Practically nobody gives a s**t how dark or light his skin is, and the few people who do are people whose votes neither candidate wants, because they are crackpots, just like the people obsessing over this.  


by PlainWords on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 06:08:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: factcheck.org says this is FALSE (none / 0)

I'll take that to mean that my revised statement is no longer an oxymoron in your eyes, but apparently you do see it as moronic.  I sort of agree, that this isn't a huge deal, but I think that our leaders need to set a good example by avoiding cheap tactics.

What do you think about the HRC campaign making up the madrassa lie?

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/o bama.madrassa/


--1jphusseinb-- she's not a monster, as far as I know--diplomat Sinbad, making the world safe--all bluster, no cattle--
by 1jpb on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 06:59:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: factcheck.org says this is FALSE (1.66 / 3)

Everybody knows the school was not a madrassa.  The story has right wing all over it, just like Drudge leaking that silly picture and trying to blame it on Clinton.  I have no good reason to believe Clinton had anything to do with either one.  The accusations that she did are just more Obamaphile paranoia about Clinton.  And frankly I'm sick of it.  You sound like a bunch of whining schoolchildren.  Obama's whole campaign boils down to "I'm the One and the mean old witch is trying to stop me."


by PlainWords on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 07:37:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: factcheck.org says this is FALSE (none / 0)

did you look at the link?


--1jphusseinb-- she's not a monster, as far as I know--diplomat Sinbad, making the world safe--all bluster, no cattle--
by 1jpb on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 07:48:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: factcheck.org says this is FALSE (2.00 / 3)

Yes.  Insight, The Washington Times, Glenn Beck, and Fox?  You gotta be kidding.  It's "an obvious right-wing hit job."  Note the word "obvious."  

I think there is a clear connection between all this phony trash Obamaphiles dream up about Clinton and the blank stares his surrogates give when they are asked to list his accomplishments.

I'm done here.


by PlainWords on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 07:55:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: factcheck.org says this is FALSE (2.00 / 3)

I find it hilarious for someone to say Hillary has bigger balls than most men, and you reply to that post with "factcheck.org says this is FALSE."  Gosh, who knew?


"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman
by Steve M on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:54:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

LOL! (2.00 / 8)

Exactly!!
Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:03:24 AM EST

Re: This just in... (2.00 / 6)

But he whined that she's running negative campaign because she's telling the truth about him.  


by JoeySky18 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:15:42 AM EST

And it is extra double negative... (none / 0)

when she says something positive about herself. That is the most despicable and dastardly negative campaigning in the Obama school of politics.


by ineedalife on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 08:48:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (1.71 / 7)

LOL Great satire! Lets throw in the Anti-Christ slogan as well, as she and Bill are on a crusade to destroy all of mankind.

Obama is so desperate to win now that he gets his surrogates to stoop to name calling. This is a very childish act and one that voters will turn sour on.


Steven Shaman Publisher Skywatch-Media News
by steve468 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:19:25 AM EST

Re: This just in... (1.66 / 6)

Oh, I forgot that!  Yes, she's the Anti-Christ!


by PlainWords on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:23:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (1.50 / 4)

It is my understanding that if you add up the letters in her name, their personl phone humbers, Chelsea's weight at birth, the number of people in China and reduce the number to three digits:  IT IS 666!!!!!!!!

Of course that is why she is such a perfect presidential candidate and why she won three out of four states on March 4.  God loves an anti-christ.

;-)


by macmcd on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:33:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (1.33 / 3)

Yes, I can't believe you forgot she's the Antichrist. Everyone knows this, even Chelsea (who's apparently just a pimped-out pawn, by the way). Her mother knows it, too. And, of course, the Antichrist was born of a jackal. Which is maybe why she laughs kinda funny -- clearly hereditary.

Hillary is also a vampire, by the way. We better go ahead and stake her while there's still time. Might ought to shoot her with some silver bullets, too. You know, just to be on the safe side. And hell, once she's down, let's punch her in the face. Just for fun.

Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:06:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (1.33 / 3)

Let's burn her house down...


by PlainWords on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:29:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (1.33 / 3)

Only if she's in it.
Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:35:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (2.00 / 1)

We seem to be getting a lot of TRs. ...Did people manage to miss the fact that these comments are jokes? You'd think my sig, at least, would be a dead giveaway.

I guess people honestly think I'm a Clinton supporter who would like to burn her house down with her in it, and who thinks she's the antichrist. Incredible.

Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 03:52:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (2.00 / 1)

Wait, okay, nevermind. It's just one idiot doing it, and s/he's doing it to a ton of people.
Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 04:05:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (1.50 / 4)

You also forgot that Hillary caused Benazir Bhutto death.


by JoeySky18 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 07:28:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (1.71 / 7)

Earlier in the campaign, sadly Dennis Kucinich's brother died.  I remember telling my daughter that there would probably be people blaming Hillary for that - Well, I was just joking, but would you believe I actually did see that posted in a comment on DailyKos.


by AnnC on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:22:58 AM EST

Re: This just in... (2.00 / 4)

Why does this not surprise me?  After their trying to paint Hillary and Bill as racists, I knew they would try anything.


by macmcd on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 11:35:21 AM EST
[ Parent ]

The worst is that Murdoch's NY Post (2.00 / 1)

picked up that diary and published it on 3_8.  Hope it doesn't hurt us in the General election.


by earthoat on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:22:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (1.50 / 4)

Well, the Clintons have had at least 100 people killed, as every good right winger (and Obama fanatic) knows.
Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:07:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (1.71 / 7)

Also, Vince Foster is really Chelsea's dad.  Or Janet Reno is.  Depends on who you ask.  


by JustJennifer on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:11:33 PM EST

Maury Povich Can Answer That Question... (none / 0)

...In about an hour plus commercials.


by andrewalker08 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:34:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (2.00 / 3)

This is just FANTASTIC!

I love your sense of humor and your very effective writing style.

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!


by Fleaflicker on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:13:31 PM EST

Re: This just in... (none / 0)

http://thepage.time.com/statement-from-s amantha-power/

Samantha's swan song to Hillary

lmao!

C Y A!

dee,dee,dee!  (not ready to be CIC 4 real)


by CarolinaDawn on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 12:51:39 PM EST

Re: This just in... (1.60 / 5)

I heard she kills puppies too.  Oh wait, that's another New York pol's wife..


by Si Ella Puede on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:33:48 PM EST

Re: This just in... (1.60 / 5)

No, she does, she kills puppies.  A friend of mine heard from his sister-in-law's father's car mechanic that it's true.  And I think the story was verified in the Enquirer.


by PlainWords on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:12:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She does not kill puppies... (1.60 / 5)

She eats them live.


by ineedalife on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 08:50:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (1.71 / 7)

Hillary should be blamed for all Barack's problem. How dare she come in between his dreams of the "urgency of now".

Hillary is the reason Michelle Obama is not proud of our country. Obama was buying the Rezko mansion for Hillary and Michelle got angry and got the fence up.

Cheer up!!


by Sandeep on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 02:44:26 PM EST

Re: This just in... (2.00 / 4)

Obama and his supporters have gone to great lengths to paint Hillary as the heartless witch of darkness and Obama as the holy superhero. I have been astounded by the actions they have taken...truly bothersome.


by HillaryKnight08 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:08:33 PM EST

Re: This just in... (none / 0)

You may not be able to face it but there is a dark and trouble side of HRC.

Why would she make unsupported charges against a 12 year old rape victim?

"'I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and to engage in fantasizing,' wrote Rodham, without referring to the source of that allegation. 'I have also been informed that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body.'
"Dale Gibson, the investigator, doesn't recall seeing evidence that the girl had fabricated previous attacks."

This is the Clinton behavior we've seen time and again: quite likely fabricated charges, so skillful so as to become impossible to completely disprove, which serve "the greater good" of whatever cause they're using at the moment to burnish their credentials, experience, legacy, or wealth.

What's disturbing about this isn't that Clinton mounted a vigorous case as a public defender. It's that it appears she played fast and loose with the truth in order to satiate her manic desire to prove her "bulldog" toughness to other observers. You can mount a vigorous case, but you're not supposed to conjure up the circumstances that allow you to make that defense. Lying to help yourself out during your first court assigned case is not an indispensable part of the country's legal defense system.

Of course, she subsequently accused the victims of her own husband's sexual harassment (and alleged rape, in one instance) of making it up as well. But, hey, the price you pay for being a lawyer, a pol, and a feminist, eh?


--1jphusseinb-- she's not a monster, as far as I know--diplomat Sinbad, making the world safe--all bluster, no cattle--
by 1jpb on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:34:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's just Rovian... (2.00 / 4)

...trash.


by PlainWords on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:43:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's just Rovian... (2.00 / 1)

No, Rove lies.

Rove is like a campaign that would invent and plant a fake madrassa story.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/01/22/o bama.madrassa/


--1jphusseinb-- she's not a monster, as far as I know--diplomat Sinbad, making the world safe--all bluster, no cattle--
by 1jpb on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 06:04:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (2.00 / 2)

Ok, I have seen this argument before and we discussed in great length about it.   Recycle?

A defense attorney has a job to do.  How do we preserve the system of justice if the defense attorney doesn't do their job properly?   If the girl made wrong accusation, then it had to be pointed out.  Think about the man family, his wife, his children.  The defense attorney need to protect those innocent people as well.  The case has to be laid out in court for the justice system to decide.  

Your claim is simply one of the smearing attempt to paint Hillary Clinton as a cold blood person when she was just doing her duty as a defense lawyer.
 


by JoeySky18 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 07:37:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Anti-Christ (1.50 / 4)

.
you forgot to add this in.

she is the anti-christ that eats babies for snacks.

omg, time to clutch my pearls and have
my panties in knots. the horror

;o)


by toddy on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:13:20 PM EST

Thanks for keeping the story alive (2.00 / 1)

and topping it off with the dumbest appeal to absurdity I've ever read.

Look, even Weight Watchers doesn't widen the "before" photos or darken the skin tone.  They draw the line after decoloring and bad hairdos.

What likely happened here is some overzealous staffer had a Rovian moment and decided to doctor the photo.  I understand the "whatever it takes" instinct; I wondered if instead of canvassing neighborhoods in Ohio in '04 I wouldn't do the country more good by going around tire-slashing every SUV I saw on election day.

But you can't sell your soul to win an election.  When you get caught doing this, you fire or "resign" the staffer (as Obama just did with "monster" lady), denounce the tactic and apologize to the other campaign.  Then the story is dead and both campaigns can move on.

You and the Hillary campaign are not handling this well, and you're making the Democratic Party look bad.


by corph on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:34:10 PM EST

Re: Thanks for keeping the story alive (2.00 / 5)

It's tempting to give you a serious reply, but if you really believe that DKOS story, you need to get a life.

And by the way, did you really mean to admit that you considered slashing tires?  You Obama folks are even more desperate than I thought.


by PlainWords on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:50:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yeah, I did. (2.00 / 1)

For Bush v. Kerry.  Other than the illegality and property damage, I don't see it as morally any more reprehensible than misallocating voting machines for partisan advantage.  Fight fire with fire, and all that.

I'm not talking about this primary contest. I don't know why you're equating the two elections.  Yes, I voted for Obama, but that doesn't make me "desparate" about anything.  Why should I be desparate?  He's winning by every measure other than who edged out whom in the most populous states.


by corph on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 05:28:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's sad, for you. (2.00 / 2)

It sounded like you meant this primary contest.  I don't approve of it either way.

You say: "For Bush v. Kerry.  Other than the illegality and property damage, I don't see it as morally any more reprehensible than misallocating voting machines for partisan advantage.  Fight fire with fire, and all that."

You mix a lot of things up in the above paragraph.  Misallocating [sic] voting machines for partisan advantage is, in my opinion, morally and legally a lot worse than slashing tires, although neither is defensible.  And neither one fits the phrase "fight fire with fire."

Your wild accusations do not suggest disciplined thinking.

"But you can't sell your soul to win an election.  When you get caught doing this, you fire or 'resign' the staffer (as Obama just did with 'monster' lady), denounce the tactic and apologize to the other campaign."

First, Obama has not fired anybody for race-baiting or for many of the other dirty tricks of his campaign.

Second, I think Obama has sold his soul to win this election at any cost.  My opinion of him has gone from thinking of him as a liberal but seriously inexperienced freshman Senator, to recognizing him as a dangerous demagogue.  One of the main reasons I think that is the character of his supporters and surrogates.

Your wild accusations against Clinton are irresponsible and do not suggest disciplined thinking.

It is that sort of undisciplined thinking that I was making fun of.  If you would take off your blinders for a second, you would realize that Clinton is just a good and decent person trying to do the right thing in a tough and hard-fought campaign.  Frankly, seeing all the Rove-type wild charges -- in some cases the very same ones Rove used -- this time coming from the Obama campaign, does not make me think highly of your candidate.


by PlainWords on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 05:58:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The "fight fire with fire" metaphor (none / 0)

means willingness to use scorched-earth tactics to win when the other side is already doing it.  It fits fine.  I'm not sure how else I can explain it to you.  And in case you didn't understand my original post, I'm not suggesting the Hillary campaign is doing that.

First, Obama has not fired anybody for race-baiting or for many of the other dirty tricks of his campaign.

Quote them, or shelve that argument.  Obama supporters only claim racism or other stuff when Hillary or Republicans (it's getting harder to tell them apart these days) downplay his achievements in heavily AA areas (see Clinton, Bill) or dog-whistle stuff about whether a the country is "ready" for an AA president.  And don't get me started about the stupid "misogyny" accusations being thrown around here as if they were going out of style.

You have it exactly backwards: Hillary Clinton is using win-at-all costs tactics.  Unlike you, I'll actually try to explain my argument. The primary rule of primaries is not to use the same line of attack against a fellow party member that the general election opponent will use, i.e. never attack the left from the right in the Dem primary.  Because you're helping Republicans by giving legitimacy to their criticisms of Democrats.  There are other reasons too, but this is the most glaring.

In that sense, Clinton attacking Obama on the lack of a healtchcare mandate is perfectly ok.  The 3a.m. crap and talking about a CinC threshold is not.  And no, whatever Obama said about Reagan doesn't count, because it can't be used against Clinton.

I don't care whether you think highly of Obama.  By all objective measures, he's run the far more honorable (and effective) campaign.  Which is why I went from indifferent to supporting him, and why I went from indifferent to Clinton to strongly opposing her.


by corph on Mon Mar 10, 2008 at 01:39:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The "fight fire with fire" metaphor (2.00 / 1)

I've already explained my argument in other places.  And so have others.  It's there for anyone who's not blind.  

But, just for fun, here's an article that details the race-baiting strategy that the Obama campaign has used since its inception:      http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?i d=aa0cd21b-0ff2-4329-88a1-69c6c268b304

New examples come up every day.  The latest is the ridiculous assertion in a New Yort Times guest opinion piece that the 3am ad is racist because the children are white.  http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/11/opinio n/11patterson.html?hp

And I do not at all buy into your argument that Hillary can't say anything the Republicans might say.  She can say anything that's legitimate.  The trouble is, Obama's supporters consider any comparison of his record to hers, or any comment on how thin and insufficient his record is, to be unfair.  I think he's run a dishonest campaign from day one.

Here's some more reading for you:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/29/1525 2/1780

I have very little respect for Obama, and one of the principle reasons is the dishonesty and demagoguery of his campaign.  


by PlainWords on Tue Mar 11, 2008 at 01:53:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not even that sinister. (2.00 / 2)

You routinely darken the images in contrast ads to make them appear, well, darker and more malevolent.  Someone probably should have figured out that doing so would make Obama look blacker and anticipated this fallout...


No politician ever lost an election because he underestimated the intelligence of the American public. - PT Barnum, paraphrased...
by jarhead5536 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 05:11:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (1.71 / 7)

Lets not forget she is a fighter and a woman. How dare she!!!!


by moi moi on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:35:06 PM EST

All women who aren't trophy wives (1.60 / 5)

are evil!


We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. Martin Luther King Jr.
by fairleft on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:11:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (1.50 / 2)

she's a fighter?  When?

Do you include the Iraq vote and Kyl-Lieberman?

I like women fighters.  Barbara Boxer comes to mind.

Hillary Clinton's just a DLC wuss riding on her husband's last name.


It's all about McCain/Bush now...
by thereisnospoon on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 12:18:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (1.33 / 3)

Obama co-sponsored a bill to name the Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization.  Just like Kyl-Lieberman.  So I guess you hate Obama too?

And as far as liking women fighters, I'm pretty sure you like them as long as they aren't running for president.


by PlainWords on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 09:19:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (none / 0)

wrong.  Carole Moseley-Braun is fantastic, too.

And my dislike for the Clintons is equal opportunity: Bill is even worse than Hill, if that's possible.


It's all about McCain/Bush now...
by thereisnospoon on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 04:35:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (none / 0)

keep up the desperate appeal to sexism and misogyny as the reasons anybody with half a brain in progressive politics doesn't like your candidate.

It's not about the vagina.  It's about the DLC, warmongering, triangulationg, backstabbing, win-at-all-costs anti-democratic, big-state-strategy shit.


It's all about McCain/Bush now...
by thereisnospoon on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 04:36:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (none / 0)

Yes, big state/popular vote strategy/Clinton vs anti-democratic caucus/wealthy elite/identity politics/Obama.

If you really believe in democracy, you have to pick big state/popular vote/Clinton.


by PlainWords on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 10:18:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Did Clinton Darken Obama's Skin? (2.00 / 2)

The following is from FactCheck.org:

Obama supporters on the Internet are agitated over the apparent darkening of Obama's image in a Clinton attack ad.

Our video team took a look. Our conclusions:

   * The Obama frames from the ad do appear darker than other video of Obama from the same event.

   * However, the YouTube copy of the ad, on which the bloggers base their conclusions, is darker overall than other copies of the ad.  We obtained a digital recording of the ad as it actually appeared on a Texas TV station, and it is lighter.

   * Furthermore, our analysis of the Obama frames, using Photoshop, shows a fairly uniform darkening of the entire image including the backdrop. It is not just Obama's skin color that's affected.

   * Also, nearly all the images in the ad are dark, including those of Hillary Clinton. And dark images are a common technique used in attack ads.

Others will speculate about the Clinton campaign's intentions and motives, as they already have. But without further evidence to the contrary, we see no reason to conclude that this is anything more than a standard attempt to make an attack ad appear sinister, rather than a special effort to exploit racial bias as some Obama supporters are saying.


by zenful6219 on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 03:40:20 PM EST

Re: This just in... (2.00 / 3)

And Fact Check already covered the orignal bloggers disgusting claim and posted.  NO.  NOT TRUE.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/ did_clinton_darken_obamas_skin.html


by environmentally blue on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:09:48 PM EST

Altho she's _clearly_ lesbian, (1.60 / 5)

she also murdered her secret White House lover, Vince Foster. How could you forget that one!


We can no longer afford to worship the god of hate or bow before the altar of retaliation. Martin Luther King Jr.
by fairleft on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:09:53 PM EST

Re: Altho she's _clearly_ lesbian, (1.60 / 5)

You keep forgetting that Hillary is a lesbian, so therefore Vince Foster was a woman.


No Way. No How. No McCain.
by Denny Crane on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 05:52:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary is not the real Hillary (1.50 / 4)

The real Hillary lives in the subterrain lair of Vladimir Putin in a cage.  This "Hillary" is her evil twin sister Samantha.  Everyone knows this so I shouldn't have to prove it again here.  

The Evil Hillary has been brainwashed by the neo-con warlords to split the Democratic Party and ensure the election of John McCain.  She will stop at nothing to destroy Obama and Howard Dean before they  succeed in their quest to save America and ensure democracy, prosperity, peace and equality for everyone.

Evil Hillary has the power to cause others to do her bidding and is thus blindly followed.  Only those well educated enough to be aware of the secret word "meme" are immune to her hypnotic spell.  
 


Sexism is real.
by grassrootsorganizer on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 04:38:39 PM EST

Re: This just in... (1.50 / 4)

This is absolutely ridiculous.  How can you post all of this true information about Hillary and conveniently forget that she is also responsible for blowing up all the cities in Planet of the Apes?  Sheesh. It was well documented in that movie, Cornelius and Zera meet Hillary Next to the Planet of the Apes.


No Way. No How. No McCain.
by Denny Crane on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 05:49:22 PM EST

Re: This just in... (1.50 / 4)

Have you been watching "Lost"?  At the end, I think you're going to find Hillary's hand behind what's happened on the island.


by PlainWords on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 06:14:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This just in... (1.50 / 4)

Excellent.  I knew she was the power behind the Dharma Initiative.  I'm two episodes behind, so don't tell me what's happening...


No Way. No How. No McCain.
by Denny Crane on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 01:34:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Please Advise... (1.33 / 3)

Did she borrow that Russian weather machine from Putin and send the tornado down Wysteria Lane, too????


by Si Ella Puede on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 07:43:25 PM EST

Re: This just in... (1.50 / 4)

DKOS is such a joke.


by bdog on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 07:53:57 PM EST

Re: This just in... (1.33 / 3)

I don't know if you know this, but her name used to be Hillary Rodham Lucifer Clinton.  She is from  hell.  She let Barbara Streisand sleep in President Gods bed.  That is why she was in hell......or something like that. Then, somehow she was forced into DailyKos, and started opposing the ArchAngel Gabrielle. I don't know what she did to deserve that. DailyKos is  a hellish place, too, but the damned there don't know it.  

                  That is All.


by Scotch on Fri Mar 07, 2008 at 10:20:37 PM EST

Re: This just in... (1.50 / 4)

All of you are forgetting the big one...
The Lewinsky scandal is all Hillary's fault. She is the one who made it happen and as a result, she "can't run the White House."

Also, Hillary won in New Hampshire because of fraud. She couldn't possibly win a single state without cheating. And if anyone voted for her, it's because they were threatened.


by HillaryKnight08 on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 02:01:35 AM EST

Re: This just in... (2.00 / 1)

how did this garbage get unrecommended?

this site used to be respectable.


Who killed our leaders? Who holds our reins? Who is our enemy?
by dem sam on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 02:19:27 AM EST

Re: This just in... (none / 0)

Joe Wilson is right on target!  Kos has made himself and his site the biggest joke on the internet with the Obama picture campaign.  I like MYDD much better for a more balanced and intelligent approach.  


by orionwest on Sat Mar 08, 2008 at 01:16:16 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.