and you call us cultists? My goodness.

  Not to mention using the tragedy that hit Kennedy to make a point smearing Barack Obama is completely classless.

This is going to end in a few weeks.  It's not going to the convention.  Sorry to disappoint all the Republican trolls out there.

It's 30 seconds of comedic gold. I get that grin from ear to ear and just heartily laugh as I read a mix of radical Clinton support blended with Republican talking points and a loose reiteration of  history.

So luzly, man.

Thanks.

Might it be worth mentioning who Kennedy has endorsed?  

...to use Kennedy, who endorsed Barack Obama, who is desperately ill, in this kind of manipulative crap.  

Doubts have risen and polls are red flags for Obama.

Are we talking about the poll where he leads McCain by +3 nationally, the poll where he leads Hillary by +11?

The key difference between Kennedy and Clinton is that he has been solidly anti-war and Hillary Clinton enabled the war by voting for authorization. If Hillary had followed his lead she would have deservedly won the nomination. Instead Democrats have looked for someone who wishes to change the mindset of American foreign policy to less beligerence and more negotiation. That is why Barack Obama will be our nominee and why Ted Kennedy has endorsed and campaigned for him.

Barely 24 hours have passed and the Repub trolls have already started capitalizing on the most devastating news in our nation.

Wow,  now I know Begalla is a republican.

NO Democrat would ever be so callous,  even Taylor Marsh had an instant ban on anyone trashing Kennedy's tragic condition.

Leave it Begalla and assholes like Michael Savage to rob us of all humanity: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/21 /michael-savage-mocks-ted_n_102818.html

Thanks Jerome. Glad we can now count on you to reign in the more fanatical Clinton supporters!

The dude's not worth even taking serious. The sooner you start laughing at these people, they quicker they'll realize they won't get the rise they're seeking.

Just a simple "lol" or "rofl" and be on your way.

Eh, I give you a 2/10 on the troll. Pretty weak.

Funny how Ted kinda endorsed Obama isn't it?  Troll.

Kennedy kept going because he thought Carter was unelectable?

Bullshit.

The 1980 challenge wasn't about electability -- it was ideological.

This may come as a shock to you, but Carter was considered rather conservative, much to the consternation of Democratic stalwarts in the liberal northeast.

Kennedy's challenge was on ideological grounds.

I didn't agree with it then (nor do I know) - but you're flat out lying.

...Michael, screw this...You are diverting from McCancient's talking points on the blogs today...stick to the script...Oh god if finds out you aren't listening his head might explode and Cindy's gonna hear it..Get with it...

The Issue: Time for Solutions
John McCain will put the national interest ahead of partisanship, he will work with anyone who sincerely wants to get this country moving again. If John McCain is elected President, the era of the permanent campaign will end. The era of problem solving will begin.

I don't see how "reflecting" on Kennedy's life-including his 1980 run for President-is in any way disrespecting Senator kennedy or "exploting" his condition.

It IS appropriate to reflect at this time. And this IS pretty much what happened in 1980. And Carter DID go on to lose.  

That said, either Hillary or Obama will have trouble winning in November with only 1/2 of the party supporting them..  They BOTH have liabilities in the general election.  I think Obama will lose as Carter did in 1980, and for some of the same reasons, being portrayed as "weak", "wimp", "not a regular guy".  (The "latte-sipping,  etc has been added recently).  Several states have rejected Obama by wide margins (but in fairness several states have rejected Hillary as well).  Over at Redstate, they are calling Obama "Macho Bambi".  Wait until they find something that sticks.   Not so different from Jimmy Carter.

Not so different from 1980. Not so different at all.  But the Democrats never learn.

This diary is stating the obvious, that this campaign bears many similarities to the 1980 campaign.  A candidate, though the nomination lay mathematically out of reach, nevertheless ran a spirited campaign against the frontrunner and won several primaries down the stretch.  The principal in that race has been in the news this week, and to say that the 1980 presidential campaign is NOT a significant part of Kennedy's legacy is disingenuous.

Despite polls indicating race was "too close to call", Carter went to crushing defeat in November.  

Forecast for tomorrow: more trolling with 90% stupidity.

Kennedy had the most ingracious moment of his career. He lost his convention bid, and Carter lost the election. Nice road you're advocating.

Kennedy lost at the convention.

Carter, weakened by the fight, lost the election.

No modern candidate who had to fight it to the convention wound up winning the election.

Why?  What is the point of this diary?  

When I read this diary, it says Jimmy Carter was bad, and so is Barack Obama.  

The idea is posited that Hillary is winning some primaries because Barack is seeming worse now.

There is, however, no support given to support this idea. I'd be curious to see what sort of substantial, real support the author can generate.

Is that normally the number of recommenders a diary needs here for it to make the rec list?  That's really kind of sad.

Would try to use Ted Kennedy's health to try to make a political point about the primary.

Ted Kennedy himself has already spoken quite loudly about who he thinks should be our next president... and I'll give you a clue: it's not Hillary Clinton.