• comment on a post So Sad. Obama is doing a terrible job. over 5 years ago

  • comment on a post Win Full Size Replica Obama "Hope" Poster over 6 years ago

    Just donated. It's a sweet fundraiser and a fine way to honor his birthday and to celebrate a bright future for him and all other humans.

    Whoops, forgot to say Hope Poster in my donation comments!

    Happy Birthday to your son.

  • on a comment on Full Tilt Boogie over 6 years ago

    to see the hillaryis44 crowd bringing their own special brand of reasoning here.

    This is true desperation, begging at that site for rec's and comments.

  • comment on a post Argus Leader Endorses Hillary over 6 years ago

    The opinion of the Argus Leader is HUGE!

    Especially coming fast on the heels of Ricky Martin!

    This MUST BE the tipping point!

    Of course, you lost me at "shameless exploitation" but never mind.

    And where did you get the 18 MILLION PEOPLE number?

    Doesn't matter though.

    WHATEVER you POST is VITAL and will, no doubt, continue to be RECOMMENDED.

  • comment on a post South Dakota: Argus Leader endorses Hillary Clinton over 6 years ago

    THANK  YOU, mtg44234 for this very ASTUTE analysis!

    Hillary is the only candidate with an energy policy.

    It is VITAL to get the word out about that!

  • Alegre. HOW do you DO IT?

    Horse-pucky! Boyz! Sexism! Abbie Hoffman! That Ayers fella!

    And the zinger--

    New voters!

    Oh SNAP!

    WOW! I've been waiting for HOURS waiting to read your latest DIARY and I was not DISAPPOINTED.

    Reading your WORDS I am INSPIRED to work even HARDER.

    THANK YOU from the bottom of my HEART. The campaign is LUCKY to have you!

  • comment on a post Ricky Martin for Hillary! over 6 years ago

    And I TOTALLY can't wait until VH1 does a "Behind the Music" and "Where are They Now" on our gal!

    Good times!

    Thank you, TexasDarlin' for your DILIGENCE and for bringing this so PROMINENTLY to our attention!

  • on a comment on The Caucuses over 6 years ago

    But enjoy your non-eggs and non-ham!

  • comment on a post Heart of a Champion over 6 years ago

    to you for REPOSTING this OLD diary!!!!

    THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU?

    How the HELL do you do it? How do you KEEP GOING ON?

    In the face of - tonight especially - this latest disappointment?

  • on a comment on The Caucuses over 6 years ago

    senators, governors, representatives, mayors in Nebraska.

    And, if you've been reading outside the echo chamber, you'll know that it's very possible one or two of Nebraska's five electoral votes will go to Obama (yes, we're the only state besides Maine that allocates proportionately to congressional districts, instead of winner take all.)

    Of course, Nebraska, with five electoral votes, doesn't count anyway remember? We've already been characterized as insignificant and meaningless, so I don't know why you're even trifling with us.

    Although West Virginia DOES count, and it has, how many? Oh yes, five electoral votes as well. I have never understood the Clinton math.

    But back to your "argument" which is the equivalent of "If I had ham and if I had eggs, I would have ham and eggs."

    We had our primary in Nebraska back in February. It was even reported on the big networks!

    And your candidate won 8 electoral votes, and Mark Penn dismissed us, and we have all moved on. I suggest you do so as well.

    There is no useful, or logical, data which can be derived by looking at a May beauty contest and trying to make inferences about a fantasy race which never was run.

  • comment on a post The Caucuses over 6 years ago

    a caucus held in February, which had incredible turnout and which was determined the state's delegates, with a non-binding, meaningless "primary" vote in May.

    Yes, there was a state and local election in May, which also included a presidential non-binding "primary" which everyone, even in Nebraska, understood was a beauty contest.

    So as soon as I read the sentence," In all four cases, more people participated in the primary than in the caucus.  Also in each case, Hillary Clinton performed better and Barack Obama worse in the primary than in the caucus" I immediately thought, "Who in the world could possible care how many people participated in a non-binding primary months after a state's delegates were allocated by a caucus?"

    Even in the state of Nebraska, where I live, and which Mark Penn has dismissed as small and insignificant, we understood that the race for the nomination is about delegates, and we were excited to be able to participate, for the first time, in the primary process with our caucus back in February. As a result, Nebraska's delegates were allocated 16 to Obama and 8 to Clinton.

    Progressive roots run deep in Nebraska, and the war is a big issue here. Senator Clinton was not as successful in appealing to Nebraska values, Thus, Obama gained more delegates than Clinton in Nebraska.

    Who cares what the results of the May vote were? Or that Clinton lost again?

    This "trend" and "reallocation" is baseless and insulting to the voters of Nebraska.

  • on a comment on Hillary's Swing State Advantage over 6 years ago
    And, I also see absolutely NO discussion of the impact of Jorge Posada's absence from the Yankees, which is of equal, or greater, relevance to the Democratic nomination as the polls cited. It's shocking, I tell you, this failure to engage in substantive analysis. Shocking!
  • comment on a post So - Who'll Be Next? (Updated) over 6 years ago
    Alegre.
    It's a simple question for you - the members of the DNC's Rules and Bylaws Committee, who'll be deciding on the future of our party on Saturday.
    I am very relieved that this question is not for me. You have, as usual, inspired many thoughts in my mind.
  • We should all try to keep our history straight. We should be absolutely clear about what is important.
  • I apologize for my carelessness. As background, Obama's Great Uncle (his Grandmother's brother) served in the 89th Infantry Division that liberated Ohrdruf, a subcamp of Buchenwald. Here is the corrected quote, which is at the link cited above.
    "Formed in 1917, shortly after the United States entered World War I, the 89th Infantry Division participated in several major military battles. In World War II, the "Rolling W" division landed in France in January 1945 and quickly advanced to the German front. In March 1945, it joined the Third Army's assault on the Rhineland, crossing the Sauer, Moselle, and Rhine rivers that same month. On April 8, the 89th captured the town of Eisenach and subsequently advanced farther into Thuringia and into neighboring Saxony, where it took the city of Zwickau on April 18, 1945. On April 4, 1945, the 89th overran Ohrdruf, a subcamp of the Buchenwald concentration camp. Ohrdruf was the first Nazi concentration camp liberated by U.S. troops in Germany. A week later, on April 12, Generals Dwight D. Eisenhower, George S. Patton, and Omar Bradley visited Ohrdruf to see, firsthand, evidence of Nazi atrocities against concentration camp prisoners." [United States Holocaust Museum].
    I also should have added, from the same source:
    The 89th Infantry Division was recognized as a liberating unit by the U.S. Army's Center of Military History and the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in 1988.

Diaries

Advertise Blogads