You cannot make this stuff up. Apparently one brother-in-law, a Clinton supporter, stabbed his in-law for supporting Barak Obama. My personal response to finding a family member supporting the “empty-suite-with-a-smile” would be to stab myself. Seppuku is the only honorable way out of eternal shame in such circumstances.
This came about apparently during a heated exchange with respect to Obama’s being a realist. Personally speaking, if Obama were a realist, he would be a conservative. The report stated that the two men fought and the whole episode ended with one man’s getting stabbed in the stomach. Maybe this was an attempted seppuku on the part of the Obama supporter, after finding out that there was a family member who supports ‘Her Shrillness’. From the article:
…[A] Pennsylvania man allegedly stabbed his brother-in-law in the stomach after the pair quarreled about their respective support of Democratic presidential candidates Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Here I was thinking that support for Hillary did not run very deep. With all the hype about her being the consensus candidate, the inevitable candidate I figured, “Who would care?” It’s like Giuliani (who at least successfully ran a city bigger than 30 states) when his candidacy went off the rails, there was this Republican consensus shrug. Apparently, 35 years of experience is worth fighting for.
Thirty five years of being married to what is the sharpest con man in recent American politics. Thirty five years of being married to the most accomplished philanderer in the Oval Office in the past century. I cannot speak for the Arkansas governor’s office, written historical records don’t predate the Clintons. Apparently they single-handedly brought fire into the state as well.
Being the spouse of the one who ran the place is the kind of information and experience that will get you real far at the office of a used car lot … won’t it? No?!? So how is this of any benefit for her application for a far higher office? Where are the thirty five years coming from? She was a lawyer. OK, does that mean the other 949,999 lawyers in this country are less qualified than she is?
She is a second term Senator who really stopped being a full time US Senator once she threw her hat into the ring. Which was officially a year ago and thus she can claim 7 years of legislative experience. With ground-breaking legislation such as her co-sponsorship of the Armenian Genocide Resolution, her introduction of The Flag Burning Act of 2005, and an earmark of $1M for the Woodstock Music Festival museum, it is readily apparent that the voters of NY have gotten just what they deserved, by voting for Illinois to have a third Senator.
Then there is the other side of the coin in this dust-up. The Obama has cometh, rejoice! The Obama giveth, the Obama taketh away. His presidential candidacy is the first thing that Michelle feels proud about since becoming an adult. I would like to know under which rock at Princeton has she been the past 25 years? Record crowds greet the second coming of JFK (not Kerry) wherever he may go. Womyn swoon and faint at his campaign stops, it has that ‘rock star’ air to it. Why not Ringo for President?
His candidacy is about hope and change, and hope, some change, more hope, more change, a 3 dollar bill and a pile of flakes. In case you are wondering, many of these flakes are anchoring prime time news shows on MSM across the country. What amazes me is that this empty resume is beating the tar out of Hillary at the polls. In comparison to Obama, Hillary has been in the Senate forever. Obama took office in 2004. He has been stumping for as long as Hillary, so he has half the actual time in office, one eighth the time of McCain. Le’ enfant’, no?
What is amazing is Obama actually has more legislative accomplishments than Hillary. This is damning him with faint praise, but then is it not ever so apropos? Is it possible Hillary’s suit is even emptier than Obama’s? To give an idea of some of what Mr. Change and Hope is looking to do, Obama introduced the “Iraq War De-Escalation Act”, basically we would cut and run, the time table calling for us to be out of Iraq by April 2008. Real nice, it appears that Obama is not above politicking with our foreign policy. The legislation has just the perfect timing to engineer a definitive defeat in Iraq of the Republican President in this year (any coincidence, ya think?) and its result something to tisk-tisk from afar later while in office. There’s a steaming pile of hope for you.
These are the choices the Democrat primary season hath wrought upon us. The most liberal voting member of the Senate is using a preacher’s cadence in his speeches. He speaks as a moderate, but when you look at the actions, they do not match this soothing rhetoric. Politics mixed with religion has been decried by Obama’s party for years. So what do they do? They pick a charismatic high priest who does not offer answers to any specifics. He instead waxes poetic about change and hope.
You cannot make this stuff up. Apparently one empty suit is beating an even emptier suit for the Democrat Presidential spot this fall. What will the Democrat Party’s response be at the convention when they realize that the phrase “hope and change” trumped what is in Bill Clinton’s estimation “the world’s smartest woman”?