using Christine O'Donnell logic

[Johonny]

But if -- if the House and the Senate passes a bill to fully repeal Obama Care, so that we can clear the way to start over with true reform that helps the most vulnerable, and then the president goes and vetoes that bill and the will of the people has been -- has been made very clear, if Barack Obama vetoes that, that the year before his reelection, he's setting himself up to be very vulnerable.



So if -- if health care passed the House, if it passed the Senate and Obama signed it into law. Then anyone running against it would be against the will of the people. By Christine O'Donnell logic she is thus against the will of the people. All this years anti-health care Republicans are against following the will of the people by her own logic. And all are subject to ultimate penalty, an immediate run off election against Hillary Clinton. I can only conclude, Hillary Clinton is about to take over the House and the Senate!

[Iris]

1. I could barely get past the bad subject-verb agreement

the rest just sounds like gobbledygook.

Who is buying what these people are selling?

[Gman]

2. Good grief! And I thought Palin was an idiot

I had no idea there could be someone more stupid than Palin. Conservative stupidity never ceases to astound me.

[sohndrsmith]

4. Hey, don't be so hard on yourself. She is. They both are. How and

why they are actually political/celebrity figures - with significant support no less! Is... in my view... the very definition of inexplicable.

They both seem to lack any hint of meaningful intellectual curiosity, though neither are what I'd consider "dumb" (preemptive apologies if anyone takes my use of that word as derogatory towards those with disability - any disability. I don't do that).

I do have a problem, however, with those who seem to be skilled in nothing but the art of manipulation/manipulative persuasion/selling or talking their way in or out of situations depending on how much self-benefit a certain tack will produce.

The reaction I have to how many people actually legitimize these pseudo-pols is nothing less than abject disbelief (with a tinge of horror for good measure).

I'm no intellectual gem... not by any stretch of the imagination... (though imaginary genius is the closest I'd ever get to the real thing - i.e. never mind.... <g> .), but I am gobsmacked with disbelief that anyone would listen to, read about and learn about either of these oddballs - and actually find them adequate as legislators, leaders or people who have any input regarding my fate, anyone's fate and the nation's fate.... Who, I wonder with stunned curiosity - who - truly believes either of these people (or Angle, or _____ |insert name of radical candidate who's positions are under serious Gaussian Blur| except two: "Obama: BAD!" and "Progress: BAD!" Actually, the filter is more likely 'Noise' than Gaussian Blur...

Clearly, if the rise of these folks have proved anything, it is that intelligence, integrity, substantive record and the like... are basically irrelevant. How they persuade people to support, much less vote for them... is well beyond my comprehension.

The reality that many people are faithful supporters of.... these non-entities that offer them nothing but - being white, perhaps?.... yet completely without substance, record or ability to articulate policy or debate adversaries legitimately (they're all in hiding!).

Okay, I've just come to an unexpected but undeniable conclusion... is it really as ugly as black vs. white??
"Anything but that black guy...." the concept is physically painful. But I have learned how more horrifically racist this country actually is than I thought it was - and I "thought" I was aware of the bitter truth. I've since learned how naive that was.

Obama is likely the most intelligent, capable President we have ever had - or ever will have - (Mr. Lincoln the exception).
Yet never in the history of this country has a President been so unilaterally targeted to fail - at the expense (which we are seeing unfold before us, in reality) of the health, strength, stability and ability of this country and our government. The deliberate destructive intent or forced stagnation of necessary actions - obstructed not because they're bad, but because their failure will hurt the President. That they hurt American citizens is of no consequence.

If these things are true - even partially - I find no reason to qualify my opposition to those who seem to be fostering and heightening such division and destruction... because Obama is "inferior" (yah, we are watching a shameful history: being fortunate enough to live in this time and having the most qualified leader we could ask for - and letting those who measure his skin color as obscuring any/all talent, value and leadership is beyond once in a decade... he is, or would be, and should be, one of two (maybe three) incomparable leaders this country has been blessed to have - and nearly half the country chooses to be blind to and negate this man's inordinate rarity that those of us alive at this moment are unlikely to see again in our lifetimes.... because he's a black guy. There is nothing patriotic or American about anyone who cares more about destroying the President because he's black (primarily) and giving credence to these unAmerican groups, puppets and entities seems no less than treasonous.

imagine how effective this President could have been or could be absent the racist mob agenda - but he's under an unprecedented, historic level of obstruction - the strength of which we've never seen before - just because he's white. Oh wait - black. He's as white as he is black... and his blackness is somehow an intolerable crime - worth destroying the country over.

I am thinking the mindset is just that simple - and horrifically - just that evil.

And anyone who can vote this November could be apathetic...? That's a headline - just because idiot news providers pummel us with the "fact" that we're bored, disaffected and - sometimes - when people hear things often enough, it becomes self-fulfilling.... Anyone who voted for Obama has no valid complaint on any current issue past their last vote - if that was the limit of their support. "He's on his own, now... and I'm not pleased." Back the man up and vote if you care about what is right about this country. Despite my disagreement with some of Obama's decisions - I am well aware of the fact that he is far smarter than me and has proven, time and again, that he is 10 steps ahead of the rest of us and I trust him with my vote. Do you trust someone else with yours? If so, don't vote in the mid-terms, and let the anti-Americans (extremist-faux-religious-supremacist-cultist profiteers with zero concern for the average, disadvantaged, hurting people, families, children) gain ground, then sleep well.

Okay - that was more rant than I expected... Rachel Maddow is embroiled with some moron in the background, so that may be fostering my volatile sentiment in this post. Whew. Sorry guys.

[Johonny]

5. not sure she's an idiot

It's not so much an idiot as an idiot industry. As many people on DU have pegged and as Rachel has talked about, they just appear to be career cranks. Same goes for the crank Rachel interviewed today. They all make their money being cranks. There's a certain intelligence and skill that goes with being a good crank. I mean most cranks end up being the person that shows up at the local town hall meeting every time. Everyone on the city council knows them. They all turn and do other things while they get their 5 minutes. Then the meeting moves on to reality. Once in while a crank manages to rise to actual office. For some like O'Donnell seem to move from one crank money maker (abstinence), to another missionary work, to another perpetual candidate for office. As far as I can tell this is the only unifying theme of the Teaparty election year of 2010. Hopefully they will all lose horribly and they can go back to doing what they do best. Making money off conservasuckers by writing anti-evolutionary junk for the Discovery institute, or running their anti-masturbation committee or yelling at clouds. A small few (Palin, Pat Robertson) make it rich. Many more make a nice living. But I imagine (judging by the local cranks that appear at my local city council meetings) there's a lot of minor league crankers out there dreaming of pitching in the big leagues.

[sohndrsmith]

6. I couldn't agree more in that it's an "idiot" industry. You pegged it

perfectly.

Unfortunately, (if I read your comment correctly) the one's you call "cranks" (I like that term... good going....<g>... ) are the most dangerous opponents.

EDIT: saving any/'everyone from blathering idiocy (mine).

Had to erase all - suddenly struck by the birthday of a genius.

Hey... happy birthday, John. (damn...)

[sohndrsmith]

3. wait, wait, wait, "Using Christine O'Donnell logic" is your first mistake : )

Seriously, the 'repeal' argument is one I find tiresome - especially because it is proposed without any detailed plan or structure outlining exactly what it's proponents would do upon 'starting over' that would truly result in a better outcome, much less "true reform that helps the most vulnerable."

By it's very essence and mores, the TeaParty Republican tenets and positions have little (being kind) to no interest in helping the most vulnerable, so that is a huge red flag bearing the big bright words: "Dishonesty Alert!" on it.

If she really means such a statement and truly stands by it, she ought to register as a Democrat, because the unfortunate and vulnerable seem nothing but pesky interference by the TPGOP.... has anyone seen legitimate evidence proving otherwise? That is not a campaign sales pitch (read: meaningless)?

Regardless of party affiliation and wacky statements, I have serious doubts about Christine O'Donnell after looking at CREW's documents regarding her expenses. Her house was to be sold at auction, and her (then) boyfriend bought it. Her current boyfriend is her landlord at another address, and is the son of the individual (a former supporter and campaign officer, I believe) providing his written complaint regarding unlawful use of campaign funds. He told her he had serious concerns that she was violating FEC regs, and I guess after dismissing him, he did not want to be caught up in the mess if/when it all came to light.

It is more than difficult to believe that O'Donnell dismisses her larger fiscal troubles as a clerical error - after looking through all the docs (at least the ones available on CREW). She seems to use boyfriends as fiscal rescuers.

Less (or rather completely) irrelevant - though interesting is the doc describing O'Donnells living on the edge.... alcohol abuse and sexual promiscuity. Maybe she was normal once!

I am the first in line to be forgiving when someone makes mistakes or falls on hard times by accident or fault - but make a true, deliberate effort to recover. Even if they fail, I believe in giving them as much help as possible in hopes that the 3rd or 5th or 6th time will be "the one" that helps them climb out of the pit.

It is the dishonest proclamation of being imperfect and having gone through hard times as an excuse (when it really seems deliberately misleading - not due to addiction and altered thought processes, but real misrepresentation to get away with something) is one of the most destructive sort of sentiments that keeps alive and promotes the negative view so many have of those who are truly in need, in trouble and enslaved by addiction or victims of their own stupid decisions but honestly want the smallest opportunity to rectify and make right (when possible) the stupid mistakes they have now learned from...

This person seems like a con, fully and simply.

Does she have any history - any whatsoever?? - of any action that can actually, literally, tangibly serve as evidence of being helpful towards the most vulnerable? Guessing here that she's specifically and solely using the term vulnerable to define fetuses - and no one/nothing else, period. Okay, even within that narrow-minded definition, the question remains. Is there a record of her actions resulting in help for vulnerable fetuses?