Obama gets it…uh, together
Delegate’s reversal stuns party
Wisconsin Democrat now publicly supports McCain
As an avid supporter of Hillary Rodham Clinton in the Democratic primaries, Debra Bartoshevich is not alone in her frustration over Clinton’s defeat.
She’s not alone in refusing to support Barack Obama.
And she’s not entirely alone in saying she’ll vote this fall for Republican John McCain instead.
But what makes her unusual is that she holds these views as an elected delegate to the Democratic National Convention in Denver this summer.
“I’m sure people are going to be upset with me,” said Bartoshevich, a 41-year-old emergency room nurse from Waterford in Racine County, and convention delegate pledged to Clinton.
Joe Wineke, chairman of the Democratic Party of Wisconsin, reacted with disbelief when first told Friday afternoon that one of his state party delegates is now a McCain supporter.
“Not a delegate? To the national convention?” said Wineke, who was getting ready for the start of the Wisconsin state party convention Friday in Stevens Point.
“We have a Clinton national (convention) delegate who says she’s voting for John McCain?” Wineke repeated, for clarification. “I’ve never heard of such a thing.” [snip]
Well you can say it’s so , Joe!
High-ranking TN Dem: Obama got terrorist connection?
And TN superdelegate holding off on endorsment.
Fred Hobbs, a state Democratic Party Executive Committee member representing part of [U.S. Rep. Lincoln] Davis” district, said he understands why Davis is not endorsing Obama and is “skeptical” of the Illinois senator himself. [snip]
His chief of staff, Beecher Frasier, said he doesn’t know for sure if Obama is “terrorist connected” but he assumes he’s not.
“Maybe [it’s] the same reason I don’t want to - I don’t exactly approve of a lot of the things he stands for and I’m not sure we know enough about him,” [Fred] Hobbs said when asked why he thought Davis wasn’t endorsing Obama. “He’s got some bad connections, and he may be terrorist connected for all I can tell. It sounds kind of like he may be.”
OK Fred Hobbs, I can tell you Obama hasn’t any terrorist links. Get over it!
WHO?
Well, except for Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, he has no terrorist connections.
Those Gaza phone banks working for the Obamadhi don’t count against him. They’re Arabs, not Americans.
So Hobbs, you’re wrong!
June 15, 2008 at 7:20 am | Trackback
12 comments
Well do tell. BHO terrorists connected. Who would have thunk that a girleman who only reconizes the side of his family who are part of the most violent Islamic regime to take over (raping and murdering thousands) his home country is terrorists friendly.
And I thought the right wing smear machine couldn’t connect anyone to terrorism on flimsier evidence than the white house did with Saddam. Bravo… bravo.
I haven’t had any calls lately from RWSM Inc., fred, even though I MUST be in their electronic Rolodex.
Are you referring to VW?
fred, these are the Donkeys calling him an ass. Ask Hobbs why he thinks so.
The reality is Obama has more baggage than an Amtrak station. At some point this gets unloaded. Who is going to carry it?
fred said he wasn’t an “Obamaite”, and I hope he comes back to discuss it.
Discuss what?
McCain may be a robot being controlled by a secret committee of oil company executives… as far as I can tell.
Same logic.
Who cares about McCain? I most certainly do not. He’s a jackass in a pachy suit.
The revolution starts is 2010 fred, hope you like guns.
fred, you sound hostile, and a bit conspiratorial. Not your usual rational self. Discuss Obama.
I guess a better question, fred, is this: What will lower the prices of crude, and therefore various refined fuels? A stronger dollar, maybe, greater supply, refinery capacities, the usual stuff.
What’s your opinion? You said you’re a liberal. Your House Majority leader says we can’t drill our way out of this problem, and your candidate says that more drilling is a “failed policy of the past” (?). I’m serious, fred. WHAT is your solution? Taxing “windfall profits” and suing OPEC?
Wrong thread, hotspur.
On here I was object to the concept of supposing that someone may be anything negative, and assuming “as far as I can tell” as justification.
Its intellectually cheap and morally abhorrent.
What the hell are you talking about?
Wrong thread? YOU brought up oil company executives….
You’re really pissed off, fred. Calm down.
I get it now, fred. You’re describing and condeming the blind recrimination of individuals, without substantial evidence, or the reverse, which is adulation without reason. I’ll remember your moral and intellectual aversion to such things.