BF2S Forums Hillary Clinton fires top general, the war may be almost over...

Hillary's implosion is HILarious!! Granted I thought she had Obama a few times but he just holds on (kind of admire it actually)!!

I agree she is a crusty old cunt (dont pardon my french please!) who is in trouble! Obama has the momentum right now and I think he might just pull it out! He has the money, the independents, and he has the freshness appeal that Hillary desperately wants (and clearly doesnt have). 

The arrogance on her part this entire campaign has just been unbelieveable! She thought she was gonna "walz" right through without a fight, and I love the fact Obama is taking it right too her!!

On a Republican note . . . .  I cannot believe John McCain is our candidate. . . . The one MAJOR issue that I want resolved (Illegal immigration), he has the worst policy/stance of ALL the candidates Democrat and Republican.  I am honestly thinking of writing myself in as President!

FEOS wrote:

I'm not writing Hillary off just yet. Obama is certainly gaining momentum, but it's still too close to call.

As for McCain, I'm holding out hope that his immigration position is a result of working for his constituents and that he will bring a more measured approach to immigration when his constituency is the entire country instead of a border state. Regardless, his credentials on many other major issues far exceed either Obama's or Hillary's. And he's the only one who has proven he can work in a bipartisan manner...which is absolutely critical after the bipolar acrimonial mess we've had for the past eight years.

J00 stulz me wurds...

Yeah, this is right. I was just going to say that before I saw your post.

McCain has some "reality" and temperment issues to deal with, as was said by a famous caricature artist "his head is practically a barometer for his mood".  His straight-talk express is anything but, and his initial maverick stance (and later backing down) on some core issues like advocation of torture proves that he's the perfect neo-con team player and public spoiler susceptible to deep compromise of his actual principles.

In short, he's a neo-con sock puppet that's too easily manipulated with no business having his finger on the button (nearly the same can be said for Hillary - or Joe Lieberman).

FEOS wrote:

Umm...he's been against torture (to include waterboarding) from the start. Probably because he was subjected to years of it in Vietnam.

He's hardly a neo-con. Which explains why most of the neo-cons are pushing for Huckster instead of him (and Romney before he dropped out). Certainly not a neo-con teamplayer, as you put it. McCain-Feingold? McCain-Kennedy? Neocons would rather disembowel themselves with a rusty spoon than have their names associated with either one of those libs.

Hence why its so strange that he would compromise on the language and cheerlead/vote for ambiguous wording on a bill that allows torture to continue.  Someone made a call from on-high that shut him up.  He took up the mantle and then ran scared like a little girl screaming at the first sign of the overlords brow-beating his ass, point blank.  The other explanation is that it was calculated to confuse the conservative voter base.  So he's either:

#1 - Comprimising his moral principles, and our republic in the process, to shill for the neo-con wing of the Republican Party.
or
#2 - Actively being a team-player to comprimise our republic and hence his moral obligations.
or
#3 - Something in between (I'm all for examining the gray area).

His cheerleading for the "Surge" and his outlandish claims against reality (and his dog and pony show visit to Baghdad) makes me lean towards #2.  He's also been simply consistently wrong in a fantastic way on a number of both domestic and foreign policy issues...like illegal immigration (which, big surprise, he also supports the neo-con position).

I'll agree that the neo-cons (neoliberals) would throw him under the bus and have been in his bid for president, he's too good of a soldier and patsy for them to actually want to let him in charge.

FEOS wrote:

I'm not writing Hillary off just yet. Obama is certainly gaining momentum, but it's still too close to call.

As for McCain, I'm holding out hope that his immigration position is a result of working for his constituents and that he will bring a more measured approach to immigration when his constituency is the entire country instead of a border state. Regardless, his credentials on many other major issues far exceed either Obama's or Hillary's. And he's the only one who has proven he can work in a bipartisan manner...which is absolutely critical after the bipolar acrimonial mess we've had for the past eight years.

I do agree with you on the bipartisanship on McCains resume. . . .  Mind you he worked "bipartisanly" with the democraps on that AWEFUL immigration bill that would have done more harm than good for America. . . . . .

He is BY FAR the most qualified and experienced out of the bunch, that is not the question. . . . . The question is will he SOLVE the immigration pandemic?? I dont think he has any intention of solving that whatsoever. . . .

Lastly, Your right Hillary is a complete polarizing candidate, and Obama just wants you to vote for him cause he is "The candidate of change" (what a bunch of bullshit) . . . . . They both have their heads so far up their ass they cant even see straight!!

This country doesnt need a liberal (Obama) and the country also doesnt need more of the same (Clinton) SO. . . . Vote fadedsteve in 08' I will solve all pressing issues regarding immigration!! Believe me!!! These illegals wouldnt know what hit em'!

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

GorillaTicTacs wrote:

(Bush, Hitler, Saddam, Hirohito, etc)

We're not gassing Jews, running political opponents through plastic shredders or beheading Chinese. You've lost all OP credibility by putting Bush in the same set as those names.

I agree its a very immature attempt at humor. . .  an attempt with no merit whatsoever! Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Saddam etc belong in NO WAY even close to being compared to George W. Bush! Thats fucking insulting and rediculous

They were butchers, sadists, murdering, intellorant, ignorant bastards that killed millions and will be remembered as so! Bush isnt bright, but he certainly doesnt fill any of those catagories at all. . .

Last edited by fadedsteve (2008-02-11 14:46:45)

topal63 wrote:

fadedsteve wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

We're not gassing Jews, running political opponents through plastic shredders or beheading Chinese. You've lost all OP credibility by putting Bush in the same set as those names.

I agree its a very immature attempt at humor. . .  an attempt with no merit whatsoever! Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Saddam etc belong in NO WAY even close to being compared to George W. Bush! That's fucking insulting and ridiculous

That's so fucking true!

G.W. is total idiotic amateur when compared to those others, it's an insult to despots everywhere to include G.W. on any "Great Despots" list.

An even greater ill-conceived attempt at humor.

Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2008-02-11 14:54:16)

It wasn't an attempt at humor, it was a comparison which was taken out of context.  And yes, I know Bush is not Hitler.  Hitler was actually fairly elected before fully coming to power (sorry, couldn't help it).

Basically, whenever any leader finds him/herself on the losing end of something, the first thing they do is set up and fire their top general.  Then they keep replacing them with political appointees that are good ass-kissers and the ability to tell them what they want to hear, but sub-standard at the job they're supposed to be doing.  This is sometimes referred to as "the bunker mentality".  There's many examples of this going back to Biblical times, as well as modern times in the pro-sports and corporate world as well, except there they call it a "re-alignment".  Only rarely does this actually work, as few political appointees chosen for their butt-snorkeling prowess may actually have some skills.

kylef wrote:

Clinton still has more delagates, yes? (something silly like..50-100)

Nope. Obama has 54 more right now...probably even more after today's Potomac Primary (VA, MD, DC).