REALITY CHECK!!

[ClericJohnPreston]

REALITY CHECK!

Here we are, first ( AS IN FIRST ) Primary of 50+ more, and the annointed one has already convinced his "RAPTURous" followers, of his inevitability. This is the Obama camp at their best. Then again, his web site, against all fair critical analysis of the debate last night, called him "the winner". So, take inevitability with a grain of salt.

Personally, I go by the truth of what a candidate says, matched against their record. When a campaign speaks about eliminating lobbyists and sitting in negotiations with insurance carriers ( who I know better than 99.9% of all DUers from my personal injury experience and having worked for one out of Law School ), and has a lobbyist from that group leading their local campaign and doesn't realize carriers won't give up ANYTHING , unless taken back, I QUESTION.

That is called "CRITICAL THINKING".

Personality cults have always ended badly and when I see supporters predicating support on a SPEECH, rather than actions, or in spite of actions, I worry.

Obama is a CHOREOGRAPHED, manipulative, sound byte bid, or do NONE of his supporters here understand politics yet???? Same for ALL the candidates.

This is a fluid, mercurial debate that will not be settled any time soon.

The point is, THERE IS A LONG , LONG WAY TO THE FINISH LINE.

ANY TALK OF "INEVITABILITY" IS PURE : M-A-N-I-P-U-L-A-T-I-O-N .

All of our pontificating on this board is like an exercise in futility, full of sound and fury , signifying nothing.

Mark my words, there are shakeups and twists and turns still to come. This is all a long way from over.

Do you read one chapter of a book and then conclude the ending and skip the entirety of the book? Politics and one caucus and Primary aren't cliff notes for the Electoral Process. We have miles to go before we sleep.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

1. After seeing what happened in Iowa... I feel as if I have read

the last chapter of a long twisting novel..... first.

[NYCGirl]

2. "What they say matched against their record"? You don't want to do that with

Edwards' time in the Senate.

[Egnever]

3. welcome back

DemKR

[City Lights]

6. LOL!

:thumbsup:

[ClericJohnPreston]

7. Oh..you again...

"EGNEVER", you were in my first post at DU: "Form over substance".

You never answered me when I took you on.

Like a lot of what I heard from people on the Malloy, Randi Rhodes and Maher boards, who posted here, many DUers like you "speak in tongues". Some slanderous poster named "GalleryGod" never addressed my post, but labeled me an Edwards "Operative".

LOL!!!!!

So, who do you think I am for Admin clearly knows I'm a brand new spankin New York poster who was never on DU, except as a favorite place, before two days ago.

I will post my bona fides for you and hello to any posters who know me from my previous incarnations:

RRMB: "mookiemike"
Malloy Board: "Grammaton Cleric" ( someone here stole my name )
Maher boards: "Number Six"

Thematically, except for the personalized "mookiemike", my usernames speak to rebels. ( See Patrick McGoohan in "The Prisoner" and Christian Bales character in the little known political gem, "Equilibrium" )

So sorry to disappoint...NOT!

[Egnever]

12. LOL

Who do I think you are ? Someone who makes it up as they go along with no regard for reality. But hey circle jerks are fun! Have a ball.

[ClericJohnPreston]

13. A cultist speaks of reality?

How humorous Egnever".

I embarrass you for your mistaken reference, so you make up a response on the fly.

Tell me, what is wrong with the premise of my post?

OOPS...that expects you to be able to speak substantively, rather than personalizing attacks, Mr. FALLACIOUS REASONING 101.

[Egnever]

16. what is the premise of your post?

it reads like a lot of rambling and self aggrandizement to me?

[ClericJohnPreston]

19. To an Obama supporter with an axe to grind.

"self aggrandizement".

MMMkay.....someone have a chip on their shoulder, or what?

You called me "DEMkr", whatever that is.

Now, you take a post about how early in the race this contest is and call it "self-aggrandizement".

I'm just trying to understand you, "Egnever".

But, sadly, there is nothing there to understand, I fear.

[Egnever]

21. Ha you don't know jack about me.

And clearly know nothing about this board. Perhaps I was wrong and you aren't DemKR with a new fresh moniker. He clearly had better writing skills.

Enjoy your stay hopefully you learn something while you are here.

[ClericJohnPreston]

27. Where is the period in your run on sentence self-appointed rater of writing skills?

Talk about an empty vessel......geesh.

Thanks, at least, for admitting you were wrong about the "Demkr".

P.S. I don't ever back down. Get used to that.

[Steely_Dan]

34. Nice to finally meet...

Number 6

-Paige

[fenriswolf]

4. so who do you like?

[L0oniX]

5. ..

:popcorn:

[ClericJohnPreston]

8. JOHN EDWARDS

is who I like.

Action + words= HONESTY

[Didereaux]

9. Careful, careful now. This one comes perilously...

close to describing a near majority of Obama supporters and not a few of those supporting Clinton and Edwards. I refer to your last item: "Do you read one chapter of a book and then conclude the ending and skip the entirety of the book? Politics and one caucus and Primary aren't cliff notes for the Electoral Process. We have miles to go before we sleep."


BTW I entirely agree with you. It will be short attention spans that once again defeat the DEMS if they actually lose another one.

[ClericJohnPreston]

11. Thank you

for a literate, thoughtful response!!!

As I said, we need "critical-thinkers" now. We can't afford to screw this up.

Lets wait till the finish line is near, when all the warts and moles are apparent, before we annoint a "King".

I worry most about personality cults. Their members get lost in the fog of rhetoric and they always end badly.

[cali]

10. Obama's supporters are enthusiastic, but as a group we're

no more cult like than any other candidate's. I see posts all the time here about how JE is the only one who can save us. I've never seen an Obama supporter go that far.

For someone urging others to employ critical thinking skills, you exhibit a sore absence of such. And your writing skills are so poor that your OP is nearly unreadable.

I've written in detail why I support Obama and it's not for the reasons you say all Obama supporters are on board with him.

Seems to me YOU are the cultist and you're simply upset that not enough people are joining you in support for your candidate.

[ClericJohnPreston]

14. go personal

when logic fails.

I think no one else here had a problem understanding my OP.

I am no cultist, but I fear those who are. Glad to see you made the cut!

P.S. For whatever it is worth, as I am so new here, my first post received 40 recommendations.

[GalleryGod]

17. Experience Counts!

Historical perspective for you young folk.

[cali]

23. you went personal in your OP

so don't try your sanctimonious shit on me. You accused Obama supporters of being cultists, and I flung it back in your sweet face.

Oh, and why would I give a flying fuck about how many recs some post of yours got??

[ClericJohnPreston]

25. I only called cultists......

those who focus on one speech and his use of imagery and words, over substance, to become believers.

Are you one of those people. Carefully read what I wrote. I didn't indict all supporters, only urging against beliefs based on mere personality.

If you doubt my premise, then read one of the hundreds of examples of threads on this board, where many who support Obama, do so, based on a "speech".

"Sanctimonious"? No. Concerned? Yes.

We can't afford to get it wrong this time.

[Sulawesi]

15. This is scary weird...

[LWolf]

18. I, for one, am glad that it's "a long way from over."

For me, it's not over until the conclusion of the convention, when I then take inventory of what's coming up in November and decide where to put my time and votes.

[GalleryGod]

20. Actually..I believe February 6th (18 Primaries) is only 31 days away

The last convention I attended that had any zing to it was Chicago in 1968.

[ClericJohnPreston]

24. Then we agree

I am too young to have been at the Convention, but it was news after I was born.

I am a student of history and political science and though didn't live the era, as you did, understand it.

It was a time of hope and renewal, before the assassinations of Bobby and MLK.

After that, it seemed "Camelot" was vanquished.

I can now make my case and point!

To me, the forces of corruptive evil were named by the prescient Eisenhower, a Republican, of all things, as he gave the first Presidential farewell speech.

THE MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL-COMPLEX.

In other words, an affiliation of formerly private COPRPORATIONS, whose fortunes took off with the advent of Cold War, and who thrive on WAR.

Bobby Kennedy, following Jack knew them and was an equal threat. JFK took away Vietnam, before his successor, LBJ, gave it back. Bobby threatened Vietnam and was for peace and against POVERTY, the defining aspect of his beliefs.

I believe John Edwards is an equal threat to the staus quo CORPORATE STRUCTURE, "with a stranglehold on our Democracy".

I believe that makes Edwards dangerous and thus, he is marginalized by the MSM.

I like Bobby. I like Edwards. I see them as very similar.

[GalleryGod]

30. Well done and Well said.

Sorry for the quality. From my personal collection.

[LWolf]

22. My primary isn't until May 20th.

Either it's not over until the convention, or there is nothing democratic about the Democratic Party primaries. If some states, and therefore some voters, "count" more than others, then perhaps the party should change it's name.

[Sparkly]

26. I disagree with your preference of Edwards over Obama, BUT...

I agree that it'd be nice to see a real primary for a change. The "independent-minded" New Hampshire voters -- at least in the Democratic primary -- just go along with Iowa.

And I think SC will follow too, but I don't know how Edwards is doing there -- not watching polls there.

And next thing you know, everybody's on the bandwagon and we don't get to see a real campaign. It's over before it began.

I'm fine with Obama and I was fine with Kerry. I just think the process is crappy.

[ClericJohnPreston]

28. Again, thank you for an intelligent post!

There is the essence of the case. We may agree to disagree, but the process has been hijacked by political forces long ago, at the expense of an informed Electorate.

It has become political spectacle, as if it were an ancient Roman Forum game, with the MSM guiding the narrative and affixing "labels" to those in the contest.

[ClericJohnPreston]

29. The interesting thing is....

As big a proponent of Edwards that I am, Obama is my second choice.

I am a 100% Democratic Progressive, ultra liberal. That means I'm wary of making nice with the enemy, which is why I prefer Edwards over Obama.

I'm looking forward to Hillary's losses, and the narrative focusing on Edwards and Obama for a meaningful exploration of who can best lead.

[GalleryGod]

32. Sparkly, we've been "tinkering" with it since the McGovern-Frazier Report

in 1970...which was a reaction to Big BossContrl at the 1968 Convention,and begat us Lotsa Primaries.

BTW? Anybody figure out how the DNC will divy-up the delegates from both Michigan and Floridat the Convention...I'll keep looking, and, will report if I find it.


Philly-at-Night

[Nederland]

31. I think your reality check will bounce

We will see come 2/5.

[Steely_Dan]

33. Excellent Post!

There is always time for a reality check...

-P

Do the flames hurt much?