Breaking: Clinton's Name to be Put in Nomination

[redstate_democrat]

Just heard on CNN

[onefreespiritedchick]

1. Just heard it also.

Why am I not surprised? Party Unity My Ass! :(

[mloutre]

84. Remember, you can't pronounce "PUMA" without saying "POO" right up front

[WHAT]

92. Remember, "pooh" must be a du=du(democratic underground)...

invention.

And, at least half the people here don't know what it means. This is the only place I've heard that expression. So, I imagine it's an unseemly plastic grass-roots distortion...

[mloutre]

120. WTF? "Pooh" is a children's book bear. POO is what monkeys fling at each other when they're cranky.

"Flinging poo" is a very widely known expression for childish tempermental lashing-out behavior, both within and outside of political circles. So if you're actually so clueless that you didn't recognize it, well...

[Apollo11]

131. In England it's pronounced P-you-MA

Just sayin'

[whistle]

2. Who is doing this?

[WeDidIt]

4. One person and only one person has absoilute control over whether

her name is entered into nomination.

Hillary Clinton.

[tekisui]

5. She is. SHe has to sign for her name to be called and voted on.

Not a big deal. Obama will still be the Nominee, and the Clinton Deadenders can finally get some closure and STFU!

[Owl]

19. Yes. And as much as I do admire Hillary, she could certainly show some grace and humility.

She tried, she lost.

[jobycom]

26. Aside from the shitty tone, that's true.

Clinton supporters can feel that their historic accomplishment is honored, if not enthusiastically then at least symbolicly, and Obama supporters don't get to exclude people from their own party. At least Obama is better about this than his followers.

[WeDidIt]

28. Obama had no choice

HAd Obama disagreed, the political fallout would ahve been worse than a divided convention.

This is nothing less than the Hillary Clinton 2012 gambit.

[jobycom]

35. This is nothing less than the party uniting.

The only people spouting that "2012" bullshit are trying to split the party, which is the only way the RNC can win.

[WeDidIt]

41. Bullshit

Hillary Clinton is the ONLT person who says whether or not her name is entered into nominiation. Nobody else decides.

You're being politically naive.

[jobycom]

108. Not even tangentially relevant to anything I said, so I have no idea what you think you are arguing

against.

Clinton is backing Obama, and both she and Obama are fighting for party unity. If you are arguing otherwise, you are either naive, or you have some goal other than Obama's election in November.

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[paulk]

61. I suppose DU needs all the new members it can get

since so many people have been run off of here these last few months.

[jobycom]

109. gee, sorry I missed it.

whatever happened.

[Growler]

94. Hillary needed to give them closure MONTHS ago

She is being cruel to her supporters, all to inflate her own ego.

[polmaven]

145. Cruel????

I don't feel the least BIT abused.By either Senator Clinton or Senator Obama....or Governor Dean for that matter.

[Raineyb]

121. I wouldn't take that bet n/t

Regards

[truthN08]

7. All I want to know is

after all this drama at the convention is over will it then be Obama's turn in the spotlight alone and will the Clinton supporters finally support Obama? When is enough ENOUGH already?

I just want this over and done with. She's getting more coverage than Obama it seems lately.

[WeDidIt]

30. No, Obama gets nothing out of this

The assholes pushing this have already stated unequivicolly, they will NOT support Obama.

This is Hillary's shot at making sure Obama loses so she gets her second chance in 2012.

[Growler]

96. I wonder too

> When is enough ENOUGH already?

I've been wondering that for the past 4 months.... but Hillary keeps diving below my expectations.

[butterfly77]

116. This is what she wants..

its all about her..

[PBS Poll-435]

3. SOP and approved by the Obama Campaign

What is the BFD?

[WeDidIt]

6. Oh, so Bradley had his name put into nominaiton in 2000?

Could have fooled me.

It's the 2012 Gambit.

[truthN08]

18. Also what does

"Put into nomination" mean anyway?

Does it mean she will have supporter after supporter standing up and making speeches as to why Hillary should be the nominee and making a case for her? Does it mean that there will just be a roll call vote and at the end Obama will be over the top anyway so who cares kind of thing?

There is a big difference. Also will her people try and nominate her for VP and try and make Obama put her on the ticket? That in itself could be a show down.

As long as things are agreed to in advance and she knows she can't push to be VP and there aren't a whole bunch of supporters giving speeches on TV about why they think Hillary is better than Obama then I say let them have it so they can stop waiting to exhale and we can move on from this.

[WeDidIt]

25. IF 300 delegates agree

that's precisely what it means.

[adoraz]

8. obviously the Obama campaign approved it

If they didn't, could you imagine the uproar from PUMA (and other current Hillary supporters)?

It would be a disaster for them to say no. They had to agree to it.

I don't think it will be a big deal, but it doesn't surprise me.

I'm not positive this will hurt the party, but it sure won't help. I will need to see how things go down first.

[WeDidIt]

11. I can see the headlines

DIVIDED CONVENTION SPELLS DOOM FOR DEMOCRATS!

You KNOW the corporate media will play it that way.

[adoraz]

20. I am not supporting Hillary's decision

in fact I am against it. I was just saying that if the Obama campaign said no, things would probably end up even worse.

[jakem]

13. disastrous fallout from PUMA republicons?

:rofl:

[adoraz]

24. by PUMA

I meant any Hillary supporter who continues to not support Obama (for a 2012 run), and judging by the polls I know there are still plenty out there.

[jakem]

34. pretty much anyone not supporting Obama at this point is not a Dem in my book.

[adoraz]

46. I think that is more true with this election

than any other election in recent times. I can't even think of any legitimate reason for a Democrat to support McCain over Obama. If Bush had a good second term, then maybe, but obviously he didn't. There should be no excuses this time around.

[Growler]

97. agreed.

[Kermit77]

66. The Clintons don't care about the party, they only care about themselves

Hillary wants to do everything she can to ensure that Obama loses in November so she can have a shot at 2012. Expect after the convention her camp to continue leaking more stinkbombs.

Hillary has been playing Kabuki theatre the past few months. This isn't about her supporters. This is about her rise to power.

Obama has got to win in November so we can be rid of the Clintons forever.

[Marrah_G]

90. The primaries are over- stop it

[WeDidIt]

91. Then please inform Hillary n/t

[QueenOfCalifornia]

9. The BFD

is it may be the reason McCain wins. It will split the Dem vote. :-

[PBS Poll-435]

14. Split the Dem vote? This is just theater, nothing more.

[WeDidIt]

21. Actually, no, the ONLY thing the presumptive nominee DOES NOT CONTROL

is whether another candidate has their name placed into nomination.

this is not theatre. This is the Hillary Clinton 2012 Gambit playing out.

[Marrah_G]

38. That is not how this works- This is simply a formality

Obama will win. 99.9999% of Dems will vote for him.

Hillary is not the Devil, etc etc

[WeDidIt]

43. you don't know the history of conventions, do you?

Go back and look at what happens after divided conventions.

[dkf]

10. The convention will be a Clinton fiasco.

What a disaster.

[WeDidIt]

23. Yep, Hillary Clinton is losing the election for Barack Obama

so she can get another chance in 4 years.

[dkf]

40. What do we have to do to never have to hear from these people again?

I'm so incredibly sick of them and their selfishness and their egos.

They won't help Obama anyway. Their half hearted support is pathetic. Its a joke to see how they go through the motions, but have nothing convincing to say.

[billyoc]

82. Elect Clinton. There is no other way to get rid of them, so get used to them.

They are never going to go away.

[butterfly77]

118. If that were to happen ...

she would never get my vote..If he loses or not..

[mod mom]

50. imho-intentionally so (thank you DLC for aiding the neocons)

guess the payoff is just too tempting than to do what is best for the party. :mad:

[David Zephyr]

12. Barack Obama and David Axelrod are in control. A convention is theater. And this this is all tease.

There will be great unity in Denver and everyone is going to owe me a cookie and a glass of cold milk.

[WeDidIt]

17. Actually, they are not in control of this

The one thing the presumtive nominee does not control is who has their name placed into nomination. Only the person whose name is to be placed into nomination has that control.

Obama and Axelrod were in a Catch-22. If they disagreed, Hillary could still do it any way and they look like they're dissing her. If they agree, the convention appears divided. They obviously decided a divided convention was the lesser of the two evils.

This is the HILLARY CLINTON 2012 GAMBIT, and anybody who tells you different is naive.

[onefreespiritedchick]

27. Thus, this is bascially some bullying tactic

She has Obama exactly where she wants - for now, that is.

[WeDidIt]

37. Bingo, the HILLARY CLINTON 2012 GAMBIT

She's counting on teh convention being just divided enough to make the difference and insure an Obama loss.

[David Zephyr]

33. Pulleasze. And who is controlling the speaker scheduling?

Who is controlling the "theme" of every night?

Who is raising the money to help the DNC pay for the convention?

Who chose to move Thursday night to Mile High Stadium?

Barack Obama and David Axelrod. They are calling the shots. And Hillary is on board with them.

This in no "Hillary gambit". This is part of an organized convention and every thing is going swimmingly well.

Relax.

[WeDidIt]

36. There is one thing and one thing only the presumptive nominee does not control

that is whose name gets entered into nomination.

[David Zephyr]

39. Get over the silly drama. There will be unity in Denver and you are going to feel foolish.

.

[WeDidIt]

45. The only "Drama" is being perpetrated by Clinton

If Obama loses, she is 100% responsible now.

[David Zephyr]

53. Yawn. You are working yourself up over nothing. They are united.

This is all great tease for the convention. It gets people to tune in.

Every second of the convention is orchestrated.

[Skwmom]

59. Aren't you the poster who told us that Hillary could be forced on the ticket as VP?

In fact, I'm pretty sure of it.

[WeDidIt]

62. She absolutely can

Y'all need to read the DNC rules.

[David Zephyr]

67. No. That would not be me. I wrote that Obama has already chosen her.

Skewer me for that, if you want, but she could never force herself on to a ticket.

You reveal what many suspect here and that she is trying to force herself onto the ticket. That's not the case at all.

No one will force Obama to do anything. He clearly not someone to be forced into making political choices.

[Skwmom]

70. Let's just cut the crap. Clinton is NOT doing this for some catharsis.

So as Hillary herself said, what does Hillary want?

[David Zephyr]

77. Why the snark? It's really not necessary. Clinton is not "doing" anything. Obama is in control.

I like you, Skwmom.

Axelrod and Obama have the convention under control. Give them a little (just a little) credit. They are dripping out the drama to tease, to build interest and to drive the GOP nuts.

You are going to be pleased with it all.

[Skwmom]

87. No, I don't think I will. After posting how Obama would be forced to pick Clinton, you

are now singing the praises of Axelrod and Obama?

I just don't think so.

If Clinton is the VP, it will be because she forced Obama to put her on the ticket.

[cyndensco]

88. I do think clinton is looking towards 2012.

What I don't get, though, is how anyone would consider her to be a viable candidate 4 years from now. Sure she will retain a great portion of her base, but she has burned so many bridges and continues to do so. It really makes no sense. She is not making new friends, just new enemies.

[butterfly77]

119. Exactly, I was a former supporter..

now never..

[polmaven]

146. Will it have to be WHOLE milk?

Will 2% do? :hi:

[BklynChick]

15. this is very disappointing

[carlotta]

16. Teddy Kennedy, Jesse Jackson, Howard Dean....

All of these guys had their names put in nomination in the past, even though they clearly had lost. Why the uproar when Hillary does it?

[WeDidIt]

22. Dean didn't

We lost in '80 and '88.

[jobycom]

133. We lost in 04, too.

So maybe we assume that whether we win or lose has nothing to do with whether a candidate's name is placed in nomination.

[wvbygod]

29. Here come the crickets....

Where I come from it's a long thin thread
Across an ocean. Down a river of red.
Now that the living outnumber the dead.
I'm one of many.

-laurie anderson

[WeDidIt]

32. What crickets? I explained before you posted to them

Dean did NOT have his mname entered into nomination. We had a divided convention in both 80 and 88 and we lost both times.

[wvbygod]

51. What about Teddy and Jesse?

Just askin' :o)

[WeDidIt]

52. I explained it in two posts now.

WE FUCKING LOST!

[PBS Poll-435]

54. And for some reason, you believe the convention was the cause

rather than a symptom of the underlying political reality of those two elections....

And you would be wrong.

[WeDidIt]

58. 1968, 1972, 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988

All divided conventions. Each time the party with the divided convention LOST!

[Name removed]

73. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[polmaven]

148. But 2004 was not a divided convention

and we lost anyway????? How is that POSSIBLE? :shrug:

[Lucky 13]

72. How many times does the party with the divided convention have to lose before it becomes a trend?

Or do you just want us to keep repeating the same stupid mistakes over and over and over?

[PBS Poll-435]

80. I am actually more concerned with why you think this election year is like any other?

The Republicans picked the weakest and most morally compromised candidate they could have.

Everything this man (and his wife) have ever done is great ammo.

We aren't using public funds this year.

We will have the ability to outspend McGain by 2:1 maybe 2.5:1.


This is not 1980 and this is most certainly 1988.

[Lucky 13]

107. So let's just assume it's a cake walk and not worry about it?

MAYBE if we could be assured the Rethugs would play by the rules could I relax. Maybe then I could believe Obama will win in a landslide.

But they don't. They are going to lie, cheat, and steal.. anything to get the Presidency again. Every ounce of our energy and momentum needs to go into beating them.

If we ignore history we are doomed to repeat it.

[WeDidIt]

86. Those who forget history are condemned to repeat it

I guarantee you, Hillary knows the history of divided conventions.

[Growler]

99. some people want to lose

Many Dems are addicted to losing, and only feel right if they can wag their fingers at the rest of the country....

[wvbygod]

100. Point taken...but...

Obama is not Carter or Tanker. He will pull it off. If I were to go on superstition
I would need to worry that Woodrow Wilson was the last Dem to win without WV.

I'll stick with Siouxe and the Banchees for Superstition or even Stevie Wonder.

[jobycom]

134. We lost in 04, too.

[NashVegas]

111. And Jerry

In 92.

[Beacool]

98. Because it's Hillary and she's an "evil" Clinton. Don't you know?

:eyes:

[jobycom]

132. Because they smeared her better.

[Marrah_G]

31. This is a good thing for the Party

[beac]

42. For people that are all up in arms about "sexism" and "misogyny"

Clinton and her supporters are playing RIGHT INTO one of the WORST stereotypes about women --- that we are SORE LOSERS and will POUT and CRY and WITHHOLD OUR FAVORS when things don't go our way.

Thanks alot, Hillary et al, you are a disgrace to womankind.

As for her 2012 aspirations, I think she's deluded there. I can't imagine anyone-- other than her most rabid fans-- signing up for more of the Clinton DRAMA and mis-management. Especially since, if Obama loses, it will be because she and her PUMAs demanded "catharsis" instead of caring about keeping a Republican out of the White House.

Pathetic.

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[beac]

57. I'm not "re-fighting" the primary. I am justifiably disgusted with the actions

of a so-called Democrat who is sucking all the air out of the room.

Maybe someone should inform Hillary and her PUMAs that the primary is over. THEY seem to be the ones confused about the timeline.

[WeDidIt]

48. What has she got to lose?

Seriously, the only reason she's a Senator right now is it was a stop on the way to the White House.

PREDICTION: If Obama wins this year, she won't seek re-election to the Senate in 2012.

[Metric System]

55. "Seriously, the only reason she's a Senator right now is it was a stop on the way to the White House

And you can read Hillary's mind?!? Heck, Obama's the one who barely stopped by in the Senate before seeking the Presidency if you want to go there.

[WeDidIt]

60. Oh come on.

Seriously, are you REALLY that naive?

[Metric System]

65. Are you? Do you think Obama entered the Senate so he could seek the Presidency too? Or are you only

capable of reading Hillary's mind?

[WeDidIt]

68. Actually, I don't believe the idea of running for president

was even a remote possibility in his mind, until after the 2004 convention. Then, absolutely I believe everything he did from that point forward was done with a run for the presidency in mind.

I could be wrong, though. He may have been planning to run since before he was a distant third or fourth in the runup to the Illinois Democratic Primary.

[onefreespiritedchick]

63. Continue to stay positive

Obama WILL win.

[Chloroplast]

64. Thank you! Agree 100%

[Lucky 13]

74. Agree. 100%

If we lose and she ATTEMPTS to run in 2012, I will do everything in my power to work against her campaign and work for the most progressive, most loyal, least egotistical candidate.

I just want the Clintons to a galaxy far far away.

[beac]

78. Hmmm....

Hillary for President of the Wookies?

:)

[Growler]

101. agreed

If she is claiming to represent women, then she is showing that women can't handle reality and need to be coddled and soothed.

Frankly, I think that's ridiculous, therefore Hillary is a horrible role-model.

[NashVegas]

112. The Only Mention of Sexism In This Thread That I See

Is what you just injected.

[beac]

141. As I am sure you are aware, I wasn't speaking about the mention of "sexism"

in this thread, but the constant hew and cry from the PUMA crowd about it and how Hillary's actions and those of her followers are playing INTO stereotypes rather than defying them.

[NashVegas]

142. While That Was Certainly the Case During the Primaries

We are discussing the convention and formalities. Where on DU is anyone saying it's sexism that's keeping some Obama supporters from seeing this (her name in roll call) as anything extraordinary?

[Name removed]

56. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[zulchzulu]

69. Two things will happen that won't help the Clintons

1. The nomination will be seen as divisive and will put the focus on the Clintons as trying to take the spotlight away from Obama and the message of unity that was supposed to be the focus of the convention.

2. Hillary Clinton will not get enough votes AGAIN and will essentially re-lose the primary, thus firmly sealing the deal before an international audience.

I seriously doubt she will get enough votes in the nomination to take over the convention...but if she does, there will be hell to pay.

[WeDidIt]

71. Either way, the media will portray it as a DIVIDED CONVENTION

Read.

My.

Sig.

[zulchzulu]

75. The media will interview every PUMA putz in the convention

It will be divisive and will escalate into completely unneeded nonsense. The Repigs are going to be laughing their asses off.

[WeDidIt]

85. Yup, guaranteed loss this year

Thanks Hillary.

That'll be my sig on November 5 "Thanks Hillary :-("

[polmaven]

150. We lost in 2004...

Your.

sig.

is.

crap.

[Marrah_G]

117. It is a strictly symbolic gesture

[JohnnyLib2]

76. Whooopee! 2 more weeks of sound and fury!

And then Obama is nominated.

[jenmito]

79. I bet many of her former delegates will go for Obama, embarrassing her and angering her

still-supporters. And the Repubs. will be loving it.

[Whisp]

89. that's what I'm figuring too.

couldnt this end up being a real embarrassment for her?

if she suspended and did not officially close her run
superdelegates still have the option to switch without the pressures that pledged delegates have.
so i think her SD # will be a lot lower than last we knew.

she has not officially released her pledged, but they too have the option to switch if what I was hearing late int he primaries when it was meant for them to switch to Clinton is true.

but who knows whats going on in the back scenery - Clintons are probably threatening to kill pets to keep their people in line. yeh, that's what I think of them - that's how low to the snake belly they are.

[Willo]

81. So, "having her name placed in nomination" and "take it to the convention"

is the same story under different titles?

[otohara]

83. Group Binge & Purge

pardon me while I puke now.

[Beacool]

93. Hillary has EARNED the right to place her name in nomination!!!!!

She's only behind Obama by 127 pledged delegates.

Why treat Hillary any differently than all the men who came before her?

1980:
Jimmy Carter - 1981 delegates
Ted Kennedy - 1225 delegates
Uncommitted - 122 Kennedy had no chance of winning, but his name was placed in nomination.

1984:
Jesse Jackson - 465 votes Jackson had no chance of winning, but his name was placed in nomination.

1988:
Jesse Jackson - 1218 votes Jackson had no chance of winning, but his name was placed in nomination.

2004:
John Kerry: 2192.5 Pledged delegates
Howard Dean: 114.5 Pledged delegates Dean had already dropped out, with no chance of winning, but his name was placed in nomination.

2008:
Barack Obama: 1766.5 Pledged delegates
Hillary Clinton: 1639.5 Pledged delegates

Hillary has a right to place her name in nomination and we who supported her want to see it happen.

[jenmito]

102. And how many times did the Dem. end up winning????????????

None.

[Marrah_G]

114. You should just give the fuck up now then

Obama made his decision. Her name will go up symbolically.

Since you say we are now DOOMED DOOMED DOOMED, I suggest you just find a quite spot to go hide in, since we will obviously lose now right?

:sarcasm:

Seriously though: Have some faith in the Nominee. Do you honestly think he is stupid enough to jeopardize his campaign? And if you do think he is that dumb, why do you support him?

[Beacool]

125. Actually, it wasn't Obama's decision to make under party rules.

;-)

[Marrah_G]

127. If he was against it the Clintons would not have the prominant spots in the convention that they do.

[Beacool]

129. Maybe so, but it's not up to the presumptive nominee to decide who places their name in nomination.

:shrug:

[beac]

105. And how does that help Obama get elected??

Because THAT is the ONLY thing the convention should be about.

This election is TOO IMPORTANT for little bits of theater to make the LOSER feel better.

Already, this is causing MORE trouble within the party. WHY can't Hillary make a sacrifice for the good of the party FOR ONCE?

Her selfishness is just unreal.

[Beacool]

126. Selfishness?

Excuse me, the only selfish ones are the Obama supporters who are whining about it. She has a right to place her name in nomination and has earned that right by the sheer number of pledged delegates that she amassed.

Every other guy can place their name in nomination, even though they had a measly amount of PDs, and the first woman to almost win the nomination can't do it??

Sorry, but the party is comprised not only of Obama supporters, half of the party voted for Hillary and many of us want to celebrate her candidacy by hearing and cheering the roll call.

[beac]

140. Yup, like I said.... SELFISH.

Your chance to cheer her is when she makes her speech on Tuesday but, predictably, that's not enough for Hillary and her throng.

And, FYI, at this point the party is supposed to be composed 100% of Obama supporters.

[PresidentObama]

95. Good. She deserves it n/t

[jenmito]

103. At the expense of Obama losing the election. n/t

[PBS Poll-435]

104. If the Obama campaign thought that by doing this they would jeopardize their chances in Nov...

They wouldn't have done it.


You have trusted Obama up to this point, why does this change anything?

[Marrah_G]

113. So little confidence in Obama..............

[goodgd_yall]

137. That isn't going to happen

It's not a big deal. Do you really think voters are going to abandon Obama because of an appearance of party disunity---which I think will be something the media will hype ? All those independents out there don't give a damn about any party's unity and devoted Democrats aren't going to let that sway them.

[JVS]

106. I hope her delegates defect from her for the sake of party unity.

[Kool Kitty]

110. I wonder how Hillary's supporters would

feel if the shoe was on the other foot and the Obamas were doing this.

[Marrah_G]

115. So little confidence in your nominee?

Do you think he is stupid? Unwise? Easily manipulated?

If so, why are you supporting him?

[Kool Kitty]

123. Did I say that?

I'm not talking about Obama, I trust his judgment. That's why I am supporting him. If you didn't want to answer the question, why did you reply? No reason for snark from you. Yes, she ran a historic campaign. But so has Obama.

On edit-do I think he is stupid or unwise? No to both. On second thought, I withdraw the question. Who gives a shit at this point? We have a nominee and he will win in November.

[KAZ]

143. "your" nominee? Interesting.

[Raineyb]

122. They'd be having a shit fit to end all shit fits

But since they're doing it it's just fine and dandy apparently.

Regards

[Kool Kitty]

124. That's what I think, too.

[PeaceNikki]

135. Not this one. Know why?

Because it doesn't change a thing. Obama is still the nominee.

[Lilith Velkor]

144. Projection

For most of us, this is not the first election we've paid attention to.

And yes, if the shoe were on the other foot, it would be fine and dandy. It's tradition.

[Raineyb]

147. It's not my first one either, and a divided convention is never good for the party

Plain and simple.

If you choose to keep making excuses for Clinton that's your prerogative but you can't be surprised by the number of people who are disgusted at this point. This election is way too important for us to be sidetracked by the runner-up's ego. As it doesn't happen every year it's not mandatory nor necessary. But let's take the focus off of winning in November by having a rehash of the nasty primaries during the convention. That'll be real helpful. Not!

Regards

[Beacool]

128. I wouldn't have had a problem with it.

He would also have been entitled to a roll call.

[Splinter Cell]

130. Billary strikes again....

:puke:

[JuniperLea]

136. That's how it works...

No big deal.

[goodgd_yall]

138. Right-ee-o n/t

[workinclasszero]

139. This is total BS!

Hill and Bill are planning a coup, live on TV, at the dem convention! Their PUMA's, AKA "hard working white people" will be rioting in the streets.

They will destroy Obama's chance to be President so Hillary can run again in 2012!

Mr and Mrs NAFTA and their DLC are working for McCain!

[Name removed]

149. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.