Obamaite primitives in an uproar about worthier Democrat candidate

[franksolich]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6633763

These bonfires are just starting--and there's lots of them.

The Obamaite primitives are angry.

redstate_democrat  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-14-08 11:49 AM
Original message

Breaking: Clinton's Name to be Put in Nomination
   
Just heard on CNN

onefreespiritedchick  Donating Member  (422 posts) Thu Aug-14-08 11:52 AM
Response to Original message

1. Just heard it also.
   
Why am I not surprised? Party Unity My Ass!

whistle  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-14-08 11:52 AM
Response to Original message

2. Who is doing this?

IWantAnyDem  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-14-08 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #2

4. One person and only one person has absoilute control over whether her name is entered into nomination.

Hillary Clinton.

tekisui  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-14-08 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #2

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  Donating Member  (542 posts) Thu Aug-14-08 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #5

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

IWantAnyDem  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-14-08 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #26

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.

The Obamaite primitives are rabidly angry, rabidly Hate-filled.

Like they expect Barry "Goldwater" Obama to win without 50.2% of the Democrats who supported the worthier Democrat candidate.

I dunno; wasn't Vast Teddy's name put into nomination in 1980, even though the Incompetent One had already secured re-nomination?  Wasn't Ronald Reagan's name put into nomination in 1976, even though Gerald Ford had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Hubert Humphrey's name put into nomination in 1972, even though George McGovern had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Eugene McCarthy's name put into nomination in 1968, even though Hubert Humphrey had already secured the nomination?  Weren't Ronald Reagan's and Nelson Rockefeller's names put into nomination in 1968, even though Richard Nixon had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't John McCain's name put into nomination in 2000, even though George Bush had already secured the nomination?  Weren't Lyndon Johnson's and Stuart Symington's names put into nomination in 1960, even though John Kennedy had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't George Bush's name put into nomination in 1980, even though Ronald Reagan had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Nelson Rockefeller's name put into nomination in 1964, even though Barry Goldwater had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Robert Taft's name put into nomination in 1952, even though Dwight Eisenhower had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't John Sparkman's name put into nomination in 1952, even though Adlai Stevenson had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Robert Taft's name put into nomination in 1948, even though Thomas Dewey had already secured the nomination?  &c., &c., &c.?

I have to go, and won't be back until later this afternoon, but man, the Obamaite primitives are so stupid.  Just really stupid.  Just really so stupid.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

I dunno; wasn't Vast Teddy's name put into nomination in 1980, even though the Incompetent One had already secured re-nomination?  Wasn't Ronald Reagan's name put into nomination in 1976, even though Gerald Ford had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Hubert Humphrey's name put into nomination in 1972, even though George McGovern had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Eugene McCarthy's name put into nomination in 1968, even though Hubert Humphrey had already secured the nomination?  Weren't Ronald Reagan's and Nelson Rockefeller's names put into nomination in 1968, even though Richard Nixon had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't John McCain's name put into nomination in 2000, even though George Bush had already secured the nomination?  Weren't Lyndon Johnson's and Stuart Symington's names put into nomination in 1960, even though John Kennedy had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't George Bush's name put into nomination in 1980, even though Ronald Reagan had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Nelson Rockefeller's name put into nomination in 1964, even though Barry Goldwater had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Robert Taft's name put into nomination in 1952, even though Dwight Eisenhower had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't John Sparkman's name put into nomination in 1952, even though Adlai Stevenson had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Robert Taft's name put into nomination in 1948, even though Thomas Dewey had already secured the nomination?  &c., &c., &c.?

I have to go, and won't be back until later this afternoon, but man, the Obamaite primitives are so stupid.  Just really stupid.  Just really so stupid.

Yeah, but I'm gonna LOL my head off playing their page from the Stupid Liberal Tricks Playbook about calling any contested--er--contest a "lack of clear mandate".

[Splashdown]

I dunno; wasn't Vast Teddy's name put into nomination in 1980, even though the Incompetent One had already secured re-nomination?  Wasn't Ronald Reagan's name put into nomination in 1976, even though Gerald Ford had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Hubert Humphrey's name put into nomination in 1972, even though George McGovern had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Eugene McCarthy's name put into nomination in 1968, even though Hubert Humphrey had already secured the nomination?  Weren't Ronald Reagan's and Nelson Rockefeller's names put into nomination in 1968, even though Richard Nixon had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't John McCain's name put into nomination in 2000, even though George Bush had already secured the nomination?  Weren't Lyndon Johnson's and Stuart Symington's names put into nomination in 1960, even though John Kennedy had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't George Bush's name put into nomination in 1980, even though Ronald Reagan had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Nelson Rockefeller's name put into nomination in 1964, even though Barry Goldwater had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Robert Taft's name put into nomination in 1952, even though Dwight Eisenhower had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't John Sparkman's name put into nomination in 1952, even though Adlai Stevenson had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Robert Taft's name put into nomination in 1948, even though Thomas Dewey had already secured the nomination?  &c., &c., &c.?

I have to go, and won't be back until later this afternoon, but man, the Obamaite primitives are so stupid.  Just really stupid.  Just really so stupid.

History began for the DUmmies in November, 2000.

[Lord Undies]

DUmmies know two eras.  BDU, before Democrat Underground (when nothing existed), and ADU,  the 'A' standing for 'After'.    Since nothing exist BDU, there is no sense of history or any tools to aid in the use of logic.

All this means to a DUmmie is that the only name which should be uttered out loud at the Idiot Convention in Denver, the name of Obama Hussein, will not be the only name.  To a DUmmie, it's blasphemy.

[delilahmused]

tekisui  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-14-08 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #2

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!

God forbid that whole free speech thing should rear its ugly head! Maybe their dreams will come true and Obama will rewrite the first amendment :

Congress shall make no law respecting banning an establishment of religion (except Islam and peaceful Goddess worship and Buddhism), or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech of anyone promoting abortion, redistribution, or words expressing worshipful praise of the Obamassiah (all others will be jailed, or of the press except Fox News, Washington Times and any other publication critical of Democrats...The New York Times will become the official state newspaper...all other publications will fall in lock-step or no longer allowed to be free; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble to praise Comrade Obama, and for black citizens to petition the government for a redress of grievances reparations.

Ah, hell with it, just chuck the whole document...it was written by a bunch of rich white, racist, misogynists anyway. The new constitution will simply read:

"All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others."

Cindie

[Chris_]

tekisui  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-14-08 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #2

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!

God forbid that whole free speech thing should rear its ugly head! Maybe their dreams will come true and Obama will rewrite the first amendment :

Congress shall make no law respecting banning an establishment of religion (except Islam and peaceful Goddess worship and Buddhism), or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech of anyone promoting abortion, redistribution, or words expressing worshipful praise of the Obamassiah (all others will be jailed, or of the press except Fox News, Washington Times and any other publication critical of Democrats...The New York Times will become the official state newspaper...all other publications will fall in lock-step or no longer allowed to be free; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble to praise Comrade Obama, and for black citizens to petition the government for a redress of grievances reparations.

Ah, hell with it, just chuck the whole document...it was written by a bunch of rich white, racist, misogynists anyway. The new constitution will simply read:

"All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others."

Cindie

Amen!   HI-5!  Semper Fi!  Carry on, ma'am.

[MountainSage]

D.U. - Obama's very own keyboard commandos. 

They're so busy hating and trashing Hillary they don't have time to donate to Skinner's $50,000 fundraiser for Obama.  3 months and it's at $15,499  I guess their allowance only stretches so far.

[PatriotGame]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6633763

These bonfires are just starting--and there's lots of them.

The Obamaite primitives are angry.

I dunno; wasn't Vast Teddy's name put into nomination in 1980, even though the Incompetent One had already secured re-nomination?  Wasn't Ronald Reagan's name put into nomination in 1976, even though Gerald Ford had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Hubert Humphrey's name put into nomination in 1972, even though George McGovern had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Eugene McCarthy's name put into nomination in 1968, even though Hubert Humphrey had already secured the nomination?  Weren't Ronald Reagan's and Nelson Rockefeller's names put into nomination in 1968, even though Richard Nixon had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't John McCain's name put into nomination in 2000, even though George Bush had already secured the nomination?  Weren't Lyndon Johnson's and Stuart Symington's names put into nomination in 1960, even though John Kennedy had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't George Bush's name put into nomination in 1980, even though Ronald Reagan had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Nelson Rockefeller's name put into nomination in 1964, even though Barry Goldwater had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Robert Taft's name put into nomination in 1952, even though Dwight Eisenhower had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't John Sparkman's name put into nomination in 1952, even though Adlai Stevenson had already secured the nomination?  Wasn't Robert Taft's name put into nomination in 1948, even though Thomas Dewey had already secured the nomination?  &c., &c., &c.?

I have to go, and won't be back until later this afternoon, but man, the Obamaite primitives are so stupid.  Just really stupid.  Just really so stupid.

So...what you are saying is that this has happened before yet the DUmmys are too ignorant to remember?
I see....

[lizard]

D.U. - Obama's very own keyboard commandos. 

They're so busy hating and trashing Hillary they don't have time to donate to Skinner's $50,000 fundraiser for Obama.  3 months and it's at $15,499  I guess their allowance only stretches so far.

And Cheetos take most of that allowance.   

[comradebillyboy]

OK I am a very bitter DUmmie, still clinging to my guns (yes there are Democrat gun nuts) and loyalty to Hillary as the best the Dems can offer. I joined your forum not to be a troll, but to agree with everything I see posted in this thread.

Most of the sane people at DU who are not bowing to the Chosen One have been tomb-stoned.

I am not really a conservative, but more of a moderate with strong libertarian tendencies. I am not here to mock you conservatives, although I have many disagreements, but rather to share the distrust and dislike of my party's disgusting presumptive nominee. I would rather see McCain elected than Obama.

As they say, politics makes strange bedfellows. I would be honored to join you in the mockery of a place where I was once proud to be a member.

[Schadenfreude]

OK I am a very bitter DUmmie, still clinging to my guns (yes there are Democrat gun nuts) and loyalty to Hillary as the best the Dems can offer. I joined your forum not to be a troll, but to agree with everything I see posted in this thread.

Most of the sane people at DU who are not bowing to the Chosen One have been tomb-stoned.

I am not really a conservative, but more of a moderate with strong libertarian tendencies. I am not here to mock you conservatives, although I have many disagreements, but rather to share the distrust and dislike of my party's disgusting presumptive nominee. I would rather see McCain elected than Obama.

As they say, politics makes strange bedfellows. I would be honored to join you in the mockery of a place where I was once proud to be a member.

We are glad to have you with us. Welcome! 

[Chris]

Welcome.

[comradebillyboy]

thanks for the welcome

I'll try to stifle my liberal tenancies and be a constructive contributor in our areas of mutual agreement.

[jtyangel]

Another welcome to you. It says something that you don't only think along a party line just cause he's your guy. That's more a sign of a 'free thinker' then any mumbo jumbo I've ever seen posted about it at other sites. Welcome again.

[Schadenfreude]

thanks for the welcome

I'll try to stifle my liberal tenancies and be a constructive contributor in our areas of mutual agreement.

No need to stifle anything, we love healthy debate. The operative word being healthy.

[Carl]

thanks for the welcome

I'll try to stifle my liberal tenancies and be a constructive contributor in our areas of mutual agreement.

No need to stifle anything...the key is constructive contributor,we don`t wish for anyone to walk in lockstep of any particular political thought.
It can work as long as all parties and people are civil and respectful.

[Chris_]

tekisui  Donating Member  (1000+ posts) Thu Aug-14-08 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #2

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!

God forbid that whole free speech thing should rear its ugly head! Maybe their dreams will come true and Obama will rewrite the first amendment :

Congress shall make no law respecting banning an establishment of religion (except Islam and peaceful Goddess worship and Buddhism), or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech of anyone promoting abortion, redistribution, or words expressing worshipful praise of the Obamassiah (all others will be jailed, or of the press except Fox News, Washington Times and any other publication critical of Democrats...The New York Times will become the official state newspaper...all other publications will fall in lock-step or no longer allowed to be free; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble to praise Comrade Obama, and for black citizens to petition the government for a redress of grievances reparations.

Ah, hell with it, just chuck the whole document...it was written by a bunch of rich white, racist, misogynists anyway. The new constitution will simply read:

"All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others."

Cindie

I have to disagree with you on this one.  The 1st Amendment deals with the Government and ONLY the Government.  Private clubs (which is what political parties and online fora are) can demand and get total silence or be forced to repeat any statements.  As long as participation is voluntary, there is no problem.

Be careful when applying rights to edit citizens' right of association.

[Splashdown]

I'm still having a hard time getting past "Democrat gun nut."

Welcome to the forum.

[Miss Mia]

thanks for the welcome

I'll try to stifle my liberal tenancies and be a constructive contributor in our areas of mutual agreement.

Welcome!

[Rebel]

Hmm, could you be Operation Mindcrime? I've been wanting to get that guy here since this site was started.

Welcome aboard. We tolerate liberals a helluva lot more than DU tolerates conservatives. One of our most respected Mods is a liberal and an Obama supporter. I'm hoping I can change that. 

[comradebillyboy]

I'm still having a hard time getting past "Democrat gun nut."

Welcome to the forum.

I am a defender of all my constitutional rights including the second amendment. When I enlisted back in 1970, I took an oath to defend the constitution, not the president and not any political ideology. Plus I enjoy going out and shooting with my friends  twice a month. Its very therapeutic. None of that keeps me from being liberal on some other issues. Here in New Mexico I'd guess most Democrats are gun owners. Even Dem Governor Bill Richardson has a concealed carry permit and he even got the NRA endorsement.

[comradebillyboy]

thanks for the welcome

I'll try to stifle my liberal tenancies and be a constructive contributor in our areas of mutual agreement.

No need to stifle anything, we love healthy debate. The operative word being healthy.

what I really need to stifle are my occasional tenancies to be an asshole. I spent too much time at DU.

[PatriotGame]

OK I am a very bitter DUmmie, still clinging to my guns (yes there are Democrat gun nuts) and loyalty to Hillary as the best the Dems can offer. I joined your forum not to be a troll, but to agree with everything I see posted in this thread.

Most of the sane people at DU who are not bowing to the Chosen One have been tomb-stoned.

I am not really a conservative, but more of a moderate with strong libertarian tendencies. I am not here to mock you conservatives, although I have many disagreements, but rather to share the distrust and dislike of my party's disgusting presumptive nominee. I would rather see McCain elected than Obama.

As they say, politics makes strange bedfellows. I would be honored to join you in the mockery of a place where I was once proud to be a member.

Hey glad to see you here!
While this board does have a conservative bent, I feel you will find that you will not be caved (tombstoned) just because you don't tow some line.
Enjoy your stay and please engage!
Also, if you have not already, hop on over to the welcome wagon forum and introduce yourself.

It is only an on-line message board and nothing more....have fun!

[Rebel]

I am a defender of all my constitutional rights including the second amendment. When I enlisted back in 1970, I took an oath to defend the constitution, not the president and not any political ideology. Plus I enjoy going out and shooting with my friends  twice a month. Its very therapeutic. None of that keeps me from being liberal on some other issues. Here in New Mexico I'd guess most Democrats are gun owners. Even Dem Governor Bill Richardson has a concealed carry permit and he even got the NRA endorsement.

You can probably google Rebel and Bill Richardson and find that I was thinking he was the most experienced candidate among the Democrats. I've said it many times. Would "I" vote for him? No. ...but I don't consider him a Marxist.

[asdf2231]

thanks for the welcome

I'll try to stifle my liberal tenancies and be a constructive contributor in our areas of mutual agreement.

No need to stifle anything, we love healthy debate. The operative word being healthy.

what I really need to stifle are my occasional tenancies to be an asshole. I spent too much time at DU.

Welcome to the Cave!

Don't stifle ANYTHING.

Just be yourself.

We have had many a fine "Na AH! YOU are the shithead" arguments here in the past.  People just pull up their big girl pants and truck on.  We try to avoid those but it can even be fun sometimes.

Unless you are Lanie in which case you start a billion whiny threads about how the "Cons" that run this place are big mean poopy heads who make you feel bad.