Given that fact, assuming it is an organization composed of democrats is a bit unreasonable.

Really? I didn’t know. From what I read about it, I thought it was made up of Democrats who were resisting jumping on the Obama bandwagon and harboring hope that Hillary could still grab the nomination. In fact, the only place I’ve ever read about it has been on Democratic sites.

It may have been started by a Republican but it sure has a lot of Democratic party adherents.

ed.

Former President Clinton will have a role at the Democratic convention in Denver later this month….

http://www.thenewconservatives.blogspot.com

Second, it was primarily corporate money, then Republicans gaming the caususes in Red states and, finally, authoritarian leftists who fixed the delegate count with Dean’s oversight that elected Obama. He did not win the majority of votes in the Democratic primaries, nor did he win the major Democratic states.

Third, I have heard Hillary on tape answering supporters’ questions say that she will not sign the petition that puts her name in nomination. She believes that her supporters should have their say (and have a catharsis); this is, after all, a democracy. Large blocks of voters always have a role in every Nominating Convention. And no one should minimize the size or importance of the block of (former) liberal and centrist Democrats who believe that the Democratic Party is nominating the first UNQUALIFIED AND ILLEGITIMATE CANDIDATE ever put forward by a major political party, and nominating that person by shady means.

Fourth, Hillary will not destroy the (New) Democratic Party by trying to take over at the convention. The question is: Will the Democrats in the final analysis nominate the one Democrat at this time who could possibly lose this election. John McCain looks more and more respectable, intelligent, like a candidate with sensible policies, trustworthy, and patriotic every single day. In addition he has a sense of humor and is willing to answer voters’ questions. Obama should be way ahead in the polls, but because he has deficits in each of the categories above, he loses some standing every day.

Fifth, Obama is not the leader of the Democratic Party; he is the presumptuous nominee of a “fixed” primary system and the leader of the far-left (loser-Dean-Brazille-Pelosie-Reid) New Democratic Party. They will all be defeated by Democrats, Republicans, and Independents in November.

And, fifth, I think Bill should be permitted to do exactly as he wants to do, not that he needs anyone’s permission.

(lol)

I agree that it was “niggardly” praise, but please admit that you at least thought twice about using the word. Lefty blogs will trackback and undoubtably claim that this is a subtle racist invective (”there were so many other words to use… why would Moran choose ‘niggardly’?”).

I’ll bet you won’t see anybody claim that he has niggardly experience (which he does).

Words are fun. Idiots are “funner”.

It crossed my mind, sure. But if someone wants to take me to task for it, they will look like the idiots that they are.

ed.

Clinton’s frontrunner status in 2012 is solely predicated on an Obama defeat now. Four years as the Democratic standard-bearer, regardless of how his fortunes play out in the House and Senate, will make his position unassailable by Clinton or any other Dem.