Sunday, June 08, 2008

Hoppin' the Hillary Bandwagon

A week ago Sen. Hillary Clinton was Cruella De Ville, the Wicked Witch of the East and Nurse Ratched rolled into one. This weekend she is Mother Theresa. One speech is all it took. The same folks who all but crucified her just days ago are recommending her for sainthood now. My, what a difference a few days makes. I'm sorry, but all the fawning, hypocrisy and phoniness of it all is making me want to puke. Democrats are tripping over themselves to congratulate and praise Hillary for her Saturday rallying cry of support for Obama in his bid to beat Sen. John McCain, the GOP's presumptive nominee, in the presidential election. What is it about Democrats and bandwagons? This one is so full it's about to tip.

To be sure, that the party is coming together as we head towards November is certainly an important turning point, and if Clinton's call for unity helps achieve that then she clearly deserves her props. But honestly, what was her other option? Are we really so surprised at the content and tone of her speech? The Democratic establishment, the media, and Obama supporters spewed so much venom towards this woman that she realized Wednesday morning, after the last primaries closed and Obama claimed the nomination, that she could (a) go down in history as the shrill narcissist whose naked ambition destroyed her reputation, her legacy and perhaps sank Obama's historic campaign, or (b) swallow her pride, tuck in her tail and go public with her endorsement and "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" speech. That she chose the latter after all the intense pressure and criticism is of no surprise. It's exactly what anyone in her position would have had to do. I just wish Democrats would stop all the bullshit about how wonderful Hillary is now. How this was the speech of a lifetime. How she has just secured her place in history as a respected political leader. Just days ago these same attack dogs had bought her a one-way ticket to Siberia and were calling her every name in the book. It's all so shamefully patronizing and condescending. Politics ain't pretty.

HELP ELECT BARACK OBAMA PRESIDENT: It's now time for us to pull together as Democrats and unite behind Obama and his historic candidacy. These are exciting times. I urge you to support Obama by sending the campaign whatever you can afford. In politics, money is key. There are many swing states this year--Colorado, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Missouri among them. With a sizeable war chest for campaigning, ground teams/staff, ads, mailings, Internet/email promotions, etc, he can win these states. Click here to make a contribution and help change America.


Anonymous said...

Not all Democrats. I still think she's the Wicked Witch. ;)

Unknown said...

And for the same reasons Hillary Clinton had to do what she did, the Democrats have to roll out this "Don't mention the war... We're all friends now" routine.

Anonymous said...

Thank you Ostroy, You're about the only voice around that is not that of a sexist. I am astounded and deeply, deeply hurt by the hatred of women exhibited during this campaign and the hatred of white people by black people. It has been a very sad eye-opener.

But back to Hillary. Up to the time of her arrival for her speech, the TV people were making fun of her and belitttling her. And, as you see by the entries here and the continuing commentaries on TV and in tne newspapers they continue to "put her down." It's beginning to look like the Republican men are more "progressive" in their gender attitude than the Dems. Condi was appointed, Laura is respected as is/was Nancy. And there are many more examples.

The only reason I can see is that the Dem men in government are so spineless that their "masculinity" is threatened by strong women. They need a pecking order.

Well, I won't vote for a candidate who hates me because I'm white and I won't remain in a party that hates me because I'm a woman.

Anonymous said...

It's all about self-interest. She hasn't changed. She just recognized she had no choice. Did you notice that she couldn't muster up a smile but instead spoke about supporting Obama through clenched teeth? The only smiles were reserved for her comments about her suporters. She looked like she absolutely hated to be making the speech and saying what she was saying. Like drinking caster oil. Hold your nose and do what you have to do. Next couple of months will be interesting.

Anonymous said...

She's a good politician. No different than a good male politician. It doesn't always have to be about race or gender. She is smart and pragmatic. She needs to try to keep the party together for her own career. Savvy move.

Anonymous said...

Hillary has to play the "Uncle Tom" role to be liked by the Dems. Now she'll also have to,as Ostroy mentions, play Mother Theresa, and hit the road to get Obama elected. Don't we hope she and all women have learned their place????? Let's have a movment now that blacks are established for women to have equality.

Anonymous said...

11:54 is like the parent who while beating his child screams at him to stop crying while he's being beaten. Why on earth would Hillary be estatic about endorsing Obama whom she thinks is not ready to be president. I wasn't smiling while she was endorsing him because I don't think he's ready.

I will not be one who holds his nose while voting for Obama. I'm now for McClain and breathing easier.

Anonymous said...

I love the way they're all saying that Hillary didn't lose because of sexism (there's no glass ceiling for the presidency) but that she ran a rotten (stupid) campaign. I can't believe that Chris Matthews is still beating up on her. Hasn't it sunk in that "the Bro beat the Ho."?

Anonymous said...

12:04 should vote for the candidate of his/her choice, but don't confuse McCain with a centrist or progressive. Say what you want about Obama not being ready (may be true), but if you vote for McCain, you are supporting anti-choice Sup Ct judges, a long presence in Iraq, Bush tax cuts, etc., etc., etc. Some of us may be less than thrilled with Obama, but an Obama Presidency will reflect far more of our policy preferences than a McCain Presidency.

Anonymous said...

11:54 is like the parent who while beating his child screams at him to stop crying while he's being beaten.

What a ridiculous and insulting analogy. Sounds like 12:04 is a petulant closet right winger who takes the marbles and runs home when the game doesn't go the way you like. Stop whining and think about the big picture instead of your own petty hurt feelings.

Anonymous said...

Sounds like 12:04 hit a raw nerve of 11:33, who has the "audacity" to mention "insulting" after what Hillary has gone through. If 12;04 is a "petulant closet right winger" why are you stupid enough to think he might think your "big picture" is "his big picture."

Stop giving directions to everybody else and look at your own short comings. You'll probably feel like whining then, too.

Anonymous said...

12:17 I'm not 12"04 but I'm hesitant to vote for Obama despite what you say. Maybe youd could help by enlightening me.

All I've heard for all of the months from him is "CHANGE." What does he mean? What "change" is he going to bring? His "platform" is pretty much the same as Hillary's and he said she was out of touch. I'm not trying to foster a debate here. I really want to know what his plans for change are and how he will do it. I can't vote for him since I have no idea what he means. Thank you. Or maybe you would tell what he's about, Ostroy.

Anonymous said...

If what some people are reporting is true,that certain 527 groups have tape showing Michelle Obama saying fuck whitey ,that will be the end of the dems.The only thing the repuks have to do is make sure the tapes are not played intill late oct.(LIKE 31st of oct)It'll make them vet the empty suit the next time

Anonymous said...

"Don't whine" "Stop screaming when you're being hurt" "Take it like a man" "Smile, Hillary, when you endorse Obama." "Keep your marbles in the game even if we cheat." "Do as I say." "If you know what's good for you you'll follow my orders". "Me Tarzan, you Jane."

I'm so tired of all the Dr. Phil advice from these Obamanable Supporters.

Anonymous said...


As you yourself say, the "platform" of both Obama and Clinton is pretty much the same. I will note that their shared platform is vastly different than that of Mr. McCain. So if one believes in the ideas/philosophies/priorities of Hillary Clinton, a vote for John McCain is pretty much thumbing your nose at everything she's done and hopes to do for Americans.

Go to and click on the "issues" tab for information about plans and ideas.

Anonymous said...

see.thats what the Obama camp was counting on,front people like Micheal. so people like sidney and other onama fans could make the clinton into racist's and good for nothings and then have micheal come along and claim not all obama fans trash the clintons.The question to ask micheal is when was one time he stood up for the clinton's in their defense before Obama was named the massiah,don't start looking because he didn't,he only wants your vote for Obama now

Anonymous said...

The questiom/mystery/concern is not Obama's platform. It is almost exactly like Hillary's. The question is:

What is the CHANGE he promised and his supporters are so thrilled with; and,

How is he going to create that change.

Obama has ever clarified that or even spoken about it. It should be the center of his campaiang, which it is, but no one knows WHAT it is.

Anonymous said...

1:24 is right. The Mithceel damn Whitey" tape will come out at the last minute like the Kerry Swiftboat tape did and, if it's not over for Obama by then, it will be. However, I suspect the Wright tapes will have ended his presidency.

Avedon said...

Oh, stop, all of you. This stuff is disgusting.

The "Whitey" tape is bull.

And Clinton was always going to endorse the nominee, no matter who it was.

You people have worked yourselves into such a lather of hating one candidate or the other that you've lost your senses.

Both candidates are ambitious people who did destructive things in order to win. Obama's campaign was slicker at it, and he pulled off the nomnination.

Now if you believe in progressive programs you will vote for him and stop being divisive. This isn't a game. Over a million people are dead because too many people convinced themselves in 2000 that the Republican was no worse than the Democrat.

Millions more will die if you do that again. We have to win by huge margins to overcome the voting machines, so suck it up.

Anonymous said...

Michael I don't know how Obama is going to bring that change and what it is so I went to the website like you said to that other person who doesn't know. All I saw was more of his platform which to me seems just like the normal Democratic Party platform. Nothing new or radical there. What is the change he's going to do. He said he'd bring us all together. I looked for how on his website. Nothing is mentioned about "change" and bringing us all together.

How is he going to bring together his Trinity congregation and other blacks to liking whites; how is he going to bring together the Hispanics for and against illegal immigration and the other USA citizens for and against illegal immigration; how he is going to bring together those "bitter" people he doesn't like and the rich people he is one of; how is he going to bring together the Republicans and the Democrats; how is he going to integrate the Muslims who want to wear veils to school and sacrifice animals; how is he going to make all the women who feel the country is sexist feel better and get equal pay and break glass ceilings?

How is he going to come togehter with the people in power who still want to send our jobs ovefseas?

How is he going to change things so we all come together????? Why doesn't he tell us on his website, although I shouldn't have to have a computer to find out what the president candidate is running on.

Anonymous said...

I'm so sick of the bickering. How in the hell are the Democrats going to ever get this country back to what it should be??? I enjoyed Hillary's (yes I'm gonna say it) historic and gracious speech. I'm also an Obama supporter. I felt he was better on the issues and so that's how I voted (even as a white, lesbian woman).
Those from the Hillary camp that plan on voting for McCain are simply idiotic and childish, not to mention IMHO traitors. How in the hell can you possibly compare the two. Then again...were you folks ever Democrats in the first place or are you just racist???
Even as an Obama supporter, I would be voting for Hillary if she had won the nomination.
Repugs have been running this country for way too damn long and it's time for a New NEW Deal. I don't want to see my country go to hell in a handbasket with McCain at the helm.


Anonymous said...


No one can find for you or show you what you do not want to see. No one can disabuse you of a notion if you are not willing to open your heart and mind to truth. And you don't have to have a computer to learn about the candidate. He's written two bestsellers, which should be available to you at your local library. He's also participated in 22 televised debates.

However, your mischaracterizations of, and presumption to speak for, various ethnic, socioeconomic and religious groups in what is clearly the attempt to belittle Senator Obama's message does seem to betray a lack of real interest in finding what you "seek". I'd like to think I'm wrong in my characterization of your level of interest so will now encourage you to read his books.

In the meantime, you will have 5 months with which to compare and contrast the remaining candidates. I think you will find the difference to be stark and that there is only one candidate remaining who not only shares much of the same goals as Hillary Clinton but also is not beholden in any way to corporate fat cats and lobbyists.

THAT is real change.

Anonymous said...

You want to hear sick? I'm sick and tired of hearing CHANGE, now NEW DEAL. What the f_k is the CHANGE and what is the NEW DEAL? Obama's platform is almost like Hillary's only not so good. She wants EVERYBODY to have health care. And, who knows what he thinks anyhow. He keeps flipping and flopping. Even Biden had to defend his change on Iran and say "He's learning." How could he be "better on the issues." I'm not even sure what HIS ISSUES are except that he's going to CHANGE SOMETHING> WHAT and HOW we don't know.

And as for united. Let him start by uniting the blacks and the whites. 94 percent of the blacks voted for Obama and said don't vote for the "ho". You people don't like to call that racism. Some or calling it "reverse" racism. How dumb is that? How about the "bitter" workers he's driven away from the Dem. Party? How about the Hispanics who have their problem with Afro Americans as do Afro American's with them.

And I"m sick of those of us Democrats who are not for Obama being automatically accused of being "racists".

I won't vote for Obama because he has lied. You don't sit in a church for twenty years and not know what's being taught. Not only that even those not attending the church knew what it is/was about. I won't vote because he keeps chaning positions and because he is a member of a church that preaches hatred against white people and America. And, because I can't get a straight answer from anybody about how he's going to "change" everything and unite us.

I don't know who above twenty years old doesn't understand that character is more important than being a charming "elist." McCain is not a liar, he is not a racist and he's a moderate. All of that is more than you can say for B.O.

Of course you would be voting for Hillary, Melissa. What's not to vote for? She was the better candidate and would have been elected president.

Anonymous said...

Avedon You may or may not recall many Dems voted for George Bush to go to the UN about Iraq and that they were lied to and the majority of the country believed the lie along with Congress. That includes, of course, countless Democrats.

And you seem to imply that since, if you're right, there is no "whitey" tape that there are no other "whitey" issues.

You forget the Dems kept supporting the war with their votes even while being in the majority. Couldn't help it - perhaps but the war continued.

No one was convinced in 2000 that the Republican was no worse tham the Democrat. The Repuboicans ran a better campaign and the media battered Gore as they've done Hillary this time. Then too, Bush was not concerned with the color or his wardrobe or any or the other nonsense on the Dem. side. Not only that, then as of late, the Dems have been spineless.

Barry Schwartz said...

Yeah, and when your child does the right thing, hit him anyway, because he didn't have his heart in it.

Freakin' hypocrisy. Go give her campaign some money, dammit. It'll reduce the amount Obama's campaign has to give her.

Hillary stopped it on her end, I don't care why; reward her for doing it. I gave her campaign money yesterday, to reward her and help pay her debt. Dumping on Hillary was my favorite pastime, but it is time to get a new pastime.

Anonymous said...

Thank you 11:53 AM. I will not vote for Obama because he is racist and so is his wife. I will not remain in the DNC because they can't see the forest for the trees when it comes to viable candidates. The DNC remains sexist and disorganised. I am now an independent who takes voting orders from no one.

Only suckers and those too weak to stand on their own feet will vote for Obama.

Anonymous said...

count me as one of those who aint buying into hillary's bs....she is in debt to the tune of 20 mil...thats the only reason she made nice for about 6 minutes of that entire speech...which was mostly of her whining about her being a woman...i say eff hillary and bill...i cant stand either one of them anymore

Anonymous said...

All of you that say you plan on voting for McCain over Obama because you say you dont know what Obama means when he says the word "Change".You people obviously dont what to know what he means.Go ahead and vote for McCain and get more of what you have been getting for the past 8 years.

Anonymous said...

Dont you think that if there was such a tape of Michelle Obama using that term that Hillary would have given it to every media outlet?You hate filled people are so gullible.

Anonymous said...

"But honestly, what was her other option? Are we really so surprised at the content and tone of her speech?"

Honestly, yes.

As a former Hillary supporter, who was pulling for her until her remarks about assassination and her focus on beating Republicans rather than a future big enough for all of us, I think we do need to make a big fuss. I believe what I read on another blog: she really did not believe that she'd lost; she believed she just needed a little more time.

Given infinite time and resources, any candidate can win, and the most persevering candidate who emotionally connects with the electorate does.

Time ran out.

Anonymous said...

No "Mr. Nice Guy" here, Andy!

I still point out that while HRC was on the Board of Directors of Wal-Mart co., she SAT QUIET, and quietly collected her director's cut (paycheck) - while Wal-Mart went on a two decade "keep women OUT of management positions" tear. Ironically, the only reason HRC was on that Wal-Mart board was because... her husband was governor of Arkansas, W-M's home state. She said "I'm not going to be like Loretta Lynn, I'm not going to just stand by her man", but "standing by her man" is the only reason she became senator and Dem. frontrunner in 2007-2008.
She was given her great Health Care Reform commission in 1993... by her husband! - and proceded to blow it with a dictatorial "punt", instead of confronting the Health Care companies & HMO's over 30% paper & profit margins, instead seeking to IMPOSE the cost of providing billions of new health care coverage on - small business owners!
Then, Andy, there is the _video_ of her saying that she was _opposed_ to NAFTA... when the videos from 1994 show her strenuously advocating for it.
The Hillary Health Care "reform" package of 1993 presaged the Democrats losing both the House and Senate in 1994, for the first time in decades. And on the eve of election 2006, by some accounts she sucked the air out of long-shot Dem. challenger candidates, long after her re-election victory was secure. Then she refused to dip into her war chest to put some of those candidates over the top in last crucial week of campaign.

Do I have to go on?
Is there a pattern here?

Anonymous said...

Clinton gave an excellent speech in her endorsement of Obama. If all her speeches had been as straightforward and devoid of reality distortion and macabre RFK references, she might have been the nominee.

Anonymous said...

Did anyone see this weekend's picture of Obama riding a bicycle ? Obama is such an elitist phony. He looks like Kermit the Frog on a bicycle!

Next time he needs to take off the mud flap and not wear jeans. Maybe then he won't look like such a tool.

Anonymous said...

Get real.

McCain would be the worse thing to happen to our country.

Wake up.

Anonymous said...

With 18 million voters, why wouldn't a Obama/Clinton ticket be great?

Anonymous said...

8:41 I saw Obama, Michelle and one of their daughters ALL riding together on their bikes, with those silly helmets on. They're making the same stupid PR mistakes Gore and Kerry made with the hunting jacket and the "earth tones." Etc. When did the Democratic Party get so stupid. Is Donna Brasille ruining this campagin too?

Anonymous said...

michael is right,you will have 5 months to find out the only differnce between Obama and hillary is ,hillary had a brain. all obama programs being brought out are hillary programs except thee is in place of the.The change,the obama camp is talking about is a different person in the white house,just the same SLEAZE going on.This is the same man who kept african american votes from being counted in the chicago area because they were for another africa-american,not obama.Michael won't tell you these facts,it shows Obamo to be the devil not the massiah. Micheal is your typical obama mouth piece,never answer a question or a problem with obama.he'll change the subject call you names and switch the mirrow for a muddey one

Anonymous said...

It's the economy stupid and the two candidates running are both stupid when it comes to the economy. We have lost and the country has lost. We needed Hill and Bill to make life livable again. Food staples have doubled, gas -- we all know where that is -- interest rates are at rock bottom - no jobs -- things are rotten -- but not for McCain, Obama, Kennedy -- what do they know? They're "elitel" and RICH> I'm sick of the people in power and OBama is no better. Yeah, change. Crime has gone up inthe little town I live in -- they're stealing gas and anything else they (the poor and needy) can get their hands on. I guess the only hope would be Romney on McCain'sa ticket. Romney seems the only one left who knows something about economics. HELP One woman who has a fairly good job came here can't afford an a.c. and the temp here is over 100. She's "middle class" or used to be. Her husband is retired.

Anonymous said...

Thank you 9:37 I didn't know about Obama and the elections in Chicago. Not surprised and will take that, too, into consideration.

I also want to point out that in the NY Times today, Paul Krugman reported that racism toward Afro-American's is not a national problem anymore. He then pointed out that that is not the case with mysogyny which continues to flourish.

Anonymous said...

All this talk about sexism and racism is hog wash. If she had voted against the war she would be the next President. I live in a very liberal white community in Washington state and our caucus voted 83% for Obama. Talking to my neighbors and I agree, it was because of the war.

Anonymous said...

10:33 If youre so f__king smart why don't you have a weekly column in the best newspaper in the country? Krugman does as was pointed out by 10:23. Get your head out of the white-community-hole in Wash. state and look at the real world. Or better still, if you're a man, have one of those sex operations some men love and see what life for a woman is like in parts of this country.

And it wasn't the war. Obama's little meaningless vote, which he discounted at another time, had nothing to do with his win. Your little poll among you elitists has no value.

Anonymous said...

Just read the Krugman article and am thrilled. At last perhaps there can be help for women. There is no longer any need for affirmative action for Afro Americans (perhaps they'll agree to now being called Americans without the Afro attachment) so now maybe women of all colors can get some help.

Affirmative action help for women raising children who have been abandoned by their husbands; women getting help winning sports scholarships to big universitites; girls having sports teams in high school so they no longer have to wear short skirts and cheer the boys on; affirmative action help for rape victims, victims of domestic violence, victims of hate crimes, victims of abuse by workmen who overcharge and cheat women (especially the old and the very young); the end of the victimization of women in porno films; day care centers for working women (as they have in most other countries); and of course equal pay and equal opporunity in all areas of life --- these were just on the top of my mind. This affirmative action would include all the programs that have been afforded to Afro Americans for the last sixty years. Maybe in another sixty we can have a female president.

Anonymous said...


You don't get chosen the head of the Harvard Law Review without having a brain.

Oh, wait! If he went to one of the most prestigious universities in the world then he must be an ELITIST! Uh, oh. Must have forgotten that Senator Clinton went to Wellesley and Yale...

The claim that Obama engaged in voter suppression is simply another GOP, bullshit attack line. You have no proof, you simply heard it from someone else who made the claim, cannot substantiate it and you find that it fits your notions about the man so you repeat it. These notions, by the way, are not fed by fact but out of an anger that he won the nomination over your chosen candidate.

Your candidate has now chosen to support Obama. Why? In order to spite you? No, because she understands full well that Obama is of like mind with her on the vast majority of issues and that the GOP standard-bearer is the antithesis of everything Clinton stands for.

Anonymous said...

12:02 By the current definition I, myself, am an "elitist" I have no probelm with the term or the implication. What I have a problem with is Obama for his snobbery, arrogance, and dishonesty, especially concerning his affiliation with BLT.

I care not at all that Hillary supported Obama. It makes no difference to me.

And, if Obama and Hillary were of "like-mind" on the issues, why was he chosen? Sexism, perhaps????

This is my last word so don't try to engage in an tireseome exchange as is your wont.

Anonymous said...


What a fool you are. "(D)on't try to engage in an (sic) tireseome (sic) exchange as is your wont." It takes two in order to have an exchange and, despite your weariness with our exchanges, you consistently participate.

Are you a sadist?

If a lack of snobbery, arrogance and lies are your criteria for supporting a candidate, good luck finding one.

Anonymous said...

"...Kermit the Frog on a bicycle"

ha ha! Obama does look like an idiot on a bicycle - check out the picture on the drudgereport.

Anonymous said...

So michael,the Cnn report of Obama pulling reg.voters from the rousters is lie's,they ran it for an hour,you've just proved who the LAIR IS HERE TAKE A LOOK IN THE MIRROW IT'S YOU MICHAEL

Anonymous said...

if i gave my vote to obama i would be rewarding the media and the rest of his supporters for the way they treated hillary.I personally hopes she does'nt campaign for him if he wants it let him go get it.HILLARY PLEASE BECOME AN INDEPENDENT.

Anonymous said...

Anon136 - what CNN report are you talking about? How about a link for us?

Anonymous said...

Gotta love this one:

things are rotten -- but not for McCain, Obama, Kennedy -- what do they know? They're "elitel" and RICH> I'm sick of the people in power

Sooooo, I guess you're under the impression that Clinton is
1) not rich
2) not a person in power

You really need to get out of the house more often.

What's funny about your post Ostroy is that I've found almost no articles wildly praising or nominating Hillary for sainthood because of that speech. If anything, I've seen a ton of people crawling down the throats of Olbermann and Matthews for their "hateful" analysis of her speech and for not praising her enough. A quick tour of the blogs on your blog-roll finds the vast majority sentiment (and you yourself concede) that Hillary made the speech that she had to make in terms of her platform and place within the Democratic Party. As Democratic Party standard bearers for the last 2 decades, the Clintons couldn't further tarnish their legacy by taking a fight to the convention against a nominee who won the primary fair and square. Hillary also can't ignore the concerns and problems of her supporters - women and minorities who would suffer horribly and immensely under a McCain presidency. She promised to fight for those people and the best way for her to ensure that those people are protected and cared for is to be sure that Obama wins the White House in November. Most people understand this. A lot of politicos made grand gestures towards her after the speech because that's what civil-minded politicos do. That's exactly what Clinton's speech was - playing nicey nice to the guy and his supporters that she'd been constantly ravaging for the last 16 months. C'mon Andy - if you're going to rant about wanting to puke about all the "patronizing hypocrisy", then at least have the courage to acknowledge that Clinton's speech was pretty patronizing and hypocritical when put in the context of her campaign. Remember, you yourself kept reminding us that this was a FIGHT TO WIN, which means punches are thrown. But at the end of that fight, a good sport always at least stops throwing blows and concedes, the rivals bump gloves and move on.

And y'know, it WAS a speech of a lifetime because no other woman has ever made such a speech, being the last challenger standing in a primary race that tallied the votes of every state in the union and all the extra territories to boot. Hers was a historic fight. Don't demean that fact, or someone on your blog might start calling you a sexist misogynist.

Anonymous said...

I saw it too.It was on,just before the south dacota and montana primary.They told how Obama when he ran for state senate he purged the signature of his rivals and made sure he was the only one on the dem ballet.It's easy to win in an all black neighborhood when you purge the other 2 blacks off the card. One was an african american woman,the other an african american male. All in a mostly democratic area.Niether person has ever run for office again.The woman obama had tossed,held the senate seat before he did,look it up

Anonymous said...

bkln. we realise your are a Obama KISS_ASS all the way.Andy's bloggs are a hell of a lot more fair to Obama then most here believe they should be.If your so fucking great start YOUR OWN BLOG(THATS RIGHT NOBODY WOULD BE THERE).bETTER YET GO BACK TO BUZZ-FLASH WHERE YOU'LL BE EXSTINT WITH THEM.tHEIR BASH OF HILLARY AT ALL COST IS CATCHING UP THEM.go with them

Anonymous said...

2:53 I and I'm sure others are with you one hundred percent. blkln and michael and the once upon a time Sidney, deliberately clogged this blog with their very wordy and stupid remarks so people might not notice and read the comments those three disagreed with and knew were the truth about Obama.


Anonymous said...

2:21 Thank you for confirming the Obama voting theft. I wish I'd seen it, but I'm sure I weill when the Repugs run that info against him later in the campaign.

Anonymous said...

bklyn your entire rant about Hillary and her speech is "patronizing" and condescending and disgusting. You didn't mention that equally historical was that no other "Challenger" (not "woman" - but CHALLENGER) has had as many votes in the histroy of our country that she had; and that constituted her having the MAJORITY OF THE POPULAR VOTE in this primary; and, when have you ever heard in the history of the USA of a CANDIDATE (not "woman") for the Presidency has 18 million supporters who may not vote for her opponent even though he's their Party's nominee? In your rant you overlooked Obama's NEED for her help to win and the entire abusive Party's begging and demanding she do so.

You are pathetic.

Anonymous said...

The black woman Obama stabbed in the back to get his first public office, Alice Palmer, campaigned for Hillary in Indiana. Funny we didn't see that reported in the news. The MSM was very selective about what we got to see to support their chosen One.

Anonymous said...


I may be many things, but a liar is not one of them.

Voter suppression, which is what Obama was charged with by you or another anon, is electoral fraud aimed at reducing legitimate ballot vote totals of an opponent. Examples would be voter caging, poll taxes, deceptive mailings or phone calls to confuse voters, bomb threats at polling stations, hacking voting machines, etc. People can go to jail for voter suppression.

The Obama campaign did NOT engage in voter suppression in his Illinois Senate race. He utilized a PERFECTLY LEGAL and OFTEN USED petition challenge which was upheld and removed the other candidates' names from the ballot. One of the other candidates admitted that he paid for signatures and was defrauded by those he paid since it appeared they simply filled the names on the sheets themselves. The other candidate's petition, the incumbent's, was tossed because several names on the sheets she turned in came from people who did not live in the district or were not registered to vote.

It took all of 757 good signatures to secure a place on the ballot. When invalid signatures were taken off of the totals, none of the other potential candidates mustered the whopping 757 needed signatures.

For some perspective, each Illinois Senate seat represents roughly 200,000 citizens of the state.

Anonymous said...

Obama purged the voter records and had some of them thrown off for printing their name rather than writing thier name.Anyway you look at it Obama purged the voters rolls.And this is the massiah the democrates have picked,They holler about jim crow laws,and pick a guy that use's them.WHAT A FUCKING JOKE

Anonymous said...

And just think People like Michael back them up

Anonymous said...


It's quite clear you either have no real understanding of the elections process, election law or are a disingenuous ass. I'm thinking it's the latter since you've compared Obama's legal act with Jim Crow.

Obama did not purge voter rolls. The names on the petitions were invalidated and did not count because they did not conform to the laws of Illinois. This is even CLOSE to the same thing as not allowing a person to vote.

If a person was registered to vote, lived in the 13th Senate District of Illinois and signed their name to a petition, it counted. If not, it didn't. For those interested in the truth, it's not hard to understand.

Anonymous said...

thats the problem micheal half the names thrown off is because people printed their names they couldn't sign (use cursive)thier names.So they lived there. They just printed instead of signed,only the elite would call that fair

Anonymous said...

Of course the previous should be written as: This is NOT even CLOSE to the same thing as not allowing a person to vote.

Anonymous said...


So "elitism" is now defined as "following the law".

You do not know why the names were printed on the petitions so don't pretend to know. Also, you have no proof that "half" the names kicked off were because of names being printed instead of in cursive.

Many were kicked off because the collectors were not properly registered, so entire sheets of names were invalidated, and because voters were not themselves registered or lived outside of the Senate district.

Anonymous said...

Give it up Michael. CNN, would get the facts to avoid being sued, and these contributors are right. Obama used JIM CROW tactcs to steal an election. All your hollwering won't change it or his character. It's as bad or maybe even worse than the Republicans did in Florida to steal the election. And Obama was going to CHANGE things. HA. Too bad his first Christian experience wasn't with a Chruch that taught Christian values.

Anonymous said...

How come Michael you say 6:07 doesn't know anythng about it and YOU claim to know it all. "Many were kicked off because . . . " Yeah, let's all believe Micahel who sounds like he's on the Obama payroll and forget everybody else's reports.

Anonymous said...


I will not give it up. I grew up and live in the South and understand full well what Jim Crow was and what it means - supposedly separate but equal facilities for whites and non-whites, a de facto institutionalized racism.

Illinois election law does not differentiate between races or sexes so your comparison is mistaken at its very core.

But, hey, don't let logic and truth stand in the way of your blind irrationality.


I've not been paid a penny by the Obama campaign nor have I claimed to know it all. But you might want to look at the following, since we're supposed to look at everyone else's reports:

Anonymous said...

Then who pays you Michael to stay on your computer during and beyond normal business hours and answer EVERY COMMENT ON OSTROY"S BLOG. Common sense suggests you're getting paid; you are independently wealthy and a political junkie; Obama is a relative and you will get a position in his cabinet; or you are the "bubble boy" on SEINFELD and can't leave your house and this fills your time. It could be you are a househusband, but I doubt that.

Sidney had the same "job" but I guess he could have gotten a client by now, since he's a laywer.

Anonymous said...

too many whiney women on this blog...

Anonymous said...

Too many guys deeply in love with Obama on this blog. That's why we whine. Where have all the good men gone?

Anonymous said...


I suppose one might ask the same question of you, since it seems you have the time to respond quite frequently to Ostroy's blog... So are you paid by McCain, independently wealthy, politically connected so expecting a position in the McCain White House, a bubble boy or house wife/husband?

Or are you, like me, someone who has a family, works hard for a living and cares passionately about our country and its politics for our future and that of our children? Are you, like me, committed to the ideals and ideas of the Democratic Party - the party of inclusion, the party of social and economic justice, the party of equal rights for all regardless of sex, ethnicity, socio-economic status, sexual orientation or religious affiliation (or non-affiliation) - ideals that people like Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been fighting for over decades of public service while John McCain has given them short-shrift?

I believe so. Otherwise I doubt you would have found yourself at Ostroy's blog in the first place.

Anonymous said...

Micheal -- All the Anonymous responders are not the same person and I, an occasional contributer, resent the accusation. Ostroy must think it strange, too, that you think there are two people who read this blog, you and one Anonymous.

Anonymous said...

"the party of social and economic justice, the party of equal rights for all regardless of sex, ethnicity, socio-economic status"????????????????

Please send a copy of your rave review to Rev. Wright and tell him he's teaching lies at Obama's Church. Or maybe he's not a Democrat. Or maybe he just hates white Republicans and loves the Democrats.

Anonymous said...


Just imagine that I might consider the resentment returned in kind.


Since when was Reverend Wright elected to any position as a representative of the Democratic Party?

Anonymous said...

Can't we all just unite and elect Kermit the Frog on a bicycle to act out Carter's second term agenda ?

Anonymous said...

How can the Democrat Party leaders continue to be so stupid? They let the Bush's steal the 2000 election, screwed up the 2004 election and are determinded to lose a sure win in 2008. Obama would not be where he is if he were not black, he has no experience. Explain how with winning Iowa with 12000 votes, he got 13 delegates and Hillary won PA with over 200000 votes and only got 10 delegates. This has been heaped upon us by the media and the cross-over Republicans who gave Obama over 3,000,000 votes. I am sick of the back stabing Democrats who helped with the dragging the Clintons through the mud, every since Bill was elected in 1992. I am 66 years old and I can tell you the 8 years Bill was in charge were the best 8 years I can remember. Oh, I forgot about "The Blue Dress"----who cares, nobody died. I will not vote for Obama, I have never voted for a Republican, but if the race gets close in Nov, I will vote for John McCain to help keep Obama from winning.

Anonymous said...

I too am a senior citizen and I am really depressed. I depend on my savings bringing in some income and it's not happening now. I prayed that Hillary would be our next president and I'd have some financial relieft\ and "good times" again. It ain't gonna happen and I ain't gonna vote for Obama. He'll make things worse -- if that's possible. At least I know McCain and don't have to be afraid of him like I am of the "unknown one." I'm still thrown off by Obama's preacher and his wife. Obma has lied so I don't know what I could count on with him.

And, I'm realy disgusted with the Dem. party and the leaders. Can't trust them either. No one left to trust and I'm scared.

Anonymous said...

First let me say that this is the first blog post I've ever written so I hope it goes well.

I was sent here, and other places, by a friend who is politically active and who knows that I have not been active in either party, until now. He thought it might be a good idea to "get my feet wet" in an anonymous environment.

Here's my story: I am an evangelical Christian and my background is military. I served in the first Gulf War, put in over 20 years of service in the United States Army and now serve in the Veterans Administration. I have seen first-hand how poorly we are dealing with our wounded warriors, how their families are suffering and there does not seem to be much relief on the way.

For most of my life I have primarily supported Republican candidates. Based on my personal experience and what I've seen done to veterans of both Gulf Wars, I can no longer in good conscience do so.

As I followed the Democratic nomination process I must admit that it bothered me tremendously the level of foolishness and pettiness that was exhibited. It made me question whether to vote at all. But after watching Obama on Tuesday and Clinton on Saturday, I really do believe that the party can come together to try and solve some of the big issues we face as a country.

What I continue not to hear is any real solutions or changes in direction coming from the Republicans, specifically John McCain. It's status quo all the way and I cannot accept this as an answer to the rapid increase in suicide rates, self-inflicted wound rates, divorce rates, bankruptcy rates, foreclosure rates and general lack of medical and mental health support for our veterans as a result of Republican leadership. We owe our veterans better and the ultimate insult was John McCain not even having the courage to show up in Washington to vote on the new GI Bill. I will never forget that slight of our military men and women.

I will enthusiastically mark my ballot for a Democrat for president for the first time in my life on November 4.


Anonymous said...

A man who attended, supported and listened the teachings of the BLT for twenty years; a man tho lied about knowing what was going on; a man who stole an election at the state level in IL; a man who flip-flops on issues and a man with no experience is not going to fulfill anybody's hopes for veterans' needs; bankruptcy rates, foreclosure rate or any other needs and challenges facing our country. Obama is simply not right for or up to the job by virtue of his lack of character and experience. I can't believe am evangelical Christian would support a man who sat in an anti-Christian chruch for so long.

Anonymous said...


If this is what you intend, you are wasting your time trying to convince me otherwise. I am quite at peace with myself, enthusiastic about my decision and you can absolutely believe this evangelical Christian and military veteran will support Obama.

Anonymous said...

You Obamainable Supporters are certainly "sensitive" and "defensive" I wouldn't think of trying to change your opinion nor would I want to "tangle" with any of you. I was doing no more than expressing my opinion as you did. Go in peace, Bro.

Anonymous said...

you can't help the blind when the blind likes being lead around by the blind.obama sat in a church for 20 years being preached white hatred.He even had his wife and childern there.In 2006 he new the rev. right was a problem.did he leave the church at that time? Nooooo When the sermons of rev.Wright hit the MSM airwaves, did Obama leave the church? Nooooo Obama only left the church when polls showed the rev.wright problem was bigger than he thought. he and his followers think they put the reverand to bed,guess what? the repuks are waking him up.Obama the gift that just keeps giving.Lots of little needles out there.One by itself isn't bad but poke, poke,poke and after a while it pops.The rev. wright,rezko,voter suppression and turning the clinton's into racist's. and this is the best the dems. have MCCAIN takes office jan 2009

Anonymous said...

Does anybody really think that McCain who is from a military family and a vet and POW himeself would ever do anything to hurt our American veterans or servicemen and women?

Anonymous said...

As a Hillary supporter who watched in horror as the sabotage and smear campaign was launched on her by the Obamatons, the DNC, The MSM, the Bloggers and all the fools who decided that a man with no experience at all in National politics, given he spent the first part of his senatorial term campaigning was more suited for the presidency than the brightest, most informed, articulate and compassionate candidate the Democratic Party has fielded for years, I would sooner vote for Zippy the Chimp than Barack Obama.

Rally around him my ass! That would be putting party before country, which is something I will never do.

He is totally unqualified for the presidency of the USA no matter what letter has after his name.

Anonymous said...

I feel exactly the same way 3:11 feels and I'm so glad he or she articulated it so well. I particularly agree with, and surprised all Democrats didn't, that the obvious priority of any citizen should be the country before the Party. The Democratic leaders did not do that and the entire country is going to suffer. And, he cannot win which has been obvious since March.

Anonymous said...

This election is a nightmare. Neither candidate will be the president we need. McCain is the lesser of the "two evils." It would be an obamanation if Obama were elected, if for no other reason than he's totally inexperienced and unprepared; and, he has poor judgment.

Anonymous said...

Just think of an election without Obama. We could really be getting to know the candidates and having real discussions about issues and the direction the country needs to head towards,

Instead the DNC gave us an "inadequate black man" and told us to support him. Eff That! Donna Bridezilla has been the worst thing to hit the DNC and Howard the Coward is a close second.

Pelosi is a do nothing anorexic and Reid is a mormon slimeball.

There is no reason to vote for Obama. There is no valid DEM party to support.

Anonymous said...

Obama = black
Pelosi = woman
Reid = Mormon

There is no "valid" DEM party to support = there is no white, male, suitably Christian person at the head of the party.

Anonymous said...

10:40 WHADDA YA STUPID. You are pathetically wrong. The ONLY LEADERS in the DEM PARTY are "white, male, and Christian" That's the problem with the Party, why it's in so much trouble and why so many are leaving it. These white, male leaders are sexists and losers. Everyone who loudly supported Oamba were losers: Kerry, Kennedy, Dean, Carter, for starters Maybe they wanted to pick another loser in Barack so they wouldn't feel so bad about themselves. Who knows what twists in their minds caused this horrendous screwup and loss.

The Mormans say they're Christian. You got a problem with that?. They do hate women, though, no matter what they are. Just look at the TX mess.

White males -- not doing so good in any area -- except our soldiers -- men and women -- fighting this unnecessary war started by white males. Does Rev. Wright have a point? Guess not since he included women in his group of whites to hate. A ridiculous point of view since women have no power to screw up the world and they certainly didn't own slaves. They didn't even own their own homes.

Anonymous said...

Today in the Times Maureen Dowd proves herself to be an equal opporunity mysogynist. She's beats up on Michelle who has no power at all on her own. I guess Dowd just can't stand to have other women get any attention. Wonder why she never picked on Laura? Maybe it's because her conservative brothers would beat up on her. Maybe that's why she likes to be "one of the boys" who bash women.

Anonymous said...

to use a sexist term Dowd was "catty" but Michelle should be considered when electing Obama. First, she's the boss - yes, he's, to use that sexist term - "henpecked" She "let him run" if he gave up cigarettes. Worse she's a black racist and he's infkuenced by her. Not only that do we want either a white of black racist in the WH as president, vp or first lady I don't think so.

They talked about this on Wolf Blitzer's show today and of course Donna Brazzel defended her as did the Rep. rep. However, Wolf had the nerve to say Michelle had a very touching life story since she rose from POVERTY to go on to Ivy League Colleges. Her father had a CITY JOB which until recently was a substantial MIDDLE CLASS job. What has happened -- now middleclass jobs mean you're in poverty. And of course she got her Ivy League schools through affirmative action -- not scholarships or working her way through college. I think she has debts - or she says she did, but not full price, I sure. Her "poor" brother also won a athletic scholarship to Yale.

Also remember Nancy Reagan's influence on Ron? She's the one that pulled in astrologists who made charts that influenced our President's decisions First Ladies can be dangerous.

Anonymous said...

If the judgement of first ladies should be called into question, should we be concerned about a drug-addicted woman who stole copious amounts of drugs from a charity hospital? It's a crime most people would go to jail for, at the very least a nurse would lose his/her license to work for, but Cindy McCain pretty much walked.

Teresa Kerry was hammered relentlessly for not releasing her tax returns even though her money had nothing to do with Senator Kerry's career. Cindy McCain and the Hensley fortune bankrolled Senator McCain's fledgling political career. But she vowed never to release her tax returns, only to relent and allow a partial glimpse of a single year.

We should also remember that she carried on an affair with a married man.

Anonymous said...

and by 6:39s post you can see.the obama camp plans on running the same sleazie fucking campaign against Mccain,They ran against the first lady(HILLARY), This is why you cannot elect Obama.He claims he'll run a different campaign and he and his cronies are running nothing but sleaze,And don't be supprised if 6:39 is one of the people the obama camp hired yesterday to patrol the web and spread this kind of bull-shit.I was think about voting Obama after clinton lost,but with all this crap obama's people are spreading.Bet your ass Mccains getting my vote.THANK YOU 6:39 for helping make my mind up

Anonymous said...

Today it was reported that the hopital Michelle Obama's runs got a huge amount of money from the federal government. This on top of Pfleger's church getting a huge grant fromt the federal government and Thrinity church getting fifteen million from the US of America.

It is very disturbing to discover all these people who are closely associated with Obama got all this money from the Fed. Gov. If he can do that as senator, what will they get if he's president? And if he isn't responsible, who is? Our little hospital here in this little town could use some money. It doesn't even have an ER. What's going on? Why there in IL does so much money go to people close to Obama?

Anonymous said...


Did you type that with your pacifier firmly in your mouth?