The Wicked Witch is dead.
 

Ding Dong! The Wicked Witch is dead.
Which old Witch?
The Wicked Witch!
Ding Dong! The Wicked Witch is dead.
Wake up, you sleepy head.
Rub your eyes
Get out of bed.

Reference: Sen. Hillary Clinton will officially suspend her campaign for the presidency by the end of the week, multiple sources told CNN.

:lol2:

There is a God. But she will not go quietly. She will make some kind of power play and secure a position.

That's a given and part of the Clinton playbook/legacy/rules of war.

Again, I marvel at how many people called this "sour grapes" when the republicans accused the clintons of the same thing, back in the day.

She's not dead yet

Wasn't like they didn't have cause, though. The Clintons behave only one way: discreditably. I wouldn't vote for The Baggage With The Baggage if you bribed me.

They (the Clintons) play rough, that's for sure. I don't think Republicans have anything to complain about, though.

:sheep:

Dead? Don't count on it.

I would prefer her being chosen to run for VP, but only because it will keep her out of the Supreme Court for the time being.

who is this 'wolf' person......they seem familiar somehow.

If she only suspends her campaign, then she will still have her pledged delegates when the convention starts. This means that she could still make a fight for the superdelegates and make a play for the nomination.

I expect the Clintons to drag up everything and anything that can slime Obama between now and the convention in an effort to make Obama un-electable by November.

No, at this point he has enough pledged delegates that mathematically it wouldn't matter even if she got the support of every single superdelegate.

George Will and the Fox newsies basically are saying that taking Hillary on as Veep will make Obama unelectable. Bonnie Erbe, of the Boston Globe and not exactly a rock-ribbed conservative, writes ". . .for her to campaign for that spot is nothing short of unseemly. And that goes double for her husband. Yet, "campaigning" for it is exactly what some of her supporters, including Big-Mouth Bill, are doing."

For the Dems to try an Obama-Clinton slate would be... more stupid than I'd believe, and that's saying something.

Oh, just the Clintons trying to shove Extra-Large Government down all our throats and visibly viewing the Bill of Rights not as a guide to their behavior and policymaking, but as a stumbling-block to their ambitions -- in notable contrast to the Administration of the younger Bush, who contrary to crazy anti-Republican rumor, has been scrupulous in not trammeling our rights and liberties. The evidence of the past seven and a half years shows this clearly. There is a fog of allegations otherwise, but they are not borne out by the substance. Here we are shooting at anti-democracy foes, keeping them fucked right up, and some people just hate that we're doing that. I can't understand it. Makes you wonder how many closet fascists we've got in this generation, doesn't it?

I'm not even a Republican, and I can see this. There are a lot of dumbfuck Americans out there.

Can you say, delusional? :rolleyes:

Bruce, you know I don't take crap advice, or ill-founded remarks, at all seriously.

If I did, I'd agree with tw about politics a lot more. Or radar.

Now my golden, wonderful, excellent advice is for you to blow away the fog that blinds you.

Yup and I can read it too.

Not true. He has 1763 pledged delegates, you need a total of 2118 to win. He has enough pledged + declared superdelegates to win.

Hillary can still get some of his declared supers to switch sides, and walk away with the nomination. She would need 192 additional superdelegates to vote for her.

Are there 192 open seats on the Supreme Court?

Ah, my mistake.

What Peggy Noonan Had To Say On It.

Exerpted from her June 6 column:

I could say it to you.

Further remark on it from Mychal Massie -- wow, he doesn't like either one of them.

N'COBRA's entire raison d'être sounds like a WTF.

I'm intrigued that you see fascists everywhere UG. Left, right, pacifists, liberals, gun-control, vegetarins, nuns (okay I made the last two up)
Methinks you doth protest too much.

vegetarians make great lovers. Except they refuse to shave their bush and that is a bit of a problem. :D

Hasn't Clinton already tried to make the case that even the pledged delegates are not legally-bound to vote for the candidate that they were elected to support?

And what happens if Obama is sidelined by scandal between now and August?

I am not a Democrat. I have never been a Democrat, and I will never be or vote for a Democrat. But I hope that Clinton still makes an issue of the Florida and Michigan delegates. According to the Florida state constitution, the state legislature can regulate political parties. I question the validity of this under the U.S. Constitution since it restricts our right to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances. But if state law can regulate national political parties, then I don’t see how party rules can dictate when state law says a party can have its primary. However, if party rules can override statutory law, then the parties should be paying the cost of holding the primary elections. As it stands now the state of Florida will only pay the cost of holding a primary election for the Democrats and Republicans- third parties must foot their own bill. This is fundamentally wrong and I hope that a challenge from Clinton can bring public attention to this issue.

I could gripe about your grammar, but I'll just let you go study it. The KJV does use correct grammar, btw.

Fascists, communists -- not only would I hate to have to live on the difference, you'd hate to too. One will do for the other in all but the most minute policy details, and it ends up being more a difference of style than of substance.

Pacifists are not in my experience fascists. But the poor wretches can't rescue anybody from them -- not and remain pacifists. They're better neighbors than fascists are -- and utterly useless at quelling a riot. That's bad if you don't want your roofs given to the flame and your flesh to the eagles.

Gun control is of course a great help to fascists or their inspiration the communists. This alone is reason to reject it.

I'd rather digest vegetarian dishes than vegetarian, uh, philosophy. Our teeth and our tracts declare us omnivorous.

Good God, man, you just can't help yourself can you? Pompous, self-satisfied, arrogant and absurd.

Those loyal to the Clintons take note of those who were not
By Mark Leibovich

Wednesday, June 11, 2008
WASHINGTON: Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton was gracious in her full-throated endorsement of Senator Barack Obama. But that does not mean all is forgiven by others in the Clinton universe.

For proof, look no further than Doug Band, chief gatekeeper to former President Bill Clinton.

Band keeps close track of the past allies and beneficiaries of the Clintons who supported Obama's campaign, three Clinton associates and campaign officials said. Indeed, he is widely known as a member of the Clinton inner circle whose memory is particularly acute on the matter of who has been there for the couple — and who has not.

"The Clintons get hundreds of requests for favors every week," said Terry McAuliffe, the chairman of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. "Clearly, the people you're going to do stuff for in the future are the people who have been there for you."

McAuliffe, who knows of Band's diligent scorekeeping, emphasized that "revenge is not what the Clintons are about." The accounting is more about being practical, he said, adding, "You have to keep track of this."

Band, who declined to comment, is hardly alone in tallying those considered to have crossed the former candidate or the former president in recent months by supporting Obama. As the Obama bandwagon has swelled, so have the lists of people Clinton loyalists regard as some variation of "ingrate," "traitor" or "enemy," according to the associates and campaign officials, who would speak only on condition of anonymity.

Philippe Reines, a spokesman for both Clintons, said neither kept any specific catalog of those believed to have wronged them. "There is no list," Reines said.

The lists maintained by supporters tend to be less formal documents than spoken diatribes, with offenders' names spat forth in rants, gripe sessions and post-mortems.

Several names and entities are common among various list makers. The lineup invariably begins with A-list members like Governor Bill Richardson of New Mexico; Representative James Clyburn of South Carolina, the House Democratic whip; Gregory Craig, Bill Clinton's lawyer in his impeachment and trial; David Axelrod, Obama's chief strategist; Senator Claire McCaskill of Missouri; and several Kennedys. Some members of the Democratic Party's rules committee, the state of Iowa and the caucus system in general are also near the top.

The news media have already focused on some list entries, including the online gossip purveyor Matt Drudge (who had the nerve to show up at Hillary Clinton's departure speech on Saturday), Todd Purdum of Vanity Fair (the author of a recent profile of Bill Clinton) and the cable network MSNBC (whose hosts Chris Matthews and Keith Olbermann are charter list members, Clinton associates said).

The lists are also reported to include lesser-known Obama-supporting members of Congress (for whom the Clintons campaigned), former ambassadors (appointed by Bill Clinton) or Clinton White House officials turned Obama advisers (like Anthony Lake, a former national security adviser, and Susan Rice, a former White House and State Department official).

These are people who should know better than to ask the former president or first lady for a job recommendation for a son-in-law.

Prominent list entries tend to be philosophical about their status. "When you're on the losing end of a campaign, your sense of victimization is higher," said Joe Andrew, the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee (appointed by Bill Clinton) who joined the lists after he switched his superdelegate allegiance from Hillary Clinton to Obama just before the primary in his home state, Indiana.

Richardson, the former energy secretary and United Nations ambassador under President Bill Clinton who endorsed Obama after leaning toward Hillary Clinton, said, "I know they're unhappy, but I've been on these lists before."

While Hillary Clinton has a short list of people who disappointed her, Bill Clinton, who reportedly has an encyclopedic memory of all the people he has helped, employed or appointed over the years, apparently has a far longer one, the campaign officials said.

Hillary Clinton's friends have a list of their own (it has frequently included the former president), as do veterans of Bill Clinton's White House (who love to blame Patti Solis Doyle, Hillary Clinton's former campaign manager), Clinton campaign employees (who complained incessantly — and continue to — about Mark Penn, the demoted chief strategist), Clinton fund-raisers and women's groups who supported Hillary Clinton's campaign.

"I won't forget these people," said Susie Tompkins Buell, a co-founder of the Esprit clothing company and a longtime friend of the Clintons who describes herself as "a soul sister" to Hillary Clinton.

When asked to name "these people," Buell specifies "all the women who sold out Hillary." She declined to volunteer names on her list but answered "all of the above" when read a roster of prominent women supporting Obama that includes Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Governor Janet Napolitano of Arizona and Governor Kathleen Sebelius of Kansas.



http://www.iht.com/bin/printfriendly.php?id=13626061

Whoa...really? I rebut you thusly.

To be fair, unless he changed tone since he qualified for ignore, he doesn't find fascists among the hard right ultra-nationalists.

I could with equal accuracy say I find fascists among the hard left ultranationalists. How many have quipped anecdotally that fascism went so far around to the right it met the left coming the other way?

Then you have scholars like von Kuehnelt-Leddihn actually researching the matter and proving it.

The point, and I do have one right at the end of this finger I'm thrusting at you, is fascism is not fundamentally distinguishable from leftism, communism, and suchlike large-government societal paradigms.

Let's see, Dana, how this logically follows: I know more about accurate fifteenth-century grammar, without Google, than you do -- and you call me names on that account.

Can't say as that one shows you in your best light.

If you wanted to say "Methinks thou dost protest too much," why then did you write something else?

Again UG does what UT wants the Cellar to be. Posters insult others rather than post facts. In twenty years, UG got no higher than Corporal. No college education. But he is an expert even on spelling. UG could have won the national spelling bee. But he was too busy saving our nation from evil enemies. Oh. That would be facts. Instead, this is the new Cellar that UT openly encourages. UG attacks DanaC because that proves UG is intelligent. Apparently this makes UT happy.

Well, another Corporal also rose to become his country's leader. He also did it by disparaging the bourgeois and intellectuals. How's that for scary.
UT wants The Cellar to be a hotbed of personal attacks especially from Urban Geurilla. UG, why did you not just call her a cunt. You wanted to.

You do realize I can't be provoked in this way.

UT's personal hygiene is not always up to par.

How's that? Now are you provoked?

Well, don't expect much, he's only a thickstringer. :stickpoke

It's true, I did not shower this morning, ran out of time. However I do try to keep my ass completely wiped and do put on a new layer of deodorant.

Talk about personal attacks. Sheeeesh.

tw never makes it personal.

I don't see where UG called Dana a name anyway. - Are the posts I read somehow different or is Tom delusional....or both?

I think he leans toward both.

I started reading your rebuttal link, got through the first three, and didn't see where the constitution has anything to say about the last two, and the first one is dealing with the congress. I didn't waste my time reading farther.

Well done, well done. I'm a little thick though could you help me?

TW, you're a lying cunt.

Does that count as an insult, or does it fall only in the fact category? So confusing.

Gross!
 

Yes but when you finally do shower, you can just peel it off like a layer of skin.

You do lose some underarm hair this way, so I shave.

subway sandwiches aren't all that fun to taste a second time. how about a little warning next time?:greenface

One who still supports George Jr and who, as a professional investor, could only recommend underperforming mutual funds. Yes, lookout123 need only understand what he is told to think and how to scam his clients for maximum profit. Just facts - no insults intended.

This is the new Cellar where the topic is perverted to attack another poster. Not that lookout123 knows the difference. Attacking others is the best way to win an argument that defends wacko extremist rhetoric.

lookout123's friend even distributed voter registration cards, destroyed cards of those who registered Democratic, and then sent in only the Republican cards. Just a friend that lookout123 admitted to - then later tried to deny.

UT – how many more should post like TheMercenary, UG, and lookout123 before you decide their attitude and personal insults are acidic to The Cellar? Is open insulting tolerated until others respond in kind?

And you know this because...????

Tom, Insults can come in many forms - there are those that are blatant "Your a cock" for example, and those that are loosely veiled. Either way an intelligent reader can see that they are both insults just in different forms. Just because they are buried under a mountain of BS, conjecture and text does not make them any less insulting.

Just my :2cents:

now classicman, just for the sake of clarity - when you say "you're a cock" are you referring to tw? i only ask because i don't want the little twat's feelings to get hurt.

ah, fuck it, what do i care?

tw, get over it. in my 7,000+ posts i think i've only insulted two other dwellars. one was a hardcore troll and one was rkzenrage. figure it out, i'll insult you until one of only a few options happens:

1) UT bans me (which I don't want, but I would accept if he deems necessary)
2) You stop lying constantly and ONCE, just ONCE actually engage in an honest, meaningful dialogue about the issues that we have locked horns on.

I have many times given you the opportunity to support your anti- financial advisor stance. I've presented information that casts light on your assertions. Not one time have you ever been man enough to step up and respond. Instead you wait until the next thread to come back with the same old tired mantra of "lookout licks gwb's jockstrap..." whatever dude - anyone who reads should know my stance on bush and most other politicians as well.

you're a pathetic, lying, worn out cunt without enough self awareness to grow as a person. prove me wrong.

lol @ lookout - no that was just a general insult not intended for any particular dwellar, but if the shoe fits....

A supporter of Bush shorted every stock, except Google and Mastercard.

what exactly does that mean?

That deadbeater is having satiric fun with this thread.

"If I build a shoe and somebody wants to put it on and loudly announce that it fits..." -- Bill Mauldin, Up Front, circa 1944

Well....I didn't. You quoted from a post by Sundae Girl. I was attempting to suggest that your attack on her use of grammar was an unnecessary and ungracious way to answer her point. I stand by that. Now are you really going to attempt to tell me that you are better with language than Sundae Girl?

This grammar nazi bullshit really aggravates me. If I write a piece for university it is submitted with flawless spelling and flawless grammar. I don't require a spellchecker to ensure that. I submit first draft material and it has not one spelling error, nor a single grammatical mistake. I post here, however and that is not the case. I can only assume this must also follow through for other people, Sundae included. This is because this is an informal setting, not a formal one. If I deliver a speech, I ensure I am very careful wth my language. If I am sitting in a pub chatting with my mates and putting the world to rights, I am less careful.

[eta] pointing out other peoples' grammatical, or spelling, errors isn't necessarily a bad thing: sometimes it is funny, or draws attention to a freudian slip; sometimes it is relevant, as would be the case if someone posted about another dwellar's errors only to litter ther own post with the same. Sometimes, though, and this is why I took umbrage to UG's snipe, it is simply ungracious, or is an attempt to demean and belittle another dwellar.

You've got UG's number. :thumb:

Yes, that is exactly what I'll tell you. She blew it, and in the blowing committed an absurdity. Solecisms are the kind of error someone has some grounds to know better than.

I do apologize, of course, for any mistaking of her for you. That's one on me. But wait! -- see post #27 this thread, and see if you're not in error yourself. You know: the post just above your own post #28, which you quote, and misleadingly, in #56.

Go. Enlighten me. Point out to me which unforgivable and absurd error I have committed. I really, really care.

*shakes head* ok. You win. It must be so lonely be the cleverest man on teh interwebz.

For the record, Urbane Guerilla considers himself a better writer than Sundae Girl. Personally I find this absurd and delusional. But hey, what do I know?

[eta] in the wikipaedia article on solecisms it ends with this note:

Now this doesn't apply in this case because 'thou' is not much in common usage (except for a few places in the north of england, where Thee and Thou have been corrupted into 'tha') but it does point to a general direction within the field of linguistics: a direction which is the opposite of the one you are heading in, UG. Your approach to grammar, as evidenced by your obsessive need to point out mistakes to those with whom you are arguing, is already outmoded. The world is leaving you behind my friend:P

I was paraphrasing Shakespeare.
He uses doth rather than dost, although I accept it is said about another person as opposed to being addressed to them.
Can't say I'm all that fussed about getting the finer points of archaic and obsolete grammar wrong on one occasion. Just my bad luck to address it to one of the few people who still uses it.

Still, nice to know I can still blow it with the best of them.