ODS Patients, Line Up
Tweet
ODS – that’s Obama Derangement Syndrome. It manifests itself via people referencing the Washington Times if it seemingly hurts Sen. Obama or echoing Fox News type attacks to gin up outrage (in this case its inconsequential because the “snub” is ridiculous).
Right now the high water mark is the NY State NOW branch for accusing Sen. Kennedy of “gang rape” for not endorsing Sen. Clinton, but I fear we’ll see more as time marches on.
10 Responses to “ODS Patients, Line Up”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
OW, why do you guys have to borrow from Clinton on this one? She has CDS. Can’t you come up with something more original than ODS??
Jeebus, what are we, 8 years old? Stop it already.
I don’t get NOW’s objection. Obama is solidly pro-choice so what’s the problem?
Would I be wrong in suggesting that Obama has more widespread appeal than Hillary despite their being so close on issues? If so, I cannot understand why a good portion of the Democratic base and establishment wouldn’t be pushing Obama more.
Duhh., the W in NOW stands for WOMEN, Jay, you ass.
And yes, you would be wrong in suggesting Obama has more widespread appeal than Hillary.
Depends who and where and when you measure.
Who says the Dem base and establishment are not pushing Obama? Did you see Ted Kennedy, Durbin, McCaskill, Daschle stumping for him?
Who was the keynote speaker at the 2004 Dem convention, Jay?
Again, you have no idea what you’re talking about. But as long as it gets someone, especialy a Liberal on this site going, you’ll say anything, no matter how stupid.
Duhh., the W in NOW stands for WOMEN, Jay, you ass.
No shit Sherlock, but if you actually READ the press release you would see this:
This latest move by Kennedy, is so telling about the status of and respect for women’s rights, women’s voices, women’s equality, women’s authority and our ability – indeed, our obligation – to promote and earn and deserve and elect, unabashedly, a President that is the first woman after centuries of men who “know what’s best for us.”
Does Obama fit the model of a man who claims to “know what’s best” for women? I don’t think so. Thankfully, the main arm of NOW didn’t resort to such foolishness:
Though the National Organization for Women Political Action Committee has proudly endorsed Sen. Hillary Clinton for president, we respect Sen. Kennedy’s endorsement.
And yes, you would be wrong in suggesting Obama has more widespread appeal than Hillary.
Why?
Who says the Dem base and establishment are not pushing Obama? Did you see Ted Kennedy, Durbin, McCaskill, Daschle stumping for him?
Who the hell cares about endorsements? I’ve already said that most endorsements are useless. The proof in the pudding is on the ground…in the the trenches. That’s where the establishment does the most work and it’s what helps propel candidates into double digit leads leading into primary contests.
Who was the keynote speaker at the 2004 Dem convention, Jay?
That was nearly four years ago. Such a long time renders it meaningless in the political realm.
Again, you have no idea what you’re talking about.
Considering you think a candidate giving a keynote address at a convention four years ago is evidence of his standing as the establishment choice in the DNC, you’re not really one to make such judgments.
But as long as it gets someone, especialy a Liberal on this site going, you’ll say anything, no matter how stupid.
Actually, I asked a pretty innocuous question. Your knee just jerked because I asked it so don’t blame me for your issues.
Right now the high water mark is the NY State NOW branch for accusing Sen. Kennedy of “gang rape” for not endorsing Sen. Clinton,
No, that release from NY NOW was dated January 11, long before Sen. Kennedy’s endorsement. I think they were referring to Brian and Timmy and the male candidates all ganging up on HRC at the debate.
Beat you to this one last night, Oliver.
Reading NOW’s letter… sounds kind of like they’re saying Obama’s just another black man who wants to rape a white woman.
It’s so unpleasant when identity politics reigns supreme. You end up with situations like this one…
And the worst part of it is, I’m out of popcorn.
J.
Reading NOW’s letter… sounds kind of like they’re saying Obama’s just another black man who wants to rape a white woman.
And you sound like a taunting child who is desperate for attention.
Go to your room.
Obama is solidly pro-choice so what’s the problem?
He lacks a certain something. Some would call it a Vajayjay.
But Teddy doesn’t have one either. Now I’m confused.
Sigh…I liked Obama better when his slogan was “Hope for Change” and not “Stop Being So Mean!”
I’ve seen Obama people all over the blogosphere (and heard on the phone two nights ago) parroting any Free Republic attack they can about the Clinton years. There was a time when eight years of peace and prosperity was something to be proud of, not something that needed changing.