Larry Johnson is among the more rabid anti-Obama/pro-Clinton bloggers out there. But his spin — and it is spin — on last night’s primaries is both silly and insulting at the same time.
Okay. Then if he is the candidate of change fighting Washington, why did a majority of the Washington, DC and the government employees in the surrounding suburbs and those pesky lobbyists and their spouses and employees, vote for Barack? You see, I believe that people act in their own interest. So, when the folks who live inside the beltway, vote in large measure for Barack, then maybe he is not what he claims to be.
You got that? Voters in MD, DC, and VA don’t count. Why? Because many of them work for the federal government. Because employees of our government apparently don’t have worthy opinions, at least when they don’t vote for Hillary Clinton. And this somehow makes Obama the “establishment” candidate.
Who was the inevitable candidate supported by the party bigwigs for almost a year again? In order to narrow it down, I’ll give you a clue: it’s not a man.
Oliver, help me. I am a little slow today on cold medicines. Just where the heck did his candidate live for eight years? I believe at the midpoint of the rough circle/oval that makes the Beltway. And she is running to … move back in. Right?
Someone needs to give Larry the stooge a map. The vast majority of the DC metro area, let alone the states of Virginia and Maryland, lies outside the Beltway. What a way to show massive disrespect to his own party – he is a Democrat, right? But more generally, Obama won in 10 out of 11 Virginia Congressional districts and probably 6 out of 8 Maryland districts or more.
What a moron – or liar?
Yea, and you know that Larry Johnson is right and stuff because Hillary NEVER did business with lobbyists. Disregarding how foolish Johnson’s premise is, I would think it is a good thing to have the support of Federal employees. Maybe they feel they will have the resources to do their jobs finally. And they will, because Obama won’t shovel billions into the crony’s of Bush loyalists.
Again, I have to say, get a grip people. Johnson’s premise (whether one wants to believe it or not) is that Barack isn’t the candidate of change that he (and the media) portray him to be. Nothing in the article even remotely suggests that he believes that the votes of the D.C. democrats don’t count or are somehow tainted or that Hillery never did business with lobbyists. Or even that Obama is a bad man because he’s not what the media portrays him to be. It’s a point, encapsulated by this line: “Yeah, Obama is Mr. Anti-Washington. He is surrounded by Tom Daschle, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and Patrick Leahy. If you believe that those guys represent ‘changing the way business is done in Washington,’ then you will believe anything.” The appropriate response to this would be to point out how he’s wrong, not gnash one’s teeth and scream and then proceed to misrepresent what he says. Get a grip!
So according to Larry Johnson’s logic, that would make McCain the actual “candidate of change”, since we all know Maryland, DC, and Northern VA will vote blue in November.
Oliver, you would do me a favor if you would name ODS as anything different than ODS.
I agree there have been a lot of ridiculous, over the top attacks on Obama, and there have also been a lot on Clinton as well.
And I understand where you are coming from, and my only issue is that for the past 8 years I have been lambasted as suffering from BDS on almost everyday.
I truly want to believe that us Democrats are different from the Republicans, and seeing how both D sides are reacting to the other sides candidates has made me really depressed.
As I’ve mentioned on Brad DeLong’s blog, I am not particularly happy with either of them. Both have had a year or more of national attention and how did they lead the party? By never once taking a real leadership position in the Senate and standing up for the people.
I will eagerly vote for whomever is on the ballot in November, but I think neither candidate is the leader we actually need.
So please, consider calling ODS anything other than ODS.
Thanks,
Jerry