Here's what I learned today about Ted Kennedy's endorsement of Obama

(Edit: if you don't make an effort to read to the end of the post and understand what's actually being discussed, you should prepare to be taunted mercilessly. Just ask Impeachment Monkey.)

1. Teddy is one of the most divisive figures in politics as demonstrated by his 1980 primary run against Jimmy Carter that single-handedly resulted in the Republican takeover of the federal government.

2. Teddy's real motivation for endorsing Obama is a long-simmering vendetta against Bill Clinton for Welfare Reform. It has nothing to do with Obama being an agent of change. It ESPECIALLY has nothing to do with any perceived similarities between Obama and certain alleged relatives of Senator Kennedy.

3. We need to think long and hard about taking a chance on someone as inexperienced as Barack Obama. ESPECIALLY when we could choose such a tested, experienced leader like Hillary Clinton.


How do I know this? Because both Stephanie Miller and David Bender (and, I'm sure, quite a few others) received almost identical, well-rehearsed phone calls -- one from a white woman and another from a black man -- that repeated these points word-for-word.

I'm so glad that Hillary has decided to provide such a useful service to radio listeners. Otherwise, we might be stupid enough to vote for someone besides her. :crazy:



(Any bets on how many people won't read to the end and start flaming me for points 1 & 2?)

that's a rather odd way to refer to JFK and RFK.

did you forget to paste in the :sarcasm: advisory?

Try reading the last line of the OP.

and apparently a Kennedy-hater too boot.

How sad.

I watched Ted Kennedy's endorsement speech and learned that Obama's father from Kenya was sponsored by the Kennedy Foundation to
attend college in the USA, where he met Obama's mother.

The family ties are deep... much deeper and more compelling than your cheap attempt to smear Obama and the Kennedys with your OP.

Try actually reading the OP. Or better yet, read the responses from Big Blue Marble or gately. They may be willing to lend you a clue.

And oh yes, I'm really a Billary supporter. Check out my avatar -- does that look like Bill or Hillary? :rofl:

But that does nothing to improve the tacky nature of your OP. sorry.

Hint: you're not gaining any points for Edwards with this kind of vitriol against the Kennedys and Obama.

Okay, it's too painful to watch you dig yourself in any further, so here goes: The post is NOT anti-Kennedy or anti-Obama. Really.

Not enough of a hint?

The post is about two phone calls I heard today while listening to different call-in shows at different times of the day. It shows that the Clinton campaign is desperately calling into these shows and reading off nasty talking points.

Get it now? Seriously, I'm typing as slowly as I can.

by your cheap shots. Welcome to my ignore list. .. my first one actually .. ever.

Could some kind soul PM and explain it to him? Use small words...

while pointing out that fact... never once considering that just maybe the OP was poorly written and a bit confusing.

PS: I took you back off my ignore list after taking a few deep breaths... just so you know.

:P

And yes, I was kind of a dick to you. Sorry.

sorry right back at you, for flying off the handle a bit myself.

I especially like how the body of the message still makes sense, but in a totally different direction. ;)

Grow up already.

:rofl:

:sigh:

Yes, you predicted that people wouldn't read the whole post. But do they really deserve to be called dumbasses and idiots? Seems overboard to me. But maybe I'm a dumbass idiot, too.

Really read the whole post, okay? The poster is making a point that the calls were reading campaign talking points.

place has become.

DU is nothing if not predictable. :eyes:

Will it ever end? Only time can tell.

(Strangely, the body of the message is still appropriate)

here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4283859&mesg_id=4283977

If you really read the post, you'll see that. Is it flame bait? Not to me.

and I set the record straight. When I make a wrong call, I'm not ashamed to make it right.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4283859&mesg_id=4283977

But the OP was a vitriolic attack on both the Kennedy's and Obama, as well as the deep ties between their two
families .. definitely flamebait in my book.

:eyes:

:rofl:

Seriously, was the tone of the post THAT hard to understand? Most other people got it.

Good grief... Is our children learning. :sarcasm:

Very interesting. What a disgusting way to try to win an election.

Isn't that the way Repukes spread their nasty little talking points?

You almost couldn't tell he was reading his points. But the giveaway came in the first sentence when he insisted that David let him get all his points out before replying.

The long-simmering vendetta is inane. Whoever is responsible for these calls could have come up with something better. More juicy, to get media coverage.

AND, if it is a campaign attack -- even from the repugs who we're constantly told WANT Hillary as the nom, I hope it's investigated.

David was filling in for Rachel Maddow. I'm listening to the podcast now and the call comes in at the bottom of the second hour. I don't remember when Stephanie's caller chimed in, but it was so obvious that Steph cut her off and ragged on her for reading off talking points.

They are going to pay a price for this. They really are.

"Exactly how stupid is the American electorate?"

Honestly, I'm a bit scared of the answer.

Ergo... I made to the end of the OP and avoided poo-flinging debris from attaching to my face.

Thanks for the heads-up K & R

some bs anonymous phone calls most likely starting with, "Did you know Barack Hussein Obama...'

OK, I'll edit the post to make it clearer. Never bet against the cluelessness of some DUers...

If that is all you need to make a decision then I can't wait to hear how you vote in the general election.

Much like many of the "spontaneous" posts here on DU. Don't you see when you're being played?

simply because they have been coming in for weeks.

Irony is truly dead.

On the other hand looking at the number of people who agree with you is enough to justify my LOL to your logic.

Luckily, it's looking like I won't have to.

see your avatar and not read to the end. As soon as I saw the avatar I knew there was more to this than the first couple of points. Then again I'm also for Edwards so maybe us Edward's people are more inquisitive and less knee-jerk.

Edit: added one word

Here's to the inquisitive ones. :toast:

Looks like there's only about 17% of us. ;)

endorsments don't mean shit. Not to political junkies because they know how to think for themselves. And not for anyone else because they aren't paying attention.

Seriously, read it again.

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

:rofl:

I don't think endorsements help -- they only hurt. They have no positive effect except for those looking for a reason to justify voting against a candidate. And for good reason. They provide red meat to the opposition, and nothing for the campaign seeking the endorsement.

There are in fact people out there that do posit these sorts of theories. After living in Oklahoma for three years I learned this.

However, I don't think Hillary Clinton is behind this, and I also don't believe in dehumanizing her either by making baseless accusations against her or any other Democrat. I don't see where you got the notion that Hillary Clinton is behind a couple of nitwits calling -- they could have done it themselves or they could be part of a group. I seriously doubt that calling radio shows that most people don't even know about is on the agenda... Good grief.

Maybe people here should focus on attacking the Republicans for a change rather than a circular fricking firing squad against members of our own party. It's really quite sickening and immature.

This is the first time I was able to catch them red-handed, with identical phone calls to two different shows on the same day. There have been far too many well-rehearsed, bullet-pointed anti-Obama calls to progressive shows in the past month. There's your "circular fricking firing squad".

Contrary to what some DUers may believe most Americans don't listen to or even know people like Randi Rhodes, Stephanie Miller, etc... Therefore, how would the Hillary Clinton campaign stand to gain from getting people to call into shows that a small percentage of the population listens to? I will submit that it is far more likely that there are over-zealous supporters who may be doing what you alleging the Clinton camp itself to have done, but I reject the very premise that Hillary Clinton's campaign is behind it because it is nothing more than baseless supposition without even the slightest backing of FACTS. I am swayed by facts -- not emotion. That's why I support Edwards -- not Clinton, not Obama.

I'm not usually a :tinfoilhat: person, but my intuition is screaming on this one. It's a tough one to prove since you'd have to sift through hours of call-in shows, but there are just too many polished, well-rehearsed, pro-Hillary calls coming in for it to be chance.

Here's my experience, subjective though it may be: All of these shows get calls for all three top candidates (and a few for Dennis and a couple for Ron Paul). The Obama and Edwards supporters are almost always typical radio callers -- nervous, fumbling, etc. Many of the Hillary callers are that way as well.

But every day or two, there's a caller that makes it through with a polished, efficient set of points that have definitely been written out and rehearsed. They get on the air and rattle off their schtick. As soon as they're challenged, they either hang up or fall off script and revert to typical radio call-in folks. These are ALWAYS pro-Hillary calls.

I'm open to the possibility that I may be seeing a pattern where none exists. The calls I heard today were just too similar to let go without comment.

However, I just don't think that there would be enough benefit derived from doing so to have the Clinton campaign involved in such happenings. I myself cannot go on gut-feelings or instinct, and I have a habitual distrust for such things given the fact that it's something that President Bush tends to rely upon in his decision-making. (And we all see just where that has got us.)

If there is an organization/group of folks out there coordinating calls on behalf of a candidate that they support, then more power to them. Politics is after all about persuading people to believe in a certain point of view or to go along with a certain platform. For that matter, it could simply be that you're seeing a pattern where none exists, for how often have we heard that such behavior is an innate part of human nature? That is, to look for patterns...

I commend you for bringing this up, and though I disagree with the degree of your certainty expressed in the original post, it's a good thing to come on a forum to discuss issues like this. However, I wish that it could be done without belittling people or fellow Democrats. Nonetheless, you made a succinct point by stating from the start that many would not finish reading the post before they attacked. Definitely a happy little social experiment... Kudos to you on that. ;)

Part of my suspicion comes from my work on Jerry Brown's campaign in 92. I saw the Clintons up close in their first national campaign and they left absolutely NOTHING to chance. There was no detail to small for them.

I love and respect Jerry but he's not the most detail-oriented campaigner. He ended up getting crushed by them -- not because his message wasn't resonating, but because he just got overwhelmed by the Clinton attack machine.

:o

you have an odd way of going about it. :eyes:

Failing that, I may have to break out the editing software tomorrow and create some clips for y'all, We'll see...

Because then maybe some reality will set in for some. To villainize Hillary Clinton on the lines of George W. Bush and company is beyond the pale. I'll tell you this -- I would stomp and support any of the fine Democrats running for office against the snake-oil salesmen that the Republicans are putting up -- any day in every way. I'm not going to put down fellow Democrats who have the courage to run for office and take on the Republican machine to fix America. That's a hell of a lot more than Republicans have planned -- that's for dammed sure.

Carter didn't have enough money to run his own campaign, but had to pay of Teddy Kennedys campaign debts, I get what you are saying, Kennedy or Kerry endorsment of Obama means nothing. I thought I blocked Kerry emails, however here comes one from Kennedy through Kerry's email, I did the same with Kennedy's I uns. it.

Ted Kennedy had an adulterous affair with a young woman, was driving her home drunk, ran off a bridge.....

left her to sink and drown.....

don't think he even notified the police til the next day

that's Ted for you

I'm going to support any of the Democratic candidates. I just hope the votes are counted.

My retired neighbors and many local "snowbirds" don't like Kennedy. Between his endorsement and the possible Rezko scandal, they won't take a chance. Even progressives are "conservative" (old) progressives.

Hate for Hillary go to make a statement like this?