Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

Lamont endorses Obama plus some debate talk
Posted by: McQ on Thursday, January 10, 2008

Greg Sargeant is excited:
On the same day that Barack Obama scored the endorsement of John Kerry, he's set to get the support of a decidedly non-establishment Democrat: Ned Lamont.
I say, "who cares" - which was about the same reaction I had when I heard John Kerry had endorsed him.

BTW, I'm watching the Republican debate. Fred's going after Huckabee. Ron Paul denounced the truthers and then has been denounced by all the other candidates for his foreign policy pronouncements.

And McCain is now claiming he's the agent of change.


Rudy had the best line: "Sure the Democrats want change. They want the change out of your pocket".

Frank Luntz's focus group said Fred Thompson won. It was, by far, his best debate.
Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

You’re watching the debates?

Do you hate yourself?
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
Thompson looked good. The little fox debate group of south carolina people said pretty overwhelmingly that he won.

Paul had some good points at times, but he just looked ridiculous on the question about Iran. The whole place was literally laughing at him.
Written By: ChrisB
URL: http://
(alternate universe thought)

I’d love to see a Ron Paul nomination - I’d love to see all those heads explode when they realize his anti-this-and-that stance isn’t just anti-Bush...

Especially Sully’s.
Written By: bains
URL: http://
Of cource it isn’t just anti-bush...

It’s also anti-reality.

I have to wonder some times if he actually believes what comes out of his mouth, or if he’s just stoned out of his mind...
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
or if he’s just stoned out of his mind...
Having been stoned many times before, I’d discount that possibility.
Written By: bains
URL: http://
Having been stoned many times before, I’d discount that possibility.
Why? Does he not make enough sense? Is he too disconnected from reality?
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://
I’m not shocked about Kerry’s choice. The Clinton’s support for Kerry in ’04 always seemed next to non-existent. Bill was more relevant then as well but didn’t help the Democratic cause much.

Of course a Kerry win in ’04 would have meant a Kerry run in ’08, pushing Hillary to ’12. It also would have positioned Edwards in ’12 whether Kerry won in ’08 or not. So basically Billary was praying for a Kerry loss in ’04.
Written By: jpm100
URL: http://
I say, "who cares" - which was about the same reaction I had when I heard John Kerry had endorsed him.
Well, that was my first reaction, too. But I got to thinking about it and came to two conclusions:

1: Obama cares. It’s an open question, far as I can see, if John Kerry’s endorsement carries a positive or negative weight for the endorsed.

2: Perhaps more importantly, John Edwards cares. This isnt quite so much about whom Kerry endorsed as whom he didn’t. His former running mate would seem to have been a logical choice, were Kerry’s choice anything but a cynical attempt at triangualtion. Kerry’s not endorsing Edwards also seems to me both a damnation of Edwards as a prospective President, and a bit of revenege for what Kerry obviously feels was a major reason for his not winning in 04; Edwards being on the ticket.

Written By: Bithead
When in reality it was because Kerry was on the ticket.

So close, but yet so far...
Written By: Scott Jacobs
URL: http://

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks