Hot Air poll!

Which woman would you like to see age in the White House:

1) Hillary Clinton
2) Michelle Obama

Rogue on January 20, 2009 at 6:05 PM

It’s not even close. I’m a lifelong Hillary Haytah and would have taken her over McCain, ffs. I wouldn’t vote for Michelle to shine my shoes.

Go ahead, didn’t know she was living in NY tho.

reshas1 on January 20, 2009 at 6:34 PM

That requirement doesn’t apply to well-known liberals seeking to represent the great state of NY.

I say get rid of Schumer somehow and put both Princess Caroline and The First Lady in there. Let’s go all out.

You know who I should appoint to the Senate? Michelle Obama

Let’s see, liars, murderers, Klan members, various assorted dumbbells, she would fit right in…

I mean, if Caligula can put his horse in the Senate, why not Obama his Michelle?

Hot Air poll!

Which woman would you like to see age in the White House:

1) Hillary Clinton
2) Michelle Obama

Rogue on January 20, 2009 at 6:05 PM

What’s the quote in the 1st Spiderman? Something about some psychopath coming along and giving you two insane options to pick from.

- The Cat

1) Hillary Clinton
2) Michelle Obama

Rogue on January 20, 2009 at 6:05 PM

Neither one. Sarah Palin would be my choice.

George W. Bush, meanwhile, is slinking back to Texas with such low ratings that we forget that he made his own run at Presidential greatness. That ambition became apparent after the 9/11 attacks, when Bush adeptly, if briefly, harnessed the hunger for leadership that always follows a major crisis. In those days, incredible as it may seem now, Bush was often compared to Lincoln.

Obviously, Nicholas Lemann is not a historian. If you want the full impression of how Lincoln was reviled by his opponents, you get such snippets as this:

Resolved, That this convention does explicitly declare, as the sense of the American people, that after four years of failure to restore the Union by the experiment of war, during which, under the pretense of a military necessity of war-power higher than the Constitution, the Constitution itself has been disregarded in every part, and public liberty and private right alike trodden down, and the material prosperity of the country essentially impaired, justice, humanity, liberty, and the public welfare demand that immediate efforts be made for a cessation of hostilities, with a view of an ultimate convention of the States, or other peaceable means, to the end that, at the earliest practicable moment, peace may be restored on the basis of the Federal Union of the States.

That’s from the Democratic Party Platform of 1864. Seems like it was just written yesterday, doesn’t it?

As for Lincoln’s reputation, there is this interesting letter of August 22, 1864 to him from Henry Raymond (publisher of the New York Times and Chairman of the Republican Party’s Executive Committee):

I feel compelled to drop you a line concerning the political condition of the country as it strikes me. I am in active correspondence with your staunchest friends in every state and from them all I hear but one report. The tide is setting strongly against us. Hon. E. B. Washburne writes that were an election to be held now in Illinois we should be beaten. Mr. Cameron writes that Pennsylvania is against us. Gov. Morton writes that nothing but the most strenuous efforts can carry Indiana. This state [New York], according to the best information I can get, would go 50,000 against us to-morrow. And so of the rest. Nothing but the most resolute and decided action on the part of the government and its friends, can save the country from falling into hostile hands.

Lincoln’s reputation was in the tank, the population was tired of war, and a large number of influential newspaper publishers were united against him. Only a few union victories just prior to the election saved Lincoln from defeat. He luckily won the election 55%-45% (margin == 5%) to defeat the Democratic candidate “little Mac” George McClellan.

He’s joking, of course, but acclimate yourself to the idea now….

Coming from you, the journalistic imperative is tolerable, but distracting still. Something like “But you may want to consider acclimating yourself to the idea now” wouldn’t have raised my blood pressure.

Let’s try a simple case: “Bite me, Keith Olbermann.” Doesn’t that seem a little rude? But if, instead, one says, “You may want to consider biting me, Keith Olbermann,” it seems much more polite.

Heh.

Nooooooooooooooo. Day One.
And we’re already being terrorized.

Trust in Obama
All your worries gone forever
Bush goes to jail now

Barack is dreamy
Sorry Iraq we leave soon
Bush goes to jail now

http://ace.mu.nu/archives/281415.php

Neh, he doesn’t really look like the guy on the dollar bill.

Tzetzes on January 20, 2009 at 7:04 PM

I don’t know…plopped at a celebutard party with coke stuck to him…just like a bill.

Allah…I only have so much Aleve Pepto.

MadisonConservative on January 20, 2009 at 6:14 PM

FIFY.

And then, in 2020, Michelle vs. Palin!

Can’t be. Palin won’t be allowed a 3rd term. :)

As careless as he was, Rush was likely right. Women are judged more harshly as they age.

Esthier on January 20, 2009 at 6:16 PM

The truth is never careless…

I thought the options were going to be “women”. OH! Alright, if I have to pick, option (1) but d@mn you and Jimmy Carter for making me choose her side today. As Granpappy would say, Michelle looks like she fought an ugly stick and lost.

LastRick on January 20, 2009 at 6:31 PM

sorry, but life’s a b&$%^ and so are they….

…the new George Washington…

Neh, he doesn’t really look like the guy on the dollar bill.

It’s the fall of the Roman Empire. So who’s Nero?