John Thornton wrote:
>
>
> >
> > Swing and a miss. Strike one.
>
> Actually the onus is on anyone who wishes to posit that Obama has a
> different relationship to money and the moneyed class than other
> politicians to offer evidence to demonstrate this is so. Not the other
> way around.
> Fumble is perhaps the proper sports analogy now?
The legitimacy of the DP is religious dogma with Max; hence it is a priori the case that _some_ (realistic) candidate embodies that dogma. No one could seriously claim any longer that the Clinton Administration (NAFTA, TANF, etc) was such an embodiment. Hence it is devinely revealed that Obama does.
One cannot argue with revealed truth.
Carrol