Who's Using Republican Playbook? (UPDATE 2: BO ATTACKS)

UPDATE:

I normally put these updates at the bottom when I update but I think this needs to go front and center guys. This diary started out as a light-hearted attempt to show just how full of BS Obama is in claiming he's taking the high road in this campaign. Well no more. After the developments of this afternoon I'm pissed as hell over this garbage and I need to vent in a more prominent spot in my post.

In my first update below we hear of two new attack ads that Obama's camp have just started running against Hillary in Pennsylvania. This clears up the reasons for his manufactured outrage over Hillary's alleged negative campaigning. He knew he was about to launch the very kind of Republican attacks he suddenly claimed Hillary's been engaged in. If this isn't Rovian, Chicago smack-down politics as usual I don't know what the hell is.

Then we hear about another attacks by Camp Obama in a press call today. Take a look at this quote:

General Walter Stewart:

"One of the inherent duties of the president of the United States is to lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier on Memorial Day. Now we can assume, and let's keep in mind that Senator Clinton has said she was under sniper fire, or she joked about, which to me was the cruelest part of all this, she joked about it with Jay Leno. We can make an assumption here that the honored dead within the Tomb of the Unknown was killed by a sniper. Imagine the lack of moral authority she has now to lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier on Memorial Day. I'll say this as a Vietnam veteran, hundreds, we can speculate about how the unknown died. But you go over to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall and will certainty there are hundreds on that wall that died under sniper fire. That's the incident I think in a nutshell."

"So, let's look at moral authority as the essential element of leadership. President George Bush, Sen. Clinton, Sen. McCain have squandered the moral authority of the United States of America and our ability to lead the free peoples of the world and the oppressed peoples of the world towards freedom."

SO my question this afternoon to you is two-fold...

What do you think the reaction would be if this load of bull had come from Hillary's campaign?

Especially if she'd just claimed days before in a debate that she and her campaign were not pushing this story to the press and the media?

THey're clearly pushing this story guys - and in a most low-down and negative way imaginable. For them to claim they're above it all is beyond laughable and should be called out at every opportunity.

Ok now back to your regularly scheduled light-hearted post...

Hillary's been accused of using the "Republican attack playbook" in her campaign to win the Democratic nomination, and as I've pointed out several times in the past, that's just not the case.  It's another fabrication of her opponents and detractors that's been picked up by the press and media for general consumption.  

But I've got news for you gang - someone is using that playbook and I gave you a bit of background on that in last night's post (She Didn't Ask the Questions and He Couldn't Answer Them).  It's loaded with examples of how downright nasty Camp Obama's gotten in this campaign when it comes to Hillary.

Soo... it's pop quiz time.  I gave you some of the answers in the above write-up so no cheating ok?  I want to see how well you were paying attention.  Here's what the campaign just posted up on their blog.  Check it out...

Take the Quiz: Who's Using the Republican Attack Playbook?
by Peter Daou4/19/2008 1:02:40 PM

One of the enduring myths of the Democratic primary campaign is that Hillary has been "throwing the kitchen sink" at Senator Obama while he runs a hopeful, unifying campaign. As I wrote in a blog post recently, the reality is that Sen. Obama and his top officials have been throwing the sink, the stove, the plates and the garbage can at Hillary.

Whether you've been following this race closely or you just tuned in, see if you can figure out who's been using the Republican attack playbook.

Take the quiz:

www.hillaryclinton.com/quiz

Ok I'll give you another leg up in this quiz - here are the questions so you can study up:

Who said Hillary Clinton is "literally willing to do anything to win"

Who said Hillary Clinton is attempting to "deceive the American people"

Who claimed Hillary Clinton has a secret 20-year plan to become president

Who said Hillary Clinton is "making the run for the best actress nomination"

Who called Hillary Clinton a calculating, poll-tested, divisive figure

Who called Hillary Clinton "one of the most secretive politicians in America"

Who said Hillary Clinton's campaign is "playing politics with war"

Who said John McCain is seen as more honest and trustworthy than Hillary Clinton

Who called Hillary Clinton dishonest

Who said Hillary Clinton is "overbearing and scary"

Who referred to Hillary Clinton as "a monster"

Who said Hillary Clinton is "not being straight with the American people"

Who said of Hillary, "The American people are not going to elect a president that they do not trust"

Who claimed Hillary Clinton "consistently" and "deliberately" misleads the American people

Obama's got most of the press and media working with him in an effort to spread the lies and misinformation when it comes to Hillary, so it's up to us to help her set the record straight you guys.  Sites like MyDD and the diaries we post help - and so do fun quizes like this.

So go take the quiz and see how you do ok?  And then report back here and let us know how many you got right out of those 14 questions.  Let's see who scores the best ;o)

U P D A T E

BREAKING: Someone posted info at MSNBC on two new ATTACK ADS by Camp Obama. These ads will run in PA now through Tuesday's primary. I won't embed them here but you can see for yourself just how above it all Mr. Hope & Change is in all this.

Ad 1

Ad 2

NOW I understand just where all this manurfactured outrage is coming from out of Camp Obama guys. They knew they were going to go negative on us with these ads, so they had to fabricate some excuse in the lead up to the airing of these bullshit ads. This isn't Hope and Change - this is more of the same from a hypocrite (yeah hypocrite) of the lowest order.

Don't let them get away with this guys! Tell Camp Obama that this sort of dirty politics will not stand. He can't trump up charges of dirty campaigning against Hillary and then pull this kind of shit.

Send Hillary whatever you can to help her buy ad time to counter this garbage.

HELP HILLARY TO VICTORY IN PA - CONTRIBUTE NOW!

UPDATE 2

I was just on a press conference call and someone asked about something said during a call by Camp Obama a little while earlier. Guys you can almost SMELL the desperation coming outta that camp. Check out what one of his followers had to say about Hillary during that call...

General Walter Stewart: "One of the inherent duties of the president of the United States is to lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier on Memorial Day. Now we can assume, and let's keep in mind that Senator Clinton has said she was under sniper fire, or she joked about, which to me was the cruelest part of all this, she joked about it with Jay Leno. We can make an assumption here that the honored dead within the Tomb of the Unknown was killed by a sniper. Imagine the lack of moral authority she has now to lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier on Memorial Day. I'll say this as a Vietnam veteran, hundreds, we can speculate about how the unknown died. But you go over to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall and will certainty there are hundreds on that wall that died under sniper fire. That's the incident I think in a nutshell."

- Obama Campaign Conference Call, 4/19/08

Wow - unfreaking-real. These guys are really stretching folks. And I'm sorry but there is no way in hell someone can shovel that kind of bullshit and still claim they're taking the high road in this campaign.

Let camp Obama know what you think of this garbage. Of the manufactured outrage over something they claim Hillary's doing but that they're clearly engaged in up to their eyeballs. Let them know you won't sit still while Obama and his henchmen are saying this kind of garbage about a woman who serves on the Armed Services Committee - who's gone to bat for our troops more times than I'd say that jerk of a general ever has - and who'll do right by our troops once she's in the Oval Office.

Guys there's a reason Hillary's got over 35 retired flag and general officers in her corner. And there's a reason why Obama's got guys like McPeak and Stewart in his.

HELP HILLARY TO VICTORY IN PA - CONTRIBUTE NOW!



Display:


SO - How'd You Do? (1.86 / 23)

Sound off! ;o)


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 02:51:25 PM EST

Re: SO - How'd You Do? (1.66 / 6)

too little too late . . . she wouldn't have been in this mess if she had fired Neo-Con Mark Penn in January. Her loyalty is admirable, but we need a fighter that will not be surrounded by yes-men/women.


NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!
by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 02:53:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: SO - How'd You Do? (1.92 / 13)

Take the quiz - let us know how you did.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:04:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: SO - How'd You Do? (1.87 / 8)

I tried to take the quiz, but my anti-spin filter blocked it :o(


NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!
by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:10:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: SO - How'd You Do? (2.00 / 7)

Scared of the facts huh? ;)

Wish I could set up a spam filter here.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:04:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

saddle up and stop whining (1.33 / 3)

If Hillary can't take a tough campaign, she should drop out.


by OhPlease on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:54:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

whining (2.00 / 4)

is boo hoo, fact checks are fun.  It's always a good time to out the truth. Maybe it's a girl thing?  


just say it: Medicare for All
by anna shane on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:43:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

no, it's whining (none / 0)


by OhPlease on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 11:06:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: SO - How'd You Do? (2.00 / 2)

Spin filter?  How then would you post?


I'm as strong as a bull moose, and you can use me to the limit. - Teddy Roosevelt
by fogiv on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:52:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: SO - How'd You Do? (none / 0)

I got only 11 out of 14---I guessed Obama and his surrogates/campaign stafff had made all the remarks!  


truthseeker2
by truthseeker2 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:55:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

smart (2.00 / 0)

you played the odds.  


just say it: Medicare for All
by anna shane on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:47:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: SO - How'd You Do? (2.00 / 3)

I looked at the quiz and realized that I agree with a lot of those things. How dare she push the Ayers story? That is such crap. Guilt by association is one of the lowest of the low approaches one can take.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 10:33:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: SO - How'd You Do? (2.00 / 1)

what is this a viral disease that afflicts every blog? It is not guilt by association. How many times can somebody trash these talking points and then it appears in the very same diary about 50 posts below. This is too tiring to respond to this garbage of "guilt by association" in the case of Ayers. Pls go look at my other comment in another thread.

Give the bots their due, they just dont give up on their BS and essentially tire you out by repeating the same lies over and over in every blog possible. I have to believe vast majority of the bots are single and have not much else to do. Or a few hired guns going from blog to blog doing this thing regularly, like they do in DKos.


by pdxarch on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:52:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Military Leaders Know That... (1.50 / 2)

That's why Jack Murtha is out stumping for Hillary Clinton. They're deathly afraid of having Barack Obama as their "Commander-in-chief."

As a veteran, from a military family, I can tell you that Hillary Clinton's support for veterans is second to none. Barack Obama doesn't know the first thing about veterans, and he doesn't give a damn about them, either. This guy doesn't even know to put his hand over his heart during the national anthem?! Give me a break. He's pathetic.

Barack Obama will be surrounded by yes-men who will have to remind him to put his hand over his heart during the national anthem!

http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0, 29307,1662530_1446035,00.html
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-fi nkelstein/2007/10/20/obama-no-hand-heart -pledge-either-will-msm-notice
http://www.pajamasmedia.com/2007/10/obam as_disheartening_behavior.php


"I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell." Harry S Truman
by Tennessean on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:37:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Military Leaders Know That... (none / 0)

Barack Obama doesn't know the first thing about veterans, and he doesn't give a damn about them, either.

WRONG . . . I personally worked with Senator Obama and his friend Major Tammy Duckworth on Veteran Affairs issues in Illinois. You can blabber all you want about your opinion, but I speak from my personal experience.

BTW - I am still waiting for Alegre (de-facto member of the HRC campaign) to apologize for calling General Stewart a jerk.


NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!
by Veteran75 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:16:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

LOVE it. Thanks for posting this. (1.81 / 11)

Any chance they have of exposing him for the fraud he is is a chance they should take.


by LatinoVoter on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:30:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LOVE it. Thanks for posting this. (1.76 / 13)

See update - mr hope & change blah blah blah just started running two negative ads in pa.

We can see now where all that manufactured outrage came from over Hillary's supposed negative campaigning's comeing from.

HYPOCRITE thy name is barack.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:43:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LOVE it. Thanks for posting this. (1.66 / 6)

You got a word wrong there- you said "hypocrite" when you meant to say "President"


Serious question- Is This Snark?
by ragekage on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:11:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LOVE it. Thanks for posting this. (1.88 / 9)

Heh, not if I have anything to do with it.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:12:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Fortunately, you don't. n/t (1.50 / 2)


by bookish on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:21:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If My Posts Don't Have An Impact (1.88 / 9)

Then why do you and your pals lie in wait and pounce every time I fire one of these up?

Doesn't matter? Why bother?

Face it - these and other pro-Hillary posts are making a difference or BO's followers wouldn't have swarmed over here from dKos once we left them to their echo chamber.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:47:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well, if you see an impact (2.00 / 3)

then by all means, point it out to me. Just because we respond to your highly incendiary topics to defend our candidate doesn't mean you're changing anyone's mind. It has to do with setting the record straight.


by bookish on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:17:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well, if you see an impact (2.00 / 1)

pls enlighten us. what record did you set straight here? That Obama and his campaign did not attack hillary on her character from last fall no less. BO himself and his campaign have made plenty of comments starting in 2007 about Hillary saying she is divisive or cannot be trusted or too much baggage, referring to her past and is not likable etc. As I said earlier in another comment somebody with an iota of intelligence has to clue me in as to how these words used by either Obama or his campaign is about the issues/policy/Hillary's record and hence positive campaign and not the old-style politics of character assasination. Here is a challenge for you. Find comments from Hillary's or her campaign impugning Obama's character pre-dating his or his campaign's character assasination of hillary as mentioned above. His campaign kept attacking her character, particularly in the late fall of 2007, (successfully I have to add) and had the chutzpah to claim they were for new style politics and ushering in a new era of pure/positive campaigning. And the bots just gobble up such nonsense with great zeal. [I can understand now why some powerful preachers are as successful as they are in preaching morality, while they do things that have nothing to do with what they preach] I can get you the exact quotes and dates should you pretend not to know team Obama's character assasination. Also dont play dumb interpretation games where somehow anything anyone says about Obama's policy or his inexperience is a character attack. Like the way BO tried to claim that Hillary saying she would have left the church in response to a question directly asking if she would have left the church, is offensive to BO.


by pdxarch on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 04:17:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Yeah, they just swarmed over (2.00 / 4)


by bookish on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:27:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yeah, they just swarmed over (2.00 / 1)

These statistics are not controlled for the average length of each hit.


by dbrown04 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:50:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Based on the mean over time (2.00 / 2)

that's just nitpicking.


by bookish on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:31:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually, its not. (none / 0)

We had a diary along these lines a couple of weeks ago.  It turns out that the average hit on dKos is less than one minute and the average hit on Mydd was on the order of 23 minutes.  That's a big difference.  It probably reflects the way the sites are organized.  Based on my calculations, there is 1.22 minutes spent on Mydd for each one minute spent on dKos.


by dbrown04 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:35:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Actually, its not. (none / 0)

I didn't see the original diary you refer to, but I agree that it probably has a great deal to do with the site architecture. The fact that you have to open a new window for virtually every action probably requires all that extra time. Plus MyDD seems to load worlds slower than DK in general.

Chances are, if the architecture was more user friendly, there might be a bigger constituency here than there currently is.


by bookish on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 08:58:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LOVE it. Thanks for posting this. (2.00 / 2)

There is manufactured outrage on both sides of this and you know that.


"If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your a$$...!" C.J Cregg
by JenKinFLA on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:12:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LOVE it. Thanks for posting this. (2.00 / 6)

Ok give us an example of it from Hillary's side.

Because I can tell you one thing - I'm pissed as hell over this.  He totally set Hillary up with this shit.  Suddenly claims she's gone negative when nothing's changed knowing ALL ALONG he was going to pull this shit.

Maybe you can answer those two questions I posed up top - what do you think would have happened if Hillary had pull these stunts?  

Especially on the heels of claims that she wasn't pushing the bosnia story etc.?

Ambinder doesn't even have this stuff up - Halperin's got it but it's just a report.  NOBODY is calling this jerk on this stuff.  Not one.

But if Hillary'd pulled this it'd be a whole other story and you guys all know it.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:55:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LOVE it. Thanks for posting this. (2.00 / 3)

NOPE!

If Obama did anything as outrageous as this I'd have to rethink my entire position on the man.

The fact that he didn't - and wouldn't - is the point.

I may feel very competitive about Clinton, but the Wright-feeding, pin-questioning, capability-slandering, McCain-promoting - all that I can live with.

But if Obama had done the Tuzla thing, I would sit there with my mouth open and say the same things:

o  He didn't even need to do that. WTF was he thinking?

o  WTF is a future commander-in-chief doing bs-ing a one-upsmanship over his own troops??

If Obama had not been viable - and in the early early days of the campaign he didn't look that way - I would be sitting here as a Clinton supporter this very moment thinking those very things.

-chris


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:12:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LOVE it. Thanks for posting this. (1.33 / 3)

Are you for real?  Which campaign are you watching?  Hillary has to be paying you for this stuff.

How about "McCain is more ready to be president".  "McCain will make a better CIC".  He's an elitist!  First he has to do the spade work.  Farakahn, Hamas.  Shame on you!  Latte sipping, volvo driving... The skies will open...

That's just off the top of my head.


by Kiku on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 11:48:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: LOVE it. Thanks for posting this. (none / 0)

couldn't agree more.   This is enlightening

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NS4BW_8D5 ys


by Cruiser35 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:19:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

12 out of 14 (2.00 / 1)

statements that I thought the campaign said were printed by right wing blog sites and magazines!


by 4justice on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:40:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 12 out of 14 (1.77 / 9)

They came from BO and his henchment.  IF you take a look at my post from last night you'll see backup in the linked info.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:44:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks ,will do. (2.00 / 2)

I think that is even worse!


by 4justice on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:53:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks ,will do. (1.00 / 3)

Ditto!  Ditto, dudes!

Oh, I am such a big fan!!

I can't believe I'm on the radio, can I say hi to my Mom?

I am such a big dittohead, Rush - er - alleged!

:~D


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:01:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 12 out of 14 (2.00 / 0)

Henchment? Sounds scary.


Serious question- Is This Snark?
by ragekage on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:12:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 12 out of 14 (1.75 / 4)

Heh, not as scary as some of you lot.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:55:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: 12 out of 14 (none / 0)

There's no call for that.  At least I and I don't see ragekage insulting you and so you choose to insult him, b/c he makes a different choice than you.  Bad form!


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:49:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

HRC will get about 8 net delegates in PA (2.00 / 1)

That's nothing.

It's not going cut significantly into Obama's lead.


by OhPlease on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:25:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: HRC will get about 8 net delegates in PA (2.00 / 1)

I think 8 is probably the low end.  18 is the high-estimate.

Neither is going to cut into his lead.


by Mostly on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 09:03:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

keep tellign yourself delegates matter (none / 0)

at this point.  You are in for a big disappointment.


For Obama it now becomes: Faith, hope and CHANGE! And the greatest of these is Change!
by TeresaInPa on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 06:45:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

saddle up and stop whining (2.00 / 1)

If Hillary can't take a tough campaign, she should not be running.


by OhPlease on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:53:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Would BO have said this of a male? (1.00 / 1)

...."She's got the kitchen sink flying and the china flying, the buffet is coming at me ... constant distractions, these petty, trivial, slash and burn, back and forth, tit for tat, politics."

China flying?  Buffet coming?  Petty.  Trivial.

Sounds just like a little women throwing a tantrum, doesn't it?  Oh well, she'll get over it.

But I won't!


by CoyoteCreek on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 09:18:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Would BO have said this of a male? (none / 0)

He forgot to mention the lamp.


by Kiku on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 11:52:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Would BO have said this of a male? (none / 0)

and was it the Good China? Oh my! Women are just so emotional - periodically.


by ellend818 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:03:52 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: SO - How'd You Do? (none / 0)

Thanks alegre.


by durendal on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 11:28:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican Attack Playbo (2.00 / 9)

If nothing else comes out of this primary season, it will be the enduring notion that, when it comes to shooting our own selves squarely in the backside, Democrats have raised it to an artform.

Beyond that, I find it sad that Hillary Clinton will likely be starring in advertisements for John McCain if Obama gets the nomination... and vice versa.

No one can snatch defeat from the jaws of victory like Democrats can...!


"If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your a$$...!" C.J Cregg
by JenKinFLA on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 02:55:26 PM EST

What I find said is that he first (1.46 / 15)

viable black presidential candidate went form being the next Kennedy to being the next Ken Starr.

You know Barack wanted to be Republican but he chose to be a "dem" because back here in IL he had no chance of getting a seat in a Republican district.


by LatinoVoter on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:32:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

sad . . . (2.00 / 6)

That just sounded like the kind of smear tactic Alegre is against.


NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!
by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:35:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Its true, though-In San Francisco its the same way (1.00 / 1)

Lots of Republican-esque 'democrats' who wear black (and admire Mussolini?)


public option=not affordable for middle. It cant cover all affordably, google adverse selection for why
by architek on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:59:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What I find said is that he first (2.00 / 2)

Back in Wisconsin, I heard you were a total jerk and clubbed baby seals and left the toliet seat up. What? Sources? No, but it's true! I WAS BACK IN WISCONSIN, I KNOW!!!!11


Serious question- Is This Snark?
by ragekage on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:14:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What I find said is that he first (1.50 / 2)

You know what I find sad... about every word of your post.


"If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your a$$...!" C.J Cregg
by JenKinFLA on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:14:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What I find said is that he first (2.00 / 2)

that's okay....we'll get this ass in the election....He sickens me...


by NHLight on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:26:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yep, those Obama supporters sure are nasty (1.66 / 3)

that's okay....we'll get this ass in the election....He sickens me...

your comment is the definition or Troll Rate Bait - happy to oblige.

And Obama supporters are called out as meanies?

that's okay....we'll get this ass in the election....He sickens me...

Sorry, I just had to see that again...

-chris


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:54:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What I find said is that he first (2.00 / 2)

Ken Starr?  Nah, more like Ken doll.


by Tolstoy on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:12:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You mean like those plastic (1.00 / 2)

dolls that have a lump where they're genitalia is suppose to be?

Yeah, I guess you may have a point with that comparison.


by LatinoVoter on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:31:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

That's called: STRATEGY '12 (2.00 / 1)

Courtesy of Mark Penn (who also happens to be employed by McSame).


by haystax calhoun on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:20:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican (2.00 / 5)

Gee, the substantive portions of your diary are directly copied from Clinton's website.  I wonder what answer I would come up with?

So much for objectivity.


by rfahey22 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 02:55:51 PM EST

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican (1.11 / 18)


NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!
by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:00:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican (2.00 / 6)

Disappointing to see people mojo-rating this slime with its clear implication that the war is Clinton's fault.  Not only does it clearly imply that, but it sensationalizes the implied lie with its graphic depiction of war dead.  This is an awful, awful yellow-journalism cartoon.

Listen, I have no problem with people fairly blaming her for her bad AUMF vote and for not standing up when a statement could've been made, but there was no way in hell she was going to stop that war from happening, whatever way she voted.  She had nothing at all to do with starting that war and this cartoon is an absolute smear job.  Anybody that posted or mojo-rated this cartoon needs to step back a moment and think about the long-term harm that dishonest political discourse does.


by Trickster on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:03:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican (2.00 / 1)

People mojo rate slime all the time here... it just has to be slime that agrees with their predetermined viewpoint....


"If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your a$$...!" C.J Cregg
by JenKinFLA on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:15:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican (2.00 / 2)

I don't think it implies it was her fault, only that she was complicit in it.  And since she never spoke out against it BEFORE it began, isn't that the truth?  After all, the inspections were stopped before the war began when GWB said that they should leave before the bombing began.  That would have been a perfect time for HRC to step out to say that Bush hadn't given inspections enough time and that he shouldn't gone to war.  Yet she said nothing.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:22:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican (2.00 / 3)

I feel 100% certitude that there's nothing she could've done to stop that war.  She could've self-immolated on the Capitol steps . . . the war would've gone on.

Like I say, I'm not trying to get her off the hook from taking justified political damage for lack of courage, but to say she caused those people's deaths and is sitting on a stack of bodies that she impliedly created is just bullshit.

I would love to have seen her show more courage with that vote--and I would particularly have loved to have seen enough Democrats to actually make a difference show courage with that vote.  But George Bush is 100% responsible for starting that war.  And I am confident that part of Senator Clinton's calculation on how to vote on that measure included her knowledge that her vote meant nothing as to the outcome.  There was no way in hell a blocking-sized coalition could've been put together.

If she had been the deciding vote--or even within a vote or two of being deciding--then hell yes, stick her on top of a gory stack of bodies to sensationalize her act.  But she wasn't.  Her vote had no realistic effect.  She didn't cause that war.  she didn't kill those people.  This cartoon is bullshit.


by Trickster on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:03:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican (2.00 / 1)

Trickster, I'm about to blow your mind.

I agree with you.

There was no stopping the war from the moment Bush opened his fat mouth and announced it.

What I would have liked (maybe impossible given the circumstances) would have been for the Dems to focus on how to do it right instead of wasting the opportunity with debating whether it would happen.

That was the honorable out that the Dems should have taken - step up to reality and take responsiblity for the actions of the nation.  The only thing more disappointing than watching the nine-month debate about not doing it was watching the Canadian Parliament argue for weeks about the definition of "not being involved" as people started dying...

Frankly I'm so pissed off with all of Washington for screwing up Afghanistan (the war that had to happen) and then screwing up Iraq (the war that Bush never should have started) that I'd like to fire everyone withing 100 miles of the place.

-cheers!

-chris

PS - you know what, I'm even going to Mojo you (wonders may never cease!)


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:45:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican (2.00 / 1)

Nice post, and you did blow my mind.  Gratz on both.


by Trickster on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:08:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

And may I add (2.00 / 1)

I've never quite looked at it that way--given that the war was going to happen, why not step up to the plate and make sure it was planned properly?

I remember being stuck in traffic between San Francisco and Palo Alto one afternoon listening to a Senate hearing broadcast live on NPR where Colin Powell was getting grilled about planning for the post-war period.  As I heard more and more, it became increasingly obvious that we simply had no plan and Powell was just trying to tap-dance til the clock ran out on the hearing.

That would've been a good time for those senators to "man up" and make some demands.


by Trickster on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:22:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: And may I add (none / 0)

the thing is it was not a 'war vote' really. at the urging of Hans Blix to have a threat of force to make sure SH kept cooperating the AUMF was voted on. It depended on another UN vote but dumbaya just pulled out the inspectors and invaded.
by zerosumgame on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 09:26:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That's not the whole story (2.00 / 2)

You failed to mention her vote against the Levin amendment which would have forced a second vote on Iraq after the UN inspectors had made their assessment, so let's not go casting claims of dishonest about.

I love the argument for Clinton that because she could not stop the war, she was justified in going along with it. That's real leadership.


by bookish on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:29:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's not the whole story (none / 0)

Did I say something about justified?


by Trickster on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:09:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's not the whole story (2.00 / 0)

Yup.  And, she was the only Dem candidate to vote for Iran.

She was the only Democrat to vote against a resolution that tied military funding to progress in Iraq.  It passed in the Senate 80-14.  (She was in the company of 13 Republicans.  Her vote was to the right of 36 other Republicans.)  It passed the House, and it was vetoed by Bush.

She did not read the intelligence.

If people had done their job, if the Congress had read  the intelligence, if they had asked harder questions, if they had voted no, they could have stopped it.


by Kiku on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:13:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican (none / 0)

I agree that she is not uniquely to blame for the war. She is not absolved of all guilt either. She simply carries a piece of the guilt with her.

That said, the point of the cartoon is that since the war has started, the cartoonist believes she has been more concerned with the politics of whether it is better politics to continue supporting the war than being concerned about the human tragedies that have occurred as a result of the war. To summarize it, the cartoonist is blaming her for not standing up and trying to stop the war either before or after the initial vote.

You can debate whether the point the cartoon is making is correct.You can make valid arguments that she is powerless to change the war, or that she is not alone in her position since the war. You can also make a valid arguments that she has consistently hesitated and seems to make her statements only based on the politics of the situation. The cartoonist obviously believes the latter, but you can't say its an inherintly invalid argument


John McCain wants to make abortion illegal
by Lost Thought on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:43:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican (none / 0)

That is a disgusting distortion of the truth!


Zionism is Bullshit
by moonheart on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:38:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican Attack Playbo (2.00 / 8)

On this question: Who said John McCain is seen as more honest and trustworthy than Hillary Clinton

That's really just a statement of fact. In every poll I've seen Senator Clinton is ranked last in honest and trustworthy questions. If there is a poll showing her ranked higher maybe someone can post it.


Proudly joining the legions of people and states that don't matter on May 20th.
by Obama Independent on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:00:55 PM EST

Re: POP Quiz: Who's (2.00 / 5)

repug media atttacks over the years have addded up, you wanna talk whose repeating rethug smears.


by linfar on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:11:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's (2.00 / 4)

It doesn't make it any less a statement of fact. She is seen as less honest and trustworthy and polling bears this out. Now you could argue that this perception is wrong, though the whole Bosnia thing doesn't help. In the end though this points to a failure of campaign strategy. Anybody should have seen this as an electibility problem for her and steps should have been taken to change this perception that people have. When you have to go on a likability tour and tell your supporters that they should say how nice you are you got larger problems.


Proudly joining the legions of people and states that don't matter on May 20th.
by Obama Independent on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:39:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's (2.00 / 0)

If I want to go to a site for "repeating rethug smears," No Quarter is always first om my list.  Recommended diaries here ain't bad either.


by Rumproast on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:09:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's (2.00 / 2)

So, if Obama said the Republicans have been in the White House more in the last 50 years than Democrats, you'd be going "ZOMG RETHUG PLAYBOOK!!!eleventy!", I guess.


Serious question- Is This Snark?
by ragekage on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:16:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's (2.00 / 3)

Well, that's the response you get if you point out that Clinton lost Congress.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:23:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's (1.42 / 7)


Serious question- Is This Snark?
by ragekage on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:35:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican Attack Playbo (2.00 / 3)

Polls = fact?  So I guess Saddam really was behind 9/11, eh?


by Trickster on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:56:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican Attack (2.00 / 2)

Your post makes no sense.  Polls of people's perceptions can be used as factual evidence of their perceptions.  If you were to ask, "Do many people think Saddam was behind 9/11," and then a poll confirmed that, you could use it as evidence that the public was misinformed.


by rfahey22 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:12:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican Attack Playbo (2.00 / 2)

When the statement is subjective yes. Polls bear out that people see her as less honest and trustworthy. Polls also bear out that people thought Saddam was behind 9/11. They would be wrong. People who see Senator Clinton as less honest and trustworthy as Senator McCain could also be wrong. But the statement was about perception and the available evidence validates it.


Proudly joining the legions of people and states that don't matter on May 20th.
by Obama Independent on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:13:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using (2.00 / 7)

Fanfuckingtastic!!!! He has been using repug talking pts, analysis and their playbook from the git-go. I am so glad we are  pushing back on it.


by linfar on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:02:56 PM EST

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using (1.75 / 4)

Linfar . . . I know your YMCA upbringing helped shape you in a good way, and I know that in nine months we will both be on the same team cheering a DEM take the oath of office . . . whether that be Obama or HRC.

I am just glad that we only have about six more weeks of this intra-party battle before we close ranks.


NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!
by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:39:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican Attack Playbo (2.00 / 1)

Who took Obama's greatest strength (his ability to unite people with his words) and turned it into a weakness, just like Rove took Kerry's strength (his military service compared to Bush/Cheney) and turned it into a weakness?


by jdusek on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:03:05 PM EST

WTF? (2.00 / 5)

"A top adviser to Hillary Rodham Clinton's campaign said Wednesday that Democrats should give more thought to Sen. Barack Obama's admissions of illegal drug use before they pick a presidential candidate."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22226198/

Did Alegre forgot who drew first blood?


NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!
by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:06:42 PM EST

Re: WTF? (2.00 / 4)

The Alegre does not forget. Only chooses to overlook.


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:09:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WTF? (2.00 / 3)

You left out the "and was fired immediately" part.


by Trickster on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:57:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WTF? (2.00 / 0)

Ahh. If you fire them, it's okay. Well, hell, why didn't someone tell me those rules before?


Serious question- Is This Snark?
by ragekage on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:17:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WTF? (2.00 / 2)

Resigned actually....


"If you ever post anything on that website again, I will shove a motherboard so far up your a$$...!" C.J Cregg
by JenKinFLA on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:18:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: WTF? (2.00 / 3)

He said he resigned, the campaign said he was fired.  Normally, when your boss says you're fired, it doesn't much matter what you say. . . .


by Trickster on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:23:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican Attack Playbo (1.75 / 4)

So wait, are Clinton supporters actually denying that Clinton is using the Rove playbook?


by Bobby Obama on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:10:26 PM EST

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican Attack Playbo (2.00 / 7)

well, she can't even get hold of a copy. someone named b. obama checked it out from the library and won't return it.


by campskunk on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:13:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican Attack Playbo (2.00 / 3)

She doesn't need a copy, she's got it memorized.


by venician on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:21:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican Attack Playbo (1.00 / 3)

What a ridiculous child you are.


by amiches on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:46:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

In Hillary Bizarro World... (2.00 / 1)

Hillary Camp exemplifies high moral character and Obama is spewing a hate mongering campaign.


by optimusprime on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:17:38 PM EST

Re: In Hillary Bizarro World... (2.00 / 1)

Prove it!


by venician on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:22:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: In Hillary Bizarro World... (2.00 / 1)

You missed the "Bizarro" part.  Me so happy, me want to cry.


by rfahey22 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:57:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I wonder... (2.00 / 4)

Tactic #3: Accuse Your Opponent of What He/She is Going to Accuse You Of

Art Silverblatt, Jane Squier Bruns and Gina Jensen - DECIPHERING KARL ROVE'S PLAYBOOK: CAMPAIGN TACTICS AND RESPONSE STRATEGIES

Who indeed?  I would suggest you should actually read it but it's clear you already have.


by Shaun Appleby on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:24:37 PM EST

If you can't take the heat (2.00 / 4)

then get out of the kitchen.

Stop whining.


overthrow the government~participate
by missliberties on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:27:37 PM EST

Re: If you can't take the heat (2.00 / 2)

The problem is there's no kitchen sink left because they threw it at Obama.


by Rumproast on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:12:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: POP Quiz: Who's Using Republican (1.44 / 9)

just another bullshit alegre diary that will make the rec'd list


by aaaa05 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:30:32 PM EST

The Republican Playbook (none / 0)

is also the Democratic Playbook, they just don't want to take any accountability for it.  This campaign has been relatively clean, but both camps have been guilty of attacks and bickering.  


This administration is not sinking. This administration is soaring! If anything, they are rearranging the deck chairs on the Hindenburg!
by venavena on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:45:58 PM EST

too little, too late for Obama (2.00 / 3)

the adds, I think, are not that effective.  The first, Obama uses not his words, but the words of all the newspapers who endorsed him.  Second, the health care plan ends with "reduces costs more than Hillary's", but does not level with the viewer about his plans.


by 4justice on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:49:46 PM EST

Been a wonk for quite a while (1.66 / 9)

I really feel bad when I see you and Susan spending all of your energy trashing another candidate.  I used to enjoy your work, but you know, I think you have both jumped the shark and are starting to hurt the Democratic party.

You don't have to like Obama, heck, you don't even have to like Clinton.  I thought the whole point of the netroots was to strengthen the Democratic party.

I am dismayed and dispirited by the level of shit throwing from all the hyperpartisans.


accepting McLettuce is like being 9 years old and forced to eat your own cooking
by Sychotic1 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:52:34 PM EST

well (1.40 / 5)

you choose to blame it on two people who you call out?  lol!

I personally like the diarists you mention, and follow their work.  They have been accused of all things, but the point is long before anyone had these questions of Obama, they had them.  They have been systematically harassed by Obama supporters and troll rated for nothing more than having an opinion that happens to be well-sourced.

So stop  the sanctimonious, personality-based attacks, step up to the plate and defend your candidate with substance and without calling anyone names, or, respectfully, step away from the keyboard.


by 4justice on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:58:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: well (2.00 / 2)

I don't have a candidate.  BZZT try again.


accepting McLettuce is like being 9 years old and forced to eat your own cooking
by Sychotic1 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:41:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: well (2.00 / 3)

er, like you just TR'ed Sychotic1?

Lemme see, did you think s/he was  troll because s/he said:

I used to enjoy your work, but you know, I think you have both jumped the shark and are starting to hurt the Democratic party.

or

You don't have to like Obama, heck, you don't even have to like Clinton.  I thought the whole point of the netroots was to strengthen the Democratic party.

?

Others have rated this comment as follows:
Bee 2
Caldonia 1
interestedbystander 2
TxDem08 1
Rumproast 2
chrisblask 2
4justice 1
McTrollop 2

-chrisblask


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:30:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

reported (2.00 / 2)

and dinged for TR abuse.  I don't dig trashing other diarists with personal stories of how you're disappointed with them, and throwing out a bunch of insults.  If you've got something to say, say it, or step away from the keyboard.


by 4justice on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:08:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Well Said (none / 0)

Spot on 4justice.


by durendal on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:50:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Who's Using Republican Playbook? (UPDATE: BO A (2.00 / 5)

This diary commits the grave sin of being BORING.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:57:28 PM EST

so boring, you had to read it (2.00 / 2)

look at the adds, and take the time to comment?


by 4justice on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:03:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: so boring, you had to read it (2.00 / 3)

I saw them before at The Page and other sites as well.

How about all those endorsements for Obama?

And what's wrong with pointing out what a mandate means in the context of no information about the cost of the premium?


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:17:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The Alegre (1.57 / 7)

prop·a·gan·da  [prop-uh-gan-duh]
-noun
1. information, ideas, or rumors deliberately spread widely to help or harm a person, group, movement, institution, nation, etc.

de·lu·sion   [di-loo-zhuhn]
noun

  1. an act or instance of deluding.
  2. the state of being deluded.
  3. a false belief or opinion: delusions of grandeur.
  4. Psychiatry. a fixed false belief that is resistant to reason or confrontation with actual fact: a paranoid delusion.


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:05:40 PM EST

The lizardbox (1.80 / 5)

Kool-aid:

  1. popular drink for children
  2. drink made nefarious by spiking with hallucinogens

Cult

  1. formal religious veneration : worship
  2. a system of religious beliefs and ritual; also : its body of adherents
  3. a religion regarded as unorthodox or spurious; also : its body of adherents
  4. a system for the cure of disease based on dogma set forth by its promulgator <health cults>
5 a: great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book); especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b: the object of such devotion c: a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion


by tarheel74 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:15:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I present to you... (1.00 / 6)

The Cult:

_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:21:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I present to you... (1.50 / 2)

see we do not keep track of individual donors. We are trying to seek legitimacy only a cult does that.


by tarheel74 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:23:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I present to you... (2.00 / 2)

Well, keeping track would obscure the smaller number, that's for sure.


by rfahey22 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:25:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I present to you... (2.00 / 2)

"see we do not keep track..."

"We"? You part of a cult too?

Of course your candidate won't keep count. However, they will run with stupid ideas by asking their donors "where do you want us to spend your money", (i.e., we really ain't going to win this thing, so here, just give us money so we can spend it and pretend like we're still competing)

I know it's hard. I know when the chances are slim there's not much left to do but talk about middle fingers and lapel pins. In any case, here's an interesting read form the Times Sunday paper: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/us/pol itics/20donor.html?_r=1&oref=slogin


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:34:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I present to you... (2.00 / 2)

Actually, the FEC requires that all donors are accounted for.  Any campaign would have to keep track of each donor.

What you really mean here is that the Clinton campaign just isn't sharing that information, which she obviously has.  I'll leave you to guess the reasoning behind that, but it seems obvious to me that it's because she's nowhere near Obama on this.

Or it could be a natural tendency to be secretive...


"Action comes easy; it's the moments just before that are hard." ~Defiance, Ohio~ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65I0HNvTD H4
by ScienceTeacher118 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:55:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The lizardbox (2.00 / 0)

Insanity:

A state in which the thoughts, expressions, and actions are wild, irregular, and incoherent; mental aberration; a roving or wandering of the mind.


by venician on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:34:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The lizardbox (1.00 / 1)

5 a: great devotion to a person, idea, object, movement, or work (as a film or book); especially : such devotion regarded as a literary or intellectual fad b: the object of such devotion c: a usually small group of people characterized by such devotion.

Reading Comprehension:

"Intentional thinking during which meaning is constructed through interactions between the text and the reader."

Apparently, you have not fully developed this skill, b/c if you had you would have noticed that the definition that you posted demonstrates that Obama's campaign is not a cult.

At 1.5 million contributers, millions of volunteers, 14 million voters this is not a cult, it's a MOVEMENT.  Do you think any other political movement has acted differently (except for of course the technology used)?


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:32:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

a shukster or a snake oil salesman (2.00 / 5)

That's what Obama is these days. So instead of coming up with a comprehensive healthcare plan he attacks the superior plan using fear tactics straight out of the Republican play book. Is this the new style of politics? Politics of hope? Obama's campaign reminds me GWB in 2000. All talk and negative attacks based on fear and race-baiting.


by tarheel74 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:11:08 PM EST

Re: a shukster or a snake oil salesman (2.00 / 3)

There's nothing superior about the Clinton plan. It's built on the false pretense of Universal Coverage and not Universal Care. Of course the supporters will chant "Universal, Universal" without knowing what it is they're getting (or being taken by the government from their wages).


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:15:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a shukster or a snake oil salesman (2.00 / 1)

Those promoting the Clinton plan remind me of the saying that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. I think a lot of them actually believe her plan bears resemblance to past Democratic and liberal approaches. They have no idea that it was hatched from libertarian-conservative think tanks.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:19:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a shukster or a snake oil salesman (2.00 / 1)

name the libertarian and conservative think tanks with links. otherwise stop spewing propaganda.


by tarheel74 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:22:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a shukster or a snake oil salesman (2.00 / 4)

I guess you like to parrot things without analysis. I am in the healthcare field and having read both plans the Clinton plan is for universal coverage without which you don't get affordable universal care. Obama tried to sell his has universal care and then being caught in that lie he said it is universal access...well I have newsflash for you, we have universal access now but it is NOT AFFORDABLE.
p.s. lay off that kool-aid
by tarheel74 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:21:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a shukster or a snake oil salesman (2.00 / 2)

Who's parroting without analysis? Go look at how successful the MA plan is. And if you've read both plans, how about you author an original diary comparing the two instead of the old tired talking points you keep on throwing at us.


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:27:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a shukster or a snake oil salesman (2.00 / 3)

now, don't be parroting Obama's criticism of the MA plan.

I live in MA and the REASON why it isn't as good as it should be is because good o' Mitt took out certain things.  Also, ONE state, out of 50 states, cannot affect the HMO's and drug co's - you know that & Obama knows that.  Only when the federal gov't levels the playing field, can we have true collective bargaining.

he is disingenuous when he brings up MA as a comparison.


by colebiancardi on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:38:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a shukster or a snake oil salesman (2.00 / 2)

this is what the Obama campaign does. They have NO POLICIES. None progressive. All they have is platitudes, lies and smears. A campaign high on rhetoric and low on specifics lacking an ideological rudder.


by tarheel74 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:44:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a shukster or a snake oil salesman (2.00 / 3)

anyone who is parroting Republican talking points  is you. Clinton plan does not even resemble the MA plan. It was rather infamously used by the BO campaign to raise the stink and the Kool-aid kids lapped it up (hey everyone wants helathcare without paying for it like Obama's plan promises, except he does not say how he will do it or how that will keep the costs low).
The Clinton plan has a greater role at the government level like the Edwards plan, that is why both Edwardses have been on record to say that the Clinton plan is clearly superior.
by tarheel74 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:41:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a shukster or a snake oil salesman (2.00 / 2)

I'm not repeating republican talking points. I'm just against mandates. I know Clinton cares about healthcare, but she won't get us to the "Universal" bit of it with her mandates.


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:45:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a shukster or a snake oil salesman (2.00 / 3)

which means you are against social security, medicare and medicaid...am I right? these too work on mandates.


by tarheel74 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:48:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a shukster or a snake oil salesman (2.00 / 1)

Not the same. And you speak of social security though it's running perfectly. If anything, we should think twice about mandates because of Social Security.

In any case, my objection to mandates is based on personal experience and is in no way ideological

That said, it's Saturday, and I'm heading downtown for some good tapas.

I enjoyed the back and forth. Good luck. We do it again sometime soon.

cheers


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:52:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a shukster or a snake oil salesman (none / 0)

Well, the way I understand it, if you get 3rd degree burns from setting the American flag on fire, you're covered, but not while in jail.


by haystax calhoun on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:31:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a shukster or a snake oil salesman (2.00 / 3)

nice try but for the intellectually ungifted in jail you do get free health care courtesy of the US government.


by tarheel74 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:37:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a shukster or a snake oil salesman (none / 0)

Sorry about not outing the snark within.
Good to know though, good to know.
by haystax calhoun on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:40:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: a shukster or a snake oil salesman (none / 0)

Oh wait, am I intellectually "ungifted"?  Or are you saying that the jailed, but "gifted", have to pay for their own medicine?  Bummer either way.


by haystax calhoun on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:55:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Alegre... (2.00 / 3)

Nice diary keep up the good work. I don't know how long I'll hang on MyDD to cheer you on though. MODs get up in arms when there's too much anti-obama stuff. I'll either get sick of them or they'll get sick of me, I'm not sure which will come first. It's all good though :D


by soyousay on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:22:16 PM EST

Re: Alegre... (1.00 / 0)

I would say the latter.


by venician on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:47:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Clinton IS Using The Republican Playbook (2.00 / 2)

There's great article by Colbert King in the WaPo today that delves into Hillary's use of the right-wing noise machine and tactics:

Granted, Hillary Clinton has philosophical differences with the putative Republican presidential nominee, John McCain; far-right-wingers Pat Buchanan and Rush Limbaugh; and the conservative talking heads on Fox TV. But they and Clinton have a common enemy: Obama. Their allegiance to the goal of bringing him down makes them compatriots.

To discredit Obama, Clinton plugs McCain's commander-in-chief qualifications.

She and McCain, working from similar talking points, do a tag-team number on Obama, labeling the Democratic Party front-runner "out of touch" and "elitist."

 

Meanwhile, Bill Clinton turns up on Limbaugh's show on the day of the Texas primary (he was interviewed by a guest host) to plug his wife's candidacy to Limbaugh's vast conservative audience. The Clinton-right-wing friendship is one of the most arresting developments of the campaign.

Reminder, young hopefuls: There's no telling what some folks will do to get ahead.

Lesson Two: Resort to McCarthyism.

Discredit your opponent by associating him or her with someone who is strongly disliked or deemed disreputable.

It matters not that your opponent neither shares nor is influenced by that person's ideas or behavior. The association, if presented skillfully and persistently, may be enough to create doubt about the opponent.
Case in point: Link Obama with controversial figures to call into question his fitness for the presidency. Sen. Joe McCarthy did it by impugning the patriotism of innocent Americans. It worked for him -- for a while.


by edmandspath on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:22:46 PM EST

Re: Clinton IS Using The Republican Playbook (2.00 / 3)

and what was Obama doing on Hannity and Colmes when Wright controversy broke? hypocrites.


by tarheel74 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:24:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton IS Using The Republican Playbook (2.00 / 2)

Diffusing a crisis before the Republicans could use it against him - after all, Fox claims to have "broken" the story.  To not go on afterwards would look like he was covering something up.  It was a good strategy.


by rfahey22 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:44:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton IS Using The Republican Playbook (2.00 / 1)

What was Bill Clinton doing on Rush Limbaughs hate radio show.


by venician on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:50:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Clinton IS Using The Republican Playbook (none / 0)

He wasn't actually on the show.  He was on a different show, who's host subbed for Limbaugh and played the interview on Limbaugh's show.


by Kiku on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:37:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Wha'ever. (1.50 / 2)

another hillaryhub C&P job.  Hell, I can write these in my sleep now.  What doofus is going to take a quiz manufactured by the hillaryhub thinktank masterminds, that hasn't already swallowed their twisted logic?  Diarist, please just give us the direct link and spare us the spin-off spin.  

Here, I'll save you the post:
www.hillaryhub.com/


by haystax calhoun on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:28:12 PM EST

Saw HRC using middle finger (2.00 / 2)

... pushing her hair back as she was talking about Obama.

OMG!  Take her out and flog her!  You KNOW she knew exactly what she was doing because HRC is cold and calculating and sleazy!  You KNOW what she was thinking because we'vee ALL been told what's going on in her head for years now!  You KNOW that HRC doesn't make a move without taking a poll and everything is scripted because she is just so non-human!

We KNOW that this is just another part of the kitchen sink.  How long will she go!?

She is appalling and disgusting!

/snark


by Southern Mouth on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:31:00 PM EST

Limbaugh, Scaife, Drudge: Their numbers (2.00 / 1)

are probably in that handbook. You seen any of the candidates using those outlets lately?


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:36:35 PM EST

Re: Limbaugh, Scaife, Drudge: Their numbers (1.66 / 3)

You can't be suggesting that...wait, you wouldn't...ohhh, I see.  You don't think the Clintons would embrace...hey, what are you trying to...oh, geez.  You must be mistaken, I'm sure ;(


by haystax calhoun on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:46:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Who's Using Republican Playbook? (UPDATE: BO A (1.83 / 6)

Wow!  An anti-Obama diary from Alegre.  You just don't see those enough!


McCain = Iraq. John McCain = overturn Roe.
by PantsB on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:40:27 PM EST

Re: Who's Using Republican Playbook? (UPDATE: BO A (2.00 / 4)

wow more dishonest republican campaign ads from Obama. Cannot get away from them.


by tarheel74 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:45:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

republican campaign ads (2.00 / 2)

From the fifth former Clinton Cabinet member to endorse Sen. Barack Obama rather than Sen. Hillary Clinton:

"When millions of Americans are losing their homes and jobs, when the economy is facing its worst crisis in 60 years, when the Iraq war is still causing chaos in the Middle East, to focus on whether Obama should have used the word 'bitter' when he talked about the plight of many in Pennsylvania, and to resurrect the old Republican themes of guns and religion, and to call Obama 'elitist' . . . just put me over the edge."


by haystax calhoun on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:51:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: republican campaign ads (2.00 / 4)

At least Hillary has proposed plans to address all those issues, where are Obama's plans? I am sure Bob Reich would have something to say about them but he does not. He did make some faint efforts about the healthcare plan but Paul Krugman took him to the tool-shed over that.
btw just to let you know I did not expect Bob Reich to endorse Hillary after he was unceremonious sacked from the Clinton adm. and replaced by Rubin.
But still does not address my point....I thought Obama was new politics and politics of hope instead he is using Republican lies to make a negative ad.
by tarheel74 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:55:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: republican campaign ads (none / 0)

you won't find Obama's plans where you're looking.


by haystax calhoun on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:01:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Back up one level (2.00 / 2)

Try an answer other than "I know you are but what am I? >-P"

Are you saying that the person quoted above knows less about the Clinton campaign than you do?

I know you didn't respond to the comment at all, but I'm kind of assuming you are calling her comment unfounded.

Care to provide a basis for your educated opinion?

-chris


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:18:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: republican campaign ads (2.00 / 2)

How can anyone trust your analysis when you don't bother to get the most basic facts right?

Robert Reich was never replaced by Rubin.  He was succeeded by Alexis Herman.

Rubin was Secretary of the Treasury
Reich was Secretary of Labor


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 10:23:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Great diary! love the quiz, Alegre, any (2.00 / 1)

chance on revealing how much has been raised on your HIllraiser link? i'm curious! I donated once on it, i believe


DEMOCRATIC 08!
by rigsoHC on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:11:59 PM EST

Make up your mind, alegre (2.00 / 2)

First, you criticize Obama for not fighting hard enough.

Then, when he fights back, you WHINE.  


by OhPlease on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:19:48 PM EST

This is the thing that really gets me (2.00 / 2)

One of the primary complaints from the Clinton campaign has been that Obama isn't tough enough. He doesn't know how to fight politically. He can't take the political heat. And so on, and so forth.

But then he releases an ad that merely responds to the negative attacks Clinton has launched at him, pointing out that her negative campaigning is not the kind of politics he wants to play... and what's the response from the Clinton supporters? "Oh no! Obama is on the attack!"

Kind of makes you do a double-take, huh?


by Zoey on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:05:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Oh NO you didn't! (2.00 / 4)

Let them know you won't sit still while Obama and his henchmen are saying this kind of garbage about a woman who serves on the Armed Services Committee - who's gone to bat for our troops more times than I'd say that jerk of a general ever has - and who'll do right by our troops once she's in the Oval Office.

YOU ALEGRE just insulted an Honorable General that I am proud to know. You also insulted me with your comment above. Alegre . . . ARE YOU on ACTIVE-DUTY in the Military right now?!

You have some nerve telling ME that the General's words are garbage. I have lost enough of my colleagues to this war, and I some of my fellow soldiers are directly involved with the Tomb of the Unknown. You can wish away her Tuzla-gaffe all you want . . . but do not deny that we were outraged by this.

YES YES YES . . . I think she will also defeat McCain the GE, but you aren't helping her cause.

Most of my Soldiers don't read the progressive blogosphere, so fortunately they won't notice your offense.


NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!
by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:21:02 PM EST

Re: Oh NO you didn't! (2.00 / 1)

Wonder if General Stewart should be directed to this diary?

Alegre is a punk and coward posting comments like that.  Far as I can tell he hasn't posted a single response to his own diary.

So, "Alegre" whoeverthehellyouare, can you reiterate for us all again how many military engagements you have been involved in, how many soldiers you have led in battle, how many life-or-death decisions you have had to make and live with forever?

......

..........

C'mon.  You can do it.  "Zero" is an acceptable answer if it is the truth.

Me?  None.  Just a civilian pansy who would never ever claim or question the valor of Tammi Hetherington, General Stewart, George Bush Sr. (though his son, that's another thing...).

Do you have anything negative to say about the people on this page?

Come on, if you are going to go face-to-face with veterans you are REALLY cool if you do what they do - show their face and their name and be held accountable for their actions.

If not, then everyone here can assume Mr. Deeds was correct:

"As I assumed, he was a coward and a weakling."

Your candidate deserves credit for leading with her face and not hiding behind anonymity.  She accepts that she may be called out and besieged - she's made the point over and over. Aren't you inspired to follow suit?

-chris blask


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:41:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

hmm, KnowVox gave me a Zero for that comment (none / 0)

I've been on a TR rampage for the last few days, so maybe that's just payback?

Or do you have a problem with your cronies being called out when they are attacking soldiers?


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:05:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oh NO you didn't! (2.00 / 1)

Hey Veteran 75

Based on these kinds of statements and arguments, its pretty clear that this situation is bringing up someone's emotional baggage and not a public discussion.

Sorry to all the vets out there. And all the level headed Democrats who are pretty balanced in their thinking.  Disrespect to the military is not to be tolerated.


by URKnot on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:42:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Seconded (2.00 / 1)

Vet75, you would have my undying gratitude even if I disagreed with you (and sometimes I do.. ;~).

I have absolutely no idea what it would be like to have the kinds of responsibilities and risks you have taken.

You and your comrades can ask anything of me and its yours.

-best

-chris


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:56:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oh NO you didn't! (2.00 / 3)

Vet75-- my cousin is a combat vet and so was a long ago fiance who came home minus half a leg. Neither one of them would stoop to use their service to beat up on someone with whom they disagreed. you have a right to your opinion, but not to use the uniform to slime someone because you don't like what they have to say. The uniform you wear represents a country that believes in freedom of speech and each person's right to their own opinion. You seem to think it gives you the right to shut people up.


by linfar on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:33:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That jerk of a General . . . (2.00 / 1)

comment was over the line. She has the right to call the Honorable Major General Stewart names, but Alegre should know that it is not the right thing to do.

I support Obama, but I may not agree with all of his supporters. I did not like the "betray-us" ad by moveon.org, for example.

------------------------

MAJOR GENERAL WALTER L. STEWART, JR.

Major General Walter L. Stewart Jr. assumed duties as Deputy Commander, Headquarters State Area Command, Pennsylvania Army National Guard, November 1, 1998. As deputy commander, he oversees the 16,000 members of the Pennsylvania Army National Guard.

The general's military career began as an enlistee in the United States Army in 1966. He was commissioned after completion of Infantry Officer Candidate School. General Stewart served with the 13th Combat Aviation Battalion operating in support of allied forces in the Mekong Delta area of South Vietnam in 1969 and 1970. General Stewart began his active reserve service as a member of Troop N, 104th Armored Cavalry, Pennsylvania Army National Guard in 1973. General Stewart has served in a variety of staff and command assignments with the 28th Division and with Headquarters, Pennsylvania Army National Guard. He served as assistant adjutant general for Pennsylvania and as Commanding General, 28th Infantry Division (Mechanized). In 1994, then Brigadier General Stewart was selected by General George Joulwan, CINCEUR/SACEUR, to form the first stand-alone Unified Command level reserve component directorate. While serving at USEUCOM, Major General Stewart was mobilized for active duty as part of the Presidential Selected Reserve Call-up for Operation Joint Endeavor. In this regard, Major General Stewart became the first Army National Guard Major General mobilized for federal service since the Berlin Crisis.

MAJOR AWARDS AND DECORATIONS:

Silver Star
Defense Superior Service Medal
Legion of Merit
Distinguished Flying Cross with 1st Oak Leaf Cluster
Bronzed Star Medal 2nd Award
Meritorious Service Medal
Air Medal 1st thru 31st Award with Oak Leaf Cluster
Army Commendation Medal, 2nd Award
Good Conduct Medal, 1st Award
Army Reserve Components Achievement Medal
National Defense Service Medal
Vietnam Service Medal
Armed Forces Reserve Medal
Republic of Vietnam Campaign Medal with 60 Device
Master Army Aviation Badge
2 Overseas Bars
Republic of Vietnam Cross of Gallantry with Silver Star


NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!
by Veteran75 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:48:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That jerk of a General . . . (2.00 / 0)

I salute all Veterans, including Vet75 and Maj. Gen. Stewart. I have heard from reliable sources that General Wesley Clark will be one of the mediators to bring the HRC and Obama camps together. Clark will be a valuable member of either DEM administration.
by FOB92 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:54:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That jerk of a General . . . (none / 0)

Clark is one of Hillary's supporters who hasn't compromised their integrity a bit in support of his candidate.

I'm thinking as opposed to Joseph Wilson and his ilk.


by Mostly on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 11:15:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Zero. (2.00 / 0)


"not to use the uniform to slime someone because you don't like what they have to say"

I like that.

Vet75 did not even rise to that bait to defend himself - that is how serious military folks take claims of valor.

It isn't that she said something that someone else did not agree with - that is a fly a mile away compared to the chainsaw in hand of this offense.  She Claimed the Valor of Vet75, General Stewart, and every other person who ever served.

I, personally, would rather jump in front of a train than do that.

And alergic called General Stewart a "jerk".

That is not something to "disagree" with.  That is slander against a specific military veteran.

If you can't separate these things from normal discourse then there is no hope for you at all.

I know Vet75.  We don't always agree on everything, but I know for a fact that he has more right to defend himself and General Stewart than you can possibly imagine.  But he doesn't defend himself, he defend his comrades and the General.

Integrity.

Imagine that.

-chris


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:52:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oh NO you didn't! (2.00 / 1)

That freedom of speech that you mentioned? It includes vet 75, too.

He didn't claim a right to shut anyone up either, he just voiced a strong disagreement.

Last, I just want to point out that you are defending a woman who stooped to use stolen valor to pump up her political resume; yet, you criticize an actual combat veteran for "using his uniform" to disagree with her. Now that's irony.


by Zoey on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:12:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oh NO you didn't! (2.00 / 0)

Pardon me but didn't she kind of "slime" as you put it, herself? We all know she lied- not misspoke nor mis-remembered or all of that other nonsense. She was trying to beef up her tough national security and foriegn policy cred and repeated it over and over and even had her surrogates tell the story. I heard it straight out of MaCauliffe's mouth in January myself.  Did Obama ever attack her on this? Run ads showing her outrageous lies? He could have forced her right out of the race within 2 days of that story breaking and you know it. The media would have been in a frenzy and the entire country would have been screaming for her to step down in shame. Obama could have whipped that up and pounded her and Chris Matthews and others say this every day. They can't understand why he didn't "stomp her into cement" when he has the chance like she does. They all talk openly how this could have been over a long time ago if he played by her rules. He could have knocked her out with all her "negatives" in Ohio and Texas, but he didn't. Why you people don't see that I will never understand. You are not rational. All of the candidates have strengths and weaknesses. They are all flawed as are we. Yet, you consistently refuse to see reality time and time again. You really scare me...really scare me...


by Voxlisa999 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:46:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

blh blah blah (2.00 / 1)

being in the military doesn't give you super citizenry.  The guy is acting like a blowhard.  We are not a military dictatorship and he should show some respect for the Senator id he wants any in return.


For Obama it now becomes: Faith, hope and CHANGE! And the greatest of these is Change!
by TeresaInPa on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:21:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Bill Clinton & Karl Rove together forever... (2.00 / 3)

Rove spoke at Bill Clinton's Library on Politics last year after being courted by the Clintons. Bill praises Rove's tactics. HRC campaign manager vows to run the campaign like Rove. How I could go on and on. I can't believe you have the audacity to say Obama has the republican playbook.  You know very well that he is being skewered in the media for not "crushing Hillary when she was down"- i.e. Bosnia, He didn't even do it in the debate. Don't believe me about the Clintons and Rove? From the Washington Post. Links included.

The Clintons recognize the skill Rove has brought to politics and admire his craft, if not his ideology. Just days after the November 2004 election, Bill Clinton pulled Rove aside at the dedication of the William J. Clinton Presidential Library in Arkansas. "Hey, you did a marvelous job, it was just marvelous what you did," Clinton told Rove, according to the book, ""The Way to Win: Taking the White House in 2008," by our former colleague, John F. Harris and his co-author, Mark Halperin. "I want to get you down to the library. I want to talk politics with you. You just did an incredible job and I'd like to really get together with you and I think we could have a great conversation."  http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail /2007/08/14/hillary_the_rove_candidate_o f.html

Clinton's campaign manager, Patti Solis Doyle, seems to agree with that assessment, having effectively vowed to run her operation much as Rove did his two successful national campaigns. "She expresses admiration for the way George W. Bush's campaign team controlled its message, and, given her druthers, would run this race no differently," Michelle Cottle writes this month in New York magazine. " 'We are a very disciplined group, and I am very proud of it,' she says with a defiant edge. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2007/08/14/AR2007081401722. html


by Voxlisa999 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:58:39 PM EST

Re: Bill Clinton & Karl Rove together forever. (none / 0)

nice find.


by haystax calhoun on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:12:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Someone Zero Rated VoxLisa for this... (2.00 / 0)


But it looks like their account has already been deleted for it (or other stupidity).

Good call, Admin!

Others have rated this comment as follows:
nklein 2
politicsmatters 2
chrisblask 2
McTrollop 2
Zero Rating: 1


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:48:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Does she ride a bloom? (2.00 / 0)

GOP said half of the country believe that Hillary rides a bloom.

I'll say hell Yeah!.

Hillary is like Hermione Granger. She is super smart, knows all the answers and always has the right magic to pull everybody's rump out of the fire. She is also witty, loving, and caring.

"The greatest wizard of her time." My kind of president.


by JoeySky18 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:08:50 PM EST

Re: Does she ride a bloom? (2.00 / 0)

She is prety good, and prior to Obama being viable I would have voted for her.  But that's the way elections are, before they start the best guess anyone has about who will get elected is worth $1 put to the actual test (as long as it is written on a dollar bill).

Didn't know about riding flowers, though.  That is very very cool. :~)

-cheers!

-chris


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:29:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"Load of Bull?" (2.00 / 2)

er, are you calling General Stewart a liar, or the Stolen Valor Act of 2005 (signed by Senator Clinton) a farce, or US veterans wimps, or...?

Just not sure where you go with that one.

I know it strikes you as unfair to have a decorated military officer confront a civilian claming military honor to be put forth as a counter to whether your "pastor loves America as much as you do", but the whine level is a bit uncalled for.

I mean since Ickes stated that Race and Religion is the Clinton attack plan, Truth and Troops seems like a reasonably tame response.  Ya' know, Truth and Troops are real issues that a Commander in Chief should have some passing thoughts on, while Race and Religion are, um, perhaps less than honorable arguments for American elctions?

Work with me here.  I know FleaFlicker - er - Susan is back after her troll-deletion and the "purge" you all arranged hasn't worked out so well, but seems to me that most folks here want a Dem president in the fall.  If you can't hold your own it might just be that your ranks are thinning out.  Maybe taking a tack that does not include "full of BS" and "that jerk of a general" in it - maybe that might be a more pro-Democratic approach?

The Tuzla issue is the only serious bone I have to pick with Sen. Clinton - and it's a big one.  I'd like to hear her apologize, and not just say "I already apologized for" it.

Do you or your candidate have an answer that does not involved hurling something at something else?

-with deepest condolences

-chris


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:26:35 PM EST

Re: "Load of Bull?" (2.00 / 0)

Excellent post, Chris. I differ with you on only one point, in that for me, the Tuzla issue isn't the only serious bone I have to pick with Hillary -- but it's a biggie! As a combat veteran myself, I am deeply insulted that someone who claims to have so much political capital would stoop to fabricating such a story just to make herself look good. She then goes on to laugh about it on late-night comedy, while I sit slack-jawed, wondering how this woman can make light of something on national television that some of us have long since given up on ever trying to forget.

Armed Services Committee? What, is the original diary's author trying to impress me or something? Would this be the same Armed Services Committee that resorted to using the Reserves and National Guard like active duty troops -- akin to paying your weekly grocery bill out of rainy-day savings? With the same predictable result, of course -- our forces are now stretched so thin that we have NO wiggle room left, and must rely increasingly on civilians to fill in the gaps. Same committee responsible for me going to Iraq with no weapons cleaning kit? a flak vest that was too large for me so that if I tried to fire my weapon from a prone position the collar would push my Kevlar helmet down right over my eyes? a weapon, speaking of which, that was once kicked off a training range for a mis-fitting bolt assembly, but could never get a replacement? Sent me out into downtown Baghdad every day in a ratty Hummvee with bald tires and NO RADIO??? And so on....

If Hillary was on the Armed Services Committee overseeing all that, then this is an equally hefty bone I have to pick with her. Barack Obama has said he would never send troops into harm's way without making sure they had what they need to fight and win. That's the guy I want calling the shots.

~~SSG Cheryl Kopec, Pierce County Veterans for Obama


'The time for can't do, won't do, won't even try, is OVER!" --Barack Obama
by LuckyCharm on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:47:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Why hasn't Obama chaired any NATO meetings? (none / 0)

Please spare us.
Sen. Obama cares so much for vets in MI and FL that he doesn't believe their votes should be counted.
As chair of European affairs, Sen. Obama has not held ONE meeting - nor has he even travelled to Europe. (I'm not talking London)
So it's OK with Obama that despite him being the point guy for NATO - that he hasn't held a single meeting regarding NATO and Afghanistan? Obviously so.
by durendal on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 11:13:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

These comments are not endearing the camps to each (2.00 / 2)

other.  I'm a bit concerned we're not going to be unified after June 3rd. Lets tamp it down some folks.


by LoneStarLefty on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:40:42 PM EST

Re: These comments are not endearing the camps (2.00 / 1)

You are right, Lefty.

It is amazing the restraint required somedays.  I counsel patience, (try to) exercise it, and still fail.

I wouldn't last a moment on the presidential campaign trail.

I need to save my typing on this diary since it will probably be deleted when Admin nukes Alleggy, anyway.

MyDD is showing signs of reaching the goal it was created for - encouraging Democratic discussion and promoting progressive goals.  These last-gasps of divisive trollness have to be either honest folks who have run off the rails with candidate support or actual Limbaugh dittohead plants.

None of this is good for anyone but McCain (or Nader?).

-thanks

-chris


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:48:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Alegre has about as much credibility as... (1.50 / 4)

Fox News.  Go ahead and try to protect your candidate for being caught in an offensive lie and then trying to joke her way out of it.  She did that when she lied about sniper fire and then went on Leno and made fun of herself being caught in a lie.  Bush and Cheney employ these tactics!  

Let me repeat...

BUSH AND CHENEY EMPLOY THESE TACTICS!

I don't fighting against these red herring tactics are Republican Playbook arguments.  In the same vein, calling Hillary out for using this strategy to get herself out of a horrible lie is totally legit.  


by froggyman on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:51:58 PM EST

Alegre - Keep on writing these Diaries (2.00 / 4)

I lost all respect for BHO after the debate and his speeches afterwards As shown in the last debate he has no clue regarding taxes and economy.

He is a uniter. He united all the republicans and has divided the democrats.


by indus on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:10:08 PM EST

Re: Who's Using Republican Playbook? (2.00 / 0)

Does "Clinton supporters" qualify as the correct answer?  I mean, I know "fingergate" is one of the most pressing issues of our time, but I thought that we would save some of the stupid for the GE.


by rfahey22 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:31:17 PM EST

Alegre, you are truly a sad, angry little person (1.33 / 3)

   You have had nothing but gleeful applause for every nasty, back-biting, small-minded smear to come out of the Clinton campaign in the last 15 months. Every new slam has you breathlessly announcing "the tide is turning", even as your candidate drowns in her own nastiness, and blows through formerly loyal constituencies (black, latino, under 50k-a year whites, wealthy Liberals) like I go through socks. You haven't had a word of reproach for any of the bald-faced lies Hillary has spouted, no matter how silly, or counter-productive, or doqwnright stupid they were. You have been a cheerleader from hell, no matter what she said or did. Now that Obama has finally gotten pissed off, and decided to dish it out, you suddenly discover intellectual integrity? That's not even honest enough to make me angry, ya know? It would be funny, if it weren't so pathetic. The mental contortions you had to go through to be able to write this post are scary. Keep up your witless boosterism, though. Obama can  only benefit by the comparison. After the election, you and your fellow Clinton supporters can get together and cry about Disloyalty, Mysogyny, Mean Boys, DKos trolls, Unfair Media, whatever...I never agreed with you, but I used to enjoy reading your stuff. But you've gone 'round the bend, friend. Here's hoping you get your head outta yer ass by november.

Obama 08


by Kordo on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:47:16 PM EST

Re: Update 2 (2.00 / 2)

I would imagine that if HRC said this, or set up Obama this way, he and everyone would be saying, "see, not fit to be commander in chief".

Imagine the undecided voter, thinking that Obama promised new stuff. Sadly, as it turns out, "meet the new boss, same as the old boss"

Promising to be a uniter, instead he becomes the divider.  Where have I heard that before?


by 4justice on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:56:13 PM EST

Re: Update 2 (2.00 / 1)

She's said all sorts of stuff, it's why everyone except (most of) her core supporters have bailed.

If Obama had made-up war stories (literally) there would be no end to the Clinton camp's bashing on him.

As it is, Harold Ickes has already declared that Race and Religion are the targets.  Truth and Troops is extremely fair by comparison.

-chris


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:31:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Just yesterday, he wasn't 'tough enough.' (2.00 / 1)

Today, he's too tough.

Gotta' love it.


by Bob Johnson on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:42:00 PM EST

Re: Who's Using Republican Playbook? (UPDATE 2: BO (2.00 / 2)

I thought the line of today was "if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen".  You can't complain about negative ads (that aren't really particularly negative) at the same time.


by Mostly on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 09:14:05 PM EST

Re: Who's Using Republican Playbook? (UPDATE 2: BO (2.00 / 1)

One of the ads just quotes newspaper editorials.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 11:30:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Who's Using (2.00 / 1)

Can we just nominate John Edwards now?


by RDemocrat on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 09:15:02 PM EST

The day that Obama brings up (2.00 / 1)

cigars, blue dress, Whitewater, etc is the day that Obama has truly gone into negative campaigning.

This little back and forth between Hillary and Obama is NOTHING compared to what the GOP will hit Obama or Hillary with if they get the nomination.  If Hillary wins the nomination, cigars, blue dresses, etc will be talked about every day.

This isn't really that negative...LOL!


by puma on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 09:53:21 PM EST

Re: The day that Obama brings up (1.00 / 2)

Yeah, I love that we just can't talk about any of that, even though Bill Clinton's inability to tell the truth made his a very lame duck much sooner than he needed to be.  She covered up for him for a very long time and he learned he could try to get away with anything.

If she gets the nomination, also expect to hear a lot about her discovering Rose Law firm papers in the WH -- now, how did those get there?


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 10:28:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

If Hillary gets the nomination (none / 0)

we all will be beseached with every known crap that came out of the 90's including Hillary killing Vince Foster plus all the other crap since including Bill's deals with China, Columbia, etc.


by puma on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:23:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

trust and the people who know them (2.00 / 1)

If HRC and BC are so trustworthy and competent, then why have 17 US Senators endorsed Obama and only 13 Clinton?

And we can see how those who have decided not to support Clinton have been treated as traitors.  Some at mydd even like that sort of approach!

The division between loyalists and traitors chillingly reminds me of the Nixon days.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/us/pol itics/20loyalty.html?ei=5087&em=& ;en=33ca05b0fe2bd454&ex=1208750400&a mp;pagewanted=print
"People in the Clinton orbit say there are a varying gradations of perceived disloyalty. In their eyes, the least offensive (if somewhat annoying) group are "likely" Hillary Clinton supporters who have not defected, in part out of recognition of past ties, but have not made public commitments to her, either. Until Friday, this would have included Mr. Reich, who had said he would not formally endorse Mr. Obama out of "loyalty" to Mrs. Clinton, a friend for over four decades whom he actually went out on a date with in their college days.

Then there are those whom Mrs. Clinton worked hard to win over but who have actually taken the step of endorsing Mr. Obama. These would include newer senators like Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, or older colleagues, like Senator John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia.

There is also a large class of Obama supporters in the Senate for whom the Clintons raised considerable amounts of money. This includes Claire McCaskill of Missouri, who upset Mrs. Clinton in a 2006 appearance on "Meet the Press" when she told Tim Russert that while Mr. Clinton was a great leader, "I don't want my daughter near him."

But the worst offenders, associates say, are former Clintonites who not only endorse Obama, but who also publicly criticize Mrs. Clinton's campaign as they do so. Mr. Craig, a former law school classmate of Mrs. Clinton's, became a charter member of this club when he wondered aloud (to Jonathan Alter of Newsweek) "if Hillary's campaign can't control Bill, whether Hillary's White House could."

Mr. Richardson moved instantly atop the roster of infamy after he endorsed Mr. Obama and then took the added step of saying that people around the Clintons practiced "gutter" politics and that they felt entitled to the presidency. He was tarred as "Judas" in The New York Times by James Carville, still a fierce defender of the Clintons."


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 11:29:26 PM EST

seeing it for ourselves (2.00 / 1)

One of the most insulting lines of argument in this diary and others of similar ilk is the idea that people don't trust Clinton because the media or the Obama campaign make that happen.

Maybe we're just seeing it for ourselves.

From the NYT linked above --

"Perhaps most painful among Clintonites are the lower-profile defections. They are the losses of former supporters like Mrs. Larson, people who revered the Clintons in the 1990s and still regard them highly. Both Mr. and Mrs. Clinton called Mrs. Larson on her cellphone earlier this year, telling her how much they needed her. Mrs. Larson even declared her support for Mrs. Clinton in mid-January.

But then the race got nasty in South Carolina, and Mr. Obama started winning and Mrs. Larson started reconsidering. "There was something about Senator Obama that I found really fresh and exciting," she said. "I like how positive he has been." She also spoke of "the destructive negativity" of the Clinton campaign."


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 11:33:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama's Candy Shop (2.00 / 3)

imageshack

Read all about it:

http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/04/19/ rove's-sweet-dream/


by Nobama on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:07:50 AM EST

Your Point is you Candidate is Karl Rove? (2.00 / 0)


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:42:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Who's Using Republican Playbook? (UPDATE 2: BO (2.00 / 0)

Do you have links for all the statements on the "quiz"?

And who is General Walter Stewart?


by rhetoricus on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:15:27 AM EST

Re: Who's Using Republican Playbook? (UPDATE 2: BO (2.00 / 0)

General Walter Stewart has been speaking out against the Bosnia issue since Hillary first make her comments.

He, like most of the military, are offended by Hillary's lies.  It's called "theft of valor" to lie about having been in action, when you haven't.  It's a pretty big deal in the military.  In fact, Congress passed a law called the Stolen Valor Act of 2005, passed in 2006.  It makes it illegal to falsely claim to have earned a medal of honor.  Hillary cosponsored the Act.   She's also on the Senate Judical Committee.  She knew that what she was doing was offensive.  She didn't expect to get called on it.

I know some people in the military, so I've been paying attention to it.  I've written a blog here:

http://hillsbosnia.blogspot.com/2008/03/ tammis-poem.html

I even quote Stewart, and point to other places where he's made statements.  He calls for Hillary to apologize, and asks all military supporters to withdraw their support from Hillary.

What is offensive about Alegre's post is that she, as with Hillary, completely ignores this aspect of the event.  But, it's very real.  And very sad.

Our soldiers give their lives to protect us and our liberties.  The loose limbs, their eye sight, and everything imaginable.  Because they love this country.  We cannot repay them for it.  All we can do is honor their service and respect them.  In the military, that service is highly respected.  Lying about it dilutes and defaces the noble act.

Hillary lied about Bosnia for personal gain - to claim that she had better credentials than Obama to be CIC.  It's pretty despicable.


by Kiku on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:50:56 AM EST

Re: Who's Using Republican Playbook? (UPDATE 2: BO (2.00 / 0)

I'm glad that Obama is giving voice to the military.  They deserve to be heard.


by Kiku on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 12:56:21 AM EST

Re: Who's Using Republican Playbook? (UPDATE 2: BO (2.00 / 0)

Here is the true cost of war.

http://www.opaobie.com/images/Generation sOfValor.jpg


by Kiku on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:00:00 AM EST

Re: Who's Using Republican Playbook? (UPDATE 2: BO (2.00 / 0)

Here's a real story about Bosnia, published in the military's Talon newsletter:

May 25 was once a day for the young. But Saturday, it will be a day of sorrow in Tuzla.

Something horrible happened exactly one year ago in this city on a beautiful, warm, spring evening.
Seventy-two people were killed, and 124 were wounded when an artillery round landed without warning and exploded in the crowded Cafe District.

The youngest victim was a 2-year-old boy.

The explosion had a profound effect on Tuzla. It was the city's largest day of bloodshed during four years of war here.

Almost every young person in Tuzla knows somebody who was in the Cafe District that evening.
Now, the survivors only have memories of the people who were killed.

One survivor, Jasmin Hadzimehmedovic, 33, was in the crowd when the round exploded.

"May 22 was my birthday, but I didn't have time to celebrate", he said. "So, I decided to celebrate on May 25. It was such a nice evening. Even now, I can remember the happy faces."

But the euphoria was shattered in a instant.
"I saw a bright flash. I didn't hear anything coming in. After that, I heard a lot of screaming and saw many bodies", Hadzimehmedovic said.
"I was laying on the ground, with a pain in my leg, between wounded and dead people."

Blood and body parts lay everywhere, he said.
"It was repulsive, but no one felt anything," he said. "We were like machines. You couldn't feel anything. But in that moment you only wanted to help the poor people."

"That night, my best friend... she was killed. I only wanted to celebrate my birthday with her, she was only 21 years old," he said.

A monument to honor the victims will be unveiled tomorrow during a memorial ceremony held at the site of the explosion.


by Kiku on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:14:41 AM EST

"Attack ads"? You gotta be kidding me! (2.00 / 0)

Those are perfectly accurate, and perfectly above-board ads. Yeah, they're saying something negative about Hillary.... so I guess if that's your definition of "attack ad", you're right.

And as for what that general said, I'll agree it was a bit over the top. But only a bit. Did Hillary, or did she not "make a joke" about her sniper fire stuff? And did she, or did she not, smile and laugh as she told the sniper fire lie in the first place? Yes she did!

Do you seriously think that anyone who has been through REAL sniper fire (or esp. someone who has had a loved one DIE by it), appreciates Hillary joking about this?


by ratmach on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:24:46 AM EST

Re: Who's Using Republican Playbook? (UPDATE 2: BO (2.00 / 0)

Allegre, you have every right to defend your candidate, but there are some lines that you should not cross.  Denigrating our military, and those who serve us is beneath contempt.  Your misdirected anger is especially egregious in defense of a candidate who lied and dishonored our military.  That makes it a double insult.

There are some lines that your over the top righteous dignity should not cross.  It may feel good to express your indulgent outrage, but you need to grow and recognize that sometimes your candidate may make a mistake.  

You do her no favors with your over the top posts.  There isn't a single person who will be won over by these posts.  You are only speaking to the choir.  So what's the point?  

You actually are hurting your candidate by examplifying a vindictive reactionary unreasonable base.  Some Hillary supporters have a good sense of her errors, and support her anyway, for valid reasons.  You are completely ignorant of any sense reality.

Who wants to go there?  If you really want to do your candidate some good, change your tune.


by Kiku on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 01:31:46 AM EST

Re: Who's Using Republican Playbook? (UPDATE 2: BO (none / 0)

The comments of General Stewart is what is indignant.  Those comments so flippantly of the General who knows better just for the puropse of a political point are as insulting and stupid as his McCarthy comments.

The only person who is doing a dis-service is General McCarthy himself.


Well I guess that's one way to say things have 'changed'.
by TxDem08 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:42:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Who's Using Republican Playbook? (UPDATE 2: BO (none / 0)

That's right, keep insulting the Vietnam Vet.

When Nov comes you will be right out there pretending to be a Dem and slandering McCain's 5.5 years in the Hanoi Hilton.

Nice work, TexRep08


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:11:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Who's Using Republican Playbook? (UPDATE 2: BO (none / 0)

I feel sorry for people like you, who will trounce on anyone who has a different opinion, even when they are right.  This is the Rovian playbook full force, in it's full insanity.

Hillary lied.  That lie was offensive to the military, and they are speaking out on it.

Suck it up, dude, and quite whining, it's very un-Texan of you.


by Kiku on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:09:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Astroturf outrage? (2.00 / 0)

Most objective observers acknowledge that the Clinton camp has been much more negative during this campaign, and that Obama has been content to let things remain positive unless challenged, when he has been forced to respond to avoid being swiftboated.

The only purpose this sort of manufactured anger serves is to provide Clinton supporters a reason to explain not supporting Obama in the general.  Now, nothing can actually excuse that anti-Democratic act, but not many people are truly using their cerebellum at this point.. the lizard brain is much more useful in a fight.


by Wayward Son on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 07:35:32 AM EST

Re: Astroturf outrage? (none / 0)

According to who?  MSNBC?  Chris Matthews or Kieth Olberman?

I'm sorry, I meant MSNOBMA.  Yeah right.  Only Obama is the candidate to use an actual Republican attack ad against another DEM.  Only Obama is the candidate to actually say that another DEM will say anything to get elected.  Only Obama has said that another DEM is part of the problem with Washington.  Obama injected race into the Primary race BEFORE S. Carolina.

Who's using Repbulican talking points and going Negative?  Obama MUCH more than Clinton.  It's only now that the MSM might be re-thinking it's undying adoration of him and actually asking questions does the fodder of indignation and frivolity arise.

The Obama campaign is manufactured the outrage in order to divide and use a scorched earth policy for one reason only.  To further Obama's unbridled grab for more power, regardless of never finishing one complete office term.

There are now PLENTY of reasons not to vote for Obama just based on his actions within the Primary, in addition to his policy stances-when he actually has any, and the details of his policy actions-when he actually has any on those reasons alone.

The fact that he is just more of the same dispicable Kennedy & Chicago politics is just the cream filling that topped it off.  If I'm gonna be picking on that reason alone, I'll at least chose the person who actually has plans, experience and can actually get work done across the aisle instead of just talking about it.


Well I guess that's one way to say things have 'changed'.
by TxDem08 on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:40:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

3am ad - Republican rerun (plagiarism! :) (none / 0)


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:08:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

President McCain thanks you (2.00 / 0)


by OhPlease on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 03:02:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: A reminder for all you patriots and veterans (2.00 / 1)

In 2004 Hillary was asked by the Department of Defense to serve as the only Senate member of the Transformation Advisory Group to the Joint Forces Command. The military wanted her on that committee - she was the only Senator invited to serve on this committee tasked with reforming the Pentagon.

http://www.jfcom.mil/about/priorities.ht m

http://www.senate.gov/~clinton/news/stat ements/record.cfm?id=278112

By contrast, Sen. Obama is Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on European Affairs.  He failed to hold a single substantive hearing, though this sub-committee has responsibility for Europe and NATO and NATO's policy in Afghanistan.  He's admitted he was too busy running for President.

Senior Military Brass are worried about Obama:

"...[T]he mostly conservative retired officers, industry executives and current defense officials interviewed by The Washington Times cite Mr. Obama's lack of experience in national security. They also point to his determination to pull American combat units from Iraq at a time when a troop surge has reduced violence, damaged al Qaeda and allowed the Iraqi government to progress toward Sunni-Shia-Kurd reconciliation.

"We're very concerned about his apparent lack of understanding on the threat of radical Islam to the United States," said retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Thomas McInerney, who is pro-Iraq war and a Fox News analyst. "A lot of retired senior officers feel the same way."

Mr. Obama also has stirred concern in national security circles by pledging to talk to the leaders of rogue nations, such as Iran and North Korea, without preconditions.

His urging of the Bush administration to conduct air strikes against terrorist targets in Pakistan without its approval is privately derided inside the Pentagon as the way to ruin relations with a good ally. Pakistan will not allow U.S. combat troops to operate on its soil."

Flag Officers Endorsing Hillary Clinton for President and Commander-in- Chief:

http://thepage.time.com/clinton-campaign -statement-touting-military-supporters/

*

General Henry Hugh Shelton Endorses Hillary for President

Senator Clinton today [3/1/08] is proud to announce that General Henry Hugh Shelton has endorsed her to be the Nation's next Commander-in- Chief.

One of our nation's top military figures, General Shelton served two terms as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff under Presidents Clinton and George W. Bush.  

In announcing his endorsement, General Shelton said, "I've been with Senator Clinton when she has been with our military men and women.  I know from those experiences that she understands the demands and sacrifice of military life. I am confident she will always put the readiness and well being of our troops first.  She is ready to be Commander-in- Chief."

General Shelton joins General John Shalikashvili as the second former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff to have endorsed Senator Clinton.  General Shelton is the fourth flag officer to endorse Senator Clinton this week.

The first Green Beret to serve as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Shelton served our Nation with distinction over a career that spanned 38 years.  General Shelton served two tours of duty in Vietnam , and was awarded a Bronze Star and a Purple Heart. He was assistant commander of the 101st Airborne Division during Operation Desert Storm in Iraq , and later commanded the 82nd Airborne Division.  Prior to serving as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Shelton commanded U.S. Special Operations Forces.  He served as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the nation's highest ranking military office, from 1997-2001.

General Shelton joins a distinguished group of 28 retired flag officers who have endorsed Senator Clinton to be our nation's next Commander-in- Chief.  In addition, more than 2,000 veterans and military retirees are members of Senator Clinton's national and state veterans' steering committees.  

"I am so proud to have the endorsement of General Shelton.  He has spent his career commanding our country's elite military units.  He commanded at the highest level of our nation's armed forces, while always remaining dedicated to the effectiveness of their combat capabilities and the well-being of their families."

"I Was Too Busy Running For President"

Sen. Barack Obama admits to not even holding one hearing while Chair of the Subcommittee on European Affairs which includes NATO and Afghanistan. Ponder that for a moment. Afghanistan is in free-fall; the Taliban are re-taking the country; U.S. Troops are there fighting and dying.

But, Sen. Obama said he was "too busy" running for President to even hold one hearing about Afghanistan, NATO or US troops serving in Afghanistan.

Obama stresses the importance of veterans health care:

"Long as there are wounded service members receiving substandard medical care, we have failed in our duty to honor the commitment of the brave men and women who chose to serve. We must provide our returning heroes and their families with every resource they need to rebuild their lives," Obama said in a press release on April 10, 2007.

But:

Obama skipped a hearing about expanding veterans' health services. Craig opened, "We also have legislation before us to specifically address the demand for long-term care. As the veteran population ages, the demand for long-term care has increased accordingly." Akaka added that the committee would consider legislation that would encourage "creative ways to help alleviate the burden on caregivers while expanding services to veterans." (From the GPO, May 11, 2006.)

Obama also skipped a hearing to create insurance benefits for veterans in rehabilitation. Craig announced that the committee would "hear testimony about the traumatically injured protection under service members' group life insurance benefit." Akaka declared that "this insurance program helps ease the financial burden" on a hospitalized service member's family. (From the GPO on September 7, 2006.)

*

Obama skipped the hearing on improving veterans' health care access. "In many cases, VA's facilities are located where veterans used to live, not where they now live," noted Chairman Craig. The legislation under consideration was "designed in part to address the changes in the demographics of our veterans' population and follows America's medicine's transformation from hospital-centric to patient-centric delivery of care." (From the GPO on April 6, 2006.)

Sen. Obama also missed an "exceedingly important" nomination hearing for the VA's Undersecretary for Health. "Dr. Perlin [has been nominated] to serve as VA's Under Secretary for Health," announced Chairman Craig. "This is an exceedingly important position. The Under Secretary, in effect, serves as CEO of the VA's entire health care system, the largest integrated health care system in the United States. Dr. Perlin, this is a big, big, big job." (From the GPO on April 7, 2005.)

*

Sen. Obama missed the vote to eliminate requirement that severance pay be deducted from disability compensation: Obama did not vote for the Levin, D-Mich., amendment No. 2019 to the Levin substitute amendment No. 2011.

The Levin amendment would establish a Defense Department and Veterans Affairs Interagency Program Office to implement a joint electronic health record system and eliminate the current requirement that severance pay be deducted from disability compensation for disabilities incurred in a combat zone. It would authorize $50 million for the treatment and rehabilitation of service members with traumatic brain injury or post-traumatic stress disorder and create common disability ratings to determine those eligible for care.

The substitute would authorize $648.3 billion for defense programs in fiscal 2008, including $127.5 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. It also would authorize $143.5 billion for operations and maintenance; $109.9 billion for procurement; $122.9 billion for military personnel and $74.7 billion for research development, testing and evaluation.

(The Senate vote results: #246, Amdt. 2019 to HR 1585, Passed 94-0: R 48-0; D 44-0 (ND 39-0, SD 5-0); I 2-0; 7/12/07; Hillary Clinton voted yea; Obama did not vote.)

Obama missed a vote to provide $109.3 billion in fiscal 2008 for the Department of Veterans Affairs: Obama did not vote for passage of the bill that would provide $109.3 billion in fiscal 2008 for the Department of Veterans Affairs, military construction and military housing. The bill would provide $87.5 billion for the Department of Veterans Affairs, including $37.2 billion for veterans health programs. It would provide $41.2 billion in mandatory spending for veterans' service-connected compensation benefits and pensions. The bill would provide $9.8 billion for military construction, $2.9 billion for military family housing and $8.5 billion for the latest round of base closures. As amended, the bill would provide $100 million in emergency funding for the Homeland Security Department to reimburse state and local law enforcement entities for security and related costs associated with the 2008 presidential candidate nominating conventions.

(From Vote 316, HR 2642 (Fiscal 2008 Military Construction-VA Appropriations), Passed 92-1: R 47-1; D 43-0 (ND 39-0, SD 4-0); I 2-0, 9/6/07; Clinton voted yea; Obama did not vote.)

*

Illinois' disabled veterans are at "rock bottom" -- "dead last" -- in benefits and claims processing of applications for disability. But Illinois' veterans take a back seat because their junior senator is running for president. And that senator, Barack Obama, has missed an astonishing number of hearings and meetings of the Senate Veterans committee.

But Obama has skipped 19 of 37 VA committee meetings in the 109th congress. Obama's attendance record was the second worst of all Democrats on the committee. He attended just 18 of the committee's 37 meetings in Washington D.C.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/2/27/1057 11/135


"I never give them hell. I just tell the truth and they think it's hell." Harry S Truman
by Tennessean on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 08:57:58 AM EST

Re: A reminder for all you patriots and veterans (2.00 / 0)

Obama was just endorsed by two Democrats with extremely strong national security credentials, both  from red states -- Sam Nunn and David Boren.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 09:33:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Bosnia claim a mistake/joke - Clinton (none / 0)

Source

Greensburg, Pennsylvania - Hillary Rodham Clinton said on Tuesday she made a mistake in claiming that she came under hostile fire in Bosnia 12 years ago, as rival Barack Obama's campaign continued to challenge her credibility.

In a recent speech and interviews, the New York senator described a harrowing scene in Tuzla, Bosnia, in which she and her daughter, Chelsea, had to run for cover as soon as they landed for a visit in 1996. But video footage of the day showed a peaceful reception in which a young girl greeted the first lady on the tarmac.

Clinton told reporters in Pennsylvania on Tuesday that she erred in describing the scene, which she now realises after talking with aides and others.

"So I made a mistake," she said. "That happens. It proves I'm human, which you know, for some people, is a revelation."

The more important issue, she said, is whether she would be a better commander in chief than Obama or Republican presidential candidate John McCain. Clinton and Obama are competing for votes in Pennsylvania's April 22 primary.

Clinton's aides had tried to control the Bosnia flap on Monday, saying the New York senator "misspoke".

'Lighten up, guys'

But Clinton had to address the issue herself on Tuesday, after repeated airings of the 1996 video clips caused critics to ridicule her.

Reminded that she had said it was the first time she had misspoken in 12 years, Clinton told reporters: "I was joking. Lighten up, guys."

In a March 17 speech in Washington, Clinton said of the Bosnia trip: "I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base."

That account was still posted on her campaign website on Tuesday.

Clinton told CNN last week, "There was no greeting ceremony, and we basically were told to run to our cars. Now, that is what happened."

Several news outlets disputed the claims.

Clinton began retracting the remarks in a series of private interviews on Monday and Tuesday before addressing about two dozen reporters here after a speech.

She told the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: "I was sleep-deprived, and I misspoke."

She told KDKA radio in Pittsburgh: "You know, I have written about this and described it in many different settings, and I did misspeak the other day. This has been a very long campaign."

Claims 'astonishing'

The Obama campaign fuelled the Bosnia brouhaha on Tuesday, sponsoring a conference call with Pennsylvania reporters that featured retired Major General Walter Stewart of the Pennsylvania Army National Guard. Stewart said he was assigned to the Army's European headquarters when Clinton visited Bosnia as first lady in 1996. He said her claim that she landed under enemy fire insulted US soldiers charged with her security.

Clinton's explanation that she misspoke was "really astonishing," said Stewart, who supports Obama.

"She has no sense of what a statement like that does to soldiers," Stewart said. "She is insulting the command in its entirety."

"Believe me, heads would have rolled all over" if the military put the first lady and her daughter in a position of "unacceptable risk."

At her news conference, Clinton said, "the military and the Secret Service did a terrific job" of handling the situation in Bosnia. "We did take precautions," she said, noting that she was the first president's wife to enter a war zone since Eleanor Roosevelt.

Or was that since Pat Nixon?

And she was the "first high profile person" from the US in Bosnia - except for the President and Secretary of State (no, I meant realy high level...)

-chris


Motley Moose: Progress Through Politics
by chrisblask on Sun Apr 20, 2008 at 10:42:28 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.