Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Hey gang, didja hear?  A Congressman just compared a sitting US Senator - one of his colleagues - to some stalking psycho in Fatal Attraction.  I've seen some pretty horrid behavior in this campaign, but I draw the line when some loser of a Congressman - in his blind effort to trash Hillary and kiss Barack Obama's @ss stoops to that level.  Face it - there's little difference between what Cohen said and someone tossing racist epithets out there folks.  

Are we going to hear any outrage from all Democrats over this?  Will Pelosi, Dean, Reid, Ted Kennedy or Barack himself speak out against what this jerk said?  Or are half of our party going to continue to remain silent while nobodies like this drop down in the mud and attack a good and decent Democrat  in the name of supporting their guy?  Dammit I want to know who's with me in saying ENOUGH!

It's one thing when some hack of a comedian or broadcaster says stuff like this - but a US Congressman should know better dammit.  Face it guys - Cohen does know better and that makes this all the more offensive because he said it anyway.

Jake Tapper posted something on this earlier today...

Obama-Backing Congressman Compares Hillary Clinton to Glenn Close in 'Fatal Attraction'

This week, Obama-backing Rep. Steve Cohen, D-Tenn., said on local television, when asked about Sen. Clinton, that "Glenn Close should have just stayed in the tub."

All were referring to Close playing the insane, deluded Alex Forrest -- the wronged "other woman" who refuses to accept her fate and just go away, and becomes suicidal and homicidal. (And also rabbit-cidal.)

snip

No matter how you slice it, Alex Forrest was the movie's villain, like Jason Voorhees or Michael Myers. I'd posit at the very least that it's not keeping with Obama's lofty campaign rhetoric to compare Clinton's tenacity to psychosis. And it will indubitably further alienate women voters whom Obama needs to bring to his side once the Democratic race concludes.

Happy freakin' Mother's Day folks.

I don't think Tapper, or anyone in the MSM or press understands what a backlash these kind of comments will unleash on the political scene.  The double standards, the sexism, the lies and misrepresentations that have been spread about Hillary and her family have gone on for too long.  The personal attacks that have come from Obama's camp and even from the candidate himself in this race... all of it adds up and this is the straw that's going to break this camel's back unless our party leaders speak out against this garbage.  Unless the candidate himself - once and for all says this garbage will NOT be tolerated within his ranks.

Cohen calls himself a Democrat and yet he uses this misogynistic hate-speech against a fellow Democrat and a sitting Senator?  I'm sorry but this is NOT the same party I've been a member of for the past 35 years.  

Seriously - is this what we've been reduced to?  Are my fellow Democrats going to remain silent - laugh it off as someone uses this kind of hate speech against another Democrat?

Think back to last fall, when Billy Shaheen mapped out what the rethugs would use in their race against Obama if he ends up being our nominee.  People were outraged that he mentioned Obama's admitted drug use etc., and Hillary not only told this volunteer statewide coordinator that his support was no longer welcome, but she personally apologized to Obama.

Will Obama denounce this asshole and tell him his support is no longer welcome?

And don't you dare come at me with accusations of faux outrage boys because this woman - this working mother of a little girl is beyond pissed off over this.  If someone talked about my daughter like this I'd take his head off.  And if my son treated a woman like this he'd never hear the end of it.  Has our political discourse dropped this far down into the gutter - to where a United States Congressman can get away with talking about a Senator like this?

If you thought I was mad about this shite before well you ain't seen NOTHING yet.  I'm going to scream it from the rooftops until people understand that we won't ignore this hateful garbage any longer.  We've tried to stay above it - we've tried to ignore it because it's not worthy of our outrage.  But they'll continue with these sexist and demeaning attacks - thinking it's not offensive - until we speak out and stand up to the bully-boys out there.

And to those of you who call yourselves a Democrat (with a big D) don't you dare stand up and tell me I'm wrong to be pissed off over this.  Don't you dare you tell me I'm wrong when I say this is no different than someone going on the local news and using the N word to describe a candidate for the presidency.  I defy anyone to tell me if that'd happened - you wouldn't be calling for his head on a platter.

Dammit that'd be righteous anger and I'd be right there next to you in that call for justice!

I expect nothing less from you - my fellow Democrats - in the face of this latest load of crap.

Now before you boys get in my face for trying to draw attention to the non-stop sexism and hate-speech that's been directed at Hillary in this campaign, let me just head all that off by noting something that Big Tent Democrat said over at Talk Left this evening...

Nice. Sexism is the bigotry that has the imprimatur of respectability it seems.

By the way, for folks and bloggers who are getting tired of my harping on the rampant sexism directed at Hillary Clinton, I say this, when it stops, then I will stop.

I can't applaud that last line enough gang...

When it stops, then I will stop

Meanwhile - if you're as pissed off over this shite as I am, then let Cohen know what you think of his comment.

CONTACT HIM
Send him a note here. or email him at steve@cohenforcongress.com.

UPDATE

Apparently, Cohen's issued a generic CYA apology for his comments about Hillary. Now whether he's bothered to apologize to her for his horrid behavior is still an open question.

He made the comment and apologized but the hate-speech is still out there. And he gets to go along as if it never happened.

I'm sorry guys but I'm still not satisfied. He got caught out making an incredibly sexist remark - one that I'm sure Hillary can handle. Hell she's taken worse hits and attacks than this in her life - this probably seemeed little more than some gnat buzzing around her ear.

I think Cohon has missed the bigger picture here guys. His remark wasn't only offensive to the candidate he attacked. His remark was an attack on every woman. Cohen claims his comment didn't reflect the sentiments of the Obama campaign, and yet time and time again we see his supporters making sexist attacks against her. It's time he put his foot down and made it clear that this shit won't be tolerated within his ranks. Period.

Issue a press statement. Hold a presser. Hell, maybe he could make a short speech to clear this up once and for all.



Display:


Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (1.87 / 16)

Will anyone from BO's camp speak out against this?


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:17:13 PM EST

Yes (2.00 / 10)

Sucks but that is what we've been reduced to.

Bill Clinton was a lousy prez.  Tavis Smiley is a jerk and Hillary is a witch.

Wheee Haaa


I didn't believe in god before the primaries and I still don't.
by NewHampster on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:18:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I forgo to mention (2.00 / 11)

Any of us who support Hillary are racists.


I didn't believe in god before the primaries and I still don't.
by NewHampster on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:19:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I had no idea! (2.00 / 7)

My brown boyfriend will be shocked to learn of this news! Maybe its just a fetish that I have...
by linc on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:21:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

and I thought linc was a guy (2.00 / 4)

all this time. ;-)


I didn't believe in god before the primaries and I still don't.
by NewHampster on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:25:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Don't let yourself (2.00 / 7)

get ahead of your intuition, linc is most definitely a guy. If he isn't, his boyfriend is going to have a great deal of bad news this eveing ;)
by linc on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:29:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sorry my Bad (2.00 / 6)

My old fart stupidity please forgive me oh awesome linc one.


I didn't believe in god before the primaries and I still don't.
by NewHampster on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:33:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

lmao oaoa! (2.00 / 5)

No problem whatsoever! I have rather enjoyed this thread. And it is really NewHampster that is the awesome one, lets not kid ourselves!
by linc on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:40:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

back at ya ;-) (2.00 / 2)


I didn't believe in god before the primaries and I still don't.
by NewHampster on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:47:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

lol (2.00 / 1)

and I always thought you were a female, probably because you spoke about your "boyfriend" and I made assumptions.


For Obama it now becomes: Faith, hope and CHANGE! And the greatest of these is Change!
by TeresaInPa on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:47:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

We were both guilty (2.00 / 1)

in our own old fart ways.  although I would never call you an old fart.  TinP


I didn't believe in god before the primaries and I still don't.
by NewHampster on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:49:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

ah the internets! (2.00 / 1)

I suppose my constant cribbing and quoting of Audre Lorde doesn't help either!
by linc on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:55:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: lol (none / 0)

holy cow.  Am I also wrong in thinking that you're a female, TeresaInPa?


by slynch on Sun May 11, 2008 at 02:26:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

TeresainPA? (none / 0)

Decepticon!


by Bipolar Disorder Democrat on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:40:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I forgo to mention (none / 0)

Actually you hampster are just a sexist who loves porn.


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Bill Clinton
by venician on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:22:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This is true (2.00 / 2)

but I'm not a racist


I didn't believe in god before the primaries and I still don't.
by NewHampster on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:24:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes (2.00 / 2)

Yeah and you know what they think of Joe Wilson and Wes Clark right?


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:29:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes (none / 0)

Who is "they"?


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:32:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Yes (none / 0)

The voters.


by Mostly on Sun May 11, 2008 at 01:42:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (2.00 / 1)

Um, yeah.  "I speak out against this."

Satisfied?


"I'll bite your legs off!" -- HRC 2008!
by username3 on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:21:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (2.00 / 3)

Me too, alegre.
I speak out against this, right here, right now.

It was the cheapest of cheap shots, way over the line, and should not be condoned by any progressive Democrat. Cohen's mom should wash his mouth out with soap, on Mother's Day.

I denounce that asshole. And I'm not one of 'you boys', thank you.

But '...his head on a platter' and 'right next to you in that call for justice'?

Geeze, alegre, right now I'd rather see the generals in Myanmar have their heads on a platter, and justice and humanitarian aid for the Myanmar survivors, wouldn't you?


Let the children lose it Let the children use it Let all the children boogie
by toyomama on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:20:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (2.00 / 2)

You have to understand, all this misogynist tripe that's been targeting Hillary and often women who back her as well, is every bit as vile as using the "n" word. But unlike racism, sexism isn't condemned but flagrantly encouraged- by so called "progressives" as well as right wingers and moderates. Don't be dismissive, that makes it look like you are in agreement with it. Think about it, had a McCain supporter said something racist about Obama would you have dismissed an Obama backer for expressing the same sentiments? I wouldn't, and I don't even like Obama- but I dislike Obama for his misogyny, classism, ageism and weak voting record on  human rights issues, and weak record on enviromental issues.

I'm mixed race myself- part Native American, and it was obvious enough when I was a child other kids thought I was Ameriasian, I was called "little jap girl" by other kids. They meant it as an insult and I knew they did, but to me it wasn't an insult, but something to take pride in.

I'm not part Japanese, but the interesting thing that insult being flung at me had- I developed an interest in Japanese history and culture- both modern pop culture and classic art and literature. An interest I still have to this day. I often get irritated at false picture in western media and culture of Japanese women- it's a racist sexist stereotype that needed to go away a long time ago.  All stereotypes are nasty and shouldn't be tolerated, especially by people that call themselves liberal or progressive.

The few (and contrary to what you Obama backers probably believe, it is very few) Hillary backers that spout stereotypical anti muslim comments (I've never seen one racist comment about Obama as an African American from Hillary backers, again contrary to what you probably believe) gets me angry. I have dear friends that are Muslim and when those things are said I think of my friends that are Muslim- a woman in Turkey, a woman in Malaysia, one of my college professors, who is a Muslim feminist from Pakistan, who proudly argues  with Wahabists. The way Obama said he wasn't Muslim bothered me too, though. He said it in a way that sounded like an insult to Muslims. I  thought he could have said he wasn't with more sensitivity.

When you have a personal connection to something it makes you more aware. The sad thing is though, liberal and progressive guys do have personal connections to women- if no one else, their mothers, but yet so many have ZERO sensitivity to misogyny and many spout it themselves, without a second thought, and attack or dismiss it, when called on it.      


by K1966 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 01:19:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (2.00 / 1)

You accuse Obama of misogyny, classism, ageism...?


Like the nominee, don't like the nominee... Our nominee is still better than John McCain...
by JenKinFLA on Sun May 11, 2008 at 01:55:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (1.50 / 4)

I don't accuse- it's right there for anyone to see and read. If you can't see it then you're part of the problem, simple as that. And no I will not hold your hand and be your mommy or teacher and educate you on misogyny, classism, and ageism. That expectation is sexist. Look it up yourself, it's really easy to find.


by K1966 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 02:28:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

"War" not gender (2.00 / 4)

So you're a mixed race female that's been called a Jap girl and you think you understand what African Americans have been subjected to in the 60s?

I'm Asian and I've been called plenty worse than that and I don't even try to compare it to the journey that African Americans have had to make in this country.

If you're going to parse Obama's denial of being Muslim, especially in this political climate and then blame him, why don't you do a nice little analysis piece of HRC's serial misreprentations?

As for ageism, are you talking about Obama's bearing comments?  Do we need to educate you on what "bearings" mean?

Also, with regard to feminism, last I remembered from my gender law class was that it was anti-feminism to blame the other women for your spouse's infidelities.  Care to comment on whether gender theory has changed on that in the last 20 years?

Oh, just to confirm my misognynistic tendencies, I've voted for Ann Richards, Anne Eshoo, Boxer and Feinstein.  Also, half the senior VPs at my company are women (there are no black VPs or directors in my company).  

I realize I'm part of the problem just because I refuse to support a candidate that calls hard working (over 60 hour work week), white collar, graduate educated Dems--"latte sippers" that don't get it.

I get it plenty.  With my military history master's I called out that the Iraq War was a bad idea.  Hillary voted for it.  I will not forgive her for that.  Sorry that's its not a "gender" issue but a "war issue".  I'll also throw out my law degree and my master's in development biology as being too esoteric to get Hillary's message.

Try again.


by Regenman on Sun May 11, 2008 at 02:51:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: "War" not gender (none / 0)

Then you need to go back to class and study. Te AUF was to provide leverage, the threat of force, to force UNMOVIC and IAEA back into Iraq for inspections. Bush promised to go back to the UN for a second resolution, he told everyone in Congress the vote was a vote for peace and he lied his ass off.

Bush misused the authorization and he and his neocon war mongers took us to war, not Hillary. What has your 2 years removed from the state senator done since he gave his speech? Nada


by Newport News Dem on Sun May 11, 2008 at 07:50:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She trusted Bush (none / 0)

not to misuse a authorization of force.  It was bloody obvious that he was ignoring contrary evidence and wanted to invade no matter what.

On top of that, I'm convinced Bush didn't go to war because he actually believed it was necessary for the safety of the United States.  I think he did it for political reasons.  Every major decision in his first term pointed to his desire to be reelected.  And Hillary was kind enough to oblige with her vote.

The "judgement" thing Obama people keep bringing up?  Exhibit A.


by corph on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:37:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (none / 0)

"I will not hold your hand and be your mommy or teacher and educate you on misogyny, classism, and ageism. That expectation is sexist."

Did you just call yourself sexist?  Wow, this is really getting out of hand. LOL


by catalysis on Sun May 11, 2008 at 02:58:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (2.00 / 3)

Nope, just know what comes next from misogynist trolls, you whine and want a woman to show you the sexism, etc... I'm not your mommy or your teacher, and having that expectation of women is sexist. Apparently your comprehension level is lacking, no surprise.


by K1966 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 03:28:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (none / 0)

as if that's an either or situation.


by swissffun on Sun May 11, 2008 at 06:07:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (2.00 / 8)

This Obama supporter just emailed his objections to the Congressman's despicable statement.


by Same As It Ever Was on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:23:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (2.00 / 7)

Wow - you rock SAIEW.  Fair play to you :)


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:30:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (2.00 / 3)

At this point in a hard fought primary battle that your candidate has now lost.

And given what we all know will be a nasty, dirty, dishonest smear campaign by the McCain/Corporate right wing against Barack Obama for the General Election for President of our beloved and wounded country in November.

I ask you to think about what you've been reduced to, by trying to throw every last piece of the kitchen, bathroom, and any other sink at:
not something that Obama said or his campaign said.
But at some back-bench Congressman who said some stupid things about Hillary.

Obama didn't say it, the campaign didn't say it, I didn't say it.
You are a passionate Democrat and a talented writer. Don't let yourself get "reduced to" too little yourself. Please don't.


Let the children lose it Let the children use it Let all the children boogie
by toyomama on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:46:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (2.00 / 1)

The "hard fought primary battle" ISN'T over, and won't be until ALL the votes are counted. When they are, Hillary will have won the majority of votes, which is why Obama has failed to garner the nomination.

Frankly, many are disgusted by the nasty, dirty, dishonest smear campaign Obama and his surrogates have conducted. Smart, progressive democratic women are NOT "monsters."

Proclaiming a false "victory" by disenfranchsing MILLIONS of voters and smearing smart, progressive Democratic women hurts our "beloved and wounded coutry" far more.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Sun May 11, 2008 at 01:34:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (none / 0)

Proclaiming victory doesn't disenfranchise anyone. Obama is going to win. It is essentially in the bag. I am sure plenty of people in the remaining primaries will still vote for Hillary... after which I am sure most Hillary supporters will begin to advocate getting "pledged" delegates to change their vote. Thats fine. It is your right.

But know this- if it goes to the convention we lose in November. If it goes to the convention we get McCain no matter who winds up our candidate... and I am saying this as an Obama supporter who advocated him dropping and taking the VP slot if offered. I wouldn't advocate that now, but that is because there are no big primaries left. There is no realistic way for her to turn the ship around.

I love your candidate- almost as much as I love mine. But it is over and that is just the way it is, so pull your head out of the sand and get to work on beating McCain.


I read the body count out of the paper; now it's written all over my face.
by JDF on Sun May 11, 2008 at 06:13:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Against (none / 0)

As soon as she wins the popular vote including Puerto Rico, she can say that every vote counts and then try and get the super delegates to overturn every vote.

There is a cognitive dissonance here.


overthrow the government~participate
by missliberties on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:27:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Against (none / 0)

What's the current rate Hillary's getting superdelegates? And how many did Obama get today?


by Okamifujutsu on Sun May 11, 2008 at 12:16:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (none / 0)

We have a tough time getting these politicians to take republicans to task on more serious issues such as the electrocution of soldiers in iraq or even seek impeachment of bush for his various crimes. This is small fry compared to bigger issues in the world.

You want to attack the politician for making a dumbass statement? Fine. Perfectly understandable. But get some perspective on what democratic leaders reaction.


by Pravin on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:21:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You know what is funny about this. (2.00 / 3)

He posted his this on his blog at 9:04 a.m on the 10th, you posted your diary at 10:16 p.m. on the 10th and I am looking at his blog at 11:00 p.m. on the 10th and I see this update:

UPDATE: Congressman Cohen's office has issued an apology this evening. Cohen says, "I sincerely apologize for the comments I made about Senator Clinton's campaign. I have great respect for Senator Clinton as a US Senator. She has waged an historic campaign which has done much to break the glass ceiling.  My comments obviously do not reflect the sentiments of Senator Obama or the Obama campaign. Nor do they reflect my opinion of Senator Clinton whom I have known for years and admire. My hope is that our party will come together to work to defeat John McCain."

Now I have a feeling that, the update was on there when you wrote your diary.  Maybe it wasn't  but I would be suprised if it suddenly turned up in the last couple hours.  Did it not fit your outrage to include it?  Seriously do you just sit around looking for things to feel victimized about?  Some people have chosen to be outraged about Wright, and want to claim he is stoking the flames of bigotry.  But when Hillary and her supporters do it they get a pass.  Sorry no one is more guilty than people like you.  But it someone from Hillary's camp started rejecting gender bigotry, they would have to start with Hillary herself.

Sorry, the guy said something stupid he shouldn't have, he already apologized.  Can the same be said of Gereldine Ferraro, Bill Clinton, or  Hillary Clinton? No, they just turn it into another reason to feel victimized.


Victorious warriors win first and then go to war, while defeated warriors go to war first and then seek to win. ~ Sun Tzu
by Tumult on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:35:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

alegre should include Cohen's apology (none / 0)

Cohen's remarks are pretty offensive.

It does seem alegre should include the apology and allow readers to make their own judgment.


Rrrinnggg... Time to change the government.
by Carl Nyberg on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:17:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Is this what you've been reduced to? (2.00 / 4)

Obama is not responsible for every remark by every asshole that just HAPPENS to support him.  Any more than Clinton is responsible for every jerkish remark by people who happen to support HER.

If you want to hang this over Obama's neck, I can't stop you.  But it seems pretty childish and over-reaching from where I'm sitting.


by DawnG on Sun May 11, 2008 at 12:31:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Speaking of murder on CNN (none / 0)

Did you hear David Gergen on CNN the other day when he was asked if Obama should pick Hillary for Vice President?  Gergen's answer advised Obama not to make Hillary VEEP   if he wants to survive his first term!
Nobody said a word.  There was no outrage, no reigning in, no apology, no assertions of way over the top, unacceptable, horrendous.
Nothing.
Nobody removed Gergen from his position as a Republican comentator, or as someone fit to advise us about what Hillary should and should not do.
What do we do about him and what do we do with the environment that let him get away completely with saying such a thing on a news broadcast?

Are we all remembering to contact the MSM and their talking heads and Sunday shows to let them know what we think about the coverage and what data we think they should be including and investigating?


by itsadryheat on Sun May 11, 2008 at 04:36:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Speaking of murder on CNN (none / 0)

Why WOULD Obama choose Hillary?  Kind of flies in the face of the whole "turn the page" and "change" concept.


by Rick in Eugene on Sun May 11, 2008 at 05:21:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Speaking of murder on CNN (none / 0)

Wow! I missed that. Sounds like he is accusing Hillary of being capable of assassination, or at least not stopping assassination, to become president.

Now, it has been seen that men do this in many countries, along with our own corporations/government/agencies(See "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man"). But to suggest that Hillary would do so to a fellow Democrat is just astounding.

Wonder if anyone has a video of that. I would like to see it and hear it with my own eyes and ears.


by splashy on Sun May 11, 2008 at 02:38:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Speaking of murder on CNN (none / 0)

I think it was Tuesday night and can't remember if it was Wolf or Anderson moderating the pundits.  It is possible that it was not until Wednesday night, (though I was trying hard not to watch any of those guys on Wednesday,) if that helps anyone find the spot.


by itsadryheat on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:44:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (none / 0)

Will anyone from BO's camp speak out against this?

No.  Why start now?

This has been another episode of simple answers to simple questions.


I have yet to see what [Obama] has done to take the highest office in the land. He is no Martin Luther King. --Helen Thomas
by ghost 2 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 05:16:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (none / 0)

So, your mind is made, and don't confuse you with facts? Did you even read any of the upthread comments?


by hopeful on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:47:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

attn: Alegre (none / 0)

Your presence has been requested at this discussion:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/11/1855 59/861


McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist.
by obsessed on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:07:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

As an Obama supporter I condemn it (none / 0)

Comparing Hillary Clinton to Glenn Close's character in Fatal Attraction is just vile, and does not help Obama or the party in any way.

I'm looking forward to the end of the intra-party nastiness as soon as possible, so we can all get together and take the battle to McCain.


by Joe Buck on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:30:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Another phony tirade (none / 0)

What this jerk Congressman said was absurd.

But what is sillier is for someone who has written nothing but personal attacks here FOR MONTHS, many which differ little from what appears on redstate, to take offense.

At this point the absurd need of a minority of Clinton supporters to believe in their own victimization borders on self parody.

And this is less offensive from the vote stealing accusition that this diarist made in Indiana on NO EVIDENCE.


by fladem on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:55:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Does Obama seriously have to speak out (2.00 / 1)

everytime some a-hole says "boo!"  ?

If so, he would be getting waaaay too much airtime.


accepting McLettuce is like being 9 years old and forced to eat your own cooking
by Sychotic1 on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:20:30 PM EST

Re: Does Obama seriously have to speak out (2.00 / 6)

This is so hypocritical. Anytime someone even remotely connected to Senator Clinton says something that can be construed as impolitic, Obama supporters unleash dozens of posts calling on Hillary and her supporters to reject and denounce the remarks. Now, when the same this happens to Obama, his supporters whine and ask whether His Holiness should seriously have to speak out everytime some supporter goes off message.
by rayj on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:26:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Does Obama seriously have to speak out (2.00 / 2)

Actually, I've never asked a candidate to apologize for someone else's statement.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:28:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Does Obama seriously have to speak out (2.00 / 1)

BTW, how do you define "remotely connected?"


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:29:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Does Obama seriously have to speak out (2.00 / 2)

Exactly.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:31:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What did the shark look like (none / 0)

as you sailed overhead?


by bookish on Sun May 11, 2008 at 01:03:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Does Obama seriously have to speak out (2.00 / 3)

I'm already so tired of the "denounce and reject" theme of this camaign.  As you note, it has certainly come from the Obama supporters as well.  For me personally, if they don't have an active, high-level campaign position, I give the candidate a pass.  By all mean, however, denounce the speaker to your heart's content.


John McCain vows to overturn Roe
by soccerandpolitics on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:02:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What do you mean by remotely connected? (none / 0)

And I don't believe I have ever asked for apologies or denouncements, so I don't think that you can call me hypocritical...and if I was sensitive, I would take offense to you calling me that.


accepting McLettuce is like being 9 years old and forced to eat your own cooking
by Sychotic1 on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:56:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Does Obama seriously have to speak out (none / 0)

I'm not sure what "remotely connected" exactly means, but there's a difference between a supporter and someone speaking as a campaign member or speaking at a campaign event.

Off the top of my head, a lot of the impolitic things said from camp Clinton about Obama have been said by members of the campaign or at campaign events.  So, yes, there's a difference.

But, given that, what this guy said is wrong.  He should apologize.


Donate to Obama, Today!
by freedom78 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 12:22:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

These fellows are going to squeal like (1.00 / 3)

stuck pigs when Obama goes down the toilet in November.
May they all go down with him.

Good riddance.


by internetstar on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:46:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: These fellows are going to squeal like (2.00 / 1)

how, on earth is this kind of comment tolerated on this site? This is uninformative and unhelpful.


by hopeful on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:50:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (2.00 / 6)

Sure, as soon as you post a diary expressing your outrage with hillarys comment about white working class Americans supporting her and not Obama.


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Bill Clinton
by venician on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:20:39 PM EST

Why should she lie? (1.77 / 9)

I suppose the 92% of blacks supporting him are doing so because of his economic policies and his outstanding plans to open government via the national blog system.

Yep


I didn't believe in god before the primaries and I still don't.
by NewHampster on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:23:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You did not go there! (1.83 / 6)

don't you know, its the rules of blogoland that you do not point out the obvious- particularly when it doesn't look good for Obama!
by linc on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:27:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You did not go there! (none / 0)

Identity politics don't look good for America, because they remind us that we're not to the point where identity doesn't matter.

But if blacks vote Obama or women vote Hillary because they feel a connection and have a belief that their candidate can empower them, then I see no problem with that.

But whites voting for a white candidate because s/he's white isn't about empowerment, but about oppression.

Big difference.

I'm betting most blacks didn't vote for Obama to oppress whites, and most women didn't vote for Hillary to oppress men.  Rising to a point of true equality is not the same as keeping another group from bettering itself.


Donate to Obama, Today!
by freedom78 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 12:26:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You did not go there! (2.00 / 2)

Blacks voting for blacks is OK.
Women voting for women is OK.
Whites voting for whites is...Oppression?

What is men NOT voting for women?

***A


by adrienne4dean on Sun May 11, 2008 at 08:19:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You did not go there! (none / 0)

Adrienne, there's a difference between voting for such-and-such because of their race/gender, and voting for such-and-such regardless of their race/gender.

There's also a difference between wanting the 44th white/male president, and wanting the 1st black/female president.

Desiring the line of presidents to include ATLEAST ONE black person/woman, isn't the same morality-wise as wanting the line of presidents to include ONLY white men.

Don't pretend it is.


by Aris Katsaris on Sun May 11, 2008 at 08:33:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You did not go there! (none / 0)

Nope.  Not what I said.  It's not about the vote, it's about the motivation.


Donate to Obama, Today!
by freedom78 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:45:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why should she lie? (1.66 / 3)

I am you racist. How dare you act like blacks can't think and make decisions based on policy. How dare you. Stop acting like trash.


by sweet potato pie on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:27:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Don't let him get to you (1.75 / 4)

They get away with posting the most egregiously racist stuff all the time here, because people really doesn't mind it if it's harmful to Obama.

You're new. It's the price we pay to post here, is dealing with these ridiculously unfair slams.

Think of it this way, though: most of these people are actually neocons, if not in intent, then in actual effect.  It will become very clear to everyone what they are once Obama wins the nomination and they continue to slam him without offering productive discourse.

The site owners will lose all credibility if they don't do anything about it at that point.


In this avalanche, the pebbles get to vote.
by Dracomicron on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:35:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

where did NH say that (2.00 / 1)

black people could not think or make a choice based on policy?


For Obama it now becomes: Faith, hope and CHANGE! And the greatest of these is Change!
by TeresaInPa on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:56:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: where did NH say that (2.00 / 1)

When he mocked the idea that black voters might support Obama for his policy positions.


by letterc on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:02:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

But that is not what I said (2.00 / 4)

I said snarkilicioshly that 92% of the blacks voting for him is not because 92% of blacks know what any of his policies are.  That does not mean that many, even most may indeed know his policies but I'd be you my retirement fund that if he was white Irish those 92% of blacks would not be voting for him

just sayin'  jeeezzzzzzzzzz


I didn't believe in god before the primaries and I still don't.
by NewHampster on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:07:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Irony (2.00 / 2)

Irony is an explosive substance, and it behooves the user to be careful with it.  In your mind, it may have seemed obvious that you meant that something less than the full cohort of 92% of African Americans know details about Obama's policies.  From our perspective, however, it seemed more likely that you were speaking of that 92% of AA voters en masse.  And I thought it offensive.

People on both sides get sensitive about stuff like this.  My advice is to be careful with the irony, unless you don't care if you offend people who misunderstand your intent.


by deminva on Sun May 11, 2008 at 12:15:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But that is not what I said (2.00 / 1)

Tell that to All Gore, who received 90% of the black vote in the 2000 GE.


by Rationalisto on Sun May 11, 2008 at 02:28:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But that is not what I said (none / 0)

That's nice.  Do you have any examples of this happening in a Democratic primary?


by therealdeal on Sun May 11, 2008 at 04:36:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: But that is not what I said (none / 0)

I do wonder how well George Wallace was doing among the black bloc. His numbers were probably even worse than Hillary's, even without the need to run against a black candidate.


by Aris Katsaris on Sun May 11, 2008 at 07:58:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Jeeeezzz (2.00 / 1)

It was a racist comment but indicative of the type of comment that happens on this site. Get your panties in a wad because Hilary might have been compared to another woman but say that 92% of black people haven't the brains to make a intelligent decision and it's jeezz chill and BTW vote for her after she steals the election.

Not GONNA happen.


by Mylie on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:41:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeeeezzz (none / 0)

Hillary fighting for her right to fairly win or lose the nomination with Michigan and Florida votes being counted (even a pure revote) is not "stealing" the election. I have heard this meme far too often. I will not even respond directly to those who use it, they are too far gone.

Oh yes, I know it is probably too late for my candidate to win the election, but I cannot and will not consider Barack's winning to be legitimate if the lead is so fragile that including states that normally should be part of the process would erase the lead.

For those who take this line of thought, then why don't you urge Obama to try to win the nomination outright, instead of shortcuts.  

Because you are afraid that your candidate will lose if that is the case.


by Al Depansu on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:48:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why should she lie? (none / 0)

I imagine it has more to do with the Clintons' blatant racial polirazation of the contest to attract white voters.


John McCain vows to overturn Roe
by soccerandpolitics on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:10:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why should she lie? (2.00 / 1)

If African Americans were supporting Obama only because he is black, then he would have had 90+% of their support from the beginning. He didn't. So either something Obama did changed their minds. Or perhaps it was something Clinton did. Or maybe a little of both.


by Rationalisto on Sun May 11, 2008 at 02:23:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

exactly right (none / 0)

As late as October 2007, most African-Americans supported Hillary.  It wasn't until after Iowa that AAs started to believe in the possibility of a black president, and it wasn't until after South Carolina that the AA vote shifted overwhelmingly to Obama.  This was a reflection of how both candidates ran their races, and it doesn't reflect well on the Clintons (I think that Bill Clinton's remarks in South Carolina turned the tide, possibly costing Hillary the nomination).


by Joe Buck on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:36:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Why should she lie? (2.00 / 1)

The problem with your line of thinking is that Clinton held a lead among black voters by something like 60/40 at the start of the election.  


by darryl darryl darryl on Sun May 11, 2008 at 05:31:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

They're probably supporting him (2.00 / 1)

for the same reason that 92% of Blacks have always supported Alan Keyes, J. C. Reid, Michael Steele, and Lynn Swann.  Right?


"All I'm doing is trying to look at things objectively and arrive at a solution to a very difficult situation." Major Danby in Catch-22 ch. 42
by Major Danby on Sun May 11, 2008 at 06:19:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]

They're probably supporting him (none / 0)

for the same reason that 92% of Blacks have always supported Alan Keyes, J. C. Reid, Michael Steele, and Lynn Swann.  Right?


"All I'm doing is trying to look at things objectively and arrive at a solution to a very difficult situation." Major Danby in Catch-22 ch. 42
by Major Danby on Sun May 11, 2008 at 06:21:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

The who did what (1.85 / 7)

on race baiting and racism is going to be a hard one to heal. I will vote for Obama if he is the nominee (political forgiveness, if you will), but I will probably never, truly forgive him for inciting racial divides and painting HRC as a race-baiter. I hope he finds some personal clarity on the issue one day.
by linc on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:25:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The who did what (2.00 / 1)

The main thing he did to incite racial divides is to be black and running for president.


by letterc on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:04:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The who did what (none / 0)

How dare he?!?


"I'll bite your legs off!" -- HRC 2008!
by username3 on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:20:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The who did what (2.00 / 1)

But then he made Bill Clinton say the stuff about Jesse Jackson after South Carolina.  I'll never forgive Obama for doing that.


by deminva on Sun May 11, 2008 at 12:16:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The who did what (2.00 / 1)

The turning point for me was when he pulled his ventriloquist act and made it look like Hillary Clinton was dropping Farrakhan's name just to drop his name at the last debate.

Had she done that, that would be blatent race-baiting.  But it was just more of his tricks.


by Mostly on Sun May 11, 2008 at 01:31:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

yeah right (2.00 / 2)

you must have missed the memo that 'wasn't released to the press' but somehow, made it into the press. Or his surrogates like JJ Jr. running around before every major black caucus or primary, letting everyone know how racist HRC is. Or talking up that stupid photo before the MS primary.

It has benefited him, I give him that- he certainly knows how to win at all costs. Its politics, the person who does it is usually the person IT benefits the most. There is no way, in any shape or form, that HRC being painted as a racist benefited her in any way in this primary. And the dog whistle thing? Do you really think that there are that many racists in the democratic electorate? Do you really think they, as small as their numbers might be, were ever going to vote for Obama anyway? Do you think they need HRC to tell them that Obama is black?
by linc on Sat May 10, 2008 at 11:24:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: yeah right (none / 0)

You've been tossing around unsubstantiated claims like croutons and cherry tomatoes.  Exactly when did Jesse Jackson, Jr., accuse Clinton of being racist?


by deminva on Sun May 11, 2008 at 12:18:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You are kidding right? (2.00 / 2)

Here is ONE instance of JJ Jr. playing the race card

Now, Clinton was required to denounce every single supposed association that made a comment that could be even remotely tied back to race. What happened to JJ Jr? Ah, nothing.
by linc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 12:31:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You are kidding right? (none / 0)

Yes, very definitely the race card.  But he doesn't come out and call her racist.  He raises a potentially ugly question: Why did she cry in NH, but not after Katrina?  The insinuation could be that she cares more about herself than others, or more about her candidacy than about African Americans.  It's an ugly insinuation, but he certainly never called her racist.  There's a slippery slope here.

Further, if you thought it offensive that Clinton was made to apologize for every surrogate's statement, then why in the world are you trying to turn that around?  Jesse Jackson, Jr., is not helping run the Obama campaign.  Yet you move from his statement on Clinton and Katrina to "the Obama campaign played the race card."

I don't like that game either, and I don't believe the campaigns can control everything their surrogates say.  For those who disagree with me, I'd be interested in knowing where Andrew Cuomo's line about Obama "shucking and jiving" or young Sheehan's question about whether or not Obama ever sold cocaine fit into your timelines about which candidate played the race card first.


by deminva on Sun May 11, 2008 at 02:05:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You have pretty much hit my point (2.00 / 2)

Cuomo isn't even associated with the campaign- that comment got way more press and indignation than what JJ Jr. had to say. I also agree with what Clinton did, she got rid of everyone that was even remotely associated with the campaign that might have even remotely said something racist or 'race-baiting'. Bill is an exception, but he shut up at least.

My greater point is that Democrats are not racists. If they were, Obama wouldn't be in this race, he would not be a head in this race. If you believe the Clinton campaign engaged in race baiting then you believe that there are enough racists in this party to matter and you beleive that somehow, they needed a dog whistle from the Clinton camp to remind them that Obama is black.

In politics, the dirty work is usually done by those it benefits. Hillary Clinton being painted as a racist or race-baiter (is there really a difference) benefited only Obama's campaign. I don't think Hillary is stupid, especially not when it comes to politics-

The JJ Jr. message above was just one of his many attempts to paint Clinton as a racist. Obama did it himself when he went in front of all black audiences in MS (at least) and talked up that stupid photo that Drudge claimed came from the Clinton camp.

The Obama campaign sent out a memeo that specifically pulled together every single instance of 'race-baiting' by the Clinton camp, in the lead up to the SC primary- no matter how reaching. If they were ambitious enough to outline it in a memo to the press, then you know very well that it was part of the on the ground campaign dialog.
by linc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 06:22:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: yeah right (none / 0)

Well, if I'm following what some friends of mine believe, I guess a key part of the accusation that the Clintons are race baiting is, in fact, assuming that a lot of Democratic voters are complete racists AND complete morons, who would not notice that Obama is African American if Hillary's evil campaign hadn't somehow pointed it out to them.

I think at the heart of it.. to be honest.. contempt for fellow Americans, fellow Democrats, a very quick willingness to assume that they're ignorant and racist, and a wish to separate themselves from that group by pointing the finger in the other direction.  I'm incredibly disgusted by this.. not least because.. I think we all should look in the mirror first before throwing stones at other people.  

I have seen PLENTY of racism in the white collar workplace, and IMHO it doesn't take the form of some secret "code" they accuse the Clintons of using.  It's the HR gatekeepers picking and choosing which resumes are read, it's the quick assumptions as to who knows something and who needs to be told, it's condescending ways of trying to show you know another person's culture, it's who gets asked to take on projects and who isn't, it's who gets promoted and paid more and who doesn't.  And IMHO having been in a work environment that was very overtly liberal, what blew my mind was.. people there just SO bent out of shape crying OMG racism every time race is mentioned in just about any context in politics/media.  And I want to say (but can't) look in the mirror, look at your own workplace, why is it 95% white!?  why are senior managers 100% white?  That's what happens.


by daria g on Sun May 11, 2008 at 01:55:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: yeah right (2.00 / 1)

Actually, yes, I think there are lots of racists in the Democratic party, but I think they are almost all of the "I'm not racist, but..." category (well, except in the South, where there are still a fair number of Dixiecrats, who won't register Republican because of the war and Lincoln). These are a group for whom dog whistling is very effective, since telling people who are vaguely racist but uncomfortable with their racism that it is okay to vote against the black candidate because other people are racist and won't vote for the black man, thereby giving us president McCain, is both convincing and gives them a reason to go with their gut instinct to vote against the black man.

Clinton has been getting several percentage points pretty consistently from white people who tell pollsters that "race of the candidates is important to them" and that they voted for Clinton (I suppose that some of those people are people who almost voted for Obama because they want to see a black man elected president, but decided to vote for Clinton instead for other reasons, but I doubt it). Given that she lost the black vote nearly completely from fairly early on, the dog whistling doesn't actually hurt her much at this point.

"hard-working Americans, White Americans" certainly struck me as a dog whistling. I just can't imagine why else she would have said that.


by letterc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 03:18:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The who did what (none / 0)

Word.


by Rationalisto on Sun May 11, 2008 at 02:25:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (2.00 / 4)

I heard Obama boast about his support from the AA community, fyi.


TexasDarlin blog
by TexasDarlin on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:27:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (2.00 / 1)

Please cite your source than.  Hillary boasted about her support of white folks just in time for the K meeting.


by sweet potato pie on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:29:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (none / 0)

When? Where?


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:29:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (1.50 / 2)

Yeah darlin, and you also post on your blog that Obama isn't a U.S. citizen.


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Bill Clinton
by venician on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:33:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (1.66 / 6)

No, vencian, that's false, as usual.  I posted that people had raised questions about whether he has dual citizenship.  Get it?  dual.  I did not state an opinion one way or the other.  I stated that there were questions, which there are.  But, I forget, no one is supposed to ask any questions about Barack's background because he is the anointed one.  Gimmee a break.


TexasDarlin blog
by TexasDarlin on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:41:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (2.00 / 3)

Darlin, any person can ask a question, does that mean you are going to post every question asked about Obama? Or just the ones that help spread discusting RUMORS?


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Bill Clinton
by venician on Sat May 10, 2008 at 10:46:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To? (