Rahm Emanuel: Kennedy, that's "Uncalled for and Wrong"

by andrewalker08, Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:05:28 PM EST

From the diaries, Jerome

What exactly is "uncalled for and wrong?"

Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy's comments regarding the possibility of a Obama/Clinton ticket in November.

Late last week, the senior United States Senator from Massachusetts broke the Democrat-amended Reagan Commandement, "Thou Shalt Not Speak Ill of Another Democrat", when he suggested that New York Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton did not possess the "real leadership" needed to be Vice President of the United States.

Ted Kennedy, the aging liberal lion of the Democratic Party, took a nasty bite out of Hillary Clinton Friday, saying she shouldn't be vice president because the job requires "real leadership."

Kennedy added that he hoped Obama would choose a running mate who is "in tune with his appeal for the nobler aspirations of the American people.

"And I think if we had real leadership - as we do with Barack Obama - in the number-two spot as well, it'd be enormously helpful," he added.

Source:  5/9/2008 New York Daily News article "As Obama gains superdelegates, Ted Kennedy says Hillary not fit for veep"
The Massachusetts Senator's words were a little bit too much for one of Obama's Illinois colleagues in Congress -- U.S. Representative Rahm Emanuel.

"I have a lot of respect for Ted Kennedy, but I don't know how the hell he comes off saying that," said Mr. Emanuel, who has ties to Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama and has not endorsed in the race. "The gratuitous attack on her is uncalled for and wrong. He is a better senator than that comment reveals."  [Source:  5/11/2008 The Caucus/New York Times Political blog "Emanuel to Kennedy: That's Not Nice"]

Seeking to backtrack from his degrading statements against the former First Lady, Sen. Kennedy's office released the following statement:

"Senator Kennedy believes Senator Clinton is qualified to be vice president but doesn't think it's likely given the tenor of the campaign."




Tags: Hillary Clinton (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 232 Comments :: Post a Comment


Tips & Recs for Rahm Emanuel... (2.00 / 24)

...Standing up and doing what's right when a leader of the Democratic Party is attacked unnecessarily.


by andrewalker08 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 06:31:46 PM EST

Re: Tips & Recs for Rahm Emanuel... (1.66 / 3)

methinks good old Teddy is hoping he is asked :)


by zerosumgame on Sun May 11, 2008 at 06:42:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tips & Recs for Rahm Emanuel... (1.50 / 2)

I think quite a few of the past losers are swarming around Obama thinking they will be VP, Kennedy, Kerry and Daschle - his political mentors. Apparently Kennedy thinks he's first in line.


by Justwords on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:16:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Point of fact... (2.00 / 2)

Obama is doing unbelievably well with the next generation of Democratic voters.

I don't believe that any of the Dems you mention have V-P aspirations.

I do believe they care about advancing our agenda.

fwiw.


Clinton Democrats care about the same things I do, most importantly beating John McCain.
by TrueBlueCT on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:25:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tips & Recs for Rahm Emanuel... (1.00 / 1)

Ted Kennedy is a long term alcoholic who should be voted out of office. He is the walking argument for term limits.


by 07rescue on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:34:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Concern Trolling (none / 0)

Do you live in Massachusetts?  Are you registered to vote in the next Massachusetts Senatorial election?  Do you have some kind of personal knowledge of your accusations?

No?

That's what I thought.  Can we disagree with people without attacking them?  Especially fellow Democrats, for Chrissakes!


by auronrenouille on Mon May 12, 2008 at 03:45:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tips & Recs for Rahm Emanuel... (1.13 / 15)


 Chappaquiddick... now that`s a noble story. Go back to the Gin bottle Teddy.
Wisdom Is The Reward For Listening Over A Lifetime
by gunner on Sun May 11, 2008 at 07:18:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tips & Recs for Rahm Emanuel... (none / 0)

I am not sure why you were troll rated for this.  You raise a good point that it's hard to talk about nobility with such a checkered past.


by reggie44pride on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:27:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It's the Chappaquiddick thing (none / 0)

and the gin bottle thing.  They're both ad-homs agains a generally well-respected Democrat and are not relevant to what he said.


by corph on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:23:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Sure if he did the same (2.00 / 1)

everytime either Clinton opened their mouth about Senator Obama. Maybe he did and I never saw it reported.  Gasp Kennedy said something negative about Clinton after months of Clinton implying if not outright saying  the same type of thing about Obama.  If he is the PC police I am suprised he was able to take time from holding his little red stop sign up to Clinton to hear what Kennedy said.


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 Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:42:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sure if he did the same (1.50 / 2)

You got it.  None of them could be King so they are settling for a last gasp chance to be King makers.  


by Tolstoy on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:54:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I agree. Teddy's attack was unnecessary. (1.50 / 6)

Accurate, but unnecessary.

We don't need Teddy Kennedy to tell us that Hillary is unqualified to be VP.

Hillary has done that herself, because she has proven herself unqualified to be POTUS.

Hillary is unsuited to be Obama's VP for the same reason that Hillary was unsuited to the Democratic nomination:  it disarms the Democrats' strongest arguments against McCain, the "supports the Iraq Invasion and Occupation" argument, and the "bad judgement" argument that flows therefrom.

Obama can't put anyone on his ticket who supported the illegal and immoral invasion and occupation of Iraq, unless that person a) realized very early on that they had made a mistake, and 2) vocalized early and often the fact that they had made a mistake, 3) apologized for that mistake, and 4) worked their ass off to reverse that mistake.

Hillary has disqualified herself on all four counts.

In addition, Hillary's campaign, losing the nomination, when a year ago everyone -- including her -- considered that she had an insurmountable edge, to an upstart first term Senator that almost nobody gave any chance of succeeding a year ago, has demonstrated that she is incapable of running a large organization strategically and effectively.  Again, that disqualifies her from being POTUS.

There are at this time no rational arguments that can be made to support Hillary over Obama (mostly, arguments of precedent) that do not equally argue that neither of them should be the nominee.

I can think of a few rational arguments for superdelegates to decide that neither Clinton nor Obama are as suitable for the job as some other Democrats might be, but it's going to take some serious turns of events to push them to do anything that drastic.


Ignorance is weakness. Get strong.
by tbetz on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:45:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So Teresa, point out the factual inaccuracies... (2.00 / 1)

... in the post you so boldly troll-rated.

Or are you embarassed that you can not do so?


Ignorance is weakness. Get strong.
by tbetz on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:58:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So Teresa, point out the factual inaccuracies. (2.00 / 1)

I can't speak for Teresa,  but I'll be happy to point out your condescension if you like. Take a look at your response to Josey.


"It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for subtlety". Salvor Hardin
by Denny Crane on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:40:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You can't defend Teresa, either. (none / 0)

Josey was also unable to dispute the factual nature of my post;  instead, she responded with tired smears.

My reply to those smears was generous, by comparison.


Ignorance is weakness. Get strong.
by tbetz on Mon May 12, 2008 at 07:20:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Poor Josey -- still sticking to long-discredited.. (1.50 / 2)

... distractions.  Can't even come up with sources to cite that aren't in-the-tank Clinton blogs.  You might as well cite HillaryIs44.

But you just keep pushing them.

Sometimes, even fading dreams can come true.


Ignorance is weakness. Get strong.
by tbetz on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:02:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tips & Recs for Rahm Emanuel... (2.00 / 2)

Got to say, Hillary is not my favorite person right now, but that was wrong and completely uncalled for by Ted Kennedy.  Shame on him.  


by yitbos96bb on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:55:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tips & Recs for Rahm Emanuel... (none / 0)

It's too bad Rahm didnt keep his mouth shut after the 2006 elections. But I agree with him. Ted Kennedy should have kept his mouth shut. I do not want to see Hillary as VP, but Kennedy should shown more tact. Kennedy needs to worry about the senate first.


by Pravin on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:36:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

attacked unnecessarily (1.00 / 1)

Do you mean when the "presumptive" leader of the party, Obama, is unecessarily attacked by an opponent with no mathematical chance of winning by saying, "hard working Americans, white Americans," won't vote for him?


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:43:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: attacked unnecessarily (none / 0)

Come on... Do you honestly think that was what she meant to say... Just like the bitter comments from Obama, she worded it poorly and the poor wording came back to bite her.  She phrased it badly, but she isn't a racist or anything like that.


by yitbos96bb on Mon May 12, 2008 at 08:24:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: attacked unnecessarily (none / 0)

Hillary's no dummy. She was blowing the dog whistle.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:27:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: attacked unnecessarily (none / 0)

You are being intellectually dishonest in trying to further what you know is a lie from Obama's surrogates.

It is a FACT that exit polls show that working-class, hard-working white Americans are part of Hillary's coalition, her base.  That is indisputable.

The LIE comes from trying to extend this to say THAT means that Blacks are NOT hard-working, which is not only stupid, but a lie.


by dembluestates on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:11:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: attacked unnecessarily (none / 0)

It was just another of the ongoing attempts by Hillary's campaign to drive a wedge between demographics in the Democratic party.

It stated last year when Bob Kerry claimed Obama attended a madrassa. Then it was floated that Obama had been a ghetto drug dealer. Then he was called the "black candidate." Then Bill Clinton compared his SC win to those of Jesse Jackson. Then Ed Rendell suggested that white people in PA wouldn't vote for Obama.

Now this. It wasn't a slip of the tongue nor a simple statement of fact. It was an attempt to appeal to the worst in some people as a last gasp effort to keep her campaign from finally going all the way under.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:23:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's not about the DNC.... try DLC (none / 0)

That's where Emanuel's (and Hillary's) true allegience lies. Oh, and here ya go, a little insight into nice Mr. Rahm:

On the night after the Clinton (1996) election, "Emanuel was so angry at the president's enemies that he stood up at a celebratory dinner with colleagues from the campaign, grabbed a steak knife and began rattling off a list of betrayers, shouting 'Dead! ... Dead! ... Dead!' and plunging the knife into the table after every name."


by ratmach on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:50:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You tell em! (2.00 / 5)

This is a nice statement by Rahm. I have alot of respect for him as someone who calls bullshit on both the Obama and Clinton campaigns, and I loved his blunt language.


Hillary supporter for Barack Obama in 2008
by zcflint05 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 06:40:35 PM EST

This is politics. (none / 0)

Of course, Rahm is going to give a olive branch to the Clinton Camp by calling out Kennedy.  He already called Obama the 'presumptive nominee'.  He is close to both, so of course he will make this statement.  But it will not go anywhere.


by tracey webb on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:33:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is politics. (2.00 / 1)

I think that's an excellent point.  I was surprised to hear Rahm say that Obama was the likely nominee.

I also agree that Kennedy needn't have spoken ill of Clinton.  But it cracks me up that her supporters here are jumping all over a statement that, in its context, is about 1/5 as toxic as her repeated declarations several months back that she and McCain were qualified to be Commander-in-Chief, but Obama wasn't.  

If a front-pager at MyDD is going to call out Kennedy for breaking the 11th commandment, I'm interested to know if they did the same when Clinton spewed her C-in-C BS.  Or was that "totally different," because it's right and good that opponents in a primary contest should "differentiate themselves" for the voters?


by deminva on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:42:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ted Kennedy has no moral authority to judge (2.00 / 8)

any woman under any circumstances.
He is one to talk about leadership after he caved to bush on healthcare and NCLB.
For Obama it now becomes: Faith, hope and CHANGE! And the greatest of these is Change!
by TeresaInPa on Sun May 11, 2008 at 06:44:35 PM EST

Re: Ted Kennedy has no moral authority to judge (1.25 / 4)

I can think of a woman that he judged.


Fight for Democrats in Congress.
by owl06 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 06:58:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ted Kennedy has no moral authority to judge (none / 0)

Is this a Chappaquiddick reference?  If so, those uprating it should think about how they'd feel if it was a Vince Foster reference.  Both are reprehensible and should not be encouraged.


by semiquaver on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:38:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ted Kennedy has no moral authority to judge (1.00 / 0)

Are you nuts??? Chappaquiddick is a FACT, not a rumor.  


by JustJennifer on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:26:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ted Kennedy has no moral authority to judge (none / 0)

It's also true that Obama used drugs as a kid, but it's still character assassination to bring it up.


by semiquaver on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:36:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ted Kennedy has no moral authority to judge (none / 0)

I don't like the reference (if that's what it was - I thought it had more to do with womanizing, which I also don't like), but how in the world is Chappaquidick anything like Vince Foster?  


"It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for subtlety". Salvor Hardin
by Denny Crane on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:43:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ted Kennedy has no moral authority to judge (none / 0)

both distract from the issues with negative sensationalism.  True, one is unfounded and the other is fact, but we're talking about his choice for VP, not an accident he caused 40 years ago.  He has done many good things since then, and trying to discredit him with something that has nothing to do with the current topic is irresponsible.


by semiquaver on Mon May 12, 2008 at 03:01:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Ted Kennedy has no moral authority to judge (none / 0)

dead is dead.


Fight for Democrats in Congress.
by owl06 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:19:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rahm Emanuel: Kennedy, that (none / 0)

apologize teddy!


I would say at this point we're starting to see a little desperation on the part of the woman who I support... NY Governor Paterson
by obamaovermccain on Sun May 11, 2008 at 06:44:42 PM EST

here we go again with the half-azz apologies (2.00 / 4)

another voice from an Obama supporter (and I like & respect Kennedy - he is my senator) who makes a azz statement and then uses the meme of "Oh, I have a lot of respect for Sen. Clinton"

how many times has that come out of the Obama camp/surrogates/supporters?


by colebiancardi on Sun May 11, 2008 at 06:51:43 PM EST

Re: here we go again with the half-azz apologies (none / 0)

More than I can count.  Yesterday it was Steve Cohen and today Teddy.  Nasty words, total disrespect, followed by wimpy apology.  


by Tolstoy on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:00:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: here we go again with the half-azz apologies (2.00 / 0)

You know, I'd have more respect for all of your hyperventilations if you were anywhere to be found when the Clinton campaign were quite directly saying that Obama "had not crossed the commander-in-chief threshold".

But instead of being censured, as Ted Kennedy is rightly being here, he was cheered on.  So hurray for Rahm Emanuel.  You guys?  Eat your crow.


by Jordache on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:50:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

A bridge.... (1.21 / 14)

Apparently Kennedy wants to build a bridge to the future. He knows a lot about bridges.


Fight for Democrats in Congress.
by owl06 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 06:57:49 PM EST

Re: A bridge.... (2.00 / 2)

Ted Kennedy knows a lot about health care.  I just wish he had a chance to implement Democratic ideas and ideals.  Hillary had her chance.  Ted Kennedy is a giant redwood.  Others are small saplings.  It hurts to lose, but the good Democrats here should get over it and stop doing McCain's dirty work.


by howardpark on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:43:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks, Rahm. (2.00 / 8)

As for Kennedy, the press statement is scarcely less insulting than the original statement. Damnation by faint praise indeed.

At least Samantha Power and Steve Cohen said they greatly respected Hillary Clinton after saying ill-advised things about her.


by OrangeFur on Sun May 11, 2008 at 07:02:10 PM EST

Re: Thanks, Rahm. (2.00 / 4)

kennedy, um not going there - but rahm said exactly what BO should have said now and for the past months.  sigh


"Democracy! Bah! When I hear that word I reach for my feather Boa!" -- Allen Ginsberg
by canadian gal on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:09:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, Rahm. (2.00 / 0)

Obama HAS said that, despite being told again and again that he's not qualified to be Commander-in-chief.

To smile and be magnanimous in the face of insults shows more character than a lot of people have.


by Jordache on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:53:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Thanks, Rahm. (none / 0)

really he has called out the HRC character assassinations (especially from his surrogates and supporters)?  please direct me to where i can go and see.  thanks.


"Democracy! Bah! When I hear that word I reach for my feather Boa!" -- Allen Ginsberg
by canadian gal on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:57:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Every time I see or (1.80 / 5)

hear Uncle Ted now all I can think of is the YouTube clip of Barack saying in '03 that he was getting old and that he needed to grow some spine and fight the Republicans. It is really sad to see him falling on his sword for Barack after Barack insulted him.

I hope Hillary never carpools with Uncle Ted, as Rev. Wright would say he was "riding dirty."


by LatinoVoter on Sun May 11, 2008 at 07:17:23 PM EST

Re: Every time I see or (2.00 / 2)

Riding dirty..ooh I like that one.


Wisdom Is The Reward For Listening Over A Lifetime
by gunner on Sun May 11, 2008 at 07:31:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Fell on his sword? (none / 0)

Maybe he just took Obama's advice to heart.


by corph on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:26:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rahm Emanuel: Kennedy, that's " (1.60 / 5)

Given that Hillary said that Obama could not win the GE because he is black, how could she run as his VP?  She also does not believe Obama is qualified to be CIC, only she and McCain.  So given these two statements I don't think Hillary would run with someone she thinks would not win. the GE.  And I doubt that Obama would want to run with someone who has such a poor opinion of him.


by Spanky on Sun May 11, 2008 at 07:35:19 PM EST

Re: Rahm Emanuel: Kennedy, that's " (2.00 / 1)

Suits me all to hell


Wisdom Is The Reward For Listening Over A Lifetime
by gunner on Sun May 11, 2008 at 07:42:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I hope she's not planning (1.90 / 10)

a VP slot. As much I love me some Hillary her as VP would be a disaster. We know how much Barack and his followers love to blame Hillary and Bill for everything and with her as VP they'd have all kinds of complaints.

Plus, the more qualified of the two candidates shouldn't have to settle for VP and train her boss. Her Base waited 8 years while she worked her ass off in the Senate to vote for her and I can wait another 4.


by LatinoVoter on Sun May 11, 2008 at 08:36:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I hope she's not planning (2.00 / 1)

She'd never be the nominee in 2012.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:09:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sure she will. (1.66 / 3)

With her base and all the people she has converted she can run the "I told you so" campaign.


by LatinoVoter on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:18:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sure she will. (2.00 / 0)

Her base has been insufficient to win this year. Why would she do any better in 2012?


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:21:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

When Barack (1.80 / 5)

crashes and burns in the GE her base plus the converts who will see she was right all along will be more than enough.

Plus I have a feeling that for the next round they'll revamp the system so that caucuses don't have the importance they have now.

And after the party loses the GE I doubt they'll try to disenfranchise two states again just to give Barack an advantage.

McGovern+Mondale+Dukakis=Obama


by LatinoVoter on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:28:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: When Barack (2.00 / 1)

McGovern + Mondale + Dukakis? You forgot to add "The Chevy Chase Show" + "Gigli" too.

I don't like Obama, so he's everything bad I ever heard of once. Plus he smells.

Regrow some thick skin people. How often has Hillary and Bill outwardly said that Obama isn't qualified to be President. You all say that every 10 minutes.

Boo F'ing Hoo Hillary has to deal with a similar statement. And Obama doesn't speak for Kennedy and Kennedy doesn't speak for Obama. Hillary, on the other hand, speaks for herself, and has had no problem raising questionable -- AT BEST -- comments questioning Obama's leadership, skills, intelligence, etc.

I wish Obama would tell her what she's become -- a sad shell of herself, drained of passion for anything but 'winning.' And then filled to the brim with 100% uncut Chutzpah. I wish a sandbag would fall on her comicly when she's about to go on stage, resulting in whatever amnesiatic stuper she's been in since Super Tuesday to wear off so she can say "where am I; I said THAT about Black voters; me???!!

I wish the Clinton stragglers understood that primary's end, and the time for Obama bashing is over. If she still has an argument for her own candidacy to make, she should make it.

I wish that she should have thicker skin in doing so -- as should everyone here. Because there's enough certitude in his nomination, that her attacks will start bruising more than just Obama, and more than just Obama will be defending him.

But what I wish for never happens.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:43:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: When Barack (none / 0)

Yeah if he crashes and burns a significant portion of his base will blame her.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:52:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Fads don't have a base. (1.00 / 1)

Once the novelty of the political equivalent of an iPod wears off his "base" will move on to whatever new shiny object catches their attention.

He's been running for office every four years of his political life because he doesn't have the mental capacity to stay with something. That's why he has no record of his own or causes he's championed you can point to. In four year he'll prolly be bored and be running for God or doing something else.

And whatever "base" he has left will be completely irrelevant as they'll be seen as the ones that snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.  


by LatinoVoter on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:09:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sure she will. (1.50 / 2)

what the hell are you talking about? her base is much broader and includes the swing voters we actually need to win a general. Obama has blacks, who are guaranteed for the Democrat anyway and not swing voters, and young people who also barely come out, and when they do, they go Dem anyway. Obama has the McGovern base.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:49:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sure she will. (1.71 / 7)

Right. Because us Blacks are fucking robots.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:53:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Sad little troll raters. (none / 0)


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:18:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sad little troll raters. (none / 0)

Get over it Esquire.


by reggie44pride on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:39:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sure she will. (none / 0)

Wow. The Us vs. Them mentality of the remaining Clinton folks is stunning.

You really think Hillary openly dismissing the importance of blacks, the youth and those inspired by Obama's candidacy as less important because they're more reliable... will really help keep those people reliable? What a great public explanation of the calculus that has made "change" -- define it as you like -- needed. This triangulation crap has got to go.

A party can appeal to all, even if the candidate doens't appeal immediately to everyone. Bill Clinton didn't appeal to New York in the primary (see Primay Colors for a funny depiction) but oddly enough, 8 years later, Hillary becomes the state's JR senator precisely because of her strength in NYC.

Just goes to show...


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:23:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sure she will. (2.00 / 1)

she is not "dissing" the importance of the blacks and youth, be she is not making them the ONLY voters whose voters matter for a nominee. They matter, but because they are likely to go Democrat, and we have gotten clobbered with working class whites and not done as well with Latinos as Bill Clinton did, we have LOST elections. THOSE are the voters we need to work harder to court, if we had not been doing well with them in the past. Obama and his crew are the ones dissing the importance of getting new voters, meaning voter demographic groups who haven't voted Democrat in recent elections back to the Democratic party. By losing the white vote by 17 points in 2004 and only winning Latinos 53-44 instead of Clinton's 74-22, John Kerry lost 2004. We don't need a repeat. We should hedge our bets. While young voters are important to have, considering they are important but come out less to vote, and have done so consistently over many years, and they didn't get McGovern close to the White House, we should shift emphasis to put it more on Latinos, who we need to win BIG with to win, and white voters, who we have gotten clobbered with in the last 40 years, and the only 2 Dems to win the White House since, Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter both gotten within 5 points of beating the Republican in the white vote. Al Gore would have secured wins in 2000 if he had done better with whites, instead of losing by 13, enough likely to have possibly won NH, MO, or even TN and never mind Florida. We need to go after voters we haven't done as well with before, not preach to the converted. If Obama could get working white voters and Latinos, then he'd be perfect because he could continue getting blacks and young voters. But he's not doing those well, so he's a one trick pony. Hillary is more likely to do well with Obama's demographic groups in a general election than Obama with Hillary's. That is what I am saying. The problem is with this process, anything less than politically correct is called "racist."


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:37:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sure she will. (none / 0)

If he was a one-trick pony, would he be winning the nomination?

If he were a one-trick pony, would he have won in many states without a significant African American presence?

If he were... GOD, I'm so tired of having to explain this. No one is calling her racist for discussing demographics... she's being called racist for calling black people lazy. Seeing as how many bigots already view blacks as shiftless, lazy and unreliable, isn't that the real meaning of her dog whistle about Hardworking Americans, White Americans? Isn't that at the core of this whole argument -- blacks aren't enough, we can't win with blacks alone, they'll vote for us anyway -- that blacks aren't as important? Seeing as presidents were elected without the benefit of blacks for years-- without concent, seeing as how if the black vote was split or less enthusiastic, Democrats would have few if any candidates elected, seeing as how blacks are historically the recipient of election mischeif -- don't you see the danger in her comments? Don't you see how those comments ALONE are enough to ensure she should be on no ticket EVER since she has ensured that blacks now understand that in the political calculus they once again matter less than whites. Whites who always get the attention in the elections. Whites who always get their preferred candidates and always get their issues up front and center.

And finally, that a black candidate has won with both whites and blacks, (and youth and elderly and many other delightfully non-white male demographics) the argument is "well, that's still not enough. It's not enough to give the white voters what they want over everything else EVERY YEAR, but let's use that as a reason to scuttle what analysists say they DONT WANT. Blacks won't care! They like being treated like crap.

Hillary poisioned her own well. If the democrats lose the black vote, it's over for us. Forever. It's that simple.

White blue collar voters are nice. But you can't pick and choose one group over the other. That's called a wedge. Hillary isn't just exploiting one, but exacerbating it, and deserves to lose forever for doing so.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:53:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

He's a one trick pony. (1.00 / 0)

All he's ever done his political life is run for office and get elected. That's why his record here in Illinois consists of bills that were jacked from other legislators and given to Barack to put his name on them.


by LatinoVoter on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:11:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He's a one trick pony. (1.00 / 0)

you forgot the bills he voted "present" on.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:39:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I stand corrected. (1.00 / 0)

He's got two tricks.


by LatinoVoter on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:40:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

when did she call blacks lazy? (none / 0)

and whats wrong with calling whites hard working? They are the forgotten demographic group in American and Democratic politics. Every and party always is courting minorities, the latino vote, the cuban vote, the asian vote, the black vote, but Democrats never court the white vote.  I don't think here comments were well worded, but she did not say anything wrong or racist. They came off badly, but she is saying what really needs to be said. If kerry and Gore courted the white votes more, they'd have won. Kerry could have gotten 4 more percent of the white vote and won the 2004 popular vote, meaning 93% chance of winning that election.

And when you talk of Obama winning in states with few blacks, he wins in small caucus ultra red states where the extremely few Dems who exist there only voted for him a. because they were the only guys on the ground, and b. because their states have gone GOP for so long the figure why not try someone new. And those were all before Jeremiah Wright and Obama's "typical white person" speech. Watch Obama get clobbered in those states come November, when they count.

This is a political contest, not a feel good nice nice thing to make blacks, who make up only 12 percent of the US populace the all important center of the universe. Whites are the MAJORITY and yes their choices of candidates and issues are going to come first, because there are 7 times as many in this country overall than blacks. However, I do appreciate black voters and don't take them for granted. But we can't accomodate only them at the expense of everyone else. Obama has been floundering with whites in his own party, who are supposed to be more liberal than the overall electorate, in RECENT CONTESTS, and its where you end up, not where you start, as Wright and "typical white person" weren't around during Virginia and Iowa. If it had been, he'd have been a goner. he'd have never gotten close the nomination.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:21:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: when did she call blacks lazy? (none / 0)

"I do appreciate black voters and don't take them for granted. But we can't accomodate only them at the expense of everyone else"

Yeah, that's been happening a lot over the last 230 years. /snark


by shalca on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:20:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: when did she call blacks lazy? (none / 0)

we can accomodate them WHEN we get to office. But we can't get to office if say "fuck you" to all the other demographic groups, whites, working class whites, Latinos, women, and only please the blacks and Mcgovernite college students who won't even come out this fall.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:55:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: when did she call blacks lazy? (none / 0)

I find it interesting that Obama doing well with blacks somehow constitutes an "F You" to all other groups.

Does the fact that Hillary gets 10% of the black vote constitute an F You to the black community?

And in case you're wondering, Hillary didn't say "white americans who happen to be hard working," she said Obama's support among "working americans, hard working americans white americans is weakening."

These aren't three seperate demographic groups. It was ugly and wrong. Jerome talks about "Clinton hate" (frankly, one sees what one wants, I get only the reverse here) but I think I see a little of what he's getting at.

I do hate Hillary Clinton 2008 -- not because of what she's said to Obama or her campaign per se -- but what her campaign has done to Hillary Clinton 1992-2007 -- when she was a lion among sheep. I don't know what happened, but seeing her demean not just herself, but everything she's worked for with this quality of comment, re-imagining of herself as Everything Obama Is Not, despite it being everything she is not...

It's been a demeaning process, and her lack of self-awareness in pursuit of the crown has just made it all the more demeaning. She's supposed to be the smartest one in the class -- and yet, she bungled and bungled and blamed and blamed.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:26:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: when did she call blacks lazy? (none / 0)

there was a comma between "hard working americans" and "white americans" and it was clearly a list. You guys just played the race card on her and spun it because she dared to mention that white americans are a demographic and people too. Of course they are separate groups. The "hard working" ones meant ALL hard working Americans, black, white, latino, asian, etc. You just spun it and played the race card on her. She never called blacks lazy once. If they thought she did, then they got self esteem issues.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:43:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: when did she call blacks lazy? (none / 0)

riiiiiiiight.


by shalca on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:39:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: when did she call blacks lazy? (none / 0)

Clearly a list. Because, you know, the exit polls differentiate between "working Americans", "hard working Americans" and "white Americans."

Oh, wait. No. The exit polls differentiate between race, education and earnings. She's citing a statistical analysis weighted in her favor showing support among less educated, lower-earning Whites.

A single demographic. It's her point. The so-called "Reagan Democrats." She didn't use that term, she used "working americans, hard working americans, white americans" to define these people.  Now, sure, maybe she would have said "Working Americans, Hard Working Americans, Black Americans" in talking about Obama's support -- and just didn't have time. But instead she just said blacks...

...and spin away. The proof is in the dog whistle.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Mon May 12, 2008 at 08:48:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: when did she call blacks lazy? (none / 0)

FYI -- accomidate them WHEN you get into office? I'm sure the black community, NEVER EVER having heard THAT one before, would gladly take that as a comfort.

I'm sure most blacks would then agree, please, go ahead and campaign for the blue collar whites. It's about time whites got some unabashed supporters on Capital Hill. Totally the forgotten demographic.

Won't someone PLEASE think about the Whites? PLEASE?


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Mon May 12, 2008 at 08:52:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

She'd never be the nominee in 2012. (none / 0)

As I heard the inestimable Willie Brown say the other day, "We Democrats don't hang with losers like the Republicans do."


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:47:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I hope she's not planning (none / 0)

Amen!   I'm with you on this...should she not get the CIC...we can wait!  She can do more good in the Senate...


by Cruiser35 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:48:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I hope she's not planning (2.00 / 0)

Hillary Clinton will never be the nominee, now or in the future.  She lost this year and in doing so alienated one of the most important constituencies the Democratic party has.  She will not get African American voters back in 2012 if Obama goes on to lose, because she would have been complicit in softening him up and driving up his negatives for McCain.  But I think the more likely scenario is that Obama wins in 2008, and by 2016 Clinton will have long passed the point of relevancy.  


by Headlight on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:00:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I hope she's not planning (none / 0)

My hope for 2012, is with both O'bama and Hillary's aspirations hitting a wall, my man JRE will make another run. O'bama will have joined the democratic one and done, club, and can set around discussing what might have been, with McGovern, and the rest of one time democratic standard bearers, Hillary will realise she can never overcome the Clinton hating majority in her party, leaving the field to a real Populist.
 JRE in 2012!
by muggle on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:42:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She did not alienate AA voters - (none / 0)

sure, she did not pull them from Obama but that is something else than alienating them.  It was Obama who wanted to make this campaign about race and who has made it about race.  As such he has driven a wedge into this party that I think was a huge mistake - casting his own premature ambition to run for the WH ahead of the good of the party.


by Molee on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:50:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She did not alienate AA voters - (none / 0)

So he should have waited his turn?  Sorry, I thought we lived in a democracy.


by shalca on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:22:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She did not alienate AA voters - (none / 0)

so true, thank god someone said it. he made it about race by even running, because he has no issues, has no qualifications, no real causes, thus the only thing he really brings is the prospect of being "the first black president" so as to galvinize the black community, turn on PC white students, and thus be able to cast his opponent, Hillary, who has achieved things in her life and has qualifications and knows government as a racist.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:59:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She did not alienate AA voters - (none / 0)

Is this satire? Are you being satiricle, funny, hilarious, belly-fulla-laughing? Because claiming Obama made it about race... because he's of a different race is just, officially, the most ridiculous thing I have ever read outside of a Chick tract.

Seriously -- if you think what you've said up there is true, I don't know the point of typing anything more. You've hit some kind of rarified air in this tragic of an argument. I think only a claim that Obama is a manchurian candidate brainwashed by al Qaeda would be more ridiculous -- but at least then you'd be laughed out of town on a hilarious hilarious rail.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:32:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She did not alienate AA voters - (none / 0)

Jesse Jackson's "hillary didn't cry for black people," Michelle's "blacks will come to their senses," spinning Bill's comments about Obama's "fairy tale" stance on the Iraq War, calling Hillary's comment about how LBJ get civil rights somehow insulting to MLK and thus being racist, yea his ilk made it about race. The Jesse Jackson comment was completely called for, and it was right. OF COURSE Obama is going to win SC, as the blacks make up most or a huge part of the Democrats and will vote for their own after seeing him in Iowa. It just came off poorly and the Obama campaign and the media spun it.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:40:22 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She did not alienate AA voters - (none / 0)

Ilk?

Really? That the word you're going for here? Cuz with the fake michelle quote, and use of Jesse Jackson comment without context or mention of the fact that Jesse Jackson speaks only for Jesse Jackson... and then using the word "ilk..." well. It just says it all, don't it?

Let's just say your comments this evening came off poorly, and it doesn't take the media to spin it for that to be obvious.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Mon May 12, 2008 at 08:44:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Kennedy, that's Uncalled for and Wrong (2.00 / 2)

I have lost so much respect for "Teddy" Kennedy, it's not even funny.  Actions and his WORDS speak volume.


by LindaSFNM on Sun May 11, 2008 at 08:36:20 PM EST

Re: Kennedy, that's Uncalled for and Wrong (2.00 / 1)

actions, you mean such as killing a young woman by driving her off a bridge?


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:48:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That's what you and Limbaugh say. (1.00 / 0)


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:48:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's what you and Limbaugh say. (1.00 / 0)

What's up with you kobi?  Are you denying Ted Kennedy's past?  Or does he get a free pass for being a rich kid from you too?


by JustJennifer on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:55:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's what you and Limbaugh say. (2.00 / 0)

As I said to another Limbot upthread, when Democrats attack their own with GOP smears, they are truly bankrupt.

But with Hillary as a role model ("hard working Americans, white Americans") it lessens the blame somewhat.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:42:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's what you and Limbaugh say. (1.00 / 0)

IT IS NOT A SMEAR.  It is fact.  What a copout.  Ted Kennedy stands for what the Democrats are supposed to oppose - rich white guys who get away with "murder" because they can.  Just like the Republicans.  I can't believe any progressive with a conscious would defend someone with such an egregious history against women.


by JustJennifer on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:52:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's what you and Limbaugh say. (1.00 / 1)

i don't think Ted has anything in general against women. It could have been a male in the car with him that night. Its just fun to bring up Chappaquiddick when he does stupid shit like his '80 run and his Obama sellout/comments like this. I doubt he really meant to murder Mary Jo like he did.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:01:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's what you and Limbaugh say. (1.00 / 0)

It's not just what happened to Mary Jo.  And sure it could have been a man in the car but there was a girl in the car and she was there for a reason..  Also the thing with his nephew was pretty disgusting.  The Kennedys in general don't have the greatest history when it comes to respecting women.  And I am pretty sure Joan Kennedy could add some colorful commentary to that.  I just don't like the guy - he represents everything that is wrong with the Democratic party to me.  White, rich guy in charge and virtually "untouchable" no matter what.  Like I said if Ted Kennedy was a poor black man he would still be in prison today.  Injustice is wrong no matter what your last name is.


by JustJennifer on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:10:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's what you and Limbaugh say. (2.00 / 0)

What Cappaquiddick has to do with Kennedy's comment about Hillary for VP is what has me scatching my head. And it's even harder to understand why a few people are so outraged that he said she shouldn't get 2nd place when they keep insisting she'll win anyway.

Are they really hoping for #2 for her?


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:29:26 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's what you and Limbaugh say. (1.00 / 0)

because he's not only already a convicted killer who got a suspended 2 year sentence, but he is killing party unity by saying such a thing about half of the voter's candidate. Not that I think the ticket would be a good idea, as it may present too much change for people, and black and white woman on the same ticket. But he still insulted Hillary by saying she doesn't count as "leadership" on the bottom of the ticket.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:37:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

There's an echo in here (1.00 / 0)

but of whom?


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:12:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: There's an echo in here (none / 0)

Jaysus man I didn't even know Limbaugh had a hard on for Ted Kennedy.  In fact you seem to know a lot more about Limbaugh than I do.  I have never listened to his show.  All I know is he is a big fat idiot who used his maid to fuel his addiction to pain killers - hey another rich white guy who got away with a crime because of their status.  Yep, he is a total pig too.

You do realize it is possible to be incensed by injustice against women without listening to Limbaugh - who by the way is no champion for the women's causes?  


by JustJennifer on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:15:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: There's an echo in here (none / 0)

I only know what I just googled. You seem to know him well enough to quote from memory.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:20:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: There's an echo in here (none / 0)

Quote who?  Did Limbaugh break open the Chappaquidick story?  News to me.  Everyone knows what happened to Mary Jo Kopechne.  She will never breathe another breath, never get married, have children, have grandchildren.. her parents never got to see her again. Because of Ted Kennedy.  I think Limbaugh was probably a teenager then.  What does he have to do with what happened?


by JustJennifer on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:25:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: There's an echo in here (2.00 / 0)

Limbaugh uses Chappaquiddick as a diversionary attack whenever Kennedy can't be beaten on the facts -- just as you and some others are doing.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:31:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: There's an echo in here (1.00 / 0)

I don't care about his comments regarding Clinton.  I care that he got away with letting that young girl die.  I guess a lot of people seem to have gotten past that and have some sort of respect for the guy but I never will.


by JustJennifer on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:33:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: There's an echo in here (none / 0)

Whatever.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:38:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: There's an echo in here (none / 0)

Yes indeed.  Whatever.


by JustJennifer on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:50:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: There's an echo in here (none / 0)

.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:35:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (2.00 / 2)

said Obama wasn't qualified to be CIC?


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:09:17 PM EST

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

I was wondering the same thing as well.


by sweet potato pie on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:13:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (2.00 / 3)

We'll have to wait until she says that his isn't qualified, because she hasn't said that yet.

Why do Obama supporters feel the need to misrepresent the issues?


by joc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:27:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (1.00 / 1)

Parsing words may be useful during depositions, but don't make a joke out of yourself. Both she and bill have made that case explicitly and implicitly, and trying to spin it just insults all of us.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:46:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (2.00 / 2)

Well, then feel insulted based upon the inferences that you choose to make. What you aren't is correct. She has said that she is more qualified. She has not said that he was unqualified.

Why do Obama supporters feel the need to misrepresent the issues?


by joc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:49:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

Hmmm.


"...I think it's imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander-in-chief threshold," the New York senator told reporters crowded into an infant's bedroom-sized hotel conference room in Washington. "I believe that I've done that. Certainly, Sen. McCain has done that and you'll have to ask Sen. Obama with respect to his candidacy."

Same Speech:

Calling McCain the presumptive GOP nominee a good friend and a "distinguished man with a great history of service to our country," Clinton said, "Both of us will be on that stage having crossed that threshold. That is a critical criterion for the next Democratic nominee to deal with.

The article goes on to quote Todd Beeton here in MyDD saying, and I sum up, "WFT?"
http://news.aol.com/political-machine/20 08/03/07/crossing-the-threshold/

Anyway, that's just the third or something link from googling "commander and chief threshold."

Now, you can pretend that she wasn't calling Obama 'unqualified' but you're making yourself look foolish in doing so. By heaping praise on McCain for his experience, praising her own experience, and questioning Obamas she's clearly setting a standard and picking one opponant as having it, and the other as not.

Again, pretend away to the contrary -- that Clintonian skill to find loopholes out of standard discourse is part of the reason the rest of us are ready to move on.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:58:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (2.00 / 2)

I don't have to pretend. I have to simply look at the facts. The claim was made that

"Clinton said Obama wasn't qualified to be CIC?"

She hadn't said that, and I called the commenter on it. You have provided no evidence that she had. You are attempting to infer it. It is certainly your right to infer that she meant something she didn't say, but you cannot claim she said something she did not say.

You can feel that it makes people look foolish when they want evidence rather than opinion, but we are different that way. I think it looks foolish to provide no evidence and demand other to accept your inference as fact.


by joc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:03:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

You lose. Use The Google. It's your friend.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:06:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (2.00 / 1)

I see, if the Google were to show I was wrong, I would be wrong. Only it doesn't (see your other comment), because she never made the claim you said she made.


by joc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:09:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (1.00 / 2)

Right. And she never SAID white democrats were too racist to vote for a black man.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:11:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Aw, More weak TR drive bys. (none / 0)


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:02:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not on my part. I stopped, took a look (none / 0)

and, with the help of this sage advice,

Users who are bashing or attacking any other user on the site, including authors of diaries and frontpage postings, will be banned. Candidates and politicians are fair game (but that doesn't mean you can use inflammatory language against candidates).

and in the spirit of a "community moderated blog" came to the correct conclusion that your comment is nothing but inflammatory BS.

And she never SAID white democrats were too racist to vote for a black man.

It may be your opinion, which is really sad in and of itself, but it is inflammatory nonetheless and deserves a "strong" TR.


Obama supporter working to defeat McCain.
by Rumarhazzit on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:18:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Not on my part. I stopped, took a look (none / 0)

It's not just my opinion. If the candidate uses inflammatory language then the candidate gets called on it.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:10:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

It is your opinion. She never said (none / 0)

what you are trying to twist her words into and you know it. TR stands.


Obama supporter working to defeat McCain.
by Rumarhazzit on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:30:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It is your opinion. She never said (none / 0)

Right. I didn't SAY that she SAID that. Though plenty of people understood that to be her meaning. TR away bubble person.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:54:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

"Right. And she never SAID white democrats were too racist to vote for a black man."

I guess since so many old people are for Hillary they can't hear the dog whistle as well as younger folks.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:23:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

Dont try to change the subject when your lies are exposed.


by Sandeep on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:01:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

My 4 year old peed his pants.

"Did you go to the bathroom in your pants?" I asked.
"No," he said. Pants soaking wet.
"Let me try again, did you go to the bathroom in your pants."
"I said no."
"You're fibbing -- you don't have to fib."
"I'm NOT fibbing. I DIDNT go bathroom in my pants. I went PEE PEE in my pants. I didn't go to the bathroom at all."

Now, he's 4. His being so literal is excusable because he's cute, he's just as likely confused as lying, and he's 4. Four.

Now, you're not 4 right? So surely you have enough reading comprehension to read Hillary's comment and get the clear point she was making -- while being politiciany enough to avoid outright saying it. She avoids it so that her spinmeisters can say "No way! She avoided enough specifics so I can pretend she didn't say Obama was unqualified. But here's an off the record quote to show that's really what we think."

But just because they are that weasely, doesn't mean you have to. Fight the weasels!


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:10:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

Of course her Spinmeisters said "YES WAY!" in this instance.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:14:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (2.00 / 1)

Apparently you don't have enough reading comprehension to get the point I'm making. When someone says something that isn't true, I'm going to call them on it.

You can insult me, try calling me foolish, or four years old, or whatever you want. What you cannot do is prove that I am wrong, when I say she never made the claim that "Obama wasn't qualified to be CIC."

I'm tired of running in circles on this, where I ask for evidence to prove, I'm wrong, and you stomp your feet and demand that I take your inference as evidence. Because until you have actual evidence this isn't going to change.


by joc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:18:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

But we have enough reading comprehension to understand what Clinton said.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:19:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The quote from Hillary in March (none / 0)

"I think that I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience that he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002."

Thats pretty dismissive


"You might well think that. I couldn't possibly comment"
by xenontab on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:20:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

reasoning like a child (none / 0)

History is not going to be kind to many of you Clinton supporters.


by TMP on Mon May 12, 2008 at 03:10:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

Oh. Has he passed the CIC threshold now?


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:54:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (2.00 / 2)

She never claimed he hadn't, which is what you said before. I notice you aren't providing any evidence of your false claim.

Why do Obama supporters feel the need to misrepresent the issues?


by joc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:56:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

Why? Because we're not. Try not to accuse others of misrepresentation when the Google is so darn easy to use.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:59:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

And you used Google, only to find that I was right (see your other post), Clinton never made that claim.

Why do Obama supporters feel the need to misrepresent the issues?


by joc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:05:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

Right. What's the meaning of is?


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:10:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

actually when Bill Clinton asked that during the deposition, he meant that when the Jones' lawyers asked him "is there a sexual relationship?" with Monica, whether "is" meant "its there one in your past we don't know about," or whether "is" meant "is there a current one going on" and at that point in time, there wasn't one going on. It had ended in 1996. Bill Clinton is a lawyer, so he thought about that. This is the reason why the impeachment was a scam. Bill Clinton was doing what was reasonable and ok in a court of law, as a US citizen supposedly protected by it. The GOP Congress didn't think so, but the Senate and the American people did.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:37:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

Right right. She just said:

"I believe that I've done that. Certainly, Sen. McCain has done that and you'll have to ask Sen. Obama with respect to his candidacy."

Then Penn said:

"As they get more of a sense that he's not ready to be Commander-in-Chief, a lot of Independents who were supporting him are disappearing."

and Wolfson said

"[W]e continued to believe that Senator Obama has not passed the key commander-in-chief test at least at this point


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:05:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (2.00 / 1)

Exactly. Which is why you were wrong to claim that she did he wasn't qualified.


by joc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:08:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

Righhhht. Whe


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:09:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

Righhhht. Wolfson is the King using the Royal we...


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:10:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

I wasn't speeding, officer. I was standing still and the earth rotated under my car, which gave it the appearance of speeding. All the dead deer in my grill were suicides.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:11:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm curious. What did Rahm say when Clinton (none / 0)

"She never claimed he hadn't"

It's always good to see clinton's people arguing that Obama IS qualified to be CinC.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:51:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

why would a Clinton supporter want her (none / 0)

to be VP?

Seriously, I don't get it. She can be a powerhouse in the Senate for many years. As Obama's VP, she'll be cutting ribbons for at most 8 years.

I wouldn't want to waste her talents on being VP. She will emerge from this experience as a better Senator, in my opinion. (I think every mistake she's made in the Senate has been geared toward not looking too liberal when she runs for president.)


Join the Iowa progressive community at Bleeding Heartland.
by desmoinesdem on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:11:09 PM EST

Re: why would a Clinton supporter want her (2.00 / 3)

One reason is that they want the Democrats to win the Presidency this November, and while Obama may be ahead in the Democratic nomination, he's behind in the electoral college vote in a head-to-head with McCain. This is early in the year, and things will certainly shift, but a lot of people feel it would be a much stronger ticket for the party if she were on it.


by joc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:31:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: why would a Clinton supporter want her (none / 0)

Please.

The general election is a totally different map.  Clinton's negatives are too high, sorry that is a fact.  And there are more experienced women out there to put on the ticket.  Remember, this is a CHANGE election, not a THROWBACK election.


by tracey webb on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:35:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: why would a Clinton supporter want her (2.00 / 5)

I agree, it is different. Clinton wins the electoral map, even though she didn't do as well in the nomination. That is a fact. You can certainly be of the opinion that her negatives are too high, but the polls don't bear that out.


by joc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:44:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: why would a Clinton supporter want her (none / 0)

"Didn't do as well in the nomination" = "it doesn't matter how well she does in the electoral map."

We have a nomination process so that our party nominee isn't just the one who will win, but the one who best represents us as a party and will win.

Sorry if the results of that weren't to your liking. I had to say goodbye to Dean/Clark/Edwards and deal with Kerry. Prior to that I was 3/3. Losing sucks.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:48:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: why would a Clinton supporter want her (2.00 / 2)

Actually,

"Didn't do as well in the nomination" = "Didn't do as well in the nomination"

If you want to read something into things that are not written, go ahead, but trying to alter my meaning doesn't make what I wrote any less true. She outperforms him in electoral college match-ups against McCain. If sorry, if those results aren't to your liking, but they are what they are.


by joc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:53:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: why would a Clinton supporter want her (none / 0)

She doesn't perform better than Obama at anything because... get ready...

POLLS ARENT ELECTIONS.

You can enjoy all the polls you want from here until Halloween, because the only polls that matter, the only evidence of 'electibility' that matters, is how you do on election day.

So! She had great advantage going into the primary, leading in all the polls from here until there -- and yet still lost to Obama once the polls turned into actual voter returns.

This means that the Polls now that show her with a great advantage going into the GE are JUST AS MEANINGLESS.

The only thing that matters are votes. The small task that Hillary had was maintaining a commanding lead over the most abbreviated primary calender EVER.

She FAILED.

Don't project that failure on the guy who actually SUCCEEDED and WON.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:04:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: why would a Clinton supporter want her (none / 0)

Really, polls aren't elections? Well, now you have me there, 'cause I was certain they were.

You feel that Hillary failed, fine, you can do that. But again, you are reading something into what I wrote that isn't there. I never projected failure onto Obama.

Why do Obama supporters feel the need to misrepresent the issues?


by joc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:13:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: why would a Clinton supporter want her (none / 0)

If you plan on being so literal, you really should say "some" or "a few" Obama supporters feel the need to misrepresent the issues.  Otherwise you imply that all Obama supporters feel the need to misrepresent the issues.  That can be inflammatory as it denigrates a large percentage (in fact a majority) of the people who voted in the Democratic Primary, and could earn you a TR.


by shalca on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:32:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

why would Hillary want to be VP (2.00 / 1)

Under a candidate she has said repeatedly is not competent/experienced enough to be president?

I think all of this VP talk is just a way to bow out gracefully. If it can be made to appear that she is leaving on her own terms, then she doesn't lose as much face, compared to a situation where people think she is actively seeking VP but Obama refuses to extend an offer.


by highgrade on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:16:44 PM EST

Re: why would Hillary want to be VP (2.00 / 2)

She never said she wanted to be VP. She has nothing to be ashamed of. Why would she want to play second fiddle to barack and Michelle. More over we all know he would never make it to the WH because he would lose in a landslide because GE is not a Caucus.


You may not agree with What I say but don't forget I am a Democrat
by indydem99 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:39:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Kennedy is bitter. Does he live in PA? (2.00 / 1)

Kennedy has a stick up........ Better known as a bee in his bonnet over something.  Probably he is still hurting from Clinton not heeping enough glory on his family name when she said Johnson got the civil rights laws through govt. and didn't mention or emphazize his brother. To me, Kennedy is looking pretty childish and self absorbed throughout this.  I always knew I didn't like him, but I didn't realize just how much.

It is particularly ironic when he made a big deal and spectacle of himself when he took his run to the convention.  He needs to stop thinking he is the center of the universe.  Oh, and Teddy, that fake statement doesn't fool anyone.


by Scotch on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:19:07 PM EST

Kennedy is just gleaming (2.00 / 1)

that another family, like his won't be able to get 2 members into either the VP or Prez spot. He's jealous that his own Presidential bid in 1980 flopped and wants to see it happen to someone else, who threatens the Kennedy family name of "dynasty' they have had for so long. If Hillary were to be prez or VP, the Clintons would be a more important political family in the history books than the Kennedy's. However, I don't think she should be VP because America will only handly a black or woman at a time, not both at once. But to say she's not "leadership" is an insult. The Clintons deserve honour.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:21:41 PM EST

IT is ridiculous (none / 0)

to think that Hillary getting elected VP or even President does anything to lessen the Kennedy name or that she or Bill could do anything to somehow make the name Clinton leapfrog the name Kennedy in the history books.

Maybe he just doesn't see Hillary as much of a leader? Is that possible? He certainly has a right to his opinion; although I do not like the way he expressed it.


Oh Mammy Dear, we're all mad over here livin' in America
by JDF on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:27:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kennedy is just gleaming (2.00 / 0)

So where was your outrage when clinton said Obama wasn't qualified to CIC? Right you weren't. So what's with the double standard?


by venician on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:28:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kennedy is just gleaming (2.00 / 3)

I guessing there was no outrage or double standard, because she never said he wasn't qualified.

Why do Obama supporters feel the need to misrepresent the issues?


by joc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:33:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kennedy is just gleaming (none / 0)

Yeah right!


by venician on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:36:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kennedy is just gleaming (none / 0)

Feel free to provide any evidence you feel backs up your comment. I'll be waiting, and waiting, and waiting...


by joc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:58:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kennedy is just gleaming (2.00 / 2)

thats candidate on candidate campaigning. Thats allowed. The GOP candidate was going to say it anyway. Unlike Obama, Hillary never attacked Michelle like they attack President Bill Clinton and his honourable legacy. If Obama gets the nod, she'll do a Mitt Romney and talk Obama up on everything.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:45:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kennedy is just gleaming (none / 0)

What honorable legacy? NAFTA, Welfare Deform, Immigration Deform, the Telecom Act? Just because people liked him doesn't mean he has a great legacy. He's a middle of the road president at best.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:22:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kennedy is just gleaming (none / 0)

he needed to reform welfare. That issue is what helped cost us 1968, 1972, 1980, 1984, and 1988. We were known as the party of welfare, and being soft on crime before it. After Bill Clinton, those issues have never been able to be used against us. That is why we coudl win the popular vote in 2000, and get close to unseating a war time incumbent in 2004 with one of the worst candidates in recent history. The Telecom Act had huge veto proof majorities, and vetoing it would be pointless, and just bring up more political hostilities. Why not blame the Democrats who voted for it, which was nearly all of it. NAFTA was necessary to get the corporate donation money our party badly needed, which we had lacked for the prior 25 years. NAFTA did help "the corporations," which is why Dem candidates these days can actually raise money. NAFTA also was negotiated by Bush I anyway, Clinton merely implemented it. Political parties cannot survive without corporate donations. People need to face that corporations are never going away, they are here to stay. That is not to say we can't reform their practices, but we can't all come off as the hippies portrayed in South Park. Why do you think Obama can get so much corporate money from Wall Street and hedge funds? because they now know Dems are friendly to business, and witnessed Bill Clinton, a Dem managing the economy better the the Bushes and Republicans.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:44:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kennedy is just gleaming (none / 0)

But he didn't reform welfare. It just serves less people who need it. Reform means to make something better. Shite even Bush  vetos shit now. That's not an excuse. Political parties can survive without corporate donations.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:59:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kennedy is just gleaming (none / 0)

to the voters in America our party needed to court, the suburban voters, it WAS "reforming" it. Those were the voters turned off by our image of welfare, who gave Nixon, Reagan, and Bush I victories. Politics 101 says sometimes, you need to pander. Bill Clinton did just that, and secured our place as actual contenders in Presidential elections. Also, people should work for a living, not cheat the system, or engage in irresponsible acts and then rely on government.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:33:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kennedy is just gleaming (none / 0)

You mean dismantling. That's not reform. Sorry I don't cater to racists who fall for the welfare queen myth.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:11:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Kennedy is just gleaming (none / 0)

I should add that Clinton also presided over our loss of power in Congress and his triangulation didn't help one bit.


My candidate lost fair and square. So did yours. Get over it and let's kick McSame's ass!
by RLMcCauley on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:11:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

and when Ferarro said the same crap.. (none / 0)

you people keep making all kinds of bizzare rationalizations for why Hillary is allowed to do what no one else is.


by TMP on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:51:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Actually, I would pay very close attention to (none / 0)

Kennedy.  He is stating what many won't.  They are not going to have that option on the table.  Why?  The whole premise of Barack Obama is CHANGE.  The Clintons are not that.  And lastly, in all honesty, who want a former president who works as a team with his wife, breathing over your neck as you are trying to govern.  That alone is enough for anyone to say, "NEXT".


by tracey webb on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:31:58 PM EST

that is your opinion (2.00 / 2)

good for you for really buying into the negative attacks on Hillary- own um, make em yours! To me, Hillary is the greater change- and the change with better chance of actually winning in November.
by linc on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:38:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: that is your opinion (2.00 / 1)

What is she the change from? In the party -- or in the presidency?

I know her policy is different -- but Obama has been campaigning as an agest of practice change.

How will Hillary be an agent of change in 'how things are done.'? What has she done to impress upon us a different form of governance from Clinton or Bush.

And symbolic or not -- Jeb Bush will never be president because his last name is Bush. Hillary won't be on the ticket because her last name is Clinton. It's not fair, but the dynasty is part of her baggage and it's hard to look past that for people trying to move past that.


Fight the Smears!
by Lettuce on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:51:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rahm Emanuel: Kennedy (none / 0)

Teddy's describes Hillary the same way he would be described - that is funny.

Obama cannot pick from the Senate - perhaps with the exception of Webb


Matthew25Network.com
by cardboard 1 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:32:32 PM EST

Re: Kennedy (2.00 / 2)

Poor Teddy -
Totally irrelevant -
And mean-spirited, too.

By the way, who won the Mass primary?
I seem to have forgotten.


by johnnygunn on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:34:23 PM EST

Re: Kennedy (none / 0)

also, ask him who the last Dem to go all the way to the Convention was? Also ask him how Mary Jo would vote in this primary. I used to respect him, until he began his Obama demagoguery.


"there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right in America"-William Jefferson Clinton, forty-second President of the United States
by DiamondJay on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:45:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

you must have confused hm for Hillary (none / 0)

Does anyone really beieve that a 1.5 term senator has a clear shot to be senate leader? I suspect a few dozen other Senate Dems will not be so forgiving of Tonya as she tries to elbow her way into her new calling.


by TMP on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:48:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Exactly right (2.00 / 2)

Emanuel is right on the button...

Ironic considering Ted's brother was the inspiration for Bill Clinton to get involved in public service in the first place...

I guess not enough genuflecting at the Kennedy altar by Hillary has gotten Ted mad...

He screwed over Jimmy Carter in 2008 and it looks like he is aiming for a repeat performance in 2008...


by SaveElmer on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:35:55 PM EST

1980 rather...nt (none / 0)


by SaveElmer on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:36:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary is not #2 material (2.00 / 1)

President - yes.
Majority Leader - yes.
Supreme Court Justice - yes.
VP - NO!

And don't you dare call me a sexist. All of my problems with Hillary have to do with traditionally MALE character flaws. She's too macho, too aggressive, too uncompromising, and too competitive to be VP. She's a strong LEADER but not a strong team player.

I'd rather have Obama lose the nomination entirely than be saddled with HRC as VP. It would be the Republicans' dream come true and that's exactly where their corporate media keeps pushing for this insanely disastrous ticket.


McCain housing policy shaped by lobbyist.
by obsessed on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:35:58 PM EST

Re: Hillary is not #2 material (none / 0)

You aren't a sexist. But I strongly disagree with you about the Republicans.  I simply don't give a damn what they dream about. Right wing nutjobs don't get to influence my choice about whom I support - it just isn't a factor.


"It pays to be obvious, especially if you have a reputation for subtlety". Salvor Hardin
by Denny Crane on Mon May 12, 2008 at 03:00:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I do enjoy watching all these Clinton acolytes.. (1.40 / 5)

... giggling over Republican talking points, now directed at Ted Kennedy.

You really do have no shame.


Ignorance is weakness. Get strong.
by tbetz on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:47:16 PM EST

Okay, I guess some do have shame. (2.00 / 0)

For example, Radiowalla and 4justice are ashamed enough that they TRed me instead of counterarguing my observation.

Really, I can understand how you would be ashamed of all those bridge jokes.  What I can't understand is how you would continue to endorse them.


Ignorance is weakness. Get strong.
by tbetz on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:15:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Okay, I guess some do have shame. (none / 0)

I rated it back up. As a Hillary supporter I do think the bridge references were over the line and TR'd those that made them. I think anything else said about his remarks or opinions of him for being so low class are fair game.


by Justwords on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:38:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks for demonstrating that my hope... (none / 0)

... for better discourse is not unfounded.


Ignorance is weakness. Get strong.
by tbetz on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:52:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Bite me (1.00 / 0)

How is discussing actual true facts about Ted Kennedy's past repeating "Republican talking points"?  And how barforama is it that Democrats want to stick up for someone who has abused the system.. and women.. for his entire life???  Gag, ick, Ted Kennedy is a disgusting pig who has participated in and covered up horrible crimes against women.  He killed one, and he covered for his cousin's rape of one.  He is truly a horrible blight on the Democratic party.


by JustJennifer on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:06:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Bite me (1.00 / 0)

Correction - he covered up for his nephew not his cousin.  


by JustJennifer on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:07:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I guess that we are lucky... (none / 0)

... that he never made it to the White House, where he could have pursued his infidelities in the Oval Office.

Double standard much?


Ignorance is weakness. Get strong.
by tbetz on Mon May 12, 2008 at 08:03:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

are you talking about Ted Kennedy or Bill Clinton? (none / 0)

Because when this stuff comes up about Bill then you all start making excuses. To think "the fighter" was married to guy just like Ted Kennedy for decades. Hmmmm ... I wonder why.


by TMP on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:44:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: (none / 0)

Well, that's certainly not helpful.  But, I am genuinely puzzled as to why Clinton would want to be the VP.  Everybody around here sort of assumes that she would be so inclined, but if I were in her position I might very well choose to remain in the Senate or maybe run for governor.


by rfahey22 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:50:38 PM EST

Re: (none / 0)

I thought she was running for Prez.  Why is everyone talking about her VP preference as if she's lost the nomination already?


by hienmango on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:52:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Because she has. (none / 0)


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:38:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Typical Obama supporter (2.00 / 5)

dividing the party.

The kool aid is so strong, they actually think they can win the general without half the Dem voters.


by gotalife on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:57:35 PM EST

The kool aid is so strong (2.00 / 0)

they actually think Hillary can win the nomination with fewer delegates.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:38:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Typical Obama supporter (none / 0)

Democrats will vote for the democratic nominee, gottalife.  You might not, but democrats will.


Howard Dean is my go-to guy
by lojasmo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 07:49:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

you usually vote Republican anyway (none / 0)

stop pretending.


by TMP on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:42:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Kennedy: Hillary qualified for VP but (1.00 / 0)

won't be hired.

Geeez, thanks, Senator "No Child Left Behind" Drunk


by observer5 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 09:57:57 PM EST

re (2.00 / 2)

Ask Joan Kennedy what Teddy thinks of women.


by rossinatl on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:05:40 PM EST

"given the tenor of the campaign" (2.00 / 4)

Jeez, I wonder how the tenor got to be so bad. Couldn't be because idiots like Teddy Kennedy can't keep their effing mouths shut long enough to actually try to unite the party.

Pelosi, Kennedy, and Michelle Obama have done enough to drive away Clinton supporters that Obama should be having a fit.

Too bad he doesn't have the character to enforce his "new politics" upon those closest to his campaign.


by theshornwonder on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:06:55 PM EST

Re: Rahm Emanuel: Kennedy, that's "Uncalled (2.00 / 2)

Frankly, I think Ted Kennedy is not qualified to comment on whether Hillary Clinton is qualified to be VP or not.  


by observer11 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:11:39 PM EST

Re: Rahm Emanuel: Kennedy, that's "Uncalled (none / 0)

What is Kennedy's opinion about taking this to the convention?

He is qualified to speak about that.


by reggie44pride on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:50:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rahm Emanuel: Kennedy, that's "Uncalled (2.00 / 2)

For one thing, Hillary Clinton has proved to be, in her relatively shorter tenure in the senate, a much better senator than Ted Kennedy will ever be.


by observer11 on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:24:23 PM EST

Re: Rahm Emanuel: Kennedy, that's "Uncalled (none / 0)

How so?


by hienmango on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:53:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Red Herring (Hillary doesn't want VP post) (none / 0)

According Howard Wolfson (Hillary's top strategist), Hillary is not seeking VP post.  

See this article:

Clinton's Top Gun: "I Have Seen No Evidence Of Interest" In VP Spot

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/05/11/c linton.obama/index.html


by hienmango on Sun May 11, 2008 at 10:51:03 PM EST

Re: Red Herring (Hillary doesn't want VP post) (none / 0)

It would only be news if the headline had read:

Clinton's Top Gun: "I Have Seen Much Evidence Of Interest" In VP Spot

What else is he going to say but that she's not interested?


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:34:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Be careful who you quote..... (none / 0)

Emanuel also called Obama the "presumptive nominee."


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:31:27 PM EST

Re: Be careful who you quote..... (none / 0)

Striking quote.  The shame!  Who should ever point out the obvious.


by reggie44pride on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:48:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Some people need the obvious pointed out (none / 0)

more than others.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:26:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Rahm Emanuel (none / 0)

Earth to Teddy:  Even with your endorsement -- and that of Kerry and Deval Patrick -- Hillary crushed Obama in super-liberal MA, 60% to 40%.

Writing's on the wall.

Wake up.

We're not voting for Prom King, people.


by No Blood for Hubris on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:33:16 PM EST

Not voting for prom king (none / 0)

Neither are we voting for sparklingpeaceprincess.

In fact, 'we' for the most part, have voted.  Obama is going to be the nominee, barring some nearly impossible circumstances.

He won twice as many (sanctioned) states.

he has won the popular vote in all sanctioned contests.

He has gotten more donations.

he has more donors.

He has more pledged delegates.

He has the support of more supers.

In every viable metric, he leads, and should continue to lead.


Howard Dean is my go-to guy
by lojasmo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 10:34:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hillary lost the majority of the national vote (none / 0)

Oh the pain.. It hurts.


by TMP on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:39:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Writing's on the wall. (2.00 / 0)

Actually. it's written in stone. Obama is the nominee unless there's an asteroid with his name on it hurtling toward earth.


Hillary: "Her dishonesty is actually honest." -- yellowdem1129
by Kobi on Sun May 11, 2008 at 11:35:42 PM EST

Kind of pathetic (none / 0)

Ya know, what can be said?

.......

He's never respected women.

I edited the rest of it out.


TexasDarlin blog
by TexasDarlin on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:02:06 AM EST

Re: Rahm Emanuel: Kennedy, t (none / 0)

Kennedy state the obvious.

And this is a story?

Only in the post-Fox world.


by wrb on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:21:53 AM EST

Re: Rahm Emanuel: Kennedy, t (none / 0)

Rasheed Wallace

Now there's a role model.


by reggie44pride on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:44:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rahm Emanuel: Kennedy, t (none / 0)

Damn right.

Smart and funny too


by wrb on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:53:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Fuck Ted Kennedy (1.00 / 0)


by nikkid on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:33:45 AM EST

Re: The Koolaid is so strong... (none / 0)

Kobi this one's for you.... The koolaid is so strong they actually think they can win the G.E without Ohio or Florida!


by nzubechukwu on Mon May 12, 2008 at 01:56:10 AM EST

Re: Rahm Emanuel: Kennedy, (none / 0)

Kennedy is an ungrateful piece of garbage.  When he was getting chased around Massachusetts by Mitt Romney in 1994, it was Bill and Hillary Clinton who saved his ass in that Senate election.  Without their efforts, we'd be talking about Senator Romney instead of Senator Kennedy.

The only reason Kennedy endorsed Obama was because of ego to protect the Kennedy brand ID.  He was always concerned that a Clinton win would establish a Clinton dynasty which would surpass the Kennedy brand in the Democratic party.  When Hillary made the MLK comment (which Obama's camp falsely and maliciously exploited as racist) Kennedy was very upset at the Clintons and all but told Bill he would endorse Obama at that point.  The reason was simple:  Hillary told the truth about LBJ and his impact.  Without LBJ there would be no Kennedy legacy to speak of. LBJ pushed forward on civil rights in ways that Kennedy never would have because he was very concerned about his general election prospects in 1964, having won a razor thin victory in 1960 where dead people voted in Illinois.  That hurt the Kennedy brand, and Obama wrapped himself in the image of Kennedy so Teddy went with Barack.  

That is how superficial and petty Washington politics gets.  Those within the DC establishment who accuse the Clintons of being ruthless and personal should look at themselves in the mirror.  


by khyber900 on Mon May 12, 2008 at 03:37:35 AM EST

Re: Rahm Emanuel: Kennedy, (none / 0)

On the other hand, Kennedy might be trying to save Hillary. :-) An Obama ticket will be a LOSER in the GE.

(By the way, did the MA voters listen to the Kennedy-Kerry endorsement? I recall Obama lost big in MA.)


by pleaseno on Mon May 12, 2008 at 05:37:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

and how did Indiana work out for you? (none / 0)

Clinton won by less than 1% because her friend Rush endorsed her. Thats who you support.


by TMP on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:37:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: and how did Indiana work out for you? (none / 0)

I do strongly support Hillary. What is your problem. I just don't see the point of your statement.

You are supporting a loser.


by pleaseno on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:43:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Rahm Emanuel: Kennedy, (none / 0)

There are so many people that have helped the Clinton's. some of who even went to jail for them, only to be shanked in the back for it latter. Both Clintons shanked the Black community in the Back. For any Clinton supporter to be offended by Kennedy's said about "the fighter" is hypocritical


by TMP on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:35:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Read your comments, children (none / 0)

Have some of you gone back and read through your posts here?

Sad.


by reggie44pride on Mon May 12, 2008 at 04:43:01 AM EST

In the minority here among Obama supporters (none / 0)

But Kennedy needs to just keep quiet (as probably should all surrogates - theres a month left so just shut your yaps and let it play out).  His attempt at ongoing political relevancy by attaching himself to Obama's rising star is pretty shameless (but all politicians are shameless so Im not surprised).

Ive never been a big fan of Kennedys and have always believed his assumed stature and influence in the political world was much lower than he, or those around him, believed.

I am sure he has probably served admirably for MA, but not being a resident there I really have no idea.  And I am sure he stands for good solid democratic ideals and has backed them.  But as a senator, and leader, I cant think of one thing in particular that stands out that I go 'man, if it werent for Ted Kennedy we wouldnt have gotten X done'.

He seemed to be ultimate benefactor of nepotism.  The unfortunately least talented and charismatic of 3 brothers who rode his way to where he is based on his fathers help and his brothers legacy.

Kennedy does Obama no favors when he opens his mouth.  He is a dinosaur of another era and truthfully would be good for him to move on.

The days of Camelot and Kennedy relevance are well and truly over.  JFK and RFK will always be remembered with the reverene they deserve, the rest will mostly be footnotes.

That said, I agree with the tenor of his argument but not the words or delivery he used.

And Rahm is just as much a tool.  Hes probably worse in that he is playing both sides against the middle.  Hes just trying to get back in the good books with the Clintons after he tried to test the waters publicly on the Obama side.


by pattonbt on Mon May 12, 2008 at 06:06:32 AM EST

uncalled for (none / 0)

Kennedy said nothing wrong.  We need a VP candidate who represents change.  Her vote on the IWR and Kyl-Lieberman were panders of the worst sort, and the cost in human life is terrible.

Taken with the tenor of the campaign, and I don't want her anywhere near the ticket...save a brief endorsement.


Howard Dean is my go-to guy
by lojasmo on Mon May 12, 2008 at 08:31:40 AM EST

I don't want her anywhere near the ticket (none / 0)

Logasmo,
You may (or may not) detest HRC, but here's a fact:  Obama cannot win without the whole-hearted support of the 16 million DEMOCRATS (some 49% of two-person vote) who support HRC.
Be pure and lose, and figure out how to connect with the voters needed to win.  Or do you really want McCain?
I hope not.
by borlov on Mon May 12, 2008 at 11:26:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I don't want her anywhere near the ticket (none / 0)

That's not a fact.  That's an opinion.  Furthermore, it is an opinion predicated on the opinion that HRC supporters will not wholeheartedly support Obama.

You lose twice here.


Howard Dean is my go-to guy
by lojasmo on Tue May 13, 2008 at 02:04:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Ted Kennedy has lost his bearings (none / 0)

Ted Kennedy has lost his bearings. I follow my party nominee's words.


by Sandeep on Mon May 12, 2008 at 12:03:24 PM EST

Re: Rahm Emanuel (none / 0)

Actually I have not yet seen an instance where Clinton has shown real leadership. I've seen her happily resort to Republican campaign ideas, but other than that all I've seen are a bunch of proIraq War, pro-flag burn ban, type things incredible infighting in a campaign now in massive debt (and when do vendors stop relying on her credit? Isn't it about time considering the small businesses she has stiffed as of this time).


by MNPundit on Mon May 12, 2008 at 02:34:05 PM 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.

Login
Username:

Password: