Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

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

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

Jake Tapper posted something on this earlier today...

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

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

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


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

Happy freakin' Mother's Day folks.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

When it stops, then I will stop

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

Send him a note here. or email him at


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

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

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

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

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

Tags: 2008 elections, Barack Obama, Congress, Hillary Clinton, president, sexism (all tags)



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

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

by alegre 2008-05-10 06:17PM | 0 recs

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

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

Wheee Haaa

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 06:18PM | 0 recs
I forgo to mention

Any of us who support Hillary are racists.

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 06:19PM | 0 recs
I had no idea!
My brown boyfriend will be shocked to learn of this news! Maybe its just a fetish that I have...
by linc 2008-05-10 06:21PM | 0 recs
and I thought linc was a guy

all this time. ;-)

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 06:25PM | 0 recs
Don't let yourself
get ahead of your intuition, linc is most definitely a guy. If he isn't, his boyfriend is going to have a great deal of bad news this eveing ;)
by linc 2008-05-10 06:29PM | 0 recs
Sorry my Bad

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

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 06:33PM | 0 recs
lmao oaoa!
No problem whatsoever! I have rather enjoyed this thread. And it is really NewHampster that is the awesome one, lets not kid ourselves!
by linc 2008-05-10 06:40PM | 0 recs
back at ya ;-)

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 06:47PM | 0 recs

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

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 06:47PM | 0 recs
We were both guilty

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

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 06:49PM | 0 recs
ah the internets!
I suppose my constant cribbing and quoting of Audre Lorde doesn't help either!
by linc 2008-05-10 06:55PM | 0 recs
Re: lol

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

by slynch 2008-05-10 10:26PM | 0 recs


by Bipolar Disorder Democrat 2008-05-11 08:40PM | 0 recs
Re: I forgo to mention

Actually you hampster are just a sexist who loves porn.

by venician 2008-05-10 06:22PM | 0 recs
This is true

but I'm not a racist

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 06:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes

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

by alegre 2008-05-10 06:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes

Who is "they"?

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes

The voters.

by Mostly 2008-05-10 09:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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


by username3 2008-05-10 06:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

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

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

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

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

by toyomama 2008-05-10 07:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

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

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

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

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

by K1966 2008-05-10 09:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

by JenKinFLA 2008-05-10 09:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

by K1966 2008-05-10 10:28PM | 0 recs
"War" not gender

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Try again.

by Regenman 2008-05-10 10:51PM | 0 recs
Re: "War" not gender

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

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

by Newport News Dem 2008-05-11 03:50PM | 0 recs
She trusted Bush

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

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

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

by corph 2008-05-12 06:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

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

by catalysis 2008-05-10 10:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

by K1966 2008-05-10 11:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

as if that's an either or situation.

by swissffun 2008-05-11 02:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

by Same As It Ever Was 2008-05-10 06:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

by alegre 2008-05-10 06:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

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

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

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

by toyomama 2008-05-10 07:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

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

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

by KnowVox 2008-05-11 09:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

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

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

by JDF 2008-05-11 02:13PM | 0 recs

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

There is a cognitive dissonance here.

by missliberties 2008-05-10 06:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Against

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

by Okamifujutsu 2008-05-10 08:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

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

by Pravin 2008-05-10 07:21PM | 0 recs
You know what is funny about this.

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

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

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

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

by Tumult 2008-05-10 07:35PM | 0 recs
alegre should include Cohen's apology

Cohen's remarks are pretty offensive.

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

by Carl Nyberg 2008-05-11 06:17AM | 0 recs
Is this what you've been reduced to?

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

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

by DawnG 2008-05-10 08:31PM | 0 recs
Speaking of murder on CNN

Did you hear David Gergen on CNN the other day when he was asked if Obama should pick Hillary for Vice President?  Gergen's answer advised Obama not to make Hillary VEEP   if he wants to survive his first term!
Nobody said a word.  There was no outrage, no reigning in, no apology, no assertions of way over the top, unacceptable, horrendous.
Nobody removed Gergen from his position as a Republican comentator, or as someone fit to advise us about what Hillary should and should not do.
What do we do about him and what do we do with the environment that let him get away completely with saying such a thing on a news broadcast?

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

by itsadryheat 2008-05-11 12:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Speaking of murder on CNN

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

by Rick in Eugene 2008-05-11 01:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Speaking of murder on CNN

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

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

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

by splashy 2008-05-11 10:38AM | 0 recs
Re: Speaking of murder on CNN

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

by itsadryheat 2008-05-11 06:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

No.  Why start now?

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

by ghost 2 2008-05-11 01:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

by hopeful 2008-05-11 06:47AM | 0 recs
attn: Alegre

Your presence has been requested at this discussion: 59/861

by obsessed 2008-05-11 05:07PM | 0 recs
As an Obama supporter I condemn it

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

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

by Joe Buck 2008-05-11 08:30PM | 0 recs
Another phony tirade

What this jerk Congressman said was absurd.

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

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

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

by fladem 2008-05-12 01:55AM | 0 recs
Does Obama seriously have to speak out

everytime some a-hole says "boo!"  ?

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

by Sychotic1 2008-05-10 06:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Does Obama seriously have to speak out
This is so hypocritical. Anytime someone even remotely connected to Senator Clinton says something that can be construed as impolitic, Obama supporters unleash dozens of posts calling on Hillary and her supporters to reject and denounce the remarks. Now, when the same this happens to Obama, his supporters whine and ask whether His Holiness should seriously have to speak out everytime some supporter goes off message.
by rayj 2008-05-10 06:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Does Obama seriously have to speak out

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

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Does Obama seriously have to speak out

BTW, how do you define "remotely connected?"

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Does Obama seriously have to speak out


by alegre 2008-05-10 06:31PM | 0 recs
What did the shark look like

as you sailed overhead?

by bookish 2008-05-10 09:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Does Obama seriously have to speak out

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

by soccerandpolitics 2008-05-10 07:02PM | 0 recs
What do you mean by remotely connected?

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

by Sychotic1 2008-05-10 07:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Does Obama seriously have to speak out

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

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

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

by freedom78 2008-05-10 08:22PM | 0 recs
These fellows are going to squeal like

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

Good riddance.

by internetstar 2008-05-11 06:46AM | 0 recs
Re: These fellows are going to squeal like

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

by hopeful 2008-05-11 06:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

by venician 2008-05-10 06:20PM | 0 recs
Why should she lie?

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


by NewHampster 2008-05-10 06:23PM | 0 recs
You did not go there!
don't you know, its the rules of blogoland that you do not point out the obvious- particularly when it doesn't look good for Obama!
by linc 2008-05-10 06:27PM | 0 recs
Re: You did not go there!

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

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

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

Big difference.

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

by freedom78 2008-05-10 08:26PM | 0 recs
Re: You did not go there!

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

What is men NOT voting for women?


by adrienne4dean 2008-05-11 04:19AM | 0 recs
Re: You did not go there!

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

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

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

Don't pretend it is.

by Aris Katsaris 2008-05-11 04:33AM | 0 recs
Re: You did not go there!

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

by freedom78 2008-05-11 07:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Why should she lie?

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

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-10 06:27PM | 0 recs
Don't let him get to you

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

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

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

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

by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 06:35PM | 0 recs
where did NH say that

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

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 06:56PM | 0 recs
Re: where did NH say that

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

by letterc 2008-05-10 07:02PM | 0 recs
But that is not what I said

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

just sayin'  jeeezzzzzzzzzz

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 07:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Irony

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

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

by deminva 2008-05-10 08:15PM | 0 recs
Re: But that is not what I said

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

by Rationalisto 2008-05-10 10:28PM | 0 recs
Re: But that is not what I said

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

by therealdeal 2008-05-11 12:36AM | 0 recs
Re: But that is not what I said

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

by Aris Katsaris 2008-05-11 03:58AM | 0 recs

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

Not GONNA happen.

by Mylie 2008-05-11 05:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Jeeeezzz

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

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

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

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

by Al Depansu 2008-05-12 07:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Why should she lie?

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

by soccerandpolitics 2008-05-10 07:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Why should she lie?

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

by Rationalisto 2008-05-10 10:23PM | 0 recs
exactly right

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

by Joe Buck 2008-05-11 08:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Why should she lie?

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

by darryl darryl darryl 2008-05-11 01:31AM | 0 recs
They're probably supporting him

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

by Major Danby 2008-05-11 02:19AM | 0 recs
They're probably supporting him

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

by Major Danby 2008-05-11 02:21AM | 0 recs
The who did what
on race baiting and racism is going to be a hard one to heal. I will vote for Obama if he is the nominee (political forgiveness, if you will), but I will probably never, truly forgive him for inciting racial divides and painting HRC as a race-baiter. I hope he finds some personal clarity on the issue one day.
by linc 2008-05-10 06:25PM | 0 recs
Re: The who did what

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

by letterc 2008-05-10 07:04PM | 0 recs
Re: The who did what

How dare he?!?

by username3 2008-05-10 07:20PM | 0 recs
Re: The who did what

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

by deminva 2008-05-10 08:16PM | 0 recs
Re: The who did what

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

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

by Mostly 2008-05-10 09:31PM | 0 recs
yeah right
you must have missed the memo that 'wasn't released to the press' but somehow, made it into the press. Or his surrogates like JJ Jr. running around before every major black caucus or primary, letting everyone know how racist HRC is. Or talking up that stupid photo before the MS primary.

It has benefited him, I give him that- he certainly knows how to win at all costs. Its politics, the person who does it is usually the person IT benefits the most. There is no way, in any shape or form, that HRC being painted as a racist benefited her in any way in this primary. And the dog whistle thing? Do you really think that there are that many racists in the democratic electorate? Do you really think they, as small as their numbers might be, were ever going to vote for Obama anyway? Do you think they need HRC to tell them that Obama is black?
by linc 2008-05-10 07:24PM | 0 recs
Re: yeah right

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

by deminva 2008-05-10 08:18PM | 0 recs
You are kidding right?
Here is ONE instance of JJ Jr. playing the race card

Now, Clinton was required to denounce every single supposed association that made a comment that could be even remotely tied back to race. What happened to JJ Jr? Ah, nothing.
by linc 2008-05-10 08:31PM | 0 recs
Re: You are kidding right?

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

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

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

by deminva 2008-05-11 10:05AM | 0 recs
You have pretty much hit my point
Cuomo isn't even associated with the campaign- that comment got way more press and indignation than what JJ Jr. had to say. I also agree with what Clinton did, she got rid of everyone that was even remotely associated with the campaign that might have even remotely said something racist or 'race-baiting'. Bill is an exception, but he shut up at least.

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

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

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

The Obama campaign sent out a memeo that specifically pulled together every single instance of 'race-baiting' by the Clinton camp, in the lead up to the SC primary- no matter how reaching. If they were ambitious enough to outline it in a memo to the press, then you know very well that it was part of the on the ground campaign dialog.
by linc 2008-05-11 02:22PM | 0 recs
Re: yeah right

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

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

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

by daria g 2008-05-10 09:55PM | 0 recs
Re: yeah right

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

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

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

by letterc 2008-05-10 11:18PM | 0 recs
Re: The who did what


by Rationalisto 2008-05-10 10:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

by TexasDarlin 2008-05-10 06:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-10 06:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Actually KKK have raised money for BO. Guess that`s the change he`s talking about. Now that is some real support.

White Christian Supremacist group the Ku Klux Klan has endorsed Barack Obama to be the next President of the United States of America.

Speaking from his Kentucky office in Dawson Springs, the Imperial Wizard exclaimed that anything or anyone is better than having that "crazy ass bitch" as President.

This is the first time in Klan history that any member of the KKK has ever publicly supported an African American candidate for the presidency.

KKK lodges all over America have been gathering and holding rallies supporting the black presidential candidates.

by gunner 2008-05-10 07:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

When? Where?

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

by venician 2008-05-10 06:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

by TexasDarlin 2008-05-10 06:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

by venician 2008-05-10 06:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I heard Obama pooped a solid gold baby that he uses to hypnotize people.  It's the only reason anyone votes for him.  Mass hypnosis!

As for HRC, well..(whispers)...she loves lamp.


by fogiv 2008-05-10 06:53PM | 0 recs
by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 07:04PM | 0 recs
by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 07:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

linux apache mysql php?

by letterc 2008-05-10 07:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

nah, just plain old lamp, a la Ron Burgundy.


by fogiv 2008-05-11 07:40AM | 0 recs
Great advice for
both sides of this primary contest.
by linc 2008-05-10 07:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

As is usually the cause with your 'statements'... they're rarely based on facts. But instead rumors , smears and innuendo. There is always "someone" asking "something". People have e-mailed me asking if TexasDarlin is a republican troll... not saying you are, but there are questions.

by Tatan 2008-05-10 06:55PM | 0 recs
I think we all must be

All us Hillary supporters who can't stand the Obama.  I've been voting Democratic since 1972 just to keep in hiding.

But you bring up a good point.  Maybe Obama was brain washed in Indonesia and is in reality an Al Queida plant.  Really dumb I know, but hey you never know.

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 07:01PM | 0 recs
Re: I think we all must be

Sorry, I think that is way across the line of what is acceptable to say.

by letterc 2008-05-10 07:10PM | 0 recs
I'm so sorry for what I said and I denounce it

is that ok?

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 07:13PM | 0 recs
Re: I'm so sorry for what I said and I denounce it

No, you must reject and denounce. It's critical that you reject. Critical.

I'm not one to accuse all Hillary supporters of being repubs. Just the ones that peddle baseless smears. I think that's beyond the pale.

I've heard all kinds of rumors about Hillary. I don't believe they're true and I won't give them new life by repeating any of them. I wish Hillary's supporters would show as much restraint.

by Tatan 2008-05-10 07:18PM | 0 recs

WE reject and denounce the rumor.

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 07:20PM | 0 recs
Seriously though, rejecting and denouncing...

isn't enough.

It would be nice if you actually to took it upon yourself to call out people on your own side that engage in this kind of activity. It's easy for TexasDarlin to dismiss criticism of her behavior when it comes from political opponents, but much hard to do so when it comes from people on the same side. I've certainly troll or hide rated several obama supporters for going over the line, I've seen very few Hillary supporters doing the same.

by Tatan 2008-05-10 07:26PM | 0 recs
But you don't get it

I haven't seen Hillary supporters over the line.  We tend to respect our elders even though there aren't many elders on the Obama side of the blogosphere.

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 07:52PM | 0 recs
Re: But you don't get it

Really you don't think it's over the line when TexasDarlin peddles smear and rumors and justifies it by saying "it's just questions people are asking". I'm quite sure that if I started posting diaries about the "questions" some people have about Hillary, you would be among the first to raise a riot. Am I wrong?

by Tatan 2008-05-10 07:58PM | 0 recs
you are wrong

I don't care about questions.  I don't care if you wonder that some people think she killed Vince Foster.  I don't even care if you call her a lier.  See the thing is and has been a difference since the beginning.

We are comfortable with our candidate and who she is.  We don't have to go around convincing ourselves that we love her.  We don't have to sell her by saying how she's not Obama, we sell her by saying who she is, what she's done and what she will do.

This dedicated HillBot does not know any Obamabot, Obamaziod, OBot or Bam Bam who isn't completely insecure in their support of the One.

got it?

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 08:06PM | 0 recs
Re: you are wrong

I get that you talk a great deal about "having respect for your elders" but it seems you don't care much for having respect for your fellow man. It's cheap and dirty to engage in the sort of rumor mongering you and TD seem to be supporting. I'm sorry to disappoint you in not stooping to your level on this. I believe when we engage in that kind of behavior it cheapens our debate. I'm not worried about my candidate... I'm worried about my country. I think we should be better than this, and I'm disappointed, saddened and hurt when people who I think should be better citizens, better debaters and better human beings... lower us all into the cesspool in which they wish to conduct our public discourse.

We are owed better than debates about rumors and innuendo. We are owed better than talk radio and tabloid rumors about our candidates. We are owed better than smears sent across e-mail chains. I am owed better than that. You are too... I wish you would have the guts to stand up and say so. Instead of trying to turn this into a cheap political point about your or my candidate. They're both better than the behavior you've engaged in tonight.

by Tatan 2008-05-10 08:25PM | 0 recs
But I disagree

I do not think Obama is better than this.  I think all he does is run by smearing a great person.  By making snide remarks about her, by flipping her off and in looking down his royal we node at her.

He lowered the debate the moment he made the debate about her old style politics.  He did that to distract people from the real issues that Hillary has fought her ass off for and is still talking about while he whines that nobody wants to talk issues.  I say, shut up and talk issues then.

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 08:50PM | 0 recs
I had thought better of you

I've seen your comments on here for months... I've seen you be needlessly harsh. Repeatedly assume the worst about anyone who had a different opinion than you. Make endless streams of disparaging and insulting remarks about people who chose to support another candidate.

I still somehow thought you were better than that. I admired the passion you showed in promoting your candidate... I thought it was inspired from a sense of hope and oppourtunity you saw in her campaign.

Now, I see it's all just anger and bitterness for you.

I support Barack Obama not because I hate Hillary... but because he asks me to be better than our politics. Because he doesn't tell me how he's going to fix everything, but rather how WE can work to change things for the better. (you can accuse me of being a cultist for believing in something greater than myself if you'd like)

Truth is I would have been all too happy to see Hillary as president... perhaps a tinge uncomfortable with the idea of bush, clinton, bush, clinton (I would have liked it better if she had kept her maiden name and run as Hillary Rodham instead). But I believe , by and large, her goals, policies and ambitions are a huge improvement and quite admirable.

I know from many of your past remarks that you feel Obama supporters are insolent and lack respect. I hope sometime tomorrow or some other day later, you look back over our thread tonight and consider who was insolent and who lacked respect.

I would engage you on your insinuations about Barack Obama's action and motivations, but I think somewhere you already know that these have been disproved or are based merely on the absolute worst interpretation. I'll simply say that while I can't assume what the Senator has been thinking throughout this campaign... I can tell you what I have been. And as someone who has volunteered and donated to the campaign I feel I have a bit of ownership in it. Hillary Clinton is an incredible woman, and a formidable candidate... we as a campaign have tried to engage her both honestly, respectfully and also effectively. I'm sure you'll disagree with me on all three... but that is your interpretation, not an objective fact.

by Tatan 2008-05-10 09:12PM | 0 recs
I forgot to mention above.

that I'm fairly plastered and not responsible for anything I say tonight.  

But.  Should you happen to see THE Obama don't forget to give him my respects.

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 07:55PM | 0 recs
Re: I forgot to mention above.

So this is just cause you're plastered? Cause I'm looking back over the last 90 ratings you made, and I can't find a single instance of anything other then you encouraging and engaging in the same sort of divisive and embittering interaction you've shown a preference for tonight. I find it hard to believe you were 'plastered' for all of those as well.

by Tatan 2008-05-10 08:06PM | 0 recs
Re: I forgot to mention above.

Hillary's into fisting? Yikes.

by Rationalisto 2008-05-10 10:34PM | 0 recs
Re: I forgot to mention above.

Sorry, I'm not gonna mojo ya because it's a bit to risque...but, I must admit....I thought the EXACT same thing when I saw that pic!  ;)

by Kysen 2008-05-11 08:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

you can ask questions about me all you want.  I am not afraid of that.  no, I am not a republican troll. I am currently a Democrat, have been all my life, who supports Clinton but may soon become a registered Independent because I don't like some of what I'm seeing in my party.

But I am not running for President.  Anyone who chooses to do so should be unafraid of any question.  If you are open about who you are, your credentials, life experience, background, etc., you shouldn't care if anyone asks questions. In fact, you should welcome it.  That goes with the territory of being in public office, especially running for the highest office in the land.

by TexasDarlin 2008-05-10 08:57PM | 0 recs

Would you mind asking why Hillary and her supporters signed off on nullifying the delegates of Florida and Michigan in October of 2007 and yet now are desperately trying to re-seat them when it's advantageous to her?  

Still have not heard a response to this question from ANY HRC supporter.  Understandably so, of course, but the irony is staggering.

by Seeking Cincinnatus 2008-05-10 09:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

You're not asking question because you care about the answer or because you want to engage in a debate... you're asking a question for the explicit reason of perpetuating a smear that cannot be backed up with actual facts and as such cannot be stated by you as a fact. So instead you phrase it in the form of a question (that someone else is asking) so that you can distance yourself from the very smear you're trying to peddle. I'm not saying it's true, it's just what I heard... I'm just passin' it along. Don't blame the messenger. Well, not so fast there slick... if you spread a false rumor, you better be prepared to be called out for it.

by Tatan 2008-05-10 09:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I think he has already answered the Muslim question, so is it that you don't believe the answer, or did you not hear the answer?  Because you keep on asking it.

by interestedbystander 2008-05-10 09:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

That's Fox News MO to say we didn't say X was true, we just said there are questions about X.

by soccerandpolitics 2008-05-10 07:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Why in the world would you or anyone else question his citizenship???  And so what if he does have dual citizenship?  My husband is not a US citizen and thus my kids are allowed to have dual citizenship - so what is this supposed to mean?  They are terrorists or unpatriotic?  This is the biggest bunch of garbage....a candidate has to be a US citizen and Barack Obama is a US citizen, okay?  drop it.

by mariannie 2008-05-10 08:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

How malevolent, for a politician to acknowledge his supporters, I'm sure you are reliably up in arms every time Clinton mentions blue collar voters or women.

by letterc 2008-05-10 07:06PM | 0 recs
attn: Texas Darlin

Your presence is requested at this discussion: 59/861

by obsessed 2008-05-11 05:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I'm sorry but how is that even remotely the same?

Hillary's statement is backed up by poll after poll after poll.  She stated something that's true.

Or are you saying that what Cohen said is true?  In which case - we have nothing more to say to each other.

by alegre 2008-05-10 06:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Actually, it isn't true. No exit poll that I have seen has a classification for white working class. So if what you say is true, please enlighten us.

by venician 2008-05-10 06:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

So hardworking Americans = white Americans? That is what her construction means.

It is true that Clinton does marginally better among white voters and blue collar voters than Obama among Democratic voters in some states. That isn't really the problem with Clinton's comment.

by letterc 2008-05-10 07:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Hillary knows very well, that just becase working class white voters with less education are voting for her, does not mean they wouldn't vote for Obama.  Most of the statements made about voting trends have been deliberately misleading.  And the MSM loves picking them up and running with them.   The sad part is, Obama has allowed Clinton to get away with lie after lie because he did not want to be seen as "attacking" her too much.

I mean really.  Buying into that is like accepting that Hillary is such a bad candidate that the only reason why people are voting for her is because they refuse to vote for Obama.   And at that point, you would either have to abandon support of her, or admit your a Republican who just wants Hillary, the easier candidate to defeat in November.

So which is it for you.

  1. Hillary is such a bad candidate that no one should be voting for her.
  2. Hillary is a good candidate and once she leaves the race, Obama will be able to get the groups that voted for her.
  3. Hillary is a good candidate, and voting patterns are meaningless.  I am deliberately lying everytime I pretend they mean anything.

See the problem with all Hillary's arguements recently? Don't vote for Obama because of x,y,z.  But in the general election vote for me, even though McCain is stronger in x,y,z.  Hillary can't have it both ways.

by Tumult 2008-05-10 08:04PM | 0 recs
excuse me?

What about this is not true?  White working americans(and other people of color)are voting for HRC. Does that mean they are racist? No. does that mean she is racist? No.

And I thought your guy won? What does it matter what HRC says? Are you trying to leverage your support for condemning this comment to get something else?  How cool is that?

by 4justice 2008-05-10 06:42PM | 0 recs
Re: excuse me?

Actually, Obama wins a majority of the young white vote and Hillary wins a majority of the old white vote.  There are more older voters than young so you cannot really say with certainty that Clinton has some kind of overwhelming support of white voters.  There are other metrics at play.

by catalysis 2008-05-10 11:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Hillary was right.  And before Bob Herbert pulished that hypocritical hit piece yesterday, he basically acknowledged the SAME THING and blamed it on racism:

He was asked at a fund-raiser in San Francisco about his campaign's experiences in the run-up to next week's Democratic primary in Pennsylvania. One of the main problems, of course, is that he hasn't generated as much support as he'd like among white working-class voters.

There is no mystery here. Except for people who have been hiding in caves or living in denial, it's pretty widely understood that a substantial number of those voters -- in Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia and elsewhere -- will not vote for a black candidate for president.

Pennsylvanians themselves will tell you that racial attitudes in some parts of the state are, to be kind, less than enlightened. Gov. Ed Rendell, Hillary Clinton's most powerful advocate in the state, put it bluntly last February: "I think there are some whites who are probably not ready to vote for an African-American candidate."


Senator Obama has spent his campaign trying to dodge the race issue, which in America is like trying to dodge the wind. So when he fielded the question in San Francisco, he didn't say: "A lot of folks are not with me because I'm black -- but I'm trying to make my case and bring as many around as I can."

Instead, he fell back on a tortured response that was demonstrably incorrect. Referring to the long-term economic distress of many working-class voters, Mr. Obama said: "It's not surprising then they get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or antitrade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations."

He danced all around the truth. Unless you're Fred Astaire, if your dance steps get too intricate you're bound to make a misstep. This was a big one.

by psychodrew 2008-05-10 06:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

If you're going to put something in block quote, then provide a link so the reader can judge the context.  Unless, of course, your intent is to mislead.

by soccerandpolitics 2008-05-10 07:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I did provide the link.  Please read more carefully before pressing the "post" button.

by psychodrew 2008-05-10 07:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

So  you did.  I was wrong.  I reject and denounce myself!

by soccerandpolitics 2008-05-10 08:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I think we've all hit that post button a little too quickly once or twice.

by psychodrew 2008-05-11 03:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Well you didn't provide the context.  He was answering an attendee at the event, who asked him what to expect when she went to PA to campaign door to door for him.  and he thus went into a fairly long explanation of waht to expect in PA, with some humor.  he should not have said 'bitter' or 'cling' I guess...but the uproar over that comment was waaaaaay beyond the circumstances in which it was said.

by mariannie 2008-05-10 08:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I wasn't talking about Senator Obama or his "bitter" gaffe.  

I merely pointed out that Bob Herbert accused white, blue-collar voters of not voting for Senator Obama because they are racist.  And then he goes and calls Senator Clinton racist for pointing to an AP story that confirmed what he himself had already acknoledged--that white, blue-collar voters were supporting Hillary over Senator Obama.

by psychodrew 2008-05-11 04:00PM | 0 recs
What nonsense

Obama made a dumb comment about a certain subset of rural voters.  He didn't even use the word white.  Get a grip.

by JJE 2008-05-11 03:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Alegre don't lose faith! Even if the MSM is against Hillary she can still win! Even if the math isn't there she just got to win! Hillary is a fighter come on don't ever give up on her because Hillary wouldn't give up on you!

by Hillarywillwin 2008-05-10 06:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Delusional. Is it no wonder that China and India are ahead of us?  Sheesh.

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-10 06:26PM | 0 recs
Not this again

Please, please pack it in with this mocking of Clinton. It's not helpful.  It doesn't help Obama... if that's your goal.

You just look childish and petulant.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 06:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Not this again

But Hillary can win this thing. Why else would Hillary be in it? Hillary hasn't given up on us. Obama is in the last throws. Hillary will win because WV is Hillary's SURGE! Just like Iraq we can win this thing come on people!

by Hillarywillwin 2008-05-10 06:40PM | 0 recs
Doing the right thing means nothing, then?

Now I know how sricki feels looking at the daily Jeremiah Wright diary.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 06:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Doing the right thing means nothing, then?


by fogiv 2008-05-10 06:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?
Even if the math isn't there she just got to win!

Please God let this be snark...
by username3 2008-05-10 06:33PM | 0 recs
It is snark

It's some anti-Clinton person just being an ass.

Like we need this kind of thing.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 06:45PM | 0 recs
Re: It is snark

I consider my snark-dar pretty good, so when I can't tell the snarkers from the supporters...

by username3 2008-05-10 07:17PM | 0 recs
Snark or Not Snark?

The first goal of a propagandist is to make us question the nature of truth. After eight years of Bush's propaganda, this is what we've all been reduced to.

You've learned well, children.

by Rationalisto 2008-05-10 10:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

If there's one person who will be there "til the last dog dies" it's Alegre.  Her devotion and determination knows no bounds and she has the love and appreciation of all the Hillary supporters who know her.

So, don't worry about her.  She has her asbestos pantsuit on and isn't going away.

by Tolstoy 2008-05-10 06:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Straight up.  The thing is... this isn't over and I don't care how snarky or nasty people get.  I'm in this for the long haul and still know that Hillary has a shot at winning this thing.

by alegre 2008-05-10 07:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Alegre with the Obama people taking over Mydd and being mean to Clinton people like dailykos was don't you think it is time to strike at Mydd?

by Hillarywillwin 2008-05-10 08:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

This site is quite comfortable compared to the toxic waste dump that Markos has allowed his to become.

Jerome does a good job of keeping us all within the bounds of sanity and safety.  That was not the case at the Rotten Orange.

by Tolstoy 2008-05-10 09:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

There are a lot of alegre followers who are unhappy with how things have been going. We need a strong leader like Alegre to stand up for us. Alegre was strong when she called for the strike at dailykos. Look at how many have disappeared that have followed Alegre lead here.

We need Alegre to be strong again and start a new strike. Where is that brave woman that stood up to all those at dailykos. Come on Alegre please can't you see what is happening. We need you to lead us! Alegre please lead the Clinton supporters one more time here at Mydd! You are a strong woman and we need you!

by Hillarywillwin 2008-05-11 12:43AM | 0 recs
Politics is a rough sport

People on both sides have been way over the top.

It didn't come from the candidates mouth.


by missliberties 2008-05-10 06:24PM | 0 recs
Funny thing about the candidate's mouth

when Geraldine Feraro says something Hillay pays.  when Bill the chief surrogate get race baited it's Hillary's fault.

But fuckin' god Obama is not responsible for anything his followers say.

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 06:27PM | 0 recs
Is this fellow a campaign chair?

I don't think he's officially part of the campaign as anything other than a superdelegate, is he?

I'm not too familiar with him.

If not, I'm not sure you could equate him with Bill or Gerry.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 06:28PM | 0 recs
But Obama seems to never be responsible

for what his rock star campaign has created.  Nver his fault because the great one is beyond reproach and can do no wrong.

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 06:30PM | 0 recs
I don't hold Clinton's campaign responsible...

...for you.  You are a small, rude person with utterly no regard for others and a mentality that you can just smacktalk your way out of any situation.

I only hope that someday you realize that you can do good as well as ill with your words.  I feel sorry for you, more than anything, at how empty your life must be for such specious thrills to excite you.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 06:38PM | 0 recs
Ohhh that was good

I don't have a comeback.

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 06:51PM | 0 recs

I got uncharacteristically annoyed and immediately regretted losing my temper after I posted it.

I'm usually not so hot on the direct put-downs.  Passive aggressive is where I score most of my snide points.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 06:54PM | 0 recs
But it was really good

My wife would say you are socially unattractive and totally lacking in finesse.

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 07:22PM | 0 recs
Well that's true

Tell your wife that she's pretty good at this.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 07:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Funny thing about the candidate's mouth

Yeah, remember that time I fucking ran for vice president?  Neither do I.  Must be the weed...

by username3 2008-05-10 06:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Funny thing about the candidate's mouth

You forgot randy rhoades who called Hillary Clinton a fucking whore while at a shindig for Obama raising him some more money.  Obama couldn't acknowledge that because he was so busy apologizing to McCain for someone saying he wasn't patriotic or some crap.  You always have to address the respect of McCain first before you don't address the respect of another senator.  But then Hillary labeled a whore in his name was just so much less important than someone saying McCain was not a patriot.  And then there was that other weakness having to do with patriotism that Obama has, called Rev Wright and to ignore McCain being called unpatriotic might make Obama doubly unpatriotic.  So I guess it's understandable.

by Scotch 2008-05-10 07:21PM | 0 recs
Did I tell you I had a scotch tonight

before I had the best Almond Joy Mudslide.

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 07:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Did I tell you I had a scotch tonight

You wish.

by Scotch 2008-05-10 07:37PM | 0 recs
took me a second


by NewHampster 2008-05-10 07:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Funny thing about the candidate's mouth

I think Geraldine and Bill are a little 'closer' and more involved in the campaign than this Obama supporter.  

by mariannie 2008-05-10 08:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Politics is a rough sport

He endorsed BO - he's a supporter.  I've lost count of the number of times BO's followers have screamed for the head on a pike of Hillary's supporters or endorsers when they said something they objected to.

So no - I won't chill.  I want your guy to clear the air and tell his followers to stop attacking Hillary because of her gender.  He either condones this shit - or he condemns it.  He can't stay silent on this any longer and expect to be taken seriously as the leader of all Dems.

by alegre 2008-05-10 07:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Politics is a rough sport

I really do not like Hillary Clinton. Can you write to Senator Obama's campaign and ask him to denounce me?

by zep93 2008-05-10 09:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

That was a nasty comment. I agree with you, Alegre.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:25PM | 0 recs
Where was Alegre...

To demand that people speak out:

1) When Andrew Cuomo referred to Obama as the "shuck n' jive" candidate

2) When Billy Shaheen accused Obama of being a drug dealer

3) When Gov. Easley referred to Obama as a pansy

4) When some fool in Indiana referred to Hillary's testicular fortitude.

Where was the anger?  I can't hear you.

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-10 06:26PM | 0 recs
Let's back off some

This argument never ends well between Obama and Clinton supporters.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 06:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's back off some

It's just ridiculous how Alegre and other supporters of HRC act. I mean just plain hypocrisy.  Ugh.

by sweet potato pie 2008-05-10 06:30PM | 0 recs
I know.

It's just pointless.  Clinton's campaign is in its death throes.  Just have patience.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 06:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Way to stand up...

...for democratic principles!

by half nelson 2008-05-10 06:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's back off some

Ok. Even assuming that they are hypocrites, it doesn't make it ok for you not to do something about this.

by Falsehood 2008-05-10 06:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Where was Alegre...

Obviously you can't hear at all.  None of those people said those things.  You twisted their comments and made inferences which exist only in your mind and the minds of rabid Obama supporters on the internet.

by Tolstoy 2008-05-10 06:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Where was Alegre...

I called Rep Cohen because of this post, so I appreciated it. What it says that alegre didn't call out any of those comments is not my concern. All of those comments offended me, as did this one. Shaheen and Cuomo both got smacked for their offensive comments, Easley and Carville (the fool in Indiana was James Carville) got away with theirs because sexist, homophobic bullshit from Clinton supporters doesn't fit the media narrative and is therefore invisible.

Also, Easley (pro-death penalty SBO that he is, a far worse offense than his comment) didn't call Obama a pansy, he called the fictional character Rocky Balboa a pansy. Offensive, stupid, but not at the same level as Rep. Cohen's comment.

by letterc 2008-05-10 07:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Where was Alegre...
Obama himself used the term to describe the New Orleans Saints unlikely 2006 season
when they mostly African-American football team came to Chicago for the National Football Conference title game.
by suzieg 2008-05-11 05:35AM | 0 recs

Countdown with Keith Olbermann had a Worst Persons Segment on this when the NPR fella said it, if I recall.

This was pretty stupid of him to say.

That said, it's hardly the worst that has been said about Clinton in the last two decades and you have to admit that she's trying people's patience by continuing to eat news cycles that could be going towards the main event between Obama and McCain.

I'm thinking two things right now.

A) Clinton is a big girl with thick skin that doesn't need us to fight her battles for her.


B) Steve Cohen needs to take a chill pill and realize that there are bigger forces at work with Clinton dropping out than what he might think.  

by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 06:26PM | 0 recs
25 million dollar debt

If Clinton's donors step up to the plate to invest in their candidate or not will be critical to when and what she decides.

Her campaign has always been about the insiders, and the times have changed.

by missliberties 2008-05-10 06:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Strange

Plenty of horrid things have been said about Hillary.   But rarely is it said by a sitting member of Congress about a colleague in the Senate.

by alegre 2008-05-10 06:46PM | 0 recs
That is kinda screwy

I'm glad he apologized.  You should post the link to the apology, if you haven't already.

Then again, there apparently was never apologies for the fistfights McCain got into on the Senate floor...

by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 07:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Strange

So you now reduce her to a "news cycle eater".  I won't give you mojo but I'll give you a check mark for the newest insult.

by Tolstoy 2008-05-10 06:46PM | 0 recs
Eh, I'm not really trying to insult her

The one I begrudged who was eating news cycles was Wright.  At least Clinton is an important national figure.

I just don't understand where Clinton is coming from on her latest demographics-obsessed headlines, though I'm trying.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 07:00PM | 0 recs
by Bee 2008-05-10 06:30PM | 0 recs
Glad for that

There you go then.

Things get heated on the campaign trail.  I'm glad it got sorted out.

alegre, you should probably include the apology in the diary, just to show that we're not completely uncivilized.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 06:41PM | 0 recs
He apologized.

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

by bobdoleisevil 2008-05-10 06:32PM | 0 recs
Well that fixes everything

I am so sick of apologies from Obamazoids.

And throwing your pastor under the bus does not forgive 20 years of friendship.

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 06:36PM | 0 recs
Whatever. I hope you'll vote

the same as your Congresswoman will in the general.

by bobdoleisevil 2008-05-10 06:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Well that fixes everything

Well, what do you want him to do? Take a jaunt to Gitmo for some waterboarding?

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Well that fixes everything

That would be a start.

by Scotch 2008-05-10 07:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Well that fixes everything



by map 2008-05-10 06:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Well that fixes everything

Hampster is the opposite of classy. Or coherent. I believe he is the original "Old Man Yells at Cloud."

(I try to be nice, but some of these folks get on my last gay nerve.)

by Rationalisto 2008-05-10 10:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Well that fixes everything

oh, yeah, I am so glad Jerome keeps this site civil just like kos...just think what kinds of nasty unhelpful statements would be allowed if he DIDN'T monitor the comments.../snark

by hopeful 2008-05-11 07:05AM | 0 recs
Re: Well that fixes everything

Reading that literally, I can only assume that my apologies are no longer welcome. What do I do if I can't apologize?



by Falsehood 2008-05-10 06:54PM | 0 recs
Re: He apologized.

I condemn his original comments but am glad he responded so quickly.  It was a very very poor choice of metaphor.

I'm sure Alegre will update her diary with this new information. ;)

by map 2008-05-10 06:40PM | 0 recs
Re: He apologized.

Wanna bet?  Unless of course it's to criticize him in some manner for the apology.

by soccerandpolitics 2008-05-10 07:46PM | 0 recs
Re: He apologized.

Wow, if that's the way he talks about people he admires, one can only imagine the filth he spews about people he doesn't like.  Limp apology.  Not accepted.

by Tolstoy 2008-05-10 06:48PM | 0 recs
Re: He apologized.

What a bunch of fake drivel.  I love how politicians and others make the most obnoxious comments that a normal, good person would never in a million years say, and then claim that deep down in their hearts they never meant it.  It was a mistake. They actually love the person they smeared...and blah, blah, blah.  A person who has a friendship or respect for another would never say what he did, ever.  What do they think we are a bunch of idiots who will believe and lap up every word they say?

by Scotch 2008-05-10 07:10PM | 0 recs
Re: He apologized.
Yeah, it's kind of like Bill saying he couldn't be racist because his office is located in Harlem.
Just saying!
by venician 2008-05-10 07:31PM | 0 recs
looks like cohen will get a primary challenge

seems like a lot of woman hating going on.

by 4justice 2008-05-10 06:33PM | 0 recs
Re: looks like cohen will get a primary challenge

Not that anyone here would dare to play the gender card...

by username3 2008-05-10 06:36PM | 0 recs
look at the comments in this diary

and including your own. You diminish and dismiss women, especially cynically and without meaning show no outrage at Cohen, and put up the usual, typical, snarky one-liners that show me you have no respect for anyone at all.  Not even yourself, apparently.  Whre is the substance?  Where is your support for Obama?  Or are you just really into this because you hate HRC?

So right, now, tell me again why you shouldn't be troll rated mercilessly for your hateful and dismissive comments?

by 4justice 2008-05-10 06:54PM | 0 recs
Re: look at the comments in this diary

I don't hate you, or even dislike you.  Same for Senator Clinton.  We probably agree more than we disagree.

I just think that you're in denial now, and the only reasonable response to your comments is to dismiss them out of hand.

by username3 2008-05-10 07:02PM | 0 recs
Re: look at the comments in this diary

I watched a Clinton speech where she said.  "We need to clean up the White House....Women are good at cleaning up, that is why I need to be elected.  Maybe I will invite you to bring your brooms and dustpans to the White House when I get elected."  And "It is hard for women to be the best at anything....that is why I need to be elected".  These arn't exact quotes since they are just from memory.

I really have no clue how anyone can call people out on sexist comments when they support Hillary Clinton.  Shouldn't the first outraged act be to demand Hillary Clinton stops this?  Attempting to divide peopel by gender has been one of the foundations of Hillary's campaign.  But she has gotten away with it, she has gotten away with the way she has defined both herself and Obama, and even if we accept that the Obama campaign is 100% guilty in playing the race card, why was it ok for Hillary to pile on about Ayers, Wright, Bitter and NAFTA when it seems the MSM was carrying those stories just fine on their own.

by Tumult 2008-05-10 08:53PM | 0 recs
I reject and denounce

Now, can we move on?

by lizardbox 2008-05-10 06:34PM | 0 recs
Re: I reject and denounce

But you have neither dejected nor renounced!  Scandal!!!

by username3 2008-05-10 06:36PM | 0 recs
Yep - the denounce word

solves everything.  I denounce the drugs I did in college so I guess I didn't.  I denounce the six pack I stole 30 years ago, so I guess it's ok.


by NewHampster 2008-05-10 06:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Yep - the denounce word

No BS. I don't jokingly reject and denounce. It's bullshit what Cohen said. But that's just one man's f*k up that won't affect the overall well-being of people. So, f*k him. We move on.

by lizardbox 2008-05-10 06:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Yep - the denounce word

Just one man's fuckup that won't affect anyones well being?  Institutionalized sexism which it is an example of was a million mens fuckups that didn't affect anyones well being according to all the men who heard it at the time.  Men, and I assume you are one or else someone as clueless who is a woman, still don't fucking get it.  Do you think there is any reason at all why this type of comment is so accepted in the media now?  It is because a comment like it can be repeated a million times over, and the reaction against it everytime is "...just one man's fuck up that won't affect anyones well being".  Well there have been millions of "well beings" affect by each of these single comments stated one comment at a time. It is affecting the lives and has for hundreds of years, this attitude that anything can be said against any woman and be laughed off, or patronized with an apathetic apology. You can move on apparently, but others of us can't because society won't let us.

by Scotch 2008-05-10 06:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Yep - the denounce word

So, what do you suggest we do about Mr. Cohen? And please don't be passing judgment on how hard or easy I've had it. You know nothing about me and you seem to be very well capable of making a point without stereotyping, so do that next time. I'm not big on manufactured anger. This is a big deal in some respect, but not as you're making it out to be. Where was your anger or that of Alegre for that matter when the good Senator Clinton decided to let us know that hard working Americans, white Americans prefer her? Oh... I remember, there was nothing wrong with that. That was not institutionalized racism or anything. Just a truth worded badly. The campaign regrets such error (OBAMA IS BLACK), moving on

by lizardbox 2008-05-10 07:10PM | 0 recs
Re: Yep - the denounce word

Gitmo for Cohen!

by soccerandpolitics 2008-05-10 07:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Yep - the denounce word


He was using funny phrasing, but he was AGREEING with Alegre - it was bad. I don't know how to satisfy you here with a comment.

by Falsehood 2008-05-10 06:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Alegre, I concur with everything you wrote, and I would add this point:

The reason this slime-ball's remark was tolerated, and continues to be tolerated, is because we are now in a climate that tolerates full-blown insults against Hillary Clinton.  In the past few days cable TV stars and Obama surrogates, such as Ted Kennedy, have trashed this 2-term senator who has been a good, loyal, and accomplished Democrat -- both in and out of office -- for 4 decades, more accomplished by far than her opponent.  It's like a witch trial.  It's a campaign to end her.

Does anyone remember New Hamshire?  BACKLASH, baby, watch it comin' like a tidal wave....

by TexasDarlin 2008-05-10 06:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

His remark wasn't tolerated and he has since apologized.

And, as I've seen over the months, you've characterized anything critical of Clinton, her policies, and campaign strategies as "trashing."

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

you know what?  The Obama campaign & their surrogates can stick it.  How many times have their surrogates/supporters say the most outrageous shit (and I mean really outrageous bullshit that slams and demeans character) about Hillary and then they turn around and state "oh, I so sorry.  I so respect Sen. Clinton and I didn't mean what I said"?

too many times.  And it is planned, imho.  They know damn well what they are saying and their so-called BS apologies are not done on the same public sphere as their original insult was done on.

by colebiancardi 2008-05-10 07:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

oh - and this is the same campaign that is supposed to be a different type of campaign.  Yep, they certainly are.  I cannot post what type of campaign they are.  Unity?  BS.  

by colebiancardi 2008-05-10 07:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

You're right about one thing. It is a campaign to end her. And it's the VOTERS who made that decision.

by venician 2008-05-10 06:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

This should not have been troll rated.

by shalca 2008-05-10 09:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Yeah, the backlash is going to be awesome to behold.  She might even come back to win WV by 30+ points now.  Rise, Hillary, Rise.

by map 2008-05-10 06:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

No, the expectation for days is that she wins WV by 40 points, that state so well known for being a bastion of third wave feminism.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Whatever the expectation, she'll come back to win... no matter what the final margin ends up being!  Just like she came back from 5-10pts UP in IN to win by 1pt.

And yes, WV is a little known bastion of female empowerment, which explains why it's going for Hillary in a big way while OR isn't.  There's no other explanation.  Not one that isn't bannable anyways.

by map 2008-05-10 07:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I imagine both Clintons have made a fair number of enemies over the years--and even more during this primary. Perhaps everyone's taking James Carville's advice. To paraphrase: "When your enemy is drowning, don't throw them a life preserver. Throw them an anchor."

by Rationalisto 2008-05-10 10:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

With all due respect, essentially all of your predictions over the past few weeks have been horrendously wrong.

Why should we pay attention to your sky is falling concern trolling now?

by PSUdan 2008-05-11 05:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

TR'd by JulieinVt, another "progressive" member of the "new" democratic party no doubt.

by TexasDarlin 2008-05-11 06:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Now that he's apologized, then there's no reason to keep the congressman's e-mail up on this diary -- unless harassing him is your bag.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

sorry - read up thread.  Too many times we have seen this shit from the Obama camp - from his surrogates.

make a horrific comment on Hillary's character very publically and then hidden away is the small "Oh I am so sorry" BS.

slime oozes from these types of "supporters"

by colebiancardi 2008-05-10 07:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I wrote the same thing to Howard Dean an hour ago:  He has NO idea what this kind of sexist---no, misogynistic---crap is about to unleash.  Somebody in the Democratic party better get over their aversion to upsetting the Obama Drama-tists and give their attack dogs a lesson.  It is this:  Women are more than 50% of the population.  There are more women than men in the Democratic Party.  MOST of the work on campaigns is done by women.   And women will be angry beyond words if the nomination is stolen from Sen. Clinton by Obama and his minnions [a la Lake County IN's ham-handed attempt; documented theft of caucus outcomes in Texas].

For years, women have watched other women be denied and degraded in the party.  And for months, women have been forced to endure the media savage a distinguished U.S Senator and a former First Lady, women are, truly and finally, as mad as hell.  

We ain't your Sweet Mammas, boys.  We have money and power and discipline you've never seen. We have changed the world before, and we will do it again.   And we are sick of this!  

by tj in tx 2008-05-10 06:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

More of this gender victim stuff. I'm pretty sick of it.  I'm a woman, I used to support Clinton and switched to Obama in January.

The majority of women under 65 voted for Obama. That's a lot of women!

BTW, you can't steal a nomination by winning the majority of states, delegates, and votes. That's not stealing in anyone's remotely rational definition.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:45PM | 0 recs
Can you give proof of that statistic?

I'm not being snide, I am honestly curious where you got the data to back-up "the majority of women under 65 voted for Obama"?

by twinmom 2008-05-10 06:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Can you give proof of that statistic?

Exit poll analysis. I've read it several places, but am too tired to hunt it down right now.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 06:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Yes we know you used to support Clinton.  You announce it in every comment.  Could you cut us a break and get some new material.

by Scotch 2008-05-10 08:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Wrong! the only age demographic where large numbers of females voted more for Obama were females under 25. From 25-29 and 30-39, only slightly more favored Obama. From 40 up female voters favor Hillary. And that's the majority of female voters.

That's the real exit poll numbers, and they've been rather consistent across the states, the only change with female voters has been she's gradually been picking up more females 25-39- as Obama and his campaign has become more and more overt in their misogyny, even those women over 24 and under 40 are becoming angry with Obama and his campaign's misogyny and are switching to Hillary and staying with her.

by K1966 2008-05-10 10:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Hear, hear!  Yes we are.

by Tolstoy 2008-05-10 06:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Some women will be outraged beyond words. Most will not.

by Mandoliniment 2008-05-10 07:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Hide rated for alleging voter fraud in Lake County.  Give me a source for actual voter fraud there and I'll uprate you and apologize.

by soccerandpolitics 2008-05-10 07:31PM | 0 recs
The Mayor of Gary

Used school buses at tax payer expense to take thousands of students on field trips to go vote early.  I'm fairly certain they didn't send the same buses to all the nursing homes in town.

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 07:42PM | 0 recs
Re: The Mayor of Gary


by soccerandpolitics 2008-05-10 07:56PM | 0 recs
No link and I sure hate the show me proof BS

The good cheats don't get caught.

But this was told to me personally by a Hill staffer from the Gary office.  Also told how the Obama visibility people would harass Hillary supporters and try to push them off busy street corners.

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 08:11PM | 0 recs
Surprise, surpirse

More hearsay, rumor and innuendo peddling from NewHampster. Shock of all shocks. Having worked on the field in Scranton, PA and New Jersey... I've never seen the Obama campaign engage in any tactic even remotely like this.

The fact is we've run an honest campaign. So when you spew forth some rumor you heard from some person, who heard it fro, someone else... who knows someone who is totally in the know... etc.etc. You'll forgive me if I take the opportunity to speak as someone with first hand experience on how the Obama field team handles things and call BS on this one.

by Tatan 2008-05-10 08:47PM | 0 recs
I was in Scranton for GOTV

and there weren't enough of you to bother us.

by NewHampster 2008-05-10 08:52PM | 0 recs
Re: I was in Scranton for GOTV

There were plenty of us. We were busy canvasing and preparing for our events. One which Hillary's campaign was planning to disrupt as I recall from one of your posts about Scranton.

by Tatan 2008-05-10 09:14PM | 0 recs
Re: I was in Scranton for GOTV

I had a lot of respect for you for saying this:

Then I was asked to join them in the Viz at the Obama rally.  I drove over and almost got out of my car but when it comes down to it, I see that as something they do.  I don't need to be against him in order support her.

But it seems that while you were better than that, the campaign was not... they had 'Viz' at the event regardless of whether you were there or not. And you know first hand that it was coordinated from the campaign itself, do you not?

by Tatan 2008-05-10 09:28PM | 0 recs
Re: I was in Scranton for GOTV

Oh and since you were at Hillary's event the next day... did you happen to see any Obama 'Viz' at that event? It's not like it would have been difficult logistically... the headquarters office was just a few blocks away. We could have very easily sent over a few people with giant signs (like Hillary did)... we didn't. The campaign is better than that.

by Tatan 2008-05-10 10:14PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Also hide rated for accusing Lake County of vote fraud, for which there is no evidence.

by letterc 2008-05-10 07:53PM | 0 recs
Ya' know, we are not &quot;boys&quot;

We are men - equal to women. My house is full of both.

You can't answer sexism with sexism.  My son is no more guilty of anything just for being male than my daughters are for being female.

The kind of statement you just made is what got me attacked by feminists for pushing against at the same time I was being attacked by white supremacists for pushing back on them.

I'm more than a little tired of anyone claiming the moral high ground on discrimination simply "turning the tables" and thinking that is somehow a step forward.  

Men are not against women.  This campaign is not about Men trying to attack Women.  My son is not sexist.  I am not.  My father is not. My brother is not.

You, however, may or may not be.  That's for you to figure out.


by chrisblask 2008-05-10 10:23PM | 0 recs
Are you a Texan?

When was the last female governor of Texas?  Oh yeah, I voted for Ann Richards.

When was the last black governor of Texas?  Oh yea, never.

You have Kay Bailey as a Senator.  You (and African Americans) had Barbara Jordan as a Congresswoman.  (I took a class from her btw).

This is a historical event for both women and African Americans.  Don't try to make this an oppression comparison between women and blacks.  You'll lose that one.

by Regenman 2008-05-10 10:54PM | 0 recs
And Hillary's &quot;Rocky&quot; Reference?

Lets see...

in Rocky I the white Italian stallion fought a black man...

in Rocky II he fought a black man...

in Rocky III he fought a black man...

Rocky IV - a white man! - but of course a cold-war russian eneny who is treated as the anti-Uncle Sam.

Roicky V...did anyone actually see that movie? was a dumbass thing for Cohen to say and I sent a short note to that effect to his office...but I think the outrage here is a little over-the-top...and your claim that Obama has said anything even remotely this offensive is equally disingenuous.

by Newcomer 2008-05-10 06:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I agree what he said is bad and he has apologized for his remark, but to insinuate this is an attack on woman as a whole is stretching it.

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-10 06:49PM | 0 recs
sorry you don't get it

ask your mother.

by TeresaInPa 2008-05-10 07:08PM | 0 recs
Re: sorry you don't get it

My mother? My mother is a big Hillary supporter but she's not big on taking every comment about Hillary and deciding that it's anti-woman or anti-all women.  That doesn't sit well with her at all.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 07:15PM | 0 recs
Re: sorry you don't get it

I am sorry but Hillary does not represent women as a whole.

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-10 07:16PM | 0 recs
Re: sorry you don't get it

Seems to me that Hillary and her supporters might just be a little too sensitive for the rough and tumble of politics - thank goodness she isn't going to be President, because the rest of the world wouldn't treat her with the kid gloves you would like everyone to don.

by interestedbystander 2008-05-10 10:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

You forgot the link to donate to Clinton. What's up with that?

by soccerandpolitics 2008-05-10 06:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Yes she needs to retire her debt.  Those people in NH and NV would like their bills from Hill to be paid ya know!

by Bobby Obama 2008-05-10 06:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Those bills have been paid.

As an Obama supporter, I would hope you would stop being so negative without cause - it won't make it any easier for people to unify around the candidate.

by Falsehood 2008-05-10 06:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I know a number of people who worked for Hillary in Iowa and STILL have not been paid.

by hopeful 2008-05-11 07:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I hadn't heard about workers - just contracts. Oh dear, oh dear.

by Falsehood 2008-05-11 12:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Don't Clinton supporters try and claim Obama supporters play the victim card or some nonesense like that?  What would this be called?

by Bobby Obama 2008-05-10 06:52PM | 0 recs
Cohen's office phone number:

The email link you posted is restricted to people in his district, you might want to add his office phone numbers:

DC: (202) 225-3265
TN: (901) 544-4131

Here is the email I would have sent him:

Dear Representative Cohen,

You owe Senator Clinton, Senator Obama, and the American people an apology for your comment on Senator Clinton's campaign: "Glenn Close should have stayed in that tub." I can't imagine what made you think that that was an acceptable or appropriate comment for anyone to make about Senator Clinton's campaign for president, much less for a sitting US representative.

I am a supporter of Senator Obama, and I intend to vote for him here in Oregon, but that does not make your comment one iota less disgraceful and disgusting to me.


[my name]

by letterc 2008-05-10 06:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Cohen's office phone number:

Apology has been made, FYI. The letter is still justified though.

by Falsehood 2008-05-10 07:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Cohen's office phone number:

I'd like to see the apology, where can I find it?

by Scotch 2008-05-10 07:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Cohen's office phone number:

It's upthread.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 07:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Cohen's office phone number:

I saw that after I called him. At least I know I'm not alone in calling him.

by letterc 2008-05-10 07:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

This Obama supporter thinks the remark was in poor taste and offensive.

by Reaper0Bot0 2008-05-10 07:00PM | 0 recs
This process has been such a battering

I sometimes honestly wish I could go back to the days when Hillary Clinton was my Senator from NY and I was blissfully unaware of the sexism and misogyny which still runs rampant in this country.

I've been shocked by it. I expected it and was ready for it in the General Election with Hillary as the nominee. I never expected to see it coming from fellow Democrats.

Equivalent racist statements would never be tolerated. It is considered offensive to utter the names of Obama and Jesse Jackson in the same sentence to make a comparative political point but it is fair game to compare Hillary to a psychopathic murderous woman who rises to stab the hero in the back after he has left her for dead?

Thing is, I am so numb to it all at this point that it doesn't even shock me anymore. Afterall, last week on the NYTimes blog there were many Obama supporters gleefully comparing Hillary to Eight Belles and saying that because she came in second she should be "put out of her misery too".

by twinmom 2008-05-10 07:03PM | 0 recs
Re: This process has been such a battering

It isn't fair game, and he has been forced to apologize for it.

Not that that makes it much better.

by letterc 2008-05-10 08:00PM | 0 recs
Re: This process has been such a battering

Yeah, we American feminists have been trying to end this misogyny by speaking out in public for 182 years. Each generation of feminists hopes they can end misogyny for the next generation of women. We struggle and win bit by bit, in spite of all the hatred that is thrown at us (often literally). Many of us veteran feminists (that now includes founding third wave feminists like myself- 41 years old now) think the misogyny is so intense because we are so close to that victory over sexism and misogyny (especially the later, the lower grade bigotry of sexism will take more time.) All these misogynists whether they call themselves progressives or conservatives are on the attack because they know in their guts that women are sick of tolerating this nastiness and are going to fight back hard no matter what. But if Hillary wins and becomes president we'll have support against misogyny from the top office of this country, that's what terrifies them. They think women are going to unleash a revenge campaign against misogynists. Seriously, I've seen  both "progressive" and conservative misogynyist spout that nonsense. It says that for all their pretended ignorance, they darn well know that they have been misogynist. That's why call bs when some misogynist troll claims ignorance. I know darn well they know exactly what they are doing.

It really stinks that you are having to deal with this  twinmom, we activist feminist women fight it so hard in the hope that women like you won't have to. It hurts my soul that you have had it slapped in your face. And it makes me angry and even more determined to fight the creeps.

One more thing from my heart- Happy Mother's day!  May your children someday live in a world that women aren't subjected to misogyny and sexism! I know I'm fighting for that!  

by K1966 2008-05-10 11:20PM | 0 recs
Amen to that!

Happy Mother's Day to you too K1966... whether you are a mom or not, you clearly have the maternal instinct.

Thanks so much for your reply, I literally have tears in my eyes (emotional day anyway). I fought so hard to have my children (many years of infertility and pregnancy losses). I have found my hero in Hillary Clinton... for women, for children, for healthcare, for families, for education, and for the incredible strength, fortitude and courage which she has always been able to greet her detractors with.

My twins are 4 year old boys. It was my deepest dream to have the first president they remember be Hillary Clinton. Imagine that... a generation of men for whom the way they see and perceive that world is completely unlike anything that has come before. A world where women truly can (and do!) accomplish anything.

by twinmom 2008-05-11 05:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

it's just more of the same, speaking of her with nasty dismissive references or with unpleasant characterizations. she' used to it, it's always hard being the first.  Of course Barack should address it, and perhaps give us all an uplifting speech on misogyny.  I'm certain we'd all feel elevated.  

by anna shane 2008-05-10 07:09PM | 0 recs
Just once

I would like to see Obama speak out on the blatant misogyny that has characterized this campaign. Just. Once.

by OtherLisa 2008-05-10 07:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Just once

Do you think Hillary Clinton will ever apologize for trying to tag Obama with the "Farrakhan" label?  Of course not.

by Mostly 2008-05-10 09:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Just once

It's not his campaign - why can't you guys see that?

by interestedbystander 2008-05-10 09:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Unpleasant characterizations?!!?! It's almost like this were a political campaign, or something.

Can your self-righteous bullshit.

by amiches 2008-05-11 12:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

she's do anything to win?  She's in bed with special interests?  Are these not unpleasant characterizations?  

by anna shane 2008-05-11 09:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

The first is an opinion (which more and more agree with every day), the second is categorically true.

by amiches 2008-05-11 03:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Yup, it's been this way with the Obamabots since day one. What else is new?

I was really hoping the Dems could convince me to vote with them this time. Not now... Maybe not ever.

There's the Green Party, Ralph Nader, and even McCain to consider, but not Obama for sure.

P.S. - Cynthia McKinney of the Green Party is a black woman and can whoop Obama's ass any time. So, Obamabots, don't call me a racist if I don't support Obama.

by Swing Vote 2008-05-10 07:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Can the insults. I support Obama and used to support Clinton, have never called anyone a name, and agreed with Alegre that this was a nasty remark.  Don't put all Obama supporters in the same category.  And if stupid remarks affect your vote choice, well it's obviously your right as a citizen to use that as your basis, but in my humble opinion, it means your vote is disconnected from the world you want to create.

by politicsmatters 2008-05-10 07:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

hahahaha McKinney??? ahahahahaha oh please vote for that nutcase oh please

/I am not a cop so I am safe from her abuse

by obamaovermccain 2008-05-10 07:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Oh, this is rich, an Obamacan attacking an African American woman. Double dose of bigotry at once- racism and sexism.

by K1966 2008-05-10 11:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Geez, maybe he is just attacking her ideas?

by hopeful 2008-05-11 07:20AM | 0 recs
Bye bye abortion rights

Let it be on your head.  And that's not fear mongering either.  Last two seats went to Roberts and Alito and supposedly 3 more seats will come up soon.

You do the math....

by Regenman 2008-05-10 10:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Bye bye abortion rights

Uh huh, and Obama wants to appoint justices like Roberts and dismissively calls women's rights "ideology". So he's no better than McCain on women's issues. Doesn't surprise me. fits right in with his sexist behavior in this campaign. So hang it up with that threat, it won't fly. Both male candidates are equally bad on women's issues. I won't vote for Obama nor will I vote for McCain. I'm voting for Hillary or if she doesn't get the nomination, I'll either write her in or vote Green- women's issues are treated with respect in the Green party.

by K1966 2008-05-10 11:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Bye bye abortion rights

In the hopes that you can be brought from darkness to light, please at least do yourself the courtesy of reading through Obama's stances on women's issues before you cast your ballot: omenissues

by The Distillery 2008-05-11 12:54AM | 0 recs
sorry, but his website does not cut it

on women's issues.  And there is no gurantee that Obama will appoint judges that will help--after all, he wanted to vote for Roberts before his staff talked him out of it.

No, Obama is certainly not a candidate for women.  And Michelle's behavior certainly reinforces that.

by 4justice 2008-05-11 07:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Bye bye abortion rights

Did you watch the interview/debate that the Baptist folks had with Hillary and Obama? He was wishy washy about abortion rights. It was not encouraging.

Here's the debate on Youtube, from the beginning. 4A&feature=related

by splashy 2008-05-11 09:29PM | 0 recs
Not a robot, just an Obama supporter

Don't equate the most committed partisans with all supporters of Obama.

As the polls show - clearly and consistently - the large majority of Obama supporters would happily support Hillary Clinton in the general election.

Reading political websites can lead us to forget that, because they attract the most committed followers of each candidate and because the posts that stir the blood the most are the ones that stick in memory.  But even on this site there are some thoughtful and considerate Obama supporters, and there are many, many more out in the real world.

We aren't robots.  We're fellow Democrats.

by TL 2008-05-11 05:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I would never call you a racist, but I might call you a warmonger. After all, a vote for John McCain is a vote for more war and more dead soldiers.

(And sorry, folks, but a vote for not-Obama is a vote for John McCain. Whether we like it or not, it's a two-party system for now.)(

by CrazyDrumGuy 2008-05-11 10:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Seriously, after all this drama, we'll be lucky if a woman or a Black person is ever nominated again!  I feel a comeback of the angry white man!

The comment was in poor taste.  But I thought Carville's joke about Obama's #'s of testes was sexist too.  Why does a woman have to have "balls" in order to be strong?  I feel strong with ovaries!  That was a disgustingly sexist comment made by a Hillary supporter.  But he got away with it.  There is a sexist double standard in this country.  Unfortunately we tend to excuse it (Bitch is the new Black) when it suits us and decry when it doesn't (see diary).

by Hope08 2008-05-10 07:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

"Bitch is the new black" wasn't a sexist comment. Sexism implies an aspersion, and even the term "bitch" in general isn't sexist; it's derogatory, and gender specific, but "bastard" is the equivalent mail term, and is used as liberally.

Likewise, "balls" isn't really a gender specific term, which is why Clinton can, indeed, have them. Objecting to "balls" vs "ovaries" isn't quite as bad as decrying "woman" as a sexist word and demanding "womyn" as a replacement.

by mattw 2008-05-10 09:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Wow, you really would make the Clinton's proud.  "Balls isn't really a gender specific term."  I guess that depends on what the meaning of "is" is?

Are you high?  Balls = testicles.  Testicles are pretty gender specific there hoss.  I guess because Carville used the term it kind of ruins your "Obama is playing the gender card" meme though, huh?

by belicheat 2008-05-12 06:52AM | 0 recs
In other news

tens of thousands of Democrats got off their duffs and registered new voters all over the country today inspired by the campaign of Barack Obama.

Yes, a Congressperson said something idiotic which he reportedly apologized for. So did Hillary Clinton...let's leave it at that.

Here's the real story from today.  Tens of thousands of Democrats, within the structure of a campaign, registered new voters across the nation in MAY of a Presidential election year.

I registered seven. Four had never voted before. 1 was a young Latina who had just turned 18 and was so proud to be a registered voter. 2 were young, African American men. 1 was an immigrant Filipina senior citizen. 1 was a white senior citizen. and 2 were an Asian/white married couple with kids.

That's what change means. That's what working hard for it means.

I read on some websites that folks are trashing their Democratic registrations.

That's a very small minority view; a miniscule, negative, cynical view. All over the nation today a massive voter registration drive got's not stopping anytime soon.

by kid oakland 2008-05-10 07:29PM | 0 recs
Re: In other news

Yeah, it's truly amazing what Obama is doing. By the end of the drive he hopes to have over ONE MILLION people to help get out the vote in Nov. Mc Same must be shitting his pants.

by venician 2008-05-10 07:43PM | 0 recs
That's a little much, alegre

His remark wasn't only offensive to the candidate he attacked. His remark was an attack on every woman.

While I appreciate that you posted the apology, I'd appreciate it if you held off on the hyperbole.

As much as you might love Hillary Clinton, she's not the feminine archetype and she doesn't represent every woman.  Sexism is a problem in our culture, but let's not suggest that this elected doofus just started a WWI-scale gender war.  "It was the off-color movie reference heard 'round the world..."

by Dracomicron 2008-05-10 07:30PM | 0 recs
Wrong-- and understand the reference

You call Alegre on hyperbole and by created one of your own; she wrote it was an attack on every woman...where are you getting "WWI-scale gender war" from?

Hilary Clinton IS A contemporary feminine archetype, not the only one, but certainly certain types of attacks directed at her read as attacks on what she represents and all women who can or could be identified with her.

I heard an interesting observation yesterday -- if the ranking in this primary were reversed, I believe a chorus of pundits would be encouraging Obama to fight on -- not because he could win -- but because of what his candidacy symbolizes.  He would be urged to "stick in there" to keep his agenda in the mix and hold Clinton accountable.  He'd be applauded for him tenacity and courage.

But when a woman hangs tough for any reason (and we don't know what her reasons are for staying in) in any context -- it's happened to me, it's happened to women I know -- out comes the "Fatal Attraction" reference.  

Our culture is not comfortable with a woman who displays tenacity or ferosity against a man.  It must be psychosis or some twisted obsession with him. Women are supposed to nurture, cooperate, compromise and concede.  And when they don't or won't they are "ball-busters", "bitches", sexually furstrated and/or psychotically fixated.  

I personally find the old Glenn Close reference the most offensive sexist rebuke out there.  It's the contemporary framing of the age old dismissal of female dissent as lunacy.

It makes me want to go all Kathy Bates on any guy who uses it.

by grassrootsorganizer 2008-05-11 01:40AM | 0 recs
No, I see your point.

I just disagree.

If the congressman had said, "Like all women, Clinton will never give up, just like Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction, then THAT would be an attack on all women.  An attack on every woman in the world would, indeed, be a world war on women, which she claims is sounded by this one ill-concieved insult, much like the "Shot heard 'round the world" that triggered WWI.  I'm building off of her hyperbole to explain its silliness.

Hyperbole is exaggeration of the importance of something.  This guy screwed up but he wasn't maliciously trying to denegrate over half of the population.  

I'd like to clarify something about Obama, if the tables were turned.  He'd be sticking in and campaigning to the end, but that's what he said he'd do, as long as he had the resources to do it.  That's the 50 state strategy; it has less to do with winning the presdiency and more to do with party building.

What he wouldn't be doing is coming up with new victory conditions every week or using bizarre anti-intellectual panders to scare up votes.

I would love it if Clinton just stuck in the race, Huckabee style and did her best, letting the chips fall where they may.  Calls for her to drop out are dumb and short-sighted, but when she gets aggressive against the presumptive nominee, I can understand why they make them.

by Dracomicron 2008-05-11 04:45AM | 0 recs
When will Bill apologise

to Jacki Rickert?

by benmasel 2008-05-10 07:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Cohen's comment is terrible, but rather than taking the predictable route of trying to make this Obama's problem and nurturing political advantage for Clinton how about you take the time to explain to people who don't understand why Fatal Attraction references are problematic?

What struck me most about his comment was that he references the tub. For those unfamiliar with the history of the film, the original ending of Fatal Attraction had the Close character committing suicide and unsuccessfully attempting to frame the Douglas character for her "murder." The test audiences were dissatisfied with this ending, and wanted one that satisfied their blood lust. So (much to the chagrin of Close) they reshot the ending in a bizarre slasher film manner where you think she's dead (been killed by Douglas) in the tub but then she jumps up only to be shot by the angelic wife. The film was widely interpreted as being violently anti-feminist, particularly with the new ending. And when Cohen references the tub, he's referring to that slasher-style film moment when you think the killer is dead but (s)he comes back one more time.

Tapper nails Cohen for comparing Clinton's persistance to psychosis, but I think if Cohen had compared her to Freddy Krueger it wouldn't be as bad. Alex died in the original script, but it wasn't good enough for that test audience (sitting in representation of our culture) so the filmmakers contrived to kill off the character in a manner that simultaneously raised the crazy a couple of notches and made sure that she was appropriately punished for her transgressive behavior (ranging from interferring with the family bond to being an intelligent woman with a successful career, depending on your perspective). From my perspective, saying she should have stayed in the tub is egregious because the only reason she was in the damn tub to begin with is because society demanded the woman be punished in a manner more severe than suicide (because that's such a great outcome?).

I'm not suggesting that Cohen was aware of all this when he made his comment, I don't know anything about the guy. But I don't think we should ignore the cultural force and context that Fatal Attraction references carry. Men make these comments in a semi-joking manner all the time - although I've noted a stronger preference for the "I won't be ignored" line over the ending. And in my experience most of these men are not making a conscious decision to enforce sexist or misogynistic frames - they're kind of surprised by the suggestion that they're unwittingly doing so. If you want them to understand, it's better to explain than to go into attack mode.

Some people have snarkily suggested that Obama give a speech about it, but the more impressive speech would be from Clinton herself. Of course, the day a woman in her position can speak honestly and openly about the ravages of sexism is the day sexism isn't as much of a problem so I don't blame Clinton for not doing it.

by Mobar 2008-05-10 08:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

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

Will alegre every back our candidate?  That is the question.

by neonplaque 2008-05-10 09:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

ever, even.  Probably doesn't matter here anyway.

by neonplaque 2008-05-10 09:02PM | 0 recs
It was a terrible thing to say

I think the congressperson should be held accountable, and I think he should apologize to Senator Clinton.  I don't, however, think that Obama himself is obligated to hold a press conference or anything.  

by kellogg 2008-05-10 09:02PM | 0 recs
Re: It was a terrible thing to say

Agreed...this Congressman should make a formal apology to Senator Clinton and face any consequences with the people he represents in November. But no, Obama does not have to "denounce, reject, disown, disavow, repudiate, etc. etc." this guy beyond saying that he thinks the analogy was insulting and poorly chosen to say the least.

by GrahamCracker 2008-05-10 09:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Alegre's diaries are a cesspool.  And they're supposed to be - nothing gets people fighting faster than her day-in, day-out bullshit.

by Mostly 2008-05-10 09:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I don't see how this is sexist. Just because Hillary is a woman and Glenn Close was a woman doesn't make it a sexist comment. He was saying: Hillary doesn't know when enough is enough. He was saying it rudely and crudely, and an elected official should know better than to liken Hillary to a sociopath, but it's not sexist. At least, I didn't take it that way; admittedly, sexism, like racism, is somewhat in the eye of the beholder. But I seriously doubt he meant for it to be demeaning to women in general; he only meant it to be demeaning to Senator Clinton. If you want to be equally outraged over that, can't say I'd want to defend him. He blew it. I'm sure Obama dislikes it just as much.

by mattw 2008-05-10 09:38PM | 0 recs

disgusting comment that will only harm the party

by rossinatl 2008-05-10 09:56PM | 0 recs
The larger issue is

how do you guys want this to end?

1. Hillary will walk away quietly.

2. Hillary will divide the party and gain the greater half and win the nomination.

3. Hillary will divide the party and gain the lesser half and Obama will win the nomination.

Which of these options is preferable to you?

by Sam Wise Gingy 2008-05-10 10:22PM | 0 recs
I'd propose a 4th option

How about she gets celebrated for being the first female candidate to ever make a viable run for the Presidency? How about she gets shown some respect and admiration for what she has accomplished?

How about the Democratic Party make a REAL attempt to fight against societal sexism and misogyny?

How about Obama and his supporters actually recognize and acknowledge the huge rift which has been formed during this primary? Everyone seems away of it on the race front, but no ones seems to notice or care about the sexism rift.

Why should she "walk away quietly"? She's not walking away. Get used to it. At the very least she and the 16million voters who supported her (with more to come in the next contests) will be holding Obama accountable for OUR platform.

The political landscape will ALWAYS have Hillary Clinton in it. She's not going gently into that goodnight. Not even close. I, for one, thank God for that!

by twinmom 2008-05-11 05:19AM | 0 recs
Re: I'd propose a 4th option

So, what makes you think this will not happen? In fact, I believe it will. I think Hillary will play a huge roll in the she should. But her attacks are aimed at Obama personally right now...whether you choose to believe it or not, his have been aimed more at her policies and decisions. I am sure I will get attacked for this statement.


by hopeful 2008-05-11 07:18AM | 0 recs
Re: I'd propose a 4th option

Please name me a candidate that came in second for the nomination and still played a "huge role" in the convention.

by Sam Wise Gingy 2008-05-14 07:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I read about this comment earlier this is definitely way over the line.  He was trying to communicate that Hillary is hurting the Party by staying in and attacking Obama when she has no chance of winning.  But wow, he coulda said it in a decent and civilized way like I try to do.  I am glad he apologized.

by gorebeatbush2 2008-05-10 10:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Hillary is NOTHING like Glen Close's character in that movie, well, as far as I know.

by Rick in Eugene 2008-05-11 01:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Thanks for cheering up this dismal diary rehearsing the same old pain.

Your comment, rick, had me rolling around with laughter.

Is that a form of 'rick rolling'

Oh my, I feel a web link coming on...

by duende 2008-05-11 01:23PM | 0 recs
I think anyone cheering on this diary should read

This dairy: /46061

Then this diary: /66699

Then go start doing something positive work towards beating McCain rather than listening to Alegre try to get people frothing at the mouth, again and again and again.

It's time we start doing something positive rather than just pissing and moaning, or McCain will really give us something to cry about, as my mother likes to say.

by mattjfogarty 2008-05-11 02:01AM | 0 recs
Re:Cohen represents a black district in Memphis

He took over Harold Ford, Jr.'s seat, when Ford left to run for Senate. Cohen was popular at first, but he's been having trouble. If you ask me, this was an outrageously opportunistic remark to ingratiate himself with his overwhelmingly black district. That he said it on local television proves he had something to prove to his local audience.

And, that makes it EVEN WORSE.

Shame on Steve Cohen, exploiter, opportunist AND sexist.

by Tennessean 2008-05-11 02:54AM | 0 recs
is this.................?
only one allegra diary on the rec list?
has it come to this?
by citizendave 2008-05-11 03:51AM | 0 recs
Re: is this.................?

LOL.  Actually I thought she was bribing Jerome to give her posts a little extra juice for the rec list.   Not really.  Her rec list presence just shows what outrage and fallacious reasoning based on inaccuracy and innuendo can do if one is not terribly concerned about actual facts versus support of a particular candidate. Also known as having an axe to grind.  

And Alegre, being a mom doesn't buy you any more right to be outraged than anyone else. What Cohen said was horrid and should not have been uttered by any elected official. Period. But don't make the mistake that something said by someone who supports Obama means that Obama or the Obama campaign is making an assertion about his competitor for the nomination.  

Your diary is full of emotion over something that the Obama campaign is not responsible for nor do they realistically have time to apologize for everything that any supporter anywhere says that might be deemed offensive by someone else.  It's ridiculous that you would even think that he should apologize for all such pronouncements.  Do you expect Hillary to apologize for all the things said about Obama and his supporters by her supporters?

Please go enjoy your Mother's day with your child as I will do with mine and think twice before you post the next time.

by vbdietz 2008-05-11 04:58AM | 0 recs
Yep! MyDD is not a bad place

and most folks here are not anti-Dem, just supporters of Sen. Clinton.

Many diaries now are actually pro-Dem, and it is moving in the right direction.  Once there is a candidate and (assuming gravity doesn't reverse itself) it is Obama, Jerome can decide whether to keep the site going as a Dem site or not.

I don't know the guy, but I assume it will be an ongoing site and will focus on electing Obama.  Alegre, SusanHu (the former FleaFlicker if I'm not mistaken) and some others may not stay, but others will come.


by chrisblask 2008-05-11 07:55AM | 0 recs
Kudos to you Alegre

It's people like you that put pressure on politicians and hold them accountable for they're actions.

by soyousay 2008-05-11 04:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

He won't accept comments from people out of his district the coward! What's his phone number we should deluge his office with faxes and calls.

by suzieg 2008-05-11 05:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Is there sexism in the USA? Yes.

Are there other problems in the USA? Yes.

Is sexism the top problem facing the country? It depends on who you ask.

Is electing HRC going to end sexism as a problem?

Is it possible that another candidate might be better at dealing with the total set of issues facing the country?

by Carl Nyberg 2008-05-11 06:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

if the shoe fits...

by lockewasright 2008-05-11 07:18AM | 0 recs
*My response*

So a Congressman feels it's ok to repeat poor tast comments that other Obama supporters or surrogates make?  Maybe he would like to repeat those nice words Randi Rhodes did, calling our former First Lady, sitting Senator and presidential candidate a f*ck*g whore.  Or maybe he'd like to use those words used by Obama's Spiritual advisor/Pastor for 20 years and Lead Advisor on his presidential campaign, Rev Wright and he can shout out "God Damn America, or he is a Congressman of the US of KKK" or some other witty comment.

I wonder, if some called Obama-Charles Manson or David Koresh from Branch Branch Obamian, how that would go over.  Or maybe just the same belittling bigotry with Obama is just another f#ck##g Pimp and Hustler.  


But, this guy is supposed to be a Congressman uttering these things, huh?  But when you have our media glorifying this speak, should we be surprised?  He thinks he special now, because he dared went there.  

Uh yes, demonize our heros and worship losers.

Which category do you want to fit in with Congressman?

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

More of those words that HAVE TO BE SAID by politicians, huh?

Well, yes, you keep repeating this "Come Together" meme, while you attack and demean the other more than half of voting population and lets see how you think that's going to happen.  See Congressman, you are the perfect proof of "do on to others as you would have do un to you".  Or simpler, reality provides a different picture of your painted words.

And in the end, with all the damage Camp Obama and his supporters and surrogates have caused, you BETTER HOPE IT IS HILLARY as our nominee, because there is no other way a Democrat will win the General Election.

by environmentally blue 2008-05-11 07:19AM | 0 recs
shuck and Jive, lucky Black man,druge dealer

Reaching up to break the glass ceiling by standing on the backs of the Black community.

by TMP 2008-05-11 08:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I assume it's a typo but the diary reads:

Is this what we've been reduced to? by Alegre

when it should read:

Is this what we've been reduced to by Alegre?

by lockewasright 2008-05-11 07:20AM | 0 recs

One stupid comment gets attributed to all Obama supporters -- we must all reject and denounce one stupid comment.

Okay, I reject and denounce it! Please, everybody, reject and denounce this! This cannot stand!

by Black Anus 2008-05-11 07:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Great diary! You are so right and I admire you.

I'm with you. That weasel will get an email.

Sexism: the dirtly little not-so-secret of this campaign

by cuppajoe 2008-05-11 08:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Alegre, you'd be more credible if you had only commented on the comment that was made.  And the manner how you mentioned Obama's name in your diary, you lost all credibility.

I think you diary is less about the comment than it is about Obama vs. Clinton.  The senator has apologized, and yet you are unsatisfied.  Seems you want blood, or if the senator endorses Clinton, would that satisfy you?  

I think you are trying to state a principle.  But I can't see past your anger to see it.

And you know what?  I don't see Hillary jumping up and down regarding this comment.  Hillary can defend herself without you being so mean and divisive.  I think you give Hillary supporters a bad name.  Shame on you.

by hienmango 2008-05-11 09:42AM | 0 recs
Please refrain from using &quot;we&quot;

He was wrong, it was beyond the pale and his apology falls flat.  As an Obama supporter, I don't know how Obama can be held accountable for what this guy said.

Please stop with the guilt by association, it's getting old and it's getting us nowhere.

by Ellinorianne 2008-05-11 09:53AM | 0 recs

by Kobi 2008-05-11 11:17AM | 0 recs

somebody somewhere said something bad about my hero Hillary Clinton.

by alb 2008-05-11 11:40AM | 0 recs
It must be nice to be Alegre...

w/ enough spare time to be able to track each and every negative thing somebody said about your candidate, then write a 20 plus paragraph blog entry detailing said offense.  Unbelievable!!!

by alb 2008-05-11 11:41AM | 0 recs
Is this what Alegre's been reduced to?

If only one could get paid to write diaries like this...

Oh wait...

by duende 2008-05-11 01:27PM | 0 recs
There is no end

to the things Obama supporters, (not all of them, I know), will say about the Clintons.

If the same things said about Clinton were said about Obama, the person would be branded a racist immediately.  

It's terrible...and the reason Obama will not be getting my boat...I'm not getting on the bandwagon with those people.

by SoCalVet 2008-05-11 01:48PM | 0 recs
Alegre I am with you - 100%

by Molee 2008-05-11 02:53PM | 0 recs
Artur Davis and James Clyburn

A little over a week ago, Davis called supporters of HRC racist on MTP and Clyburn called us henchmen.

Take your unity blather and hollow kumbaya rhetoric and stick it where the sun don't shine BO.

by Newport News Dem 2008-05-11 03:53PM | 0 recs
a gift for the diehards

Here's an article that's still trying to draw up Hillary scenarios. I hated it, so y'all'll prolly love it: ernstein.clinton/index.html

by obsessed 2008-05-11 04:20PM | 0 recs
Hillary's folks don't apologize for their smears.

What the congressman said was so wrong on so many different levels (I'd encourage him to read Faludi's chapter on Fatal Attraction in Backlash).  His comment, if the quote is right here, is misogynist and hateful, and he ought to apologize, and Obama should say it's unacceptable.  

That said, Hillary hardly ever does the same when various and sundry of her surrogates say hateful, nasty things about Obama.  Somehow this makes her seem "tougher," but I think it's pretty bad form.

This remark may well be special in its awful nature.  Had a Hillary surrogate compared Obama to, say, some raving African American psycho, I'd say it was time for Hillary to say something strong in response, and I'd recommend it for Obama as well.  It's disgusting stuff, and Obama should be classy enough to disown it. . .


by maconblue 2008-05-11 06:00PM | 0 recs

If anything that has happened during this campaign is how misogyny is not only alive, well, but is actively endorsed by many Obama supporters as well as pretty much the entire MSM.

I seriously didn't like any of them but this sort of behavior has disgusted me to the point of outrage.

Frankly, you all should do diaries talking about the many policy agendas Hillary has for women, single mothers.  She does have exceptional plans and note who does not!

Fortunately I am in a state where casting my vote for 3rd party has no effect but I'm sorry there is no way I will vote for Obama because of the horrific and outrageous misogynistic treatment of Hillary Clinton.

Any one who is for equal rights, equality, supports women, is a woman I think they should be having a major call to arms at this point.

by Robert Oak 2008-05-11 09:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

I sent him a nasty email about his comments...

by nikkid 2008-05-11 09:53PM | 0 recs
It's a Pretty Cheap Comparison... make... but "misogynistic hate speech?"  That's kind of ridiculous.  Is it misogynistic hate speech just because Hillary and Glen Close are women?

by TooFolkGR 2008-05-12 05:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Is This What We've Been Reduced To?

Honestly, at this point I really don't know what else can be said about you Alegre.  Don't let anyone ever accuse you of folding when the going gets tough.  I would just have a bit more respect for what you are saying if there wasn't some sort of sexist crisis every single day.

Yes, it was a stupid comment.  But Hillary and her surrogates have made just as many comments that inject sex into this contest, not to mention some of the more racially charged comments.  So cool it.  You aren't helping anything.

by belicheat 2008-05-12 06:55AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads