'90's Misogyny Rehashed

Obama has chosen to adopt and nurture the love child of the Rovian right-wing machine:  Hillary Clinton as polarizing uber-bitch.

The most disturbing part of Obama's willingness to embrace this crown jewel of the Rovian media machine, is his seeming indifference to the misogynistic roots of these stereotypical characterizations.

Substantively, it is impossible to disentangle the right-wing's demonization of Clinton from the gender bias of those demonizations.

Are we then to conclude that Obama concurs with the right's characterization of strong, smart, independent women as polarizing?  Or, is he just willing to play this card because it might serve him well in becoming President.

It is the height of hypocrisy for Obama to bemoan the horrors of reliving the the battles of the '90s while it is Obama himself who is beating that tired drum.

Further, where is the outrage for these comments in the progressive blogsphere?.

Throughout the campaign, the progressive blogsphere has criticized Clinton for her use of what they feel are "right-winged frames" with regards to the war on terror, diplomacy, etc.  With Obama himself adopting perhaps THE definitive "right-winged frame", his comments will be a real test of integrity for the overwhelmingly male progressive blogsphere.

For now, they seem to be eerily silent.

Tags: Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Karl Rove, misogyny, Progressive Blogsphere, Right Wing Consipiracy (all tags)

Comments

79 Comments

Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

well put

by markjay 2007-08-16 06:29AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Totally.  You nailed it.  The reason the Right was able to characterize Hillary as a polarizing bitch was precisely because she was such a strong womn.  I find it distasteful that any candidate would use that angle.  But, so there you have.  Whatever happened to the politics of hope?

by bookgrl 2007-08-16 06:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

So if somebody states the truth about Hillary they are using Rovian tactics?  No, this post is just a reaction to the politico article which argued that Hillary is designing her campaign after Bush's.

by CardBoard 2007-08-16 06:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

I stated the truth about Obama, in his own words, and had you and other Obama followers accused me of the same. Double standard should be your name here.

by DoIT 2007-08-16 06:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Pardon me, not trying to be a poopiehead here, but when you say "I stated the truth about Obama, in his own words..." I double checked the diary for a quote, a link, anything... but no, alas all we have are your assertions, unsupported by a single shred of evidence that Obama doing anythhing of the sort you're accusing him of.

In future, for the sake of building a worthwhile argument, please provide at least some support for your arguments.

by NicholasWalter 2007-08-16 08:29AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Oops, sorry, ignore my comment... I thought you were the OP, but I guess you were referring to something else.  My apologies!!

by NicholasWalter 2007-08-16 08:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

I stated the truth about Obama, in his own words, and had you and other Obama followers accused me of the same.

No you didn't. You just made up a bunch of stuff and tried to put it in the Senaors mouth.

by Mystylplx 2007-08-16 09:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

NH Union leader has an interesting take on Obama's 'uniter' claim.

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx? headline=Who+is+divisive%3A+Clinton+or+O bama%3F&articleId=c38366ec-caec-412d -a918-cb92b101a78b
Who is divisive: Clinton or Obama?


Oh, yeah, President Bush said that some years ago. And he tried to be just that. He began his administration by reaching out to Democrats as he did in Texas. But the Democrats would have none of it, and the rest is history.

Now Obama says he'll heal those wounds and bring the country together, and that Sen. Hillary Clinton won't.

That might be true. But it also might be true that Sen. Clinton would govern in a more bipartisan, unifying way than Sen. Obama would. Between the two of them, Sen. Clinton, believe it or not, is more appealing to moderate, independent America. She plays to the middle while Obama plays to the left. Is she just pandering? Maybe. But maybe she, like her husband, would govern from the middle, while Obama would govern from the left. If that were to happen, Clinton would be the more unifying President.

Speaking to a Washington Post reporter here in Manchester, Obama said he would bring about "a more fundamental change in how business is done in Washington."

That's the kind of inspiring rhetoric the Illinois senator is brilliant at dispensing. But the question is, "How?" Peel away his eloquence, and his policy proposals are revealed to be solidly left-wing and no more appealing to middle America than Clinton's are. Can he unite the country simply by speaking eloquently about our shared values? It is not likely, especially if he intends to turn us decidedly leftward.

If Sen. Obama really plans to unite the country, he can start by showing that he would actually govern from the middle and not just talk from there.

by areyouready 2007-08-16 06:48AM | 0 recs
The Union Leader?

Great...there's an endorsement every Democrat is looking for.  If you wanted an example of why Hillary Clinton is a cautious, DLC centrist who will sell out progressives, this was probably it.

by rashomon 2007-08-16 07:45AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Between the two of them, Sen. Clinton, believe it or not, is more appealing to moderate, independent America. She plays to the middle while Obama plays to the left. Is she just pandering? Maybe. But maybe she, like her husband, would govern from the middle, while Obama would govern from the left. If that were to happen, Clinton would be the more unifying President.

This is a pretty powerful comment from the editorial board of the Union-Leader -- the voice of the moderate to conservative spectrum in NH politics. Independents in NH are disgusted with Republicans and looking for alternatives.

by hwc 2007-08-16 09:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Excellent diary. This stuff needs to be said and repeated. I agree with your question: Where is the outrage?

Thank you!

by DoIT 2007-08-16 06:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

There's no outrage because that's not what he said.

LOL.

by BlueDiamond 2007-08-16 11:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/08/1 5/politics/purehorserace/main3170418.sht ml


Democrats are hungry for change -- a specific brand of change. They may well win the White House on a platform that represents the party's position on issues ranging from Iraq to terrorism, health care, taxes and trade, but that won't wipe out generation of bitter differences. Elections are waged by making sharp distinctions with the opposition, not accommodations -- and Democrats are in no mood to accommodate at the moment. If he's right and the country has been carrying on these partisan and ideological fights for more than four decades, it is hard to imagine how this year's election will be any different regardless of who the candidates may be. We cynics will only believe it when we see it, but for now, Obama's self-proclaimed ability to "bring the country together" seems likely to end up in the same place as Bush's promise to be a "uniter, not a divider" -- and long before the 2008 election. -- Vaughn Ververs

by areyouready 2007-08-16 06:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Bush is different because he has intentionally been as divisive as possible since day one.  I don't think any of the Democratic candidates will be as divisive as Bush, although the Republicans will do everything they can to ensure the divide stays in place.

by Steve M 2007-08-16 07:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways
Hey, there is a great diary about Hillary as the female candidate on dkos:http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/16/ 103027/337
You may want to read it.  Rec it if you can.
by bookgrl 2007-08-16 06:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways
How bout the 'inexperience' of the black candidate.
The campaign has now began. This is a democracy. Voters will have a clear choice.
choice (a) Washington experience which brings back the divisiveness of the 90s.
choice (b) Washington inexperience, new ideas and ending the red/blue divisions so the country can move on.
The voters will have to make that choice.
by joachim 2007-08-16 07:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

You know each passing day Obama speaks I get the feeling that He thinks he is Jesus Christ . His campaign is a little too " Self Centered " to me.

I am the one that can bring the country together.

I have the best foreign policy

I am the one that can clean out washington

I am change

Both parties are bad , I am the one to repair it.

Hillary is too polarizing , If you don't elect me it will continue to be polarized.

I am hope and People are pushing their hopes through " me ".

Just a little too self promoting for me.

by lori 2007-08-16 07:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

By the way all this uniting talk from Obama is just crap . I wonder why some people cannot  see its election year pandering . It is not grounded in reality.

by lori 2007-08-16 07:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

This seems kinda silly in the same way that it's silly to say Hillary is too ambitious.

These people are running for President of the United States.  When I go to a job interview, I try to explain why I think I'm the best person for the job.  That's just normal.

by Steve M 2007-08-16 07:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

I am knocking him for being ambitious and trying to distinguish himself , but I just have a bad vibe from him when he speaks , he comes off like he is a little to full of himself.

by lori 2007-08-16 07:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

i am not

by lori 2007-08-16 07:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Generally speaking, "bad vibes" are in the eye of the beholder.

by Mystylplx 2007-08-16 11:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

But do tear down other applicants to make yourself seem the best? Of course not, because an employer would frown on such behavior.

by Dickweed 2007-08-16 08:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Usually, you don't know who the other applicants are, so the analogy sort of breaks down at this point.  But there's a finer line than you think between saying "I'm the best qualified" and "The others aren't as qualified as me."

When you say that your experience or your personal qualities make you the best suited for the job, you're implicitly saying that the other candidates' experience or personal qualities aren't as good as yours.  There's no getting around that.  That doesn't mean that every time you contrast yourself with other candidates counts as an unfair negative attack, let alone a "Rovian" one.

by Steve M 2007-08-16 08:44AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

What an absolutely useless diary.

by AdamSmithsHand 2007-08-16 07:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

I think it's really sad that this gets on the rec list because a handful of Hillary supporters rec in lockstep, even though the diary doesn't actually say anything.  Kind of a weakness of this site.

by Steve M 2007-08-16 07:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

There are big problems with the rec. list. And usually they work against Clinton instead of for. The typical rec. list consist out of one Obama piece, one anti-clinton piece and the rest all edwards all the time. It's hardly a Clinton specific problem

So I think that most Clinton supporters would actually support a change and they usually get a lot of this sort of diaries against them.

My problem is that good technical dairies never get recommended. The whole system may be thrown out, it doesn't achieve anything It's all cheerleading or bashing.

by Ernst 2007-08-16 07:44AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

I'm not a fan of hit pieces against anyone, but god, at least put some substance in there.  This diary is about one step removed from "Obama sucks."

by Steve M 2007-08-16 07:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Luckily the title has been changed, so the worst part has been modified. I agree that it is a bit light on substance. I'm able to condense the whole dairy in a single sentence without losing any real information. But then again, we both can do that with most attack dairies. :)

by Ernst 2007-08-16 08:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

You got lots of nerve talking about Hillary supporters. We are few. It is the Obama and Edwards supporters that recommend diaries with one comment or only a few. It's like they have radar anytime something is posted in favor of their candidate. And it might only be that they clipped their freakin toenails or tried a breath mint. Talk about your lamers. Mob mentality.

by Dickweed 2007-08-16 08:24AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Lately, it seems to me that it's the Hillary crowd which has gotten out of control.  Don't you guys aspire to be better than the rest?  Instead we get crap like areyouready calling Obama a "desperate beast."

I've been pushing back against lame anti-Hillary diaries on Daily Kos for years now, so I think I have standing to express this opinion.

by Steve M 2007-08-16 08:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Can people stop lumping all Hillary supporters, all Obama supproters and all Edwards supporters together?  Some supporters of any given candidate are thoughtful, articulate and passionate.  Others are frequently useless (as in this diary), rude or trollish.  Let's try to judge things by their merits.

by NicholasWalter 2007-08-16 08:45AM | 0 recs
Worse than that - it's shit

This is a drive-by hit piece.  

We can criticize other candidates without being Rovian.  It is EXTRAORDINARILY insulting to call a Democrat "Rovian".  Obama is, in my opinion, reasonably nuanced in his criticism, and such crap fests as this diary are just unfair and sloppy.

by dataguy 2007-08-16 07:55AM | 0 recs
Obama going negative, getting ugly

I knew he was just another pol.  There is nothing different about this guy.  Actually he may be more of phony than most.

by dpANDREWS 2007-08-16 07:09AM | 0 recs
Clinton is not just another politican

God forbid candidates compete with one another primary. I'm sure Hillary has never made any claim that she's the best candidate, that would be so political of her. She's so above politics.

by HatchInBrooklyn 2007-08-16 07:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

I'm not sure what comments of Obama's you're referring to when you claim he's trying to portray Hillary as a polarizing uber-bitch.

I thought Obama's reference to Hillary's baggage from the 90s was rather mild and way too much is made of it.  Hillary's negatives are real.  The fallout from things we never successfully debunked in the 90s is real.  I don't particularly buy Obama's argument that these things should be dispositive, but it's an fair point to make.

Are you referring to something more significant than those comments I reference?  If not, I think this diary is a bit of an overstatement.  By the look of the other comments, you're basically preaching to the converted here.

by Steve M 2007-08-16 07:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Obama's comments were intentionally conceived to have people remember all the terrible things that republicans said (and now so-called progressives say) about a former first lady. They even accused her of being a murderer. Seriously. And their blatant in your face sexism was beyond belief. So having Obama bring this stuff up is beyond contemptible, it is a pure Rovian attack strategy. Obama has no conscience when it comes to winning. He doesn't have any respect for Hillary or the Democratic party. All he cares about is himself.

by Dickweed 2007-08-16 08:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Look, I agree with you that the vast majority of Hillary's negatives are attributable to wholly illegitimate reasons.

So because of that, no one can even reference those negatives without being called "beyond contemptible"?  The negatives are a fact.  They don't go away just because we make a rule that it's wrong to talk about them.

And this line about Obama having no conscience, being willing to destroy the Democratic Party to win, yadda yadda, which I've seen from more Hillary supporters than just you, is totally ridiculous.  Completely unjustified by anything that's been cited here.  You can say it if you like, but you harm your own credibility by doing so.

by Steve M 2007-08-16 11:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Obama never accused her of being a murderer. And you can imagine all sorts of extreme and hidden motives for the Senators very mild (accurate) statement about Hillary's baggage, but that's all it is.

What is extreme and "Rovian" is calling him "contemptable" and saying he has "no conscience."

I suggest you check the log in your own eye before you start complaining about the splinter in Senator Obama's.

by Mystylplx 2007-08-16 11:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Maybe you should learn to read. I didn't say Obama accused Hillary of murder. Maybe you need to get some glasses. Or maybe you are just too starry eyed over Obama to see straight.

by Dickweed 2007-08-17 11:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

You suggested that Obama's comments were in some mystical and imaginary way an attempt to remind people of all these terrible things, including murder, that Republicans accused Hillary Clinton of.

His comments were nothing of the sort. Even among Republicans that whole murder thing is only on the fringest fringe.

by Mystylplx 2007-08-17 01:17PM | 0 recs
by BigBoyBlue 2007-08-16 07:16AM | 0 recs
Re: At Kos Now. Recommend

Thanks. I just recommended there, and hope all bloggers will do the same - the right thing!

by areyouready 2007-08-16 07:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/arch ives/2007/08/why_rove_attacked_clinton.p hp

Why Rove Attacked Clinton
16 Aug 2007 10:05 am

Two Republicans close to Karl Rove said that his decision to tie his exit from the Bush White House to a series of frontal assaults on the political viability of Sen. Hillary Clinton stems in part from his conviction that she will be the Democratic nominee, as Rove said. But there's also a bit of envy: Clinton has so successfully rehabiliated her image -- she's established her own political identity -- that Rove wants to pressure Republicans to begin their character attacks on Clinton now, rather than later.

It's a strategy Rove employed during the 2004 re-election, when the Bush campaign decided early to cover Bush's own negatives by portraying Sen. John Kerry as completely to lead the country during perilous times.


by areyouready 2007-08-16 07:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

The Clintons are way ahead of the game.  As Bill Clinton said in his spectacular 2004 convention speech, the Republicans know the country doesn't support their agenda, so their only option is to try and portray the Democrats as unacceptable.  This will be their game plan no matter who the nominee is.

The problem they'll face with attacking Hillary is that not only is she ridiculously experienced and smooth at dealing with this stuff, but the public feels like they've heard it all before when it comes to attacks on Hillary.  It's going to be hard to come up with a new angle.

Of the other Democrats, John Edwards is also an excellent counterpuncher (Giuliani's foreign policy is "George Bush without the thinking" - what a great line!) but he's not quite as Teflon as Hillary.  Obama, he's certainly not a wimp, but I'm less certain of how well he'll do when the Republicans really go after him.  On the recent foreign policy arguments, he fought back pretty well but never got off a devastating riposte.

by Steve M 2007-08-16 07:32AM | 0 recs
Hillary under fire - she's a tough bitch

During her first campaign, she was in a debate with that Repukeliscum moron.  He came over and stood over her at one point.  She stood her ground, and did not back away.  That won her the election.

I believe that Sen Clinton is a tough bitch.  We need a tough bitch in the POTUS.  Calling her a tough bitch is a compliment.

by dataguy 2007-08-16 08:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

No question about it. If you read the full transcript of Rove's comments on Limbaugh yesterday, he went through an entire list of Clinton voting against Bush's "health care initiatives".

He left his "official" capacity in the White House so that he could be free to be the Republican attack dog. He won't have an "official" capacity with any campaign so that the candidates have deniability.

His job will be to lead the Republican attacks on Clinton. He will also be in charge of racial smears against Obama.

The Democratic candidates better figure out that they need to stop attacking each other and focus their guns on the Republican administration and candidates.

by hwc 2007-08-16 09:25AM | 0 recs
Take the Rove bit out of the title.

Then people would have to debate the merits not the hyperbole.

by bookgrl 2007-08-16 07:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Take the Rove bit out of the title.

What would you recommend, bookgrl?

by BigBoyBlue 2007-08-16 07:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Take the Rove bit out of the title.

How about "Polarizing Hillary meme has sexist origins"?

by bookgrl 2007-08-16 07:44AM | 0 recs
Re: Take the Rove bit out of the title.

how's that?  thanks for the advise!

by BigBoyBlue 2007-08-16 07:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Take the Rove bit out of the title.

Much better, I'd change it at dkos as well, but that's just me. ;-)

by bookgrl 2007-08-16 07:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Take the Rove bit out of the title.

I did!  They're an aggressive crowd over there!  ;)

by BigBoyBlue 2007-08-16 07:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Take the Rove bit out of the title.

Weird how it didn't shoot up the rec'd list over there.  Maybe that's because they're 100% right.   It's utter bullshit to say "Rove" especially.  In the 90s, Rove was whispering "lesbian" to reporters about Ann Richards in Texas and planting bugs in his office.  Referencing Limbaugh, while similarly unfair and credibility-undermining, would at least be historically accurate.

by msbatxnyc 2007-08-16 10:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

In the future, when criticizing comments, and demanding accountability from the blogosphere for them, it might be a good idea to ACTUALLY QUOTE them. Or, failing that, LINK TO THEM. I think this should be a prerequisite for any diary, let alone a rec'd diary.

It is not just a matter of courtesy to your readers, but a matter of accountability for the diary writer. Otherwise we are stuck with mere characterization of the comments without any way to agree, disagree, or distinguish.

Once you do that, I will be happy to discuss them with you.

by thenew 2007-08-16 07:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

It doessn't take a genius to see that Hillary is polarizing.  She consistently has the highest negatives in the race, with 42-48% of the population vowing to vote against her.  Its strange how the same people who are constantly shouting from the mountaintop about every new poll that comes out refuse to acknowledge the deep dislike for Hillary Clinton that those very same polls show over and over again.

by WellstoneDem 2007-08-16 07:48AM | 0 recs
OK, she has high negatives

What's your point?

by dataguy 2007-08-16 07:57AM | 0 recs
Re: OK, she has high negatives

That this diary is, therefore, a bullshit hit piece.  Noticing someone has high negatives and pointing out that it could be a liability is completely fair game.  It's actually a crucially important piece of information that should be carefully considered when evaluating candidates.  Obama supporters might complain about the substance of the experience attacks against him, but we don't say "you're racist b/c you said he's inexperienced.  That's the same argument George Ryan made and so you're racist like him."  Obama's comments didn't have dick to do with deriding HRC's ambition or her gender.  Leaping to that conclusion and playing victim is so weaksauce and slimy and Wolfson looked like an idiot when Drudgeico, of all places, smacked him for it.  

by msbatxnyc 2007-08-16 10:38AM | 0 recs
Her high negatives

are decreasing.  I'm no fan of Sen Clinton, other than my general admiration for her courage under fire, but I am warming to her.  Her negatives are dropping, over time.  I believe that if she hews to a centrist, reasoned approach, she can be the first woman POTUS.  Won't make everyone happy, yeah true enough.

by dataguy 2007-08-16 07:59AM | 0 recs
george peddled that line a few weeks ago...

but her negatives have returned to historic high range...

by bored now 2007-08-16 11:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama's Rovian Ways

Hillary has high negatives because Republicans hate her. And rightfully so as she has stood up to them for years and exposed and put to rest their lies. Some so-progressives get all worried that our leading candidate is despised by Republicans. It makes me wonder if they are really even Democrats.

by Dickweed 2007-08-16 08:40AM | 0 recs
Shit

This is a shit diary.

Take this shit and flush it.

by dataguy 2007-08-16 07:52AM | 0 recs
Why not

just call him a Nazi and get it over with?

Disgusting trash here.

by dataguy 2007-08-16 07:53AM | 0 recs
Hillary as inside the beltway

Even when she was first lady of Arkansas?

by dataguy 2007-08-16 07:56AM | 0 recs
Clinton spokesman compares Obama to Rove

Why no diary about that?

by dataguy 2007-08-16 08:14AM | 0 recs
i think it's a little ridiculous to try to claim..

that hillary is not the most polarizing politician in the field (perhaps in the country).  i mean, i get that voters are stupid, but do you think they are that stupid?

this is a woman who has hit historic highs in her negatives, SOMETHING THAT NO OTHER NON-INCUMBENT has every done.  i guess protecting the queen bee means that you have to be dishonest and argue that the sky is red now...

by bored now 2007-08-16 08:17AM | 0 recs
Obama in Iowa: Don't blame Bush

Good to know that Obama has joined with Joe Lieberan to defend our President --- how desperate Obama has become.

by dpANDREWS 2007-08-16 08:46AM | 0 recs
when? link?

by bored now 2007-08-16 09:06AM | 0 recs
by dpANDREWS 2007-08-16 09:21AM | 0 recs
i followed the link...

and didn't see anything about lieberman or obama defending bush...

by bored now 2007-08-16 10:17AM | 0 recs
Re: i followed the link...

"Part of the problem here is not just George Bush and the White House," Obama told a crowd of hundreds gathered at a park in Cedar Falls.

This is Obama using a Joe Lieberman tactic.  He is taking a shot at Democrats - taking some blame off Bush, and shifting it to Democrats -  in order to shine up his credentials.   That is exactly what the sanctimonious Jomentum does all the time.

Anything that takes heat off Bush, helps Bush, if Obama is helping Bush, it is not much of a lip to say he is defending him.  

by dpANDREWS 2007-08-16 10:44AM | 0 recs
i see, it's subjective...

i didn't realize that truth telling gets one called lieberman-like.  unless you can show that george bush and his white house are completely responsible for our problems...

by bored now 2007-08-16 11:22AM | 0 recs
Any Democrat

Who does anything to take even a little teeny bit of heat off Bush as we head into the election is doing Democrats a disservice.

Bush and the Republicans are drowning.  We need to throw them an anvil, not a rope.

by dpANDREWS 2007-08-16 09:24AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama in Iowa: Don't blame Bush

Do you not understand how detrimental this kind of comment is to an exchange of ideas?  You completely twist and misrepresent his comments.  You make a completely false equivalence between Lieberman defending Bush's policies and Obama making the point that the corrupt culture of D.C. and government by lobbyists will still be in place when Bush leaves office.  This is intellectually dishonest and irresponsible.  It hurts this site and drives people away because reading your posts is a waste of their time.  You should be, at a minimum, not be allowed to post on the front page for a while.  

by msbatxnyc 2007-08-16 10:44AM | 0 recs
You can apologize for Bush

I won't.

by dpANDREWS 2007-08-16 11:52AM | 0 recs
Re: You can apologize for Bush

You are having severe problems with logic.  The consequence of your position is like saying that criticizing lax handgun laws is an apology for gun-weilding serial killers, or that criticizing courts' propensity to blame victims in sexual assault crimes in the same as excusing rapists.  Pointing out that a system makes bad governance easier is not an apology for bad governance; it's a critique of the system.  You make this place worse with this crap.  Please think more carefully about your posts.  Take a deep breath or something.

by msbatxnyc 2007-08-16 12:27PM | 0 recs
Re: '90's Misogyny Rehashed

It definitely irritated me.  

by sterra 2007-08-16 08:52AM | 0 recs
Re: '90's Misogyny Rehashed

Obama has chosen to adopt and nurture the love child of the Rovian right-wing machine:  Hillary Clinton as polarizing uber-bitch.

When did this happen? Outside your own paranoid imagination I mean....

by Mystylplx 2007-08-16 09:04AM | 0 recs
Re: '90's Misogyny Rehashed

Hillary is the one who called Obama naive, which is funny after she naively voted for the war, for cluster bombs that kill children. For someone who doesn't even have a health care plan, she has an awfully big mouth.

by Pope Jeremy 2007-08-16 09:36AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads