• comment on a post Some Preliminary MS Exit Polling over 6 years ago

    This comment has been deleted by an administrator.

  • comment on a post Progressives & MyDD over 6 years ago

    I agree with igwealth too. I've seen anti-Howard Dean diaries on this blog, which leads me to believe these folks are actually Republicans, or astroturfers, and not Democrats or progressives.

    I've seen links to Republican-made anti-Obama websites. Sick stuff. Attacking fellow progressives, and propping up John McCain is just wrong.

    Real progressives who support Hillary should tell her to stop making pro-McCain comments that will just come back to hurt her in the general election. And to just cut the Democrat-bashing nasty stuff. It's just stupid.

  • Right! She was an actress, not a scared little girl in bed, as Clinton tried to claim.

    And the little girl doesn't want Clinton.  She wants a grownup with good judgement, Barack Obama, answering that phone.

    By the way, it's the Clinton team's desperate scorched-earth policy that clearly shows who's desperate. We're running out of states. Wyoming goes to Obama, next Mississippi.

    Obama will take Indiana (70 delegates) and North Carolina (115 delegates) to more than match Hillary's slight victory in Pennsylvania (158). Obama takes Oregon. Clinton takes West Virginia.

    Maybe if Hillary behaves, Obama will consider offering her the VP slot.

  • Maybe not, but Pennsylvania voters do.

  • on a comment on Open Thread over 6 years ago

    Nance, that link goes to a website called StopObama.org. Why would any Democrat in his or her right mind want to disparage one of the brightest lights in the Democratic Party?

    Barack Obama is the person that Hillary Clinton, if she wins the nomination, may ask to be her VP. Right? How can she justify having Barack Obama as her VP if she's trying to destroy his character? It certainly doesn't help her chances of winning the general election.

    In fact, the only person it helps is John McCain. Coincidentally, her campaign strategist, Mark Penn, is the CEO of Burson-Marsteller, the company that's running the McCain campaign.

    If that conflict of interest hasn't struck you as odd yet, ask yourself this: What happens in the general election when Mark Penn's company is representing both candidates? Which one will he go all out to get elected? If you were a corporate lobbyist who represented big businesses, which candidate would you want elected?

    The website you should be linking to is StopMarkPenn.org, or at the very least, StopJohnMcCain.org.

    If Clinton were smart, she would be spending the next two months joining Barack Obama in going after John McCain relentlessly, challenging his votes on Iraq, his threats to bomb Iran, his total lack of an economic plan, etc. Think about the impact it would have for both Obama and Clinton to use every campaign stop to go after John McCain.  Why doesn't she do it? Because John McCain is, in effect, Mark Penn's client too.

  • on a comment on Open Thread over 6 years ago

    Here's another guessing game: Who Said It?

    "This is a very difficult vote. This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make -- any vote that may lead to war should be hard -- but I cast it with conviction.

    And perhaps my decision is influenced by my eight years of experience on the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue in the White House watching my husband deal with serious challenges to our nation."

    Answer: Hillary Clinton said this right before voting in favor of the Iraq War resolution.  This is how her eight years in Washington prepared her to "deal with serious challenges to our nation."  

    So, who do you want taking that phone call at 3:00 am?

  • on a comment on Open Thread over 6 years ago


    You troll rated me for quoting Hillary's exact words, and reminding you that, after Obama won South Carolina, Bill Clinton dismissed it as a black state that Jesse Jackson carried?

    You should be up in arms that the Clinton team is resorting to this kind of behavior, and using the "Southern Strategy" to scare up  votes.  Don't you realize that Clinton will NEED every vote she can get -- white, black and brown -- in the general election if she wants to beat McCain?

    Instead of troll rating, why not try to defend Clinton's behavior? I guess it's tough to defend what's indefensible.

    I troll rated you for lacking the guts to engage in a debate over the Clinton campaign's questionable tactics.

  • on a comment on Open Thread over 6 years ago

    Does Hillary even want to win Mississippi?

    Here's Hillary dissing Mississippi:

    "I was shocked when I learned Iowa and Mississippi have never elected a woman governor, senator or member of Congress," Clinton told the paper. "There has got to be something at work here. How can Iowa be ranked with Mississippi? That's not the quality. That's not the communitarianism, that's not the openness I see in Iowa."

    Now, I forget, is Mississippi one of the latte-sipping states, or what Bill Clinton would call one of the black states?

    Is the Clinton campaign planning to use the Southern Strategy -- darkening Obama's face and widening it -- down in Mississippi?

  • comment on a post Open Thread over 6 years ago

    How is Hillary different from McCain?

    Pro-Iraq War (voted and spoke in favor of it)
    Pro-Kyl-Lieberman Amendment.
    Pro-NAFTA (1993-1997).

    Ties to Wal-Mart. Cozy relationship with Rupert Murdoch.  They share the same campaign people (Mark Penn is CEO of Burson-Marsteller).

    Same thing.

    You won't hear Jerome Armstrong say so, but there it is.

  • Obama NOT a progressive?

    • Obama has been against the Iraq War from the start.
    • Obama is FOR campaign finance reform, and helped pass an ethics reform bill.
    • Obama is FOR NAFTA reform, despite the lies told by Hillary Clinton, who has been promoting NAFTA since 1993.
    • Obama has one of the most progressive voting records in Congress.

    He was called "one of the most liberal members of the Illinois Senate" or something similar, by CNN.

    And yet here at MyDD, the astroturfers try to brand him as a right-winger.

    Wake up. Stop believing the lies.

  • The McCain people are the same as the Clinton people -- Mark Penn is the CEO of Burson-Marsteller, the group behind McCain's campaign.

    If Obama beats Hillary, B-M will bludgeon Obama with Hillary's own words.  Mark Penn and B-M win either way, and progressive Democrats lose.

    Hillary is such an idiot to allow herself to be manipulated this way.

  • comment on a post Can Keith Olbermann even repair his reputation? over 6 years ago

    Keith Olbermann has done more to expose the corruption and incompetence of the Bush Administration than anyone on TV.

    Anyone who criticizes Keith Olberman on a progressive blog like this one is what you call an "astroturfer" -- someone pretending to be a grassroots member of the community, but isn't.

    Who specializes in "astroturfing"? Mark Penn, Hillary Clinton's top strategist.

    [Burson-Marsteller, Penn's company] pioneered the use of pseudo-grassroots front groups, known as "astroturfing," to wage stealth corporate attacks against environmental and consumer organizations.

    So when you see comments like this one on a progressive blog, take it with a grain of salt. It's the astroturfers talking.

  • Delegate totals reflect margins of victory, and Obama's margins have been much larger.

    Also, winning delegates and caucuses demonstrates better organizational ability and real grassroots support, which is how Obama is winning this campaign.

  • The difference is that Mark Penn has a vested interest in a McCain victory.

  • Mark Penn's company Burson-Marsteller is, in fact, representing John McCain. That's a fact. The lies and smears (Southern Strategy) of the Clinton campaign have been documented. They're facts.

    Clinton's attempts to build up John McCain's credentials are facts.

    The only question is why she and Mark Penn are doing this. Mark Penn's company wins either way, and if Clinton is dumb enough to keep him on staff, she may be dooming her own campaign and destroying Democrats' chances of winning the presidency in 2008. She's alienating the very people who she will need to vote for her.

    (By the way, are you  really a "democratic voter"? The name sounds like something astroturfers use to establish credibility on a Democratic blog.)


Advertise Blogads