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.
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.
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.
"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?
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.)