Lay Off the C40's

I have been an Obama supporter from the beginning of the primaries.  I have donated, phone banked and canvassed in 3 states for him.  My support comes from a strong desire to see this country change it's image in the world, change the way we treat the poor, minorities, women, the LGBT community, each other and to secure a better future for my two sons.  I have spent money I really don't have, I have travelled to states with time I could have been working...and I do this because I truly believe our country is way off the track and I fear for our children's future.

Having said that, I was a violent Hillary Clinton opposer.  I would demean, degrade and disrespect the woman...I had convinced myself she was selfish, a dirty campaigner and a liar.  I believed she thought she was "entitled" to the nomination because she was a Clinton.

However, I finally saw the light.  I cannot pinpoint an exact time when this happened...it could have been when she kept on fighting when everyone said she was finished, it could have been when she exhibited what a policy wonk she is, it could have been seeing my sister getting involved in politics for the first time because of Hillary, it could have been the meaningful discussions I have had with Clinton supporters on mydd...but one thing is clear to me, Hillary wanted to make America better and had the plans to do so.  I would have been disappointed if Obama would have lost the primary but I would have been more than happy to work my tail off for HRC...but it would have taken time.

I don't know how long it would have taken me to get over my grieving period about Obama.  What I do know is at this very moment I have the utmost respect for the Clintonistas for Obama (C40) crew.  It had to be heart-breaking to see their very capable candidate lose such a historical, hard fought and emotional primary contest.  I think of all the time, energy and emotion I put into Barack and how devastated I would have been if he were to lose...but it didn't happen...it is much, much easier to be a gracious winner than be gracious loser.  I respect and admire the C40's for that...I don't know if I could have done the same.

The C40's are caught in an awkward position...a Catch 22 or No-Win if you will...and I am tired of seeing them being portrayed as "Betrayers" or "Concern Trolls".  I do not envy them.  

First off the C40's have all stated they will vote and work to get Obama elected.  Second, they have written pro-Obama diaries, anti-McCain diaries and published them here, Dkos and their own website (which I encourage people to visit).   But folks remember, Obama was not their first choice (maybe not their second, third or fourth) so of course they are going to have differences about where Obama stands on certain issues or how he is running his campaign...They are allowed to express concern or frustration and deserve respectful feedback from the people in this community.

The C40's have branched out on their own, separating from some very die-hard Clinton supporters who will not support Senator Obama under any circumstances.  These were people with whom they developed strong and meaningful relationships with...It can not be easy.  Many PUMA's have made it their mission to seek out C40's and harass their former comrades buy calling them "sell-outs", "traitors", "unloyal", etc.  The C40's have made a noble decision to support Obama because they see what turmoil the USA is in and recognize we cannot afford four more years of Dubya or the Republican Party, and because they are Democrats.

C40's must be given the respect they have rightfully earned, and all disrespectful comments towards them must be called-out in a forceful manner from members of the mydd community.  There will be no tolerance for over-zealous Obama supporters or members of PUMA.

sricki, atdnext, canadian gal, psychodrew, zcflint05 and all the other C40's I want you to know that your efforts will not go unrecognized anymore.  There will be much more empathy, respect and good-will in regards to your comments and thoughts.  My two boys and I would like to thank you in your efforts for getting a Democrat into the White House and ensuring a better future for us.

Tags: C4O, clinton, obama, PUMA (all tags)

Comments

194 Comments

Re: Lay Off the C40's

Thanks for the diary. As a Hillary supporter who will do whatever it takes to get Barack Obama elected, I appreciate finding so many mature and respectful Obama supporter. Thanks for being a good winner.

by Hollede 2008-07-07 11:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Great diary, except for the callout to sricki, who has been going around labelling people 'trolls' and 'deadenders' for criticizing Obama's positions.

Sricki is very schizophrenic in his posting...his diaries come across even-keeled, but when he is comment mode, watch out...a nastier and less balanced poster I haven't met often on here.

He and his posse of spunkmeyer (the disrupter who only posts 'fail' pics over and over in diaries with which he disagrees) and spacemanspiff (the atypical Obama-backing troll-hunter) have done more damage to 'unity' than a gaggle of rethug undercovers could ever do.

Like I said, nice diary, but I would be very careful about holding sricki up as some kind of ideal.

by rankles 2008-07-08 05:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Oh, Rankles, you always give me a reason to laugh in the morning. I have to admit, I almost spit up my soda on the screen when you described her as "nasty" and "less balanced than anyone I've met on here".

by zcflint05 2008-07-08 06:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Why do you lie about my comments, when anyone can read exactly what I wrote?

by rankles 2008-07-08 06:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Let's see if anyone without a reading comprehension problem can tell the difference between these two posts

My comment:

a nastier and less balanced poster I haven't met often on here.

What I was accused of saying

you described her as "nasty" and "less balanced than anyone I've met on here".

Someone needs to study up on their English language skills.  Or maybe better yet if the hard leftists around here stop with their perpetual lying.

by rankles 2008-07-08 06:40AM | 0 recs
Communism is so passe

by RisingTide 2008-07-08 07:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

For someone who seems so obsessed with sricki, you are wrong in one essential fact.  Sricki is a she, not a he.

Full disclosure:  Sricki is my co-blogger and I think she rocks!

by psychodrew 2008-07-08 09:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Thanks for the compliment on the diary.  However, I must reject and denounce your naive and rude comments toward sricki.  She has been a stalwart for this community.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 09:11AM | 0 recs
Thanks, hootie!

I really appreciate you sticking up for us. It really hasn't been easy for all of us, as some of us are still reeling from primary wounds. But when Obama supporters like you give us such a warm welcome, it gives us reason to continue doing what we're doing.

Thank you! :-)

by atdleft 2008-07-08 11:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks, hootie!

No problem atdleft!  You gals/guys are one of the main reasons I like it here at mydd.  I love to hear your well thought out positions on the issues and when and where we need to start leaning on Obama to ensure a somewhat progressive agenda.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 12:41PM | 0 recs
MyDDers are "dregs"?

Posted 7/5:

"Most of the people who know us seem to be absent, so we're left with the dregs, aside from a few good folks"...

by susie 2008-07-08 12:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Thank you Hollede for your input to this community.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 09:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

you are very welcome.

by Hollede 2008-07-08 12:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

This diary really is gratifying.  We C4Os have been buzzing about it.

by Beltway Dem 2008-07-08 11:29AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Well, I guess Hollede has it right in part. I'm a Hillary supporter who would do whatever it takes to get democrats elected into Congress this year--as for Obama, my enjoyment in listening to him gives me almost comparable to Bush in the angst it causes me on an impulse level.

I know many Obama supporters will dislike me coming out to say this on a site where they've basically taken over.

However, I guess I can remain silent until the convention and afterwards only speak again on election day with my vote. Only time will tell if Hillary supporters will vote for Obama considering the deep fissures of division in the democratic party are quite apparent.

by Check077 2008-07-09 07:29AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

I agree...the only problem is, outside the names you specifically mentioned, and maybe a few others, it's hard to know who may be a C4O with genuine concerns, and who's just being a disruptive pain. It's like Invasion of the Bodysnatchers, man! They're all around us!

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-07-07 11:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

I know. But some have been part of this community for along time and engage in meaningful discussions.  These are the ones I speak of and for.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 09:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Well, ask yourself this:

Do you stand to lose more by being polite to a troll?

Or by being rude to a genuine C40?

Being polite to a troll (or just keeping silent if you can't manage to be civil) has no drawbacks. In fact, since trolls thrive on attention, I daresay the worst thing you could possibly do to someone you suspect is trolling is just to not reply.

On the other hand, being polite and friendly to C4Os has definite benefits.

My suggestion would be to err on the side of the greater potential good. But maybe that's just me.

by SuGeAtARC 2008-07-08 12:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

OMG!!! holy smolies!!! Jimminy Crickets!!! wowie zowie!!! This so well stated that I want it posted at the top of everything at mydd. Thank you for stating this simply and elegantly.

by Hollede 2008-07-08 01:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

If you are wondering what to when you disagree with someone, just read this comment by SuGeAtARC again please, (and again, and again, and again...)

by Hollede 2008-07-08 01:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Wow, thanks! *blush* Glad you liked it.

I know it's tough when emotions are running high, but it just seems like the obvious way to move on, if I can borrow that phrase. I mean, the MSM obviously wants to keep the "fight" alive, so we have to stand against that, for one thing.

And I do think there are a least a few political operatives among us whose job is just to get everyone as riled up as possible so we can't work together.  It bugs me a lot when it looks like it's working, too :(  

by SuGeAtARC 2008-07-08 01:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Exactly. I get bummed on occasion, because I see all of these sincere and caring Democrats (on either side) who are being played by either republican trolls, the media, or just by argumentative cantankerous souls who have a lot of time on their hands. I think the advice you gave is applicable to anyone who gives a shit about our country and our party.

by Hollede 2008-07-08 01:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

I agree with your entire post except that it's pretty obvious that sricki is a concern troll.  I mean she totally doesn't think that Obama walks on water, and I'm fairly certain that I saw her posting something about Obama not being the son of God.  I mean WTF?!

Seriously though, it was pretty nasty/depressing seeing people calling out people like sricki and canadian gal as "trolls", considering how much they contribute to this site and how much they've openly supported the Democratic nominee.

I hate to use your diary as a place to vent, but I think that the main reason we are seeing people calling out "trolls" left and right is because of the rampant abuse by actual "trolls" that went unmoderated for so long.  There were so many people here who only posted to cause arguments, tear down the nominee, and sow division that some people started to see everyone that questioned Obama on a political position as having ulterior motives.

Anyway, good diary and thanks for standing up for the awesome people that hang around this site.  This place would be better off if we had more people like the Clintonistas for Obama posting here.

by thatpurplestuff 2008-07-07 11:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Seriously though, it was pretty nasty/depressing seeing people calling out people like sricki and canadian gal as "trolls", considering how much they contribute to this site and how much they've openly supported the Democratic nominee.

Oh yeah? Well I've never once heard Canadian Gal say she's going to vote for Obama. Why, I'll bet she's not even a registered Democrat! There can be no other explanation for this other than her being a troll!

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-07-08 12:08AM | 0 recs
The operative word is: CANADIAN! It's illegal for

Canadians to vote in US elections unless she possesses dual citizenship!

by suzieg 2008-07-08 02:56AM | 0 recs
tone deaf

by JJE 2008-07-08 05:53AM | 0 recs
Re: tone deaf

Suzie shows exactly why the no25centers are so shrill and unforgiving. They don't do nuance. They don't do subtle. They don't do humor. They don't do any of those things because they don't understand them. That's why they don't understand Obama.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-08 07:18AM | 0 recs
Re: tone deaf

unlike the likes of you and hootie who are shrill and unforgiving until you win then suddenly you can NOW see why it was wrong to lie and demean and yell RACIST at the drop of a hat and pass on nuance, now suddenly you all see the light and now you all desire unity (as long as you keep getting to lie and insult and demean someone else anyway, if that is cut off no doubt in my mind you will be right back spreading the RW 90's smears against HRC). Yeah, you are soooooooooo much better then 'they' are. Damm these inner-tubes for preserving the words you wrote. Must be a commie plot, huh?

by zerosumgame 2008-07-08 07:52AM | 0 recs
Re: tone deaf

This kind of comment is why so many people dismiss what you have to say. It smears with a broad brush. You use hyperbole and absolutes to tar all Obama supporters.

Please show where I have lied in my diaries or comments. Show where I have ever accused someone of being a racist. Show where I have ever smeared Bill or Hillary Clinton.

The worst I have ever said about Bill Clinton is that his post-presidency connections might prove problematic if Hillary is the Veep.

The worst I have said about Hillary is that I find her foreign policy stances - obliterate Iran - troubling.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-08 08:21AM | 0 recs
Re: tone deaf

...who are shrill and unforgiving until you win then suddenly you can NOW see why it was wrong to lie and demean and yell RACIST at the drop of a hat and pass on nuance, now suddenly you all see the light and now you all desire unity...

Bullshit.  You are just looking to start a flame war. If you would search my diaries you would know I became very positive of Senator Clinton two months before the primary was over. Shove it!

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 09:16AM | 0 recs
Re: tone deaf

You will notice that zero's examples from either one of our posting history amounts adds up to zero. I've said before that his name matches the value of his contribution to this site.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-08 02:20PM | 0 recs
Re: tone deaf

I don't know anything about suzie, but I do find this to be a generally humorless site. Maybe it's because of all the bad blood that existed and still continues to exist, but sadly, you often have to make jokes really obvious to account for the frayed nerves.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-07-08 07:59AM | 0 recs
Re: tone deaf

I haven't been here long, but from what I've seen people say some stuff that I go "Oh, you must be joking," then I find out they're serious and I want to back away slowly without making eye contact.

So yeah, if you're genuinely being humorous, be sure to label it, because some of the stuff that screams "satire" to me...is 100% real. It's been quite a shock (being new to the blogosphere entirely.) I no longer assume I have a clue what the intent of any poster is unless they make it crystal clear.

by SuGeAtARC 2008-07-08 12:39PM | 0 recs
Thanks for a relevant ....

diary.

Folks around here are still trying their best to paint everyone who was a supporter of Hillary as some kind of threat to democracy.  Folks just can't wrap their little heads around the fact that there were other folks who saw her as the best choice (49+% of those voting in the Democratic primaries, not a small number folks), and can't understand that support for one candidate over the other didn't mean actual 'opposition' to the final winner.  It was a 'preference'.

I'm glad to see this in your diary, it must have been hard to say:

"Having said that, I was a violent Hillary Clinton opposer.  I would demean, degrade and disrespect the woman...I had convinced myself she was selfish, a dirty campaigner and a liar.  I believed she thought she was "entitled" to the nomination because she was a Clinton.

However, I finally saw the light.  I cannot pinpoint an exact time when this happened..."

Thanks for that, it does help some of us to see folks finally acknowledge this, and it helps us to move on.

Perhaps I can help you pinpoint an 'exact time' for you ...... the Saturday when she finally gave her concession speech?  Some Obama supporters  were  free of their Hillary hate then, others still carry it today.

by emsprater 2008-07-08 03:53AM | 0 recs
Why HATE her?

she did some things that were downright skullduggery. I don't like that she did those things.

She's still a damn fine Senator.

by RisingTide 2008-07-08 07:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Why HATE her?

That's hogwash.  NEITHER candidate did anything that could be construed as 'skullduggery'.

You, like far too many others, have bought the crap being slung by the folks who do, yes, HATE her.

Yes, she's a damn fine senator, and if the Obama phenomenon had not taken root, she would be the next damn fine POTUS.

by emsprater 2008-07-08 07:36AM | 0 recs
you haven't been watching the shadows

nor do you see the waiting eyes that lurk within...

I can agree with your last statement, while reviling you for falling victim to your own self-righteousness.

by RisingTide 2008-07-14 10:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for a relevant ....

Do you have to be so condescending with your remarks?  "wrap their Little Heads?"

I appreciate your comments but jeebus you appear to be taking advantage of this conciliatory diary by getting in as many potshots as you can...yeah I get it, she didn't win like she was supposed to due to all these stinking idiot kids.  

But hey, instead of taking a dump on the olive branch how about just toning it down a bit, huh?
Since you are putting on airs of superiority, why don't you be graceful and act like it

by KLRinLA 2008-07-08 08:34AM | 0 recs
I can't help but smile a little...

When I hear the chorus of people ranting about being duped by "those crazy kids" (aka the youth vote).  It's so reminiscent of the villains in scooby doo cartoons.  

Not to mention the fact that it's a pretty warped perspective to have taken away from the primaries.  After all the youth vote made up less (sometimes far less) than 18% of the total vote.  It would actually be more true to say that Hillary did so well because of the elderly vote (average 30%).  She and Obama were about even for 30-59 vote.

by Tenafly Viper 2008-07-08 11:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for a relevant ....

Thanks for the comment on the diary.  However concerning this:

Perhaps I can help you pinpoint an 'exact time' for you ...... the Saturday when she finally gave her concession speech?

It was before that.  Check out my diaries about her, it was before the primary was over, a couple months before.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 09:18AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for a relevant ....

Fair enough.

I suppose all that week of 'how dare she not concede during her remarks after her last campaign victory, how dare she 'diss' Obama in that way' that makes it appear that some folks wouldn't even admit she was human until after her Saturday concession speech.

by emsprater 2008-07-08 11:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for a relevant ....

Fair point...but I wasn't one of them.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 12:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for a relevant ....

Great post.

C4O in the hizz house!

FUCK PUMA!

by spacemanspiff 2008-07-08 04:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks for a relevant ....

Spaceman, have you seen this?

http://www.mydd.com/user/lara%20in%20ita ly/ratings

Yet another sockpuppet whose sole purpose is to TR every single post of yours.  That is the second one I've seen do that - the other I can't remember but it was one of the people who rec'd roxyfoxy's "answer troll" diary if that helps.

I believe there are more, but don't hold me to that.  In fact, you probably know better than I do.

by Jess81 2008-07-09 07:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Hi Hootie I always enjoy your diaries. I too came to admire Senator Clinton as she fought. Rec as always. I will think of you when Obama is elected President.

by Politicalslave 2008-07-08 04:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Thank you Politicalslave...your comment means alot.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 09:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Sorry that was suppossed to say as Senator Clinton fought on.

by Politicalslave 2008-07-08 04:10AM | 0 recs
Good post

C40's  are trying to overlook the relative inexperience of Obama supporters, but it's harder to do with each passing week.

Obama's most ardent supporters need to  ask themselves if they really think the hubris and hostility will get Obama elected.  

We're Democrats first and foremost, which means we learn to get along with each other and work towards a common goal.  Just because a fellow Dem isn't wild about Obama, but is still willing to work to get him elected isn't a betrayal.

Next time around, Obama supporters will look back and have a better understanding. Most are very new to the game. I suspect many will regret their words and actions and know a lot more about campaigns.  

Fellow Dems are willing to forgive and forget, but we have to see some sign of progress.  The hate and hostility is getting tiresome and boring. Your candidate won't win with it.

by Betsy McCall 2008-07-08 05:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Good post

Great post.

by rankles 2008-07-08 05:16AM | 0 recs
Old people don't get it

How many presidential elections do you old people have to lose before you try something new?  

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-08 05:25AM | 0 recs
come on now

this is a BS comment.

"old people"?

Also, what is so "new"? The main thing that is "new" this time around, is that we had been given a choice between the first woman or the first person of color. This is a great thing!

by kevin22262 2008-07-08 07:03AM | 0 recs
Re: come on now

"Old people" is as offensive as "relative inexperience".  They are both meant to offend and are both wrong.

by CAchemist 2008-07-08 07:26AM | 0 recs
Re: come on now

No, I disagree.  'Old people' is meant to offend, 'relative inexperience' is a descriptive term that's acceptable.   One can both be 'oldER' and have 'relative inexperience'.  One does not preclude the other.  Likewise, 'youth' does not mean 'relative inexperience'.  There were tons of 'newcomers' to the political arena this cycle, and that by definition can mean 'relative inexperience'.

However, the crass offender using the term 'old people' meant to offend, and he did, thus one of my very rarely given TRs.

by emsprater 2008-07-08 07:45AM | 0 recs
Re: come on now

I think out of context you are correct.  In context, I think Betsy was trying to be offensive.

Context was not needed for Blue's comment as it is offensive either way.

I don't want to get in an argument so I will let it go.

by CAchemist 2008-07-08 07:52AM | 0 recs
Re: come on now

I'm not easily offended (and am not by this) but the comment was a play on the constant theme of youth, inexperience, and naivete thrown at Obama supporters all campaign long.

While the "old people" comment was also intended to offend, it was pretty clearly a response to the initial comment.

by freedom78 2008-07-08 08:56AM | 0 recs
Re: come on now

DFTT

by psychodrew 2008-07-08 09:17AM | 0 recs
Re: come on now

That is adorable.                                                            

by Hollede 2008-07-08 06:40PM | 0 recs
Yes, if only our trolls were too.

They might just get a hair ruffling instead of an ass whupping.

by Sumo Vita 2008-07-08 06:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes, if only our trolls were too.

Heh, heh, heh

by Hollede 2008-07-08 08:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Old people don't get it

Since Obama is looking like Kerry redux... what was your point again?

by Montague 2008-07-08 10:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Old people don't get it

New McCain troll talking points. Obama and his supporters hate older women. Not true but a Good strategy

by Politicalslave 2008-07-08 05:08PM | 0 recs
I may be inexperienced...

but that doesn't mean that I'm not woodswise.

I know that there's not much difference between Obama and Hillary -- and that Hillary's biggest failing is her mismanagement.

by RisingTide 2008-07-08 07:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Good post

Obama won 50+% of the votes in the primary.  Most of these votes were not from "inexperienced" Democrats.  Please stop trying to be offensive.

As for the youth movement behind Obama, good for them.  Your vote does not count more and is not more meaningful because you are older.  I am glad that they are being brought into the fold and will help the Democratic party stay strong for decades to come.

by CAchemist 2008-07-08 07:24AM | 0 recs
actually he didn't

anyway you cut it, Barack Obama, whether he wins or loses the popular vote, depending on the scenario, as Hillary Clinton, he did not get over 50% of the popular vote in the primary. I'll remind you Clinton haters of this because after all, you always remind Clinton supporters about how Bill didn't get over 50% in his elections. (but of course Bill had to also compete with pro-choice pro-gay anti-NAFTA Perot who took equally in both 1992 and 1996.)

by Lakrosse 2008-07-08 08:03AM | 0 recs
Re: actually he didn't

Please search my entire posting history and try to find a negative comment about Hillary or Bill Clinton.  You may find one, I remember saying that the gas tax holiday was pandering.

Now that we have confirmed I am not a "Clinton Hater" maybe you care to discuss the content of my comment.  

Sorry for overstating his support.  We will now say 49%+.  Given that, my comment should read:

Obama won 49+% of the votes in the primary.  Most of these votes were not from "inexperienced" Democrats.  Please stop trying to be offensive.

As for the youth movement behind Obama, good for them.  Your vote does not count more and is not more meaningful because you are older.  I am glad that they are being brought into the fold and will help the Democratic party stay strong for decades to come.

Discuss.

by CAchemist 2008-07-08 08:14AM | 0 recs
Re: actually he didn't

when I meant "you" Clinton haters, the "you" wasn't directed at you, CAchemist, but to many on this site who continue to bash them with the GOP meme I wrote above.

by Lakrosse 2008-07-08 08:20AM | 0 recs
Re: actually he didn't

I've actually never once seen anyone on this site mention that Bill Clinton got less than 50% of the vote.  If you can find an occurance of that I'd be interested in reading it.

I don't mean to be insulting, but are you DiamondJay?

by MeganLocke 2008-07-08 08:40AM | 0 recs
Re: actually he didn't

Rumsfeld and Cheney have all the "experience" you could want. These  voters will gain experience and vote for President Obama again in 4 years

by Politicalslave 2008-07-08 01:34PM | 0 recs
stop trying to press your worn out memes

There is no popular vote in the primary.  Just because you can't count people from caucus states doesn't mean they don't have a say in the election.

No need to respond, except rhetorically for your own vanity; I don't intend to engage you further.  You've already disrupted this comment thread enough with your rude aside.  Your strawman arguement was intended for no purpose other than to sow division.

by Tenafly Viper 2008-07-08 12:58PM | 0 recs
Old People don't get it

How many times are you old people going to lose a Presidential election before you try something new?

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-08 08:13AM | 0 recs
Hey everybody, come quick!

Somebody here needs attention!

by psychodrew 2008-07-08 09:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Old People don't get it

Just as offensive the second time around, and since the offense was brought to your attention by many folks the first time, the second time is even more offensive, because it's done purely for that reason alone.

by emsprater 2008-07-08 12:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Old People don't get it

It is true!  Old people like the commenter don't get it.  I can't help it if the truth is offensive to some people.

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-08 12:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Old People don't get it

I do 'get' that your sole purpose  is to be offensive to everyone you can possibly be offensive to.

Don't worry, your day will come, if you exist long enough.

by emsprater 2008-07-08 12:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Good post

We Obama supporters who aren't young find the condecention and assumption that we are a bit offensive.

by wrb 2008-07-08 11:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Good post

Again, 'relative inexperience' aptly describes those who are of ANY age who were drawn into political action by Obama, folks who self described as 'new' to politics by registering to vote.

If there's evidence that Obama didn't draw the 'newly registered', please provide it, and then I'll agree with your assumption.

by emsprater 2008-07-08 11:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Good post

He did, but he also drew those who'd experienced the dramas of a Clinton administration, due to our experience.

He also drew those of us who'd experienced the decline of civil and intelligent discourse going back at least to Lee Atwater and followed through by Dick Morris and Karl Rove..  Because he was at least attempting to higher and more mature standards.

by wrb 2008-07-08 12:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Good post

With all due respect emsprater, HRC drew many "inexperienced" political persons into her campaign as well.  Look at the amount of new women voters that turned out...We look at this as a bad thing (inexperience) but isn't that what the Democratic Party has been trying to do for years, increase turnout and excitement?

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 12:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Good post

I would agree with that point, and I would call those folks 'relatively inexperienced' as well.  Some folks, however, just want to call them 'old people'.

As I've said, it's not an age thing.  I do believe,and correct me if I am incorrect, but the 'hype' was that the majority of the new to politics folks were smitten by Obama.   That's not a bad thing, it's just a statement of what I feel the facts bear out.

by emsprater 2008-07-08 12:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Good post

Fair enough, although I must say many of these "relatively inexperienced" folks have educated themselves on the issues and the candidates more so than many "experienced" voters.

Example, my mother and father up until 2004 voted Republican for the last 35 years, just because it was handed down to them by their parents.  They did not bother to get "involved" in the campaigns to see what each party stood for and which one identified more with their needs.  After a crash course from me that all changed in 2004.  My sister on the other hand voted for the first time this year thanks to HRC.  She educated herself on the issues and the candidates and formulated a well-thought out opinion.

What I'm saying is just because my parents voted for the last 35 years it did not make them anymore experienced than my sister who voted for the first time this year.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 01:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Good post

I guess we'll just have to leave it like this.

It's a dead end to try to discuss who's supporters were 'old people' and who's were 'relatively inexperienced'.  

I still, however, think that one term is derrogatory and the other is descriptive.  I guess it depends on how many years a person has under their belt which term is most offensive.

by emsprater 2008-07-09 07:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Good post

These "OLD" comments are just troll talking points

by Politicalslave 2008-07-08 05:11PM | 0 recs
party unity lessons from a PUMA....hmph...

You're PUMA, right (or a sympathizer at any rate)? Well for a group of people who are so distrustful of the media, your sure buying into one of the biggest hyperboles of their coverage.

Your post is fundamentally flawed.  There may be an influx of first-time voters this year and a lot of people who have switched their party affiliation, but that doesn't mean that they are all young people.  There are plenty of older folks who were previously jaded about politics, that decided to sign up this primary season.

Based on exit polls, only 13% of the electorate (this primary season) is under 30.  You can compare that with approximately 29% of the electorate which is over 60.  This demographic being a big area of support for Hillary.  Which means Obama's largest demographic was the split with Hillary for the 30-59 vote.

by Tenafly Viper 2008-07-08 12:36PM | 0 recs
Never!
If the Clintonistas want to pretend to feel betrayed by Obama after supporting him for three weeks or if they want to imply that Obama supporters are trying to shut down their blog then they are going to be called out over
such things.   I am not going to take it easy on them simply because some people feel sorry for them.  Whether the Clintonistas intend it or not, their diaries are providing cover for the PUMA's, and they aren't helping Obama get elected by continuously finding fault with him.
by Blue Neponset 2008-07-08 05:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Never!

Somebody has to hold Obama's feet to the fire on FISA, on a woman's right to choose, on gay rights, etc. I supporft him as the nominee but I'll be damned if I will behave as if I am blind to this righty positioning which is IMO ghastly!!!

by linfar 2008-07-08 09:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Never!

Somebody has to hold Obama's feet to the fire on FISA, on a woman's right to choose, on gay rights, etc.

When did you hold Clinton's feet to the fire over those issues?  Her stance on them is exactly the same or to the Right of Obama.

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-08 09:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Never!

True, but now Obama is the nominee.  There is space for criticism of him since there's no one ideologically near him to take up any space that he abandons.

by Jess81 2008-07-09 07:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Never!

So what!  We can tell the difference between a PUMA and a C40...Using your logic many Obama supporters are giving you cover to bash well-intentioned Clinton supportes that intend to vote and work Obama.  Your style is getting old real fast.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 09:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Never!

Your style is getting old real fast.

That means it is working.  :-)

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-08 09:29AM | 0 recs
Re: Never!

Your right...You are changing so many people's minds with your one note style.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 09:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Never!

Maybe what he means is that his antics are getting him more attention at www.desperaterussianwomenlookingformento getthemgreencards.com?

by psychodrew 2008-07-08 09:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Never!

I am not trying to change anyone's mind.  This is a partisan Democratic political blog.  Anyone who is participating here should be supporting the Democratic nominee for President.  Those who are not are the opposition.  I won't lay off the Clintonistas for making it easier for opposition/PUMA's to stick around here.    The C4O gang's long litany of concerns about Obama is not helping anything.  They didn't hold Clinton up to the same high standard.  They deserved to be challenged for that.  

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-08 09:46AM | 0 recs
Karl Rove, is that you?

So we're either with him or we're against him?  Criticism is unDemocratic?

Sound familiar?

by psychodrew 2008-07-08 09:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Never!

Check out the About mydd link..

MyDD is a group blog designed to discuss campaigns, the progressive movement, and political power.

Maybe you are misinformed.  Mydd is a blog that discusses campaigns and the progressive movement.  Many people have legitimate gripes with Obama's current positions and how they relate to progressivism.  They are valid points of discussion on this forum.  I will admit to not being as progressive as some on this site,  but that does not give me the right to proclaim what is an important issue or not.

Now I do agree there are some on this site whose main objective is to undermine the Obama camapign.  To them I have no tolerance.  It is easy to discern a C40 from a PUMA.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 10:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Never!

Many people have legitimate gripes with Obama's current positions and how they relate to progressivism.

Then they should be able to defend themselves from the likes of me.  That defense might include a diary or two showing a consistent approach to the issues they are concerned about.  The Clintonistas never held Hillary's feet to the fire over FISA, Abortion Rights or Gay Rights.  Her positions on those issues are either the same or to the Right of Obama's.

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-08 10:15AM | 0 recs
Re: Never!

Clinton is not the Democratic nominee.  If you want my honest opinion, I think Obama should be accountable to his constituency in this election, but not to the point where we (Democrats) establish a talking point for the Repugs.  I feel we should first get him into office and then "lean" on him toward a more progressive agenda.  Just my opinion.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 10:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Never!
I think McCain wants us to lean on Obama now
not after the election. I can't figure out why?
by Politicalslave 2008-07-08 05:22PM | 0 recs
Who the hell HR'ed my comment?

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-08 11:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Who the hell HR'ed my comment?

I think you have made some good points. I hope to hear more.

by Politicalslave 2008-07-08 05:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

How magnanimous of you to grant respect to people who have chosen to agree with you.

Does anyone else find the victors favoring former opponents who can be relied on to police their own obscene? Am I misreading the tone of this diary?

by souvarine 2008-07-08 05:47AM | 0 recs
You, sir, are an ostrich

when your handbasket reaches hell, will you be happy with a tan?

by RisingTide 2008-07-08 07:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

I think you are misreading the tone of the diary.

Last week some of our best diarists were called trolls and attacked for pointing out some Obama platform flaws.  A large chunk of the community who know these diarists well came to their defense.  I think this is another example of that defense.

You may not like how it was said but I think it was done in good faith.

by CAchemist 2008-07-08 07:29AM | 0 recs
Actually, I find this ....

diary a refreshing change I can 'believe in'.

Not many of the Obama 'from day one supporters' are being this gracious.  It's time they all realize, as this diarist did, that 'we' all have to get under the same boat if it is going to float.  It's going to take all of us.

by emsprater 2008-07-08 07:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

They do not earn my respect by merely agreeing with me.  They have earned my respect by rejecting the idea of helping McCain win the White House and instead embraced the idea of electing a Democrat who will promote a better future for all Americans.  In doing so they have alienated themselves from other Clinton supporters with a different agenda.  It can not be easy.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 09:27AM | 0 recs
they have alienated themselves

Everyone needs to realize that a handful of bitter dead-enders and McTrolls are trying to perpetuate the divisions of the primary campaign.

by Beren 2008-07-08 09:43AM | 0 recs
Re: they have alienated themselves

Beren you are so right.

by Politicalslave 2008-07-08 05:25PM | 0 recs
Its also possible

That some of the Obama "supporters" who consistently attack even C40's may in fact be the trolls.

Their talking points are very similar and always divisive.  Many appear to thrive on keeping divisions alive regardless of attempts to unite the party.  

It hasn't gone unnoticed.

by Betsy McCall 2008-07-08 09:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Its also possible

"That some of the Obama "supporters" who consistently attack even C40's may in fact be the trolls."

What I see in that regard is reactive on the part of supporters of the Democratic nominee to attacks on him. That's defensive rather than trollish.

But there is an occasional needless dig at former Clinton supporters who continue to fight a long lost battle for the nomination.

by Beren 2008-07-08 10:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

I'd be careful suggesting what different poster's agendas are. The practice of counting out these members of the community as the good ones and those as the bad ones is inherently divisive, engage people on what they have to say, not on what group they belong to.

For instance there are plenty of Republicans who have been drawn to Obama's campaign, it is worthwhile to engage people who oppose you.

by souvarine 2008-07-08 10:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

engage people on what they have to say, not on what group they belong to.

I do engage people on what they have to say.  When they say they will not vote for Obama no matter what then I say screw them.  Being a PUMA member is synonymous with not voting for Obama.  Any person whose agenda or words encourage or aid a John McCain presidency is fair game for a beat down.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 10:28AM | 0 recs
Thanks Hootie.

It's been a difficult process overall, for I think all of us--but there's nothing more important in this election than getting a Democrat, Barack Obama elected President in November. I know it's what Hillary wants, and it's what's best for our country.

Thank you for this diary. It does mean alot and I have to say that overall, since the primary season's been over, the feeling of the Democratic Party coming back together has been great. We've had a few roadbumps but I think it's worth it. I'm excited for November.

by zcflint05 2008-07-08 06:24AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks Hootie.

zcflint05, you are the one who should be thanked.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 09:27AM | 0 recs
Two things here....

1.) There are a hell of a lot of former Clinton supporters on this site that are now Obama supporters (or in various levels/stages of support for the Party's nominee).

I'm one of them. I made up my mind on June 4th. That's it for me. End of story. It's all about Obama now.

I'm not really a 'joiner.' It's just me. So, I really haven't spent any time over at C4O; although I certainly consider myself to be a good friend and supporter of many of them. I suspect there are many like me on this blog, too.

2.) Everyone's waaay too much into labels this cycle. With all of the problems facing our society right now--perhaps more than at any time in the past few generations--isn't it the "responsible thing" to get beyond this pettiness and focus upon the issues? And, shouldn't that be manifesting itself in our blogging, too?

So, could we stop it with this childishness and get on with the business at hand?

Enough of these call-outs. Enough of this obsession with PUMA's and C40's and Concern Trolls and Purity Trolls. What purpose does this serve? IMHO, not much at all.

A little less introspection and selfish blogging about petty bullshit; a little more focus on the matters at hand affecting our society, IMHO.

It's not about "me." (i.e.: "you.") It's about "us!"

Time to change the dialogue!

by bobswern 2008-07-08 07:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Two things here....

Well said.  

We should all try to publish diaries about issues such as your last week's voter suppression diary.  It was very good.  I was in college in 2000 in Ohio so I was there firsthand for some of the Ken Blackwell bullshit.

by CAchemist 2008-07-08 07:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Two things here....

It will be my last one bobswern.  I just wanted to make clear how much you guys/gals mean to this community and that I have your back...not that you need it.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 09:29AM | 0 recs
Re: Two things here....

Do need it-- your having our back. I think CFO's will tend to be more critical of Obama--I know I will--he needs folks who hold his feet to the fire. We never drank the kool-aide, pardon this overworked metaphor, but you know what I mean. People just have to be willing to say wtf to him :)

by linfar 2008-07-08 10:55AM | 0 recs
Definitely agree with you!

You're absolutely right, Linfar.

Hootie, we need everyone watching everyone else's backs this cycle, bigtime. It's appreciated...sincerely. Lot's of bullshit going on as the Rethugs prepare to open their brand of psych warfare and otherwise disgusting can of whoop-ass upon us.

I will totally hold Obama's feet to the fire. Don't exactly have a rep for not speaking up, then, do I? Neither do all of you other great folks and fellow/former/present Clinton supporters. If you were on the record and supporting Hillary, past/present/future this year, by definition you had to have GUMPTION. (I do love that old-fashioned word!)

Noone's vote should ever be taken for granted.

All of the above being said, speaking of "speaking out," I'm still reading (in some cases between the proverbial lines) quite a lot of Hillary hate over at the Big Orange, even now.

Kos posted a piece about Wolfson signing up with Faux News, and called him a whore. I ripped Markos a new one in the comments to his own blog, calling him a total hypocrite. (The guy's got a fellowship from a formerly DLC-centrist group, and he writes for Newsweek.) Indeed, for many, it's about either affecting change from the inside or criticizing it from the outside.

BLOG ON! And...peace!

by bobswern 2008-07-08 02:41PM | 0 recs
Re: Two things here....

bobswern, thank you for your sensible, reasonable, and rational comments. You are very appreciated.

by Hollede 2008-07-08 08:31PM | 0 recs
You're welcome...and same here!

But, like most of us, I try to blog sensibly, reasonably, and rationally, most of the time. But, sometimes, the keyboard is quicker than the mind...LOL!

by bobswern 2008-07-08 09:21PM | 0 recs
Re: You're welcome...and same here!

Heh, I know what you mean. I don't always practice what I preach. I let a few disturbed folks get under my skin as well. Hang in there, we'll figure this out.

by Hollede 2008-07-08 10:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Shout out to Linfar, Canadian Gal, etc.

We're all in this together!

by X Stryker 2008-07-08 07:33AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Wow. that feels so welcome. Can't say how much. His moves to the right are really rough...

by linfar 2008-07-08 09:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Sorry for not mentioning you linfar.  You are definitely note worthy:)

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 09:29AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

ah, noteworthy, eh?? lol I needed as good laugh...

by linfar 2008-07-08 10:52AM | 0 recs
Thank you for the excellent diary..

Your diary made my day..

There will be no tolerance for over-zealous Obama supporters or members of PUMA.

Glad to be on the same side. I'm glad that you said the above.

We are working to elect Obama for the Presidential election but that doesn't mean we have to agree with all of his moves like FISA.

I say Go Obama..

by louisprandtl 2008-07-08 08:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Thank you for the excellent diary..

louis I forgot to mention you, but you deserve a shout out as well.  I'm with ya, let's get a Democrat in the White House and then start leaning on him about our progressive values.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 09:31AM | 0 recs
hey thanks buddy...absolutely I'll carry the water
for anybody with a Dem sign on it to get rid of the "**" (fill in any epithet) occupying the WH currently..
There is no doubt Obama is probably one of the most inspirational candidates to come our way for a long time. We have our own apprehensions about any new change, but I think he for the most of part of it will be great for our country and for the World. But yes, as liberal progressives, we will give him piece of our mind if we don't like what he is doing..And he knows that..
by louisprandtl 2008-07-08 10:05AM | 0 recs
Thanks, Hootie

I really needed to see this today.  

by psychodrew 2008-07-08 09:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Thanks, Hootie

psychodrew you are the one(s) that need to be thanked.  I appreciate all that you do for the Democratic Party and the mydd community.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 09:39AM | 0 recs
Thank you, Drew!

The criticism that you occasionally include in your diaries is always constructive and thoughtful, and it establishes you as honest and passionate. Even on those very rare occasions when I disagree with you, the way you write lends credence and respectability to your positions and your support both for Hillary and Barack.

by warmwaterpenguin 2008-07-08 09:48AM | 0 recs
Thanks!

This has not been easy, but I'm trying.

by psychodrew 2008-07-08 09:53AM | 0 recs
Very true.

I think Drew demonstrates genuine concern and sincerity in his occasional criticism. Point this out to the concern trolls, often.

by Sumo Vita 2008-07-08 06:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Yeah, me too. appreciate this hootie--A Lot!!

by linfar 2008-07-08 09:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

linfar, I need to apoligize to you.  I totally misread you and have now come to terms that you are one helluva person.  I'm sorry for all my past actions that may have offended you.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 09:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

It's true, hootie, I used to cringe whenever I saw your handle. lol! Moving on. And it ain't ez so I do appreciate your handclap here.

by linfar 2008-07-08 10:50AM | 0 recs
'Moving on!'

That is one of the primary stock quotes around the house these days (the best line from "Night at the Museum" - Dick Van Dyke gives it the ultimate "already past there" intonation).

I've sullied these pages with enough of my life story, and there are reams more that I won't (yet ;-) bore you with.  But that line is what keeps Donna and I sane.  We've shed untold mountains of obligation in the past year, not all of it with the best possible outcome, but "moving on!" leaves the path forward a bright and sunny place.

Look back?!?  Screw it, the past is gone.  Crank up "Ramble On" and think about the future.

-moving on!

-chris

by chrisblask 2008-07-08 12:31PM | 0 recs
Linfar, you're an inspiration

I mean precisely that. The way you've absorbed and funneled all of your passion for Hillary into her causes, including electing a democrat, is an example I will draw strength from every time I'm hit with a political disappointment. You really are a marvel and a credit to Hillary and democrats everywhere.

by warmwaterpenguin 2008-07-08 09:50AM | 0 recs
C40s are some of our best diarists.

I find more I agree with and feel edified by in their diaries than 90% of what I see on MyDD. Thanks to all of you (particularly Linfar who writes quite possibly the best diaries I've read).

by warmwaterpenguin 2008-07-08 09:46AM | 0 recs
Re: C40s are some of our best diarists.

oooh, warmwaterpenguin--here's a fishy for ya. make that 2 :)

by linfar 2008-07-08 10:48AM | 0 recs
woot! n/t

by warmwaterpenguin 2008-07-08 11:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

There is a militant hatred and lack of empathy to anyone that is not 'of Obama.'

I have been told that team Obama has even treated a developmentally challenged man that switched from Clinton to Obama like dirt.

by owl06 2008-07-08 10:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

owl, c'mon--what do yu get repeating baseless smears like this????

by linfar 2008-07-08 10:47AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

LOL any criticism is now a "smear." Love it! I'm going to start selling some flip flops called "smears."

Anyway, a good friend of mine saw it happen in person. The individual I am referring to is well know for always wearing his Special Olympics medals. He was treated like dirt.

by owl06 2008-07-08 11:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Criticism is not a smear, but saying things like "I have been told that team Obama has even treated a developmentally challenged man that switched from Clinton to Obama like dirt" is a smear.  Put up or shut up.

by thatpurplestuff 2008-07-08 01:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Oh, and have you read this diary?  Is it a smear too?

by owl06 2008-07-08 11:27AM | 0 recs
No, but you are.

I second the put up or shut up.

by Sumo Vita 2008-07-08 06:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

There is a militant hatred and lack of empathy to anyone that is not 'of Obama.

Love those sweeping generalizations.

Sure, what the heck.  We're busted.  There is a written edict passed around among Old School Obama supporters that anyone new be treated like a pile of dirt.  Gosh, you caught us.

See, since a year ago there were only like five hard-core Obama supporters, the idea is that if we encourage "militant hatred and lack of empathy for anyone who is not 'of Obama'" it will make it easier to swell the ranks of supporters.

-chris "not of Obama, so what do I know" blask

by chrisblask 2008-07-08 12:36PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

People do tend to remember the nasty posts more than the polite ones -- that's just human nature in action.  Which is why, I think, some Clinton supporters may feel that Obama supporters are universally hostile and condescending. Any reasonably fair sampling of comments will show that that's just wrong, but it only takes a few spittle-flecked maniacs to drag the tone of the discussion down into the gutter in no time flat.

I've noticed an increasing trend on the board in the short time I've been here to try and get some of the mouth-foamers to settle down, which is nice to see. I tend to think they're a weird sort of Republicker troll, even if they don't realize it, because by preserving and deepening the split in the Democratic party they're helping McCain.  They should knock it off, like, yesterday. There is NOTHING to be gained by trashing Hillary Clinton and her supporters at this point. Not one single thing. Anyone who engages in this behavior is either not very smart or is being deliberately disruptive. I tend to suspect the latter more, since the concept of "agent provocateur" is alive and well in politics today, but I don't really know -- there seems to be a lot of rampant stupidity out there as well...not that that is anything new in the history of humanity :-)  

Anyway -- obviously this poster's view is biased, but the best way to unbias that opinion would be to make it so obviously false that he or she looks stupid for suggesting it. Imagine if trolls on MyDD were met with only complete and absolute silence while everyone else engaged in interesting, thoughtful, even humorous discourse?  

Yeah, I know that's never happened once in the history of the Internet, but I can dream!!!

by SuGeAtARC 2008-07-08 01:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Yeah and unfortunately this is the responsibility of everyone who supports our candidate. The nasty folks will never stop, unless we all cease engagement once you realize that the converstion is utterly pointless.

by Hollede 2008-07-08 06:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

You "have been told that team Obama has even treated a developmentally challenged man that switched from Clinton to Obama like dirt." Dude, who do you hang out with?

by Hollede 2008-07-08 06:44PM | 0 recs
Glad to see you have

matured.  Sadly, it's too little and too late.  Good luck with Obama, but he will never get my vote, much less my money or my time.  This will be the first prez election in decades that I haven't helped the prez candidate.  I will limit my support to other Democrats in other races.

I'm not in PUMA and I'm not going to vote for McCain, either, so no grief about that, if you please.  The Democratic Party has killed the one hope they had of getting the WH back, and I'm not the one who participated in that.

by Montague 2008-07-08 10:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Glad to see you have

Well, Montague, I beg to differ. You are part of "that."

by linfar 2008-07-08 10:47AM | 0 recs
You are wrong

There is more than one way to make political change.  After enabling the DNC and the party for decades (and receiving two Dem presidents for my trouble, one of whom couldn't even win reelection), it is time to practice some tough love on the inside-the-Beltway Dems.  They badly need to know that they are losing rank-and-file members.  Bob Shrum, James Carville, Donna Brazile, Kerry, Kennedy, et al. will NEVER know what it is to worry about paying the mortgage or to worry about whether they will have a dignified rather than desperately poor retirement.

It is NOT only about getting a Democrat in the WH.  More importantly it is about the electorate pushing the elected officials to do what is right and to help the country.  Instead, these people (Hillary and Obama included) are safely ensconced in their cushy positions.  It's time for a humongous wake-up call.  And what better time to do it than a time when we aren't going to win the WH no matter what?  Obama is even weaker as a candidate than Kerry was, and McCain is going to prove vastly more formidable than too many blogsters give him credit for.

by Montague 2008-07-08 11:29AM | 0 recs
You are wrong

You are mostly alone in believing McCain will be president.  Even very few Republicans think so, outside of the surrogates who are paying their dues during the "dark times".

Do what you will out of frustration - I voted for Perot out of the belief that all politicians were fools, so everyone is allowed their time to huff off in disgust.  But the whole "betray their base" meme is, frankly, boring me to tears.  If a candidate had gotten the votes they'd be the 'presumptive nominee', and look at that - one did.

-chris

PS - gosh but it's nice to be online again!

by chrisblask 2008-07-08 12:23PM | 0 recs
Re: You are wrong

chris, awesome to have you back!   You rock!

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 12:57PM | 0 recs
Re: You are wrong

I am not even remotely alone in that thought. Republicans are pretending to be scared. They always play this game.  Always. You must be limiting yourself to reading lefty blogs or something.

If Obama had gotten more popular votes than Hillary, that would make a difference, now wouldn't it?  But no.  What I see is a lot of buyers' remorse going on right now.

In addition, I'd rather have divided government anyway than a Democrat who will sell us down the river.  It's time for the Dems in Congress to stand up and fight.  Let them fight McCain rather than capitulate to Barack Let's-expand-faith-based-government Obama.

by Montague 2008-07-08 01:21PM | 0 recs
It's cool

In a few decades, when young people are saying "what did you do during the election when the first black President was elected?" you can say "I sat on my bitter ass and stewed because my candidate didn't win."

by JJE 2008-07-08 01:28PM | 0 recs
Re: You are wrong

You may see a lot of buyers remorse, but the poll numbers just don't support your findings.  Also, I find it more than a tad ironic that you're attacking Obama over faith based initiatives while at the same time supporting Hillary.  You might want to read up what she has to say about the issue in an article entitled "Sen. Clinton urges use of faith-based initiatives" before you look any more foolish.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/massach usetts/articles/2005/01/20/sen_clinton_u rges_use_of_faith_based_initiatives/

by thatpurplestuff 2008-07-08 01:31PM | 0 recs
Just stomp your feet

and hold your breath.  It will be just as effective and just as intelligent.

by JJE 2008-07-08 01:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Just stomp your feet

True, it's not going to work.  

But even so.... No more enabling.  It's time to help third parties grow.  We need them badly, I've always felt that way, and now is the time I'll help make it happen.

As for intelligence, I've never doubted the intelligence of my friends who voted for John Anderson, Ralph Nader or even Ross Perot.  I just disagreed with what they were doing, and I told them so.  But I respected them because I knew they were liberals and libertarians who shared many beliefs with me.

Thanks so much for showing that there are still plenty of people out there willing to insult well-meaning people who believe in improving things by using a different method than you do.

by Montague 2008-07-08 01:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Just stomp your feet

Your intelligent friends helped elect George Bush. Not very smart of them was it?

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-08 06:16PM | 0 recs
Again, I have used that argument

on them, although I didn't insult them with sarcasm while I did made the argument.  They rejected it, not surprisingly.  

But there is a big, big difference.  Al Gore had a chance of winning (and indeed, he won).  But Obama is going to lose with or without my vote.

Really, your tone doesn't help and your words don't either.  You're not bringing anyone over to your side.  And if there is one thing Obama needs, it's a few million new votes from somewhere.

by Montague 2008-07-08 11:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Again, I have used that argument

If, as you say, Obama is going to lose anyway my words or tone don't matter. I disagree on a couple of points. One, I don't think Obama is going to lose. Two, I have found sarcasm to be an effective tool in conversation.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-09 06:09AM | 0 recs
Sarcasm= Effective Tool in Conversation

It's not.

How have you been measuring that effectiveness?

And how does sarcasm fit in with your tag line?
(Maybe in using that line you're being sarcastic).

by susie 2008-07-09 12:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Sarcasm= Effective Tool in Conversation

It may not have proven to be an effective tool for you, but that doesn't mean it can't be one. A tool is only as good as the workman (or woman) using it.

As for measuring its effectiveness, I do that the same way I do the effectiveness of any rhetorical tool; by whether or not it helps move someone to my point of view.

The tagline doesn't mean you have to be sugary-nice to everyone all of the time anymore than Obama's claim to bring a new kind of politics to Washington means he can't use any of the old style politics.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-09 12:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Sarcasm= Effective Tool in Conversation

The good-natured man is commonly the darling of petty wits, with whom they exercise themselves in the rudiments of raillery; for he never takes advantages of failings, nor disconcerts a puny satirist with unexpected sarcasms.

by Montague 2008-07-09 03:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Sarcasm= Effective Tool in Conversation

Good comeback. In the future, please attribute quotes. For those who might not recognize it, that's a Samuel Johnson quote. Sort of a double-call out on me.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-09 03:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Sarcasm= Effective Tool in Conversation

The other thing about that quote is that Johnson was actually making fun of people that don't use sarcasm. He was a master of the art of sarcasm. He was also a very formidable oratorical opponent. What does that tell you about the effectiveness of sarcasm?

Sarcasm isn't always, or even usually, used to convince the person you are arguing against. It is more effective at showing the bystanders who are listening to the conversation the ridiculousness of the other person's argument.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-09 03:38PM | 0 recs
Oh, I think Johnson was poking

a little bit of fun at puny satirists who think highly of themselves.

So let us see... by the above are you intimating that you were really just trying to show off to your fellow Obama people, trying to score one off me?  

by Montague 2008-07-09 03:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh, I think Johnson was poking

He was poking fun at petty satirists and petty wits who would be disconcerted by unexpected sarcasms.

This discussion is really kind of pointless, since my original statement was not sarcasm. In order to qualify as sarcasm it would have to be rewritten to something like this, "That was really smart of them wasn't it?"

The statement I made pointed out the irony of their actions. It was not sarcasm.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-09 04:07PM | 0 recs
I don't think you understand sarcasm

Your intelligent friends helped elect George Bush. Not very smart of them was it?

The above is written sarcastically.  Putting it as a question is what turned it into sarcasm.  Yes, you were pointing out an irony, but to keep that from being sarcastic, it should not have been in question form at all.

One way to keep it from being sarcastic would be to write it this way:

"You say that your friends, who in my opinion helped elect George Bush, are intelligent, but in fact I think that was not smart of them at all."

by Montague 2008-07-10 08:48AM | 0 recs
Re: I don't think you understand sarcasm

Good try, but to be sarcastic my comment would have had to be reworded as "That was really smart of them, wasn't it?"

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-10 09:05AM | 0 recs
Re: I don't think you understand sarcasm

Now, the "Good try" in my last comment could be considered sarcasm, if it wasn't qualified with the following clause.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-10 09:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Sarcasm= Effective Tool in Conversation

I agree.  It's not effective in conversation.  It FEELS good to do it (at first anyway), and gawd knows I'm a sarcastic ass at times, but it isn't effective in getting people on your side.

by Montague 2008-07-09 03:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Again, I have used that argument

If you're sure Obama is going to lose, then why not vote for him?  Just for shits and giggles.

I mean if you're POSITIVE, then why not put it to the test?  Because this circular logic of Obama will lose therefore I won't vote for him is getting tiresome.

Actually it's not circular, it's completely backwards.  Anyway - I'm done.  I'm going to go set my house on fire since my insurance company told me that I live in a high-risk zone so it's probably going to happen anyway.

by Jess81 2008-07-09 07:15AM | 0 recs
Because it would sully my vote

I would lose self-respect.  I've never voted for a Republican, even one I knew would lose, for shits and giggles or any other reason.

Surely you knew that would be my answer.

by Montague 2008-07-09 03:22PM | 0 recs
You should move to Europe

because anyone who has any understanding of the US electoral system would realize that third parties are not viable.

by JJE 2008-07-09 07:05AM | 0 recs
Re: You should move to Europe

Oh my goodness.  Ben Franklin and Tom Jefferson should have just moved to England because independence wasn't viable.

What a ridiculous argument.

by Montague 2008-07-09 03:23PM | 0 recs
Never!!!

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-08 11:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

It has often been said that sports is a metaphor for life. I've always felt that there was a lot of truth in that claim.

Clinton supporters who now find themselves reluctantly supporting Obama are exactly like Ohio State fans who reluctantly support Michigan in the Rose Bowl against a west-coast team. Any other time, they would hate Michigan, but when it comes to upholding the honor of the Big Ten against another conference they will give their support for a short time, even if so half-heartedly. Then, there are other fans who hate the other team so much they can never bring themselves to do anything except hope for the other team's downfall. We see that scenario being played out here. It's an everyday thing.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-08 11:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

You just had to go there.

If it ain't Alabama, it ain't football.

LOL.  Roll Tide, and Bear, we miss ya.

by emsprater 2008-07-08 12:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Alabama? I didn't know they had a football team. I thought the furthest south for any team was Columbus, OH. /snark

I imagine all football fans miss Coach Bryant. Well, almost all. I don't imagine fans of teams that had to play him miss him much.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-08 12:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

We Are Penn State...Points for the Big Ten reference though.

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 12:55PM | 0 recs
Sadly

as a UM alum, I don't think it is true that OSU fans support us in the Rose Bowl.  They just hate us too much.

by JJE 2008-07-08 01:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Sadly

Yes and no. As a UofM fan, I will pull for OSU over any non-Big Ten team in a national title game. At least it would make the Big Ten and, by association, Michigan look better. I think a lot of OSU fans probably feel the same way, no matter how much they say they hate "that team up north". In that kind of situation, a national championship game, it stands to reason the Big Ten team beat their biggest opponent in the regular season. If Michigan, or OSU depending on which is there, wins then it makes the team that lost the regular season game look a little better.

If Michigan's only loss is to OSU by 3 in Columbus and OSU goes on to win the National Championship by a touchdown or more then Michigan has a real claim to being #2 in the nation. In that scenario, I'm pulling for OSU to win.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-08 02:10PM | 0 recs
Thanks for the dairy, hootie. This C4O

is humbled and appreciative.

by Rumarhazzit 2008-07-08 02:08PM | 0 recs
oops! make that "diary."

by Rumarhazzit 2008-07-08 02:09PM | 0 recs
Don't milk it, now. n/t

by Sumo Vita 2008-07-08 06:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

I don't remember the specific things you wrote, hootie, but I commend you for realizing belatedly that Hillary Clinton wasn't so bad after all.

Unfortunately, for me, the primary season felt like a giant blur of violent Hillary-hatred, not just from anonymous blog commenters, but including the gasbags at MSNBC, prominent lefty bloggers, Obama campaign surrogates, newspaper columnists, and senior leaders of the Democratic Party (including, in a bad moment, Ted Kennedy). I still can't believe all the smears and lies that were propagated about her.

So when these same people come and ask for my vote and my donations, well, let's just say my first reaction isn't so positive.

Does this mean I'll vote for McCain? No, of course not. But it does mean that I want to hold the party accountable for what they did and what they condoned. I'm not sure how to do that. The party has clearly demonstrated its contempt for me, and clearly doesn't think there's much I can do about it. They're probably right about that. But it doesn't mean I have to go along.

Anyway, thanks for the diary.

by OrangeFur 2008-07-08 06:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

I can't pretend to know how you feel...I try to make myself think how I would feel, but in reality I will never know how it was to walk in your shoes in the primary.

All I can say is take your time, think it through and do what is right for you.  I can see how people would/should be disappointed in our party and clearly changes must be made.  However, at the same time I feel really proud of our party because a woman and an African American were our last two candidates.  It shows me people are willing to forego past prejudices and vote on a person's ability and not their gender or the color of their skin.  I really feel this overlooked.

Finally,  I feel we are all just trying to make our country better for ourselves and our children...some people go about it the wrong way...I would know I was one of them.

Here's to our future Orange Fur!!

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 07:06PM | 0 recs
wow hootie - grace and charm.

thanks for this diary.  this past week has been rough for the C4O.  and i personally have been scaling back a bit as a result of the scars of the last weekend - so this diary is just what the doctor ordered. ;)

by canadian gal 2008-07-08 06:41PM | 0 recs
Re: wow hootie - grace and charm.

Thanks CG...I miss you and sricki!!

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 07:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Great diary.

by rfahey22 2008-07-08 07:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Lay Off the C40's

Appreciate it rfahey!!  We have to win the White House this year!!

by hootie4170 2008-07-08 08:00PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads