• comment on a post Former Clinton DNC Chair Switches Support to Obama over 5 years ago

    Terrific.  This is a huge, resounding endorsement . Fantastic news to come home to.

    This is well reasoned and smart endorsement, and one that has a huge impact from many angles.  First, switching is an incredibly strong message in and of itself.  Second, this guys is from Indiana and has tons of clout, third he is as much a Clinton insider as they come. And for he is a huge DNC insider. About the only thing better would be Carville switching.

    Don't get me wrong, I still believe we must let the entire primary play out.  But it is nice to see some of these folks finally exercising better and sanity.  Most important, it is nice to see the party begin to remember to keep their eye on the prize, which is keeping republicans out of the White House.

    And who knows, if Clinton keeps having all these defections, we may see Obama reach the threshold before the convention after all.

    Going to bed and sleeping like a baby.

  • comment on a post Gas tax? over 5 years ago

    Just another example of real leadership. The easiest  political road in this country is the anti-tax road.  

    It is going to take exactly this kind of courage to get us moving forward.  That is why Obama is the only option remaining for anyone who does not want the status quo.

  • comment on a post Gas tax? over 5 years ago

    Yeah, the gas tax holiday is the worst example of misguided policy pandering to a sound bite rather than offering real solutions.

    HRC even surprised me, and I am no fan, when she came out in support of this.  NO wonder Al Gore could not stand to be under the Clinton's, they are so misguided.

    To do anything to increase demand for gas right now is nothing short of criminal to the extreme.

    This is a perfect example of how HRC is so wrong so often on the policy she likes to claim makes her such a rock star.

  • on a comment on Racism On This Site over 5 years ago

    But I still say it is really a good sign of all the good people here that it was overwhelmingly down rated.

    Even when we disagree we can do so in a civil manner.

  • comment on a post Racism On This Site over 5 years ago

    This was my favorite example of trash yesterday:

    http://www.mydd.com/comments/2008/4/28/2 03131/408/21#21

    And you can see my reply right below it.  I will say that thankfully since the last time I looked at it yesterday, I lot of people have down rated the original racist post, so there really is hope.

    I will say that out of the half dozen blogs I peruse,  this sight has the nastiest stuff most days.  That is why I stay here, to dialog with all of the sane people who I merely disagree with and provide some balance to the others who want to go off into right field.

  • comment on a post Going Positive over 5 years ago

    All of you folks who think BO was first or worst with the negativity are hilarious, and pun is intended.

    More on point with this diary, I really do wonder how it will work to finally ignore her negativity and just campaign.

    I have been using my usually republican brother as my measuring stick.  He supported Bush2 heavily twice.  He could not particularly care one way or the other about social issues except that he is catholic and staunchly anti-abortion.  The thing is he is also greedy enough about fiscal issues that he will put them ahead of the only social issue (abortion) that he even cares about.

    I was really happy to learn a couple of months ago that he was going to vote Obama.  He sees McCain as destroying the economy, continuing the Iraq war, and starting a new war in Iran...all pretty accurate observations.

    When asked about Hillary, he simply says she "is an order of magnitude worse than any of the other candidates" and he would literally never vote for her.  

    As for Obama, he says, "look, I don't agree with every thing he says, but I will give him a chance...he seems a lot more sane than the other two".

    The only other interesting thing my brother said recently is that none of "the Rovian style HRC attack...and believe me I know them because I helped pay for them and cheered them on for 8 years while supporting Bush" matter to him at all.  The only thing he is disapointed about is that Barack did not respond better.  

    My best interpretation of what a better response would be to my republican brother I think would have been a real attack against HRC...but I am not sure if that's what he meant, and I am glad BO has not stooped to her level.  She lives in the muck and knows it well.  Barack gains nothing by accepting her rock bottom standards.  He is far better at being a motivator, not a divider.

    Me, I think BO is so much more clearly on higher ethical ground than HRC that he should go all positive.  She can never live on a positive campaign, which is why she was losing miserably until she went to her current scorched earth campaign policy.

    Oh, and one final thing, the other 5 members of my family (don't worry there are several dozen democrats too) all agree with my brother, who I dialog with more often.  Not one of them could ever consider vote for HRC or any other Clinton under any circumstance, but they are all open to considering BO.  

  • My god, you people just will not take off your blinders.  The Clintons do not help the party, only themselves.  Period.

    That is why under Bill Clinton we lost pretty much every seat in the country, including eventually the next presidency.

    HRC is now showing the exact same inability to look past her own ambition for 10 seconds to say a supportive word for not one but two other democrats. God forbid if she get the Democratic nomination and somehow manages to beat McCain (very unlikely) she will end up governing a Republican Senate, House, mostly republica governors and state congress's, EXACTLY LIKE THE LAST TIME WE HAD A CLINTON IN THE WHITE HOUSE.

    So all of you will do and say what ever it takes to avoid the issue that out of all the democrats and republicans last week, HRC is the most unethical enough to refuse to defend and support democratic candidates for governor from what every one else in politics recognizes as unwarranted attack ads.

  • That is an irrelevant example. Let's try this again cause you clearly missed the point.  HRC can say whatever she wants against BO, but if she wants to call herself a leader of the Democratic Party (which  you people seem to forget is a part of being POTUS...it's not really just about HRC) then she needs to act like one.

    Make all the excuses you want.  SD's who care about the coat tail effect of candidates clearly will see this as the selfish shafting it was.

  • Wow, I see you have risen above racially charged language and resort to pure reason.

    Jive ass race hustler is what my grandma used to call us white kids when we would sneak some chocolate chip cookies from the cookie jar...

    Oh, wait I am wrong, this is an outdated disparaging description of black people.

    If this kind of remark is an example of main street America, we are all in serious trouble.

  • Sorry folks, meant this as a reply to a later comment.  Did not mean to double post.

  • Sure indus (I accidentally posted this at the top, but here is my reply to your question...sorry, my computer has been really glitchy today)

    The North Carolina State Republican party decided to air attack ads against Lieutenant Governor Beverly Perdue and State Treasurer Richard Moore (both of whom are running to replace Easley as the next Governor of NC), which showed of Obama and Wright side by side, with snippets of the Wright speech we all know so well. The add goes on to criticize the two candidates endoresement of Obama, saying Obama is just too extreme for NC.

    The DNC, The RNC, Obama,  McCain, and even many in the MSM all spoke out strongly against the fear mongering attack ad.

    Now, McCain spoke out against it strongly at least 3 times, but it should be noted that some our leveling criticism against him that he is getting it both ways, he gets to say the add is wrong but reap the rewards of damaging democrats, and that if he can't control the state Republicans message, he does not deserve to lead his party.

    Clinton was silent for days, and as far as I know has never defended these two hard working democrats who are guilty of nothing more than giving their own endorsements to Obama. I think that despite the fact that they do not endorse Clinton, if HRC wants to claim she is the best candidate for president from the DEMOCRATIC PARTY, she has a duty to lift up and support lower level democratic candidates, even the ones who are not her closest allies.

    Here is my blog entry from when this happened, which has the add link etc:

    http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4/24/2244 0/7800

    This to me shows a clear lack of leadership for the whole party, and is really terrible.

  • Sure indus

    The North Carolina State Republican party decided to air attack ads against Lieutenant Governor Beverly Perdue and State Treasurer Richard Moore (both of whom are running to replace Easley as the next Governor of NC), which showed of Obama and Wright side by side, with snippets of the Wright speech we all know so well. The add goes on to criticize the two candidates endoresement of Obama, saying Obama is just too extreme for NC.

    The DNC, The RNC, Obama,  McCain, and even many in the MSM all spoke out strongly against the fear mongering attack ad.

    Now, McCain spoke out against it strongly at least 3 times, but it should be noted that some our leveling criticism against him that he is getting it both ways, he gets to say the add is wrong but reap the rewards of damaging democrats, and that if he can't control the state Republicans message, he does not deserve to lead his party.

    Clinton was silent for days, and as far as I know has never defended these two hard working democrats who are guilty of nothing more than giving their own endorsements to Obama. I think that despite the fact that they do not endorse Clinton, if HRC wants to claim she is the best candidate for president from the DEMOCRATIC PARTY, she has a duty to lift up and support lower level democratic candidates, even the ones who are not her closest allies.

    Here is my blog entry from when this happened, which has the add link etc:

    http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4/24/2244 0/7800

    This to me shows a clear lack of leadership for the whole party, and is really terrible.

  • The point isn't whether they are all politicians, it's whether a POTUS of a party has a duty to help bolster the entire party, even the elements that are not her prime constituency.

    It is utterly shameful that HRC let Lieutenant Governor Beverly Perdue and State Treasurer Richard Moore swing in the breeze and refused to come to their defense just because they were BO supporters and she (it is now obvious) had some deal going with Easley.

    She deserves to run forever if she wants, but she wants to be this parties leader, she has to act like one.

    Just another good reason to feel good opposing her scorched earth politics.

  • Hmmm, lets see.  First Hillary was virtually the only national political figure who refused to stand up for Lieutenant Governor Beverly Perdue and State Treasurer Richard Moore, the two folks vying to replace Easley, and who both shockingly happened to be Obama supporters.

    Now Easley comes out endorsing Clinton.  Funny.  Why  am I not surprised.  

    Coincidence?  I seriously doubt it. I wonder what Hillary promised Easley for his vote. Oh well, at least Easley is a relatively weak governor by all accounts, and whomever is the next democratic governor will have better judgment than the one on the way out.

Diaries

Advertise Blogads