Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laughing [UPDATED]

I'm going to make this really short because my point is very simple.  However, I'd like to preface that point with saying that I fully support Obama as the nominee, I think he will win, I've given him money, even though I can't imagine a bigger supporter of Hillary Clinton that I was.

Throughout the primary I participated in discussions on this and other websites; if you remember me, you will remember some of those hated debates.  It was obvious to me that, although not absolute and total, most Obama supporters were new to politics.  They took Obama's every word as gospel; any hint of criticism was attacked in a hilarious panic.  Obama was the second coming...if you weren't 250% on board, according to those with this cultish mentality, well then, f*ck you!  Hillary Clinton was absolutely trashed for taking such "centrist" positions and "shape-shifting".  "She'll do anything to get elected," so many argued.  They were indignant to her "triangulating" and her "narcissistic" drive for the presidency.  

I, for one, have to say, in light of the last week or so: HA! HA! HA!  It is absolutely a riot, reading, listening, hearing how indignant many of his supporters are because he has "flip flopped,""forgotten who put him where he is." Absolute rubbish!  He's doing exactly what he should do, to be elected.  HE'S A POLITICIAN!  Just like Hillary Clinton.  Just like John McCain.  Just like every single person taking up space on Capital Hill and in capitals throughout the country.  

FISA.  Brilliant.  Brave.  He and his consultants knew he could take the hit, which would come from his base upon his blatant reversal.  Just as they knew he could get away with reversing himself on campaign finance reform.  Blatant flip-flop.  He's doing what he needs to to be elected and that's exactly what he should be doing.

I just felt the need to bring this up, as I'm sure others have already (I haven't been reading much).  But the way a damn fine public servant like Hillary Clinton was treated is an absolute disgrace and should go down in history as such.  She was attacked, basically, by a wild cyber lynch mob that was doing nothing more than running around and screaming in the darkness.  

I work on campaigns, so perhaps I shouldn't take it for granted that everyone should understand what's going on and appreciate the game for what it is.  But, I'm more than happy witnessing the reality setting in with this group of novices.  Consider yourselves educated on the real world of politics.  Welcome!

There, of course, is a silver lining that shouldn't go unmentioned.  I sincerely mean "Welcome!" I'm more than delighted to see people newly involved and engaged, it tickles me to death.  But, I hope that more than a few of you will take this opportunity to at least revisit and think about your collective hysteria and the way you trashed a good woman who has devoted her life to public service;  a woman who is responsible for searing the idea of universal healthcare into the modern political mind.  Yeah, she'll flip-flop on something if she needs to.  Yeah, she'll use carefully chosen words.  Yeah, she'll fight tooth and nail to get the opportunity to lead.  I never had any illusions about what a politican looks like; therefore, I'm not surprised to see Obama move to the center, as he makes such fundamental changes of mind.

Think about it!

Update [2008-7-4 18:50:43 by MKyleM]: For what its worth, an attempt to clarify. The point of my post concerned Obama's supporters online - here and on other left-leaning websites. If you didn't see it or weren't around to witness their childish outbrusts, then I really don't care to go into great detail educating you. I will say this, though. The behavior of many here and other places remarkably resembled that of religious fundamentalists faced with opposing opinions or any critical thinking that would require them to even entertain a reality that may not 100% resemble their preconceived notions. I grew up in the south, in a town with 15 churches to every stop light. So, I have a ton of experience dealing with them. When gay bashing or the like was going on, I loved to point out that Jesus saved the life of a prostitute and told the mob that only those without sin should throw stones. I can't tell you all the terrible things I've been called in response to that. I've been charged with devil worship, being brainwashed by Bill Clinton, a faggot, a sinner. I said that to one guy and he just looked at me and said, "Have fun with your eternity in hell." When a Clinton supporter even simply posited an opinion or advocated in anyway for Hillary (not even including an attack on Obama or mentioning him at all), her supporters were roundly ridiculed, dismissed, called Republicans, Trolls, corporatists, murders, all kinds of terrible names. It really was the same sort of knee-jerk, visceral reaction to an opinion of a person that only asks to be heard. Yet, that asks that you consider something outside the Obama-Oh-Wise-One bubble. I've always considered such reactions from religious nuts to be a sad sign that their faith, which they proudly tell any and everybody about, is really very weak and fragile. I have religious faith, but it is strong; I'm, therefore, not intimidated by the faith and ideas of others. This is how I felt about Clinton, my support for her. I knew she wasn't perfect; I was well aware of her history and the mere fact that she is human. I believed in core principals; I believed she would appoint the right judges and fight tooth and nail for universal healthcare - I never had a doubt that she genuinely wants and cares about that. Perhaps it was the lack of a political education that made Obama supporters react so angrily to opposing views; they really had no way to respond. So, anger is always first resort and they denounced us as against everything decent and good. And the thing is, with a handful of exceptions, Clinton supporters really didn't argue that Obama was a bad person and that his supporters were bad people. Again, I'm talking about people here, at DailyKos, and at TPM. Those are the people I'm talking about. Every Obama volunteer or supporter I met in the real world was nothing short of respectful of my support for my candidate. It was online that things were disgraceful. There are many people that should feel down-right embarrassed about their behavior. The disregard for reality in their demonizing Mrs. Clinton, in spite of all that she has done for this country, is one disgrace. Perhaps a bigger disgrace is the way this vocal minority treated others here.

Tags: clinton, Election, obama (all tags)

Comments

301 Comments

Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Oh, give it a freaking rest already.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-07-03 06:51PM | 0 recs
You first.

by Scotch 2008-07-03 07:44PM | 0 recs
Re: You first.

Okay, I promise not to post whiny diaries where I bash Clinton and try to replay the primary wars. Oh wait, I don't do that. Silly me.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-07-03 07:46PM | 0 recs
Re: You first.

uprated for not deserving a tr.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-07-04 08:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

"They would do anything to win, and that means anything," David Axelrod, Obama's chief strategist, told me [Roger Simon at Politico] Monday.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/030 8/9086.html

I'm sorry, but the shoe IS now on the other foot.  Or something.

by strongerthandirt 2008-07-04 04:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

more HR abuse, trying to hide the actual words. how pathetic.

by zerosumgame 2008-07-04 08:16AM | 0 recs
oh noes...

  Oh Noes

by Mae Scott 2008-07-04 07:56AM | 0 recs
Re: oh noes...

Good diary.  But I disagree that Hillary is laughing.  On the contrary, I suspect she's disheartned knowing that all she's fought for, all she's cared deeply about all her life, will not come to fruition under a President Obama.  I have no doubt she'll try to help him and she won't give up her work on universal health care, but he will throw her under the bus as quickly as he did his minister and his grandmother.

by Tolstoy 2008-07-04 12:51PM | 0 recs
so much for a new kind of politics

as Obama apologist Claire McCaskill said in the Obama commercial. I can't wait till the radical Kos hates Obama as much as the Clintons for being moderate.

by Lakrosse 2008-07-03 06:52PM | 0 recs
Re: so much for a new kind of politics

Last I heard, he was 'holding' his $2,300 check and waiting for the opportunity to 'reward' him for a move he is sure will come.  For such a smart guy, Kos is certainly full of it.

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 06:56PM | 0 recs
Re: so much for a new kind of politics

KOS is so self absorbed.

by William Cooper 2008-07-03 10:24PM | 0 recs
Re: so much for a new kind of politics

I agree and that's being nice about it.

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 10:28PM | 0 recs
Re: so much for a new kind of politics

Markos is what we call, in scientific terms, a prick.

by rankles 2008-07-04 12:00AM | 0 recs
Re: so much for a new kind of politics

Nah...  He's got an agenda, and wants to use all the tools at his disposal to achieve it.  Based on his Internet Ramblings (which is all I know of the man), he seems like a stand-up individual.  Okay, maybe he's KIND OF a prick.  But I'm kind of a prick.  You prick.

Also, what he's doing for Darcy Burner should tickle the clue-center of your brain.

Happy Fourth!

by SummertimeDissent 2008-07-04 06:29AM | 0 recs
This is very condescending.

What is the point in saying Obama supporters have a "cultish mentality"? How is that helpful to anyone?

by sricki 2008-07-03 06:53PM | 0 recs
Re: This is very condescending.

Because it feels good.

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 06:54PM | 0 recs
Re: This is very condescending.

o/~ "Why are you such a mega-bitch, Heather?"

"Because I can be." o/~

Ah, the joys of high school, writ large.

by Dreorg 2008-07-04 01:53AM | 0 recs
Re: This is very condescending.

corn nuts!

B-Q

by MKyleM 2008-07-05 11:25AM | 0 recs
Because you

you enjoy posting anonymous insults.

I wonder how to characterize that behavior...

by fladem 2008-07-04 07:03AM | 0 recs
This whole dairy is an insult

by a troll.

by missliberties 2008-07-04 09:49AM | 0 recs
Re: This is very condescending.

Obama supporters are using tools at their disposal to hold their own candidate accountable.  It's what he's asked, it's what the country needs, civic debate is never a bad thing, citizen participation is never a bad thing.  I think you need to think about these things.

by mannabass 2008-07-04 08:51AM | 0 recs
Re: This is very condescending.

Ding ding ding. You win a pony.

I think this is what upsets the Clinton deadenders the most. Not Obama's FISA stance, heck, I've yet to see how Hillary will be different. But that the supporters are staying true to themselves, holding the dude accountable for the bad stance, without pretending the candidate is unworthy of election support because of it.

It's called facing reality and being grown-up about it.

It's the opposite of what Obama "cult" supporters were supposed to be like. So you get these trolling diaries to try and goad us into being... um... like Clinton supporters refusing to face reality or be grownups.

by Lettuce 2008-07-04 01:04PM | 0 recs
Re: This is very condescending.

And it happens to also be true!

by BRockNYC 2008-07-04 10:11AM | 0 recs
i agree fully.

but you gotta admit the "wild cyber lynch mob" reference is kinda funny.

by canadian gal 2008-07-03 07:04PM | 0 recs
Re: i agree fully.

Yes, and it is accurate of the discourse back during the more volatile time of the primary.

I do have to wonder about consistency here though, because back during that time, when each and every utterance from either Clinton was dissected to nanopoints in order to make something devious out of it, I made a comment referring to 'let the lynching party begin' in a diary bemoaning some perceived ill words of Hillary, and I was quickly castigated and warned by the admin folks, having to acknowledge the warning in order to be able to continue on this blog.   I almost didn't.  Guess it all depends on how touchy folks are on a given day.

by emsprater 2008-07-04 10:40AM | 0 recs
NOT a GBCW post .....

I'm leaving this blog for awhile peeps. This sudden surge of PUMA members on a Democratic site are making it hard to find a decent read or conversation. The saddest part is it's starting to look like the primary wars in here but with an added level of crazyness. It's troll diaries or flame wars, one after the other, and it got old last week. I'll come back when Jerome gets the new system up and running. No use in wasting my time with the current system in place. See your around!

by spacemanspiff 2008-07-03 09:20PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT a GBCW post .....

FUCK PUMA!

by spacemanspiff 2008-07-03 09:20PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT a GBCW post .....

You people are batshit insane and it's hilarious what fools you are making of yourselves. Commenting here is starting to look like going on a fringe site. It's hysterical to read but counterproductive to engage in discussion.

by spacemanspiff 2008-07-03 09:24PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT a GBCW post .....

so what does that say about you?

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 09:47PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT a GBCW post .....

you cant blame people for looking when they drive by the scene of an accident.

by karagekun 2008-07-03 10:10PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT a GBCW post .....

spacemanspiff is leaving?

That should raise the level of discourse about 1000 percent.

by William Cooper 2008-07-03 10:14PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT a GBCW post .....

I'll miss his postings telling us how idiotic we are for....posting....on this website.  

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 10:17PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT a GBCW post .....

42) Re: Obama, get on offense concerning Death Penalty [2.00 / 1] Replies: 0
posted by William Cooper on 06/27/2008 07:56:31 AM EST
attached to Obama, get on offense concerning Death Penalty

Says the person who has been here for a week.

See what I mean?

To many damn sockpuppets and delusional wackos.

by spacemanspiff 2008-07-03 10:29PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT a GBCW post .....

what the hell does that mean?  do you expect people to make sense of that?  and you dare call others delusional?

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 10:33PM | 0 recs
Its pretty clear

You talk about the level of discourse of a particular poster in the first diary or story you've ever posted in.

"William Cooper" first posted a whole week ago.  

Given the content of the posts that pretty strongly suggests the accounts are BS accounts, be it direct trolls, formerly banned users or a sockpuppet.  

by PantsB 2008-07-04 06:36AM | 0 recs
Re: NOT a GBCW post .....

Spaceman Please don't leave. We need you.

by Politicalslave 2008-07-04 02:09AM | 0 recs
Well since you've only been posting here for...

a few days, I don't really see how you could miss it very much at all.  ??

Your intellectual inconsistency is astounding, your schadenfreude--classless and repulsive. Your tone reminds me of my cat who gloats whenever he comes home with a feather from a bird he's only fantasized about killing.

Don't you recognize the irony in that every lie you just posted about Obama supporters applies to the PUMA's and other Hillary groups that can't let go of the primaries?  

"Any Hint of criticism is attacked with hilarious panic"   And then you go on to list the criticisms against Hillary which you were obviously incapable of coping with.  Whether any of the criticisms against Obama or Hillary are valid is beside the point;  your claim that we're unable to deal with it is nullified by the fact that you can't deal with it.  Your rant belonging to the category of: Oh no, a few people don't like the Clintons, in defense we must hurry to disgrace them collectively. A hilarious panic indeed.

Obama supporters are new to politics It is unsubstantiated that most of his online support is new to politics.  All I know is that while many of the insults thrown at Obama supporters are ageist, I've run across plenty of older, seasoned Hillary supporters who have acted like children in the throes of a tantrum--like yourself for instance.  There also seems to be a contingent of them who have no historical framework outside of contemporary politics so they appear "new" to politics as a whole.  
I don't have anything to substantiate that claim either, but in a post-rational diary that was rec'd by the head of the site, it seems that vaguely defined accusations are all that is necessary to write something (ahem) substantive.

"She was attacked, basically, by a wild cyber lynch mob that was doing nothing more than running around and screaming in the darkness." again...pot meet kettle.

"Yeah, she'll flip-flop on something if she needs to.  Yeah, she'll use carefully chosen words.  Yeah, she'll fight tooth and nail to get the opportunity to lead.  I never had any illusions about what a politican looks like"  Translation: yeah Hillary is a politician, transparent, desperately ambitious, a pragmatic liar really.  I know that but I'm not going to call her on it and neither should you.

And this is where you are fundamentally flawed in your opinion of Obama supporters.  We've been criticizing him since the General has begun and we haven't attacked any Clinton supporter for criticizing him on fair and equal grounds.  And if you haven't noticed we've been completely consistent with our criticisms. We've criticized him for similar things that we criticized Hillary for in the past.  So lay off the Obamabots and religious fundamentalist jargon, because we have criticized our "messiah" when he's been wrong and we've praised him when we thought he it was deserved.  

Can you say the same for yourself and the other blind followers of the Clinton way?  Perhaps you could take a step back and consider that your preconcieved ideas say more about your own biases than the people you are criticizing.

by Tenafly Viper 2008-07-04 04:45PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT a GBCW post .....

nah - come on.  there are plenty of good 'eggs' here - like you!

by canadian gal 2008-07-03 11:02PM | 0 recs
I'll respond cuz it's you : )

It's pretty obvious what's going on CG. Many of the users who fled to the hate sites and deadender blogs have been doing t'rate drive bys for the last couple of days. Now they are starting to actively put up diaries (see anna belle and the troll who wrote this) and leave inflammatory comments. Don't even get me started on the sockpuppets of former users (susanhu,texasdarlin,alegre) and aliveandkickin and his 20 handles.

These PUMA's who openly advocate for McCain - which is against the site rules - see this as a blog war which they must wage in the name of Hillary. It's Obama hate that drives them now and crazy conspiracy theories.

They are "invading" this blog and taking it back. I'm sure the times you'll be t'rated are going to go up because Obama supporters will be overly defensive. Flame war and pie fights, one after the other. I don't have the time to rehash the primary war. I'll be reading and lurking though but not as much as before. I hope Jerome fixes the system soon.  See you soon canada!

by spacemanspiff 2008-07-03 11:20PM | 0 recs
Re: I'll respond cuz it's you : )

you are absolutely batsh*t insane.

this diary is not pro-mccain.  the english language does not allow for me to be more explicit in my support for the dem. nominee.

this site is not the sandbox of kindergarden class.  it is not your echo chamber.

i generally have an edge and punch back with opposing comments, but i honestly must say you sound like a paranoid fruit loop.   this is crazy, what you have taken away from this.

i hope you seek help and rebound from this bout of psychosis.

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 11:29PM | 0 recs
Fuck off.

Please. Only have to take a look through your past diaries to tell how far off you are.

by spacemanspiff 2008-07-03 11:36PM | 0 recs
Re: I'll respond cuz it's you : )

and of course spiff just had to make sure and do his normal ratings abuse right after his whiny GBCW post LOL

by zerosumgame 2008-07-04 07:55AM | 0 recs
spacey...

one word:

iGNORE

i find this the best tack to take at times like these ;)

by canadian gal 2008-07-03 11:30PM | 0 recs
Re: spacey...

then why are you posting here if you want to ignore me?

again, batsh*t insane.

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 11:32PM | 0 recs
im not suggesting....

anyone specifically be ignored save for the people that are annoying someone. ;)

by canadian gal 2008-07-03 11:38PM | 0 recs
Re: im not suggesting....

So quit teasing us and leave already, troll.

by rankles 2008-07-04 12:02AM | 0 recs
Re: im not suggesting....

canadian gal is probably the most even-handed person here.  

rankles, maybe you should "leave already, troll", as you do much less to improve the discourse here.

by Can I Haz Moar Snark 2008-07-04 12:05AM | 0 recs
Re: im not suggesting....

You and your kind have no business on a progressive blog.

by rankles 2008-07-04 12:56AM | 0 recs
oh rankie-poo....

what democrat do you support?  

you appear to be calling us both trolls, yet he supported BO in the primary and i HRC.  since you state that we both do not belong on this site, maybe you could explain it to us?

by canadian gal 2008-07-04 01:09AM | 0 recs
Re: oh rankie-poo....

I wasnt talking to you, despite the fact that you have TRabused me before.

by rankles 2008-07-04 02:40AM | 0 recs
Re: oh rankie-poo....

Anyone who supports FISA, supports staying in Iraq, supports funding faith based organizations, supports the supreme court gunban ruling, etc DOES NOT BELONG ON A PROGRESSIVE SITE.

I am a progressive.  This is my home.

You may leave anytime.

by rankles 2008-07-04 02:42AM | 0 recs
Re: im not suggesting....

You're so kind, rankles.  It's hard to take your comments, sometimes, as any kind of insult because they are so divorced from any sort of reality.

by Can I Haz Moar Snark 2008-07-04 01:26AM | 0 recs
Re: spacey...

It's not that it bothers me canada. I just find it counterproductive to waste my time with these tools.  I lurk at NoQuarter for kicks and laughs. I'll do the same here. I see you have a stalker in your diary accusing you of all kinds of shit. That's what I'm getting at. I love reading a good flame war but it's a waste of energy to try to make coherent points around here lately. I'll read this site for laughs until Jerome fixes the ratings system. I have no problem with dissent. I get along great with most of the Clinton supporters on this blog. Just last night I had one of the more wonderful conversations here with 2 last night (before that diary turned into a pie fight). It's interacting with deadenders and Obamabots (bad apples from both sides) which has gotten old fast.

by spacemanspiff 2008-07-03 11:44PM | 0 recs
Re: spacey...

well...  i cant argue with that.  but ill miss ya ;(

by canadian gal 2008-07-03 11:56PM | 0 recs
Yo, spaceman, you still online?

If so, is there any way I could persuade you to rec this diary? It was very helpful to me as a former Clinton supporter who is worried about the FISA compromise.

by sricki 2008-07-04 10:36PM | 0 recs
Re: NOT a GBCW post .....

spaceman, lighten up. As we said during the primaries, if you think THIS is criticism, you'd better to back into space during the GE. This is baby level criticism, and the diarist himself is FOR Obama, as I am. We just see the irony of how the Kool Aid kids, one way or the other, through Hillary or (ironically) through Obama, are going to learn how REAL politics works.

by NY Writer 2008-07-04 06:53AM | 0 recs
Re: I have to sorta agree with the diarist

yeah, I'll agree with the diarist to an extent.  For me the real eye-opener this week was the seeding of the attacks on John McCain's military record.  As mad as I was at Geraldine Ferraro, I have forgiven her for pushing insidious memes.  Presidential politics is ugly ugly ugly.  It is what  it is.  There are no saints running for the office.  If anything, I'm glad Obama can play at this level -- not that any one should be surprised.  Anyone who can beat a Clinton has to have all the clubs in his bag. we've just seen more of them this week.  

by such sweet thunder 2008-07-03 09:53PM | 0 recs
Re: I have to sorta agree with the diarist

Leave Geraldine alone.  Every single thing she said was true.  Every single word.

by BRockNYC 2008-07-04 10:14AM | 0 recs
I guess you do not follow Illinois politics

The majority of Illinois Democratic delegation voted against the war. Here is the list that voted against the war:

Sen Dick Durbin- Rep Jerry Costello- Rep Danny Davis- Rep Lane Evans- Rep Luis Gutierrez Rep Jesse Jackson, Jr- Rep Bill Lipinski- Sen Bobby Rush- Rep Jan Schakowsky

Only 3 members of Illinois Democratic delegation voted for the Iraq war resolution. Sen. Obama was getting ready to run for the US Senate and it was politically very important for him to get the support of majority of the delegation.

I am not trying to find fault with Sen. Obama.He is no idealist. He is a skilled politician and makes the right moves. We want a winning candidate against McCain not another loser.

by indydem99 2008-07-04 01:53AM | 0 recs
Re: I guess you do not follow Illinois politics

You can say that, but the fact remains that, in his speech against the war in 2003, he described to an exact T exactly why the war would be a disaster.  John McCain doesn't even know the difference between a Sunni and a Shia.  At the time of that Senate election, vast majorities in the country supported the war.  I think all elected officials who took a stand against it should be respected for that.  Even if you are right, I'd take any politician who voted against war for political expediency over a politician who voted FOR war for political expediency.

by mannabass 2008-07-04 08:56AM | 0 recs
Nice point

Even if you are right, I'd take any politician who voted against war for political expediency over a politician who voted FOR war for political expediency.

Assuming, of course, that the politician who voted against war has other qualities to recommend him/her-- like being good at the job.

by Swedie 2008-07-04 10:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Nice point

Being against the war for the right reasons is a good start.

by mannabass 2008-07-04 08:55PM | 0 recs
Re: I have to sorta agree with the diarist

What Obama is doing is exactly what Clinton supporters hoped he would

Right you are! The irony is that Hillary supporters are likely to prefer him more now, that he has shown he's not drinking his own Kool Aid and is a realpolitic politician.

by NY Writer 2008-07-04 06:51AM | 0 recs
Re: I have to sorta agree with the diarist

If they can forget the whole the calling the Clintons racists who were no better than Bush thing....

by dtaylor2 2008-07-04 08:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Of course Obama never said that

He said it just not in words.

Talking about racial elements in the campaign

Standing behind people who called for katrina tears as a sign of non racism and the lack of them as a sign of racism.

Make no mistake he said it.

by dtaylor2 2008-07-04 08:56AM | 0 recs
Yes, shame on them

but they don't care anyway -- its all about their immaturity and narcissism.

And of course, they'll find some reason not to show up in November like they always do every four years.

by dcrolg 2008-07-03 06:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Yes, shame on them

so they bothered to show up in the primaries but will not show up in November?  

by Xris 2008-07-03 08:11PM | 0 recs
For all the ballyhoo-ing

and enthusiasm of the youth vote, they have historically disappointed in turnout, each and every presidential vote since '72.

From where I'm sitting, I see no reason why it should somehow magically change this election.

by dcrolg 2008-07-04 06:13AM | 0 recs
because it's been "magically" changing.

gradually over the course of the last eight years.  They had record turnout in 2004 and have even had record turnout in congressional races.

"The 'Generation Y' of Americans born from 1977 to 1994--shaped by the September 11 attacks, the Iraq war and Hurricane Katrina--in nine years will make up a third of the electorate." (make that 7 years since this was written 2 years ago)

http://www.yda.org/news/105/youth-turnou t-in-election-biggest-in-20-years

by Tenafly Viper 2008-07-04 05:27PM | 0 recs
I really believe he is trynig to play

the wingbats right now; more power to him if he succeeds, he'll be known as the greatest political mastermind ever if he hopefully nominates Ginsburg II much to the horror of the wingbats.  Unfortunately for Obama, McCain is promising to appoint the necessary justices to end Roe v. Wade and fight any attempts to legalize gay marriage, which will probably be all it takes to get the wingbats on his side.  I don't think the attempt to get the wingbats is worth the potential loss in support from the base.  Not a good calculation in my opinion on Obama's part.

by Blazers Edge 2008-07-03 06:58PM | 0 recs
Re: I really believe he is trynig to play

With FISA, I don't think his target are wingbats.  I think the target is the majority of Americans, the people who would support spying on terrorists.  Now, I know the reality of it.  However, he was faced with legislation that returned FISA to its normal use of warrants, yet protected telecoms.  Most Americans will support this; they'll want to move on.  

Obama's brilliant statement that got most play: "National security trumps" telecom immunity.  Score.

And the fact that a bunch of leftists are red-faced and hysterical over it, only helps him win.

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 07:05PM | 0 recs
Re: I really believe he is trynig to play

I was talking about this abortion business today, which I think is a total play at wingnuts.  I think the strategy is completely flawed and may backfire.

by Blazers Edge 2008-07-03 07:07PM | 0 recs
Re: I really believe he is trynig to play

Oh, sorry, I didn't hear about that.

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 07:09PM | 0 recs
Re: I really believe he is trynig to play

I live in Missouri and can tell you that his recent actions have helped a lot with people here.  I am not saying he is going to win this state, but a lot of my moderate democratic friends were on the fence about whether to vote or not and are now on board.  I say all that realizing it is purely anecdotal, but moderate democrats play a lot better in my state than those who are perceived as "left wing" or the dreaded "Liberal".

by Xris 2008-07-03 08:13PM | 0 recs
Slight Exageration - Obama greatest political

mastermind.

First, he will have to achieve more than just getting elected president in this year when the Republicans have self-destructed and they have nominated a 71 year old knowing they will lose.

Second, he will need to get reelected. Let's see how that goes. Then let's see if he leaves office after two terms with the highest approval rating ever, like Bill Clinton.

If he achieves that (not likely), he will have to surpass FDR. He will have a hard enough time matching Bill Clinton's outstanding economic record. I hope he does for all our sakes.

by mmorang 2008-07-04 12:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

I love diaries like this that seem to say all of the bad things came from the Obama side. As if there were no Clinton supporters doing exactly what you complain about from Obama supporters. In fact, the way so many Clinton supporters complain about "dirty politics" in the primaries makes me wonder if they have ever seen a primary campaign before. Stop trying to imply that all Obama supporters are young, inexperienced kids. Here is an excerpt from the Wisconsin exit polls - "Young voters clearly boosted Obama's margins. Those between 18 and 29 years old accounted for 16% of the vote" Wow! A whole 16% of the voters were 18-29. You have just thrown a bunch of people under the bus. Nice going. How would you like it if we implied that only older women voted for Hillary?

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-03 07:08PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

You completely missed my point, sort of like Helen Keller would miss a baseball flying right to her face.

I was talking about people participating on left-leaning websites, like this one, DailyKos, and TPM.  Those are the people I was talking about, who were acting as if they've never observed any type of campaign - primary or general.  The media, during the primary was so pro-Obama it was funny; that's why those SNL skits resonated so well.  But, again, its not the voters I'm talking about; its those in the left-leaning blogosphere.

Speaking for myself, my only complaint was that Obama's dirty tricks got far less media coverage than Clinton's.  I will say, however, she fought harder and made bolder attacks that play well in the media - which is exactly what they were designed to do.  I certainly don't fault Obama for playing tough and I think 'good for him' that he got away with it, whether or not that is something with which he or his campaign should be credited.  I say that because the media was as rabidly anti-Clinton as Obama's online supporters.
And, to be honest, I haven't heard much more from other Clinton supporters.  The main theme that I've recognized that came from Clinton supporters involved their idea that Obama was a riskier bet, in terms of electability, and, of course, that Obama was nothing special.  The classic example is Obama's criticism of Edwards in Iowa for taking help from labor unions, which Obama ridiculed as 'special interest groups', the sort that 'undermine' the democratic process.  Then he turned around and embraced such help in Nevada, without a flinch or apology, in only a matter of weeks later.  He's just a regular politician, we all said.  We were right and it is a delight watching that reality set in among his once-hysterical supporters.  

I don't have figures to reference, but for any kind of primary, 16% youth vote sounds high to me.  In most cycles, primaries consist of the most die-hard party people - which are usually older.  But, of course, this was no typical year.  

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 07:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

like Helen Keller would miss a baseball flying right to her face.

stay classy.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-07-03 07:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

in order to deal with my 'bitterness', i'm turning to blind/deaf jokes, sos that i don't turn to god and guns.

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 07:53PM | 0 recs
I'll say one thing -

You've got one hell of a sense of humor!  And yes - I do see your point.  I had my own HA! moment recently when someone who'd heavily criticized me for suggesting that Obama might not fulfill every promise literally took off on a tear over FISA.

Who says politics isn't funny?

by The Fat Lady Sings 2008-07-03 08:08PM | 0 recs
Your behavior in this thread

makes you an asshole, pure and simple.

What is sad is Jerome rec'd this diary.

by fladem 2008-07-04 07:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Actually, I thought that was pretty good even if it was aimed at me. Wish I'd come up with it.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-03 07:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

indeed. it combines jokes about the disabled with violence against women. double score!

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-07-03 07:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

I read it as "flying past her face". Guess I should have looked at it closer.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-03 08:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Its really so sweet, how PC you are.  Good job (pat on the head).  Keep it up!

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 08:34PM | 0 recs
Sounded sexist to me.

We should report it to the NOW Hall of Shame.

by Dumbo 2008-07-03 08:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

And now let's see who would rec. this crap:

The Following Users Have Recommended This Diary:
souvarine
psychodrew
LatinoVoter
BlueDoggyDogg
Mags
feelfree
Lakrosse
Xov Wonk

by venician 2008-07-03 08:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Seeing some of these old names pop here tonight makes me think of the zombies in Dawn of the Dead. They hate everyone who doesn't worship Hillary, they  hate the nominee, they have nothing positive to say about the race whatsoever...yet they still come here.

So why do the zombies still flock to the mall?

"Some kind of instinct. Memory of what used to be. This was an important place in their lives."

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-07-03 08:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

You should add my name to that list... I just recced it too =)

Cheerios !!

by SevenStrings 2008-07-03 08:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

I wasn't talking about you, or even all the people who recommended the diary. Just "certain people" who've re-appeared on this and a few other diaries tonight, almost as if they all showed up at the same time from another anti-Obama blog or something! As if that would ever happen!

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-07-03 08:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Fair enough...

by SevenStrings 2008-07-03 08:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

add me to the list!

by NY Writer 2008-07-04 06:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

I don't hate the nominee, but I don't worship him.

What I hate is hypocrisy.

by psychodrew 2008-07-03 08:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

see my comment right above yours.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-07-03 08:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Who appointed you the judge and jury.

Why don't you just cool it down a bit?

by MediaFreeze 2008-07-03 09:12PM | 0 recs
Oh, the rec police!

You really have too much free time.

by psychodrew 2008-07-03 08:20PM | 0 recs
Some people....

...like the ass listing names in this comment thread, are among the biggest trolls still allowed to post on this blog. Don't people like that understand that they're engaged in behavior that runs totally counter to their so-called stated beliefs? Apparently not.

That's the thing about trolls, it doesn't matter whom they support; they're STILL a troll!

Oh, yeah and btw, add me to the list of people rec'ing this diary.

by bobswern 2008-07-03 09:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Some people....

kick *ss!

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 09:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Some people....

rec'd

by William Cooper 2008-07-03 10:19PM | 0 recs
Re: Some people....

That' rich coming fromyou bob, one of the biggest Clintrolls here.

by venician 2008-07-04 10:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Oh, I got your point alright.

"...most Obama supporters were new to politics..."

"...Obama was the second coming...if you weren't 250% on board, according to those with this cultish mentality..."
Of course, you didn't mean to imply that most of his supporters are inexperienced kids. Sure, you didn't. That was the whole point of your diary. Ha Ha, He sure showed those young punks.

"...She was attacked, basically, by a wild cyber lynch mob that was doing nothing more than running around and screaming in the darkness..."
Implies it was all one-sided when it clearly wasn't. Look at the crazies still out there trashing Obama at every opportunity.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-03 07:51PM | 0 recs
Look at the crazies...

Shhh...  Alegre and "the regulars" might hear.

Then they might come on here to complain about the crazies and cultists.  And mass-rec the diary.

by Dumbo 2008-07-03 08:14PM | 0 recs
I had wondered

What had become of Alegre until I stumbled on her new site.  I got myself an account so I caould chime in, respectfully, when I thought somebody had said something indefensible--which would have been all the time.  Anyway, I couldn't write anything at first; I guess they make you wait a day or so or something.  Then the next day my account was gone.  I guess it didn't surprise me, but it made me kind of sad all the same.  Those people are sad.  They're beyond help, I guess.

by Mumphrey 2008-07-04 08:36AM | 0 recs
Hillary Clinton chose to go into the Gutter

Hillary's attacks on Obama went way beyond the pale. She even praised McCain over Obama:

"I think it's imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander-in-chief threshold, and I believe that I've done that. Certainly, Sen. McCain has done that, and you'll have to ask Sen. Obama with respect to his candidacy,"

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2 008/03/06/739131.aspx

Nothing turns off Democratic voters faster than a candidate who builds up the Republican Nominee as a way to attack their Democratic primary opponent.

Hillary's extreame gutter tactics are what fianaly killed her chances to be the nominee.

<bold>SHE DID THAT TO HERSELF!</bold>

It's time for you to spit those sour grapes out.

by Lefty Coaster 2008-07-04 09:31AM | 0 recs
So...what is your point?

That at least with Hillary, we KNEW we were getting a corporate-owned, centrist, triangulating politician, so poo-poo on us?

Yeah, thanks, enjoy being "right".

by Maori 2008-07-03 07:09PM | 0 recs
Shorter MKyleM

1. I'm going to make this long and rambling, because I don't have a point.

2. (the patented all-caps method) HA! HA! HA! HE'S A POLITICIAN! FISA.

You're welcome

by username 2008-07-03 07:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Shorter MKyleM

Thanks because I really couldn't bother reading the whole thing.

I looked at who recced it and figured it out.

by MeganLocke 2008-07-04 11:31AM | 0 recs
You guys just don't get it.

You set up the weakest straw man of them all, then tell that straw man, "I tolja so!"

First of all, yes, there are some naive and young people with little experience in politics that were pro-Obama on here and on other blogs.  Yes, some of them did say some silly and over-optimistic things.  And, in fact, some of them drive me nuts.

The phrase though, "She'll do anything to get elected," that the diary author uses, though, has a resonance even with me, someone not young, not naive, not optimistic about anything (with a medicine cabinet to prove it), who has worked on multiple campaigns, who has been in both parties, and quite frankly wish Rove worked for us.  It resonates because of one thing: the 2002 AUMF vote.  The one thing she will do to get elected that I never forgave her for was voting for the Iraq war.

And I think that's what most people who use that phrase (or some variant) are alluding to, because, really, political styles are irrelevant in the current environment, with such weighty issues on the table.

I expected both candidates, Obama and Hillary, to tack to the right after the nomination was settled.  The nomination period is our time to extort promises from the candidates to the left.  After that, it's election season.

I think Obama made a big mistake supporting Telcom immunity, and I have criticized him for it.  I hope Finegold can scuttle it, but don't expect him too, because there are bigger forces at work in this than I can understand.  This bill should never have come up for a vote at all.  Somebody in the Democratic Party must want it really bad.  My own personal opinion is that this has less to do with tacking to the center than it has to do with satisfying some other dirty need.  I only HOPE that it's merely tacking to the right.

by Dumbo 2008-07-03 07:27PM | 0 recs
Re: You guys just don't get it.

This shows that if a falsehood is pushed often enough it becomes the perceived truth. Even here, in a pro-Obama statement it creeps in. "I think Obama made a big mistake supporting Telcom immunity..." Obama clearly stated that he was not happy about telco immunity and that he would work to remove it from the Senate version of the bill. That's hardly coming out in support of it.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-03 07:45PM | 0 recs
Re: You guys just don't get it.

Well, he voted for it.  Period.  Obviously his unhappiness wasn't enough to stop him, which I think is the politically smart move.

Only you guys care about this, Americans as a whole do not.  And you all will vote for him anyway and he knows it.

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 07:50PM | 0 recs
Re: You guys just don't get it.

Bullshit. They haven't even held the vote yet. Where do you get your information from?

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-03 07:52PM | 0 recs
Re: You guys just don't get it.

I give you a lot of credit for even trying.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-07-03 07:56PM | 0 recs
Re: You guys just don't get it.

Think he'll reply now that he's been called on it?

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-03 07:59PM | 0 recs
Re: You guys just don't get it.

Absolutely. Shame is not easily found in diaries like this.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-07-03 08:00PM | 0 recs
Re: You guys just don't get it.

No. It's his first day of ever commenting here. And I'm always weary of people who start diaries proclaiming their support of Obama and then proceed to bash away at him, and then he proclaims his support of Hillary.

Just another McTroll??

by venician 2008-07-03 08:10PM | 0 recs
Re: You guys just don't get it.

LOL Sorry.  He has declared his intent to vote for it.  Big difference.

Sort of like he hasn't officially refused public funds for his campaign, as that wouldn't happen until after the convention.  

Its good that he gives his following enough time for it all to sink in and accept the bitter reality.

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 07:59PM | 0 recs
He's voting for the bill

that includes telcom immunity.  All the hedging in the world doesn't change that fact.  Hillary voted for the war.  Obama is going to vote for telcom immunity.  Let's spare the BS.

For what it's worth, the war vote was much, much more serious.  Nobody is likely to die because of telcom immunity.  But it's disappointing.

by Dumbo 2008-07-03 08:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

hmmm...
back on June 3
"Obamabots seem to be going off the deep end here"

now you write
"It was obvious to me that, although not absolute and total, most Obama supporters were new to politics."

Your proclivity to generalizations leads to me to believe your claim of
"I work on campaigns" has never involved serious nuts and bolts activity. One of the first things
folks new to campaigns are taught is to stay away from the
"allness" concept....
so I guess I am calling your post..ah Bullshit.
Well meaning..no doubt, but still.....

by nogo postal 2008-07-03 07:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

hillllllarious.  i'm all nuts and bolts, baby.

and i get real paid. did i mention?

And, for the Obamabots thing.  Same point.  Unquestioning units attacking a good woman, thinking Obama is the second coming, can do no wrong.  Thinking that he is something other than politicas as usual, when that is exactly what he is.  It has always been abundantly clear.  Its not that you are stupid, its just that you missed this one.  Its ok. Really!

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 09:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

It's officially the 4th of July, so I guess it's only fitting to have a ton of weenies.

by xdem 2008-07-03 08:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

This might be helpful:

by skohayes 2008-07-04 03:46AM | 0 recs
Tiresome crap

by missliberties 2008-07-03 08:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is

Wake me up when everyone decides to go after McCain.  

by rfahey22 2008-07-03 08:14PM | 0 recs
The new voters.

He has brought a lot of younger voters into the process.  And I worry about Obama alienating them and driving them out of politics if he doesn't live upto their expectations, most especially on the war.

by psychodrew 2008-07-03 08:14PM | 0 recs
Re: The new voters.

I just want the Dem to win so I really don't care how he does it.  He could go on a massive campaign to get left handed people to vote 90% for him and if that got a Dem in the white house I'd salute him.  The purity crap from our side lately has made me want to scream.  

by Xris 2008-07-03 08:19PM | 0 recs
It's not about purity.

It's about having a coherent message. When a "presumptive nominee" has changed his position on NAFTA so badly that he has to arrange a half-assed, back-channel effort to apologize to the Canadians, it's somewhat difficult to figure out where he stands on free trade. That's not a trivial issue, it's a fairly major one.

I could say the same about his remarks to John Harwood of CNBC, that tax increases on the wealthy "might have to be deferred"

Campaign finance, FISA, Guns, and now Iraq. This candidate is so soft on the issues that he's turning into a marshmallow. Nobody knows where he stands from one day to the next.

Many of us aren't demanding "purity", and are willing to cut the nominee some degree of slack; after all, this is politics. But it's getting to the point that Barack has changed his position on every major issue. When you get to the point that you don't know what you'll be getting in victory, who really cares about winning?

by BJJ Fighter 2008-07-03 08:48PM | 0 recs
Re: It's not about purity.

Many of us aren't demanding "purity", and are willing to cut the nominee some degree of slack;
Bullshit, you haven't cut him any slack on the least little thing.

More BS: NAFTA had as much to do with Hillary as it did with Barack. On top of that, he stated that NAFTA needed to be redone. He still has that position. As I said, BS.

Taxes: OMG, he might not raise taxes right away. OMG.

Campaign finance: Left himself an out in his original stance and ended up taking that out. Pretty smart politics for a guy that is nothing but an empty suit with one good speech.

FISA: I know there are a lot of people upset about this, but half the upset is misplaced. This is a House bill. The Senate hasn't voted on it yet. Obama has stated that he will work to remove the telco immunity clause. This is still open.

Guns: No real change in stance

Iraq: OMG, he might actually consult with the commanders on the ground. OMG

But it's getting to the point that Barack has changed his position on every major issue.
As I said, BS.

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-03 09:05PM | 0 recs
Re: Please

Oh, I'm prepared for that possibility. That will be one issue that I don't agree with him on. There are, and will be, others. Would you like me to list how many I disagree with John McCain on?

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-03 09:11PM | 0 recs
Re: It's not about purity.

You were previously quite vocal about your likelihood of voting for McCain in the fall - when exactly were you "willing to cut the nominee some degree of slack"?

by rfahey22 2008-07-03 09:07PM | 0 recs
But his statements are on the record

You can go to the CNBC website, and check out his interview with John Harwood. He said that his proposed tax increases "might have to be deferred, based on circumstances".

All of these shifts in position can be documented. Frankly, I think some may be trivial, but even that depends on where a specific issue ranks in your own "hierarchy of values". For me, free trade is a major issue, and I think that the way Obama bollixed up the NAFTA discussion with the Canadians last March is Bush-ian in its incompetence, and in basic ignorance.

All of these flip-flops are troubling, and they are not the fault of the blogosphere, as you suggest.

by BJJ Fighter 2008-07-03 09:10PM | 0 recs
I don't think so

The Republicans are gearing up on the flip-flop meme.  Go check out the Weekly Standard for some examples.

by dbrown04 2008-07-04 04:16AM | 0 recs
Re: He hasn't changed positions

and the thing was the thing before it saw the thing and the thing did a dance and it sang and it was the thing again and the thing became a thing that then became a thing then was another thing and it lived and it sang and it was as what it was and is and lives.

by MKyleM 2008-07-03 11:39PM | 0 recs
I expect she'll be laughing a lot......

in the months ahead, as Barack is the gift that keeps on giving when it comes to "new" positions: NAFTA, Campaign Finance, Taxes, Guns, FISA, Faith based organizations, and so on. Your comments are spot on, especially today. The key line from Barack's press conference today in North Dakota:

"I expect...that I'll continue to refine my policy..."  

Apparently, this is how Obama is laying the groundwork for a flip-flop in his ever-shifting Iraq policy. After he travels to Iraq---essentially because McCain challenged him to go and meet with General Petraeus---you'll get the new and improved version of "Barack on Iraq."

In 2004, he declared at the Democratic National Convention, "I'm not sure how I would have voted on the war resolution had I been in the Senate in 2002..." At that point, the much heralded 2002 speech opposing the war became inoperative.

Suffice it to say, that his is an ever-evolving position--on most issues. And suffice it to say that Hillary Clinton--had she ever tried to pull a stunt like this--would be crucified six ways to Sunday.

by BJJ Fighter 2008-07-03 08:38PM | 0 recs
Re: I expect she'll be laughing a lot......

Actually, you're right. She will be laughing a lot in the months ahead.

I fully expect her to be laughing as she campaigns for him around the country. It's going to be a lot of fun on the campaign trail when we're so well-positioned to take back the White House!

And she'll be probably be laughing as the wingnuts trot out their tired old attacks against Obama, her and other Democrats. She's played that game with them already and can only laugh at the BS they're going to throw!

And I guarantee she'll be laughing at his inaugural ball, because those are such jubilant events!

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-07-04 08:37AM | 0 recs
I'm tired too

I'm tired of rehashing the primary in it's myriad forms. It was tiring when we were doing it on a daily basis, and it's even more tiring now. Can't we just concentrate on the election now?

by pollbuster 2008-07-03 08:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

I never tire of reliving Obama's Primary victory...
Living here in Colorado (see you in Aug)..
to see Sen. Obama walk into the lion's den of Colorado Springs...reminds me of ah....courage.

So ...in the spirit of Sen. Obama defeating a slate of candidates the GOP will never have...

1st
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zdu7xoHU9 DA

Then the tune we will dancing in the street to in November...
Jump up and sing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHqUipinD yw

by nogo postal 2008-07-03 09:04PM | 0 recs
Repent Harleguin...

asdf

by MediaFreeze 2008-07-03 09:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Repent Harleguin...

said the Ticktockman!

Thanks for the Ellison reference.

by LIsoundview 2008-07-04 04:02AM | 0 recs
Thank You!

Isn't it something to see the angry comments about this post. Look, truth hurts. I am fine with Obama's triangulating and flip-flopping. I just hope he does enough of it to get elected.

by MediaFreeze 2008-07-03 09:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Obama has aboslutely zero credibility right now.

Vote progressive.

by William Cooper 2008-07-03 10:23PM | 0 recs
Re: AMEN to this Diary !!!

Let it be known that we were still in the month of June & our "liberal" candidate wasted no time in moving to the CENTER.

Frankly, 99% of Hillary Clinton supporters always understood what being a politician is all about. 99% of Clinton supporters understood loud & clear that the ONLY WAY a Democrat President can ever have a chance of winning a general election is by running as a MODERATE/CENTRIST politician.

That's the one & ONLY way to ever win !

And kudos for Obama for wasting no time in rapidly moving to center field after moving to the left of Madame Clinton in order to satisfy the MILLIONS of YOUNG & NOT SO YOUNG Idealistic Liberals led by Markos & his blog fans.

Somehow during the primary, Obama's rabid fans forgot that he was,is, & always will be a professional politician first. ( just like Hillary, Bill, Kerry & Gore )

LOL!  AMEN BROTHER!

by labanman 2008-07-03 10:26PM | 0 recs
Re: AMEN to this Diary !!!

Here's somebody who hasn't commented here since May.  

Methinks there is a PUMA invasion afoot.

by Can I Haz Moar Snark 2008-07-03 10:50PM | 0 recs
PUMA/McTroll

Where does one end and the other begin?

by Beren 2008-07-03 10:53PM | 0 recs
Just another McTroll diary

If Hillary had prevailed she'd be calling for the invasion of Iran right now.

by Beren 2008-07-03 10:31PM | 0 recs
Re: Just another McTroll diary

Why invade when you could "obliterate" it?

by Can I Haz Moar Snark 2008-07-03 10:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Just another McTroll diary

I suppose it would be more fiscally responsible.

by Beren 2008-07-03 10:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Just another McTroll diary

No, she wouldn't.

by Juno 2008-07-04 04:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Just another McTroll diary

Btw, your subject title only confirms what the author has written.

If you aren't drooling mad for Obama, you are a McTroll (or some other derogatory thing).

by Juno 2008-07-04 04:53AM | 0 recs
Re: Just another McTroll diary

When you carry McBush's dirty water, you are a McTroll -- or a PUMA if you prefer since there's no practical difference.

by Beren 2008-07-04 09:12AM | 0 recs
Wow

I was also about as big a supporter of Hillary Clinton in the primaries as I can imagine, and now support Obama.  Past that, I don't agree with really anything else you said.

First, the swipe at Obama supporters as being "new to politics" is petty and baseless.  And it's insulting to Hillary to act as if all the new voters were voting Obama, because they weren't.  Both Obama and Clinton attracted a huge amount of new voters, in addition to a lot of existing Democrats.  Our nominee wasn't chosen by a bunch of lunkheads who didn't know what they were getting themselves into.  We had a defined nomination process with record numbers of new voters voting on each side, and the Democratic Party chose him as our nominee.  It wasn't who I voted for, but I respect the decision.

Second, Obama's stance on FISA isn't brilliant, brave, or necessary.  And it isn't moving to the center, either.  Why?  Because voters in the center don't care about FISA.  Voters in the center don't really know what FISA is.  The only voters who care about FISA are on the left and the far right, and Obama took the risk of alienating some of his base to avoid "weak on terror" ads from the Republicans in the fall.

Third.  You work on campaigns?  Great.  Guess what?  You're posting this on a political blog.  Virtually everyone reading your diary works on campaigns, too.  So let's lose the condescension, please.

by Daliant 2008-07-03 10:34PM | 0 recs
Ha Ha!!

Check out the PUMA trying to pretend he is enjoying being on the losing side.

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-04 03:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary

rec'd, just to see the flipped out comments that remind me of the posts I made (that flipped out the same users).

by Jerome Armstrong 2008-07-04 04:10AM | 0 recs
Ha Ha!

Check out the gate crasher who can't get past the primary.  

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-04 04:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Ha Ha!

Change!  Hope! Inspiration!

by Juno 2008-07-04 04:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary

Check out all the zeroes they're flinging around, too. I'm suprised you didn't get hit.

by Scotch 2008-07-04 09:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary

lol

by Skaje 2008-07-04 01:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary

Jerome, I'd missed your primary-based obtuse sarcasm (not to mention the flat-out wrong political analysis). Good to have it back even if only to rec other obtuse snarkiness.

by abrxas 2008-07-04 02:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary
Lame. Just like this diary.
by Curt Matlock 2008-07-05 02:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

I can at least appreciate the people who are trying to hold Obama to his word, idealistic and often misguided as they are.

The ones who get my ire up are the ones who, as you note, bashed Clinton for "doing whatever she needed to win", among other criticisms, but are now defending Obama's yawing by saying he's a politicians and doing what he needs to to win.

We were bashed for not only defending Clinton about this but saying Obama was in fact no different.

Remember? Bashed badly.

I doubt Clinton is laughing.  She's more likely crying, and rightly so.  We've been picking our candidates and presidents on the worst of criteria of late.  I don't see much change in that.

by Juno 2008-07-04 04:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

So you think Clinton feels so strongly about FISA that she is going to vote against the bill?

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-04 04:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Not the point.

by Juno 2008-07-04 04:50AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Sure it is.  Isn't the fourth amendment more important than Obama's opinion on the matter?  When Hillary stops laughing is she going to vote against this awful piece of legislation?

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-04 04:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

It is NOT the point of this diary.

Indeed, if during the primaries, while Obama was saying he would vote against the bill and any immunity provisions, had Clinton said she would vote for it, Obamans would have gone ballistic on her, accused her of "doing whatever she had to to win", etc.

Now that Obama is doing so, and not only on FISA, suddenly doing what he needs to to win is okay.

Not to mention that Clinton never claimed, let alone ran on, to be the antidote to those politics as usual.

Obama did.  

THAT is the point. It's not about FISA.  That's another thread.

by Juno 2008-07-04 04:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Ok, I think I am catching your drift.  The content of a particular bill is irrelevant.  What truly matters is that a candidate never compromises on a position he or she takes.  

I think you are going to be disappointed with 100% of the people you meet if you expect them to never compromise on anything ever.  That is an unrealistic standard.  

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-04 05:06AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

No, you don't get it.

Take this diary to a local college and have a philosophy or political science professor explain it to you.

by Juno 2008-07-04 05:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

There is no school today.  It is a holiday.  

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-04 05:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Doesn't have to be today.  You can even wait until Sept. when college resumes.

They'll be able to explain it for you.

by Juno 2008-07-04 05:27AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

You certainly can't.  

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-04 05:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

You've made that clear, which is why I suggested going to professionals who can.

The NY Times lead editorial, which I've posted the link to here, also explains it.

Or you can just dig your heels in, a la Bush, and willfully refuse to understand.

Whatever you like.

by Juno 2008-07-04 06:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Sorry for being rude.  

Thanks for posting the link to the NY Times article.  Have a great holiday.

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-04 06:09AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

I didn't support Hills in the primary, but if anything I gave her kudos for that and I'm glad Obama has it in him.  Otherwise, I'd be worried.

by lollydee 2008-07-04 04:56AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

right.  I was saying that, if Obama became the nominee, I hoped he too would do whatever he needed to to win.  

I also said he is as politically scheming as any pol, moreso even.

I was called a troll, a McCain hack, a  GOP shill, told I don't get Obama, twice had it suggested I kill myself...

Just as with Bush and his supporters, it is Obama's detractors who actually get him better than do his supporters.  We got Bush better too, also gave out the warnings, were also vilified horribly...

Same damn thing.

by Juno 2008-07-04 05:00AM | 0 recs
I actually agree with this.

I love me some Barack Obama but damn, I'm GLAD he knows how to play the game.  I'm tired of losing and  he's the best thing since sliced cheese BECAUSE he knows how to play with the best of them.

Don't hate the player, hate the game.

I think he's going to be a fantastic president and I fully support him doing what he has to do to win this thing.

by lollydee 2008-07-04 04:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary

So i have long memmory.

How many times did i have to read BO supporters and his campaign suggest  that Clinton will "do whatever she needs to win".  ANYHTING. She represents old washington. She is a liar. Anne Okley.  BO called her a panderer.  She cant be trusted.  Markos called her a racist multipe times.

Funny how BO views on NAFTA have changed.  FISA is ok. Pulling the troops out of Iraq.  I could go on and on.  If HRC changed her views like this the netroots would go FING nuts. And the funny thing is the same old BO internet bullies and democrat police go nuts if any one writes any criticism of BO.

IMHO the candidate with the most consistant views was and always will be HRC.  BO sure looks like the candidate who will "do whatever he needs to do to win" including changing his views for political reason.

daivd

by giusd 2008-07-04 04:58AM | 0 recs
Three words

Gas Tax Holiday.  

Obama is compromising there is no doubt about that but he never flat out lied like Hillary did about the Gas Tax Holiday.  It is a matter of degrees my friend.

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-04 05:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Three words

Funny how you are so typical.  Instead of defending BO you do the same old thing "lets smear HRC".  I guess you get that right from FOX news.  I guss BO wasnt lying about NAFTA, FISA, Iraq.  By the way could you provide some proof that HRC lied about supporting the gas tax.  

Did you get that from FOX news as well.

david

by giusd 2008-07-04 05:11AM | 0 recs
Re: Three words

Instead of defending BO you do the same old thing "lets smear HRC".

My main point was to refute your assersion that Obama supporters who said Hillary will do anything to win were being hypocritical for not demanding that Obama resign from the Senate because he compromised on FISA.  As I said in my comment there is no doubt that Obama is compromising on FISA.  That is a far cry from lying about the effects of a gas tax holiday.  

By the way could you provide some proof that HRC lied about supporting the gas tax.

I wrote a diary about it.  Here is a link.  I hope you enjoy reading it.  

I look forward to reading your defense of Clinton's gas tax holiday.   By the way, when is she going to introduce that legislation in the Senate?    

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-04 05:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Three words

First i never said this "Obama supporters who said Hillary will do anything to win were being hypocritical for not demanding that Obama resign from the Senate because he compromised on FISA".  But maybe i am wrong can you document where i wrote that????

You thread provides no proof just more BS and FOX based news smears.

And why dont you just admit that you smeared HRC for months and now you cant stop.  Admitting bad acts is the first step to stopping bad behavior.

And just an FYI BO is the candidate not HRC. Just in case you didnt know

david

by giusd 2008-07-04 05:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Three words

But maybe i am wrong can you document where i wrote that????

You didn't.  I broke my own rule and used a hyperbole when a having a conversation with a true believer.  You proved exactly why that is a rule of mine.  Instead of responding to the main point you latched on to the only thing you could refute which was the hyperbole.  Sorry I broke my rule.

And why dont you just admit that you smeared HRC for months and now you cant stop.  Admitting bad acts is the first step to stopping bad behavior.

I never liked Hillary Clinton and I am glad she lost.  I would be happy to never talk about her again.  That isn't going to happen however if people like the diarist post condescending diaries and people like you attack Obama supporters.  So if you want to relive the primaries I quite happy to relive them right back.  

And just an FYI BO is the candidate not HRC.

Thank God for that.  It means you can insult Obama supporters without having to defend your statements.  That is wicked brave of you Sir Robin.  Hillary must be so proud of you for running away from her Gas Tax Holiday.  

 

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-04 05:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Three words

So you call HRC a liar but you just admiited to me that you are a liar as well.  Or sorry, you call it hyperbole.  

david

by giusd 2008-07-04 05:57AM | 0 recs
Ha Ha!

Check out the PUMA who doesn't know what a hyperbole is!!!

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-04 06:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Ha Ha!

I am not exactly sure what PUMA means but i am sure it includes something like i either support McCain or wont vote for BO.  Of course both those things are false and all one has to do is look at my many posts and they would see that.  

But ilk like you throw stuff like PUMA around when you can defend your own comments.

First you lie about what i posted today and then you lie about who i will vote for.  Funny and you have the nerve to call HRC a liar.  Kettle meet pot.  You could try to get at least one fact right but i guess that would be too much to ask.

Or you could provide some proof but again we all know you are not going to do that.  Next you will be calling me a troll and then a concerned trool and then not a reall democrat.  NEXT.

david

by giusd 2008-07-04 06:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Ha Ha!

Wow, you are sensitive.  

First you lie about what i posted today and then you lie about who i will vote for.

You really should look up the term hyperbole.

Or you could provide some proof but again we all know you are not going to do that.

I did Chief.  Go read the diary I wrote about Clinton's "gas tax holiday".  Here is more proof.

She lied like a rug about the gas tax holiday.  

I have offered you evidence and you have ignored it.  I triple dog dare you to refute the diary I wrote or the link I provided in this comment.  Repeat:  TRIPLE DOG DARE

by Blue Neponset 2008-07-04 06:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Ha Ha!

I am not exactly sure what PUMA means...
ROTFLMAO You are funny. :)

by MS01 Indie 2008-07-04 09:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere,

This diary is spot on. I'm going to send him money, and vote for him although I'm a strong Hillary supporter. I find the rationalisations by his supporters for whom issues like NAFTA and FISA were make or break, most amusing. I think they have a load of disappointments in store. What I find more worrisome are the relatively weak poll numbers given the broader electoral landscape. He should be consistently 15% ahead and it's 6%. I'm the first to admit these are the dog days of summer but it's clear the Rove crew are moving into McCain's campaign so don't expect the bumbling to continue.    

by ottovbvs 2008-07-04 04:59AM | 0 recs
we'll have to see

what the effects of moving right are on election day.

by sepulvedaj3 2008-07-04 05:32AM | 0 recs
Re: we'll have to see

The issue isn't about Obama moving right, left or center.

The issue is that the entire Obama phenom was formed around his (and his supporters') claims that he was something new, that he represents a new politic, that he does NOT make politically expedient decisions.

Remember his outrage over Rev. Wright suggesting he is a politician and that is what they do? THAT is what caused him to break his ties with Wright.

Many of us knew all along that he is as politically opportunistic, if not moreso, as anyone. IT was his supporters having temper tantrums and devolving into negative attack politics, the very kind they insist Obama will do away with that they are sick of, whenever it was pointed out.

by Juno 2008-07-04 05:38AM | 0 recs
Re: we'll have to see

This whole meme that Obama is tacking to the center is being driven by media boredom and the curious fact that many Clinton supporters will probably have an easier time voting for Obama if they think he's a bit of a sell-out (and so they're pushing this line).

A clear example of this occurred yesterday.  What did Obama do with respect to his Iraq policy, but reiterate, in very strong terms, that his policy is to pull out in 18 months?  And yet that's not the headline this morning.  

On FISA think people have an argument (although even here it's not clear what's going to happen, Obama has opposed the grant of immunity, which seems to be the sticking point for many, and the bill might fail).

On these other issues, though, think this is a media-manufactured meme (though it's not one I have big problems with, because it is conventional wisdom that the candidate who can best appeal to the center is the one who wins).

Btw, silliest line in the NYTimes editorial: "We knew he ascribed to the anti-gun-control groups' misreading of the Constitution as implying an individual right to bear arms."

Haha, wow, who wrote this thing?  Talk about wearing rose-colored glasses.  Whatever one thinks about second amendment issues, can we agree this idea that it grants individuals rights of gun ownership isn't a fringe idea?  Who would even make this claim?

by IncognitoErgoSum 2008-07-04 05:57AM | 0 recs
Re: we'll have to see

No one is claiming his supporters don't rationalize his moves. They do.

We are claiming that the meme of Obama's candidacy was fraudulent.  He RAN on NOT being exactly what he's being.

Bushies rationalized all of Bush's BS too.

But if you're honest, you see it.  If you're not, you don't.  It's that simple.

by Juno 2008-07-04 06:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Timing is everything:

NY Times lead editorial addresses this very issue today!

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/04/opinio n/04fri1.html?ref=opinion

by Juno 2008-07-04 05:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere,

Interesting.

We're not the only ones noticing, and caring.

by Scotch 2008-07-04 05:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere,

He's always made me nervous. I always felt his platform was a house of cards.  But what made/makes me even more nervous is how many bought it.

Remember how so many bought Bush's compassionate/Christian/Conservative crap too?

Groan.

by Juno 2008-07-04 06:07AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere,

The only thing in his favor at the end of the day is that McCain is an even worse candidate.  McCain has been making all kinds of mistakes and stupid moves, unfortunately they replaced his manager with someone from the former Bush campaign just yesterday.  Probably someone rove related, but it might be bad news.

by Scotch 2008-07-04 06:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere,

Which is why he makes me nervous as president.

He's got celebrity and personality momentum, and that usually works to blind people to what is really important.

I just don't think he has the constitution.  He seems to need to please everyone, and I think that is a disastrous trait for a president to have because you end up usually pleasing no one and being steamrolled.

by Juno 2008-07-04 06:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

They took Obama's every word as gospel; any hint of criticism was attacked in a hilarious panic.  Obama was the second coming...if you weren't 250% on board, according to those with this cultish mentality, well then, f*ck you!

The hell we did.  Stop building stupid strawmen.  You make us all sound like Karen Hughes, infatuated with Dubya.  We can see Obama's flaws; his overwillingness to compromise was a concern for me from the very beginning.

How this has anything to do with Hillary Clinton laughing somewhere is beyond me.

by corph 2008-07-04 05:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

What's funny is how close this is to that bit from "Hillary's Downfall" (the YouTube video):

"And now you tell me those fat fucks are waddling over to worship that dandy Obama like he's the second coming of Jimi Hendrix?"

Hahaha!  Favorite line.

by IncognitoErgoSum 2008-07-04 06:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Corph: Strawmen you have to be kidding. It was pretty bad here but over at Kos it was unbelievable with all the little Stalinists running around blackballing you if a hint of criticism was raised. You were a racist or whatever. In fact the Obamanauts behaved very much like Karen Hughes. In fact many of the anti Clinton statements issed by the Obamanauts would not have looked out of place at Redstate as many observed at the time. If you can't see these simple truths it's not surprising you can't see any occasion for Clinton's amusement.  

by ottovbvs 2008-07-04 06:44AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

HuffingtonPost was a veritable cesspool.  And they just purged all Clinton supporters, as did Kos, apparently.  It was so uncomfortable to even be there. You felt like you had to take a shower afterward.

It was there that two of these Inspired people told me I should kill myself.

Among other things.

Really bad.

by Juno 2008-07-04 06:53AM | 0 recs
I've been reading Kos every day

since 2005.  I know what the general tone of the posts are like.  You're ignoring the multiple posts Markos himself has made criticizing Obama on substantive issues, even rating the overall progressiveness of his policies below Edwards' and Clinton's.  I'll look up the link as soon as you find some comments from non-trolls supporting your ridiculous canards.  Oh, and in case you hadn't noticed, throughout most of 2007 the reader poll had Edwards first around 40% and Obama 2nd with 25%-30%.  Some cult.  

About the only thing Kossacks and Redstaters agree on re: Hillary Clinton is that she's too power-hungry.

However, if you went around calling Kossacks "little Stalinists" and "Obamanauts", it's not too surprising you got a few hide ratings.

Clinton's still a US Senator.  Does she care about FISA?  How about she take a stand on filibustering the immunity provision?  Obama has torturously tried to explain his nuanced position (not to my satisfaction), but at least he isn't ignoring the issue.  I would hope Clinton has better things to do that gloat at Obama's problems with Democratic activists right now.

by corph 2008-07-04 10:48AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Yes, you did!

This is the problem with the Obama movement: it is not based in reality, and his supporters can't seem to deal with reality, or at least the more negative realities.

There was ZERO tolerance of criticism of Obama.  And usually they were met with vicious personal attacks.

There was creepy, cult-like behavior toward him.

On the one hand, his supporters trumpeted his newness, his incredible message of inspiration and change, made personality the issue, feel-good garbage, but on the other, they now want to insist that they knew all along that Obama was a mere mortal and a pol like all others.

It's creating the facts to fit the policy.

by Juno 2008-07-04 06:51AM | 0 recs
The word &quot;cult&quot; is spot on

You sum it up fairly well. I've asked family members and/or friends who support Obama what they like LEAST about him, or what they regard as a potential weakness should he be elected.

Most are caught totally off guard by the question; I've never met one who was willing to provide an answer. And they outright take offense at the suggestion that his qualifications might be a bit thin.

I've supported both Clintons over the years, and like any type of affiliation, you have ups and downs. I remember calling my brother after the Mark Rich pardon, and we both had the same reaction: "Can you believe what that assh--- did this time?" But on balance, it came down to a variation of the Dear Abby question: we thought that like Hillary, Bill's strengths FAR outweighed his flaws, and that the country was better off with him than without him.

The irony here is that voters with a truly balanced and realistic world view will stick by a politician during his/her ups and downs, and part company should the cons outweight the pros. But those who worship a candidate--without the ability (or willingness) to see any flaws--will be the first to jump ship should they feel "betrayed" by the candidate. You're now seeing the first signs of that type of unravelling in the Obama campaign, and I expect that it will continue.

by BJJ Fighter 2008-07-04 07:31AM | 0 recs
Re: The word &quot;cult&quot; is spot on

YOU sum it up well!

You get it.

When it's about personality, it is likely to fail.

It has also been my experience that Obama supporters just cannot fathom how anyone cannot not only not think he's the greatest thing since sliced bread (that is actually a quote from an Obama supporter here that I read, that "he is the greatest thing since sliced bread) but aren't completely enamored by him.

It's so weird.

For me, I see too many similarities to how Bush supporters were toward him and his detractors. They too built an immunity fence around him, no one could question or criticize him. Detractors too were viciously attacked.

So the irony is that I think Hillary would have actually represented more change than does Obama.

And frankly, I loved that Bill had an affair (had he been my hubby, he'd have gotten a frying pan to the back of the head, though).  I am sick of this creepy thing in America now where our candidates have to be saints.

I'll take the human, thank you.

by Juno 2008-07-04 07:49AM | 0 recs
I'm an Obama supporter.

you must have read my posts upthread.  Other than his overwillingness to compromise, I've often stated in my comments on this site that I find his "yes we can" and "change" rhetoric vague and thin on substance.  I got to ask him in person whether he had a "Lyndon Johnson side" and whether he was tough enough to overcome Republican scorched-earth tactics.  He could trim a few "uhs" out of his sentences too.  Does that answer your "question"?

You do the Democratic party a disservice by claiming Obama's following is cult-like.  He's inspirational to many people, is all.  You're too lazy to quote comments from dKos or elsewhere to support your silly claims.  It sounds like you simply want him to lose.

by corph 2008-07-04 11:02AM | 0 recs
Lyndon Johnson was about more than just

"toughness". He realized that effective change came from specifics and policy, not just lofty speeches. His record is as full of accomplishments for the poor and working class people, as JFK's was empty. And it's not just because he had two more years than Kennedy had.

Politics and govermnent should be about more than being "liked" and idolized. When Johnson was rebuffed by his former Senate colleagues from the South in an effort to get Civil Rights finally enacted into law, he turned to Everett Dirksen and the Republicans to help him. His former "friends" never forgave him, but he was willing to take that risk, not to mention the risk to his reelection in 1964. Now THAT's what we call a profile in courage. Caroline has compared Barack to her father...I think it is an apt comparison.

It was interesting that HRC gave credit to Lyndon Johnson for this during the campaign, as she noted that it took both advocacy AND policy work/legislation to produce meaningful change. This was a mortal sin in liberal-land! Three weeks later, EMK and several other Kennedys endorsed Obama...I guess the truth hurts. And that truth is that LBJ's "Great Society" was a worthy and successful continuation of the New Deal....and that his record contrasts favorably with Kennedy's unwillingness to tackle these challenges. As Caroline Kennedy has suggested, Barack would probably be a President "like her father".

I have found that within the Democratic Party, liberals generally prefer wine and philosophy, whereas centrists go for whiskey and action.

by BJJ Fighter 2008-07-04 11:44AM | 0 recs
Yeah, that was a silly little

non-scandal (Hillary's comment about it taking LBJ to pass civil rights).  I would say the remark was true and a valid point, if a little petty under the circumstances.

But c'mon, it's not a "mortal sin in liberal-land" to work with Republicans on bills.  The causality between Hillary's comment and the Kennedy endorsement is weak.  There were several reasons he could have endorsed Obama.

I want a president with Kennedyesque oratory and LBJ's skill in passing legislation.  So far, the primary campaign has taught me that Obama has the former, and that Clinton doesn't have the latter (see healthcare debacle, 1993 and botched fruntrunner campaign, 2008).

by corph 2008-07-04 12:06PM | 0 recs
I would give some historical context

Few if any significant social advances make it on the first attempt.

Wilson failed in the League of Nations, making it more likely that the United Nations would eventually come to fruition years later.

Eisenhower attempted Civil Rights in 1957, and had to settle for a watered down bill that gave only lip service...it had no teeth. But it provided a base, that LBJ built on with a real law in 1964.

I think it's just more "Hillary hate" when people continue to talk about "the botched health care attempt" of 1993 as her failure. Once the big pharma companies stepped in to lobby, I don't recall many Democrats stepping up to the plate to help. I think it's fair to say that it will provide a good reference point from which work will begin on a new bill next year.

by BJJ Fighter 2008-07-04 12:16PM | 0 recs
OK, I should elaborate.

I applaud her and Bill for the effort.  My disappointment with her stems from pieces written by a Democratic congressment (from TN I believe) at the time.  He had put together his own healthcare plan and painstakingly built support for it.  He explained how Hillary's task force ignored him and his input, and tried to ramrod their own plan through.  Then Dole threatened to filibuster any version of it, which was kind of a douchebag move but one that he wouldn't have made if the Republican caucus weren't unified against it.  Then the Clintons lost the support of decent if somewhat conservative southern Dems like Sam Nunn.

There was plenty of popular support for universal healthcare back then.  I blame the Clintons for their poor management and leadership on the issue, not simply because it failed to pass.

by corph 2008-07-07 07:43AM | 0 recs
The Irony is you've become a follower of your cult

The HRC Cult. They're still accepting members at hillaryis44.org

Oh, maybe you're not as dedicated. Noquarterusa is always a good HRC Cult.

Oh wait... you still have to make believe you're better than everyone and you have a moral high ground.

You're not one of them!

Sure you aren't. They're all Sheeple. You are the one.

You're not even brave enough to respond to this :)

by heyhellowhatsnew 2008-07-04 08:04AM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

Oh brother.

This is just absurd.  Clinton supporters were that: supporters. As opposed to Obama supporters who are more like followers.

We never denied that she practiced politics and would do what she had to to win. We liked her for it.

It was Obamans who did.

Btw, your post is not indicative of any change. It's just more attack politics as usual, which really is the point here.

by Juno 2008-07-04 08:27AM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

How is painting all Obama supporters with such a broad brush over and over and over again helpful?  How is conducive to discourse?

by Dreorg 2008-07-04 10:37AM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

One hopes it'll provoke them to practice some introspection.

That's how.

by Juno 2008-07-04 11:03AM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

"She Still Shines Like Polished Gold."

Whose supporters were the cult, again?

by Angry White Democrat 2008-07-04 09:54PM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

Obama's.

by Juno 2008-07-05 05:17AM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

I just gave you an example of cultish behavior and it wasn't from an Obama supporter.

"She Still Shines Like Polished Gold." No Obama supporter ever wrote anything like that about their candidate.

Whether or not you want to admit it, Hillary's supporters were far more cultish than Obama's supporters ever were.

by Angry White Democrat 2008-07-05 07:26AM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

Hogwash. And saying complimentary things about the candidate you support is not cultish behavior.

Saying "He's the greatest thing since sliced bread" is.

No, Obamans have the lock on cult-like behavior this go-round.

by Juno 2008-07-05 08:25AM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

Bullshit. Saying "She's smart" or "She's a great policy creator" is a complimentary thing to say. Saying "She Still Shines Like Polished Gold" is not. It's cultish. It indicates worship, not mere admiration.

No Obama supporter has ever said anything like that about their candidate. Hence, they are not the cult - Hillary supporters are.

by Angry White Democrat 2008-07-05 09:07AM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

Wrong.

You're not understanding the difference.

Whoever said Clinton still shines like gold wasn't singling Clinton out.  They were simply saying that Clinton still has it, whatever "it" is.

But saying that Obama is "the best thing since sliced bread" IS singling him out from the rest of the population and putting him alone on a pedestal as being superior to all.

see the difference?

by Juno 2008-07-05 09:20AM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

Whoever said Clinton still shines like gold wasn't singling Clinton out.

You're kidding, right? They most certainly were singling her out. That statement was about her and only her, and it showed the kind of cultish devotion that Obama supporters have never exhibited, despite all the accusations thrown their way.

Show me a similar statement to the "polished gold" one about Obama from one of his supporters. Give me a link. You can't, because it doesn't exist.

by Angry White Democrat 2008-07-05 11:14AM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

Oh, my god.

Let me see if I can explain this better for you.

To say that Clinton still shines like gold does not preclude anyone ELSE from shining like gold.

To say that a person is the BEST (a superlative) thing since sliced bread DOES.

Get it now?

by Juno 2008-07-05 12:12PM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

Um, "The best thing since sliced bread" (if indeed an Obama supporter did say this, you haven't given a link) is a very commonly used expression. It gets used all the time to refer to a myriad of different things.

"This remote control is the best thing since sliced bread."

It's an expression that sees widespread popular use. It doesn't indicate cultish devotion to anyone or anything.

"She Still Shines Like Polished Gold," on the other hand, is not a commonly used expression, and its usage does not indicate that the person who's using it merely likes, admires, or supports the person they're using it about. It indicates worship. That's why that is an example of cultish behavior, and there's never been anything similar from Obama supporters.

by Angry White Democrat 2008-07-05 01:24PM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

You ever read about Clinton supporters crying at her speeches?

Good grief. That's just creepy.

by Juno 2008-07-05 01:01PM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

And passing out, too.

by MKyleM 2008-07-05 01:05PM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2008/0 6/mayfield_heights_teen_ann_spar.html

Sparky missed the speech. She was doing errands with her mom. But friends heard and called the Riddles. When Sparky and her parents watched the speech on the Internet, they were nearly overwhelmed.

"Oh my gosh, I started crying. My mom started crying. And then my dad started crying," Sparky said Saturday evening, in between interviews with WKYC Channel 3 and CNN.

http://keith-london.livejournal.com/2765 519.html

There were people crying in the hall, and booing at first when she suggested that they should work with Obama.

So I guess you're calling these Hillary supporters creepy?

by Angry White Democrat 2008-07-05 01:30PM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

they were crying because she lost, not swooning.

Cripes.  Be honest, at least.

by Juno 2008-07-05 01:40PM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

And btw, the first example you give is not only a 13 yr. old girl, but it is clear from the article that she cried because Clinton mentioned her in her speech, not out of being beguiled by Clinton to the point of ridiculousness.

You take both examples out of context, which is what Republicans do, and they are very dishonest examples.

And indeed that those are the best you can come up with pretty much negate any claim that Clinton supporters behave in a cult-like manner. They don't.

But Obamans do, as MANY have noted. Why not just be honest about it. I thought Obamans were all about integrity and honesty.

by Juno 2008-07-05 01:59PM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

Hey, you're the one who brought up crying at speeches. Not me.

And like I said, "She Still Shines Like Polished Gold" is way more cultish than anything Obama supporters have said.

by Angry White Democrat 2008-07-05 05:00PM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a follower of your

Boy, as long as we're not insisting that Obama supporters can't tolerate any criticism!

ROFL!

by Juno 2008-07-04 08:28AM | 0 recs
Re: The Irony is you've become a f

There's no Clinton cult. We're just pointing out the generally extreme behavior of a lot of Obama supporters who are now busy rationalising his flips when they would have excoriated Clinton for the same thing. The charges of racism were the most appalling but there were plenty of others. Many people were purged from other liberal sites in scenes that belonged on Animal Farm. Now we're all supposed to forget it. I'm going to support Obama, his move to the center doesn't surprise me but the Repubs are going to all over him for his waffling and it's going to hurt him. What I find most concerning about the whole situ is that his poll numbers are fairly anaemic given the electoral landscape. I think the sort of comments being passed here are also symptomatic of a lot of ill feeling that's still around about how Clinton was treated and he needs to fix it.

by ottovbvs 2008-07-04 09:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

sums up exactly how i feel too, thanks.

by zane 2008-07-04 06:30AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

recc'd Please see my diary from yesterday, THE TRIUMPH OF OLD POLITICS, about how Obama's new politics was a form of old politics that out-old-politic'd our girl.

I too was the biggest HRC supporter who is now a BO supporter. But like you, I also laughed during the primaries at the naivety of his supporters, to believe the whole rap. But I'm glad they're in politics, and the young are the young, and Obama beat Hillary by being an old politic guy, even if was at the expense of "the man progressives thought they were getting," who would take on the lobbyists and change Washington, and all that other empty b.s.

And frankly I find Obama more impressive this way than as the new messiah he was during the primaries.

by NY Writer 2008-07-04 06:46AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

There was something fraudulent, though, about Obama from the beginning.

I ALWAYS felt he got into it purely on ego, because of the ridiculous calls for him to run for president after that 2004 speech, his overnight celebrity.  That worried me from the beginning (which makes it so ironic that his supporters got so angry at Hillary for noting that "he has a speech". That was actually a truthful statement!).

I also always felt that his hope/change/inspiration thing was meaningless but was in lieu of having any actual heft or substance.  That so many bought it as being substantive is disturbing.

I think the Obama thing is worrisome because it's fraud.

by Juno 2008-07-04 07:21AM | 0 recs
Fraudulent?

I know you hate the guy, but I have to ask if you have been able to see through that to actually listen to him, maybe read what he has written?

He absolutely does not claim to be anything other than he is.  

And to the diarist: glad you're with us, and I hope you can move past your lingering derision.  Many (most) Obama supporters are not college students, not cutlists, and more than aware that Sen. Obama has a pragmatic and generally centrist viewpoint.

Audacity of Hope is an easy read.  If you haven't tried yet, I suggest perusing it.  He makes no bones about not being a 60s activist liberal, and focusing on achieving what is possible rather than shouting for what is perceived perfection.

Finally, at some point the victimhood meme can play itself out.  Yes, your candidate did not win the primary, yes she was roughly treated.  As you state you understand - that is politics and it happens to everyone who runs, most of whom are good people who have undertaken the thankless job of trying to make the world a better place.  Holding any one politician up on a pedestal is disturbingly misplaced worship, and you are displaying it.

-chris

by chrisblask 2008-07-04 08:23AM | 0 recs
who won that primary again?

by omar little 2008-07-04 07:47AM | 0 recs
Actually its John McCain who is laughing right now

Because he's actually going to be President while neither Obama or Hillary will :)

Hope

THIS

HELPS :D

by heyhellowhatsnew 2008-07-04 08:00AM | 0 recs
TRed for:

1/ Promoting the GOP on a progressive blog

2/  Being so politically inastute as to hold such an incredibly naive opinion.

by chrisblask 2008-07-04 08:15AM | 0 recs
Vote McCain!

Come aboard the McCain train folks! After I voted for Hillary I decided McCain views were closest to my beliefs.

Hillary's healthcare plan is just like McCains.

Both McCain and Hillary believe in Women's Rights. Heck McCain even voted for the Equal Pay bill :)

McCain 08!!!

Yes He Can!

by heyhellowhatsnew 2008-07-04 08:02AM | 0 recs
Maybe for Christmas....

...some Clinton supporter will admit that she's not a victim.

She made a political calculation with her AUMF vote (which is also a convenient shorthand for her do-nothing, don't-rock-the-boat, keep-David-Broder-as-your-true-north, Liebercrat tenure in the Senate), and lost. She made a bad bet. Her decision, her consequences.

During the worst period in our country's political history since the Red Scare, if not the Civil War, she chose not to lead, she chose not to "fight". Then she chose to draw attention to her useless bystander's passivity in the Senate by showing that, when her political future was at stake, she was after all capable of putting up a helluva fight. But against another Democrat, not against Bush, Cheney and their merry band of Constitutional criminals.

And that is why Barack Obama, for all his flaws, was the second-to-last choice of a lot of Democrats.

by BlueinColorado 2008-07-04 08:04AM | 0 recs
You are inviting criticism for Obama. What did he

do besides give a speech against the war (NOT AGAINST the Iraq resolution) in one of the most liberal areas in the country when he was running for reelection in the IL state senate?

Has he led any marches or any anti-war movement? Has he voted against the funding of the war, the only means by the congress to stop the war? NO!

I will vote for Obama, but don't act like Hillary is the only one who didn't prevent the war. She also only gave a speech against the war when explaining that her vote was for pressuring Sadaam to let the inspectors in. Bush is the one who invaded with no cause. Stop blaming Hillary and elevating Obama for doing nothing.

by mmorang 2008-07-04 12:50PM | 0 recs
The diary

is inviting criticism. Maybe you noticed I pointed out that Obama was my second-to-last choice in the primary? Maybe you noticed I mentioned "all his flaws". I could make a list and always could, in spite of the constant projection about being an "Obamabot" from people who wanted to pretend that the decidedly mediocre Hillary Clinton was RFK, MLK, Susan B. Anthony, Thomas Jefferson and Joan of Arc rolled into one.

This is diary number 4,336 about "Poor, poor Hillary who every one was so mean to."

I'm tired of the constant fucking whining and the dishonest hagiography.

by BlueinColorado 2008-07-04 12:55PM | 0 recs
Re: The diary

This diary isn't whinny. It brings up a legitimate point about some Obama supporters. But I tend to agree with you that it's counter-productive in general.

Clinton is far from mediocre. She's also far from perfect. But she is a foreign and domestic policy expert. She is the most respected Democrat amongst generals. Give her a little credit, she knows her shit.

But again, it is time to move on to the general election. You are right.

by mmorang 2008-07-04 01:06PM | 0 recs
Re: The diary

On that last note, we agree.

And one of the reasons Clinton pissed me off is that she didn't live up to what I think is her potential as a Senator. I hope she spends the rest of her career making me eat my words. And I'll do so gladly.

by BlueinColorado 2008-07-04 02:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

IT's THE WAR, STUPID.

(Not that I think anyone here is stupid, I just want to drive a point home in Carvillian fashion)

Can anyone doubt Hillary's vote of AUMF is what cost her the nomination?  Her refusal to apologize for that vote and the fact that she proudly boasted lobbyist support to the netroots are the reasons she was treated the way she was.

I think she has been (for the most part) a decent Senator, and a pretty strong Democrat, but her posturing on the war vote was a dealbreaker for me (it's the same reason I backed Dean over Kerry in 2004).

by ArkansasLib 2008-07-04 08:10AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Hillary would be the nomanee now if she had gone along with Bush's War in Iraq for 3 years.

by Lefty Coaster 2008-07-04 09:03AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

What's the point of this? I was (and remain) as big a Hillary Clinton supporter as anyone, but how does this help us?  No, I'm not surprised by Obama's move to the center - we all knew it was coming.  I'm disappointed by the issues he's moved to the center on, but it is what it is.  Pointing at others and saying "I told you so", or whatever your message is, doesn't help at all.

by Denny Crane 2008-07-04 08:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

If I could rec this twice, I would.

by Dreorg 2008-07-04 10:32AM | 0 recs
Hillary still lost n/t

by BrighidG 2008-07-04 08:54AM | 0 recs
Your stereotype of Obama supporters is WRONG

I have been active in Politics 35 years. Most of the Obama volunteers I worked with in the campaign had been political activists for decades too. True Obama attracted many people who were new to politics to his campaign, but many more who were seasoned progressive activists flocked to his campaign.

Your stereotype of Obama supporters is just plain ignorant.

by Lefty Coaster 2008-07-04 08:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Your stereotype of Obama supporters is WRONG

It is not a stereotype based on liberal blogs like MYDD, Kos or Huffington. It's the reality of what happened. What you're not getting here is that the ongoing talk about this issue is symptomatic of a lot of bitterness lingering in the party. It may dissipate but I'm surprised its still hanging around. He needs to fix this particularly since his poll numbers are nothing to shout about in the circumstances.

by ottovbvs 2008-07-04 09:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Big difference

Iraq and energy (where she came out in favor of McCain's gas tax holiday gimmick) are the core issues of this election, and she pandered on those issues.  FISA and campaign reform, on the other hand, are not the core issues in an election where 150,000 American troops are stuck in a place where a war should never have been waged; where 45 million Americans have no health insurance; where the price of gas is over $4.00/gallon.

by Brad G 2008-07-04 09:37AM | 0 recs
You're being very selective....

in your choice of issues....which is another way of ignoring reality. Obama's "shifts" are not just on FISA and Campaign Finance Reform.

1) NAFTA: the new vocabulary is "overheated". Free trade is major, and he's been all over the map. After insulting the Canadians for about the fourth time, he's now said that his previous rhetoric was "overheated"...whatever that means.

2) TAXES: He told John Harwood of CNBC in an interview last month that his previously proposed tax increases might have to wait awhile. New vocabulary, "deferred".

3) GUNS: Voicing his support for the Supreme Court ruling on DC's handgun control law, I expect to see Barack and Michelle sporting camoflouge gear and shot guns any day now. He voiced support for the DC gun ban last November in an interview with the Chicago Tribune. New vocabulary: that statement was "inartful". Whatever that means.

FINALLY: we were told by the candidate yesterday that we can expect his Iraq policy to be "refined" after his upcoming trip to Iraq. I'm betting that the new vocabulary word will be "inoperative", used to describe is previous commitments to withdraw all troop in 16 months.

SO--Obama waffling doesn't just apply to FISA and campaign finance reform. If you believe that, you're living in your own reality, a fool's paradise.

by BJJ Fighter 2008-07-04 10:00AM | 0 recs
Re: No, I'm not being selective

Iraq, the economy, the uninsured, energy, and the Supreme Court are the core issues this election, and on each one of those issues, Barack Obama has been consistent -- perhaps not as black and white as you would like, but consistent.

On Iraq, Josh Marshall points out the bottom line:

The simple truth is that this campaign offers a very clear cut choice on Iraq. One candidate believes that the US occupation of Iraq is the solution; the other thinks it's the problem. John McCain supports the permanent deployment of US troops in Iraq. That is why his hundred years remark isn't some gotcha line. It's a clear statement of his policy. Obama supports a deliberate and orderly withdrawal of US forces from Iraq. It's a completely different view of America's role in the world and future in the Middle East.

On taxes, the same premise:  one candidate believes the tax cuts are the solution to jumpstart an economy which has lost jobs six straight months; one candidate believes the tax cuts and lack of public investment are the problem.

Gun control -- that just ain't a big issue this year -- particularly the constitutionality of DC's handgun ban.  But if you want to talk about flip-flops on gun control, John McCain went from twice voting against the 72-hour background check requirement in 1999 to one year later starring in ads in Colorado and Oregon supporting the state's ballot initiatives requiring a 72-hour background check on gun shows.

by Brad G 2008-07-04 01:29PM | 0 recs
The press is turning on him

The Washington Post political staff was all over itself for Obama in the early going.  As soon as he veered rightward, we see stories like this on the front page of the paper:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2008/07/03/AR2008070303919. html?hpid=topnews

I find it odd that people think Clinton pandered.  Pandered, or believed it was the right response in the first place?

by strongerthandirt 2008-07-04 09:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing

Judging by the spot that this baseless hit peace holds on the rec list(it's a peace of something alright), and the number of sour slams on the proprietor of the most successful progressive blog on the web (a major asset to our party and agenda) I guess that there is still a lot of dillusion and sour grapes on this site.  He's the nominee and will wind up with a track record as one of the most progressive presidents in american history once it's all said and done.

Some of the comments bring to mind a quote from Abraham Lincoln:

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.

btw, I am an Obama supporter and I am not new to politics.  My dad has a shoe box with personal correspondence between he and Bobby Kennedy.  He is no newbie.  He supports Obama.  In fact The Lion of the Senate is one of the oldest, most progressive and most experienced political personalities in this country and he has supported Obama since very early on.  Like I said, baseless piece.

by lockewasright 2008-07-04 10:23AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing

Shoot!  I screwed up my streak of spelling piece = peace. Dang!!

by lockewasright 2008-07-04 10:25AM | 0 recs
I wouldn't brag about Bobby Kennedy souveneirs

Bobby Kennedy was an opportunist, who usually jumped on causes AFTER they gained traction.

He played "Hamlet" for months over whether to challenge LBJ for the nomination....basically, he didn't want to risk losing. Once Gene McCarthy slayed the dragon--proving Johnson could be beaten--Bobby jumped in with both feet.

Ever wonder why JFK didn't pass any Civil Rights legislation? Bobby advised him that it would jeopardize his 1964 re-election by alienating the Southern states. Best to wait until 1965, RFK instructed his brother.

And the beginnings of his "career"? As Joe McCarthy's valet in the Senate. In those days, the red menace was alive and well, and McCarthy was busy ruining lives. Old man Kennedy was McCarthy's best friend, and sent his boy Bobby over to the Senate to work for him. RFK quit once, and then had to go back for a second tour of duty since he couldn't find work anywhere else in the Senate. McCarthy actually dated Jean and Pat Kennedy for a while.

Of course, once people like Scoop Jackson did the heavy lifting and took McCarthy down, Bobby was nowhere to be found. Anti-communism was no longer popular.

I know RFK is idolized in Democratic circles, but it's mainly because he was an inspiring orator and gave lofty speeches. The actual record is a little thin. (Sound familiar?)

by BJJ Fighter 2008-07-04 10:54AM | 0 recs
Re: I wouldn't brag about Bobby Kennedy souveneirs

Did you type the right url Rush?

by lockewasright 2008-07-04 11:05AM | 0 recs
No, try &quot;Centrist Democrat&quot;

by BJJ Fighter 2008-07-04 11:13AM | 0 recs
Re: No, try &quot;Centrist Democrat&quot;

or purity troll

or DLC corporate lapdog wing of the party trying to preach (ironically) about a very good man not being progressive enough.

by lockewasright 2008-07-04 02:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing

Not liking someone's opinion is no reason for a TR.

by lockewasright 2008-07-04 03:03PM | 0 recs
I just read the news that Jesse Helms died....

and I'd like to inform many of the Obama followers who have never heard of him: THERE is a man who can truly and legitimately be called a racist.

To the writer's point, the Clintons--who have devoted their lives to public service--were taken out and beaten like red-headed stepchildren for most of the last year, often by a bunch of know-nothings. Yes, it will take many of us a long time to forget the most heinous charges, that they were somehow a couple of racists.

In the most ludicrous case, Bill Clinton was attacked as a racist for trying to downplay Obama's SC victory; his horrible offense was in remarking that Jesse Jackson had also won the state. Translated--deep South states usually line up politically as follows: most whites are Republicans, most African Americans are Democrats. It's more polarized than in industrial states, where large blue collar/ethnic groups usually affiliate Democratic. African American candidates will usually carry these states in Democratic primaries.

Years ago, I predicted Michael Bloomberg's upset victory in the NY mayoral race. When I suggested to folks that his name would help him in a city with a large proportion of Jewish voters, nobody suggested that my observation was in any way "anti-semetic". It was simply recognizing a political reality that had helped other NY mayors like Abe Beame, Ed Koch, etc.

Unfortunately, the Clintons had to endure this kind of garbage for a whole year. And now we have to listen to media mediocrities like Campbell Brown wonder "how Bill Clinton will rehabilitate his image". Newsflash: the guy has more than enough to keep him busy. An article in GQ last December estimates that the Clinton foundation is already responsible for saving over 500,000 lives in Africa through AIDS prevention projects, etc.

by BJJ Fighter 2008-07-04 10:36AM | 0 recs
by nogo postal 2008-07-04 10:58AM | 0 recs
I doubt she's laughing...

but you make a very good point. I was an Obama-bot from the very beginning, but I never had any illusions either. Anyone who's seen an Obama speech from before he was a US Senator knows that he's slowly moderated himself over the past 5 years.

And, this might be unpopular, but I don't give a flying fuck about his support of FISA. I just don't care. People around here are acting like things were just hunky-dory until Obama came out in support of FISA. Give me a break! The constitution has been completely fucked for like seven years now.

We'll fix it in January... but only if Obama is the president.

by potus2020 2008-07-04 11:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Obama will be turned into Dukakis when the RNC rips him apart. It's so easy to expose him as a hypocrite now. It is funny to see those new voters and the new BO supporters on this site and many others dont understand how politics work. We lost the real president because of those bots and cult members, its just sad to see these people responsible for this country's destruction.

by bsavage 2008-07-04 12:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Well, bsavage, we'll see for sure in Nov. It's pretty clear to me, though, that you're assessment is about 180 out from reality. You do like to cede a lot of power to the moribund Republicans, though. I hear Al From could use some company over at the DLC.  

It's funny to me to see people whose candidate lost tell those of us whose candidate won that we don't understand how politics work. Thanks for the Independence day laugh.

Keep up the good work...maybe you can take it on the road someday.

by abrxas 2008-07-04 02:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere,

So, your point is...Ha! I told you so? Please. That you still need to vent your sour grapes speaks to your inability to just let go of your anger at your candidate's loss. What is the positive intent of your diary other than you feeling a little better about yourself?

While it's certainly true that Obama and his team have inspired tens of thousands of new voters, to suggest that they are the lion's share of his voters is belied by the facts as well as common sense. Roughly 18 million voters is a lot of kool-aid drinkers, no?

You may have coming across a lot of young moon-eyed Obama supporters, but I didn't see one in my personal life. Instead I saw people who've been involved for years surprised by how good of a candidate they saw in Obama. I saw cynics and optimists alike respond to both his words and his savvy campaigning. I saw life-long liberals fed up with DLC Dinos and BushDogs embrace a pol spoke to us as adults and could think on his feet.

I'm 38 years old. I and most of my friends--ranging from the late-20s to early 70s--have been voting for the past 10 to 50 years of our lives. We're all liberals of varying degrees and have all voted for (and often been disappointed by) the Democrats in every election we can think of. And with only two exceptions, we were Obama supporters all.

Personally, I supported Obama because he was clearly the best candidate in the field. I preferred his positions, his record, his temperament, his framing of the issues, his languaging, his character, and, yes, his judgement. And while of course I disagree with some of his recent moves, I stand by my decision and still vigorously support him.

And lest you think I'm a Clinton hater, I fully supported the them in the 90s. They were the best we had and I loved how crazy they drove wing nuts.

But driving wing nuts crazy was what they did best and it was often at the expense of moving issues forward. They virtually always played defense and they never succeeded at reframing the debate away from conservative issues. I hated their mealy triangulation and their willingness to embrace Dick Morris and Mark Penn types. (Hell, that old joke about Bill being the best Republican president since Lincoln always struck me as more reality than humor.)

Still the Republicans were disgusting, and I swallowed principle for political gain, however small it was, and full-throatedly supported them.

Over the years, though, I grew tired of their cynicism. Much of Hillary's record as a senator has been milquetoast to say the least. Her vote for the war (oh, I know, it was for authorization, not for war, and she was shocked--shocked--that Bush used it to go to Iraq) was atrocious. Her hawkishness of foreign policy echoes Bush's pseudo-masculinty. And her political instinctsin general just seem all wrong to me.

That she morphed from a centrist hawk to a liberal scrapper in the span of a month or so during the campaign was a thing to behold and further undermined any cohesive sense of who she is as a pol or a person. Her and her team's arrogance, their sense of entitlement, was stomach turning. Her fatally flawed campaign strategy exposed intellectual weakness and inflexibilty and undermined her whole "experience" argument.

If she'd run a better campaign or been a better senator she might have earned my support; it was just going to come automatically.

(And if you want to see a wild, cyber lynch mob all you need to do is go over to No Quarter or Hillaryis44 or any of the PUMA sites. Talk about your kool aid drinkers!)

What always amuses me about Obama's detractors is that they view him and his supporters through a weird binary lens (good/bad, coke/pepsi, right/wrong). There has seemed this fundamental inability to see the issues in any fresh way. If he/they are this, they can't be that. If he's anti-war and hopeful, he's McGovern/Stevenson. If he's nuanced in approach, he's a flip-flopping cynic, no better than McCain or Clinton. Such intellectual rigidity is expected in neocons; it's a bit surprising coming from fellow liberals.

No, Obama was never above politics for most of his supporters; he just takes the craft to another level. His mix of statesmenship and shrewd politicking shows a pol at the top of his game. He speaks to our better angels, sure, (and thank god), but he's no roll-over poodle.

Look, he took on the biggest machine in the Democratic party and won. After 8 years of the Bush nightmare, that's the kind of savvy and grit that I want working for issues that are important to me and the rest of the country.

by abrxas 2008-07-04 02:00PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere,

Yet another one that completely missed my point.

You felt the need to educate me on the transformation of Hillary Clinton.  Thanks, but I didn't need it.  Like I said, I understood that she was a politician.  Obama supporters were the ones confused; they had a crazy idea that Obama was something other than politics as usual - that's exactly what he is and it has been abundantly clear all along.  Finally, many of you have allowed yourselves to consider the fact and many have accepted he is just another shape-shifting, opportunistic politican.

The point of my post concerned Obama's supporters online - here and on other left-leaning websites.  If you didn't see it or weren't around to witness their childish outbrusts, then I really don't care to go into great detail educating you.

I will say this, though. The behavior of many here and other places remarkably resembled that of religious fundamentalists faced with opposing opinions or any critical thinking that would require them to even entertain a reality that may not 100% resemble their preconceived notions.

I grew up in the south, in a town with 15 churches to every stop light.  So, I have a ton of experience dealing with them.  When gay bashing or the like was going on, I loved to point out that Jesus saved the life of a prostitute and told the mob that only those without sin should throw stones.  I can't tell you all the terrible things I've been called in response to that.  I've been charged with devil worship, being brainwashed by Bill Clinton, a faggot, a sinner.  I said that to one guy and he just looked at me and said, "Have fun with your eternity in hell."  

When a Clinton supporter even simply posited an opinion or advocated in anyway for Hillary (not even including an attack on Obama or mentioning him at all), her supporters were roundly ridiculed, dismissed, called Republicans, Trolls, corporatists, murders, all kinds of terrible names.  It really was the same sort of knee-jerk, visceral reaction to an opinion of a person that only asks to be heard.  Yet, that asks that you consider something outside the Obama-Oh-Wise-One bubble.

I've always considered such reactions from religious nuts to be a sad sign that their faith, which they proudly tell any and everybody about, is really very weak and fragile.  I have religious faith, but it is strong; I'm, therefore, not intimidated by the faith and ideas of others.  

This is how I felt about Clinton, my support for her.  I knew she wasn't perfect; I was well aware of her history and the mere fact that she is human.  I believed in core principals; I believed she would appoint the right judges and fight tooth and nail for universal healthcare - I never had a doubt that she genuinely wants and cares about that. Perhaps it was the lack of a political education that made Obama supporters react so angrily to opposing views; they really had no way to respond.  So, anger is always first resort and they denounced us as against everything decent and good.  And the thing is, with a handful of exceptions, Clinton supporters  really didn't argue that Obama was a bad person and that his supporters were bad people.

Again, I'm talking about people here, at DailyKos, and at TPM.  Those are the people I'm talking about.  Every Obama volunteer or supporter I met in the real world was nothing short of respectful of my support for my candidate.  It was online that things were disgraceful.  There are many people that should feel down-right embarrassed about their behavior.      

by MKyleM 2008-07-04 02:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere,

Well, I guess the point missing is going around. My words in re: Clinton were not intended to educate you, they were merely to partially illustrate the reasons she didn't earn my support, and why Obama did. Clearly, you were as plugged as I.

But here's where I guess we don't see eye to eye. You suggest that all of the vitriol and vapidity were a one way street, all coming from Obama-supporting Kossaks and the like. I saw just the opposite. Even your diary has evidence of the condescension that I witnessed online for Obama supporters (see Obambis, Obamabots, etc.) Come to think of it, even your response to my comment was condescending, suggesting you'd need to educate me if I wasn't online two months ago.

Now, I'm not crying foul, it's politics. But Clinton supporters such as yourself consistently claim that it was all or mostly coming from Obama people. This is patently false. Your suggestion that only a handful of Clinton supporters got nasty is also false. There were more than a handful on this site alone, not to mention the Correntes, Talk Lefts, and No Quarters of the world.

I gather that since I saw most of the vitriol come from Clinton supporters and you saw all of it from Obama people, the truth probably lies in between. Nasty words flowed from both sides. Hard feelings were everywhere. It was the heat of battle, after all. A battle that is now over.

All of which gets back to my original question, what's the point of rehashing it other than sour grapes?

by abrxas 2008-07-04 03:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere,

OK, you have a point.  I reread your comment and, evident in my response, I see your comment may have run together in my head with another one.

You are right, too, that we don't see eye to eye on how unwelcome Clinton supporters were online.  I'm talking about DailyKos, TPM, and (to a lesser extent) here.  I don't even post on the other two sites anymore, although I still do read.  Perhaps you just had to be a Clinton supporter.  Seriously, any kind of benign comment (that didn't even mention Obama) would get tons of horrible responses.  

It got to the point where it just got all-out nasty, you are right.  I'd say the majority of Clinton's supporters at the beginning ended up dropping off the sites, they buckled under pressure.  There were strikes; I just never agreed with that since it is basically the social equivalent of suicide.  Those of us who stayed and continued to advocate for Clinton hit back hard.  We gave as good as we got.

So, the attitude in my post is directed to those people who treated us that way and, I firmly believe, they know exactly who they are.  Many Obama supporters who have responded to this diary think I've just made blanket statements about his entire national network of support.  It is a vocal minority of his online supporters on the three sites I mentioned.  I'm only talking about those because those are the ones I've been reading and on which I participate.  I don't visit the other sites you mentioned, so I couldn't say one way or the other.  

So, I hope I answered your question.  To answer it exactly: the point of rehashing is with the hope it will not happen again.   I never shy away from debate, I strongly encourage it.  If people disagree, argue away.  Argue your points until you are blue in the face; type until your frickin fingers fall off.  But, for god sake, don't act as if the person you are arguing with is evil personified and treat that person as such.  

That's my hope and intent.

by MKyleM 2008-07-04 05:41PM | 0 recs
Wasteful Diary

If Hillary is in any way "laughing" at the prospect of a McCain Presidency, then the Dems were right not to nominate her.  However, because of the various reasons that you listed, I figure she is horrified at the notion.

Just because you now support Obama, purpotedly unconditionally, does not give you justification to inflame past divisions.

The "game" was played.  You seem to embrace the reality of politics.  Stop feeling sour that two played it.  Truly enjoy your status as a new Obama supporter and let bygones go.

by jv 2008-07-04 03:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Wasteful Diary

You know, I wasn't just sitting around still seething that Clinton lost and just couldn't help but run my mouth.

My diary was in response to avid Obama supporters online, unhappy with his very recent attempts to move to the center.  Many of these same people were vicious towards those who supported Clinton in the primary and made us feel unwelcome here and other places.  These people who ridiculed Clinton and her supporters for triangulating and the rest, are either having a hard time accepting the fact that Obama is no better than she or they have reluctantly accepted the political reality - while, of course, not saying a word about what this may say about his character.  Hillary was pure evil when she did it; Obama is faced with political realities, as unfortunate as it may be.

People wont like it any better, but it really wasn't to say 'I told you so', but more to say 'you were wrong' to a vocal minority who have no concept of respect and acted like fascists.  Wrong that Obama was something other than a politician and wrong for treating Clinton supporters like scum because we accepted this to be the case with her.  

My main hope is that such ridiculousness doesn't happen the next go round, when these same people think they are supporting the next messiah and act like an angry lynch mob again.

And, finally, I don't think I could have been more clear in my support for Obama.  Not only do I support him, I'm happy to do so.  These centrist moves have, for me, greatly boosted confidence in his candidacy.  I don't fault him for any of his actions, neither him or his campaign.  My problem, again I couldn't have been more clear, was with the way some of his supporters online treated Clinton's supporters.

I can be as explicit as the English language allows and many of these same people I'm talking about will read and hear whatever they want.  There's really nothing anybody can do about that.

by MKyleM 2008-07-04 05:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

1) Why would Hillary be laughing? Obama is crushing McCain right now.

On to specific issues and Obama "flip-flops".

1) FISA: this is the one that hurts. It's pandering. It doesn't make us safer. So much for all that about making us safer and respecting the Constitution. All this "exclusivity" BS is already in the initial bill, and the Bushies claim is Constitutional in nature (obscure Article II powers for the President to do whatever he wants), so a bill has no power to clarify or reduce them. Basic Constitutional Law and a complete joke. A compete victory of form over substance.

2) Campaign finance reform. To be fair, he never said he'd agree, just that he'd negotiate. Plus, RNC has $50 million on the DNC, so an agreement with McCain would leave the Dems $50 million in the hole when the could be $150 million ahead. I reversal, but I can see why he did it. Still, a legit U-turn.

3) Iraq withdrawal. No reversal here, complete media BS.

4) Gun ruling. No reversal here. Obama's been consistent in saying he believes the 2nd Amendment grants an individual the right to bear arms. Subject to reasonable restrictions (like all the others). The DC law was a complete ban (though one could argue incomplete since it only applied to handguns). The Amendment isn't worth much if one can pass laws forbidding what the Amendment guarantees. Think if they passed a law outlawing search warrants to fight crime? Police searches are hereby per se valid.

5) Faith based initiatives. Started by Bill Clinton. And as much as we may disagree, federal funding (by itself) for religious charitable programs in NOT violative of the Establishment Clause. The wall of separation favored by Jefferson, progressives, myself, and an occasional Supreme Court Justice has never been the law of this land. Read a school funding case.

6) Abortion. This has always been such a strange issue. People who fight to protect baby seals think its OK to kill a baby if the mother is "mentally distressed" and people who don't give two shits about people when they are alive (death penalty, health care, pre-natal care, etc) freak out when someone has an abortion. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense on either side (though I admit there are those on both sides who are more thoughful). Count Obama among them. Me too.

Have I been thrilled about the last week. No.

It does show that Obama is determined not to be painted as a cookie-cutter liberal. A guess what, he isn't. For better or for worse.

by Searching For Pericles 2008-07-04 03:47PM | 0 recs
Much ado about nothing

1) Why would Hillary be laughing? Obama is crushing McCain right now.

On to specific issues and Obama "flip-flops".

1) FISA: this is the one that hurts. It's pandering. It doesn't make us safer. So much for all that about making us safer and respecting the Constitution. All this "exclusivity" BS is already in the initial bill, and the Bushies claim is Constitutional in nature (obscure Article II powers for the President to do whatever he wants), so a bill has no power to clarify or reduce them. Basic Constitutional Law and a complete joke. A compete victory of form over substance.

2) Campaign finance reform. To be fair, he never said he'd agree, just that he'd negotiate. Plus, RNC has $50 million on the DNC, so an agreement with McCain would leave the Dems $50 million in the hole when the could be $150 million ahead. I reversal, but I can see why he did it. Still, a legit U-turn.

3) Iraq withdrawal. No reversal here, complete media BS.

4) Gun ruling. No reversal here. Obama's been consistent in saying he believes the 2nd Amendment grants an individual the right to bear arms. Subject to reasonable restrictions (like all the others). The DC law was a complete ban (though one could argue incomplete since it only applied to handguns). The Amendment isn't worth much if one can pass laws forbidding what the Amendment guarantees. Think if they passed a law outlawing search warrants to fight crime? Police searches are hereby per se valid.

5) Faith based initiatives. Started by Bill Clinton. And as much as we may disagree, federal funding (by itself) for religious charitable programs in NOT violative of the Establishment Clause. The wall of separation favored by Jefferson, progressives, myself, and an occasional Supreme Court Justice has never been the law of this land. Read a school funding case.

6) Abortion. This has always been such a strange issue. People who fight to protect baby seals think its OK to kill a baby if the mother is "mentally distressed" and people who don't give two shits about people when they are alive (death penalty, health care, pre-natal care, etc) freak out when someone has an abortion. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense on either side (though I admit there are those on both sides who are more thoughful). Count Obama among them. Me too.

Have I been thrilled about the last week. No.

It does show that Obama is determined not to be painted as a cookie-cutter liberal. A guess what, he isn't. For better or for worse.

by Searching For Pericles 2008-07-04 03:47PM | 0 recs
Obama is not &quot;crushing&quot; anyone now

Gallup had the race at 46-44% this week, Rasmussen has had the spread consistently at 5 to 7 points. Nobody wants to juxtapose this with the fact that this is the worst year imaginable for the GOP, and that Obama consistently trails the party ID preference poll by +10 points.

Why is this?

And to make matters worse, the GOP nominee appears lethargic, disinterested, bored, and humorless. The fact that Obama is in a dead heat with him should be worrisome to Dems. But regardless, Obama isn't crushing anyone at this point in the race.

by BJJ Fighter 2008-07-04 04:53PM | 0 recs
You're joking, right?

McCain is, so far, running an unfocused and lackluster campaign -- the fact that, with virutally zero effort, he can remain within 5 points of Obama doesn't speak well for Obama.  If 5 points are your idea of 'crushing', you're falling into that lazy Obama-fanboy speak.
by KathleenM1 2008-07-05 10:02AM | 0 recs
Re: You're joking, right?

In electoral votes, tho, Obama really is crushing McCain.  I doubt if Obama's win will be anymore than 5 or so points, with the popular vote.  That would still be the most decisive popular vote win in a while.

by MKyleM 2008-07-05 11:02AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere,

she's not laughing, but she's hiding her tears, and she's doing her best to influence Barack to get us out of iraq, and to go for universal health care, and to educate himself on the issues and stop leaving his 'plans' to his group of advisors. She'd help him and she wouldn't need to credit herself or one-up him, she's about solutions, not about being right and certainly not about laughing in the fact of disasters, for us.  You may have been a big supporter, but you don't know her very well.  

by anna shane 2008-07-04 03:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

What a patronizing diary.

by mikeinsf 2008-07-04 04:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton

Thanks for great insights. I LOVE Obama and have been confused by his political maneuvers.Hillary has been as good as they get in her recent efforts for Obama. I am so relieved that we are all on the same page again.

by Debojg 2008-07-04 04:26PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing [UPDATED]

The only way to make the original diary a bigger piece of junk was to add the whiney update.  Of course every wrong was on the part of Obama's inexperienced silly supporters who just don't know as much as and didn't show adequate respect for the diarist.  Waah!!!

Those of us who backed Obama from the beginning are still just children with out enough respect for the real grown ups like this whiney assed diarist.  

If you're considering TRing me for this comment, go back and see if I am attacking or just returning fire.

by lockewasright 2008-07-04 04:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing [UPDATED]

Whos to say I'm talking about you?  Why do you feel as if you were personally attacked?  

Why would you take what I said so personally and why is your immediate reaction to ridicule?

I'm not only asking that you respect my opinion, I'm asking you to respect the opinions of others as well.  I'm sure you will find that a trite notion and consider yourself too cool.  

by MKyleM 2008-07-04 04:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing [UPDATED]

When did I say it was personal?  How does your diary come anywhere close to doing the things that you're asking of others.  

Where the hell did you come up with the last sentence in this comment?

You make zero sense, but hey I respect that cause when people are nonsensical that's when we most need to respect them. (I'll go ahead and point out that this is sarcasm as I don't trust your ability to reach rational conclusions.)

When you extricate the sand from your britches and stop writing diaries that serve no purpose other than to attack Obama supporters and advance nothing for our party then we can talk provided you make some attempt to tie your thought process together logically.  Until then keep your sour grape driven assumptions to yourself.

by lockewasright 2008-07-04 05:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing [UPDATED]

It doesn't make sense to you because your water head has walls as thick as concrete.

I now know why you have taken my comment so personally.  Because you are the perfect example of the mindless unit that I'm talking about.  You don't process any information that does not reinforce your cultish world view. Anything that's not songs of praise and flowers for your cult leader, your brain just won't process it.  It confuses you and things that you can't or won't understand make you angry.

So, you lash out.  You ridicule.  You mock.

What you take personally - what sets off those alarms - is the fact that someone who dared to support your cult leader's opponent in the primary has the nerve to come before you again.  This time, looking for a reckoning.  To tell you fat, sweaty, schoolyard bullies that we were mistreated and it was wrong!  

by MKyleM 2008-07-04 06:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing [UPDATED]

I, in fact, have several disagreements with Barack.  Again, you demonstrate nonsensical conclusions and baseless generalizations.    

No matter, your drivel is of no consequence anyway.  Little tip on the update... paragraphs.  There's a button on your keyboard that says either "return" or "enter", possibly both.  Try it.  If that doesn't work type <> and put the letter "p" between the symbols.  This way you can rehash (and rehash and rehash) the primary season and how we Obama supporters are disrespectful newcomer children who didn't give enough respect to you grown up supporters of Hilary who were nothing but nice and respectful to us mindless Obamabots who (let's how did your stupid fucking generalization go?):

Anything that's not songs of praise and flowers for your cult leader, your brain just won't process it.  It confuses you and things that you can't or won't understand make you angry.

Those are your words, but it's the Obama supporters alone who are disrespectful.  Project much?

by lockewasright 2008-07-04 06:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing [UPDATED]

You really can do no wrong.  Isn't that right?

You basically call me an idiot and then tell me what sarcasm is.  Your very first response to my diary was completely rude.  

I was explicit in my diary post that I was speaking about a vocal minority on three specific blogs.  Unless you were one of those people, and clearly you are, there is no reason at all for you to act like a jerk.

Its just not in my personality to keep getting slapped around and not eventually hit back.  You were a jerk.  I tried to explain (repeat) myself further.  You were a jerk again.  So, f*ck you, buddy.  Ignorance is bliss, so they say; if that's true, enjoy!

Good to know about the paragraphs, btw.  Even though I could have done without your rancid attitude.    

by MKyleM 2008-07-04 06:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing [UPDATED]

What the fuck ever.  You started off by saying that Obama supporters were all a bunch of inexperienced newcomers (couldn't just be supporters of a better candidate, no way.  That couldn't be why she lost.  It must be the masses of folks who just don't have the experience to know better or they'd have voted for your candidate, right?) and then proceeded to cry the blues about history.  History cannot be changed.  Your diary does no good for anyone.

You just cannot recognize that you were offensive to start with.  That is what happened.  That's why you continue to get attitude thrown your way, because your initial premise is itself dismissive and rude.  Read your diary again from the start.  See if you can't find it.  Take it one syllable at a time.  You can do it.  I have confidence in you.

Note that I didn't have to call any names or say F*ck you.   As salient as those points may be (sarcasm again) they only serve to show who it is that can't engage in a real conversation.

by lockewasright 2008-07-04 06:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing [UPDATED]

Your fat water head, with walls of steel, could be used as a battering ram.  It may actually serve some purpose that way, because right now it is only a massive waste of space.

I said it in my diary.  I have repeated it to you. To YOU! many times now.  I WAS TALKING ABOUT A VOCAL MINORITY ON THIS AND TWO OTHER BLOGS.  THOSE WERE THE PEOPLE I FOUND TO BE NEW OBSERVERS OF POLITICS.

AGAIN, UNLESS YOU  WERE ONE OF THOSE ASSHOLES (AND, YET AGAIN, YOU CLEARLY ARE) YOU SHOULD IN NO WAY HAVE TAKEN OFFENCE TO THIS DIARY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If you told me that X, Y, and Z Clinton supporters were such assholes to you, I wouldn't attack you.  If you said they called you awful names and made you feel like you weren't welcome, I'd listen to you.  If you said these things to me, I'd say, Gee, they sound like fucking assholes!  I'd say they were wrong.

I say that to you about some Obama supporters, and you ridicule, berate, insult, and talk down to me.  Perhaps in your life or where you come from people don't ever stand up for themselves.  Perhaps you are the type to see that as weakness and just continue punching and kicking.

I don't let people just keep hitting me.  You ridicule me, I'll do the same to you.  I never said I was Jesus-like.  

Seriously, for whatever reason, very simple things are not sinking into your head at all.  

You might want to get that checked.

by MKyleM 2008-07-04 07:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing [UPDATED]

Are you illiterate or are you only capable of the one statement?

You didn't even get to that point in your whiney snivelfest before making an offensive generalization about Obama supporters.

Quick!  Try calling me a water head again!  That might change the facts. (Are you detecting the sarcasm here?)

by lockewasright 2008-07-04 07:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing [UPDATED]

You really are thick.  I'm sure you spread misery anywhere you go.

by MKyleM 2008-07-04 07:18PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing [UPDATED]

Damn, you're good at making unfounded generalizations and being way fucking wrong every time!  If you could only find a way to market that...

by lockewasright 2008-07-04 07:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing [UPDATED]

If only you could let the pressure out of your massive skull, you wouldn't bother arguing about a diary post you, obviously, just now read.  

It took how many comments? Five? Six?

Only a total moron denounces and argues against something they didn't read in full.  It sounds like you got about 1/8th the way thru it.

Bravo.

by MKyleM 2008-07-04 07:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton laughing [UPDATED]

You still just don't get it.  Have fun stumbling through life wrong all of the time.    Twit.

by lockewasright 2008-07-05 04:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Yeah, those die-hard Clinton diarists REALLY deserved my respect (while they take money from McCain):


by ihaveseenenough 2008-07-04 05:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Is this f*cking for real?  Is she really supporting McCain?

by MKyleM 2008-07-04 05:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

I won't link to them, but you can find the site.  Yes, it's real.  I don't think she herself is supporting McCain, but plenty of others on her site are.  And she's benefitting financially from that ad, even if it's a google adwords thing.

by ihaveseenenough 2008-07-04 08:25PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Unbelievable.  

by MKyleM 2008-07-04 09:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Excellent diary. Sums up the problem perfectly. Too bad most people here don't aprreciate it. I do disagree that the Obamabots I met personally were respectful of my views though and that it was only the online ones that didn't. And here in Texas we are seeing the Obama-bots freezing out other democratic candidates that were Hillary supporters initially. So much for unity. Of course that is going to backfire here since she has more support but hey they are riding the post primary wave.

I always laughed at the notion that Obama was more liberal than Hillary and I hope she has the guts to come out against the FISA bill. It will be fun to watch the apoplexy.

Sorry though that I can't come on board like you and support him in November. I don't consider him qualified or experienced enough. He has done nothing with his life except win a couple of very skewed elections. Clever but unfortuntely I have to believe my politicians have some lines they won't cross. Had he come into the elections with some real agenda and beliefs I might have changed my mind but he didn't even do that. He ran because of his rock star status and we have had 8 years of a man with no prior accomplishments. I would still like to hope that we didn't chose presidents based on american idol type hype but I would be wrong.

Hillary was my gal precisely because of the fact that she was for Universal healthcare before it was cool. She put it on the national stage as you rightly point out. Obama came out with his proposal after hers and he blew his chance to be really progressive. That was the clincher for me.

I also disagree that he can win in November for all his tacking. Those tacks are just more evidence that he isn't for me and he has no convictions. That is what is so funny. New politician my a$$. The Obama Kool aid drinkers peaked in Feb/Mar. As someone higher up in the thread pointed out he should be leading by more right now. Maybe he can buy the election -we shall see.

by Bornagaindem 2008-07-04 06:04PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

I seriously hope you can pick up the pieces and move on with your life, rejoin the living.  I mean that sincerely.

I love her too.  She was the better choice.  That love shouldn't blind us from reality.  FACT: You don't really need experience to be president.

One of my professors once told me that you only need two things to be a good leader: intelligence and the ability to empathize with people.  Obama clearly has demonstrated his smarts; they don't let just anyone be pres. of Harvard Law Review.  You don't come from nothing and end up at Harvard, period, and not be brilliant.  And when he left Harvard, he could have moved on to any lawfirm he wanted and be a multi-multi-millionaire living the slick life.  He decided to be a community organizer.  That's a fact and, for me, proves his capacity to empathize with people.  I believe he not only wants to help people improve their situations, he has seen their hardships upclose and personal.

To vote for McCain or not vote, after supporting Clinton for all those wonderful reasons you noted, is absolute batsh*t lunacy.  I hope you can come down off the ledge, we'll need you buddy.

by MKyleM 2008-07-04 06:16PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

< FACT: You don't really need experience to be president>

But you do need real accomplishments that don't just amount to winning some elctions which is also what being chosen as pres of law reveiw amounts to.  

THERE ARE NO ACCOMPLISHMENTS - even as a state senator for 8 years. I don't know what stste you live but look at any of your state senators and honestly tell me how thrilled you would be if one of them were running for president right now.

by Bornagaindem 2008-07-06 02:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton is somewhere, right now, laugh

Bornagaindem,

You nailed it.  Rock star status and American idol type hype are exactly what I saw and terms I used during the primaries.  He's a great orator but he could have read the phone book and his followers would ooh and aah.

I see the same thing now regarding FISA.  Anything that Obama says is okay with his supporters. When, In fact ,the rule of law, right to privacy and seperation of powers are THE foundations upon which this country was constructed.  Our constitution would NOT have been ratfied had it not been for the inclusion of the first ten amendments (The Bill of Rights).

FISA, the 4th amendment, is not only #1 on the list of issues in this election, it's 10 times more important than whatever issue is #2.  

by jrole 2008-07-04 10:27PM | 0 recs
with all due respect, this is BS

Sorry, with you're just wrong.

Obama was never seen as perfect during the nomination campaign. That was just a line from Clinton supporters.

by politicsmatters 2008-07-04 06:06PM | 0 recs
Good post

Hard for some people to see it right now- but in time I'm sure they will.

by easyE 2008-07-05 07:55AM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads