Hillary Clinton, The Daily Kos and Progressive Beliefs

Progressive people are called many names such as bleeding heart liberal, politically correct, tree hugger, etc. Most people believe progressives are on the left side of the political spectrum but beyond that, even among self-identified progressives, there is no consensus as to the meaning of the word progressive. Webster's first simple definition of progressive is"of, relating to, or characterized by progress." And the second and third definition of "progress" is...

2: a forward or onward movement
3: gradual betterment; especially: the progressive development of humankind

It is that third definition that progressive people use to define themselves. They do not just see themselves as advancing a cause, they believe their cause is for the betterment of  humankind. And yet there is obviously no agreement on what is progressive. For example, the Daily Kos blog which is known as a progressive blog and calls itself a "reform blog" apparently was not much concerned with reforming the male dominant government by supporting or at least respecting a woman presidential candidate.  The Daily Kos administrators allowed non-stop and frequently vicious and sexist attacks against presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton. And yet when bloggers wrote mature, helpful, polite criticism of male presidential candidate Barack Obama the administrators would often ban those bloggers (I was banned for politely criticizing Obama). Thus the unwritten rule was it's okay to write rude, false, prejudiced criticism against woman candidate Hillary Clinton, but it's not okay to write polite, fact-based, intelligent criticism of male candidate Barack Obama. Obviously, Clinton, the only woman Democratic presidential candidate, was not treated fairly at Daily Kos. Daily Kos stacked the deck against her. If they really wanted to help women gain political equality then the absolute minimum they would have to do would be to treat Hillary Clinton fairly. Note, I'm not even saying they should promote Hillary's candidacy, which of course would help women progress towards political equality; I'm saying the absolute bare minimum to avoid harming women politically would be to treat Hillary Clinton fairly.

The fact that Daily Kos did not treat a historic woman candidate fairly and even went further by working to block women's political progress by enabling non-stop sexist attacks against Hillary Clinton and her supporters indicates they do not think women's progress towards equality is progressive.  A lot of allegedly progressive people attacked Hillary Clinton with sexism (http://www.allseasonsgallery.info/hrc/hr c.sexism.html). This shows that people have different views of what direction human progress should take. Some people believe it is progressive to take away women's rights. Others like myself believe it is progressive to increase women's rights to achieve gender equality. Are both views correct? No. Women are the most oppressed group in the world in terms of  numbers, degree of harm and cumulative harm. Sexism is a scourge that stifles innovation and studies have shown sexism greatly increases poverty and mental and physical disease. Sexism does not make this world a better place.  Thus, it is progressive to end sexism. We need a public dialogue to define progressive more accurately because as I have shown there is a misunderstanding about what it really means to be progressive.

As a proactive measure against trolling, I will not be answering questions. I wrote this diary to provide information and a different viewpoint.


Tags: Hillary Clinton feminism Daily Kos sexism progressive (all tags)




Obviously, you haven't been reading DKos.  There's no shortage of female candidates that have been supported over there.

Donna Edwards, Darcy Burner, etc.

They get love at Daily Kos because they're truly progressive and can be a major force for good if elected.  

Hillary Clinton didn't because when it comes to the Democratic party she's the epitome of the gate that Kos is trying to crash.  She's the old school, triangulating, political game playing Dem that never actually accomplishes anything.  That's not to say she's a bad person or even a bad legislator, but she's playing a game that DKos was set up with the express purpose of ending.

by Capt America 2008-07-03 05:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

She's the old school, triangulating, political game playing Dem that never actually accomplishes anything.

really?  And what is Obama lately?

other than the grassroots "effort", he has been playing the same old game as well.

by colebiancardi 2008-07-03 05:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

He's taking a position that doesn't mesh with the desires of the netroots.  It happens.  I don't like it (and neither does Kos), but you've got to take your lumps.

Obama gained support at DKos (notably after Edwards dropped out) because he was campaigning like a community organizer and wasn't afraid to talk about it that way.  He was (and is) competing everywhere and doing so in a way that Dems hadn't done in years.  His strategy is exactly what people like Kos, Dean and Jerome had been advocating for years and the DKos readership took notice of that.  

Clinton, on the other hand, ran a thoroughly uninspired campaign that surprised no one with it's conventionality, and she would have done the same in the general.  That's not the kind of thing that gets a groundswell of support over there.

by Capt America 2008-07-03 05:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

He is taking MORE than ONE position that doesn't mesh with the netroots and going against what he ran as in the primaries.

Hillary's campaign may have been "uninspired" to you - but for 1/2 of the primary voters, it wasn't uninspired.  Hillary didn't only get 2 votes, you know.  She and Obama split the party down the middle during the primaries.  She got just as much as a groundswell of support as Obama did.

by colebiancardi 2008-07-03 05:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

Clinton started with more support.  There was no groundswell, there wasn't even positive poll movement for her at any point in the campaign.  The numbers were either moving towards Obama the whole time, or they were static.

As for Obama's positions, no he's not perfect.  Then again, if there was a candidate that I thought was perfect, no one else probably would.  He's the most progressive candidates the Dems have fielded in the general in my lifetime, though, and that's good enough for him to have my full support come November.

by Capt America 2008-07-03 05:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

He is not competing everywhere, everyday that passes he has had to u-turn on some policies/issues since his ORIGINAL issues were sketchy at best filled with more rhetoric and less thought.

Lets be frank, DKos was dumb enough to fall for Obama's rhetoric. In that process they attacked, and yes ATTACKED Hillary, Clinton's, 90's and their supporters, lest not forget the West Virginian attacks.

So is this the progressives you want?

by Jaz 2008-07-03 05:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

Hmm, it looks like the discourse at MyDD has really improved since the primaries ended. /snark.

Look, you obviously don't like Obama.  I'm not going to waste my time defending him to you or watch this thread while you berate me for supporting the Democratic nominee for President.

I'll cede the floor so the tirades against the future of this country can continue.  Carry on.

by Capt America 2008-07-03 06:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

Its the kind the Kos mob wanted...

Burn Hillary at all costs.

That said If there was a Black Bizzaro Bill Clinton and he took the same positions Obama has taken recently I would back him no problems.

Being in power and having to give up the unpopular issues is FAR FAR FAR better than not being in power.

If Bush was good for nothing else he taught us that.

by dtaylor2 2008-07-03 06:06PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

So why don't you go over to kos and scream about your feelings there? Why bring it up here?

by venician 2008-07-03 06:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

Not only taht, but no candidate is perfect. Whomever you support, they will do thinks that you're not entirely comfortable with.

by spirowasright 2008-07-03 06:46PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

The netroots who supported him are a bunch of suckers.  He's selling you out, and if you're going to keep shrugging your shoulders, frankly you deserve it.  WTF do you have to "take your lumps" for??  No you don't!  This is a democracy!  Say "No!"  

by daria g 2008-07-03 08:49PM | 0 recs
Well, you've convinced me!

I guess I may as well stay home, or even better, vote for John McCain, right?

Your transparency is pathetic.  How many minds to you expect to change on a political blog, anyway?

by corph 2008-07-04 07:26AM | 0 recs
Re: Well, you've convinced me!

Well, for god's sake, do something besides letting Obama tack a long ways to the right, since he's finding that his own supporters hardly utter a peep when he does.

The number of minds = a couple million, give or take a few.  I'm all about Hope and Change on that front.

by daria g 2008-07-04 10:08AM | 0 recs
myDD has a bit fewer

than "a couple of million" readers.  In case you didn't understand me, I don't trust your motives on this.  I believe your trying to sow dissent from either a PUMA or a McBlogger perspective, not that it matters.

Yes, I'm disappointed with Obama's stance on FISA.  But I'm voting for him anyway.

by corph 2008-07-04 10:19AM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

It's triangulating if Hillary does it.

If Obama does it, it's leadership.

by psychodrew 2008-07-03 08:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Hmmm ...

Please see my post below describing the definition of "triangulating."

by Brad G 2008-07-04 06:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Triangulating?

You obviously don't understand what "triangulating" is.  Triangulating involves using public officials in your own political party for your own political gain.

On FISA, Barack Obama staked out his position on the "compromise" bill before most of his fellow Senate Democratic colleages staked a position on the bill.  He knew there were not 41 votes against cloture for the "compromise" bill, and did not want to ask his fellow Democratic colleagues -- who he will need to risk their political careers in order to get 150,000 troops out of Iraq; pass tax increases to provide access to health insurance to the 45 million Americans without coverage at this moment; jumpstart an economy that has lost 291,000 in the last six months; vote for an energy bill that reduces demand for oil (i.e., fuel efficiency standards) -- to risk their political careers in a quixiotic mission not to give telecom companies immunity for wiretapping.  Had Barack Obama come out for the compromise after many Senate Democrats announced their intention to vote against cloture, and then described those against cloture as "liberal extremists" in order to seem more moderate, that would have been "triangulation."  What Barack Obama was doing on FISA was to look like pragmatist, and reassure the public that he is not some quixiotic politician who lacks an understanding of the direction of the country and the issues of our time.  That's called leadership -- not "triangulation."

Bill Clinton, on the other hand, lambasted in his 1996 reelection Congressional Democrats as "extremists" for supporting the welfare "reform" bill he signed, and ran on a platform of of v-chips, school uniforms, and midnight basketball.  Now should v-chips and school uniforms have been the issues of that time?  I surely hope not.

Barack Obama understands that the troop levels in Iraq, the ranks of the uninsured, the six consecutive months of job losses, and our dependence on foreign oil are the issues of our time.  That's the kind of leader I want.

by Brad G 2008-07-04 06:17AM | 0 recs
Here we go again...

  over, please

by Mae Scott 2008-07-04 08:02AM | 0 recs
Once Again, with feeling..

 over, please

by Mae Scott 2008-07-04 08:37AM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

define "triangulating" in a way that excludes being for amnesty for telcoms, backing off abortion rights protection and letting religious organizations that discriminate in hiring to get federal money? just curious...

by zerosumgame 2008-07-03 06:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

Wow, how many half-truths can you cram into one sentence?

by LandStander 2008-07-03 06:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

so you can't define it either and it is juat a buzz word you toss around when you have nothing else? hardly a surprise

by zerosumgame 2008-07-03 06:12PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

If given the choice of the moral purity of Ralph Nader (or whoever your moral purity guy is) and Bill Clinton who would you choose to run in say 1996?

Bill would let you down on some issues...


If there was a black Bizzarro Bill Clinton running and he had to take some positions you didn't like would you support him or Darth Nader?

by dtaylor2 2008-07-03 06:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

what are you on? and don't bogart it

by zerosumgame 2008-07-03 06:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Wow.

Stress and only stress lol

by dtaylor2 2008-07-03 06:12PM | 0 recs
That was funny, Zerosumgame

It's the first laugh out loud moment I've had all night. :)

by The Fat Lady Sings 2008-07-03 07:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton

Daily Kos attacked Hillary Clinton with venom, so much so that right-wing attacks were tollerated an encouraged on the website by other users.

Please do not rewrite history on Daily Kos. We know what scum they are capable of and why MyDD is a better place.

by Jaz 2008-07-03 05:50PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton

So then why don't you take your grievances over there?

by venician 2008-07-03 06:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton
a) You get banned.
b) You get attacked.
c) Clinton supporters/bloggers are on strike.
by Jaz 2008-07-03 06:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton

Chicken Shit!

by venician 2008-07-03 06:56PM | 0 recs
What if you went on "strike"

and nobody noticed?

by BlueinColorado 2008-07-03 07:54PM | 0 recs
Re: What if you went on "strike"

You'd make a better use of your time than spending it answering ugly, hateful comments?  Sounds like a win to me.

by daria g 2008-07-03 08:51PM | 0 recs
Let's not rehash the primaries

Move along folks. Just another diary attempting to rehash the primary wars and cause divisions.

by venician 2008-07-03 06:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Let's not rehash the primaries

nope, it is not written by spiff or spumky or reaper

by zerosumgame 2008-07-03 06:13PM | 0 recs
Actually the worse was DKos Frontpager's

diary about HRC and his fantasy..

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4/19/1058 18/291

by louisprandtl 2008-07-03 06:15PM | 0 recs
Re: Actually the worse was DKos Frontpager's

Wow thats jacked up.

by dtaylor2 2008-07-03 06:23PM | 0 recs
I still cannot understand how this dude is still

a FP on DKos. He created lot of problems for NH Democratic State Party sometime ago

by louisprandtl 2008-07-03 06:44PM | 0 recs
I've had run in's with him before

He's the reason I took a vacation from KOS a couple years back.  I don't think his cheese is very closely attached to its cracker.

by The Fat Lady Sings 2008-07-03 07:56PM | 0 recs
His frontpage anti HRC commentaries

and hatred for Clintons actually had an appearance of conflict of interest when his former boss was Obama's National Campaign Co-Chair. Anyway interestingly his knowledge of English language is amazing..read downthread to see DailyKos Frontpager basically using abusive language..

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/2008/3/ 22/211412/654/210#c210

by louisprandtl 2008-07-03 08:27PM | 0 recs
Oh I read all that

I never did a 'goodbye' diary - I just left.  I mean - why bother?  After all - they drove someone like Maryscott O'Connor off for disagreeing with the company line.  She actually used to defend DHinMI, you know - even when his commentary bordered on psychotic loon territory.  He then paid her back by leading the charge to kick her off.

So this Hillary thing isn't the first time DHinMI's tendency towards misogyny has showed.  In fact - that's what prompted my earlier vacation.  I wrote a couple of diaries addressing the situation in general - and that got me targeted.  I'd only just started posting there again when the Hillary hate started.  So I just don't get it when people here claim everything was hunky-dory over at KOS.  They all just LOVED Hillary.  Right.  That diary alone confirms it.  

by The Fat Lady Sings 2008-07-03 08:59PM | 0 recs
True enough,

but at the same time, the people here who attack DKos are the very same people who attempt to whitewash away the fact that the bigotry and slanders against Obama here on MyDD were, if anything, MORE blatant during the primaries than DKos's against Hillary.

The only difference?  During the primaries, DKos still had non-primary diaries of substance.  MyDD had almost nothing but primary-related hate screeds.

I think it's time to get off our high horses and admit that MyDD has no claim whatsoever to moral superiority.  Both sites were abominable.

by Elsinora 2008-07-03 09:36PM | 0 recs
No argument from me there

All of it was bad.  I kinda stopped posting here as well at its height.  I want to discuss politics - not wallow in the pejorative gutter.  What ever happened to people referring to their opponent as 'my esteemed colleague'?

by The Fat Lady Sings 2008-07-03 09:50PM | 0 recs
I haven't seen MyDD FrontPager using the F-word
to a person when he/she writes a comment opposing his diary. I haven't seen the founder claiming of the two candidates not to be Democrat. That's the lowest for a blog can get.
There were substantive diaries in myDD non primary diaries on global warming, corporate social responsiblity, foreign affairs et al. I'm sorry that you missed it.
by louisprandtl 2008-07-04 05:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton, The Daily Kos

Nancy, I think many of the bias you saw and ascribe to sexism can be more explained by the long running conflict between the DLC and Daily Kos, as seen in an Episode of Meet The Press.

by Falsehood 2008-07-03 06:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton, The Daily Kos

Are you denying that there was sexim and sexist attacks at Kos or almost anywhere (media, campaigns, etc.) during the primaries?

by cuppajoe 2008-07-03 06:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton, The Daily Kos

No; I'm stating that the angry, aggressive comments and the entire original split was caused by the divide I already described.

There is no doubt that sexism was involved. We're (hopefully) moving into a norm where both men and women are equally represented in our gov't. However, we aren't there yet, so just as Obama's race became a "feature," Clinton's sex became a "feature."

That meant that people talked about it, and some were sexist. The "vicious" attacks were not because of her sex, but because of the entire DLC-related conflict. Because of prior concern, Clinton's favorable comparison of McCain to Obama touched off a firestorm, among other controvercies.

by Falsehood 2008-07-03 06:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton, The Daily Kos

Yes, I am... sexist attacks were not tolerated over there... one time use of the b* word would get you banned...

However, the definition of sexism in Hillarysupporland is rather expansive, consisting mostly of saying anything critical of Hillary Clinton...

For example, "Hillary supported the war in Iraq" would be labeled as a vicious sexist attack in Hillarysupporterland...

Like she was supposed to get special, more favorable, treatment because she was female.  Isn't that the kind of gender stereotyping (i.e. that women are "weaker" and should be protected) that we were supposed to be working to end?

The vitriol towards Hillary Clinton was the result of her policy positions and her disdain for party activists and the issues we care about.  If she courted the activists early on, she would have won their support and won the primary in a landslide.  But, she spit on us...

But, I guess in your mind, that they should have been more gentle 'cos she was a poor, helpless woman... please!

by LordMike 2008-07-03 07:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton, The Daily Kos

Oh man, what bullshit.
Sexist attacks were not tolerated at DKos?
The use of "bitch" would get you banned?

During the primaries, you could do a search for "bitch" and get hundreds of hits like this:

Phrased differently, why has Hillary embarked on a course of action that has revealed her to be a bald-faced liar, a cold and deceitful politician, an enraged, angry bitch, the Medusa of American Politics.

Without going into any great detail, Hillary owns the word ignorant, first and foremost, not in the sense of being unintelligent, but in the way of ignoring the welfare of others. In the pejoratiive sense, Hillary is ignorant.

To merit the term "bitch" one has to act in a certain abrasive, aggressive, vindictive manner over time. I think she's earned it.

But together the words are damning. To be known as an ignorant bitch means you are done politically. You are in the process of losing friends and allies. You are without honor.

The problem is, Hillary Clinton didn't play like a bitch. She played like a dick, sliming her opponent behind the lines and attempting to trick the party that had been so loyal to her into letting her steal of couple of states' primary votes.

Give me a fucking break. Please.

by skohayes 2008-07-04 03:18AM | 0 recs
Nice examples

A while back, I googled Kos and b*tch.  Turns out Kos likes this word himself.

http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/02/is_d avid_geffen_a_catty_bitch_or_how_it

by dbrown04 2008-07-04 03:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton, The Daily Kos

Look up sexist in the dictionary. There's a nice picture of you there, LordMike.

by cuppajoe 2008-07-04 10:47AM | 0 recs

Is my calendar wrong?  I could have sworn it was July.

by fogiv 2008-07-03 06:27PM | 0 recs
Kos made me vomit...

It's readable now because the primary's over, but I never had much of an affinity for the place to begin win. Thier attitude towards Hillary was not borderline sexist but officially sexist; and considering thier status in the blogosphere, was completley unacceptable. The venom thrown at Hillary supporters was unacceptable as well. I just think it's fairly ironic that the reason why all of them were so up on Obama because he was the "anti-Clinton" because of how "triangulating" she was are now getting triangulating to the 10th degree with Obama. With the way this guy was being worshipped at that site, you'd think he was in line with Dennis Kucinich on policy.

I just think it's bizarre that Daily Kos would rip apart Hillary on perceived triangulation (when I think, and many would agree, she's more to the left of Obama on most issues), in favor of Obama, when now he's drifting into the "center-right" area of the political spectrum, or getting there.

by zcflint05 2008-07-03 06:28PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton, The Daily Kos and Progressive

As a proactive measure against trolling, I will not be answering questions.
So... you're just trolling yourself with that kind of thing.

by Whash 2008-07-03 06:38PM | 0 recs
Into the Wayback Machine, Sherman!

We've got a primary to win!

by spunkmeyer 2008-07-03 07:01PM | 0 recs
Re: Into the Wayback Machine, Sherman!

TR'd for posting a stupid childish pic instead of engaging the debate, as usual.

by rankles 2008-07-04 12:59AM | 0 recs
Re: Into the Wayback Machine, Sherman!

I think you might want to change that.

From the ratings guidelines

* Do not troll rate (rating as 1) another user's comment unless it is a comment that is an attack on another user.

You wouldn't want to be engaging in TR abuse, would you?

by Can I Haz Moar Snark 2008-07-04 01:13AM | 0 recs
Re: Into the Wayback Machine, Sherman!

YOu keep trying to disrup the debate and I will keep TRing you.

You are the classic definition of troll.

by rankles 2008-07-04 02:39AM | 0 recs
Re: Into the Wayback Machine, Sherman!

I think spunkmeyer's pictures could debatably be considered "spamming the site with unrelated material" and thus could warrant a full HR instead, not just a TR.

by Aris Katsaris2 2008-07-04 02:43AM | 0 recs
Re: Into the Wayback Machine, Sherman!

except for the fact that it is actually a comment as to the merits and worthiness of this diary.  I don't understand the point, oh wait, yeah I do, to further the divide.

by KLRinLA 2008-07-04 10:04AM | 0 recs
Re: Into the Wayback Machine, Sherman!

btw I meant this diary and nto the pic in the last sentence

by KLRinLA 2008-07-04 10:04AM | 0 recs
Getting banned from DKos

I know you said you would not participate in comments, but I have a question anyway that I would appreciate an answer to. You said in this diary that you were excluded from the DKos community for politely criticizing Obama. Do you still have the texts of the post(s) which got you excluded including any correspondence with administrators at Dkos? If what you said about being banned for politely criticizing is really true, it would really reveal a side of that site that I was unaware of, and I would cease to read things there. I don't mean to be rude in not taking your word for it, but we don't really know each other and I would like to see the actual posts so I can see for myself what went on.

by glopster 2008-07-03 07:17PM | 0 recs
Obama would not appear with Gavin Newsom

An article in SFGate reported that Obama asked Willie Brown to tell Gavin Newsom not to appear in the same photo with Obama (because Newsom supported same-sex marriage.)

The article cited four sources confirming this.

I was given 9 troll ratings for posting the article. Many said "how do you know this is true"? It had four sources, Newsom was one of them.

by catfish2 2008-07-03 11:05PM | 0 recs
So the lady in the headscarf wasn't a new

experience for the Obama campaign.

by dbrown04 2008-07-04 03:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Obama would not appear with Gavin Newsom
Could you post a link to the original diary so I can see how it was written?
by glopster 2008-07-04 07:41AM | 0 recs
by catfish2 2008-07-04 10:55AM | 0 recs
Re: Link


by glopster 2008-07-04 12:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Link

I see that there was a lot of opposition to your posting something that could be looked at as negatively reflecting on Obama. But, I also see that there was support for the post as well. Some people were mad because they thought you were trying to keep an older diary alive by reposting. Overall, I don't see that much of a difference between the nastiness that surfaced over at Dkos and the nastiness that surfaced here. In both places, quite a few passionate bullies drowned out civil discourse. Thanks again for linking me there.

by glopster 2008-07-04 12:52PM | 0 recs
That was when it started to get bad

It got worse after that.

by catfish2 2008-07-04 01:32PM | 0 recs

You do realize the primary's over, right?

by BlueinColorado 2008-07-03 07:50PM | 0 recs
Yet another unfresh perspective

and McGovern should have won but he didn't.

Now what?

by missliberties 2008-07-03 08:02PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton, The Daily Kos and

"Some people believe it is progressive to take away women's rights."

Um, what?  I'm sorry, but this diary is too vague and unsubstantiated to be productive.

by rfahey22 2008-07-03 08:12PM | 0 recs

Wow, look at some of the diaries that are rec'd.  LOL

Looks like we're back to the original, terrible, MyDD.

I was wondering where that site went.

by RussTC3 2008-07-03 08:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton, The Daily Kos and Progressive

two words regarding kos and female candidates

Darcy Burner(You are aware of who she is and her recent tragedy..and how kos and the netroots are aiding her and her family right?)

To the diary person...
How much have YOU given...via kos
http://www.actblue.com/entity/fundraiser s/17762

You give a feeble front that Sen. Clinton is the only woman in office or running for office...

If your support for women candidates extends beyond Sen. Clinton....get to work..or shut the fuck up!

by nogo postal 2008-07-03 09:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton, The Daily Kos and Progressive
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/7/3/1 21550/7228/164/545967
by nogo postal 2008-07-03 09:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton, The Daily Kos and Progressive

I live in Denver...as DeGette is safe... the efforts of myself and my wife are focused to a Dem woman we believe will defeat Rep. Musgrave..


by nogo postal 2008-07-03 10:01PM | 0 recs
So tired of the Hillary/victim meme.

At least when you drive a stake through Dracula's heart he stays dead.

by Beren 2008-07-03 10:48PM | 0 recs
Why is there a 'recommend' but not a 'reject'?

It's odd that there's a 'recommend' button for articles, but not a 'reject' button. That means that (judging by this substance-free article) anyone with 15 friends can get anything onto MyDD's rec list, and then there's nothing that we can do about it but wait for it to expire.

by laird 2008-07-04 12:14AM | 0 recs
Re: Why is there a 'recommend' but not a 'reject'?

Sometimes it only takes 5-6 rec's to get on the wreck list.

The other problem is that almost anyone can post almost anything in a diary which will be very visible for quite a while.

by Can I Haz Moar Snark 2008-07-04 01:07AM | 0 recs
Nothing to see here, folks...
Move along -- this is just laughably transparent trolling.  Note the "I am a troll" disclaimer at the end, in bold for people who were skimming by that point:
As a proactive measure against trolling, I will not be answering questions.
by username 2008-07-04 03:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Nothing to see here, folks...

The "proactive measure" was brilliant, IMO. Why should the Diarist have to deal with the typical troll hysteria claims?

by soyousay 2008-07-04 03:24AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton, The Daily Kos and Progressive

by dbrown04 2008-07-04 03:33AM | 0 recs

For example, the Daily Kos blog which is known as a progressive blog and calls itself a "reform blog" apparently was not much concerned with reforming the male dominant government by supporting or at least respecting a woman presidential candidate.  The Daily Kos administrators allowed non-stop and frequently vicious and sexist attacks against presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton. And yet when bloggers wrote mature, helpful, polite criticism of male presidential candidate Barack Obama the administrators would often ban those bloggers (I was banned for politely criticizing Obama).

Apparently?  State your convictions.  It's easy to cut and paste diary exerpts and comments from the dKos archives.  Let's see what you're actually talking about.  May as well show us your "polite criticism" of Obama that got you banned too.

And since when does a blog have a consciousness of its own?  There are near 150,000 registered users on dailyKos.  Nasty comments of all stripes can fall through the cracks of the autobanning feature.  People such as Bill O'Reilly like to dredge up the most trollish comments written by got knows who, blow them up and claim them to be representative of the site.  Well, at least he bothers to actually find some.

The majority of daily Kos front-pagers and poll respondants did not support Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries because, in essence, they thought she ran a crappy campaign.  You can write that off as lack of respect for a woman candidate, but then ponder this: we're the more liberal, social-progress oriented party.  Over half of the primary electorate were women.  If this sexism/misogyny/disrespect for a woman candidate were so widespread, why didn't it backfire?

by corph 2008-07-04 07:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton, The Daily Kos and Progressive

I don't think it was about her being female of Obama being male.

I think it was, ironically, just politics as usual, where the proponents of one candidate are so whipped up about him/her, they allow all manner of criticism of the other candidate and none of theirs.

Huffington Post was the same way.  These blogs were more about getting Obama nominated, and again, the irony was they did so in large part by bashing Clinton.

So much for change.

by Juno 2008-07-04 07:38AM | 0 recs

was the reason for..............EVERYTHING....no.

Anywho, I tire of these diarys, but they are not going anywhere.  This is why, we had to candidates with very similar platforms, which made the primary vote based on personal like of a particular candidate.  Identity politics. Feelings are hurt because a particular candidate lost, and the reason said candidate was picked was because certain voters felt a personal connection to that candidate over another.

This is going to come off as offensive to some, but whatever, most of these threads are offensive to me anyway, but older women and gay men(I still have no idea why on this one) seem to have taken this the hardest, and it seems like the majority of Mydd regular posters fall into that category.  So, go ahead and get it out, its only June, and I realize identity politics is ugly, the guy I liked won, the woman you liked lost, I am not going to apologize for it, and the thought that Obama supporters have to bend over backwords for you when you act like pompous asses is ridiculous.

by Brandon 2008-07-04 08:08AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary Clinton, The Daily Kos and Progressive

As a proactive measure against trolling, I will not be answering questions.

Alegre is that you???

by PurpleMyst 2008-07-04 09:02AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads