- This topic is empty.
-
AuthorPosts
-
April 10, 2008 at 2:34 pm #617642
JoBParticipantcharla,
what you said about our young Clinton delegate was unkind and and an exceedingly low blow.
It also underscored that you were only interested in making points … even at the expense of some young woman you know nothing about.
Did you bother to ask why she didn’t show up?
Did you know she is caretaker to her elderly grandmother?
perhaps you should ask questions before making assumptions and slandering people you don’t know.
As for visionaries.. there is nothing wrong with visionaries… but the first year of the Clinton administration is a very good example of what happens when visionaries don’t know how to work the system and are up against stacked odds.
And those were only Republicans.
We are in the midst of a war that shows no signs of slowing down,
which we are financing by loans from a country which has every reason to leverage that financial dependence into world power
in the midst of a housing crisis created by rampant greed
entering into what will surely be a recession
i could go on.. but what is the point?
We need to fix the mess we have gotten ourselves into and fast before.
You talk of visionaries.. so talk of one who stepped into a mess like this and revolutionized the way our country governs itself… without a major collapse of the system.
I’d love to hear those examples
April 10, 2008 at 2:45 pm #617643
JoBParticipantoh by the way.. just an aside.. charla
but have you not recognized any of those party hacks standing behind Obama?
You know, the ones who have been lobbying so relentlessly for superdelegates for him?
Those guys who by your own colorful account have a grudge to settle with the Clintons…
Or are party hacks only party hacks if they support Clinton?
now…
have you looked at who is the co-sponsor on those bills Obama sponsored in the Senate that got passed? Bet you’ll find a couple of names prominently featured..
you know… old party hacks..
that’s the people who decided in the sixties to change the system from within and have been working at trying to do that since then… thirty plus years….
Somehow i don’t think even Barak Obama will be able to land in the White House with a magic wand that will make our current political system stand on it’s head.
or did i somehow miss it when he accomplished that in Illinois?
chances are, even he is going to have to make deals with old party hacks to get anything done.
In fact, a quick reading of the Vanity Fair article i read last night will tell you that is exactly how he got to be the junior senator in Illinois.
April 10, 2008 at 3:04 pm #617644
charlabobParticipantSlander is speech — libel is print.
We agree on only one thing — what is the point? I have said what I have to say.
I will continue to share information I find interesting or important. I will depend on lurkers to do their own research about claims that are made by both side.
JoB, I leave you with one thought — I began this election cycle strongly conflicted between the final two. The apologists and surrogates of the Clinton campaign have made it much easier for me to choose. I suspect I’m not the only one.
I will always wonder what she could have done if she’d been able to get away from the conventional mediocrity around her.
April 10, 2008 at 4:26 pm #617645
JoBParticipantcharla..
what .. no apology for your assumptions about the young woman who didn’t show up at the convention?
“I must be so cruel as to remind you of your huge enthusiasm for the young woman, new to politics, who was elected a Clinton delegate. Apparently she didn’t show up at the LD — that’s why you were a delegate there, yes?”
I don’t think anyone is unclear about what you were hinting at there charla.
no. you didn’t name the young woman… and thus commit slander…but you did assume that i would be let down by her behavior..
you assumed the worst of her… in print… will semantics change that? i don’t think so.
I didn’t assume the worst of her.. i assumed that something came up which made it impossible for her to attend…
thus.. i was not disappointed in her.. and all young Clinton delegates by implication…
There we actually a fair number of young people in the Clinton delegation Charla…
that was just a cheap easy way to make a point at someone else’s expense.
And that Charla.. is what i find disturbing about the tactics of this election..
April 10, 2008 at 7:03 pm #617646
charlabobParticipantTwo recent articles of interest about Obama: the Vanity Fair article, referenced by a previous poster, focuses on Obama’s Illinois history:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/03/obama200803
Another interesting article about Obama branding:
http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/124/the-brand-called-obama.html
The bottom line, for both, is that the Obama campaign has changed the face of politics forever. The question? will it be in time?
April 10, 2008 at 7:23 pm #617647
AnonymousInactiveAnd then there’s this phenom going on.
Young Obama supporters pressuring their parents:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2004339120_young10.html
April 10, 2008 at 7:28 pm #617648
JoBParticipanthere’s an interesting view from an outsider’s perspective.. an equal opportunity hater of both Obama and Clinton… and the republicans too… in other words.. someone we cal all unite against:)
still, this makes some thought provoking points:)
April 10, 2008 at 8:03 pm #617649
charlabobParticipantThis is still the Obama thread, right? :-)
Washington has decided — what can I do now?
Make phone calls for Barack:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/phonebankmap/
Travel to states still “in play”:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/oosmap
Sign up with the state and local groups:
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/wahome
And, of course, send money :-)
April 10, 2008 at 9:40 pm #617650
JoBParticipantOk Charlabob… what’s up here?
first you repost my link to a Vanity Fair article with “referenced by a previous poster”.
Now we get..
“this is still the Obama thread, right? :-)”
is this some new kind of rude game?
Now i don’t exist and i am rude posting anything that doesn’t praise Obama on the Obama thread?
does the phrase “Hillary’s big lies” remind you of anything posted recently by you on the Hot for Hillary thread?
hmmmmm..
i was really bad at these games in high school and somehow think that was a good thing.
April 10, 2008 at 9:56 pm #617651
AnonymousInactiveLadies…. can we just all respect each other’s opinions and especially each other’s passion for their respective candidate?
I know that it is politics (and this is why people shouldn’t talk politics at work), and it gets ugly and people get easily offended, but it’s just differing opinions.
I don’t think, JoB, that anyone is personally trying to attack you. From what I read into all these threads is that if anyone says anything negative regarding Hillary, you take it personally. I respect that level of passion and support that you have for Clinton. However, this is only the Obama supporter’s viewpoint. You may not agree with that viewpoint or his campaign tactics, but it is not a personal jab at you.
Besides, I’m pretty sure that, regardless of the Democratic candidate, you will be doing the same thing to McCain supporters (basically, me) come fall. I plan on respecting your opinions and viewpoints and speaking my own.
April 10, 2008 at 9:59 pm #617652
charlabobParticipantI believe this is the thread for postings of interest to Obama supporters. I believe that includes positive and negative postings. I also believe it includes negative information and opinions about other candidates, and I expect to see those in any thread. I don’t believe I in any way accused anyone of anything, rudeness or anything else.
The Vanity Fair article wasn’t negative AND the reason I didn’t attribute it directly is because I thought I had posted it before. And, frankly, because I thought if I said, “JoB said …” it would bring on another attack.
I think postings by two old broads hurling invective at each other aren’t very interesting to anyone except, perhaps, the old broads involved. I don’t choose to participate in that because, as I’ve gotten older, I’ve tried harder than ever not to be boring.
I will not stop posting. I will not go away from this community. I will continue to participate at the level that seems appropriate to me. I will show up at wsb events, even at the risk of being booed.
I will also buy NewRes lots of drinks whenever she wants, because I told her months ago that the Dems would manage to self-destruct. I didn’t expect be so intimately involved in that self-destruction myself.
Now, if anyone made it through this far and is interested in going to Tacoma Saturday to attend a nationwide Obama event let me know — we may be able to carpool.
April 10, 2008 at 10:03 pm #617653
AnonymousInactivecharla – You certainly are not boring (both you and JoB). I always enjoy reading both of your posts.
April 10, 2008 at 11:10 pm #617654
charlabobParticipantThanks, NR — add another drink to my tab :-)
April 11, 2008 at 12:03 am #617655
JoBParticipantNew resident…
i had to take a big deep breath before this one…
There is a huge difference between attacking a person’s ideas and attacking that person.
it is a difference i have been trying to point out here with almost no success.
When you say, “From what I read into all these threads is that if anyone says anything negative regarding Hillary, you take it personally.”
that really underscores the lack of basic understanding about that difference.
The majority of the anti-Hilary posts on this thread have surpassed classification as “anything negative regarding Hillary” long ago and have firmly settled in the realm of insults…
Only in a media climate in which it has become acceptable to characterize Hillary Clinton by any number of insults… including those used most often here… liar.. cheat.. thief.. etc…
only in a media climate in which it has become acceptable to blame Hillary for anything her husband, her associates, her campaign staff and her perceived friends.. which includes anyone who has ever publicly supported her… does or says
only in a media climate where any action of Hillary’s is automatically assumed to have negative and sinister implications…
only in that climate would you be able to characterize the posts i respond to daily as being “anything negative”.
The posts i respond to are almost always disrespectful at best…. they attack the person and not her ideas.
And they do so with all kinds of rationalizations for their behavior.. citing supporting information that is biased at best and often completely untrue…
Generally i only respond to those posts with countering information…
which has sometimes been characterized as a personal attack when i identify the person who made the comment.
But there is a big difference between insulting people and those same people feeling insulted because i point out the flaws in their argument.
I suppose that is one justification for attacking me personally… and not my ideas… believing that any rebuttal to your ideas is a personal attack…
but that’s just a rationalization for disrespectful behavior..
I have personally been called stupid, insane and deluded … just for starters. I have been told that all i have are unsupported opinions… that i am “foisting” on all of you. I have been called a liar. I have been labelled trivial…
My words have been deliberately misrepresented… and used to imply that i am a small person…
I’d say that was pretty personal.
Lately, i have decided on a zero tolerance policy for personal insults and misrepresentations. And those posts have been directed to individuals…
I reluctantly decided on that policy after trying to ignore personal comments and insults directed at me.. not to me… Ignoring those posts has not worked; the frequency and insulting nature of those posts has only escalated.
And that has been characterized as a “feud”… which implies that i have engaged in insults.
That doesn’t happen to be true.
I don’t even insult the opposing candidate… unless you consider anything negative said about Senator Obama or his campaign tactics an insult.
Which it seems some people here do.
Any time i have found myself open to the misunderstanding that i had personally attacked a someone, i have immediately and sincerely apologized for any remark i made that could be construed in any way as a personal attack.
I am not engaged in a feud.. and any misrepresentation of any part of my conversation as such is demeaning… and therefore personal.
Yes, i do take that personally.
I suspect you would to.
April 11, 2008 at 12:21 am #617656
AnonymousInactiveJoB – Because you have been labeled a “liar”, “trivial”, etc., I understand your frustration. It is unacceptable, I agree.
However, being involved with politics as you have been throughout your life, you do know that passions run deep and, regarding politics, everyone’s opinion is the RIGHT opinion. If you don’t see it my way, you must be stupid! That is usually how political debating turns out.
I feel, sometimes as if I am talking to a wall when debating with a liberal, nothing sinks in and they refuse to even consider my point of view (this has happened to me many times on this blog). And I am positive that others have felt the same about me. Other people just don’t see it how you see it. You cannot take it personally.
Because someone “insults” Clinton, does not mean that they are insulting you. It’s hard to understand that, by calling you names or putting you and your intelligence down, is their way of making their point. It’s happened to me many times.
If you are going to debate politics, be ready to defend your own self, your intelligence, your integrity, etc. I know I’ll have to.
April 11, 2008 at 12:33 am #617657
AnonymousInactiveBut my opinion really is the RIGHT opinion!
April 11, 2008 at 12:38 am #617658
JoBParticipantNew resident..
LOL.. i have been defending my own self, my intelligence, my integrity, etc.. for a while now..
sometimes i feel like that’s all i do.
i would say i don’t mind.. but i do.
spending so much time in the relentless defense of the anti-Hillary brigade means that there isn’t time left over for conversation of any substance.
and that is such a waste.
if Obama supporters can’t see past this current Anti-Hillary mindset, voters may well go to the polls this fall with absolutely no idea who Obama is other than what FOX news tells them..
and that isn’t going to be good news for anyone.
We know who FOX news likes..
at least you have FOX news on your side, saying positive things about your candidate once in a while ;->
April 11, 2008 at 1:32 am #617659
AnonymousInactiveJT – Didn’t you know, MY opinion is the RIGHT opinion! Lol!
April 11, 2008 at 1:38 am #617660
charlabobParticipantI’m afraid I have to violate my rule of nonengagement and call “bullshit” on the following statement. I’d hate for anyone to think my silence means assent, though I doubt there’s any danger of that.
Job says
>>I am not engaged in a feud.. and any >>misrepresentation of any part of my >>conversation as such is demeaning… and >>therefore personal.
I’ve debated whether to generate an item by item refutation of just today’s personal tirades (purposely demeaning term); I’ll restrain myself to one representative point:
Evidence of one of a number of alleged personal attacks:
Job posted:
does the phrase “Hillary’s big lies” remind you of anything posted recently by you on the Hot for Hillary thread? (The “you” here was me, charla, in case anyone wondered.)
A very little bit of investigation showed why the phrase didn’t remind me of anything: I didn’t say it. Neither did anyone else.
The actual chronology:
Job posted:
semi-falsehoods?
<some stuff about Obama>
In response, Charla posted:
Flat out lies:
<some stuff about Clinton>
What I find telling is the difference between what I actually said, “Flat out lies”, which was meant to be a parallel construction contrasted with with “Semifalsehoods”
and the translation of what I said:
“Hillary’s big lies”
bzzzzzt, not quite. Much more dramatic but not quite accurate.
One item on a growing list …
April 11, 2008 at 1:52 am #617661
JoBParticipantso charla..
was your post on the Hot for Hillary thread about Hillary’s lies or not?
I am sorry if i misquoted your title.. but i don’t think i misled about your intent. I simply didn’t bother going back to copy paste…
it was an honest mistake.
However, everyone is welcome to go judge my intent for themselves…
April 11, 2008 at 2:30 am #617662
JoBParticipantApril 11, 2008 at 2:55 am #617663
JanSParticipantding, ding, ding…round three is over…back to your corners :)
please let us remember that we’re talking aobut candidates…people with the hugest egos that have ever existed. We’re not talking about each other. Politics and religion…two topics that cause anger and divide good people…let’s try to not let it happen here.
OK…going back into my hole now >:o)
April 11, 2008 at 2:55 am #617664
c@lbobMember345 —
>>>was your post on the Hot for Hillary thread about Hillary’s lies or not?
Yup, I think that’s what I said–there and here. Let me go back and check — yup, that is indeed what I said.
>>>it was an honest mistake.
And I choose to believe it was an “honest mistake” made for dramatic effect, to enhance the idea that everyone is abusing the Clinton campaign and its supporters.
346 —
Huh???? Oh I get it — more abuse. So glad you pointed it out; I could have missed it.
Over and out — the charlabob is returning to the fact based world.
But, as I said before, I am not going away–nor am I going to shut up. I’m not for a minute buying the “Clinton as victim” scam–I’m also no longer enabling it.
April 11, 2008 at 3:11 am #617665
c@lbobMember347 —
No, Jan — I have huge respect and affection for you, but in this case you’re wrong. This is not about the candidates.
Job has spent this entire day posting vitriolic personal attacks against me. Talking to herself when I didn’t respond. And positing herself as a victim of the cruelty of anyone who disagrees with her.
I decided to stop pretending it wasn’t happening or pretending to be equally culpable. It is and I’m not.
April 11, 2008 at 3:14 am #617666
c@lbobMemberAs I’m sure everyone knows, the catlbob postings were from charlabob. catlbob gave up on this long ago and I hope no one feigns confusion.
In any case, I apologize profusely to my dear husband whose feet are even more grounded in reality than mine, and who knows lost causes when he sees them.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.