Hot for Hillary

[Kayleigh]

Edited prior post.

Share This

[JoB]

What would all of you done for a campaign if you hadn’t had Hillary to bash?

I have had time to think about why i am so angry… and this is it in a nutshell.

I am angry because there is no Obama campaign.. at least not on this blog… just a dirty mudslinging Hate Hillary campaign… in which any kind of vilification is considered not only acceptable but justified… in which slander is accepted as truth…. And it just keeps getting worse.

It isn’t enough that Hillary doesn’t get the nomination… she has to be totally destroyed…

and even that is not enough…

those who would defend her in any way also have to be destroyed.

There is no tolerance at all for anything but the bleating of the choir…

I may have been a bit ruthless in refuting points on this blog.. but i certainly didn’t deserve the personal attack that was launched on me here…

In fact.. no-one deserves that kind of personal attack for merely presenting another point of view… not even republicans.

There is a complete lack of respect in this conversation… if it can be called a conversation… for either ideas or individuals.

I am appalled by the blatantly sexist attacks by the media.. by the portrayal of those with low income as backward idiots.. by the lack of sensitivity for personal tragedy…

but i am ashamed of members of my own party for righteously echoing that behavior when they thought it somehow enhanced their candidate.

There is a total disconnect between the message Senator Obama preaches… the rhetoric… and the campaign that has been waged.

Can anyone explain to me just what is inclusive about this?

Somehow, i wouldn’t think that alienating older women and poor working people … the traditional base of the democratic party… would be a good election strategy…. nor would alienating nearly half of your own party and then expecting them to work for you this fall to get your candidate elected.

That isn’t terribly inclusive. Nor is it effective.

It has lost the democratic party votes… people who won’t be as inclined to vote at all when they don’t see themselves benefiting any more than they have under republicans.

It has lost them loyal democratic workers who see clearly that they are not part of the current democratic agenda.

That combination may ultimately lose democrats the election. And although i am sure those who didn’t campaign or vote for Senator Obama will be blamed…

the real blame will lie with those who found the anger they generated irrational…

This intolerance has certainly lost this worker. I have decided that my health is far more important than this campaign this fall.. and for the first time in my life, while still able to show up, i am going to play the illness card and withdraw from a commitment i made.

I will not work in my local precinct this fall.

This has not been an easy decision. I have never withdrawn from a commitment because of the possible or even probable effects on my health.. even when that commitment cost me dearly.. months and sometimes years of being mainly bedridden.

I had no intention of doing so this fall.

And I am not doing so now because Hillary is unlikely to be the candidate.

I am doing so now because I can’t support waging the kind of campaign that you have all waged for Obama so far and the one you will wage this fall… the anti-McCain campaign… and i regret having been seduced into already doing so.

There is no hope in anti-anything…

just righteousness and revenge… everything i hate about the current republican administration.

and i can’t and won’t choose to be part of that.

and i think that means i won’t be part of this conversation any longer either.

Share This

[Kayleigh]

JoB, nice to see you back. :-)

I hope that you reconsider when the dust settles, because the party needs you. We need everybody and Obama would be the first to say that. I think, in fact, he *has* said it.

I think reading this column helped me understand a lot…

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hilary-rosen/why-do-we-stick-with-her_b_103861.html

But please don’t blame Obama for the racial and class hatred that has been fostered for decades (and that Hillary exploited with the gas tax holiday and the 3am ad). Some people with low incomes *are* poorly informed and/or prejudiced and that needs to be said. Nobody is served by denying it. Of course, I am someone who told my much-loved former MIL that she was a bigot. I still love her and she’s still a bigot.

Ironic that the liberal folks who happen to be educated and wealthy (using both terms loosely) are fighting for those very WVA people who sneer at them because of their race or their education or “elite”ness. I know this because I know or am related to plenty of these liberal/wealthy/goatcheeseaters and they vote and donate and work to help those who have less. (I am educated but definitely not wealthy myself.)

And for heaven’s sake, bowling is not a moral virtue. I’m *glad* Obama stinks at bowling. Basketball is a tougher and more demanding game and he’s good at it.

Hopefully Obama can help the working class see that he *is* on their side, and I do believe he is. Not an easy task, to be sure. And that he can reach out to the Hillary supporters too. Although I honestly think they are mad at something that has little to do with Obama.

Share This

[JanS]

JoB…you are entitled to feel however you want to feel.I have tried to stay middle of the road on all of this…and I see things on both sides, as in,I see it’s perfectly OK to bash Barack Obama, underhandedly get a dig in about whether he is Muslim or not, and the behavior is excused. You are angry about how Hillary Clinton has been treated. She’s a big girl, and I think she can handle it. She is not perfect, and has made mistakes, faux pas, if you will, and she has to live with that.Perfection is illusive at best.

Take each of these candidates and take away her gender, take away his color. Let’s say they are both gray non-gender candidates…how do we feel about it now? Yes, there are a lot of women out there who feel that they would like to see a woman president in their lifetime. Yes there are lots of people who would like to see a black president in tneir lifetime. But there is far more to this than gender and race…and there is always that “sexism” card, or that “racist” card to play…not fair on either side. Issues, issues, issues…we forget that when we take these things too personally. A lot about these campaigns is not “fair”…but , as you say, that’s politics, and we have to accept it. I don’t like it…and I see you don’t like it either.

What I find abominable is that there is a faction of women out there who aren’t looking at the big picture. They will cut off their nose to spite their face, and either withhold a vote, or vote for McCain…and that tells me that they could give a damn about the big picture, they only want to have their “woman candidate” no matter what. I disagree with that completely, and certainly don’t want to hear a peep from them in the next 4 to 8 years if the Republicans pull this off yet again because of it. You reap what you sow.

Yes, it stinks that your candidate may not be the nominee…but…there are two people who are running..they can’t both win. And it is up to us, the VOTING public, to not be so vindictive that our candidate lost, for whatever reason, that we hand this election to the other side on a platter.

All just my opinion, of course, but sometimes we need to take a step backward, and think about the underlying reasons for the anger…if it’s because we truly feel for our candidate, or because we have taken things too personally, or whatever reason it might be.

I haven’t seen the “venom” that you say has been directed at you personally, but…hey,maybe I wasn’t looking for it. I’m truly sorry you feel that way, and am sorry that you feel you won’t be back here. That’s your choice, I respect that. You have things to add to the conversation, and those things will be missed.

And…what, may I ask, is wrong with an anti-McCain campaign? We ARE anti-McCain, after all…but we are also pro whoever our candidate will be. And once the nominee is decided, the campaign will be some of both. My personal hope is that the mudslinging will cease, and the issues will be discussed more, because those are what’s important, more than ever…

OK…I’m rambling…must be the good drugs – lol.

Share This

[walfredo]

JoB-

Are you serious? What would we be doing? Fighting the general election maybe?

In fact, that is what we are doing, that is what my candidate has done exclusively for close to a month.

As far as Hillary in the news lately, she has to suggest her followers might assassinate Obama as a viable excuse to continue her campaign, just to get on TV these days.

There is no Obama campaign? You aren’t paying attention, he is going to toe to toe with John McCain and winning, and putting Hillary and the Clinton machine out of there misery at the sametime. It’s pretty inspiring to think one man could take on the Clinton and Republican smear machines at once, and win…

Share This

[WSMom]

JoB:

You know that you are not alone on this forum. You have readers who are encouraged and enlighted by your point of view. You have others who can’t wait to jump in and argue with you. I understand that you’ve taken their posts personally. I could tell you not to take their words to heart, but your feelings are your own. From my perspective, you’ve bravely and more than handily held your own with those that would disagree with you using your intellect and writing skills. I agree with Jan (as always) and will really miss the interesting discussions you bring to the table. IMHO, I’d like to see you take a page from Hillary’s play book. Sen Clinton holds her head high and continues to “maintain her focus, her message and her dignity.” Don’t go away JoB, your words have power and shouldn’t be silenced.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jill-iscol/how-dare-you_b_103608.html

Share This

[JoB]

Kayleigh…

it is easy to concentrate on the sexism in this campaign and dismiss it as the reason that Hillary has not done better…

and i will agree that i don’t think sexism is the only issue in this campaign…

but i also think that the lack of outrage by my fellow female democrats at the type of sexism that has been leveled at Hillary is at the least very disappointing… and has been a huge part of this campaign.

During the Oregon primary, one of the recurrent features of the coverage of that primary was a picture of hillary from the Leno show and the resulting commentary.

that picture showed Hillary’s face on top of an exceedingly busty and exposed middle aged body and suggested that she had overlooked one way she could generate support among superdelegates.

Had the picture been of Obama with an afro and an exaggerated crotch (the black male equivalent of the picture of Hillary).. this blog would have been incensed.

The Huffington Post has concentrated on the sexism issue to discount those who still support Hillary and to discount their anger.

And.. that is in itself.. more sexism.

It doesn’t account for the real reasons that many of us support Hillary..

her actual concern and lifetime history of supporting issues that are important to the health and well being of women and children…

her work ethic.. she shows up, votes and fights for what she believes in.. even while campaigning.

her mistakes… she has made plenty of mistakes and she has learned from them

her willingness to learn what she does not know… this is one thing that is consistently said about her by anyone who has worked with her… at any level. Hillary stays to ask questions… and to ask more questions… she listens and learns.

and those are just a few…

btw.. none of those are claims that can be made about Senator Obama…

sexism has been an issue in this campaign… in ways that are likely to be felt by women for a long time.

the phrase “just a wife” to dismiss her experience is nothing but the worst kind of blatant sexism… and it was leveled while blaming her for any shortcomings of the Clinton presidency…

she was just a wife but somehow also responsible…

equating her with Bill’s sexual escapades is nothing but blatant sexism… blaming the wife for the husband’s lack of control.

I could go on.. but i don’t’ see any point.

women will live with the repercussions of the sexism in this campaign for a long time.. because they not only accepted it but loudly participated…

Women have been fighting for equal rights in this nation for well over a hundred years. I have been part of that fight for my entire adult life.

We have achieved the vote and we have made some legal and social progress…

But we are further from the goal of ratifying the equal rights amendment… that would have given women nothing more than equal rights to men under the law… now…. than we were 20+ years ago when the republicans basically came into power.

and if this campaign is any indication, it doesn’t look like electing democrats is going to change that much…

But hey… we’re all just a bunch of irrationally angry women… feminists… so it’s easy to discount us… and anything we might legitimately be concerned about… right?

that’s sexism.

as for your comments about racism, and class hatred…

“But please don’t blame Obama for the racial and class hatred that has been fostered for decades (and that Hillary exploited with the gas tax holiday and the 3am ad). Some people with low incomes *are* poorly informed and/or prejudiced and that needs to be said. Nobody is served by denying it. Of course, I am someone who told my much-loved former MIL that she was a bigot. I still love her and she’s still a bigot.”

I don’t blame Obama at all for the racial and class hatred that has been fostered for decades…

nor do i buy into the story line that Hillary is responsible for it.

I don’t think she was wrong to acknowledge that there are those in America who are going to lose the fight against destitution in this country because of current gas prices. she didn’t just propose a gas tax holiday.. she proposed a windfall profits tax against oil companies…

and she acknowledged the plight of the working poor… which Senator Obama has yet to do.

The 3 AM ad was not racist. It spoke to experience.

The ad would only have been racist had it implied that you would not want any black man to answer that 3 AM call..

all you have to do to test that hypothesis is ask yourself how well that would have worked against Colin Powell had he been the nominee…

That add was labeled racist by the Obama campaign… so it might be a good idea to ask why they chose to do that… who is actually responsible for inflaming racial prejudice in this campaign?

I do blame democrats who buy into the idea that the only people who support Hillary are bigots (cant’ see beyond color), hillbillys (too stupid to know what is good for them) and feminists (only concerned with getting a woman elected).

That’s blatant intolerance and bigotry…

Share This

[Trick]

For all the remarks about racism and sexism is just feeding the propaganda that give the talking heads on the internet something to do.

Look at their policies,the way they respond,their work ethic, merit, credits and shortcomings and make your decision.

As much as I support Obama, I’d never give up my right to vote for Hillary if she was the victor.

To make it a one or two issue vote to me is being petty.

I think alot of us have endured a losing candidate for two elections so far and I’m not going to give up because of a “He said, She said” article in some post.

Let’s get out of the schoolyard namecalling and get to work on changing the way this government does business and our lost reputation around the world.

Share This

[JoB]

JanS..

i don’t know where to start…

I didn’t say i wouldn’t vote.. or that i would vote for McCain if Senator Obama is our candidate… nor did i imply that anyone should not vote… or should vote for McCain.

What i said is that there are a lot of people who are being not only left out by his campaign… but are being dismissed as somehow not worthy of consideration by his campaign… and that it is unwise to count on their votes.

The one thing i did not hear as the pundits were discussing the reasons for Obama’s enormous losses in two of the recent primaries was the fact that he didn’t bother to campaign in those states…

You speak of the responsibility of voters who might choose not to make an effort.

What about the responsibility of the candidate and his campaign to show that he represents the interests of all his constituents if he expects their vote? I suspect that point would have been better made by actually campaigning for their votes.

I will certainly vote.. and there is no question i will not be voting for John McCain… or Ralph Nadar.. or the Republican green candidate whose name i can’t remember…

Nor am I waging an anti-Obama campaign.

I am simply not choosing to honor my commitment at the cost of my personal health for a campaign that is openly dismissive of my concerns.

and i think there will be many others like me who would have been willing to make an extraordinary commitment for a campaign that they believed in… one that generated hope… but will not do so for one that does not generate hope for them.

and that is the main problem with a primarily anti-anything campaign. It assumes that a common enemy is enough to make you suspend self interest.

But it is fed by anger… and the anger currently directed at Hillary can as easily be directed at Obama… all it takes is a little “evidence” of betrayal… or arrogance… after all.. arrogance is the real lever the press has been used against Hillary… and you kid yourself if you think it will not be used against Obama this fall.

I don’t believe that the kind of anti-Hillary campaign that was waged by democrats is justified by the kind of anti-Obama campaign that was fielded by the largely Republican press.

yes, i know that there has been much ado in this blog fueled by the Huffington Post about the possible inferences of any comment that Hillary made… but any of those comments pale in comparison to the actual names that Hillary has been called and the charges that have been made against her by her fellow democrats.

And no, i don’t think it unrealistic to expect those with whom i converse to refrain from making negative personal comments about me as a person… or my choice of personal writing style … or label me a troublemaker… especially in this kind of public forum.

It might be different if i was the type of person who indulged in personal attacks on others.. but i attack rhetoric and not people.

I don’t believe i have ever said anyone was stupid for having any idea… but i am quite sure that i have said that some rhetoric was pretty stupid.. and i am sure that i have said that repeating it was boring… and i know i have either said or implied that some people were simply uninformed… which apparently is considered condescending… whether they are uniformed or not.

Sometimes responses have disappointed me.. and i believe i once told Walfredo, NewResident and Ken that i expected more of them. But expecting more implies a belief in their intelligence..

I have said or implied that the remarks of those who have no compassion for others are callous…

but that doesn’t mean i think the people who make those remarks are callous… as theHouse demonstrated by making a donation to the local food bank and by attending and donating to the fundraiser for the locksmith.

i believe democrats who buy into the idea that the only people who support hillary are bigots, hillbillys and feminists are themselves making bigoted remarks… but i don’t think Kayleigh is a bigot. She has clearly shown herself as a person who is sensitive to bigotry.

I have consistently come to the defense of those who were being unfairly personally attacked on this forum and have consistently shown myself to be concerned with the well being of both individuals who post here and those in my community.

I thought that should have earned me a little basic respect. Apparently i was wrong.

Share This

[JoB]

Walfredo…

“As far as Hillary in the news lately, she has to suggest her followers might assassinate Obama as a viable excuse to continue her campaign, just to get on TV these days.”

Hillary did not suggest that her followers assassinate Obama.

She stated that the primary campaign of Robert Kennedy was still in progress in June when he was assassinated.

This is a clear case of passing along slanderous implications as though they were truth.

Share This

[beachdrivegirl]

“her work ethic.. she shows up, votes and fights for what she believes in.. even while campaigning.

her mistakes… she has made plenty of mistakes and she has learned from them

her willingness to learn what she does not know… this is one thing that is consistently said about her by anyone who has worked with her… at any level. Hillary stays to ask questions… and to ask more questions… she listens and learns.

and those are just a few…

btw.. none of those are claims that can be made about Senator Obama…”

Do you honestly believe NONE of those things can be claimed by Senator Obama? I think Obama has proved us he has excellent work ethic throughout this entire nomination process not only has he taken on and beat his competition to get the Democratic nomination, but he has also still maintainted a wonderful family life?

Also since when did Clinton and her voters get to decide whom the working class voters are? Did anyone else check the demographoics on Oregon? They all seemed pretty working class to me…

Share This

[Anonymous]

I edited my post because I mis-read JoB’s post.

My apologies.

Carry on….

Share This

[JoB]

NewResident…

“expecting more implies a belief in their intelligence”

means that i think you are intelligent..

not that i think you are stupid.

for the record.. i do not think Walfredo or Ken are stupid either.. for those who might misread my intention.

I am not sure why you have come to believe that i think you are stupid… and therefore read anything i say that way… since everything i have ever said both implies and says that i think you are not stupid.

So.. for the record. I don’t think you are stupid. I have never thought you are stupid. In fact, I think you are pretty intelligent…

i post links for you so you can learn from being exposed to opposing points of view.. not so that i can refute you.

I don’t look down on you because you are not formally educated.

i stated here that i think some of the most intelligent and insightful people i have ever encountered are self educated..

and that i think the best of education and that which i value most in myself… comes from continually challenging the things you think you know by reading opposing viewpoints.

You either change your mind or come to understand your own viewpoints better.

I don’t have a clue where you got the idea that i thought less of you.

Share This

[Anonymous]

Thank you for that, JoB. Please refer back to my post, as I did edit it because I mis-read yours initially.

Guess I’m not so bright! Lol!

What it’s worth, glad you’re back.

Share This

[JoB]

beachdrivegirl…

Senator Obama’s work ethic is not reflected in his voting record in the senate… while Senator Clinton’s clearly is.

Check out their voting records.

He was not known for his attendance in the Senate even prior to his campaign… and was not known to stay late and work long hours on the committees he was assigned to. In fact, he was known for heading home early every weekend and coming back late.

he also has not been known for his committee attendance …even prior to his campaign.. but especially while campaigning..

I believe that speaks more directly to his work ethic than his campaign…. which is managed by others… does.

I have never heard or read any comments about his desire to attend briefings and stay after to clarify any questions… while those comments are consistently made about Hillary.

On at least one occasion, since becoming a candidate, he was among the candidates who chose to leave directly after his briefing on the middle east and other military matters by past commanders.. not one of the two.. Joe Biden and Hillary Clinton who chose to stay and ask clarifying questions…

the positive remark made most often by those who have been associated with Senator Obama in the past is that he is charismatic…

the negative one is that he takes credit for the work of others.

and i believe you will find both referenced in wikipedia.

I believe you will find Senator Clinton’s record on legislation which benefits the poor.. and her record on working directly on issues that pertain to the wellbeing of women and children also referenced in wikipedia… and in the congressional record.

Senator Obama’s efforts can be found in the same two sources.

Senator Clinton’s record on those matters and her reputation speaks for itself.. while Senator Obama’s does not.

I did not imply that Senator Clinton’s campaign gets to decide who the working class voters are… in fact… i just read back to see if i even used that phrase.. and i didn’t.

but since you brought up the Oregon campaign… you might want to take a closer look at the demographics of that vote… which are consistent with the demographics of other primary votes… and clearly demonstrate a population that is not responding to senator Obama’s message…

A look at the statistics will show you that in spite of the repeated efforts to show that the primary is over… the Obama momentum stalled long ago. He is doing no better now… when everyone has called the race.. than he did on super tuesday.

that is not the pattern one would hope to see from a winning candidate who has delivered a clear message… he should be doing increasingly better in each primary… and he is not.

That should tell you that his message is missing a substantial number of democrats.

Perhaps there is a reason.

Share This

[JoB]

NewResident..

see, i knew you were smart.. you figured it out while i was writing to you…

but i decided to leave my post anyway after seeing yours.. because i thought it was something that needed to be said…

I think you are smart.. misguided for sure .. you are far too smart to be a Republican ;-)

Share This

[JoB]

WsMom.. thank you.

Share This

[Anonymous]

JoB – Lol!!!! I could say the same for you!

Far too smart to be a Democrat, and a bleeding heart, at that!! LOL!

Share This

[beachdrivegirl]

JoB my post does not say one thing about experience and who has more of it. My post refelcts a once again false statement made by you in regards to Obama. You state that none of those things can be said about Obama which is not true. If it were true he obviously would not be where he is today. And lastly in regards to demographoics it is not true in every primary/cuacus once again do what I asked and take a look @ Oregon or in that case even Washington.

Share This

[beachdrivegirl]

Lastly, as I have stated before, experience isn’t everything. To be a truely great President one must be a great leader. So lets look at the key characteristics that make up a leader: honest, forward-looking, competent, and inspiring. Personally, I only see these characteristics in one of the Presidential canidates.

~~~

And on a side note, for all the Obama bashing that is being done her I think I am doing a great job of not bashing his opponent while trying to point out these false statements.

Share This

[walfredo]

JoB- I wasn’t the only one who took what she said to mean- one justification for me to stay in the race, is that candidates get assassinated in June, there is precident.

Maybe its a leap to assume it’d be a Hillary supporter, but it certainly could be read as the subtext of what she said…

As far as the other statements she made, they were so deeply false its hard to begin… Bill Clinton wrapped up the nomination in April. Where’d I hear that? He wrote it in his memoirs “My Life”… The Kennedy reference, his campaign had been in existence for 3 months when he was assassinated in June. So, all the references were false, and in bad taste, but the assassination suggestion was deplorable.

As far as Bill Clinton’s whining about never seeing anything like the people trying to push Hillary out of the race… Here are some quotes from April 1992 from the Clinton campaign (note this isn’t June, and Bill had not reached the magic number):

“Things I see happening in the Brown campaign lead me to believe something destructive is happening. I’d say it’s time for Democrats to link arms, dig in our heels, set our sights and work together to put Bill Clinton in the White House in 1992.”

— Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin (NYT, 3/27/92)

“In an interview, Ronald H. Brown, the party chairman, said he wanted to maintain his neutrality but was compelled to speak out against what he described as the former California Governor’s ‘scorched-earth policy’ of verbal assault on Mr. Clinton’s record and character. “

— NYT, 3/27/92

“It’s mathematically impossible for Brown to get the nomination.”

— Clinton spokesman George Stephanopoulos on Clinton’s last foe (NYT, 4/8/92)

“In the future, people will look back upon this week and this campaign as a turning point, not for Bill Clinton, but for the Democratic Party and for America.”

— Bill Clinton, after winning New York’s primary (NYT, 4/8/92)

“People are starting to rally around the flag.”

— Dee Dee Myers, Clinton Press Sec’y (NYT, 4/10/92)

“It’s time to close ranks. We cannot wait until July when we already know who has earned the right to be our nominee and who will be our nominee.”

— West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller (NYT, 4/11/92)

“Indeed, reports circulating on Capitol Hill said the Clinton campaign was mounting a strong campaign to swing uncommitted senators behind the Arkansas Governor, and that Ronald H. Brown, the party chairman, was taking part in them.”

— NYT, 4/29/92

“I cannot imagine a set of circumstances that would keep Bill Clinton from having a majority of the delegates by the end of the primary season.”

— Democratic Party Chairman Ronald H. Brown (NYT, 4/29/92)

“Mr. Brown added that he had long hoped for an early nominee ‘so we can focus our time and attention on George Bush.'”

— NYT, 4/29/92

So I’m sorry, Clintonistas, what is happening right now is not “unprecidented”. It’s not rare. It is what happens every election, once a candidate is mathmatically eliminated (in this race that was early March) pressure starts to mount for them to leave for the good of the party. And they respond by saying no one wins until they hit the magic number, and I’m staying in to help the people.

It’s not only precidented, and common- the Clintons themselves did they exact same thing when Bill won the nomination the first time- siting things like “it being mathmatically impossible for his opponent to win”, asking folks “to rally around the flag for the good of the party”…

There is no level of hypocrisy to which the Clintons will not sink in the pursuit of power, there is always a means to an end, and absolutely anything can be justified if it ends with them being in power…

Share This

[JoB]

beachdrivegirl…

i did take a look at both Washington and Oregon.. Did you?

They had strikingly similar numbers when you compare the results of the primary elections. they also had strikingly similar demographics when you compare where the individual candidates did well… and didn’t… and among which groups of people the individual candidates did well.. and didn’t.

the numbers all across the board were close to identical.. and yet several months apart.

if Obama’s message was such a strong one.. or conversely… Clinton’s message such a weak one.. you would expect the numbers in two strikingly similar states to improve in the later primary. they didn’t.

I made no false comments about those primaries.

Yes, Obama could be a viable candidate without expressing a strong work ethic in the senate… without expressing a real effort to become educated before assuming office and by not having a strong record on issues that affect the poor, women and children.

In fact, he could become president.

We have an excellent example of just that in office now.. except we would have to substitute Bush’s record as a governor (or his record as President in his first term.. that man enjoyed a lot of vacation) for Obama’s record as a Senator.

Obama’s being a candidate does not guarantee any of the qualities i enumerated… and i made no false statements about his record or Hillary’s.

while we are at it.. we can revisit the first time you stated that i was telling false tales.

I didn’t lie about the Obama campaign in Michigan… tho you think i did.

I personally know about that one because I received more than one email asking me to help with that campaign and one congratulating all of us on it’s success from the organizers of that campaign.

No, the emails did not come from the official Obama campaign.. but that is where they got my their email list… so i don’t think it is a stretch to call that one part of the Obama campaign.

I haven’t told any falsehoods about Obama. I may have said things you don’t want to hear.. but that alone doesn’t make them false.

You should be more careful about saying that anyone makes false statements… had you read my email carefully instead of just reacted, you would have realized i said nothing i couldn’t back with verifiable sources..

So.. let’s look at those presidential qualities you enumerated… assuming Hilalry didn’t have them.

honesty… you assume Clinton is dishonest… because that is what you have heard from the nightly news for years.. and believe me.. you have heard every verbal misstep and exaggeration she has made. You still do.

get prepared to listen to Obamas if he is our candidate.. because he has a string of them.. and you will hear them often.

He is a politician… and politician’s exaggerate and misspeak to make themselves look better.

They all do. Obama is no exception. And some of his can be proven with his own words.. the differences between what he has said in his books and what he says has always been true now make for some real whoppers… starting with the idea that he has always been categorically opposed to the war in Iraq and would never have voted to authorize it.

Read his books if you don’t believe me. He is in print under his own name stating his uncertainty about what he would have done had he been in that position.

and that’s just a start….

Simply labeling Hillary a liar and then finding a way to interpret her remarks as lies doesn’t make it so…

You are awfully free with that label right now. I don’t think you will be so free with it when the discrepancies in Obama’s story become nightly news fodder.

forward looking.. Hillary tried to get a universal health care system in place 15 years ago. I would call that pretty forward looking. And that’s just one example of her forward thinking.She hasn’t just talked about forward thinking, she has actually worked at getting forward thinking legislation passed.

competent.. Hillary has been a very effective politician since her early twenties. She is an incredibly competent lawyer… so much so that she was singled out for an award. She was a competent first lady as both a governor’s wife and as the president’s wife. She has been an incredibly competent senator. She has been a competent fund raiser and campaigner for many of the democrats currently in office… including Obama. She is a competent mother.. she has raised a fine young woman in pretty difficult circumstances. Does that cover competent?

inspiring.. Hillary is incredibly inspiring to me. She is a woman who has worked very hard against huge odds and has done good work… without ever losing sight of why she chose to become involved in politics in the first place. She has been the most reviled woman in our time and still stands up for what she believes in. She has had a working partnership with her husband for nearly 40 years… imperfect though it may be.. and she is still married to a man who supports her goals in life. I’d say that is all pretty inspiring.

So it seems she has all the qualities you would look for in a president.. imagine that:)

Call Hillary a liar if you like.. but that doesn’t make everything she says a lie.

Call me a liar if you like.. but that doesn’t make what i say a lie either. I am very careful about the line separating opinion and verifiable fact.

I have tried to be very patient because i know that you don’t have the benefit of the years of political and historical study that i have and your experience is limited to recent history that has been distorted by the media…

but it is not ok to accuse me of falsehoods on the basis of opinions.. no matter how much you believe the person who voices those opinions.

Share This

[JoB]

Walfredo…

it was unfortunate that she used Kennedy as an example of a widely popular candidate who had not cinched his party’s nomination by June …. because his bid was ended by assassination and people like you read a subtext that wasn’t there…

So which presidential candidate should she have referenced? how many similar candidates in recent history did she have to use as an example? And what example could she possibly have used without the inference of implied subtext?

One has to ask since it is impossible for her to open her mouth without inferences of implied subtext abounding.

The only assassination subtext that existed is the one that political pundits made up.

I don’t care if you state that you believe that was her intention… you are entitled to your opinion… but state that it is your opinion and you support it by these assumptions… don’t just call her a liar and assume her intentions.

And don’t leap to the conclusion that it must be so because “everybody” says it’s so.

that’s how we ended up in Iraq.. or have you forgotten that?

As for the rest of that string of quotes… if you were making a point other than you think Bill Clinton is full of s..t.. i didn’t see it.

When it comes to Obama.. the only words that you think should be attributed to him are his own…

yet.. you refer to the Clintons as though they are interchangeable. I will grant they are married. I will grant they are political partners. But interchangeable? She’s his wife.. so she is entirely responsible for everything he does or says.. and she will do exactly what he has done?

That’s kind of sexist isn’t it?

If we use that standard… Senator Obama should be a reflection of his wife’s unfortunate comments.. possibly he is immune because of his sex?

Your anti-Clinton… anti both Clintons… hysteria is getting the better of you.. and proving my point that this is more anti any Clinton than pro Obama for many of you.

As for the comparisons you are trying to make between Bill Clinton’s campaign and his use of statistics as an argument and Senator Obama’s campaign and it’s use of statistics.. i would have to go back and look closely before giving a reply that was anything more than an opinion… and i don’t think it’s worthwhile to take the time to do that.

What i will tell you.. and i am being quite clear that this is my personal opinion and my personal reflections on what i remember… is that i see similarities between the campaigns that Bill Clinton and Senator Obama both waged… both have been based largely on cults of personality and used the campaign’s momentum as a selling point.. tho if i remember accurately, Bill’s campaign actually gained momentum as the primaries went on….

But, I don’t think that comparison bodes too well for Senator Obama’s chances of being effective as a President.

Bill Clinton was obviously too inexperienced to handle the opposition he faced as President… and i think there are some real parallels that bear looking at with Senator Obama.

Leadership isn’t just about being charismatic and having an uncanny ability to speak to people. It takes experience and political knowhow to get things done in Washington.. even if you are lucky enough to have a congress whose political majority matches your own… which Bill Clinton definately wasn’t…

John Kennedy had Johnson to work Congress and Bobby to push his agenda along.

Who will do that for Obama?

Bill Richardson is the most likely candidate to be his VP.. and he doesn’t have that kind of political savvy. And sadly, we can’t count on Ted right now. Kerry has the savvy but not the clout. Pelosi thinks she has clout but her record doesn’t say much for what she can accomplish against opposition.

My point is that even if we manage a solid democratic majority along with a democratic president.. we will still have a largely hostile press to deal with… and that means tremendous opposition.

You obviously think Obama is up to that. I can’t see what evidence that assumption is based on… but you are entitled to your opinion… as I am to mine

You are also entitled to your opinion about the Clintons… as long as you recognize that many of the things you present as fact are no more than opinion.. no matter how many blogs they show up on.

It would be nice if you were so generous as to entitle me to my opinions as well… you may have noticed they differ from yours.

Share This

[JoB]

JanS..

i hope you know it wasn’t my intention to be cranky to you or to anyone else here.

i really don’t feel good and am going to bed.

Share This

[beachdrivegirl]

JoB my comment about demographics and working class have to do with the fact that the median income that voted for Obama was around a $3k difference(from 38000 to 41000) between W.Virginia “working class” voters and Oregon”elite” voters. Point being is it is a bunch of b.s. I am not calling you a liar but I am saying that you are trying to make your opinion fact and an opinion will NEVER be fact. And FYI I highly doubt Richardson will be VP. I think he would be a great choice I just doubt it.

And as far as I am concerned an opinion is a falsehood including my own. back it up with fact.

Share This

[Author]

Posts