There are currently 10 users and 202 guests online.
OMG, it's a human being!
Submitted by Rachel on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 1:51am.
So all day I've been hearing about how Hillary Clinton "cried," "broke down", "let her emotions get the best of her" etc. etc. I finally checked into the video, expecting to see a sobbing out-of-control person.
The reporting on this throughout the day by the various media was ridiculous. By the time I actually saw the video I too was expecting to see something drastic with red eyes and tears. WTF? Her voice got tender. Geez. She can't win. She's too gruff. She not likeable. She cries.
For some reason the press is tearing her apart right now. As radio pundit Ed Schultz and TV guy Joe Scarborough said yesterday, she hasn't made friends with the media. Since when does she need to make friends with the media to be president? Oh, yeah. When the media started picking our presidents for us. No more unbiased media.
I hope Elizabeth kicked him where it hurts.
According to the articla, "Later, at another campaign stop, Edwards appeared to adopt his wife's more sympathetic tone."
I saw the video on this, and at the most, you could say Clinton choked up a little. Being attacked for that is a little beyond ridiculous.
I heard an Obama supporter on TV last night say that Obama's got the "momentum, message, money, and the media" with them.
I agree with him, although the "message" is not substantial, and I don't think it will survive any type of serious scrutiny, if it's given any type of serious scrutiny by today's media.
Submitted by Andy Axel on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 9:51am.
... if it's given any type of serious scrutiny by today's media.
Face it, if today's media *was* in the business of serious scrutiny? Bush would never have become president.
____________________________
With the possible exception of things like box scores, race results, and stock market tabulations, there is no such thing as Objective Journalism. The phrase itself is a pompous contradiction in terms.
I too have issues with Hillary that stop me from supporting her (unless she gets the nod, then she will have my full and unfettered support as would any other Dem running.). However, the vitriol and invective this campaign is fostering within the party, is out of control. It almost looks like people are arguing themselves into staying at home if their candidate isn't the nominee. Nothing could possibly make a rethug happier. I view it all from the viewpoint of I will be voting for the Dem candidate. Any comment that I make about one of them has to be made with the idea that I could be making it about the party's nominee.
Submitted by gonzone on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 10:04am.
"Edwards' response was classless and cost him my primary vote (not that it will matter by Feb. 5). I hope Elizabeth kicked him where it hurts."
You mean the media actually noticed a candidate named Edwards?
Well, knock me over with a feather!
And when they noticed it was something negative?
I never would have guessed!
Don't let the corporate media troll you into voting for their candidates Bubba.
I actually like Hillary better now that she has shown some emotions. Not that I ever disliked her. I think candidates need to be more open and honest and not afraid to express themselves candidly, emotions included. I cried more than once recently over my dog dying dammit and I ain't ashamed to admit it!
Will I still vote Edwards? Yes. The issues are too important to exclude him for this single incident. And further just imagine what the lying, decrepit old men in the GOP would do with this. In comparison Edwards is the heart of compassion. :-)
Journalists are lazy and they understand how to cover a Clinton. I am pulling the lever for Obama just for that reason alone. Could you imagine Cokie Roberts trying to come up on an angle on on of those people?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Submitted by Andy Axel on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 10:14am.
Could you imagine Cokie Roberts trying to come up on an angle on "on of those people?"
For now, they're letting their "new media" counterparts in the Republican fever swamp handle that... what with the likes of the "respectable" Glenn Reynolds pimping Jonah Goldberg's theory that an Obama loss could lead to race riots.
Roy Edroso: I do find these early, baffled stirrings of Obama dread amusing, but if things go like they're going I expect they'll haul out the firehoses soon enough.
____________________________
With the possible exception of things like box scores, race results, and stock market tabulations, there is no such thing as Objective Journalism. The phrase itself is a pompous contradiction in terms.
Submitted by gonzone on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 10:24am.
If the GOP loses the racist vote, they lose everything.
If Glenn doesn't have the "evil black man" to fear, then he might give up his guns!
Good thing the GOP has the South to fall back on.
I imagine that will wear out here too eventually 'cause racism can't endure forever. Hating requires a lot of energy.
Hillary keeps talking about looking at her record of 'change' but when I do I don't see any great difference between Hillary and GWB. Her support of the war, of big corporations, of rightwing christianity and her smear campaign against Obama - how could any progressive vote for her?
I think this is what is really going on as well. The GOP has trotted out the second-string (well, there really isn't a first string, but Rove isn't involved so...). There is no substantive difference between HRC and GWB and people know that. I think the RNC and the DNC are going to pay for treating the voters like idiots. Finally.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Submitted by Eleanor A on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 12:01pm.
What?! Actually, there are plenty of differences between HRC and GWB.
HRC: Pro Kyoto, pro Convention on Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, pro actual funding for childhood education instead of the ridiculous Every Child Left Behind, pro actual statesmanship instead of cowboy jihadism.
Submitted by Eleanor A on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 12:09pm.
What's your point? I happen to think both Kyoto and CEDAW are vital. What do you think the priorities are if they're not the environment, international cooperation, civil rights and education?
Kyoto and CEDAW are the symptoms. Corporatism is the disease. HRC is as corporate as it gets. I'd say she's even more corporate that GWB. At least he's willing to pander cynically to the religious right.
The priority is democracy.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Submitted by Eleanor A on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 12:34pm.
Ironically, one of the major reasons I'm supporting Hillary is that I think she won't roll over and cave in once the Republicans start up the election-theft machine (having gone to Florida to help out in 2000, I have some theories based on personal experience as to what might happen down there and in some other places.)
I guess this assumes that Obama wouldn't cave either. There is no doubt that she's a tough campaigner, but I think that the GOP hate machine would only become more powerful and less the Ship of Fools it truly is if she gets elected. The press and the MINORity Right in this country love to hate this woman. That is exactly a reason not to elect her. I don't care if they hate her. It's that they love to do it.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
I would say that is one reason among several others. She's chained to corporate money. She's a neoliberal/neoconservative. The difference in her foreign policy from Dick Cheney is that she doesn't currently have fiat. These are some others.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Submitted by Eleanor A on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 12:52pm.
Um, what he (Randy) said. ;) Although a friend of mine pointed out that we'll certainly be faced with a GOP Congress this fall (TN, for example, has no candidate...most of the open seats are in the South, which is a whole 'nother conversation.) What makes us think the GOP would cooperate with any other rightfully elected Democratic candidate? I think we'd get a grace period of three months, tops, before the Republicans would trot out Ken Starr (or some other erstwhile Sheriff of Nottingham) to investigate Edwards' haircut, or Obama's business dealings...
At least Clinton knows her way around the J. Barrett Prettyman Federal courthouse down the street from the White House. In more ways than one.
Submitted by Eleanor A on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 12:56pm.
Well, and here:
I guess this assumes that Obama wouldn't cave either.
What exactly makes you think that? I, for one, am not looking forward to the race-based hijinx the Republicans will trot out over the next few months in any event.
Although, to play Devil's advocate, this may be just the sauce we need to make the GOPers go too far and expose themselves as the festering, oozing, corpulent, hate-filled, selfish, democracy-destroying folks that they are*.
*Yes, I do know some decent Republicans and that they're not all racist and immoral. It's just the Karl Rove/Lee Atwater axis I'm referring to here, mostly.
OK. I will concede that there is nothing they can say about the woman that hasn't already been said. I still stand by my assertion that she is substantively no different from GWB.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Submitted by Denise (not verified) on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 11:07pm.
I agree. If we don't begin to save our natural environment, what good will it be to live here on earth? And with so many people without health insurance, the 'living' here is going to be worse anyway! We need thoughtful people in government right now -- not fighting guys who only think of their 'legacy' and 'corporate bottom-line.' To save ourselves, our country, and our world, we have to begin conserving our earth. Hilary may or may not deliver on campaign promises, but she's thoughtful, and that's what we need. Not another man full of male testosterone, who'll only be fighting for his ego in a few months after elections.
Submitted by gonzone on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 10:28am.
She is by far the major recipient of corporate lobbyist money (Dem and GOP)and Rupert Murdoch loves them both.
That is kinda scary as to how she would govern, for me or the money?
There is no substantive difference between HRC and GWB and people know that.
So you're going to vote for ultra-liberal Obama ("I'm going to eliminate poverty"), and expect him to get the Independent vote in the general election exactly HOW?
Just curious.
It's not just parties that Independents don't really care for, it's strict ideologies too, be they liberal or conservative.
As for playing the race card, Michelle Obama started that in South Carolina (the earliest that I know of) when she said, and I quote, "The question isn't whether my husband is ready to be president, but whether the country is ready for him to be president."
If that's not an implied accusation of racism against those who won't be voting for Obama, I don't know what is.
Submitted by Eleanor A on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 12:16pm.
You don't think Obama identifies with the black community? How come his Tennessee state steering committee has ten blacks and three whites?
White: Bob Tuke, Megan Barry, Jim Cooper
Black: Brenda Gilmore, Lois Deberry, Johnny Shaw, Walter Hunt, Lionel Mathews, Vivian Wilhoite, Jerry Maynard, Chris Woodall, John Majors, Jamie Isabel
Source: Press release, Nashville Post, January 4, 2008
Submitted by Eleanor A on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 12:37pm.
You don't think it's relevant? Somehow I think the Republicans (and many Democrats) would be ALL over it were Hillary to release a similar list weighted 70-30 female. (For the record, her list of over 100 supporters is roughly 50-50. And includes openly homosexual representatives, a big deal in Tennessee Democratic politics.)
You really think George Bush would do that? Issue a list with at least a few openly gay members on it, as well as 50% women? If you do, I don't know that we really have a whole lot left to say to each other on this topic.
[Edit: Sorry, metulj...I think we've read past each other. I didn't read your original post on this carefully enough, and I do think you make some valid points. I've gotta run out for a while, back later to carry on...]
Submitted by Eleanor A on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 12:22pm.
Can't edit my post for some reason. For your info: Barry, Hunt and Mathews are Davidson Metro Council members (Isabel is a former Metro member). Shaw and Gilmore are state House members. DeBerry is a state Senate member. Don (not John) Majors is a staffer for U.S. Rep. Jim Cooper. I believe Chris Woodall is a member of the Knoxville County Commission.
Eleanor: It's irrelevant that he has black members of his committee. I am sure there are people who are left-handed as well. You are confusing 'identification" with "identity." Is an explicit 'race' identity policy on the table with Obama?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Submitted by Lisa Starbuck on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 12:41pm.
To me, one of the biggest symbols of identity is a person's church. I am concerned about some of the things I've read on the web site of Obama's church - Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, especially some of his pastor's talking points.
A urban black church caters and identifies with black theology. Shocking.
I don't see the problem with Obama's religious beliefs or that of his Pastors.
Hillary's on the other hand: Link...
Submitted by Pam Strickland on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 6:20pm.
Interesting, but as a white Southern woman who is a practicing Christian, of the more liberal persuasion, I'm not concerned about either of these things.
pgs
Pam Strickland
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut
Submitted by Eleanor A on Wed, 2008/01/09 - 12:06pm.
You argued before (correct me if I'm paraphrasing incorrectly) that Obama can't help but be involved in discussions about his race. I think that's true, same as Clinton can't avoid becoming involved in discussions based on gender.
That said, I think if Obama wants to avoid accusations of identity politics, he'd do well to appoint more Asians, Latinos, etc. to his steering committee here in TN, as well as some more women, although I certainly think one can't do much better than Deberry and Gilmore, both of whom are powerhouse legislators.
And that's why I don't want this to get too far off track...this is Dems vs. Dems, and as I mentioned below I certainly imagine Republicans will use race and gender issues to divide the electorate (see: Willie Horton, Anita Hill, et. al., as well as the fact that Republicans are running neither blacks nor women for President in 2008.)
On a personal note, I'd pick Obama for President over George Bush, or any of the 2008 GOP candidates, so fast I'd cram my finger right through the screen on the Devil-spawn ES&S Ivotronic machine that's going to eat my vote this November. ;)
(And I'm not missing your point about the corporatism. I think it's a good one. I just think it's a problem in need of a long-term solution, and it's about more than this one election.)
Submitted by Eleanor A on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 8:06pm.
(Oddly, I knew which race most of these folks are because I've met them, or in many cases, worked for or contributed to their campaigns. If I were an Obama supporter out in either the East or West grand divisions, I'd be insisting the campaign appoint more people from outside Nashville as well.)
I never said anything about race. She has sent her surrogates out (ala GWB) to do the polical wetworks for her-
Bob Kerry:
"It's probably not something that appeals to him, but I like the fact that his name is Barack Hussein Obama, and that his father was a Muslim and that his paternal grandmother is a Muslim. There's a billion people on the planet that are Muslims, and I think that experience is a big deal."
"Look, I think Barack Hussein Obama should be proud of the years he spent studying the Koran in the madrassas. Remember, Korans don't kill: people do. Not to mention that his Islamic upbringing gives him a fresh perspective on the 9/11 hijackers that none of us church-going, peace-loving Americans can match.
What do I think about his drug dealing past? The way I see it, his experience dealing crack in the hood, which to his credit he has not denied, just means he'll be able to deal more effectively with the pigmentation issue in America today. Do I believe President Barack Hussein will turn the White House into a nest of Muslim drug lords? No. But that's why we have campaigns: to discuss these issues and give the candidates a chance to tell us where they stand. "
Submitted by gonzone on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 11:09am.
Sounds like Kerrey is a Fox News person continually using Barack's middle name. Just because it's Hussein and might stir fear in the hearts of some racist. I've not noticed a similar emphasis on ANY other candidates name, have you? I'm not wondering why. What's your middle name Kerrey? And yours, Sean Hannity? Or even your correct name Mitt Romney?
Kerrey is a former Senator, Vet involved in the Thang Phong Massacre and current supporter of the Hillary campaign. He is a (was a) 'New' Democrat. He was the finance guy for Jim Webbs senatorial campaign
Submitted by Andy Axel on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 10:50am.
As for playing the race card, Michelle Obama started that in South Carolina
Shorter Gary: It's only the race card when they do it.
____________________________
With the possible exception of things like box scores, race results, and stock market tabulations, there is no such thing as Objective Journalism. The phrase itself is a pompous contradiction in terms.
Let's see. Where's the personal attack? I said you don't know what you are talking about. That was a statement of fact. And I pointed out that the 'race' card gets played for every black person the moment they slide out the birth canal. That's a statement of fact.
You take an ambiguous statement from Obama's wife and make out like she's floated a Jesse Helms TV ad. Do you know what the statement she made means? It means that America might not be ready for Barack Obama as President. Any other gloss on it exists only in your mind unless you have evidence to the contrary. Do you?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Submitted by captainkona on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 11:24am.
Dude, logic only works on those capable of conceiving it. Gary is a lifeless person who is energized by his delusions of grandeur. The illusion that he "won" some sort of debate here is all he has in the world.
You know he's a clown, I know he's a clown, actually, everyone but him knows he's a clown. Thank God I have a life, lest I end up in Garyland. ;)
"The mind is like a parachute, it only works when it's open."
Submitted by captainkona on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 11:14am.
1) Hillary made her crying out to look like she was lamenting what might happen to the country if she's not elected. Fact is, she was crying because she's losing.
That's what happens to power-crazed Oligarchs like the Bush's and Clinton's when the facade begins to crumble.
I have no sympathy for anyone that has rubber-stamped the neocon agenda. And she has done exactly that.
Good riddence.
2) Barack Obama does fine in inter-party polling. But he cannot and will not win in November if nominated. In case anyone forgot, Dems won't be the only people voting in '08.
3) That leaves us with Edwards and I hope that sometime soon people remove the blinders and realize that Edwards is the only electable candidate we have.
Oh, Gary. Please keep advocating for Clinton. Guys like yourself are exactly the reason Democrats are backing away from her. I appreciate your help in exposing Clinton as the covert favorite of the Right-Wing.
And as was eluded to earlier in this thread, only the most naive would allow themselves to fall in behind the corporate media candidates. Republicans all around the country are switching to Dem to vote in our primary. Many of Obama's votes are coming from them.
They know what many of us already know, you see. He cannot win in '08.
I hope my fellow Democrats get tired of being force-fed candidates one day soon.
"The mind is like a parachute, it only works when it's open."
Submitted by Eleanor A on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 12:38pm.
Alternate theory: A lot of people will vote for John Edwards because he's the only Democratic white male frontrunner.
Like it or not, this discussion *is* about race and gender. And as usual, the Republicans will use those issues to divide and conquer Democrats. (Notice their party has neither blacks nor women running for President.)
Damn if I'm not tempted to go out and get that old Will Rogers saw tattooed on my behind every now and again...["I belong to no organized Party: I'm a Democrat"...]
Hillary made her crying out to look like she was lamenting what might happen to the country if she's not elected. Fact is, she was crying because she's losing.
And you know this because of course you and Hillary are so close. Or because you can read her mind.
Gary why would anyone want more of the same? More war. More Handouts to Huge corporations. No thanks.
Also you are are the one that used liberal like it was a dirty word - 'Ultra liberal' - Scary stuff.
I would say Obama is a moderate liberal at best. By your standard I would be a Stalinist.
I have heard some Hillary supporters say that she is the only electable option. Leaving aside the base falseness of this - if she where to get elected I think it could well be worse than that of mitt or huck.
Assuming the Democrats retain control of congress any 'free' trade agreements Hillary would want to pass would be clear sailing, any 'family values' law, any war or bombing would get the green light.
The same attempts by a republican president would face some opposition.*
Submitted by WhitesCreek on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 12:06pm.
I finally watched Hillary's moment and thought it was fine. It seemed like the reaction of a normal person. No biggie.
I listened to John Edwards response to the question put to him about it and thought it was fine. It was in no way the "classless remark" I had been led to believe.
Now we are seeing the media use the term "Muskie moment". When Hillary was asked if that was what it was, I think she should have responded with something like, "Of course not, but then until the media quit having Fox news moments like this one right here, America will remain in the dark, now, won't they?"
And Hillary did not immediately attack Obama like I heard George Will say on Sunday. (What a lizard)
I'll ignore the personal stuff and deal with your points.
Fact is, she was crying because she's losing.
Did you ask her? I mean I have no idea why she got choked up. Was she thinking about her legacy, her opportunities or bleesings she's had? I don't know. Glad you do.
In case anyone forgot, Dems won't be the only people voting in '08.
I agree. That goes true for the Republicans who are appealing to the base and will have to appeal to the center when the general election begins.
I hope that sometime soon people remove the blinders and realize that Edwards is the only electable candidate we have.
Blinders, schminders.
Edwards is obviously appealing to a number of Democratic voters using the class warfare strategy. That's fine. Republicans do the same on moral issues.
I guess I just wonder if Edwards can expand on the issues to appeal to a broader group if he get's the nomination.
I'm not advocating for Clinton. It's just kind of interesting that so many in the Democratic party are attacking her with such vigor. She was obviously the assumed front-runner for a reason, and I thought that reason was partly due to the political success of her husband.
Are the Democrats actually going to break with all of that? Then who would be the next Democratic president to look to? Carter and Johnson?
Submitted by StaceyDiamond on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 2:56pm.
I think at least a little of the Obama craze is Republicans trying to off Hillary. I saw an interview with a man in New Hampshire that said he changed from GOP to Dem registration because he thought " another Clinton co-presidency would be an unspeakable horror."
If not for Amy running what I'd rather do is vote in the GOP primary for the Repub I find least offensive, because for me the thought of someone who is a bigger hawk than Bush or a further religious right-winger for president would be an unspeakable horror. I would take any of the Dem candidates but I'm not doing cheers over any of them, I imagine many Republicans feel the same way. I'm tired of this Hillary hatred coming from the far right and left, when none of them can seem to put a finger on what they hate. I would say her tears were part exhaustion and part disappointment and a normal reaction.
I saw an interview with a man in New Hampshire that said he changed from GOP to Dem registration because he thought " another Clinton co-presidency would be an unspeakable horror."
Doesn't this show the Democrats though just how much Republicans fear Clinton getting the nomination? And how strong a candidate she would be in the general election?
Submitted by StaceyDiamond on Tue, 2008/01/08 - 3:27pm.
(Doesn't this show the Democrats though just how much Republicans fear Clinton getting the nomination? And how strong a candidate she would be in the general election?) I agree with Gary on the above, if the Republicans didn't think she would win, they wouldn't bother switching sides to vote against her.
I never thought so. This is popcorn chomping good shit. I am going to the Obama event up the street from my house tomorrow (3 blocks). I'll do a full write up on it. It's interesting that he is hitting NJ before Super Tuesday as that tends to be "tarmac" primary day.* I figure he knows that very diverse places like my city are going to be a slog because folks remember the Clintons well and with affection.
*And NWK is only 15 minutes by car.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
The reporting on this throughout the day by the various media was ridiculous. By the time I actually saw the video I too was expecting to see something drastic with red eyes and tears. WTF? Her voice got tender. Geez. She can't win. She's too gruff. She not likeable. She cries.
For some reason the press is tearing her apart right now. As radio pundit Ed Schultz and TV guy Joe Scarborough said yesterday, she hasn't made friends with the media. Since when does she need to make friends with the media to be president? Oh, yeah. When the media started picking our presidents for us. No more unbiased media.
I hope Elizabeth kicked him where it hurts.
According to the articla, "Later, at another campaign stop, Edwards appeared to adopt his wife's more sympathetic tone."
Clinton: Reality
Edwards: It's personal. Passion.
Obama: Rhetoric.
I saw the video on this, and at the most, you could say Clinton choked up a little. Being attacked for that is a little beyond ridiculous.
I heard an Obama supporter on TV last night say that Obama's got the "momentum, message, money, and the media" with them.
I agree with him, although the "message" is not substantial, and I don't think it will survive any type of serious scrutiny, if it's given any type of serious scrutiny by today's media.
Maybe Edwards's response was driven by his faith. If so, how could anyone question it?
Face it, if today's media *was* in the business of serious scrutiny? Bush would never have become president.
____________________________
With the possible exception of things like box scores, race results, and stock market tabulations, there is no such thing as Objective Journalism. The phrase itself is a pompous contradiction in terms.
I too have issues with Hillary that stop me from supporting her (unless she gets the nod, then she will have my full and unfettered support as would any other Dem running.). However, the vitriol and invective this campaign is fostering within the party, is out of control. It almost looks like people are arguing themselves into staying at home if their candidate isn't the nominee. Nothing could possibly make a rethug happier. I view it all from the viewpoint of I will be voting for the Dem candidate. Any comment that I make about one of them has to be made with the idea that I could be making it about the party's nominee.
CAFKIA
-----------------------------------------------------------
It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in argument.
- William G. McAdoo
"Edwards' response was classless and cost him my primary vote (not that it will matter by Feb. 5). I hope Elizabeth kicked him where it hurts."
You mean the media actually noticed a candidate named Edwards?
Well, knock me over with a feather!
And when they noticed it was something negative?
I never would have guessed!
Don't let the corporate media troll you into voting for their candidates Bubba.
I actually like Hillary better now that she has shown some emotions. Not that I ever disliked her. I think candidates need to be more open and honest and not afraid to express themselves candidly, emotions included. I cried more than once recently over my dog dying dammit and I ain't ashamed to admit it!
Will I still vote Edwards? Yes. The issues are too important to exclude him for this single incident. And further just imagine what the lying, decrepit old men in the GOP would do with this. In comparison Edwards is the heart of compassion. :-)
Journalists are lazy and they understand how to cover a Clinton. I am pulling the lever for Obama just for that reason alone. Could you imagine Cokie Roberts trying to come up on an angle on on of those people?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
For now, they're letting their "new media" counterparts in the Republican fever swamp handle that... what with the likes of the "respectable" Glenn Reynolds pimping Jonah Goldberg's theory that an Obama loss could lead to race riots.
Roy Edroso: I do find these early, baffled stirrings of Obama dread amusing, but if things go like they're going I expect they'll haul out the firehoses soon enough.
____________________________
With the possible exception of things like box scores, race results, and stock market tabulations, there is no such thing as Objective Journalism. The phrase itself is a pompous contradiction in terms.
If the GOP loses the racist vote, they lose everything.
If Glenn doesn't have the "evil black man" to fear, then he might give up his guns!
Good thing the GOP has the South to fall back on.
I imagine that will wear out here too eventually 'cause racism can't endure forever. Hating requires a lot of energy.
"If Glenn doesn't have the "evil black man" to fear, then he might give up his guns!"
It's funny, they are all "guns for everyone" until it's that wrong someone.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Hillary keeps talking about looking at her record of 'change' but when I do I don't see any great difference between Hillary and GWB. Her support of the war, of big corporations, of rightwing christianity and her smear campaign against Obama - how could any progressive vote for her?
I think this is what is really going on as well. The GOP has trotted out the second-string (well, there really isn't a first string, but Rove isn't involved so...). There is no substantive difference between HRC and GWB and people know that. I think the RNC and the DNC are going to pay for treating the voters like idiots. Finally.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
What?! Actually, there are plenty of differences between HRC and GWB.
HRC: Pro Kyoto, pro Convention on Elimination of Discrimination Against Women, pro actual funding for childhood education instead of the ridiculous Every Child Left Behind, pro actual statesmanship instead of cowboy jihadism.
You can't be serious, metulj...
Notice the word substantive.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
What's your point? I happen to think both Kyoto and CEDAW are vital. What do you think the priorities are if they're not the environment, international cooperation, civil rights and education?
Kyoto and CEDAW are the symptoms. Corporatism is the disease. HRC is as corporate as it gets. I'd say she's even more corporate that GWB. At least he's willing to pander cynically to the religious right.
The priority is democracy.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Ironically, one of the major reasons I'm supporting Hillary is that I think she won't roll over and cave in once the Republicans start up the election-theft machine (having gone to Florida to help out in 2000, I have some theories based on personal experience as to what might happen down there and in some other places.)
Guess it depends on how you define "democracy."
I guess this assumes that Obama wouldn't cave either. There is no doubt that she's a tough campaigner, but I think that the GOP hate machine would only become more powerful and less the Ship of Fools it truly is if she gets elected. The press and the MINORity Right in this country love to hate this woman. That is exactly a reason not to elect her. I don't care if they hate her. It's that they love to do it.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
The press and the MINORity Right in this country love to hate this woman. That is exactly a reason not to elect her.
Don't know about that. To me, that could be one compelling reason TO elect her.
I would say that is one reason among several others. She's chained to corporate money. She's a neoliberal/neoconservative. The difference in her foreign policy from Dick Cheney is that she doesn't currently have fiat. These are some others.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Um, what he (Randy) said. ;) Although a friend of mine pointed out that we'll certainly be faced with a GOP Congress this fall (TN, for example, has no candidate...most of the open seats are in the South, which is a whole 'nother conversation.) What makes us think the GOP would cooperate with any other rightfully elected Democratic candidate? I think we'd get a grace period of three months, tops, before the Republicans would trot out Ken Starr (or some other erstwhile Sheriff of Nottingham) to investigate Edwards' haircut, or Obama's business dealings...
At least Clinton knows her way around the J. Barrett Prettyman Federal courthouse down the street from the White House. In more ways than one.
Well, and here:
What exactly makes you think that? I, for one, am not looking forward to the race-based hijinx the Republicans will trot out over the next few months in any event.
Although, to play Devil's advocate, this may be just the sauce we need to make the GOPers go too far and expose themselves as the festering, oozing, corpulent, hate-filled, selfish, democracy-destroying folks that they are*.
*Yes, I do know some decent Republicans and that they're not all racist and immoral. It's just the Karl Rove/Lee Atwater axis I'm referring to here, mostly.
OK. I will concede that there is nothing they can say about the woman that hasn't already been said. I still stand by my assertion that she is substantively no different from GWB.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
I agree. If we don't begin to save our natural environment, what good will it be to live here on earth? And with so many people without health insurance, the 'living' here is going to be worse anyway! We need thoughtful people in government right now -- not fighting guys who only think of their 'legacy' and 'corporate bottom-line.' To save ourselves, our country, and our world, we have to begin conserving our earth. Hilary may or may not deliver on campaign promises, but she's thoughtful, and that's what we need. Not another man full of male testosterone, who'll only be fighting for his ego in a few months after elections.
Right on!
She is by far the major recipient of corporate lobbyist money (Dem and GOP)and Rupert Murdoch loves them both.
That is kinda scary as to how she would govern, for me or the money?
That's a rhetorical question right?
There is no substantive difference between HRC and GWB and people know that.
So you're going to vote for ultra-liberal Obama ("I'm going to eliminate poverty"), and expect him to get the Independent vote in the general election exactly HOW?
Just curious.
It's not just parties that Independents don't really care for, it's strict ideologies too, be they liberal or conservative.
As for playing the race card, Michelle Obama started that in South Carolina (the earliest that I know of) when she said, and I quote, "The question isn't whether my husband is ready to be president, but whether the country is ready for him to be president."
If that's not an implied accusation of racism against those who won't be voting for Obama, I don't know what is.
Please define "liberal." You really don't know what it means. It does not mean socialist. At. All. Thank you. Come again.
Also, "race" became an issue for Barack Obama the day he was born.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
ultra-liberal - anyone to the left of John Birch. :-)
Ding. Ding. Ding.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
As did "gender" for Hillary. Or am I not supposed to notice black men got the vote in this country a full 50 years before any woman?
Is Obama an identity politics candidate? No. Is Hillary Clinton?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
You don't think Obama identifies with the black community? How come his Tennessee state steering committee has ten blacks and three whites?
White: Bob Tuke, Megan Barry, Jim Cooper
Black: Brenda Gilmore, Lois Deberry, Johnny Shaw, Walter Hunt, Lionel Mathews, Vivian Wilhoite, Jerry Maynard, Chris Woodall, John Majors, Jamie Isabel
Source: Press release, Nashville Post, January 4, 2008
(in process of editing to add titles)
Please post a policy statement. Otherwise, you are diagnosing via bumps on the head.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
You don't think it's relevant? Somehow I think the Republicans (and many Democrats) would be ALL over it were Hillary to release a similar list weighted 70-30 female. (For the record, her list of over 100 supporters is roughly 50-50. And includes openly homosexual representatives, a big deal in Tennessee Democratic politics.)
You really think George Bush would do that? Issue a list with at least a few openly gay members on it, as well as 50% women? If you do, I don't know that we really have a whole lot left to say to each other on this topic.
[Edit: Sorry, metulj...I think we've read past each other. I didn't read your original post on this carefully enough, and I do think you make some valid points. I've gotta run out for a while, back later to carry on...]
Can't edit my post for some reason. For your info: Barry, Hunt and Mathews are Davidson Metro Council members (Isabel is a former Metro member). Shaw and Gilmore are state House members. DeBerry is a state Senate member. Don (not John) Majors is a staffer for U.S. Rep. Jim Cooper. I believe Chris Woodall is a member of the Knoxville County Commission.
Eleanor: It's irrelevant that he has black members of his committee. I am sure there are people who are left-handed as well. You are confusing 'identification" with "identity." Is an explicit 'race' identity policy on the table with Obama?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
To me, one of the biggest symbols of identity is a person's church. I am concerned about some of the things I've read on the web site of Obama's church - Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, especially some of his pastor's talking points.
A urban black church caters and identifies with black theology. Shocking.
I don't see the problem with Obama's religious beliefs or that of his Pastors.
Hillary's on the other hand:
Link...
Interesting, but as a white Southern woman who is a practicing Christian, of the more liberal persuasion, I'm not concerned about either of these things.
pgs
Pam Strickland
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut
You argued before (correct me if I'm paraphrasing incorrectly) that Obama can't help but be involved in discussions about his race. I think that's true, same as Clinton can't avoid becoming involved in discussions based on gender.
That said, I think if Obama wants to avoid accusations of identity politics, he'd do well to appoint more Asians, Latinos, etc. to his steering committee here in TN, as well as some more women, although I certainly think one can't do much better than Deberry and Gilmore, both of whom are powerhouse legislators.
And that's why I don't want this to get too far off track...this is Dems vs. Dems, and as I mentioned below I certainly imagine Republicans will use race and gender issues to divide the electorate (see: Willie Horton, Anita Hill, et. al., as well as the fact that Republicans are running neither blacks nor women for President in 2008.)
On a personal note, I'd pick Obama for President over George Bush, or any of the 2008 GOP candidates, so fast I'd cram my finger right through the screen on the Devil-spawn ES&S Ivotronic machine that's going to eat my vote this November. ;)
(And I'm not missing your point about the corporatism. I think it's a good one. I just think it's a problem in need of a long-term solution, and it's about more than this one election.)
is not a Knoxville council member. Chris WoodHULL is. A google came up with a real estate person named Chris Woodall in Murfreesboro.
Pam Strickland
"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut
FYI.. Chris Woodhull, Knoxville City Councilman, was recently announced as a member of Barack Obama's 12-member Tennessee State Leadership Committee.
Link...
Interesting. I thought Chris was a Republican.
Also, Eleanor,
Chris Woodhull, Knoxville City Councilman (not a county commissioner), is a WHITE guy. Not that there's anything wrong with that. ;-)
(Oddly, I knew which race most of these folks are because I've met them, or in many cases, worked for or contributed to their campaigns. If I were an Obama supporter out in either the East or West grand divisions, I'd be insisting the campaign appoint more people from outside Nashville as well.)
"If that's not an implied accusation of racism against those who won't be voting for Obama, I don't know what is."
No. You don't.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
I never said anything about race. She has sent her surrogates out (ala GWB) to do the polical wetworks for her-
Bob Kerry:
"It's probably not something that appeals to him, but I like the fact that his name is Barack Hussein Obama, and that his father was a Muslim and that his paternal grandmother is a Muslim. There's a billion people on the planet that are Muslims, and I think that experience is a big deal."
"Look, I think Barack Hussein Obama should be proud of the years he spent studying the Koran in the madrassas. Remember, Korans don't kill: people do. Not to mention that his Islamic upbringing gives him a fresh perspective on the 9/11 hijackers that none of us church-going, peace-loving Americans can match.
What do I think about his drug dealing past? The way I see it, his experience dealing crack in the hood, which to his credit he has not denied, just means he'll be able to deal more effectively with the pigmentation issue in America today. Do I believe President Barack Hussein will turn the White House into a nest of Muslim drug lords? No. But that's why we have campaigns: to discuss these issues and give the candidates a chance to tell us where they stand. "
Sounds like Kerrey is a Fox News person continually using Barack's middle name. Just because it's Hussein and might stir fear in the hearts of some racist. I've not noticed a similar emphasis on ANY other candidates name, have you? I'm not wondering why. What's your middle name Kerrey? And yours, Sean Hannity? Or even your correct name Mitt Romney?
Kerrey is a former Senator, Vet involved in the Thang Phong Massacre and current supporter of the Hillary campaign. He is a (was a) 'New' Democrat. He was the finance guy for Jim Webbs senatorial campaign
Shorter Gary: It's only the race card when they do it.
____________________________
With the possible exception of things like box scores, race results, and stock market tabulations, there is no such thing as Objective Journalism. The phrase itself is a pompous contradiction in terms.
Hey Andy and metulj-
It's so easy to see when you've been beaten, you just crank up the personal attacks and ignore the points made in the argument.
Why don't you do your candidates a real favor and just not speak up for them, if that's the best you can do?
Let's see. Where's the personal attack? I said you don't know what you are talking about. That was a statement of fact. And I pointed out that the 'race' card gets played for every black person the moment they slide out the birth canal. That's a statement of fact.
You take an ambiguous statement from Obama's wife and make out like she's floated a Jesse Helms TV ad. Do you know what the statement she made means? It means that America might not be ready for Barack Obama as President. Any other gloss on it exists only in your mind unless you have evidence to the contrary. Do you?
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Dude, logic only works on those capable of conceiving it. Gary is a lifeless person who is energized by his delusions of grandeur. The illusion that he "won" some sort of debate here is all he has in the world.
You know he's a clown, I know he's a clown, actually, everyone but him knows he's a clown. Thank God I have a life, lest I end up in Garyland. ;)
"The mind is like a parachute, it only works when it's open."
1) Hillary made her crying out to look like she was lamenting what might happen to the country if she's not elected. Fact is, she was crying because she's losing.
That's what happens to power-crazed Oligarchs like the Bush's and Clinton's when the facade begins to crumble.
I have no sympathy for anyone that has rubber-stamped the neocon agenda. And she has done exactly that.
Good riddence.
2) Barack Obama does fine in inter-party polling. But he cannot and will not win in November if nominated. In case anyone forgot, Dems won't be the only people voting in '08.
3) That leaves us with Edwards and I hope that sometime soon people remove the blinders and realize that Edwards is the only electable candidate we have.
Oh, Gary. Please keep advocating for Clinton. Guys like yourself are exactly the reason Democrats are backing away from her. I appreciate your help in exposing Clinton as the covert favorite of the Right-Wing.
And as was eluded to earlier in this thread, only the most naive would allow themselves to fall in behind the corporate media candidates. Republicans all around the country are switching to Dem to vote in our primary. Many of Obama's votes are coming from them.
They know what many of us already know, you see. He cannot win in '08.
I hope my fellow Democrats get tired of being force-fed candidates one day soon.
"The mind is like a parachute, it only works when it's open."
Alternate theory: A lot of people will vote for John Edwards because he's the only Democratic white male frontrunner.
Like it or not, this discussion *is* about race and gender. And as usual, the Republicans will use those issues to divide and conquer Democrats. (Notice their party has neither blacks nor women running for President.)
Damn if I'm not tempted to go out and get that old Will Rogers saw tattooed on my behind every now and again...["I belong to no organized Party: I'm a Democrat"...]
Hillary made her crying out to look like she was lamenting what might happen to the country if she's not elected. Fact is, she was crying because she's losing.
And you know this because of course you and Hillary are so close. Or because you can read her mind.
Gary why would anyone want more of the same? More war. More Handouts to Huge corporations. No thanks.
Also you are are the one that used liberal like it was a dirty word - 'Ultra liberal' - Scary stuff.
I would say Obama is a moderate liberal at best. By your standard I would be a Stalinist.
I have heard some Hillary supporters say that she is the only electable option. Leaving aside the base falseness of this - if she where to get elected I think it could well be worse than that of mitt or huck.
Assuming the Democrats retain control of congress any 'free' trade agreements Hillary would want to pass would be clear sailing, any 'family values' law, any war or bombing would get the green light.
The same attempts by a republican president would face some opposition.*
*or at least the illusion of it.
I finally watched Hillary's moment and thought it was fine. It seemed like the reaction of a normal person. No biggie.
I listened to John Edwards response to the question put to him about it and thought it was fine. It was in no way the "classless remark" I had been led to believe.
Now we are seeing the media use the term "Muskie moment". When Hillary was asked if that was what it was, I think she should have responded with something like, "Of course not, but then until the media quit having Fox news moments like this one right here, America will remain in the dark, now, won't they?"
And Hillary did not immediately attack Obama like I heard George Will say on Sunday. (What a lizard)
I appreciate your clear headed statements.
People are so easily spun by media talking heads but you did the responsible thing and looked for yourself. I salute you.
captainkona-
I'll ignore the personal stuff and deal with your points.
Fact is, she was crying because she's losing.
Did you ask her? I mean I have no idea why she got choked up. Was she thinking about her legacy, her opportunities or bleesings she's had? I don't know. Glad you do.
In case anyone forgot, Dems won't be the only people voting in '08.
I agree. That goes true for the Republicans who are appealing to the base and will have to appeal to the center when the general election begins.
I hope that sometime soon people remove the blinders and realize that Edwards is the only electable candidate we have.
Blinders, schminders.
Edwards is obviously appealing to a number of Democratic voters using the class warfare strategy. That's fine. Republicans do the same on moral issues.
I guess I just wonder if Edwards can expand on the issues to appeal to a broader group if he get's the nomination.
I'm not advocating for Clinton. It's just kind of interesting that so many in the Democratic party are attacking her with such vigor. She was obviously the assumed front-runner for a reason, and I thought that reason was partly due to the political success of her husband.
Are the Democrats actually going to break with all of that? Then who would be the next Democratic president to look to? Carter and Johnson?
I think at least a little of the Obama craze is Republicans trying to off Hillary. I saw an interview with a man in New Hampshire that said he changed from GOP to Dem registration because he thought " another Clinton co-presidency would be an unspeakable horror."
If not for Amy running what I'd rather do is vote in the GOP primary for the Repub I find least offensive, because for me the thought of someone who is a bigger hawk than Bush or a further religious right-winger for president would be an unspeakable horror. I would take any of the Dem candidates but I'm not doing cheers over any of them, I imagine many Republicans feel the same way. I'm tired of this Hillary hatred coming from the far right and left, when none of them can seem to put a finger on what they hate. I would say her tears were part exhaustion and part disappointment and a normal reaction.
Well said.
I saw an interview with a man in New Hampshire that said he changed from GOP to Dem registration because he thought " another Clinton co-presidency would be an unspeakable horror."
Doesn't this show the Democrats though just how much Republicans fear Clinton getting the nomination? And how strong a candidate she would be in the general election?
The postes per the committee are a little unclear.
Bottom line..I'm voting Obama.
bingo.
"Fired Up and Ready to Go!"
(Doesn't this show the Democrats though just how much Republicans fear Clinton getting the nomination? And how strong a candidate she would be in the general election?) I agree with Gary on the above, if the Republicans didn't think she would win, they wouldn't bother switching sides to vote against her.
Ah, anecdote...
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Enter the Big Dog. Now this is what I have been waiting for. He doesn't answer the question. He goes off on Obama.
Link...
Game on. Penn better put that ole resume on Monster.com. His ass is grass and Bill is the lawnmower.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Yep. This game ain't over tonight, not by a long shot.
I never thought so. This is popcorn chomping good shit. I am going to the Obama event up the street from my house tomorrow (3 blocks). I'll do a full write up on it. It's interesting that he is hitting NJ before Super Tuesday as that tends to be "tarmac" primary day.* I figure he knows that very diverse places like my city are going to be a slog because folks remember the Clintons well and with affection.
*And NWK is only 15 minutes by car.
True happiness is knowing you are a hypocrite. -- Ivor Cutler
Post new comment