Coffee's for Closers: Harold Ford Jr. comments on the Obama campaign

Wed

Apr 23 2008

08:21 am

By: R. Neal

Asked how Obama can outspend Clinton three to one and take total command of the airwaves in Pennsylvania for seven weeks and still not close the deal, Harold Ford Jr. offers Obama some free advice...

Yes, probably all that, but it's also like I said the other day. Clinton does well in states with a strong, established Democratic political machine. Ed Rendell is a one-man political machine.

Topics:

R. Neal's blog
Login or register to post comments

A lot of us Democrats in

Submitted by bizgrrl on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 8:33am.

A lot of us Democrats in Tennessee fought hard for Harold Ford, Jr. Whether or not he is liked as much now as he was at the time, he makes some excellent points.

Harold Ford, Jr. did not win the Senate seat, but it was not because he didn't work very hard in an extremely right wing state. It was a close race, kudos to him. It was amazing to watch him work. He made great speeches, he was in command of the topics, and he would stop and speak to just about anyone. I did not agree with all of his positions, but I felt he would have been a good Senator from Tennessee.

Obama should listen to Ford. He needs to appeal to the Democratic base. He needs to make every man and woman think he cares about their plight.

Keep in mind I am a Clinton supporter. Therefore, if Obama doesn't listen, I don't care. Clinton already knows what to do. I do believe Harold Ford Jr. learned from them.

HFJ

Submitted by bill young on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 12:33pm.

I like Harold & will support him if he runs
again.

But Joe gushing about Harold's campaign.

A little too much for me.

Obama DID win a Senate campaign & may still
be president.

"But Joe gushing about

Submitted by R. Neal on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 12:36pm.

"But Joe gushing about Harold's campaign. A little too much for me."

Yes, at one point HFJ had to remind Joe that he lost.

Not trying to argue, just

Submitted by bizgrrl on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 9:21am.

Not trying to argue, just curious. Pennsylvania was compared to Ohio many times last night. Clinton won Ohio by 10% as well. Do they hand out cash in Ohio? Or, for what other reason did Clinton do so well, or Obama not do so well, in Ohio?

I guess I should have been

Submitted by bizgrrl on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 10:00am.

I guess I should have been more clear. They didn't just compare without giving the comparisons. Sharing a border was not one of the comparisons, I don't think. They were using demographic (age, sex, diversity (or lack there of), urban vs rural) and economic comparisions.

The two main differences I

Submitted by R. Neal on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 10:04am.

The two main differences I seem to recall were rural v. urban (more rural in Ohio if I recall correctly), and seniors (more seniors in PA and fewer younger voters, who are apparently moving away from the state in droves).

Ohio

Submitted by Mello on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 11:43am.

A few weeks ago I took a good friend upNorth to meet those Ohio rural kind of folks. Sitting around that wonderful old and scarred oak kitchen table were my family- three generations of Ohio republican women. One by one those women talked about why they signed up to vote Democrat in the primary and why they are supporting whatever Democrat 'we' finally decide to run this fall.

Obama was unwilling to play

Submitted by Andy Axel on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 9:43am.

Obama was unwilling to play this unseemly game and Clinton was. To me, it is just another example of how Clintons will do whatever it takes to win.

You think Obama will go for unseemly if he can make it to the general?

Better "hope" so.

____________________________

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.

Careful, M...Since you ask:

Submitted by WhitesCreek on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 10:17am.

Cap and Trade: Obama supports implementation of a market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions by the amount scientists say is necessary: 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. Obama's cap-and-trade system will require all pollution credits to be auctioned. A 100 percent auction ensures that all polluters pay for every ton of emissions they release, rather than giving these emission rights away to coal and oil companies. Some of the revenue generated by auctioning allowances will be used to support the development of clean energy, to invest in energy efficiency improvements, and to address transition costs, including helping American workers affected by this economic transition.

Not super detailed, but clear enough. Now what else were you wondering?

Obama

And don't think any of this is why I support him. It is more complicated than any one issue. He was not my first choice, for sure.

and neither can most anybody

Submitted by WhitesCreek on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 6:20pm.

and neither can most anybody elses supporters. But I knew where Obama stood on that one, and Hillary and so on. I am like lots of folks who have read enough and watched enough to feel comfortable with either candidate's positions.

It is their seming diferences of understanding where we are in America and what we have to do, in order to turn this train wreck around. The little lies from Hillary about things that really don't matter exceot to make her seem like somthing she isn't are what soured me on her.

I prefer not to have a DLC Dem for the candidate, as well. Why replace a corporate republican with a corporate democrat?

And I realize that after he is elected, Obama will face some of the same trials that hurt Carter. It is difficult to be the only honest person in Washington. We need at least TWO! (John Edwards for ATTY Gen, Al Gore for whatever he wants)

Steve, I think you nailed

Submitted by Bbeanster on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 7:20pm.

Steve, I think you nailed it. When I was in law school, I used to know a guy who was just the most inveterate liar that anybody had ever heard of. He lied when he didn't have to. He lied when it didn't matter. He lied when it would've been easier to tell the truth.
One morning, a mutual friend came in and said he'd had breakfast with this guy, and that when they got to class, somebody asked what they'd had for breakfast. The guy said pancakes, and our friend was astounded -- they'd both had omelets. From then on, that became the gold standard for liars -- somebody who'd lie about what he had for breakfast.

Hillary must be kin to him.

Without referring to notes

Submitted by Hayduke on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 12:10pm.

I was impressed by his speech at Google where he talked about shining a light on the inner workings of government (and Congress in particular) by making everything possible available on the Web in a timely matter so citizens would see what was going on before the earmarks and sellouts made it into law. I believe there was a kitchen light analogy in there somewhere. He made the point that the only successful way to get most representatives to vote against their own financial interest is to embarrass them into it by drawing public attention. This is pretty much the opposite of Clinton's way of doing business.

None of the policy statements may really matter unless they're talking about things they can do without the cooperation of the legislative branch. For better or worse, not many campaign promises make much headway in Washington, sincere or not. The actual signal differences between the two Dems probably don't rise above that noise level.

Character and fundamental beliefs may be more important than specific policies, but voters haven't been all that successful at looking into the souls of our candidates. Obama talks (and more importantly, writes) a good game and I'm inclined to trust his reasoning when he's given room to flesh out his take on an issue. Clinton's motivations are pretty well documented and Beanster has a pretty good overview below. I trust her to competently do whatever is best for Hilary Clinton and can only hope that it coincides with my interests. I'll take my chances with Barack.

Bobby Toole

Submitted by bill young on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 12:23pm.

I reckon you never met ole Bobby Toole.

He was the king of ward heelers around here.

Now his folks would never kick a dog.

25$..thats good money for a vote.

In east Tenn it was always a 1/2 pint or 10$

I read that

Submitted by WhitesCreek on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 8:59am.

I read that differently...HFjr is speaking as the head of the DLC, a minority group within the Democratic party that performs as its republican wing. He damns with faint praise and excuses the worst tactics of his own candidate, Hillary. He lost his race in TN for two reasons...Corker dropped five million dollars of his own money into the race in the last 5 days..Big!

And Harold failed to actually energize Progressives, who would have put him in the Senate if they had turned out in the numbers we are seeing come out for Obama.

Obama has refused to go negative to the extent necessary to win in a state like PA, since he is currently having to go after a Democrat, and frankly doesn't have to in order to win.

Hillary jumped well under the bar yesterday, needing to win by over 66% to have a chance. She didn't and now needs over 70 % of all the votes left, and that is simply impossible. Obama closed her 20% plus lead down to a little over 9%. He will kill her candidacy in North Carolina, and if Hillary really cars about her country she will suspend her campaign and begin to help restore the country.

And Harold failed to

Submitted by Andy Axel on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 9:36am.

And Harold failed to actually energize Progressives, who would have put him in the Senate if they had turned out in the numbers we are seeing come out for Obama.

You know, it suddenly occurs to me why mainstream Democrats so often don't go after the "principled progressive" vote. It's too unreliable.

____________________________

Oxymoron - Progressives in

Submitted by Sarge on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 1:37pm.

Oxymoron - Progressives in Tennessee!

Just gotta say ..

Submitted by gonzone on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 10:09am.

HFjr is speaking as the head of the DLC, a minority group within the Democratic party that performs as its republican wing.

Just gotta say ... AMEN!

We don't need any more corporate whores. Period.

What qualifies you to head the DLC? Losing to Republicans! Look at the record of the DLC and tell me if that ain't right. Why would anyone vote
Republican Lite when they can vote Republican? I want real Democrats, not "triangulators."

Why should anyone take political advice from a loser? I know he's a Dem political machine man but his qualifications end there.

"When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro."
Hunter S. Thompson

PA is the state whose Senate

Submitted by Andy Axel on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 10:12am.

PA is the state whose Senate delegation has consisted of Arlen "Magic Bullet" Specter and, up until recently, Rick Santorum. And Bob Casey is about as "Reagan Democrat" as they come.

Clinton is a miserable candidate though beholden to "free" traders and the state-level Democratic machines.

To paraphrase Don Corleone Rumsfeld: you go to primary with the candidates you have.

____________________________

I wish it were Al Gore.

Submitted by Bbeanster on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 11:49am.

I wish it were Al Gore.
But it's not, so I'm for Obama.

I'm beginning to believe that the Clintons have a Plan B (and I do believe that winning was the Clintons' Plan A -- they just were overconfident about putting the opposition away early and had no real post-Super Tuesday plan, as evidenced by $$ issues the past two months).

Plan B is "Let me win, but if I cannot win, let me cripple Obama so he cannot win, either."

The last thing on earth Hillary Clinton wants is President Obama running as an incumbent in 2012. Hillary's got this election and next -- then she's too old.

Over the past month, I've been reading HRC biographies. Some pro-Hillary, some anti-, some objective. This is something I didn't do for years and years, because I disliked her critics so much, and didn't want to fall prey to the "vast right-wing conspiracy." But some themes emerge with remarkable consistency, whether the author set out to do a hatchet job, or not:
1. Her intelligence.
2. Her ruthlessness, which includes a changling nature that allows her to cozy up to the right wing when she thinks it'll get her a vote or a buck. She can bray that fingernails-on-the-blackboard laugh all she wants to when asked about the likes of Scaife and Limbaugh (the laugh is Hillary's "tell", btw), but it's easy to see what she's doing.
3: She lies. A lot. About everything from being named after Sir Edmund Hillary to where Chelsea was on 9/11 to being a lifelong Yankees fan. And those are just the little things that she pulls out of her ass.
4. When she gets in a jam, she blames others (Travelgate -- which appears to be the reason Vince Foster cracked up; Pardongate-- which she disclaimed any knowledge of and blamed on Bill; her secrecy-cloaked, 'my way or the highway' approach to healthcare reform -- the failure of which she blamed solely on the Republicans; her willingness to attack Bill's girlfriends, both privately and publicly -- over and over and over again -- when he got caught screwing around).
5.Her control freak nature and her greed. It appears that she had few friends among those who waited on her as First Lady, judging from the way the White House staff and the Secret Service have ratted her out for bad behavior (habitual rudeness, trying to walk out of the White House with everything that wasn't nailed down). Even loyalists like Lanny Davis and DeeDee Myers have badmouthed her and been quoted doing so.

Is it too late to draft Gore?

Betty's Observations:

Submitted by RayCapps on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 12:48pm.

First of all, most of the specific observations listed above could be equally applied to most any politician in any race. Nothing in Betty's list, individually or collectively, seemed at first to explain why there's such a powerful undercurrent of anti-Hillary sentiment in this nation, a sentiment that predates the rise of Obama and in some ways might have even led to it. There's something about her that makes a lot of people dislike her on a personal level, even people who wholeheartedly endorse her policy positions. I haven't been able to put my finger on what it is, much less reduce it to words, but I've felt it myself at times. Hillary supporters are quick to chalk it up to resentment of powerful women. I think there's an element of truth in that, but it certainly falls far short of telling the whole story.

I guess because she didn't elaborate on it, I thought more about Betty's first point, inteligence. It's not that Hillary's intelligent that has caused even her harshest critics to concede that point. Rather, it's that Hillary is remarkably, even exceptionally intelligent. In my work and in my background, I've been blessed to work with and get to know quite a few people I would describe as exceptionally intelligent. Very few of them are in a leadership role where they work, and very few of the ones who are in such a role are very good at it. They're great at collaboration. They're very good working independently. But when asked to take command, they falter. I'm not a psychologist. I don't claim to know why that is. But I have noticed some common tendencies.

A lot of these very intelligent people have a tendency talk at people rather than speak to them, to condescend rather than uplift, to explain rather than teach, and to berate rather than inspire. They aren't very good at delegation. They assign people tasks, but feel they must constantly check up on them, to offer guidance and suggestions every step of the way. If the process being reviewed is something they themselves helped to implement, they are extremely defensive about any criticism or suggestions for improvement. Once they come to view something as "theirs" it become unassailable, any crticism of the process is a personal criticism of them. In short, they don't connect with subordinantes on a personal level, and they don't cause subordinates to feel they are believed in. They certainly don't inspire their subordinates or sell subordinates on a vision or goal. Thinking about it, remembering her stump speeches and debate performances, I realize I've seen a lot of the same shortcomings in Hillary's demeanor and style.

Just my own, usubstantiated, unsupported, gut feelings and personal observations.

Travelgate -- which appears

Submitted by Pam Strickland on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 10:12am.

Travelgate -- which appears to be the reason Vince Foster cracked up;

Having clinical depression is not "cracking up." Travelgate may have been the most directly connected timewise, but someone who is clinically depressed has a chemical imbalance in their brain.

I knew Vince Foster and had great respect for him personally and professionally. His problem, I believe, was that he was clinically depressed and was not properly treated because of the wrong-headed stigma that is put on mental illness. We've gotten a little better in the last 15 years, but not much. Too many still believe that being mentally ill is shameful. Don't blame Hillary for this, blame society. We all failed Vince Foster.

Pam Strickland

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut

Pam, please. How the heck

Submitted by Bbeanster on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 11:01am.

Pam, please. How the heck did I, or anybody who is reading Knox Views, fail Vince Foster?

Bill Clinton, who grew up with him and was a lifelong friend, should have known if Foster was depressed; Hillary, who was widely described as his best friend, should have known if he was clinically depressed -- and if they did, wasn't it on them not to have subjected him to the kind of pressure he was facing?

It shouldn't have been news to them that he was calling around for help (mostly looking for anti-depressants), should it? He killed himself right after the Wall Street Journal "Who is Vincent Foster" editorial. I found a real interesting, dispassionate discussion of it here:

(link...)

This graf was telling re the difficulty of working "for" Hillary rather than being her boss, as he was at the Rose Law Firm, at least in the beginning:

I can tell you that Hillary Clinton's relationship with Vince Foster did change considerably after the travel office scandal. She was pointing her finger at Vince Foster, being kind of dismissive toward him, because she'd asked him in February of 1993 to do something about these same Secret Service guys who were around her, after a story was leaked to the Chicago Sun-Times that she had thrown a lamp at her husband. She believed that somebody from the Secret Service had leaked this information. She told him to do something about it. Foster blew it off and said, "Hey, these guys are here to protect you. Their job is not to watch you kiss and tell." Then the White House travel office scandal breaks and here's Hillary on the spot again, because of two conversations she had had with Vince Foster. If there was an affair going on, it certainly wasn't going on when they were in Washington.

I don't have time to go back

Submitted by Pam Strickland on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 1:01pm.

I don't have time to go back and read your links etc right now.

But look at it this way: Society, even now, looks at depression and other mental illnesses as a moral weakness and spiritual shortcoming. Even now, 15 years (I'm estimating here) later, more people in society see it has something other than an actual illness. As a part of a society that falls back on these stereotyping, we all contributed to his death and others. My hope was that his death would help create an opportunity for educating society as a whole about mental illness; instead it has made him a symbol of why the Clintons are bad for America. It makes me sick every time someone brings it up.

As for Vince being conflicting about going to Washington, that's true. I had more than one conversation with him about it. I believe he went because he thought he hadn't done enough to leave a mark on the world, which is a common thought process for someone who is depressed. Others worked for the administration in capacities that allowed them to stay in LR.

OK, I'm going to work now.

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut

NO

Submitted by bill young on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 12:36pm.

It just takes someone to nominate Gore @
the convention & a second.

Clinton fatigue

Submitted by Factchecker on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 12:56pm.

But some themes emerge...

OK, then.

One reason I stayed on the sideline for so long is that I didn't want to be mistaken for (or sucked in as) an Obama zealot. Besides, their platforms are very close and I thought it would be healthy to let things play out first.

But let's look at why Obama has so many zealots. And what you don't hear when they talk about him spending so much money in PA. (Because he could, which is because he's raised so much more.)

Who is more inspiring as a leader? Who has brought in record numbers of new, enthusiastic Democrats from independents and others formerly turned off by politics? Who raises by far the most cash ever, and gets it in small amounts from individuals who aren't rich/powerful? He's not relying on Haslam type money or the traditionally powerful party interests. This is grass roots in action.

I also think we ought to recognize the psychology here. It's not her fault, but he has the emotional appeal. She sounds like a crabby step mom. Why would we not apply the same virtual platform (either's) to the candidate with by far the most appeal? Repugs would crap all over themselves if they had a candidate with a fraction of the leadership charisma that Obama has. Are we too dysfunctional as a party to see what we have in him?

To some, maybe this just proves I've become a wide-eyed zealot too. I'm OK with that. If she wins, I'll of course back her and vote for her. I've lost respect, though. She went in PA as a huge favorite, ran like a desperate underdog, and won by under 10 points.

If she wins, I'll of course

Submitted by Bbeanster on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 7:22pm.

If she wins, I'll of course back her and vote for her.

I can't say "of course" to that scenario, should it come about. I'll probably hold my nose and vote for her, but I will not do anything more than pull a lever.

I'm not an Obama zealot. I have warmed up to him, once I made up my mind who to go for when Edwards dropped out (and I don't think Edwards or Gore, or anybody else is perfect, btw. I've always had a SERIOUS issue with Al over his conduct concerning the Pigeon River, but sometimes you just have to come to terms with this stuff and keep your eye on the prize).

I always supported Bill Clinton, though, and accepted Hillary as part of the package deal. I didn't analyze my feelings toward her for a long time, and just sloughed off Republican predictions that there was a Clintonian "Plan" to elect her president after Bill was done -- and that this was why she'd been so determined to overlook his conduct.

But now I've been forced to look at her, and her alone -- and I just do not like her worth a damn. She's false and greedy and self-centered. She absolutely screwed Al Gore in 2000 by sucking up money for her senatorial race like a drunk at a three-for-one Happy Hour -- at the expense of Gore's race. She even showed up at Gore fundraisers to shake people down, something that is just unheard of among civil members of the same party and the same "team." It makes me agree with those who say she had a motive beyond getting herself elected to the US Senate as a carpetbagging senator from New York -- she didn't want Al Gore to be president for eight years, making it hard for a Democrat to be elected in 2008. Gore has been very, very quiet this election cycle, and Tipper spits on the ground when Hillary's name is mentioned.

But I'm rambling.
As I said, I'm not an Obama zealot, and I'm not saucer-eyed, or young, or gullible or uninformed or any of those other belittling things that Andy and the other Hillary backers call Obama supporters. Like Daniel Patrick Moynihan's widow Liz, and Tom Dashle and Al Gore, I just cannot abide Hillary Clinton. I don't even like Bill much anymore, either. I'm done with them, and I think it is a HUGE mistake to think that she will do a whit better in the general election than Obama will. Hillary's made a lot of history since Bill's last election, and it's going to make for some interesting TV -- every bit as bloody as any Jeremiah Wright videos.

I hate things have come to this.

She absolutely screwed Al

Submitted by bizgrrl on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 6:02am.

She absolutely screwed Al Gore in 2000 by sucking up money for her senatorial race like a drunk at a three-for-one Happy Hour

Wow! This is a first for me. I have never heard that Al Gore losing in 2000 was Hillary Clinton's fault.

She absolutely screwed Al

Submitted by Bbeanster on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 8:58am.

She absolutely screwed Al Gore in 2000 by sucking up money for her senatorial race like a drunk at a three-for-one Happy Hour

Wow! This is a first for me. I have never heard that Al Gore losing in 2000 was Hillary Clinton's fault.

Yeah, I missed that at the time, too. I even missed this article last fall. I linked it here when I started my reading campaign a few weeks ago, actually.

(link...)

There's also mention of the Gore/Hillary friction in most of the literature, including a little bit in "A Woman in Charge" by Carl Bernstein, which is considered fairly sympathetic to Hillary, and a whole lot in "American Evita" by Christopher Andersen, which is more critical but not an outright hatchet job. It's pretty well documented.

Bill and Hillary resented Gore's distancing himself from them in the campaign, and blamed his loss on that. Gore deeply disapproved of Bill's personal conduct, and felt that it contributed to his loss. Tipper is pissed at Hillary, and believes that her senate race damaged Al's chances. I think they are probably all right, in some respect.

The money to Hillary wasn't

Submitted by Pam Strickland on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 10:22am.

The money to Hillary wasn't the nail in the coffin for Gore, but it was one of many factors that contributed to a smaller popular margin, which led to the Electoral College debacle.

I watched an interview w/ Gore when his last book came out. Can't remember who, but I think it was on 60 Minutes w/ Leslie Stahl. He had nothing good or bad to say about Hillary. Just flat refused to talk about her or the presidential race.

Pam Strickland

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut

The money to Hillary wasn't

Submitted by bizgrrl on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 10:32am.

The money to Hillary wasn't the nail in the coffin for Gore, but it was one of many factors that contributed to a smaller popular margin, which led to the Electoral College debacle.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure it didn't help that he couldn't carry his home state. Many of us were quite disappointed he did not visit the state much during his campaign.

I wasn't here, but not

Submitted by Pam Strickland on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 12:51pm.

I wasn't here, but not voting for Gore because he didn't visit the state sounds as unreasonable as someone not voting for Hillary because she's married to Bill. You either support him or you don't, but you don't pout because he didn't come home for a visit.

Pam Strickland

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut

We voted for him. The point

Submitted by R. Neal on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 12:54pm.

We voted for him. The point is, I believe, there are a lot of independent voters in TN, and Gore wrote off his own home state. Which went for Clinton in 96 if I recall correctly. Also, if Gore had carried Tennessee by maybe trying just a little, FL and Bush v. Gore would have been irrelevant.

Maybe your Gore rally was

Submitted by bizgrrl on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 1:16pm.

Maybe your Gore rally was like ours in East TN. He flew in to TYS a few days at the most, as I recall, before election day. Stood just outside the plane and held a pretty good rally, then was off. Yes, we were there.

And, yes, as R said, we both voted for Gore in 2000 and would again.

Al

Submitted by bill young on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 1:21pm.

Al beat the stew outa Ashe for Senate
in '84.

Then held TONS of town meetings
all over Tn.

When he started to run for president
April of '87 he stopped holding his town meetings.

Never did it again.

In '90 he had a very,very weak opponent.

Al spent most of that year stumping the country
gearing up for a presidential run in '92.

He didnt run but ended up on the ticket.

After becoming VP Al didnt hang out much in Tn.

Us folks that had been around Tn during Al Jrs rise
stuck with him..still do..

But from '87 till '00 alota new folks had moved to
town & they had never met him.

Politics is a game of addition & if
only the stalwarts are going hard for you
...you lose.

Al thought he had Tn..

Once he put 2 & 2 together..Tn was gone.

What a perfect title. Well

Submitted by Anonymously Nine (not verified) on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 5:45pm.

What a perfect title. Well done. Who will get the steak knives? We all know what third place gets.

Bravo, Betty!

Submitted by Factchecker on Wed, 2008/04/23 - 8:31pm.

I'll only "of course" back her (should she somehow win) in the sense that I'll be opposing McCain.

I'm not saucer-eyed, or

Submitted by Andy Axel on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 1:09am.

I'm not saucer-eyed, or young, or gullible or uninformed or any of those other belittling things that Andy and the other Hillary backers call Obama supporters.

And yet, we have you earlier today name-checking The Blowjob and yet again asserting that Hillary was ultimately responsible for the death of Vince Foster. Stay classy!

____________________________

And yet, we have you earlier

Submitted by Bbeanster on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 8:06am.

And yet, we have you earlier today name-checking The Blowjob and yet again asserting that Hillary was ultimately responsible for the death of Vince Foster. Stay classy

Andy, you are a bully and incapable of civil discussion (kind of a left-wing Hornback with a brain, if such a thing can be imagined), and I have pretty much quit caring what you have to say about anything. But I'm going to answer you this once.

I'm not "yet again" saying Hillary was responsible for the death of Vince Foster. Before yesterday, I never before mentioned Vince Foster on this board, or much of anywhere else.

But, yes, I am troubled by what I have read about Foster's death. Hillary persuaded him to go to Washington, where he quickly found himself in over his head, even before it fell his lot to manage the fallout after she got in trouble for summarily firing the White House travel office staff so she she could install some relatives of the Thomasons -- and then lying about it. He probably considered HRC his best friend, and when she cast the blame on others -- including him -- for Travelgate (pretty typical behavior on her part), Foster was distraught. He killed himself in the midst of the investigation, and immediately afterward, somebody sent Maggie Williams (Hillary's personal assistant) and Craig Livingston (a mysterious White House "security" operative) to sanitize Foster's office -- which was officially considered a crime scene -- thus spawning "Filegate" "out of Travelgate."

At the time, I was a knee-jerk Clinton defender who was so angered by suggestions that Hillary murdered Foster -- from people like Dan Burton and Rush Limbaugh (who also called Chelsea the "family dog") -- that I didn't pay much attention to the facts of the case. I remain disgusted by Limbaugh, unlike Bill Clinton, who appeared on his show to campaign for Hillary a few weeks ago (Limbaugh is promoting something he calls "Operation Chaos," which encourages Republicans to register as Democrats and vote for Hillary -- but, hey, a vote's a vote, right?)

And yes, I am offended that the President of the United States was getting blowjobs from and using a cigar as a dildo on a 24-year-old White House intern in the Oval Office. I remember how I felt when I read the first whispers of the Lewinski affair -- betrayed. I hoped like hell Bill was telling the truth, but we all know how that went. I quickly fell in line and stood by my man, because that was what I did back then.

And won't do anymore, no matter how much you puff and blow, so to speak.

Hillary persuaded him to go

Submitted by Bbeanster on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 9:36am.

Hillary persuaded him to go to Washington, where he quickly found himself in over his head, even before it fell his lot to manage the fallout after she got in trouble for summarily firing

I overstated and over-simplified here. From my reading, Foster had very mixed feelings about going to Washington with the Clintons, but he wanted to be part of the administration. He said would have been hurt if they hadn't offered him a job, but he evidently hated the culture there almost from the day he arrived. He and Webb Hubbell are both very sad stories in this saga.

Webb Hubbell a sad story.

Submitted by Pam Strickland on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 12:49pm.

Webb Hubbell a sad story. Webb brought all of that on himself. He was the one who doctored the law firms billing. No one, absolutely no one, can be blamed for that except him. And he knew it was there to be uncovered before he went to D.C. Nothing sad about that except his ego.

I don't like talking about Webb and Vince in the same post. It degrades Vince.

Pam Strickland

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut

See my comment above. If you

Submitted by Pam Strickland on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 10:27am.

See my comment above.

If you want to blame Hillary for his death, then take a close look at yourself and everyone you know.

I'm painfully familiar w/ the details of his situation, and no one person or detail can be blamed. The societal misjudgment regarding depression and all mental illnesses and those who allowed themselves to be duped by that misinformation are who failed Vince Foster.

Pam Strickland

"We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." ~Kurt Vonnegut

Andy, you are a bully and

Submitted by Anonymously Nine (not verified) on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 9:42am.

Word.

Andy, you are a bully and

Submitted by Andy Axel on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 11:32am.

Andy, you are a bully and incapable of civil discussion (kind of a left-wing Hornback with a brain, if such a thing can be imagined), and I have pretty much quit caring what you have to say about anything

Not everything I've ever said is constructive, sure. Freely admitted. I've been called far worse by far better. Rikki Hall comes to mind.

That said, my tolerance for "jejune" is about level with "willfully ignorant." I think you're mistaking my capacity for civil discussion (which is, in fact, quite ample) with my intolerance for insipid commentary, especially when it proffers old, debunked slander as guidance - which is a style, if I can feel free to drawing a parallel, somewhat akin to "#9 with better editing skills."

Over the last sixteen years, I've lost my patience with the lies, and it puts me in the unenviable position of feeling defensive about Hillary Clinton - a candidate who, in fact, I did vote for but who I'M REALLY NOT ALL THAT EXCITED ABOUT. If you've followed what I've written at all before figuratively clapping your hands over your ears, this should be readily apparent. I think that her pose of "fighter" is about as empty as every time I hear someone wax nostalgic about the power of "hope." I don't feel inspired or activated by either candidate, frankly. I know that a lot of people are, yet I simply don't find the case most often made for Obama compelling. On the contrary, I find the case being made against Clinton to be abhorrent and irresponsible.

If I have a bottom line in this campaign, it's that Obama hasn't had a record to run on, and the record that he does have is literally indistinguishable from Clinton's on a whole lot of important issues - although I've been actively encouraged to look the other way on those matters by you and by "elite" "liberal" leadership over here in blog-o-land when I've seen the subject broached.

So if I'm going to get weak tea in either case as "progressive" policy, I'm voting for the candidate who I think actually has more competence for the job and who I think has the best chance of knocking of Saint "Private BBQ" where it matters - in electoral votes, since we don't run popular elections for President in this country. I don't fucking buy transcendence as a value when I'm looking at two politicians both trying to buy votes, either in hard cash or with carefully tempered rhetoric.

And if carefully tempered rhetoric is political currency? Obama is showing a proclivity for blowing it when he thinks the record button is off. (Should he manage to get the nomination, it very well may be that Obama will find a way to lose all by himself. No one made him suggest that small-town Americans a bunch of embittered, dysfunctional, God-bothering, gun toting neurotics. When you're campaigning for president, you don't imply that over half the population is mentally ill. How many more rookie mistakes are there left to make?)

I'll save my principled stances for something over which I have a lot more influence. I did "principled" in 2000 and we wound up with Bush. And as in 2000, we're seeing a full-on media circus obsessed with "facts" such as the ones that you present to buffet your case. The destruction of Bill Clinton's presidency, the destruction of Al Gore, the destruction of John Kerry, the destruction of Hillary Clinton - gee, is there a pattern emerging yet?

I'm not "yet again" saying Hillary was responsible for the death of Vince Foster. Before yesterday, I never before mentioned Vince Foster on this board, or much of anywhere else.

What I mean is that "yet again" we have someone bringing up the tired old trope of how Hillary Clinton caused Vince Foster's death. "Yet again" in a long line of lazy journos who apparently believes that reading The Truth About Hillary Clinton constitutes "research." "Yet again" the innuendo, the propagandizing, the reflexive hatred, the talking points right out of the Starr chamber. Clinton got a blowjob! Al Gore invented the Internet! Kerry threw his medals! Obama associates with angry black men! Hillary killed Vince Foster! Todo lo mismo.

And won't do anymore, no matter how much you puff and blow, so to speak.

So what? You think I'm trying to change your mind?

Like I have written on other matters: I'm not on a mission here. I'm only presenting my opinion. And yeah, that opinion is like a bowel: Everyone has one and they're all full of shit, although I don't know if that sufficiently explains why people are trying to convince you to get a high colonic.

I won't offer a contrary opinion on that matter.

____________________________

Use of F**k really brought it home

Submitted by Average Guy on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 12:01pm.

insipid commentary, proffers old, figuratively clapping, wax nostalgic, abhorrent and irresponsible, subject broached, buy transcendence, tempered rhetoric, proclivity for blowing, embittered, dysfunctional, God-bothering, gun toting neurotics, innuendo, the propagandizing, the reflexive hatred...

...so, the answer to being a bully is to beat people up with big words? Strong!.., sorry I meant; Puissant!

Awful long response for; Todo lo mismo.

Like I have written on other

Submitted by bizgrrl on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 1:21pm.

Like I have written on other matters: I'm not on a mission here. I'm only presenting my opinion.

Lately when someone is a Clinton supporter their opinion is apparently a very, very bad thing. It's definitely frustrating. I'm still happy with my vote and will do it again.

Like I have written on

Submitted by Bbeanster on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 3:41pm.

Like I have written on other matters: I'm not on a mission here. I'm only presenting my opinion.
Lately when someone is a Clinton supporter their opinion is apparently a very, very bad thing. It's definitely frustrating. I'm still happy with my vote and will do it again.

Bizzgirl, that is so far removed from reality that I am stunned. Unlike Andy, whom I have never met and never hope to, I've attempted to be civil, and to document my contentions -- not that you ever bother to read any of it, or comment on the merits of the argument.
Here's his whole paragraph, sans your selective snipping -- guess you and Andy put me in my place.

So what? You think I'm trying to change your mind?
Like I have written on other matters: I'm not on a mission here. I'm only presenting my opinion. And yeah, that opinion is like a bowel: Everyone has one and they're all full of shit, although I don't know if that sufficiently explains why people are trying to convince you to get a high colonic.
I won't offer a contrary opinion on that matter.

Bbeanster, RE: And yeah,

Submitted by bizgrrl on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 4:25pm.

Bbeanster, RE:

And yeah, that opinion is like a bowel: Everyone has one and they're all full of shit, although I don't know if that sufficiently explains why people are trying to convince you to get a high colonic.
I won't offer a contrary opinion on that matter.

I thought he was making a joke in reference to your colon post earlier today. Apparently I'm wrong or it was a bad joke.

Dears...

Submitted by WhitesCreek on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 9:02pm.

I think the world of both of you.

But it's just an election and only the fate of the Free World hangs in the balance. The worst it can be, at this point, is all right.

If I need to come over with a couple of bottles of wine and a fatherly attitude...

If I need to come over with

Submitted by Andy Axel on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 10:11pm.

If I need to come over with a couple of bottles of wine and a fatherly attitude...

Depends.

What vintage?

____________________________

"It's gettin' so a businessman can't expect no return from a fixed fight. Now, if you can't trust a fix, what can you trust?"

Maybe I should just go back

Submitted by bizgrrl on Fri, 2008/04/25 - 6:14am.

Maybe I should just go back to working on my traffice CALMING devices.

Oh Dear...

Submitted by Anonymously Nine (not verified) on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 11:44am.

The situation must be bad if the best defense is "if I can feel free to drawing a parallel, somewhat akin to "#9 with better editing skills."

Betty, you had me at "kind of a left-wing Hornback with a brain".

Your turn Butterfly...

The Clintons

Submitted by bill young on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 12:01pm.

I've never been a huge Clinton guy.

Back in '92,I was big time time behind Jerry Brown.

Betty wrote a story for the old Knoxville Journal
about the first meeting we had organizing for Brown.

However,when Clinton put Al on the ticket..I went
nuts...for Clinton-Gore.

I got a kick outa watching those right wingers fume when Clinton glided to victory in '96.

Then the finger wagging I did not..

It wasn't much fun around the watercooler to
take up for ole Bill.

So being luke warm about Clinton
I didn't.

In my lifetime Bush I is the only incumbent VP to
win the Whitehouse.

Nixon,HHH & Gore all lost in very close elections.

And yes Al took Tn for granted..by the time he
got wind that Tn was breaking for W..it was too late.

In the '08 race I never considered voting for Hillary.

Like I said..never been a Clinton guy.

When Obama started acting like a candidate in
Nov of '06..I knew thats who I'd vote for.

Now if we can just somehow win Ind & NC

Obama will be the nominee.

Least likely new BFFs?

Submitted by Factchecker on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 2:21pm.

...disgusted by Limbaugh, unlike Bill Clinton, who appeared on his show to campaign for Hillary a few weeks ago (Limbaugh is promoting something he calls "Operation Chaos," which encourages Republicans to register as Democrats and vote for Hillary...

He did WHAT?!?! That's even more of a shocker than Hillary meeting w/ Scaife. Especially considering the near certainty that the Limburger lovefest is just a setup to oppose Obama and make for a much easier Swiftboat ride in November.

Wow. I'm shocked. Did I say that surprises me?

This is very sad. We should

Submitted by R. Neal on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 4:07pm.

This is very sad.

We should stick to directing our criticizm and complaints at the candidates and their campaigns (and mainly the McCain campaign) instead of each other.

United we stand, even if we disagree. Divided we suck.

'68..'08..'68..'08

Submitted by bill young on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 8:49pm.

Like today..40 years ago

The early May primary in Indiana was crucial...
but the fight this time is nowhere near
as brutal as it was in '68.

RFK had got in after McCarthy's 42% in NH
stunned the political world.

One McCarthy kid said:

"NH was like Christmas Day

Then we went down to the tree

& RFK had stolen our Christmas presents."

Then LBJ got out.

Indiana was the first primary that RFK & McCarthy
were both on the ballot.

Governor Branigan was running as a favorite-son
leading an uncommitted delegate slate.

In Indiana as everywhere else RFK did not have the students.

They were with McCarthy.

RFK ask some students in Indiana why?

"Because we are here to end the war."

"I'm against the war" said RFK

"Yes but McCarthy was there & you weren't"

According to Richard Goodwin

RFK had some odd parts to his coalition in Indiana.

Wallace voters & Blacks.

We know about the black vote & RFK.

But Wallace voters?

In '64 Wallace carried 30% of the Indiana vote
in the presidential primary.

In Gary,Indiana Wallace won EVERY white ward.

RFK carried those wards in '68.

May 7th,1968..Indiana primary

RFK-42%
Branigan-30.7%
McCarthy-27.4%

Indiana vote @ the Convention

HHH-49
McCarthy-11
McGovern-2

In '08 Indiana is crucial & it's a tough race.

But nothing as brutal as '68.

I'll leave you with this.

At the '68 convention there was a boom for Ted Kennedy.

McCarthy said to Steve Smith,Kennedy brother-in -law:

"I want my name put into nomination..then I will go to the floor & withdraw & urge my delegates to vote for Ted Kennedy"

But then McCarthy added:

"While I'm willing to do this for Teddy,I never could have done it for Bobby."

RFK had been dead 3 months & Gene McCarthy could
not forgive Bobby for running.

Thats brutal.

bitterness

Submitted by Up Goose Creek on Thu, 2008/04/24 - 10:09pm.

No one made him suggest that small-town Americans a bunch of embittered, dysfunctional, God-bothering, gun toting neurotics. When you're campaigning for president, you don't imply that over half the population is mentally ill.

I am hoping Andy or someone else can explain how Obama's comments were condescending. I think most anyone with any awareness would feel bitter and alienated about the last 7 years. Especially the working class who bear the brunt of Iraq and Bush's economic policies.

How did Obama imply that half the population was mentally ill? Did I miss a soundbite?

____________________________________
Less is the new More - Karrie Jacobs

Question

Submitted by Up Goose Creek on Fri, 2008/04/25 - 4:42pm.

You know that was not a rhetorical question. I really would like someone to explain what was so offensive about Obama's remark.

____________________________________
Less is the new More - Karrie Jacobs

Campaign Rules:

Submitted by Hayduke on Fri, 2008/04/25 - 6:22pm.

If a candidate (or anyone associated with a candidate) makes a truthful statement during a campaign or in any way deviates from the official national fairy tale, an immediate apology is required.

Let's try this a few different ways:

Submitted by RayCapps on Sat, 2008/04/26 - 11:17pm.

If someone suggested that I was unable to cope with the challenges of life and had sought refuge in Bibles and Guns, I might be a little offended.

Were I either a believer or a gun owner and someone suggested my faith or my choice of personal possessions reflected my own inability to make my way in the world, I might be a little miffed.

Simplistic Math: To many folks God + Guns = Tradition/Heritage/Pride. Apparently to Obama, God + Guns = Fear. That didn't play well.

Obama has run an excellent campaign. He's a magnificent, even inspiring, orator. I voted Obama in February. But he flubbed this one. I'm a little surprised you would need help seeing that. You specifically used the word "condescending," but the simpler term "insulting" might be more appropriate. If the Democratic candidate for president tries to run his/her campaign belittling God believers or gun owners... welcome to four years of John McCain. There's a reason why Hillary was telling stories about her grandfather teaching her how to shoot. There's a reason why almost every southern or midwestern Dem who voted for the Brady Bill was abruptly unemployed in '94. Obama needs to focus on hope, on the economy, on bringing the troops home, on health care, and keep his big mouth shut about God and Guns if he hopes to be POTUS.

Religion

Submitted by Up Goose Creek on Sun, 2008/04/27 - 8:30pm.

If that comment had come from an avowed athiest - especially of the "religious people are deluded" type, then yeah, I could see the statement as very insulting. But Obama is clearly not an athiest.

I don't think too much about the gun ownership debate, that makes some sense. But I didn't see it as fear, more like picking your battles.

Thanks for the explanation.

____________________________________
Less is the new More - Karrie Jacobs

Discussing:

Are Chat bots a waste of time? (1 reply)
Smith & Wesson noise problem (1 reply)
Musicians dropping out of President's Freedom Concert Series (1 reply)
It's time for new blood in Congress, Barnett in - Burchett out (1 reply)
Burning Down The House... (2 replies)
Behind Lege Lies (1 reply)
Peace (1 reply)
Speak your truth, fight and believe. (1 reply)
Large banks have too much AI data center debt? (1 reply)
GOP misleading on federal health care funding (1 reply)
Feds indict civil rights group (3 replies)
Georgia issues burn ban, first time in state history (2 replies)

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

State News

Wire Reports

Local Media

Lost Medicaid Funding

To date, the failure to expand Medicaid/TennCare has cost the State of Tennessee ? in lost federal funding. (Source)

Comment viewing options

Discussing:

TN Progressive

TN Politics

Knox TN Today

Local TV News

News Sentinel

State News

Wire Reports

Local Media

Lost Medicaid Funding

Search and Archives

TN Progressive

Nearby:

Beyond:

At large:

Government

About