Excellent! Another brilliant post. Great work, eriposte. The way that you keep hammering these important points day after day is heartening and inspiring. Thanks!
Posted by lima beans at December 16, 2007 02:30 PMYes, eriposte, we know you like Hilary Clinton.
Posted by Luce Imaginary at December 16, 2007 03:41 PMABC has announced Lieberloser will endorse McLame tomorrow.
Posted by TIKI AL at December 16, 2007 04:27 PMThanks, eriposte, for the breath of fresh air in this climate of obamamania.
Posted by chrisss at December 16, 2007 05:18 PMI think The Boston Globe's endorsement of Obama yesterday made the same case. I like Obama and I'm sure a lot of people in Massachusetts do as well. Senator Clinton, however, is much more qualified and experienced to pull this country out of the deep ditch it has been driven into. She would truly make a better President. I also think that Obama might have a hard time winning Massachusetts. But to the Democrat goes the victory, and a massive headache.
Posted by E Jeter at December 16, 2007 06:29 PMI feel that DMR really show some guts to endorse Hillary at this "climate". They sure read Hillary right. They sure read Obama right. What impressed me most is the lines like this in their conclusion. "Indeed, Obama, her chief rival, inspired our imaginations. But it was Clinton who inspired our confidence. Each time we met, she impressed us with her knowledge and her competence."
On the other hand, Obama's supporters really hammered down DMR desperately. So many hateful nasty words on the comment section. If you are a Hillary supporter and make a post, be ready to be killed in a 3 minutes. How sad to see so many hearts and souls were fed and poisoned and used by Obama's "technical skill" to serve him without his appearance. Now this is a nasty quality of Obama. That is the main reason I would never trust him.
I made a comment the other day on the topic they mentioned about Obama's drug issue.
I said:
Obama talked about his drug thing in his book by him self. Obama talked again to 13 -14 year old kids in his campaign and again, he was not asked about it. Obama still talks about it in his fundraising. He really want people forget about it ? or truly profit from it ? Drug=polls
Well, I almost got killed.
Also, in his speech in almost most town hall meetings, he always say "well, unlike others, I may not say the things you want to hear..." We know he means Hillary. But by repeating the same line without mentioning her name over and over again is a smart attack. The attack listeners reminded of Hillary, down her, raise Obama up. This is a technique he has been using for a long time. This weekend I watched almost all the town hall meetings, his is one of them and he said that again.
Hope is hopeless.
Posted by Maryann at December 16, 2007 06:37 PMeR - you have done a great job of describing the problem of leadership. At this point in our country, we are absolutely needing someone who truly can act right away.
I just wish I wasn't so worried about how incredibly easy it will be to derail anything that matters -- the money vote and desire for the status quo is truly overwhelming despite the fact we humans do not have any more time to waste on failed and wasteful solutions. How much is Murdock backing Clinton because he thinks he'll get to own a bigger piece of the airwaves? Every corporate interest is dying to buy this campaign and we can't afford the future if they do. Is it even possible to make the changes we need to make if the coal industry, the oil industry, the news media and the pharmaceuticals are given consideration over the needs to solve the very real problems we are facing. I'm not sure that I'm confident anyone in the US can do what is needed - and I'm worried that being too business friendly means being too willing to let the earth go to hell while everyone scrambles to grab their own piece of the pie even if that means we all end up losing.
The world needs a miracle, and I guess I don't really trust anyone except Gore to have really internalized that yet.
Posted by Mary at December 16, 2007 08:11 PMGreat post!
Posted by JoeCHI at December 17, 2007 03:42 AMMary, please go read eriposte's other post about why s/he is supporting Hillary. One of the things s/he talks about is how even though Hillary has received the most federal money from corporate interests, out of all the repulicans and democrats, her record is the best on going AGAINST their interests. Check it out. It's one of the best posts I've seen on any blog. It was the post from dec 12.
Posted by Nicole at December 17, 2007 03:37 PMYes. I try to imagine what it was like to go through Hillarycare and Lewinsky. Is going through cancer or a miscarriage tougher? I've been on the brink of death, and I don't think so. A President needs to feel the magnitude of her/his decisions -- having millions of lives in your hands is far more stressful than even losing your own life.
The night Dean lost Iowa, it looked to me as if he was struggling to hold back a nervous breakdown. And I don't think Dean would flinch if you pointed a gun at his head--but that's a different type of stress.
Hillary chose not to take a shot at Obama on the 'risk' he poses. But a risk assessment is appropriate. What are the odds that this 'national nirvana' that has never happened anywhere on earth is going to magically occur under Obama? What are the odds that an Obama presidency will fail -- and what are the dangers of yet another Presidential failure?
Obama supporters might say, "you're trying to scare people". In what dream world is a risk assessment not prudent?
I'm amazed that people regard a Presidential spouse's experience as essentially equivalent to a President's. I've been a supportive minister's spouse for twenty years, and as I've also been involved in the life of her congregations, I've been a helpful sounding board for many important decisions she's made. But in the end the responsibility, the grace under pressure, the trade-off of risk and return, etc. is her experience, not mine. Does Laura Bush's experience qualify her to run someday as one with Presidential experience? Please, let's not confuse first hand experience with close but second hand observation. Besides political experience there is life experience. But really, what kind of life experience has Hillary had as first lady to Bill all these years? Was this useful? Was this formative in a positive way?
Posted by Karl at December 17, 2007 07:27 PMKarl,
I have written specifically about the direct experience Hillary Clinton has on both domestic and foreign affairs from her time as First Lady - please see here. Comparing her to Laura Bush - when did Laura Bush get dumped on for running healthcare policy for the Bush White House? - is silly and doesn't reflect the actual record.
Posted by eriposte at December 17, 2007 11:06 PM