It's all cool; Hill had many days to go into T and O to fix the election in her favor.
If you took away Bill, her past Communist affiliations, her signing of the Patriot Act; if you took away all of her shit and leave her by herself, she's a nice funny lady and SHOULD find a career on Fascist TV, perhaps as a co-comedian with the Fox primitives, O'Reilly and the other pug-nosed bastard.
Ya see, I have Direct TV and I demanded all cable access stripped off my plan so now I get basic local channels and PBS stations. If I want to see Fox or MSNBC I'd have to visit my neighborhood bar and watch while tossing back suds.
Posted by Daniel in Dayton at March 5, 2008 04:17 AMAh, the smell of sour grapes in the morning.
Posted by Sharon at March 5, 2008 04:26 AMWait, so now Hillary is a communist *and* a fascist? A socialist *and* a breath mint? why didn't I get the memo? And if she can "fix" the election why the fuck hasn't she yet? Jeebus, smarter obama people, please.
aimai
Posted by aimai at March 5, 2008 05:17 AMObama supporters are quite pathetic and immature.
Posted by tiffany at March 5, 2008 05:32 AMA socialist *and* a breath mint?
A floor wax and a dessert topping? Tiffany, that's no Obama supporter. Daniel's a bona fide wingnut, spouting the new silliness from Regnery and Jonah Goldberg. Hitler was a liberal, dontcha know!
Posted by iamcoyote at March 5, 2008 05:38 AMClinton has lead in both Ohio and Texas polls for months/years. She barely wins in Texas, and its a "comeback"? Well, a win is a win, no question. But the "comeback" spin coming from Clinton is nothing more than a coverup for barely winning a state, TX, where she had double digit leads up until a month ago. Barely winning isn't a comeback, it's a collapse. If you had told me a year ago that a black man would get over a million votes for president in Texas, I'd probably laughed at you. What does it mean? It means Clinton now has to win every other primary to get close on delegates by the convention. I'm sure that she will do anything to wrangle delegates. Anything. The one thing she's made clear is that she will do anything to win. Sounds like a Republican, doesn't it.
Posted by T2 at March 5, 2008 06:19 AMTiffany, you know that most Obama supporters don't want to be associated with Daniel in Dayton. I wouldn't doubt that his words were well-chosen by a Clinton supporter to further denigrate Obama supporters.
To the bigger question: There has been a lot of mudslinging over the past couple of weeks, mostly at Obama, and it worked. Did the Harper Government leak the "inaccurate memo" as a favor to the reactionaries across the border? Did or did not Drudge lie about his source for the photo? Has Hillary Clinton, with her 35 years of experience, finally figured out Obama's religion or is she still not absolutely sure? Does she know the difference between renounce and reject?
Ugly is ugly. Propaganda works at the very depths of the human brain, where fear and anger lurk, and were reaction time is more important than honesty, reason, collegiality or the more positive aspects of humanity. Fear always works. That's why the Republicans use it over and over. Most people are just too dumb to understand why they are reacting to fear and hate. That's why America is in the shape it's in.
Posted by Bob In Pacifica at March 5, 2008 06:37 AMI wouldn't doubt that his words were well-chosen by a Clinton supporter to further denigrate Obama supporters.
Sorry, Bob, but Hillary supporters don't need to help you with that, you guys are doing fine all by yourself.
Did the Harper Government leak the "inaccurate memo" as a favor to the reactionaries across the border?
I thought it turned out they were doing a favor for Bush.
Did or did not Drudge lie about his source for the photo?
Of course he did, it's Drudge. But that didn't stop Obama from pretending Clinton did it.
Has Hillary Clinton, with her 35 years of experience, finally figured out Obama's religion or is she still not absolutely sure?
Hmm, so she's now supposed to be the defender of Obama's religion? She said the "muslim" stuff was ridiculous, but you're insinuating she should denounce and reject, is that it?
Propaganda works at the very depths of the human brain,
And your attempt here to catapult it is quite valiant, but silly.
And since you're doing the whole "kitchen sink," here, p'raps you should include the "do the math" meme that's been going around, too. It won't convince anyone, but it sure is amusing to watch you flail.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 5, 2008 07:41 AMJohn Dickerson makes a great point:
"Clinton is pleading for time, arguing that voters should be allowed to have their say in future contests. But even in this she comes up against a contradiction posted by Obama's lead. Because she must rely on the superdelegates to beat back Obama's likely lead in the popular vote and among pledged delegates, she is essentially asking those superdelegates to listen to the people—but only long enough to be persauded to vote for her. Then she expects them to undo the will of the people by voting against Obama in Denver."
You can't have it both ways. Either you trust the people to vote for you--and live with the results--or you steal it. Hillary is arguing that she should be allowed to do both.
Posted by nerdoff at March 5, 2008 07:46 AMYou can't have it both ways. Either you trust the people to vote for you--and live with the results--or you steal it.
Nerdoff,
Why do the parties have conventions? Too spend some quality time with hookers?
If you don't like the rules that the Democratic Party uses to pick it's nominee complain to the powers that be. But accusing someone of "stealing" the nomination by working within the existing party rules just makes you sound really stupid.
Posted by snark at March 5, 2008 07:53 AMAll this rejoice is beginning of defeat for democrats for capturing Whitehouse. As the contest continues both candidates are going to be wounded while McOld will be preparing to attack. It is time for the party elders to step in and stop this bloodshed. Hillary's negative campaigning may help her get the nomination but will lose her support of Obama faithfuls. It looks like Hillary will be remembered as the one who was responsible for losing the Whitehouse to Republicans.
Posted by suresh at March 5, 2008 08:04 AMIt is time for the party elders to step in and stop this bloodshed.
So much for the "will of the people" I guess?
The "Party Elders" need to save the people from themselves!
Hey! That was the idea behind Super Delegates!
Posted by snark at March 5, 2008 08:10 AMI thought "the Party Elders" were the Super Delegates.
Posted by Seven of Six at March 5, 2008 08:19 AMIn America politics today, pundits and media reward politicians and say how smart they are when the politician uses Bully tactics and an "Swiftboat" mentality when they tear their opponents down by smear, distortions and lies --"swift boating". The news media and pundits like to Praise the unscrupulous Politician up instead of disavowing them. The pundits like to say how Brilliant they are; What a Victory they say; what a Comeback Kid; and justify their use of Negative Ads and reward the worst in us -- this low and base behavior which should be outgrown as a humanitarian society. How many good and decent men have gone down because they were unfairly swiftboated by their opponents, mischaracaterized by those who have no morals or ethics. Something is wrong with that picture.
There is nothing brilliant about lies, distortions, peddling fear, swiftboating, and an assassination of one's character, it's not a physical killing but a killing just the same, an emotional theft and mental crime. It's slander and distortion of the worse kind and should not be rewarded or esteemed as characteristics we need to emulate within our society. Do we emulate the school yard bully? Or the thief who steals one's life's earnings? It's Dirty Politics and should be called what it is, a crime. If America is to ever become better than what she is, than we must disavow this kind of tactics because it has no place in Democracy's arms, no place in a sane and peaceful society.
Running a country is serious business and it is not a game, it is not acting. It's the governing of people and their lives and should be taken as a solemn oath and duty. Dirty politics should not be looked up to as a virtue and politicians should not be allowed to swiftboat their opponent, for the sake of gain by any means at any cost.
There is a Right way to Fight and a Wrong way to Fight. Victory based on lies and cheating should not be condoned. There should be campaign laws about this kind of unscrupulous politicking. It should not be rewarded with the highest office in the land. It should be called what it is a Crime.
America is only as good as her politicians and leaders.
Right Wing Canadian Prime Minister Tied to Leak Slurring Obama
http://www.opednews.com/articles/genera_rob_kall_080304_oen_nails_right_wing.htm
I thought "the Party Elders" were the Super Delegates.
Exactly! Which is why I don't understand all the hand wringing over the Super Delegate situation. The nominating process is set up according to Party rules. Why everyone thinks it has to have some "will of the people" purity about it all of a sudden is beyond me. The idea of Super Delegates is that they will use their insider wisdom to help choose the best candidate to win the general election. If everyone was so concerned aout the will of the people and having a clear and early victor all the primaries would be set up as winner take all contests. But it's not. It's set up so there is a hedge against the "will of the people" incase the people make a boneheaded choice.
Posted by snark at March 5, 2008 08:27 AMIt looks like Hillary will be remembered as the one who was responsible for losing the Whitehouse to Republicans.
Yeah, it wouldn't have a thing to do with Obama people refusing to go along with "the will of the people."
"It was all Hillary's fault I didn't vote Democratic!!"
I was listening to AAR's Stephanie Miller this morning - yikes! She kept doing Bush's Osama/Saddam thing with Hillary/Rove. Which, along with the "do the math" thingy, is the new meme for the troops, I guess; we've already seen it here, a lot. Then, some young guy calls up and says "I've been to a couple elections now, and I'm usually the one dragging my pals to the polls, but Obama had all of us fired up and it was great! But that dang Hillary - she's trying to take it away! Think of the children! My friends finally get involved, and now they're crushed. They've been robbed!" Oy. Apparently, to some people, being for Obama doesn't necessarily mean being for a democratic win, or being against McCain. One would think, if the goal is to beat the republican (not bury Hillary), that kind of attitude might be a problem.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 5, 2008 08:28 AMObama has made significant progress with the educated youth of the Democratic Party. That poll from Turkana's thread yesterday (Dreaminonempty) shows that.
If the Super Delegates choose Hillary it would be a step backward. The future of the Democratic Party is now, not in another 4-8 years.
Posted by Seven of Six at March 5, 2008 08:38 AMsharon...i love that smell..i really do..
Posted by dennis at March 5, 2008 08:42 AMWhen Obama tried to paint the Clintons as racists and threaten the SD's that were supporting Clinton, that was not negative??? When Obama would constantly say that Hillary will say and do anything to win, that was not negative??? And all the sexist comments he made against Hillary. Now he is caught in double talk with Canada, lies and tries to cover up and we should give him a pass??? If Hillary had been caught in that lie, she would have been forced to resign that same day. The MSM and the Obama supporters would have painted her as a conniving liar. She would have been toast!
Posted by tiffany at March 5, 2008 08:44 AMObama has made significant progress with the educated youth of the Democratic Party. That poll from Turkana's thread yesterday (Dreaminonempty) shows that.
And that's great. But unfortunately, and this is a complaint I hear from lots of people who aren't quite sold on him, he's got a lot of young people coming out for him, not for Democrats. The caller on Stephanie Miller's show, and the scores of commenters who say they won't vote for Hillary if she's the candidate indicate there might be some truth to that complaint.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 5, 2008 08:57 AMI'm troubled by the direction of the Democratic Party, have been for some time. Infusion of young blood is what is desperately needed. Obama has brought hordes of newcomers into the election process, getting them political if you will.
...the scores of commenters who say they won't vote for Hillary if she's the candidate indicate there might be some truth to that complaint.
If Hillary gets the nomination the risk is alienating these young voters. I guess that is my biggest concern. Losing this bright young talent in the political process for years... if they come back at all. As a Party, I think we need to take this support, talent, money and run with it, for the good of the Party.
It will still be called the Democratic Party, not the Obama Party.
If Hillary gets the nomination the risk is alienating these young voters.
In which case, it will be on Obama's head to direct them to keep positive and vote for the Democratic nominee. Sadly, Michele Obama very publicly hedged on that very issue. You don't think all those young people took her hesitation to heart? The onus is on Obama to make sure his supporters realize that he may not be the nominee, but he is a Democrat and hopes his supporters back the eventual Democratic nominee. Again, sadly, in his speech yesterday, he went the opposite direction and lumped Clinton in with McCain. He set himself up as the goal, not the Dems. Not good.
As a Party, I think we need to take this support, talent, money and run with it, for the good of the Party.
Which is why I think Obama needs to make sure his supporters know this isn't about him, it's about the Party. If all those people vanish if Clinton is the nominee, then we'll know Obama failed in pulling those people into the Party, he only succeeded in getting them to show up at a concert hall. It's his responsibility, not Hillary's, to make sure they go the distance.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 5, 2008 09:35 AMAgain, sadly, in his speech yesterday, he went the opposite direction and lumped Clinton in with McCain.
Kind of like when Hillary compared herself to McCain on experience during a speech at the beginning of the weekend.
She can do it herself but Obama can't? WTF!
Posted by Seven of Six at March 5, 2008 09:47 AMMary,
Good post. So the party's over? Gas stations will start closing next, huh?
Please don't tell our candidates. Let them enjoy themselves a bit longer.
The little darlings look so cute playing & having fun. I could just eat 'em up.
Thanks.
Kind of like when Hillary compared herself to McCain on experience during a speech at the beginning of the weekend.
No, more like Hillary's the enemy, just like McCain. But you can continue to clutch your pearls about Clinton's statement that McCain will hit him on lack of experience just like she has, if it makes you feel better. It's an Obama (and not coincidentally, a Republican) ruse to misinterpret something, or pretend to believe an outright lie (like Clinton sent drudge the photo, or Bill said Obama's campaign was a fairy tale), then swoon at the horror! the horror! while pretending Obama's an innocent being mauled by a tiger. And then, you all run around and say Clinton's doing all kinds of "dirty tricks." Pretty elaborate and meticulous frame job - which is exactly what it is, you know - well thought out, and helpfully echoed by the talking heads. My only question is, do you realize you're doing it? Or are you falling for the trick?
Posted by iamcoyote at March 5, 2008 10:28 AMOr are you falling for the trick?
Funny... coming from somebody who is supporting Hillary based on how unfairly people have treated her on blogs.
Posted by Seven of Six at March 5, 2008 10:42 AMFunny... coming from somebody who is supporting Hillary based on how unfairly people have treated her on blogs.
Actually, I was defending her against the unfair attacks because they were... unfair. I'm supporting her because I like her a lot better than Obama after watching his tactics, listening to his empty rhetoric, and examining his record. I think she would make a better president.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 5, 2008 11:03 AMI think she would make a better president.
Right with Mark Penn at her side.
What a boom for his business, perhaps, no bid contracts in his future?
The spying goes on. Everything is tapped, and the payoffs are all in at the Senate and the House.
Posted by NSADirectDial at March 5, 2008 01:35 PM