I think one could sum up the situation thusly;
Don't do as I say, do as my opponent doesn't say!
Or something like that.
Posted by snark at March 28, 2008 12:48 PMEri, your arm's going to get tired if you start cataloging all the hypocrisy, esp. that coming from those intent on K(eeping) O (bama) S (anctified).
Posted by Desert Dawg at March 28, 2008 12:52 PMOuch. Senatory Leahy is now urging HRC to quit the race.
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/03/28/politics/horserace/entry3977225.shtml
Posted by guido sarducci at March 28, 2008 12:57 PMIt's amazing...you keep whoring even though payment is nigh.
Can we safely assume that you simply enjoy the gratuitous fucking?
Posted by RAM at March 28, 2008 01:24 PMBefore the moderator bans me for my graphic yet accurate dissent, let's all remember, once and for all, which candidate is conniving to win without the most elected delegates.
And then let's remember that sad day lo these many months ago when this site endorsed The Tuzla Torpedo simply because she appeared inevitable.
Oops.
The blood of the Democratic Party's demise is on her hands, and yours. The ridicule of Obama shall not cleanse it.
Au revoir. The exit you're looking for is the one labeled "Irrelevance."
Posted by RAM at March 28, 2008 01:32 PMOk.
We'll remember you told us.
Thanks.
Take care.
Posted by snark at March 28, 2008 01:37 PMeriposte: Sigh. I honestly think you can use your time in a more productive fashion.
When Obama idiotically suggested that the GOP had been the Party of Ideas, he was (rightly) attacked for it.
When Hillary idiotically suggested that McCain had passed some mythical Commander in Chief threshold, she was (rightly) attacked for it.
Why this is so hard to understand is beyond me. As I suggested in the last thread, for better or worse, Obama gets a bigger pass from some bloggers, including Kos, because he hasn't spent nearly as much time cavorting with scumbags like Carville, McAuliffe, and Penn as Hillary has. Nor has he publicly sucked up to Rupert Murdoch the way Hillary has. These things matter.
But I know this: All of these bloggers that the gang at TLC now likes to slam have been far, far, far more diligent and courageous in documenting the atrocities and criminality of Bush and the rest of the GOP than Hillary (or Obama for that matter) has been on her best day.
On issue after issue after issue, everything from the politicization of the Justice Department; voting machine fraud; corruption in Iraq reconstruction contracting; the use of torture; FISA and telecom immunity; the aftermath of Katrina; the looming mortgage crisis; the health care crisis; global climate change; lead in toys from China; poison in pet food from China; Gannon/Guckertgate; the use of mercenaries in Iraq; and debunking the Social Security "Crisis" to, yes, Plamegate and Uranium in Africa, blogs like dKos, TPM, and Americablog have been there, for no other reason than their love of America and its liberal institutions.
I understand the frustration when bloggers attack your chosen candidate. Honestly, I do. But the swiftness with which Hillary supporters turn on these bloggers who have spent years standing up for all of us while run-of-the-mill politicians like Hillary Clinton covered their asses and plotted their next political triumph only reinforces the perception of Hillary being a self-absorbed, self-interested politician.
If nothing else, I can click over to dKos or TPM completely confident that nobody -- not Kos, not JMM, not a frontpager, not a random commentator, NOBODY! -- is going to make the insanely stupid suggestion that Alan Greenspan be brought in to clean up the financial crisis. These are the people you are choosing Hillary over. That is my honest assessment.
Posted by space at March 28, 2008 01:39 PMSpace,
You said it: "Obama gets a bigger pass from some bloggers, including Kos, because he hasn't spent nearly as much time cavorting with scumbags like Carville, McAuliffe, and Penn as Hillary has. Nor has he publicly sucked up to Rupert Murdoch the way Hillary has. These things matter".
They do matter, I personally ALWAYS had misgivings about Mr. Clinton. He was always too much the opportunist, too much the DLC 'phoenix', and his 'personal politics with women' were suspect and serial (enough said). He was the best option we had, and he was a steady leader for the most part.
I think it is fair to look at Michelle Obama's hospital PR job for improprieties, if any; or as an indicator of how she will counsel the next President.
Hillary has a double media scrutiny risk, if you will. That's the way it goes. In my mind you can't have it both ways. She should, as a candidate for the highest office in the land, be evaluated in the contect of her formal board membership and paid advocacay for Wal-Mart (again, for the informed- enough said).
Hillary is NOT about change. She is about corporate America, she is about congressional stalemate, she is about "drama", she is about "the parting on the left is now parting on the right...">
Eriposte, please tell me what we have to lose by voting for Obama?
Posted by tfitznc at March 28, 2008 02:06 PMHow can so many otherwise intelligent people back a candidate who is clearly unqualified?
I think the party elders decided Hillary had to be beaten this year, and put their money on the best-polling available candidate.
yuck.
So Hillary Pravda strikes again.
However, I agree with one statement - that 10% of Democrats who support Obama would defect and vote for McCain should Hillary become the candidate - yet the figures are 25% for Hillary's supporters.
You've hit the nail on the head - Obama for the nomination!
Posted by John at March 28, 2008 02:30 PMWow eRiposte....I can't believe you wade over to Avarosis blog. He's so full of his own self importance. Hanyway the real kicker is the confidence in the judgement some people still have in the A-list bloggers who through this primary process have proven they're just like the media they railed against in the first place. Speaking of judgement if my memory serves me correctly Avarosis and Josh Marshall were both supporters of the Iraq War early on....just sayin.
Now back to the topic at hand...it seems that Clinton has been branded by the Obama camp of clearly all the things that they themselves are guilty of (how Rovian). The A-list left bloggers (and the usual culprits in the media) have helped to perpetuate those myths. As turkana noted in a recent post, if SEnator Obama should win the primary (which looks to be the case) and the general election will those same fawning A-listers who were duped early on hold his feet to the fire unlike what many of them are doing now?
Posted by emal at March 28, 2008 02:32 PMdKos, TPM, and Americablog have been there, for no other reason than their love of America and its liberal institutions.
Maybe the readers of those sites. But Kos, Josh and John saw a niche and grabbed it to further their careers. They knew they couldn't get on tv any other way, and built up their blogging empires using the content provided to them by us. They started out with funding from us. They immediately realized that liberals were so hungry to have someone say what they were thinking, they'd pay for it, just like the rightwing losers paid for it. And now that they're the established "new media" it's their way or the highway. And that's great; in the beginning of blogs, you could tell which ones were going to attempt to "crash the gates." I'm not sure how many people realized then and now that crashing the gates didn't mean just getting in and getting our voices heard and making a new kind of media. It meant and means replacing the GOP noise machine with a blogger-fueled noise machine, with the people just as insipid, untruthful, coercive and cocktail-weenie-loving as the righties are. Hooray for our side? Nah.
Luckily, this information superhighway has lots more rest stops than those places, so everyone's free to go where they want, talk about what they want and don't have to bow down to the machine. This primary is an attempt to assimilate everyone into their machine, though, which is why TLC has been hounded by true believers in a new, improved cocktail weenie set from the moment Steve announced his support for Hillary. The Kos machine demands tribute, and capitulation. And being on the Obama freight train may make you think your dick's bigger and you're a winner because you're hanging on a winner's coattails, but you're just agreeing to be a part of another machine, and becoming what we've all been railing against for 7 years. Actually, only some of us have raged against the machine, others have secretly or not so much, have envied the machine, and wanted one for their very own. Fine, good. But don't tell me it's about love for liberal values, it's about a need to win and not feel like a wuss. Scroll down the page and look at the number of comments on Iraq posts or the posts about the economy or about the mistreatment of women (something that used to be a concern to liberals) and then compare the number of comments arguing about Obama and Hillary and who's better or more evil. This isn't about a love of liberal values, it's about using people who love liberal values to help them further their own careers. Fine and dandy, if our voices get heard, but right now, we're finding out only certain voices are going to get heard, aren't we?
Posted by iamcoyote at March 28, 2008 02:47 PMAravosis, Huffington, Marshall. Kos are irrelevant former or present Republicans. Now do you all understand their idiotic mean streak? They are the biggest losers, along with the clowns on NBC and MSNBC. Their journalistic integrity went down just like Bush's approval ratings. Please do not take them seriously. They are in it for the money, the new presstitutes!
Posted by tiffany at March 28, 2008 03:33 PMiamcoyote: Wow, that is quite the pathetic, self-pitying, revisionist history screed.
Posted by space at March 28, 2008 03:38 PM: Wow, that is quite the pathetic, self-pitying, revisionist history screed.
And far better than anything you've contributed here, Space.
If nothing else, I can click over to dKos or TPM completely confident that nobody -- not Kos, not JMM, not a frontpager, not a random commentator, NOBODY! -- is going to make the insanely stupid suggestion that Alan Greenspan be brought in to clean up the financial crisis.
No, they just have the insanely stupid suggestions that the next Dem president should pack the cabinet with Republicans like Hagel, or that it might be great to eliminate Social Security. Or better yet. yelling "God damn America!" and dryhumping the pulpit is just an alternative form of expression.
Go ahead and vote Obama. He'll never disappoint you, because he'll never survive the GE.
Posted by Blue Jean at March 28, 2008 04:18 PMWow, that is quite the pathetic, self-pitying, revisionist history screed.
It kept your response down to one sputtering, "nuh uh" sentence for once rather than a 5 paragraph babble about nothing, so I guess it was all worth it.
Posted by iamcoyote at March 28, 2008 04:25 PMI think the point is, regardless of whether Obama wins the nomination or not, it appears that supporters of Clinton (although less vocal) according to polling are truly pissed off at the Obama campaign (and with good reason). Instead of arrogance and taunting, people who actually claim they want to win the general election should think about why that is and realize that if it's not rectified, there will be HUGE problems for the Democratic party.
Despite the propaganda by the Obama supporters, Clinton from THE BEGINNING has ALWAYS SAID she would support Obama if he was the nominee, he nor his wife have been that kind to her. That's a fact. Unfortunately, he believes the hype and that is dangerous and naive. She is not out to "destroy the party." Bill Clinton secured his nomination in June, seriously, what's the big deal? What are people afraid of? If you're positive that your candidate is going to get the nomination, why the vitriolic calls for the opponent to leave the race? It's silly. If Clinton were leading, I would NEVER call for Obama to leave the race. I for one, like politics and the DEMOCRATIC PROCESS. We don't live in a totalitarian state, despite what some would like us to believe.
Posted by kacey at March 28, 2008 05:28 PMWow.
People were right: this blog has become a sewer like DKos and TPM.
Back to Digby...she has some class.
Posted by Mary at March 28, 2008 07:01 PMI think the Obama-ites who are dissing Clinton should maybe re-think their stance.
If Obama does win the nomination, many of us may not vote for McCain, but we may just stay home.
Posted by Moon at March 28, 2008 07:45 PMJohn, it's not so much racist, it's that the Obama supporters have been such dicks. Worse than Rove, in some cases.
Posted by Moon at March 28, 2008 07:58 PMBogus NBC/Wall Street Journal poll has been debunked by new Survey USA poll.
Obama at 40 percent unfavorable, Hillary at 42 percent. Margin of error 3.7 percent.
Posted by at March 28, 2008 08:41 PMPlease, do not include any comments brought over from the Aravosis blog.....
Big whinner, closet republican, too big for his chones...
One thing is certain - The Democratic party desparately needs to get behind a single candidate. This does not mean that Clinton needs to drop out. Despite what the Obama camp says, a. Clinton is not so far behind that she can't catch up, b. unless one drops out, either candidate will need SDs to get enough delegates, and c. for the Obama supporters to claim that Clinton is divisive is at best disingenuous considering the amount of manure that they are flinging. If the Democrats can't get it together, McCain will win (even if there is an honest election, and I wouldn't assume that.
Posted by jwrjr at March 28, 2008 09:00 PMiamcoyote complaining about "true believers" is pretty damn funny. Actually, it is mere projection.
Blue Jean: "...insanely stupid suggestions that the next Dem president should pack the cabinet with Republicans like Hagel...."
Yeah, appointing ONE member of the opposite party to your cabinet (an American tradition) is "packing the cabinet." Idiot.
Posted by gay veteran at March 29, 2008 10:58 AMAvarosis says: "Are one quarter of Hillary's supporters racists?"
Were Reagan Democrats racist? I never knew Jimmy Carter was really black.
In an event, the racists would be those who say they'll vote for Obama but don't mean it.
What I see is this: all the premises for electing a novice President have been obliterated: Post-racial? Gone. Unity? Gone. He fractured the Democratic Party with his Harry and Louise ads. National realignment? Gone.
And remember the 2004 'Faith gap'? With Obama as nominee, McCain owns faith. Compared to Trinity United, we'd do better running an atheist.
Posted by whoframedrudy at March 29, 2008 11:03 AMwhoframedrudy: "...With Obama as nominee, McCain owns faith...."
LOL, well, maybe not with Catholics when you seek the endorsement of someone like Hagee who calls the Catholic Church the great Satan
Posted by gay veteran at March 29, 2008 02:59 PMwhoops, make that "great whore" not "great Satan"
Posted by gay veteran at March 29, 2008 03:00 PM