good morning all:

i think this hatred is not just directed at hrc. it pretty much covers both candidates. it seems though more exposed when dealing with hrc and explained away with obama. but that isn't my point...

how's this for hatred?

Obama- an Antichrist We Can Believe In

Consider his sexual rockstar status among young voters, his ability to continuously lie without impunity, his connections to mob members and terrorist both real and wannabes. His strong and unscrupulous desire for raw power, at any cost, regardless what it does to others, (he became senator simply by disqualifying his opponents). His empty words and changing promises, his desire to be friends with those who wish to destroy us. His wife Michele has expressed her hatred for this country and has publicly announced her husband as the messiah.

The voodoo of this all is that Teflon Obama remains unscathed by all his nefarious connections and thug like history. He is worshiped not only blindly by the mindless masses, but by the fearful media.

I am not very religious, but I think Nostradamus got it right again. What is God going to think of all the lemmings that follow a man of darkness?

or even more simpler, huckabee making a joke about his being assassinated? who exactly advocated/ joked about hrc getting shot at, not including the bosnia issue?

this is the kinda shit we face come november.

Oh, I think there will be new and MUCH better shit come October.

Hillary or Obama will need a GOP poo umbrella.

don't misunderestimate the power of the gop poo umbrella.

speaking of poo umbrellas, mc cain and his cronies continue to foster the iran--al qaeda meme. saw it on the situation room, and wolf let it go without follow up.

can we get a msm poo umbrella from the same company???

The Left Coaster is a titanium MSM poo umbrella.

Last night I was part of a liberal discussion group and one of the very nice people I met there turned out to be a very active Clinton supporter who when she spoke of Barack Obama, could not stop calling him a monster. Somehow Clinton supporters are going to have to get over their antipathy of Obama as a strong (albeit humanly fallible) man if they want to start building a coalition with Obama supporters that can take on the Maverick and his strongest fan base.

I am so sick this Obama-mainia get a fucking life already!
He is destroying my Democratic party creating sexist divisiveness among women such as yselft that are true blue Hillary supporters, he and his supporters have bashed Geraldine Ferraro a women and a good Democrat I deeply admire and respect and because of Obama's god damn sexist bullshit she if rumors are true will not Vote for Obama.

The the other day that "sweetie" comment from Obama was plain rude and sexist! He was dealing with her in a professional enviorment and he should have been respectful. I can tell you any ma that treats me that way at my job will get bitch slapped in a hurry, maybe its not the proper way to handle it but it makes me mad some men have such little respect for women.

The latest Suffolk University Poll has Hillary closing in Oregon to within 4 points I hope that is true I will be full of hope and optimism as I stay up late tonight watchingh the Oregon polls.
There are a great number of us Sen Obama that don't faint when you speak and go all goo goo gaa gaa, Sen Obama you are not "all that"

--Heather

heather--

so his calling the reporter and personally apologizing then agreeing to answer her question does nothing for you?

geraldine ferraro's comments are good, yet his bitter comments are bad? how is he personally responsible for the "sexist divisiveness," you speak of. exactly what did he say that was sexist? and with your same reasoning, can i attribute the veiled racist undertones prevalent in this current campaign to her?

There are a great number of us Sen Obama that don't faint when you speak and go all goo goo gaa gaa, Sen Obama you are not "all that"

can say the same about hilary...

let me know if she wins, ca-va?

Anthony you can take bits and pieces of my post out of context if you so choose. To answer your question no his apology does nothing for me because it is a pattern of of behavior, not one isolated incident. It is like a husband that repeatedly beats his wife apologizing after he brutalizes her with a black eye, fractured jaw and saying my apology does nothing for you?

If you want anthony, google "sexist" and "Obama" it is not my responsibility to do your homework for you.

Same old tune Obama supporters know Obama is wrong so they resort to attacking the messenger, same old pro male pro Obama misogyny.

--Heather

Heather,

As you know, Oregon has an innovative mail-in voting system where the vast majority of votes have already been cast.

Some have suggested that the the Suffolk poll is an outlier given the double-digit lead that Obama has enjoyed for some time.

Let's say that Clinton wins. It would tend to suggest momentum, but most would agree that the nomination battle was lost some time ago.

Let's say Obama wins big. Given the actually similar demographics in the two states (look at number of whites, household earnings, and percentage of blue collar voters), wouldn't this tend to disprove Hillary's argument that she somehow 'owns' the working class white vote?

Ultimately, Obama has an Appalacia problem. Democrats were never going to get the plurality of those mountain folks in the GE anyway.

Heather,

Sorry. It's early yet where I live (first cup of coffee). I was comparing the voting demographics of Oregon (likely Obama) and Kentucky (likely Clinton) in the fourth paragraph.

Dear pragmaticprogressive:

Maybe Hillary will not be the nominee, if that is the case I am fearful that it will result in Obama losing the General Election.

The people that support Obama especially the radical left, daily kos, moveon.org types refuse to understand or accept that radical left wing liberals cannot win in the general election America is slightly right of center, you guys are living a denial "Obama is not radical left" lol what do you call a 4 year 800 billion dollar budget, what do you call raising taxes with our economy as it is.

What do you tell property owners that are making payments month to month that under Obama your property tax may rise as high as 20% to fund Obama's education budget, further adding salt to the wound is it wont even pay for schools in the area they reside in.

Hillary's economic is far better althought a long way from perfect...I won't even go into Obama's insanity of adding a coal tax.

All I can say for Obama supporters is caveat emptor.

--Heather

Heather,
Not sure what your response had to do with my post, but I always appreciate honest and respectful reparte.

I'd like some citations on your budget figures. From the Obama website?

I personally think that the political spectrum can no longer be accurately defined in terms of reductionistic classifications, e.g. "right-wing conservatives", "radical left", etc. I myself am a long-time progressive democrat, not a radical.

IMO, Obama is attempting to speak to democrats, indies, libertarians, 'small c' conservatives, and progressive Republicans. All have a common goal of changing the unworkable status quo.

He has a chance of getting the support of these groups and winning by changing the electoral map. Hardly a "radical left" strategy.

Thanks for 'listening'.

heather--

no, i don't see where i took your points out of context, after reading it a couple times. i used where your logic was going and flipped the argument. not attacking you but your argument. if you take offense to that, well, i apologize.

since i have plenty of experience working with domestic violence, your example is disengenious at best, and woefully simplistic at worst. i've seen it kill people, ruin careers, and children. equating "sweetie," to that is beyond deplorable.

you said calling her sweetie was sexist. he apologized, personally, you don't accept it, but the reporter did. 787000 hilary racist hits, 1810000 bill racist hits, and 1660000 obama sexist hits... what is your point? the sad point is that dems are producing racist and sexist hits on google.

and how exactly did i attack you? i asked you a question, you accuse me of being misogynistic. i think plenty here can vouch for me where that one is concerned.

if you look at his voting record, he is more center than radical left, just two percentage points 80% under hilary %82. here's the link, so you don't have to google it...

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Senate/lib_senator_ratings-2007.html

and i don't think his wife would allow him to be disrespectful to women, he seems to defer and give his respects to her too many times to count.

Dear pragmaticprogressive:

The figures came from a centrist think tank, that I need to look up later. I partly agree with you on your "political spectrum" statement.

You said: IMO, Obama is attempting to speak to democrats, indies, libertarians, 'small c' conservatives, and progressive Republicans. All have a common goal of changing the unworkable status quo."

Obama is being clever by half all he is doing is a clever con job, that may pass muster in the primaries, in the general when he has to define himself on guns, gays [he opposes gay marriage] and abortion his popularity will wean. Obama alluded or used a hypothetical along the lines of "if his daughter came home with an unplanned pregnancy why should she be punished? [paraphrasing] So Obama sees an unplanned pregnancy as punishment? That strikes me as very liberal left not progressive. I delineate and make a distinction between radical left and progressive.

What was that old Ricky Nelson song? "You can't please everyone so you have to please yourself"

People that try to be everything to all people worry me, most call it pandering I consider it more sinister

--Heather

WSJ:
"Roger Altman — the investment banker and former deputy Treasury Secretary under Bill Clinton — has advised Sen. Clinton that the time has come for her to drop out of the race, according to people close to the campaign.”

Heather, for a Dem I'd advise that you need to spend a lot less time "worrying" over Democratic domestic spending and taxing proposals---if you really think that letting the Bush tax cuts expire and raising income and dividend taxes on the wealthy (which both Obama and Hillary favor) isn't going to be viewed favorably by the voters in 2008, then you need to get into the Repub party because that's their view.

Our country currently spends one half of its 2 trillion federal budget on "defense". And is borrowing a huge amount of that because of Bush's tax cuts for the corporate rich. And Repubs propose cutting what we spend on all other things. That's what Bush has done for the past 8 years and it's (apparently) not popular anymore. Yet you seem to think that's what "the people" still want. If you're right, then NO Dem can win this Fall, including Hillary.

BOTH Dem candidates disagree with this course, both propose increases in taxes for some (the rich) and increased domestic spending. Yet you seem to think that "the people" don't really want that. Again, if you're right, then no Dem can win, including your Hillary. And if you personally don't want changes in our current spending and taxing policies, then you aren't a Dem either, sorry to have to inform you.

BTW, I can never quite get the Hillarians' story down---is Obama "really" a Repub as our good friend Troubled Hillarian (and others) maintain or is he "really" a "radical lefty" as Heather maintains? Discuss.

Heather,

Would you rather that Obama take a Conservative stand on these issues; or is your obvious antipathy more personal - that, as a man, he is "taking' the nomination from Hillary (the women.

Think about it.

What if John Edwards (my first choice) or Joe Biden were in Obama's mathematical position now? Would you still have the anger?

Please be careful about throwing around terms like "misogynist" on this particular blog. As you know, Left Coaster is currently a 'lit match' and the trolls love to divide us.

Peter, Dennis, got your lines in the water?

or even more simpler, huckabee making a joke about his being assassinated? who exactly advocated/ joked about hrc getting shot at, not including the bosnia issue?

Nice deflection, anthony. You take one quote (without a link) and use it to dismiss Mary's point that it's not just the GOP calling her a monster, it's the left as well. When Obama has suffered through 16 years of death "jokes" then I'll care about someone calling Obama a "man of darkness." (Shouldn't you be construing that as racist, though? Betcha Obama could get some mileage out of that one!) As for the Huckabee pile o' shit, he was at an NRA thing, wasn't he? It doesn't make his crap any better, but it doesn't sound to me like an "assassination" joke. And, every pro-Hilliary site I've gone to has condemned his comments, as they should. Not so for the death shit being aimed at Hillary - it's coming from the left. Even Olberman, a supposed champion of the left, has made his dead Hillary joke, and constantly calls her a monster. Also, the only ones I've seen talking about Obama being killed are "concerned" posters on the left - kinda ironic, considering the constant bell-tolling for Clinton, huh?

Anyhow, thanks, Mary, for pointing this out. It'll prolly fall on deaf ears, but at least someone's seeing this shit.

Anthony stop trying to outfox me, I am an experienced debater. I was not comparing domestic abuse to Obama's "sweetie" comment. What I was doing was doing was comparing was an insincere apology to an insincere apology to a domestic abusing husband, so in essence it was the insincerities of the apologies that were being compared, not the "sweetie" comment to domestic abuse.

Nice try though Anthony

Smell the misandry

The "sweetie" comment really ticked me off too. The apology was ok, but weak. He claimed that it's a bad habit and he's called "all kinds of people" sweetie. I bet he's never called a man sweetie. I bet he's never called Nancy Pelosi sweetie. I bet he's never called a boss or professor sweetie. What he means is that he calls all kinds of people who are below him sweetie. It's condescending and sexist. He should have been truly embarrassed by it and instead he just said "oops, soryy."

As for the women who are peeved and don't want to vote for Obama, I don't think Obama can really heal that--it's going to have to be Hillary. She's going to have to tell her supporters to vote for him, and she will. Obama will have to do his part too, by not being condescending and not taking women and her other core supporters for granted, but he can't do it alone.

Mary, with respect, there is plenty of antipathy going from Clintonites to Obama as well. To disregard that clear fact is not helpful, indeed, simply reinforces the antipathy. One only needs to tune in to TLC daily to see the very negative comments towards Obama from so-called Democrat Clinton supporters. When will you call for the anti-Obama Clintonites to "get over their antipathy"? I will let you in on a secret, there was/is a very large segment of the US population with a "pathological hatred" for Hillary Clinton, long before anyone every heard of Obama. That's why the GOP is anxious to have her nominated.

Heather,
Talk about needing to "get a life." Look, Obama has won the primary, HRC just won't admit it. That being the case, the only question left that you care about is "who is more electable in november--the democratic nominee or mccain." You seem to worry that the democratic nominee is both too left and too conservative (running a con game) but so what? either way he's going to be running against mccain, a stone conservative. So now its going to be up the country to decide which vision they want. Your anxieties that obama can't win the election because you think the country is still too right wing for him are not really relevant. If you don't want a rightward swing you have to vote for the democratic nominee--in this case obama. You may or may not get what you want. That happens, oddly enough, every election cycle. The time for strategizing and triangulating and second guessing is, for all intents and purposes, over. Now its just going to be a hard slog to the finish line to beat McCain, a known and pretty horrible quantity in a candidate and a party. If you don't want to vote for Obama, do the rest of us the courtesy to admit that you don't respect the political judgement of the plurality, if not the majority, of other politically active dems in this country and also admit that you are simply refusing to work with the democrats who have thrown their lot in with obama. You may choose to call it whatever you want but to my mind, as a feminist and a realist, its some kind of ugly. I didn't get my first choice (dean) but I worked my ass off for Kerry. Why? Because the choice in the general is *binary.* No one thinks you have to love the candidate. Just don't attack him from this confused rightward perspective. Once he gets in, if you are a true progressive (and if you aren't stop pretending to speak for the rest of us) hold obama and his administration accountable from the left. I certainly intend to. But for g-d's sake wake up and smell the fucking coffee. Sexism is utterly beside the point at this point--she lost. get the fuck over it.

(and apologies to all the people I've been criticizing on other blogs for not giving clinton's voters enough time to grieve their loss. Sometime's you've got to take out the two by four and remind people that politics is not,and never has been, about their singular relationship with their own ego or their candidate of choice. Its about trying to grab the levers of power from the multitudes of people who will use them for ill, and trying to do some serious work once you get them.)

aimai

Folks:

Some interesting Oregon time trends from fivethirtyeight.com.

"[analysis of changes in voter sentiment] helps to explain how polling in New Jersey and California, two states with fairly liberal-leaning electorates, now suggests that Obama might have won those states. But it also proved to be helpful in Oregon.

My modeling was consistently showing Oregon to be a toss-up state -- leaning only slightly to Obama. And if Oregon had voted back in February, maybe it would have been a toss-up. It might be noted that in Washington's beauty contest primary...Obama beat Clinton by just 3 points. And Washington should be a couple of points stronger for Obama than Oregon, as it is wealthier and has a somewhat larger black population.

But now, that isn't how Oregon is likely to vote. Clinton smartly recognized that the states that were scheduled to vote late in the primary process were moderate or conservative-leaning states. As such, she has moved somewhat to Obama's right. That's going to work to her benefit in places like Kentucky, but she's liable to pay a price for it in the one Kerry state that remained on the calender, which is Oregon. Tack on a couple of points for the fact that Obama has engaged the state more actively, and he could be looking at a double digit margin."

pragmaticprogressive:

To be honest and give you a truthful answer if Biden were in Obama's place I would not have as much anger but then again Biden has not behaved in the same sexist manner as Obama, more honesty I see Obama's as a con artist, an elitist, a man that does not want to pay his dues and wants a fast track to the presidency. I do not for one minute buy his excuses in the Pastor Wright debacle. I dread going in chapter and verse of what I do not like about Obama lol

aimai:

Sensitively done. With this kind of persuasive effort, I can feel the unity already. Re the two by four reference, I sure do like the idea of persuading people to follow me by beating them into submission first.

aimai,

First Obama has not won the nomination yet so hold off on the coronation all you will do is succeed in alienating alot of Hillary supporters like me, secondly I may follow Geraldine Ferraro's lead or put Hillary in as a write in vote. I do not have to vote for Obama.

Yeah, call us monsters and sore losers and bitches and racists, and still expect our support?

I don't think so.

And -- it's not over yet, sweeties.

fine. then vote for McCain and get Roe vs. Wade overturned.

It goes both ways [as this thread amply demonstrates]. I think the Republicans actively did a lot of this - Operation Chaos and other of their 'throw gasoline on the fire' technology. If Blacks or Hillary supporters boycott or vote for McCain, they think they can win. I'm voting for the Democrat no matter how it comes out. We've been snookered by the Republicans too many times before to let it happen again...

No Blood for Hubris,
Love your Blog ☆☆☆'s for you lol

Heather,
a write in vote is a lost vote and an insult to everyone else who gets up every day--even the day after elections--to fight for progressive causes. Its a vanity gesture and mistakes private masturbation for public duty.

Everyone else, I apologize for my intemperate langugae. The funny thing is that I've been fighting the pro hillary fight, or pro hillary voter fight, for a long time, even alienating some of my other bloggy friends because of my insistence that there is, at heart, a real and respectable grievance and grieving period for women over HRC's campaign and its losses. I don't even post over at Kos any more because of the rampant sexism. So actually my own posts here make me laugh, because when I read heather's self righteous crap I just kind of lost it and thought "holy *&^ bug juice" my friends who've moved on and faced the political facts were right. There are some pro hillary voters who are either just too stupid to live, or just too viciously anti obama to ever grasp the nature of our political system. They are so bitter and childish and angry that they will throw away their vote and throw away our only chance to retake the white house out of pique that their candidate (and by extension their very selves) were'nt chosen by the majority of other voters. Once again I'm an edwarsd voter who reluctantly came over to obama. I'm a woman who would have loved to vote for a woman. I'm a mother of daughters who wanted a woman as president. But this is not the time--the voters have already made that hugely clear. HRC herself doesn't deny that its all over but the technicalities. And the insistence of her true believers in not only stayign in the race (who cares) but continuing to smear the only remaining viable candidate we've got is truly sick. I know there are a lot of people who have to vent--I know them in real life and I know them on the net. And I also know that the vast majority of them, like the dean people before, or the al gore people this time (yay, I would have loved him) will get real and deal and work for the most progressive candidate in the general election *because there's nothing else a sane democrat or progressive can do*. But I've lost all respect for the outliers, like heather (a very small number of political morons, I think, ultimately) , who prefer to bare their fake stigmata and cry "poor me" because they didn't get the candidate of their choice.

aimai

aimai:

I liked your last post and come from the same place, that we have to get together behind the nominee. I just thought, and am glad you agree, that the language might have been a little OTT. I also agree that you're very well-known throughout the intertubes as being very even-handed and even-keeled about this crazy primary, and I respect that a lot. Rock on!

a write in vote is a lost vote and an insult to everyone else who gets up every day--even the day after elections--to fight for progressive causes. Its a vanity gesture and mistakes private masturbation for public duty. - aimai

What a crock of manure!

Voting your conscience is an insult?

You have jumped the shark with that comment.

For a Dem, Heather seems to have internalized an awful lot of right wing memes about Obama. Curious.

scottreads, aimai made a forcefully logical, intellectual argument to Heather, and Heather basically can't respond. Using logic is "beating Hillarians into submission"?

Perhaps you could do the party a great service and explain what method of persuasion will pay greater dividends if one wants to unify the party and convince Hillarians to perceive the greater good, since appeals to logic appear verboten. Many thanks.

I just want to highlight this comment from above that is dead on:

there was/is a very large segment of the US population with a "pathological hatred" for Hillary Clinton, long before anyone every heard of Obama.

For some twisted reason, Hillary supporters seem to think this a feature, not a bug. But many Democrats, myself included, don't want to hear excuses anymore. We want a winner, not a whiner.

BTW, I believe that Hillary has been misunderstood, and I have grown to like her more, not less, during this campaign, despite the fact that I never supported her.

Mary, I see a lot of Clinton hatred from Republicans. Most people I know who support Obama came to him through other candidates and aren't so much in mania towards him as disgusted with the negative campaign that Clinton has run. They may appreciate Obama's rhetorical skills and the way he's managed his winning campaign, but his policy positions vs. Clinton's are more subtle (although his foreign policy is much superior to Clinton's). In either case their domestic programs are better than anything offered by the Republicans.

There has been anger directed at the Clinton campaign as it has gone further and further negative. I realize that people who support Clinton think that saying words like "period" is some kind of coded sexism, but the rest of the world is not so paranoid.

However, there has never in my lifetime been a Democratic candidate who repeatedly has said that the Republican candidate is qualified to be President but that the presumptive Democrat isn't. That's party treason for many Democrats, and that kind of behavior earns her well-deserved antipathy. It's akin to Joe Lieberman politicking for McCain. Actually, it's worse.

Many people think that Clinton is being irrational in continuing her campaign. I don't think she is being irrational at all, which is more damning for Clinton. She is representing the class of people who benefited from the trade agreements and media mergers that her husband shepherded during the nineties. These are the same people who put most of that 109 million into the Clintons' joint bank account. That is, Clinton appears to be doing exactly what Limbaugh claims to be doing: bloodying up Obama for the general election, and she seems to be doing it for the interest of the top one percent. She has even delivered a percentage of Democrats to stupidly declare that they will vote against their interests in order to "support Hillary." Divide and conquer, the way to Republicans' success, gratis Clinton, who is only representing her true constituency.

In any case, the anger towards Clinton within the Obama camp is pretty much dissipating as the campaign winds down. The longer the hardcore Clinton supporters stay estranged from the Party, the worse the chances for a Democratic sweep in November. Gratis Clinton. Does that rise to monster level?

We want a winner, not a whiner.

So, you're for Hillary, then. Good for you!

I still find it very puzzling that Obama supporters, such as aimai, apparently believe that these passionate outbursts, however sincerely felt and subsequently regretted in part, will have any positive effect whatsoever in persuading less-than-content Clinton supporters to back the Nominee Presumptive.

What I expect to see from the Obama camp are some smarts both in dealing with the upcoming mudwrestling contest with the Rovians and their corporate media fellow travellers and in bringing the Party together. So far, Hubert Humphrey did a better job in 1968 on the party unity front than has Team Obama. It's just good politics -- for example, telling Donna Brazile, publicly, that she can sit this one out on the sidelines would be good for everyone concerned -- a clear message that (1) we're a Big Tent party, (2) we're not going to blow it like we did in 2000, (3) we're going to enfranchise Democrats and voters everywhere rather than parsing exclusionary rules, and (4) we're not tolerating snarky sniping at one of the leaders of the Democratic Party who has received 17 million votes across the country.

hey iac:

nope, not trying to deflect, trying to point out it goes both ways, somehow that got misinterpreted. sorry, i got the link from wa po.
am looking for it now...

heather:
can't equate an insincere apology from one to your perceived insincere apology from obama. someone who beats his wife to someone who called someone sweetie, doesn't equate, stupid, yes, does it equal the other, nope.

it is true, you don't have to vote for obama, but a write in is a wasted vote. it is your right, yes, but the values you hold dear as a woman, the right of choice, will go away under a mc cain presidency.

aimai.
Fine you and I disagree but do not call my posts self righteous crap, I am as much entitled to my opinion as you are to yours!

Stop acting like the left wing version of Bush censoring people's freedom of speech.
Next time you are at Starbucks please order decalf will ya!

Henry did u even read aimai's post?

She stated: "The funny thing is that I've been fighting the pro hillary fight, or pro hillary voter fight, for a long time, even alienating some of my other bloggy friends because of my insistence that there is, at heart, a real and respectable grievance and grieving period for women over HRC's campaign and its losses".

She is an Edwards to Clinton to Obama voter - big difference. She, like most of us, is understandingly sick of this back and forth nonsense.

As to the rest of your post: (1) Brazille has been an Obama fan for some time, she just hasn't declared, nor does she have to at this time; (2)saying we will win doesn't make it so; (3) Obama has publically asked his supporters to not deride Sen. Clinton, etc.

Message To All You Obama Supporters:

I am NOT right wing I am a Democrat that does not like Obama so stop cramming him down my throat will ya!

Anyone that that supports Hillary and does not like Obama you want to attack, insult, intimidate, and threaten.Obama supporters get this through your thick ass skulls I don't like Obama and I will continue to support Hillary, Get it got it good!
I cannot speak for others but I am one woman that is not intimidated.
After the nomination is O-F-F-I-C-I-A-L...got that? Then I will weigh my options and see what I will do and all your bitching moaning and intimidation tactics won't work

iac: here it is...
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/05/19/obama_faults_mccain_on_lobbyis.html

Posted by: Sarah Calreis | May 19, 2008 7:55 PM

Anthony:
Just maybe if well all rallied around Hillary and supported her instead of messiah Obama there would not be a McCain presidency, did you ever give that any thought

heather--

your passion is commendable; however, when you start your posts with

I am so sick this Obama-mainia get a fucking life already!

then later complain of being "insulted, intimidated, and threatened," doesn't the former statement wipe out the latter?

if you want to 'debate,' the issues fine, but lets do it with some joie de vive, as pointing fingers, and cursing out those that disagree with you do nothing to heal the gaping wound caused by the vitriol spewed during this primary season.

Look, Obama has won the primary, HRC just won't admit it.

The primary's over? Got a linkee?

It is truly tragic when several better qualified and more experienced candidates Hillary Richardson, Dodd, Biden, even Kucinich for that matter and we wind up with Heaven help us Obama.
This is truly depressing lol
What does experience mean in America?
Sadly not much

heather:

long before this season started, i hoped she wouldn't run, simply because the right hates her. she is their poster child for all that is evil in their world. they would've turned out in legion to vote against hilary.

this is very much true:

there was/is a very large segment of the US population with a "pathological hatred" for Hillary Clinton, long before anyone every heard of Obama.

how is it that, that particular point seems to be glossed over?

Anthony,

No it does not because I have received all sorts of threats from Obama supporters. Not from this site but others even death threats via email so no the former does not wipe out the latter

Anthony:
Every head to head poll I have seen Hillary beats McCain by a wider margin then Obama

But I've lost all respect for the outliers, like heather (a very small number of political morons, I think, ultimately) , who prefer to bare their fake stigmata and cry "poor me" because they didn't get the candidate of their choice.

I didn't write that -- aimai did.

In reference to Donna Brazile, I didn't say we will win -- I said we do not intend to blow it as we did in 2000. That's not a guarantee of victory, but it is a suggestion that we are determined to be more competent in this fall's campaign.

I think the candidate has been better than Team Obama -- what I'm suggesting, as good politics, is that he should make an example of Donna Brazile (who I can only assume has been off-message) pour encourager les autres on the Team, particularly as she can then serve as a lightning rod for various criticisms of excluding Democrats, particularly those in Florida and Michigan.

Right now as far as I am concerned this is not over until Obama reaches 2025 case closed until then I support Hillary

No Blood for Hubris writes: "Yeah, call us monsters and sore losers and bitches and racists, and still expect our support?"

The "monster" as referred to by Mary was directed by a person at a meeting, specifically towards Hillary Clinton. And yet you absorb "monster" as being directed at you. You are not Hillary Clinton. No matter how much you pretend, H. Clinton is not you.

Do I expect "losers" to support the Democratic ticket? Over the last thirty years Democrats have been on the losing end of many elections. Yes, if people believe in the principles of the Democratic Party whether or not they lost a previous election (or in this case, primary), I would expect them to support the Party because the party represents their interests.

As far as people who use "bitches" and say racist things, no, I don't expect them to support Democrats. They are not Democrats, they are reactionaries. So far in this thread, the only one who's throwing around the b-word is you, No Blood for Hubris.

That makes you the reactionary. In fact, you are reacting in front of everyone. Your need to refuel your anger is precisely the mechanism that got the Germans to hate the Jews, or the Hutus to hate the Tutsis. You might as well be wearing an armband and marching in the streets with the Republicans. You seem to know nothing much beyond being angry, and at every opportunity you want to recharge your anger.

The adrenalin rush that anger gives is a great feeling, but anger often leads people to do stupid things against their best interests. It does no good for a person to stay in a cloud of anger. It distorts a person's thinking. It eventually eats up a person's insides. I expect that most Clinton supporters know the difference between Republican and Democrat once they get off the adrenalin jag.

HenryFTP

You are another candidate for decalf, have a nice day

Heather,
Richardson and Dodd have endorsed Obama. As has Edwards, Kennedy and many other very qualified Democrats. Hillary herself has said he will have her support if he is the nominee. Your comments are loony.

OMG!

Anyone that does not support Obama qualifies as a moron, ummmmmmm what political science class is that in? I must have missed that.

The people that support Obama especially the radical left, daily kos, moveon.org types refuse to understand or accept that radical left wing liberals cannot win in the general election America is slightly right of center, you guys are living a denial "Obama is not radical left" lol

I'm with euzoius, there is something suspicious about "Heather". If she's a Democrat, she's one who is poorly-informed about facts and is heavily influenced by right-wing misinformation. I notice that her blog is "by invitation only" -- which is also suspicious.

First, of Obama, Edwards, and Clinton, it is Obama whose policy positions who are the furthest right. This has been documented in many places (Krugman has pointed this out regarding his economic and health care policy statements), and is one of the main reasons many of Clinton's supporters remain adamant about her. However, the right wing is painting Obama as "scary left" (just like they pretended Gore and Kerry were ultra-liberals), and "Heather" has bought into that.

Second, the notion that America is "right-of-center" are common in the right wing media, but are totally unsupported by poll data -- which shows that Democrats win on all the issues, and that the majority of people favor the Democrats on issues like health care, "defense", economy, abortion, etc.

Most Democrats who read blogs know these basic facts about Obama and about where the American public stands on poll data. Many Clinton supporters use these data points as arguments on behalf of their candidate. The fact that "Heather" is unaware of these things is suprising.

I challenge "Heather", who appears to be a new poster, to open her blog up to general viewers so we can see what "she" writes.

Can I ask a Question

What does it say about people that support a senator that hasn't even completed his first term as senator and a whack job for a Pastor and so far behind all his fancy rhetoric has shown absolutely no substance whatsoever. He has not made a major accomplishment in the senate and co-authored no major bill in the senate since he has been there. He has voted over 130 times "Present" in the Illinois legislature when he did not want to take a stand on a bill.

He insulted blue collar workers in San Francisco when he thought he was off the record and got his hand caught in the cookie jar.

This is the guy these pencil neck geek Obama supporters want to win the nomination, and they insult me and say they lost respect for me?

Guess what? I hold you in contempt! get a life you arrogant elitist bastards!

Anthony:
You little twit if you wanted entry to my blog instead of acting like an arrogant blowhard all you needed to do was ask, I would have sent an invitation to you via email
some people are such anal retentive conspiracy theorists

pragmaticprogressive,

While it's true that the Appalachians have tended to vote Republican, it would, however, be wrong to say that couldn't get those votes. The fact is, when we have gotten those folks votes, we've won the WH, think Carter and Clinton here. When we haven't gotten the "Appalachian" vote, we've lost.

Because there are no facts, there is no truth, Just data to be manipulated

Don Henley-The Garden of Allah

Heather, really, you're not helping.

anthony: nope, not trying to deflect, trying to point out it goes both ways,

But it doesn't go both ways, does it? That's the point. A comment on a story in the Post by some fundie calling Obama the Antichrist doesn't compare to 16 years of death "jokes," especially when the last year's worth of it can be attributed to so-called Democrats who've joined the 'pukes in demonizing the Clintons as a campaign strategy.

My anger comes from watching people on our own side try to deny that it has happened, or diminish the significance of it by saying "this person did it to Obama, too," or by calling us whiners and saying "get over it." I certainly don't appreciate Obama supporters dangling my right to autonomy over my head as if it's yours to bargain with, especially considering the supposed majority the Dems are going to have next year. Are you saying that they won't stand up for it, even if they have the majority in both houses? Again, why should I show loyalty to those who haven't even showed me basic respect? From what I understand, Obama was all for Roberts being chief justice until his handlers told him it might look bad when he runs for prez. That kind of judgement doesn't really give me much confidence that he'll pick good judges, I gotta tell you. Especially if he's gonna try to be all "post-partisan" and everything.

The fact is, Obama hasn't "won" yet. He won't "win" until the convention, or until he makes a deal with the Hillary camp. Instead, he's reportedly going to corronate himself tonight, which will probably inflame a lot of people even more. Now, it may be satisfying to tell us to STFU, but I suggest you google "Steve Corbett Opertation Turn Down." There's a movement forming in PA of Dems against Obama and it's growing daily. I'm not saying they're right, I'm just saying that Obama's got trouble, and if he and his supporters don't stop the bleeding, they're gonna be in a world of hurt come November.

Heather don't you think that the divisions were already there? Maybe the only thing going on is that the divisions have to do with the democratic party not being monolithic & homogeneous. Some of the things going on the web have to do with what the cheerleaders on both sides are doing and very little of the animus is actually about the candidates themselves but how their supporters feel.

For the record, I can't stand Bush, I have dedicated my website to fighting him and the neocon agenda. He is nothing more than a god damn bastard that should be tried on war crimes, and spying on his own people.
I have fought tooth and nail when ginbat had his contract on America and was heartbroken when Bill Clinton co-opted on those welfare reforms.

Bush and Rove have lied and cheated at everything they have achieved, they stole two elections and I do not want it to be a third, thats one of many reasons I so strongly support Hillary, so don't anyone knock my Democratic bonafides just because I support Hillary over Obama.

If Obama wants my vote let him EARN it like Hillary has.

tenacitus,

I do agree with you.
P.S. If anyone wants access to my website I will be glad to send an invite if you give me your email
--Heather

It is clear that "some people" will accept nothing less than a black as the nominee.
It is also clear that "other people" will only accept a woman as the nominee.

There is only one logical solution to win the White House.

Hillary and Obama must hand their delegates over to Donna Brazile immediately and put a stop to the pastry pugilism once and for all.

Brazile would solve the race and gender problem, and stands ready to handle the affairs of this great country with the same brilliant expertise that she showed as Al Gore's campaign manager.

To say nothing of the tact and sensitivity Brazile has displayed towards the Democratic voters of Florida and Michigan . . .

Prag, this on started early, they all seem to be doing that lately.

Heather, don't wait up tonight, Oregon doesn't come in very well. Get a great nights sleep, the vote counters in Oregon will. I'd be surprised if they have a result by noon. Check back Wednesday.

Pass the popcorn, make mine buttered.

Don't we need a change from Obama/Bush policies?

"To say nothing of the tact and sensitivity Brazile has displayed towards the Democratic voters of Florida and Michigan . . ."

That too! What can I say, she's a born politician!
That's why she's STILL on TV explaining this complicated stuff to us simple folk.

This might be the second election she hands over to the GOPee.

Heather's posts brilliantly encapsulate a certain dynamic which, as I pointed out, is of fairly limited scope. She sees herself as a "hillary" voter and argues that when other voters choose otherwise it is because they are "pro black" or "anti woman" or whatever but she isn't actually a Hillary voter at all--she's a heather voter. Because most actual voters, regardless of their original preferences, end up supporting the party nominee. In fact the whole time the shrillosphere (of which I am a very shrill member) was choosing up sides most american voters were indicating that
a) they liked the extended primary and
b) they actually wanted an amalgam of the two winning candidates and/or wanted a mixed ticket.

See, serious democrats who seriously want to put a crimp in the republican agenda realize that there's only one way to do that--to unite around the victor in the primary. I wanted a candidate I didn't get but I never in a gazillion years ever proposed to sit this fight out. Because I don't think that my widdle personal feelings even begin to weigh in the balance in this battle for control of the government. But heather thinks hers do. Heather has consistently represented on this blog that her personal pique at the way her candidate has been treated requires her to attack other candidates, their voters, and their votes as illegitimate or unwise.

I call bullshit. Heather claims to be a democratic voter but I don't think she is, not in any real sense. She's patently not interested in the democratic process--even if you think that HRC could win this thing she would only be winning by the thinnest of margins. Those margins will be the same margins that Obama will win by, if he wins. So if Hillary's millions of voters ought to be loved, and catered to, and counted if she wins or if she gets very close why shouldn't Obama's? If I woke up tomorrow and found out HRC had swept the remaining contests and miraculously every superdelegate flipped in her direction I would happilly--HAPPILLY--work for her and support her. I'd never let my chagrin about Obama's lost cause hamper me in the least. Because I'm an actual progressive. I want to see the most progressive candidate in each election cycle win. If its HRC/mccain or Obama/mccain or howdy-fuckin-doody/Mccain its an easy choice for me. I always choose "not the R" and save my bitching about how it wasn't my first choice for the people who care--a vanishingly small number of people. Because its not about me, its about the good of the country.

I wish the DNC insisted that every candidate pledge upfront before they begin campaigning that they will not permit their voters or supporters to attack the other candidates bona fides, or undermine the democratic party and its goals. I think the way this has turned into a supporter slap fest is just disgusting. I'm not afraid of hard knocks or bad language--hell, I love 'em--and I don't object to those. Its the stupidity of the heathers of this struggle that I despise.

aimai

My heart my prayers go out to Sen Edward Kennedy and Godspeed a quick recovery of his brain tumor, truly a great Senator.

--Heather

iamcoyote:

How about some constructive criticism? You want "Obama" to stop the bleeding? What would you have him do?

While Obama's supporters are admittedly looking at the math and wondering what Hillary is thinking, I have heard nothing but gracious remarks from Obama. She has a right to keep going. She's a tough competitor. It's not over yet. Yadda, yadda, yadda.

So, if Obama clinches a majority of the pledged delegates, you want him to react how? To say, "No, wait, Hillary still thinks that I can't beat McCain and she may have a point. So, let's hold off on declaring victory. I may still have more skeletons in my closet that will sway the superdelegates."

I mean, come on! I understand being gracious to Hillary supporters, welcoming them back into the fold, and focusing on the general election. But when they start making irrational, unattainable demands of Barack Obama that neither Bill nor Hillary Clinton could ever meet (or any politician for that matter) it becomes absurd. Expecting a political opponent to not spin a political victory? This is an insult? What is this, kindergarten?

"Brazile would solve the race and gender problem, and stands ready to handle the affairs of this great country with the same brilliant expertise that she showed as Al Gore's campaign manager."

I kinda like the idea actually ;-) but sadly no.

Heather, one of the things about democratic bona fides that has happened is that many folks on the web who have picked a candidate that they will support through thick or thin are seen now by many others as not independent players in getting a more democratic society & wanting a true progressive movement (not based on a single progressive in office) have weakened the progressive movement which was weak to being with by endorsing a candidate instead of a platform.

Also I reall think that many black folks and women who might have been indifferent to either nominee when they started to feel that either Hillary or Obama were being maligned not for anything that they had done, or their records, but instead for either their gender or race. Personally I believe that if we had two waspy males most people here would not care either way. The last thing that I will say is that despite what some of the supporters might think many people are not picking a candidate because they are idiots. Even when half the country voted for Bush twice I did not think they were idiots. Also whenever I have talked to conservatives I have found it best not to actually dismiss or demonize them but actually refute their points. Many of them will never agree with me but I can live with that.

I guess what I am saying as someone who is extremely ambivalent about both potential democratic nominees I don't completely understand why so many folks are emotionally invested in either candidate instead of being emotinally invested in strengthening grassroots lobbying & coalition building for a real progressive movement. But then again after seeing the divisions based on race, gender, & class among other things in this nomination race maybe I should not be surprised.

Sigh.

More generalizing from anecdotal evidence; more leaping from a description of one obnoxious jerk to a sweeping statement about how "Obama supporters are going to have to get over their antipathy of Clinton as a strong (albeit humanly fallible) woman."

I'm an Obama supporter who doesn't call HRC a monster, or a bitch, or own HRC nutcrackers, or stupid, offensive T-shirts....I will vote for whichever one is the presidential nominee.

Heather, I second your thoughts for Senator Kennedy.

Right now I am going to make my peace With Obama, I am heartbroken over Sen Kennedy, I always had a special place in my hear for all the Kennedys especially John and Bobby, John John life has been too short for all the Kennedys.
Life is short we need to mend our differences

Sometimes I wonder what percentage of blog comments are written by 12 year olds.

yes, whatever Heather's personal politics may be (and I have my doubts despite professed concern over radical lefty Sen Ted's health), it's the callowness and blithe lack of concern for the ultimate goal of our (very difficult) political endeavors by the supposedly "liberal" Hillarian extremist Heathers that is so infuriating.

A chain is only as strong as its weakest link(s), and looking forward to the snapping of the chain in Nov because you were not personally catered to by the national politics of an enormous national party means one has missed the Big Picture---and, if one actually is a Dem, self destructive as well.

amen, Senator Kennedy is my Senator. My heart is breaking for his family and for us all. He's always fought, even when, as a young child wrote today in the letters column of the Boston Globe, he could have retired and taken it easy. And he's always treated the youngest and least of his constituents, she said, as though they were "world leaders."

aimai

Thank you Peter

euzoius:
Who are you to sit in judgment over me? I sincerely hope you realize I will not lose any sleep over what you think of my politics.

The same way a parent can scold and discipline her child and still love that child I can do the same with MY Democratic party. Speaking of "callowness" your last post defines that emphatically.
I hardly need your lectures or arrogance, take your elitist psychobabble elsewhere

oh, I get it, the democratic party is "your child" and you scold her at will? Uh? and you call other people elitist? I won't bother to accuse you of elitism, but narcissism? A.Textbook.Case.

aimai

In a similar vein, one of the most interesting things about this campaign is the way Obama's supporters have used a number of framings and terms against Clinton, when it's Obama who is far more guilty on those specific counts. 'Anything to win', 'dirty/attack campaigning', the use of race as a wedge -- these are the more obvious examples. The doublespeak and 'truthiness' is an extension of what we've lived through the past eight years, showing just how effective the Bush administration and GOP have been at dismantling critical judgment and refining the 'up is down' rationalization as an embracable technique. This, along with Obama's right-wing talking points against Clinton and against universal healthcare, are legacies of GOP strategies that date back at least to the Reagan era (not coincidentally, the Republican touchstone that Obama has given either undeserved or cynical public respect, from a progressive viewpoint).

By picking up these threads -- of the right's campaign against the Clinton's, against actual progressive causes like universal healthcare, and by giving credibility to the deification of a retrogressive politician like Reagan -- Obama has gone a long way toward certifying some major cornerstones of the post-Atwater GOP propaganda machine.

Taking the next step -- using 'up is down' techniques -- is a wholly predictable development among his supporters. And, like the Republican rank and file that believed their leadership when they used these techniques, the Obama rank and file truly believes that these arguments and techniques represent the truth. Any challenge is often met with no direct defense, but rather a full-on attack involving labeling and smearing the 'enemy', which is yet another tactic perfected by the GOP machine.

If Obama does end up being the nominee, it will be interesting to see how the clash of two opposing sets of followers/campaigners with such similar patterns of 'argument' will play out.

It's also why I'll vote in local and state races this November, but will make either no choice for president or choose someone besides Obama or McCain, should Obama get the nomination. Clinton has made a number of undignified attacks and eye-rolling comments in this campaign, but the wholesale adoption of the right's modus operandi by Obama, his campaign and a great many of his supporters should not be rewarded, in my opinion. Neither should the gleeful misogyny and illogical hatred of all things Clinton, including her supporters. If this is the direction in which the party wants to go, it will go without me and, I suspect, some millions of others.

As a side note, a vote for either Obama or McCain will be a vote against progressive causes. That Obama supporters claim otherwise shows their lack of understanding of what the term 'progressive' means and has historically meant. His statements and, in fact, his voting record show that he is not a progressive politician. A shrewd one, perhaps, and a highly skilled one, but not a progressive one.

As a side note, a vote for either Obama or McCain will be a vote against progressive causes.

That's not what Heather and the right wing are saying about Obama -- they say he's in the radical left. :)

Seriously, you are accurate in that Obama's positions are not as progressive as Clinton's. And Clinton's weren't as progressive as Edwards, who wasn't as progressive as Kucinich.

It's fair to be concerned that Obama may compromise with the far right too much if he wins. He reminds me in some ways, ironically, of Bill Clinton. Bill, as you will recall, was party to the Salvage Logging Rider, NAFTA, media consolidation, energy deregulation (paving the way for Enron), welfare "reform", and a host of other bad right wing ideas that - except for the last - didn't have popular support. On the foreign policy side Bill signed on to an unnecessary bombing of Kosovo (and the subsequent creation of a large US base there) and ongoing bombing in Iraq to placate the military. His one signature issue, health care reform, he handled so badly (with Hillary's able help) that the issue was too toxic to touch for the next decade.

Yet, we still like and support Bill because he did stand up to the Republicans on a number of key issues. And so it will be with Obama, even if his track record is similar to Bill's.

Which is why I consider any Democrat who says "I will vote for McCain if my candidate loses" to be either 1) someone caught up in the emotion of the moment, who will see reason later, 2) stupid, or 3) a Republican troll pretending to be a Democrat.

I love these gutless fucking anonymous posters or ones that use these keyword identies that toss their god damn poison darts, they are so fucking stupid to not understand the difference between progressiveness and radicalism

I love this comment: the anonymous poster made:
"Yet, we still like and support Bill because he did stand up to the Republicans on a number of key issues. And so it will be with Obama, even if his track record is similar to Bill's."

What fucking track record? WTF has Obama done in the senate or lets be kind and include the state legislature HE FUCKING VOTED RESENT over 130 times WTF part of that you Obamaphiles cannot understand!

It is totally moronic to compare Obama's non record to Bill Clinton that served as Governor and President and unlike Obama BALNCED a budget

*I meant to type Voted "Present" in the above comment

From now on I am going to let all you Obamaphiles run off at the mouth I am not going waste my time justifying myself to judgmental morons that already made up their minds to tar and feather me

♫ laaa laaaa laaaa dahhhhhhhh deeeeee dahhhh tip toe through the tulips ♫

From now on I am going to let all you Obamaphiles run off at the mouth I am not going waste my time justifying myself to judgmental morons that already made up their minds to tar and feather me

Hmmmm......

(scrolls to top of page to discover):

I am so sick this Obama-mainia get a fucking life already!

Hi, Pot.

Umm, yeah, whatever you say, SWEETIE.

they are so fucking stupid to not understand the difference between progressiveness and radicalism

Now who is being rude?

You want to identify ONE think that Obama advocates that is radical but not progressive? Just ONE????

A study of his positions and speeches is a study in centrism. Not the pseudo-centrism of a Joe Lieberman, but dead-in-the-middle-of-the-polls centrism. Try-to-understand-and-work-with-all-sides centrism. It's why he was criticized by Krugman for throwing bones to the right wing on health care, the economy, social security, and the legacy of the Reagan administration.

I suspect that, like those who frequent NewsMax and WorldNetDaily, you have confused Obama's positions with those of others, such as Rev. Wright.

Look, there are many valid reasons for preferring another Democratic candidate to Obama. There are also many valid reasons for being pissed off at the behavior of Obama supporters (as well as Clinton supporters).

But, if you believe in Democratic causes, if you have been paying attention these past few years to the trend on the Supreme Court w.r.t. individual rights, if you are concerned about critical issues such as the environment, the economy, and international relations, THEN there can be no excuse for voting for McCain in the fall -- no matter who the Democratic nominee.

Anthony:
You are a fool if you think Lieberman is a centrist Go to bed and give your over taxed brain much needed rest please

"Sweetie"?

Obama, is that you on this thread?

Heather:

I'm not Anthony. And you didn't answer my challenge:

You want to identify ONE think that Obama advocates that is radical but not progressive? Just ONE????

You don't read posts very well, do you? Just skim, pick out a couple words, and blast away. No, I didn't say Lieberman is centrist, although the Washington pundits like to position him that way.