View Story | 1209 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/...
by Yoshimi on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 09:16:05 AM PDT
[ Parent ]
... does that mean I shouldn't vote for her?
"People should not be afraid of their government; governments should be afraid of their people." --V
by MikeTheLiberal on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 09:18:13 AM PDT
Haven´t we had enough of this kind of stuff from GW? We need politicians who will answer ANY questions people pose and not politicians who screen questions.
by lpeacock on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:35:56 AM PDT
You know, plant problem, green thumb?
I didn't think so.
It's Friday. Sue me. :P
by MikeTheLiberal on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 11:31:48 AM PDT
the student who was forced to ask the "diamonds or pearls" final kiss question of Hillary said all those "spontaneous" audience questions were "pre-planned and censored" by CNN. Is anything real any more?
by dotster on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 09:48:15 AM PDT
involved. So carefully orchestrated, and you know why.
But they cannot plant the voters.
"The answer is to end our reliance on carbon-based fuels." Al Gore, 7/17/08
by TomP on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 09:53:26 AM PDT
that the Clinton camp is calling this a "win" because she didn't screw up.
Rather reminds me of the low expectations expected of another candidate..though a member of the other party.
Its the delegates that count
by Morgan Sandlin on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 09:57:59 AM PDT
She doesn't have to do anything to win. She's already in. She doesn't need to convince people to vote for her, she doesn't need support from the citizenry, all she needs to do is make certain that they never get organized enough to fight for the right to pick a real candidate. That's why her campaign is focused on two things and two things only - keeping her face in front of the public w/o allowing them to get close enough to question anything beneath the facade, and silencing the competition by whatever deceitful means necessary.
"Fear not the path of truth for the lack of people walking on it." Robert F. Kennedy
by enough already on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 11:02:30 AM PDT
just elaborate coronations. In part because the average American is too clueless to be able to make decisions, being completely befuddled with waves of advertising, PR, and organized deception that is the U.S. propaganda industry. Everything in our lives is phony except, perhaps, our interaction with those most intimate with us and even then....
The struggle for each of us is to find out what is real--to learn discrimination and remain clear-headed starting with ourselves and moving outward.
by banger on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 11:09:34 AM PDT
and enraging
the average American is too clueless to be able to make decisions, being completely befuddled with waves of advertising, PR, and organized deception that is the U.S. propaganda industry
You think that just because most americans don't see the world exactly as you do that they are stupid. Well, you know what: You are wrong.
by heartofblue on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 03:40:15 PM PDT
and I don't want everybody to think exactly as I do. We are much like the blind men and the elephant--we can only get an idea of what is going on by using the information from people stationed at various parts of the elephant--but if they are drunk of incapacitated someone needs to say somethin. I've seen in my lifetime the American people as a whole including people I know well devolve into confusion because of information overload and indulgence in fantasies and addictions (including myself at times). We've lost what the ancients called virtue and stupidity is the result.
Turn on your TV and look at what's out there (thankfully we don't have one)--that's what we've become. I blame the followers of Edward Bernays for much of this.
by banger on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 05:02:07 PM PDT
of both parties. And those nominees consistently play in the hands of corporate greed forces(NAFTA, GATT, WTO, war-profiteers, big oil etc.) and ignore the needs of the people when they get elected? Yep, the general public is brainwashed. The HRC crowd is proof.
by Mike Taylor on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 11:02:50 PM PDT
As long as they have proprietary E-Voting systems and bogus TV polls to back them up, they can fix the primaries too.
by Mike Taylor on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:51:27 PM PDT
asked by the audience....like the one about Supreme Court justices where Malvaux added in the litmus test for abortion.
CNN and the people who booed Democrats should be ashamed of themselves.
01-20-09: THE END OF AN ERROR
by kimoconnor on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 09:58:58 AM PDT
...saying he will answer the question the citizen asked.
Blitzer even suggested that what Malveaux brought up was what was originally asked...
As if we couldn't see or hear without his intervention.
by elial on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:16:59 AM PDT
You can attack fellow Democrats but not boo them?
by Pozzo on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:29:17 AM PDT
Unless you think that pointing out differences is attacking.
Get real
by kimoconnor on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:34:02 AM PDT
You really think no one's ever attacke her in this camapign. You might heed your own advice about "getting real."
by Pozzo on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:37:40 AM PDT
They did not attack her.
Period.
by kimoconnor on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:44:26 AM PDT
by Pozzo on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:49:31 AM PDT
and not simply pointing out the facts of Hillary's policy.
As they say,,,,,put up or shut up
by kimoconnor on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:53:08 AM PDT
Obama took on Clinton more directly than he had before over health care, while John Edwards attacked her as a defender of a Washington system "that is rigged and is corrupt."
But I am just making this up, right? http://www.iht.com/...
by Pozzo on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 12:40:38 PM PDT
which includes corrupt lobbyists both rigged and corrupt, and doesn't Hilary defend that system calling them "real Americans"?
Did you just get attacked?
by checkmate on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 01:24:12 PM PDT
she never called lobbyists real Americans., although of course, if they are American citizens, they are
by Pozzo on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 01:56:49 PM PDT
Which is a stupid comment. As we all know that most lobbyists only work for their corporate employers, who do not always care about real Americans!
by kimoconnor on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 04:03:33 PM PDT
the case is closed.
Ok......do you also take the word of the Washington Times if they criticize anyone other than Hillary?
HERE IS WHAT WAS SAID (transcript)
EDWARDS: Senator Clinton says she will end the war. She also says she will continue to keep combat troops in Iraq and continue combat missions in Iraq. She says she will turn up the heat on George Bush and the Republicans, but when the crucial vote came on stopping Bush, Cheney and the neocons, on Iran, she voted with Bush and Cheney. On the issue of Social Security... (APPLAUSE) ... on the issue of Social Security, she said, standing beside me on the stage, that she would not do anything about the cap on Social Security taxes, and she has said privately to people, because it's been reported in the press, that in fact she would consider raising that cap. And the most important issue is she says she will bring change to Washington, while she continues to defend a system that does not work, that is broken, that is rigged and is corrupt; corrupted against the interest of most Americans and corrupted... (APPLAUSE) BLITZER: All right... EDWARDS: ... and corrupted for a very small, very powerful, very well-financed group. BLITZER: We're going to... EDWARDS: So we have fundamental differences. BLITZER: We're going to get to all of these issues, including energy and Iran and everything else. CLINTON: Well, Wolf, I've just been personally attacked again, and I... BLITZER: Senator Clinton, I'll let you respond because there was a direct charge made against you. CLINTON: Thank you. BLITZER: Then we're going to bring in everybody. Everyone's going to get time tonight; don't worry, we got a lot of time. Go ahead. (PROTESTOR SHOUTS OFF-MIKE) CLINTON: Well, you know, I respect all of my colleagues on this stage. AUDIENCE MEMBER: Clinton! CLINTON: And, you know, we're Democrats and we're trying to nominate the very best person we can to win. And I don't mind taking hits on my record on issues, but when somebody starts throwing mud, at least we can hope that it's both accurate and right out of the Republican playbook. (APPLAUSE) Because what I believe is important is that we put forth what we stand for. I have been active for 35 years. The American people know where I stand. You know, Senator Edwards raised health care again -- when Senator Edwards ran in 2004, he wasn't for universal health care. I'm glad he is now. CLINTON: But for him to be throwing this mud and making these charges I think really detracts from what we're trying to do here tonight. We need to put forth a positive agenda for America...
EDWARDS: Senator Clinton says she will end the war. She also says she will continue to keep combat troops in Iraq and continue combat missions in Iraq.
She says she will turn up the heat on George Bush and the Republicans, but when the crucial vote came on stopping Bush, Cheney and the neocons, on Iran, she voted with Bush and Cheney.
On the issue of Social Security...
(APPLAUSE)
... on the issue of Social Security, she said, standing beside me on the stage, that she would not do anything about the cap on Social Security taxes, and she has said privately to people, because it's been reported in the press, that in fact she would consider raising that cap.
And the most important issue is she says she will bring change to Washington, while she continues to defend a system that does not work, that is broken, that is rigged and is corrupt; corrupted against the interest of most Americans and corrupted...
BLITZER: All right...
EDWARDS: ... and corrupted for a very small, very powerful, very well-financed group.
BLITZER: We're going to...
EDWARDS: So we have fundamental differences.
BLITZER: We're going to get to all of these issues, including energy and Iran and everything else.
CLINTON: Well, Wolf, I've just been personally attacked again, and I...
BLITZER: Senator Clinton, I'll let you respond because there was a direct charge made against you.
CLINTON: Thank you.
BLITZER: Then we're going to bring in everybody. Everyone's going to get time tonight; don't worry, we got a lot of time.
Go ahead.
(PROTESTOR SHOUTS OFF-MIKE)
CLINTON: Well, you know, I respect all of my colleagues on this stage.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Clinton!
CLINTON: And, you know, we're Democrats and we're trying to nominate the very best person we can to win.
And I don't mind taking hits on my record on issues, but when somebody starts throwing mud, at least we can hope that it's both accurate and right out of the Republican playbook.
Because what I believe is important is that we put forth what we stand for. I have been active for 35 years. The American people know where I stand.
You know, Senator Edwards raised health care again -- when Senator Edwards ran in 2004, he wasn't for universal health care. I'm glad he is now.
CLINTON: But for him to be throwing this mud and making these charges I think really detracts from what we're trying to do here tonight. We need to put forth a positive agenda for America...
Edwards did not say anything that is a personal attack. He pointed out their differences,
If he had said she was not qualified for the job because she is a woman, that would be an attack that is unwarranted.
It is IMPERATIVE that we learn the differences in the candidates.
If Hillary doesn't like others pointing out here policies, votes etc, she should change her policies and vote like a DEMOCRAT!
by kimoconnor on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 04:01:45 PM PDT
I think Obama said "Giuliani" and "Romney" (I can't be exactly sure of the names but I got it on tape and its been discussed several times in the media as well)
is completely out of bounds and totally unfair and will drive any Dem audience berserk. The Nevada Dems remained relatively calm altho it was clear they didn't like that at all.
Imagine that happening during a Rep debate. Comparing a rival candidate to Dems. The Reps in the audience would go nuts.
by FelisRufus on Sat Nov 17, 2007 at 02:11:56 AM PDT
I saw not one attack. Calling a factual comment mudslinging is so - Hillarian. The same behavior we witnessed in the debate is precisely what we see from you hillary staffers. and you are pissing people off something awful. perhaps that is your plan.
What we call god is merely a living creature with superior technology & understanding. If their fragile egos demand prayer, they lose that superiority.
by agnostic on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 12:30:30 PM PDT
pointing out facts and differences of opinion on issues is indeed an attack - but only when the result is that Hillary looks bad - which is often.
Obama, or McCain
by Elise on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:45:13 AM PDT
If you say "My opponent voted for a huge tax increase" and it's true, it's still an attack. It's a fair attack, but still an attack.
by Pozzo on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:51:14 AM PDT
If Hillary voted the right way, you would not have to whine today.
by kimoconnor on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:53:57 AM PDT
Hillary fans are not the ones whining today.
by Pozzo on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 11:03:52 AM PDT
whining about (non)attacks on Hillary.
your suggesting that pointing out her votes is an attack.
If that is not whining, what is?
by kimoconnor on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 11:16:25 AM PDT
for things that I've done! Give me a break.
Do you know how fucking whiny that sounds? Every 5 seconds here there's some Clinton supporter crying about how she was attacked. This is a Presidential primary - it's not Senior class elections.
You don't hear me whining that Hillary attacked Obama last night...you will hear me criticizing the fact that she used Republican talking points to do it.
You folks think that every single time they point out the differences between themselves and Hillary it's an "attack" and she's either defending herself from the big mean boys, or she's attacking them and showing how "tough" she is.
It's a BOGUS narrative and I'm not buying it and it doesn't seem many others here are.
You can't claim that her gender isn't somehow a part of the campaign when you guys USE her gender to put her in this position. It's lame and it's offensive. If she can't win because of her positions on issues and because of her message, then she doesn't deserve to win.
By the way - what IS Hillary's campaign message? That she's experienced? Is that a message that will help us win the General Election? I don't see it...however, by contrast, Obama has a solid message that can not only help him win the Democratic primary, but it will also help him kick the Republican's asses in 2008 as well.
by Elise on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:58:55 AM PDT
Fer crissakes, she ran against two no name rethugs in NY, Obama ran against Allen Fucking Keys????
WTF
"As individual fingers we can easily be broken, but all together, we make a mighty fist" Watanka Tatanka (Sitting Bull)
by Tinfoil Hat on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 12:18:30 PM PDT
He ran as a virtually unknown AA candidate, in a crowded field and against a powerful machine candidate, and beat 'em all by more than 20%, in a state with only 12% AA population.
May your entire existence be one sensuous, frolic-filled experience lived in defiance of care.
by Fonsia on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 01:24:25 PM PDT
she had a baby! She's done stuff!
Republicans play only rigged games.
by output on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 03:30:57 PM PDT
by Elise on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 09:05:42 PM PDT
If you'd like to define down "attack" to include the dog pissing on the hydrant across the street, I suppose you're within your rights. Just don't expect anybody to take you seriously. About anything. Ever.
This is an attack. Questioning somebody's policy positions is not. Stop overplaying the victim.
The lone and level sands stretch far away. -Shelley
by justme on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 12:41:18 PM PDT
The HRC crowd doesn't really believe in freedom of expression, because they want to silence all speech that doesn't agree with their own. It's their way or the highway. Who does that remind us of? These people are behaving like authoritarian fascists.
by Mike Taylor on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 11:20:45 PM PDT
booed when he said "I think everyone should be held to the same standard." it was downright sad. y'all seriously abuse the word "attack". if contrasting yourself with someone else is inherently "attacking" them, the word has no meaning.
John McCain will ban abortion.
by itsbenj on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:42:11 AM PDT
the way Edwards was treated in that debate.
Edwards has earned better than that. Big time earned it.
by Fonsia on Sat Nov 17, 2007 at 12:33:15 AM PDT
by justme on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 12:21:45 PM PDT
She should have refused to ask the question.
by Rex Manning on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 09:56:20 AM PDT
being called on national tv - I don't know of anyone who would have had the courage to "just say no". And I doubt she thought that piece of crap is what the night would end on.
by CeeusBeeus on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:24:00 AM PDT
from behind the keyboard.
by Smallbottle on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:56:37 AM PDT
to control CNN and "plant" a silly question about diamonds or pearls, I would be impressed.
How many of you complained when SNL did an entire show that was a big kiss to Obama and ripped Hillary? And still Obama can't seize the moment.
.
by MKS on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 10:32:40 AM PDT
I thought it was just one skit, come on, quit doing the responding with typical Hillary-supporter delusion and look at what really happened.
by cardboardurinal on Fri Nov 16, 2007 at 11:48:12 AM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 1209 comments