View Story | 989 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
It's been said a dozen times today, at least.
Fer fuck's sake, it's primary season at Daily Kos.
People say all kinds of things.
Let's put up another dozen of these "Nyah-nyah" diaries and another dozen "I'll never vote for [CANDIDATE X]" diaries and call it a day, eh?
by Bob Johnson on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 07:44:02 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
But I've already used my diary allotment for today. Spot me one?
by grimc on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 07:47:46 PM PDT
This is getting boring.
There's not one vaguely original thought in this diary.
"It's the planet, stupid."
by FishOutofWater on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 07:59:25 PM PDT
thoughts per, this would be a sad place.
by dannyinla on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:00:31 PM PDT
so few ways to express it.
~ sigh ~
now at the left coaster and docudharma
by Turkana on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:03:34 PM PDT
...yep, you guessed it: "Thatcher 2.0."
mbr + dv + woyg
by keirdubois on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:08:16 PM PDT
Thatcher got the job on her own merits.
She was not a dynastic candidate who got to the top because she was the wife or daughter of a famous leader.
More like Indira Gandhi 2.0 or Bhutto 2.0 or Eva Peron 2.0 ...
Help! I can't tell the Republican trolls apart from the Democratic trolls, anymore!
by Bronxist on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:16:52 PM PDT
Just...Uncle.
by keirdubois on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:17:48 PM PDT
look at hillary's resume, going back to when she was valedictorian at wellesley. but way to track tweety. he'd be so proud.
by Turkana on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:21:27 PM PDT
or better.
Go look at Indira Gandhi's resume.
I'm not saying that Hillary is not an accomplished woman.
I'm saying that Hillary is not a self-made woman. Thatcher was.
(Hint: I say Thatcher, and people don't ask "Which one?")
by Bronxist on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:29:20 PM PDT
maybe if she hadn't married bill clinton, and deliberately accepted a supporting role in his career, she'd have beaten him to the white house.
by Turkana on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:31:44 PM PDT
It's a hopeful thought, but no.
She's risen to her level of incompetence, as Peter put it back in the '70s.
Outstanding student, fine lawyer, adequate first lady, inadequate senator.
I'm not willing to continue pushing her through that series.
So long as men die, Liberty will never perish. -- Charlie Chaplin, "The Great Dictator"
by khereva on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:34:40 PM PDT
given her early work for the senate, and the children's defense fund, she was clearly a rising star. number 2 at yale law school, i believe.
by Turkana on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:35:39 PM PDT
Judging by what we see now, not so much.
by khereva on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:37:03 PM PDT
but anyone who thinks obama's any cleaner isn't paying attention. we have three centrists, with varying nuances of centrism.
by Turkana on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:39:12 PM PDT
I've been nothing but disappointed in him since the first moment I heard him speak. Yes, I'd heard all this hoopla over this amazing powerhouse speaker on fire out of Illinois years ago. The first words I heard from him were from an NPR news story about Congress taking on Bush. Sadly, it was the same accommodating, compromising, wishy-washy stuff that I so despise no matter who says it: Harry, Hillary, Joementum, Nancy, whoever.
by khereva on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:59:48 PM PDT
He presents himself as "change" and "hope" and superior.
He's just another politician. So, I say vote for somebody who understands and verbalizes just how dirty it is.
Vote for Edwards
The greatest gift you can contribute to the goal of world peace is to heal.
by wavpeac on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:18:12 AM PDT
Rezco was not how Hillary insinuates. Obama did not know about Rezco and was actually trying to help poor people out.
by TMP on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:05:57 AM PDT
He admits it was a mistake and he "doesn't recall" the conversations that he plainly had with Rezco.
Read the facts that you don't like too. Don't just buy into the notion that he's an angel. The whole thing stinks and it makes me sad.
by wavpeac on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:37:29 AM PDT
The best prosector with all the time, money and power he could muster. If Fitz would have had this leeway, Bushco and his whole administration would be behind bars for treason. After 20 million dollars of tax payor money spent, the only thing he found was that Bill lied about a blow job. That's the fact. The republicans blew white water up into a HUGE deal and if you don't think they will do that with Obama you are sadly mistaken. I've read the reports, as many as I could find on Resco. Google it. Read every article.
It's damning. Obama didn't answer the questions sufficiently, but he may have to because he's named in the suit that goes to court in the next few weeks.
The republicans are gonna run with it, and Obama's responses "it was dumb of me" and "I don't recall the conversation I had with Rezco" aren't going to stand up to the neo con work up. Get real.
Whitewater produced zero and if there had been something, it would have made it to surface. I wish we could have given Fitz special prosecutor status, but they got rid of the law. The republicans feared it would be used against them like they did to the Clintons. And Oh how right they were.
by wavpeac on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:42:16 AM PDT
Are you serious? I guess your right since the Clinton's are world renowned for their truth telling abilities. Just ask all the working class woman Bill did not have "sexual relations" with.
by TMP on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:20:20 AM PDT
He cheats on his wife as did every single president since, god only knows.
I don't care about that, that's his and her business. I have know lots of folks (I think the stats say 70% for men and 60% for women), so he's in the majority on that one. I don't want him as my spouse, but it has little to do with running the nation or any other business venture. Did it cripple trump? I hate him, but it didn't stop him from being good at his job??
by wavpeac on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:48:57 AM PDT
I guess you could so most presidents were racist also... It is a character issue. Lying, smearing, distorting (NAFTA, DLC, Welfare reform) and those were just Billary's first 2 terms. Sista Soulja on my friend.
by TMP on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:00:32 AM PDT
And sorry but Obama has engaged in the same behavior in regard to gender. Neither of them are angels, stop pretending he is and we'll all get along a lot better. I just seek truth.
I think all white people have a little racism and I think men and women each carry judgments about the opposit sex. I just like to call out the facts.
by wavpeac on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:10:24 AM PDT
anything like the clintons. I'm for Obama but I'm not going to say John Edwards is the same as Hillary, he's not, he's a good man... as is Obama.
Confucius say: Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves.
by bluecayuga on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:27:28 AM PDT
You either need to give some serious and specific examples to back up Obama's "sexism" claim or be prepared to be called a giant lying steaming sack of entitled crap. I can't wait to read this.
by TMP on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:10:21 AM PDT
So did many other women over at FDL. There were several of us who experienced Obama's tone and non verbal as condescending and sexist.
I have said repeatedly I don't think he is a "sexist" in that his whole person makes decisions out of that type of thinking. I have said this over and over, again. I think it's interesting how intolerant some people are to one type of behavior, but can't see it in their own candidate.
blind love I guess.
by wavpeac on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 02:15:04 PM PDT
It was stupid and irrelevant. I thought it was disgusting how the Republicans and the media frolicked in the intimate, personal details of his marriage and private, sexual behavior. I thought Democrats would be inclined not to play school-marm with what people do in the bedroom. I guess I was wrong. A lot of public office-holders have had affairs, shit, a lot of humans have had affairs. They should not be burned at the stake for it. It was the Republican obsession with Clinton and their desire to take him down any way they could that led to the scandal. And his approval ratings were still decent when he left office.
by jodygirl on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:09:44 AM PDT
This is rich. Bill Clinton targets woman who are in socially vulnerable positions: employees, working class, the voiceless, etc. yet somehow being married to someone like this for 35 years gets you vigorous endorsement from Gloria Steinam. Why do I suspect that you may share more than one demographic marker with your candidate of choice? The Clintons are liars, they use race baiting, they screwed the poor via NAFTA and welfare reform, they praised Reagan, etc.
by TMP on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:19:43 AM PDT
I don't have a candidate of choice. I have repeatedly said that I would support anyone who gets the nomination. As a woman, I personally resent the constant portrayal (by some) of women as victims. When it is true, well by all means, but when it is just politically helpful, then I have a problem with that. It robs women of their power and keeps them pigeon-holed as "victim". Regardless of what others may think, I don't think Monica Lewinsky was a victim. Maybe not incredibly stable, but I view her as a consenting adult.
by jodygirl on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:34:36 AM PDT
This is by her admission. I don't see sexism in that move and I am a feminist. I also think women have to be 100% responsible for their behavior.
I don't dismiss what he did, but I don't see sexism in it. I don't see him trying to destroy her, or put her down, any more than I see her trying to do the same to him. What I saw in Obama was his using his male status to one up Hillary. That's sexism.
If, Clinton had been the seducer, I would agree with you here, but per her own admission, that is not how the relationship was, and she wasn't a minor. He was wrong to engage, but I see a subtle difference here.
by wavpeac on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 06:33:19 AM PDT
ANOTHER LIBERAL WOMAN WHO HATES HILLARY
cute?
by bluecayuga on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:25:17 AM PDT
by jodygirl on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:10:41 AM PDT
play his little word games while trying to ruin Obama's good name. His pissing off an awful lot of people, myself included. The two of them are running for president and I've never seen a democratic primary when an ex president is the flame thrower.. but I guess when you a man with the integrity of a pig, it doesn't matter.
I am so angry, I can't even explain it. People are coming into the party in record numbers because of the hope Obama inspires... and what do those in power, those who have been so very careful not to rock the boat, not to give Bush too hard a time for fear he'll go after them... are now using the exact strategy the republicans used on them. Save the flame throwing for the general election... piss off hundreds of thousands of core democrats and you may keep an awful lot of them home on election day.
No one has any problem with her stumping with her husband,, she can tell everyone all about her policies, she can campaign any way she wants to ... but the disgraceful tactics they are using, the personal attacks... we are fucking sick of it. this primary, she has certainly made herself look just like a republican... what would be the difference between herself and McCain (other than abortion). He's a hawk on the war, she's a hawk on the war. this is not good.
by bluecayuga on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 09:12:06 AM PDT
I love Bill Clinton (there, I said it). I love Obama. I love Hillary. I love Edwards. I love Kerry. I could go on. Hillary has said she would get our troops out of Iraq. All of our candidates have said that. When Bill is accused of "race-baiting", I'm not sure what the reference it to. I think it would be amazing to have the first woman president or the first African-American president. But most of all, I think it would be astoundingly awesome to have them on the same ticket. They have both been tough on each other and the media has exploited and exacerbated the already bad situation. I hope that supporters don't buy into the media hype again (and again, and again, and again). Know-it-all, Sighs, Flip-flop, Dean scream, French (!), Hussein, mysogyny, etc...ad nauseum. All of these issues have lost us past elections and future elections if we continue to buy the spin hook-line-and sinker. My hope for the planet is that we stick together when it matters most...NOW! Peace.
by jodygirl on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 09:45:36 AM PDT
at the Little Green Footballs store?
"The way out is via the door. Why is it that no one will use this method?" - Confucius
by Blue Intrigue on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:30:24 AM PDT
unkind words against another.
by bluecayuga on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:24:17 AM PDT
has the experience of losing both houses of congress in her last administration and supporting every piece of crap republican legislation that came along.
To sin by silence when they should protest makes cowards of men~~ Abraham Lincoln
by Tanya on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 09:04:25 PM PDT
but he is a hell of a lot more honest and honorable than Hillary.
by usmeagle69 on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 10:13:28 PM PDT
of opinion.
by Turkana on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 10:32:47 PM PDT
some of us aren't blind. Hillary is lying about Obama...not just fudging facts or spinning the truth differently, Hillary and her husband are LYING about Obama and his record. There's no real opinion here. None.
by usmeagle69 on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 10:34:22 PM PDT
how foolish of me. i forget.
by Turkana on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 10:55:05 PM PDT
diary, I have to say, I'll be so glad when a lot of these Hillary haters leave here in disgust. There used to be so much intelligent discussion at Daily Kos. I hope we can get back to it eventually.
Thanks for your continuing efforts to inject common sense, Turkana.
There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious...that you've got to put your bodies on the gears...and make it stop. -- Mario Savio
by Boston Boomer on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:41:48 AM PDT
The stuff Obama did about reigning in the police seriously made a difference in many people lives.
by TMP on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:03:58 AM PDT
hypothetical?
That is extraordinary productive discussion. You need to get out more.
You kids behave or I'm turning this universe around RIGHT NOW! - god
by Clem Yeobright on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:39:21 PM PDT
by khereva on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:41:33 PM PDT
see. Don't speak for the rest of us who choose not to look through eyes blinded by resentment and irrational hatred.
by Jjc2006 on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 09:22:21 PM PDT
nor presume to discern motivation based on your own devotion to a particular candidate.
If you manage to blind yourself to her faults, which are deep, numerous, and substantial, then so be it.
When someone orchestrates the stealing of an election, yes, even a state caucus, they forfeit my support. Such a person has no place in my nation, much less my ballot.
by khereva on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 09:58:55 PM PDT
You have it rather easy. Arguments against your candidate can all be rejected because they must come from people who are blinded by hatred and resentment.
Isn't it possible that some arguments against a Hillary candidacy are petty and irrational and, perhaps, influenced by hatred or resentment, and yet others are quite sound? Like, for instance, her position on the war, her AUMF vote, and her choice of uber-hawkish campaign foreign policy advisors like Michael O'Hanlon. You may disagree with that, but that's fairly simple and doesn't deserve mockery.
by Dumbo on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 04:43:05 AM PDT
How do you appear to be #2 in your class?
by zircon the twisted on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 03:22:36 AM PDT
by khereva on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 04:13:05 AM PDT
campaign and appointed, by Carter, to the board of directors of the Legal Services Corporation where she did something...right
During her time as chair, funding for the Corporation was expanded from $90 million to $300 million,[64] and she successfully battled against President Ronald Reagan's initial attempts to reduce the funding and change the nature of the organization.[64]
...oh and co-founder of the Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families.
Mariachi Mama Candidate Bickering Moratorium! Signatory to the Carnacki Petition
by kredwyn on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 09:59:29 PM PDT
by Lying eyes on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:43:27 PM PDT
by khereva on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:45:37 PM PDT
Quidquid id est timeo Bill & Hill, et dona ferentes.
by snowshoeblue on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:04:23 AM PDT
It's the Supreme Court, stupid!
by auapplemac on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 11:04:58 PM PDT
Someday, everything's gonna be different- when I paint my masterpiece
by NYContrarian on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:20:35 AM PDT
by TMP on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:02:18 AM PDT
by far...how did THIS happen? Could it be because he was a well-connected....male?
Hillary's not my preference, but I'll definitely work to get her elected if she wins the nomination.
by Lynwaz on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:43:48 AM PDT
When I see the comments - and diaries - dismissing Sen Clinton asking "What has she ever done on her own?", I cite the fact that she was probably known to more Americans in 1985 than was her husband.
by Clem Yeobright on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:37:32 PM PDT
"The delusional is no longer marginal but has come in from the fringe to influence the seats of power
by FightOn on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 09:58:30 PM PDT
it just isn't... at all. Not even close. Note even remotely, remotely close. But I guess 16 other people will agree with anything that makes them feel good.
Arrogance and stupidity: it's a winning combination.
by MatthewBrown on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 10:14:17 PM PDT
What does what she was doing 23 years ago have to do with anything?
by ADamiani on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 12:09:11 AM PDT
He would never have made it to the presidency without her. How many times has she saved him? He is nothing without her.
those who don't want to nominate Hillary Clinton because they don't want to return to the nastiness of the 1990s..are deluding themselves.-Krugman
by BRockNYLA on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 09:42:48 PM PDT
But she would have had to start her political career by running for city council, not senator.
Feed the babies who don't have enough to eat / Shoe the children with no shoes on their feet / House the people living in the street / Oh, there's a solution
by dconrad on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 10:13:09 PM PDT
thirty years ago.
by Turkana on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 10:33:32 PM PDT
Why isn't Barbara Boxer running for president? I'd certainly support her!
But, no, she's not, because despite being a wonderful senator, with much more experience in government than Hillary Clinton, and a voting record to really be proud of, and the love of the base and probably the blogosphere, she doesn't have the crutch of an ex-president husband.
Perhaps it's Barbara Boxer's husband's fault. Or Barbara's choice in men is the fault.
This is, of course, absurd.
by Dumbo on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 04:48:10 AM PDT
She's no doubt an impressive, accomplished person-- but I see little reason to believe that she'd be leading this race if she wasn't Bill Clinton's wife, the same way W. would never have been nominated if he weren't George Bush's son.
Certainly that's the "experience" she's always going on about as the most compelling reason for her candidacy, right?
by ADamiani on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 11:55:45 PM PDT
into what that experience was. and 150 million women didn't finish valedictorian at wellesley and #2 at yale law school.
by Turkana on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 12:27:24 AM PDT
the only woman to be valedictorian at Wellesley-- and dozens of people every year finish in the top ten at Ivy-league law schools. Only a vanishingly small percentage of them go on to become President of the United States.
Now, for what it's worth, I don't know that Bill Clinton would have been governor, and then President, were it not for Hillary's efforts. I think she's a smart, formidable, ambitious woman-- I just tend to believe that becoming President is such a low probability event, one's life has to come together in a very particular way for it to happen. You remove a major element, like a spouse, from someone's life and you've created a tremendous variable. The combination of an extremely improbable event (being elected president) and an enormous unknown variable element (how would her life have gone differently, if she had never met her husband and partner of twenty-two year?) leads me to conclude that it would be highly unlikely.
by ADamiani on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 01:04:33 AM PDT
--
The President is not my master. He is Chief among my servants.
by DemCurious on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:25:00 AM PDT
stump.... nope, she paid dearly and now it's her turn.. and anybody who wants to budge in front of Hillary is going to get the two headed monster running after him or her.
by bluecayuga on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:22:01 AM PDT
Did someone else build her resumé? Was she taken over by pod people? How come we haven't heard about this before?
It's the Supreme Court, Stupid!
by Radiowalla on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:36:19 PM PDT
It's on the list for tomorrow's "I Hate Hillary" diaries.
by Califlander on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:40:06 PM PDT
if it weren't so silly. It begs parody.
I hope it doesn't get on the list. I'd rather see a diary about the war, which everybody seems to have forgotten. I hear it costs a lot of money. But hey, we're so rich, let's keep pissing it away.
by Dumbo on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 04:52:01 AM PDT
includes, presumably, spending years in the white house studying foreign policy up-close.
Hillary's most self-touted virtue is that she has been under attack by Republicans for 16 years -- this happened because she was a Clinton, no?
Hey people, so we could have a dynastic woman leader, why get your pants in a bunch over this?
No different from W. -- he was dynastic too ... his brother Jeb in Florida is part of the dynasty. Does not mean that they don't have to run in elections.
Most countries in the world get their first woman leader thusly ... by association with a famous male.
Queen Elizabeth, Indira Gandhi, Benazir Bhutto, Eva Peron ...
The exceptional women are, well, exceptional.
by Bronxist on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:49:28 PM PDT
why not go and check out the brief on what it appears that she's actually done while W was off doing his cheeerleading gig at Yale...or dodging AirGuard duty...or destroying the TX Rangers?
by kredwyn on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 10:02:50 PM PDT
She like her husband was attacked not because they are Clintons but because they had a D after their names. This simple fact seems to have not been noticed by too many Obama supporters who think that because it's all about the Clintons that Obama will be immune to attacks. They fail to remember just how immune our other candidates were who weren't named Clinton.
...that cannot be a wise contrivance which in its operation may commit the government of a nation to the wisdom of an idiot. Thomas Paine Rights of Man
by Rebecca on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 10:10:34 PM PDT
I could see it as an entirely different story if the Clintons had been pilloried by their own party. But the Republicans have absolutely no qualms about attacking any Democrat - Ted Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, Al Gore. Certainly neither Edwards nor Obama are going to be treated with sober courtesy or hailed as brave new leaders merely because they don't happen to be Hillary Clinton.
Proud member of the Cult of Issues and Substance!
by Fabian on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 11:05:16 PM PDT
... then you have to spend the rest of your life in obscurity? Or perhaps women who help their husband's achieve professional success should simply bask in the reflected glory and do some charity work. Nothing too strenuous, sitting on a couple of charity boards, holding a fundraiser or two for the museum.
Bite Me.
To hell with independents... I'll stick with the party that brought us social security, civil rights, and environmental protection.
by dianem on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:43:27 PM PDT
You don't have to.
Why is dynastic a bad word?
Hillary can be president if W can be president.
There are plenty of men that take advantage of Daddy's success. Why not women?
Next we're going to argue if Elizabeth Murdoch is a self-made businesswoman?
by Bronxist on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:52:32 PM PDT
Why does she stoop to this level?
by jazzyjay on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 09:17:43 PM PDT
stoop to such levels of venom and vitriol as evidenced in dKos daily?
We find that after years of struggle we do not take a journey, but rather a journey takes us. John Steinbeck, Travels with Charley
by tigerdog on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 10:58:44 PM PDT
that some still see women as children...... as in this:
Hillary can be president if W can be president. There are plenty of men that take advantage of Daddy's success. Why not women?
clearly most people in liberal circles do not view women in the same relationship with their spouse as they view a child with his/her father. Granted that was true in the first half of the 20th century. Not so much now...at least not here.
by Jjc2006 on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 09:27:14 PM PDT
I pretty much think Patrick "Pill Popper" Kennedy is a joke. Ditto Evan "I'd work at Wal_Mart if I didn't inherit Daddy's job" Bayh is a laugh. I could go on.
But please, keep pretending loathing of anti-democratic de-facto noble families is re4ally disguised sexism.
What a farce.
by ElitistJohn on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 10:09:05 PM PDT
Talk about avoiding the point of my comment and go looking for straw men arguments. Sheesh. The comment was sexist and paternalistic.
One more time... a wife is NOT a child. What part of that don't you get?
by Jjc2006 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:31:11 AM PDT
which is dynasticism.
It has nothing to do with whether the use of "daddy" in reference to a husband constitutes sexism because it reduces the woman to the role of a child, etc.
by Bronxist on Fri Jan 25, 2008 at 09:57:39 AM PDT
W shouldn't have been President, and it was aristocratic for him to run in the first place. That's precisely why this dynasty is so disturbing.
Dynastic is a bad word because we're supposed to be a democracy, not a society where rulership is transmitted from father to son-- and husband to wife is little better.
by ADamiani on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 12:12:21 AM PDT
If Hillary can be president, so can Jeb! Hang on to that thought for 2012 or 2016.
"Jeb: Just like W, but smart! It's his turn, dammit!"
To play this out a little further... If Jeb wants it, it will be hard to refuse him. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. With the benefit of four years absence, W will be remembered more fondly. And the Bush family will probably still have control over much of the Republican Party machinery. The party would clear an easy glidepath for him, even before the first primary, just as it did for W back in 1999-2000.
Meanwhile Chelsea can warm up in the bullpen.
The rest of the democratic world would have to accept that we are this way, but they might not find much to admire about the quality of our democracy. Succession by heirs and spouses is so... uh... medieval.
by Dumbo on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:04:22 AM PDT
a bio about Thatcher sometime. She is not as self made as you think. Also, compared to Thatcher, Clinton is a pussycat.
I grew up in Thatchers Britian, she was one very strange lady.
May 6th 2008: IN Insignificance Day
by stevej on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 09:08:33 PM PDT
All I know about her was that her beginnings were humble, and neither her daddy nor husband were famous ...
First generation leader ...
by Bronxist on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 09:17:35 PM PDT
Not famous, but tolerably rich, iirc. But very good at keeping out of the limelight.
by Praisegod Barebones on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 11:20:14 PM PDT
what has Obama done besides give a pretty good speech here and there? I truly do not know. I like the guy fine, but we don't need to take anything away from HRC just b/c the primary is hot. Personally, I kinda like it. Either of them will be stronger in the general b/c of this battle. Believe me, it will get MUCH hotter come September & October this year.
by BRockNYLA on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 09:41:22 PM PDT
Just how many Wellesley grads do you know of who have managed to not just be MEMBERS of the College Republicans, but PRESIDENT of the College Republicans?
The 2008 Democratic Presidential Ticket: Barack Obama, President; Ray Mabus, Vice President. *** Change, Reform, Competency, Expertise.
by simca on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 09:59:32 PM PDT
That's a powerful argument. We want a President who was a Democrat and a union leader.
What? Reagan died? Nevermind.
I have my fears, but they do not have me - Peter Gabriel
by badger on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 10:41:06 PM PDT
in order to have legitimacy? It doesn't matter that she left the Republican party while at Wellesley, campaigned for Eugene McCarthy, organized student strikes against Viet Nam and for Civil Rights and thereafter dedicated her life to liberal causes?
It only matters that while a freshman at Wellesley she was Prez of the College Republicans and therefore she doesn't qualify as a REAL Democrat?
by tigerdog on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 10:46:46 PM PDT
Kyl-Lieberman, and Mark "Mr. Halliburton" Penn. Right.
Still a Goldwater Girl in so many ways.
Not much turns the stomach as much as watching her kiss Rupert Murdoch's ass.
So, on Monday, when telcom immunity comes to a vote, will Hillieberman vote FOR telcom immunity, or will she vote "against" it after it has already passed?
by simca on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 11:13:32 PM PDT
Hillieberman is so creative.
by Iberian on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:55:01 AM PDT
She's quite predictable, really.
by simca on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:24:46 AM PDT
...but I think I was being called on my bullshit. If not, well, it's nice to know that I still have generous impulses. :/
by keirdubois on Tue Jan 22, 2008 at 08:29:56 PM PDT
Basically glorified internships, corporate law stuff and a few committees Bill appointed her to. Oh by the way 35 years ago Ms Change and Experience was in grad school. I guess getting that an 'A' in seminar class is considerd working for change.
by TMP on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:01:26 AM PDT
M