Skip to main content

View Diary: We're better than this. Right? (836 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  My only issue with your diary... (76+ / 0-)

    Is that, I agree with you that we should be going after McCain and the repubs.  I very much believe that HRC's kitchen sink, scorched earth strategy is currently preventing an all out attack.  Obama had started going after McCain but since the beginning of the barrage, he's had to continually watch his flank.  I further note that Hillary, a Dem, as you point out, has chosen to go after Obama rather than McCain and has gone so far as to give the appearance of endorsing McCain.  It's hard to stay level headed under these circumstances if you want the fight to be against another 4 years of Bush.

    "We're all working for the Pharaoh" - Richard Thompson

    by mayan on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 06:37:07 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  yes, but (52+ / 0-)

      why should talking about her scorched earth strategy take up so much time, effort and energy?  Especially when there are some false things that were attributed to her?

      I really REALLY don't like how she is running her campaign.  But that doesn't mean that all of the focus has to be on every little thing she says or does.  Obama's camp knows about all of it, and frankly, too much energy is wasted here on petty crap that becomes about the posters, diarists and commentators as opposed to Clinton or Obama.

      •  I hear ya... (6+ / 0-)

        it's the time of the season...when blood runs high.

        "We're all working for the Pharaoh" - Richard Thompson

        by mayan on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 06:42:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Passion is no excuse (12+ / 0-)

          I have seen the so many insane things said here that I leave and go blog elsewhere most of the time.

          There is no community moderation when 80% of the community has the same agenda.

          Try a little experiment and imagine one day of dkos where everyone diaries, comments, and communicates with one another about the major issues facing our country.

          Everyone has to treat the other with respect, actual troll excepted of course. Deep thoughts and light-hearted posts are welcome and not one mention on either Hillary or Obama.

          Can you even remember what that was like? Remember when you actually cared for the people that have pulled up stakes and left?

          I understand why clammy wrote this. Compassion is a progressive value, one that is sorely missing here. This is one big echo chamber. Everyone is pretty much firm in their choices if minds are changed it probably isn't because someone yelled at them.

          Edwards Democrat voting for Obama, will not trash Hillary. Here's a novel idea! Let's trash McCain. Are you with me?

          by high uintas on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:04:25 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  yes-- (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          high uintas, mayan

          what's your name?
          (what's your name?)
          who's your daddy?
          (who's your daddy?)

          but just remember...

          After midnight, we're gonna let it all hang down.
          After midnight, we're gonna chug-a-lug and shout.
          We're gonna stimulate some action;
          We're gonna get some satisfaction.
          We're gonna find out what it is all about.
          After midnight, we're gonna let it all hang down.

          ...even the Hillary supporters (and we'll be chugging lattes).

          -4.75, -5.33 Cheney 10/05/04: "I have not suggested there is a connection between Iraq and 9/11."

          by sunbro on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:21:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  IMHO it's less passion and more holding campaigns (0+ / 0-)

          accountable.

          imagine just for 1 second if Obama went all out on Hillary -- talking about Bill Clinton's lying on Monica, rehashing all of the controversies, asking what the fuck Bill is going to do in the White House. She's sooo ready to be taken out, but he's never bitten.

      •  I wish there were more diaries up about issues (12+ / 0-)

        and fewer about personalities. If we would formulate and rally behind specific policy issues, the personalities would have no choice but to lead.

        Also, it's boring to read MSM sound bites about the candidates being repeated over and over again. Might as well just turn on the TV.

        Big boss man..you ain't so big, just tall, that's all.-Written by Jimmy Reed. Belted Out by Koko Taylor.

        by TheFatLadySings on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 06:57:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  They're up but ignored (9+ / 0-)

          Every time a pie fight erupts here, all the good stuff goes straight down the drain.  That's a little hyperbolic, perhaps, but as an example mcjoan's heroic front page campaign against the Protect ATT Act has gone on with very few comments and little support.  That's only about the Constitution, after all.

          Hanoi didn't break John McCain, but Washington did.

          by Dallasdoc on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:24:11 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  they're ignored because (6+ / 0-)

            the dems in congress ignore us 99 percent of the time. we have spent the last 7 years writing, calling, blogging, threatening the PTB,  GOTV, and everything else for the party and for the constitution and for the country, and what have we accomplished? A note from congress saying :elect more dems!

            We are a traumatized community, an out-rage fatigued community, an abused community by our own elected officials.

            We didn't stop caring about issues, we stopped believing that anything can be accomplished when the fact is we can't even get a damn nominee until may or june or july...

            "The Meek Will Inherit The Earth" -8.13/-7.03

            by donailin on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:16:42 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Issue diaries are ruined every day (0+ / 0-)

          by threadjackers who use other people's hard work as a platform for promoting their own candidate/tearing down the other.

          I have seen countless thoughtful, well-researched, informative issues diaries go down in flames because some jackass decides to make the topic all about "this is why I'll NEVER vote for Hillary!"

          It's gotten to the point where I've seriously considered using my HRs to start flagging off-topic comments.

          "I can't come to bed yet! Someone is WRONG on the Internet!" - XKCD

          by SingularExistence on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:07:17 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, but... but (2+ / 0-)

        If people turned their attention to things that should be talked about, such as McCain, wouldn't that then take some of the pressure off of those that don't recognize that the primary race is, as you say, for the most part over?

        I think everyone would like to get back to business, but unfortunately, many probably feel stuck on matters that should have already been decided.

      •  a trusted name from the old dk days (12+ / 0-)

        Thanks for hanging in there, clammyc, and speaking for others who are from the bad old days of 2004. I'm the same as you, Hilary was not ever my candidate either. But this is ridiculous, the hide rates and troll tags on pro-Hilary comments and diaries. Over the top.

        Great idea to refocus and brand McCain and go after him, not other democrats. We need to make Obama the best candidate he can be, and Clinton the best candidate, too. One of them must beat McCain or whomever the Republicans put up there....

        •  HRC isn't reciprocating (10+ / 0-)

          We need to make Obama the best candidate he can be, and Clinton the best candidate, too.

          Once Hillary starts trying to make Obama the best candidate he can be, we'll talk about this.

          Right now she's doing everything she can to destroy him.  I'm sick of people telling me and others that we should be nice to a woman who's trying to destroy our party.

          And don't say "either" is the potential nominee.  Obama is the only one who can legitimately be nominated, barring unprecendented size victories by HRC in upcoming primaries.

          Economic -3.50/Social -2.41 Guilt by association? How about Hillary's $3 mil from Murdoch then?

          by CenterLeft on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:52:16 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  didn't say "be nice" (3+ / 0-)

            Didn't say either was the potential nominee. Two strikes against your reading of my post - why put words in my mouth? Your anger is getting the better of your assumptions.

            With the way the last two elections have been bought and thrown for the Republican candidate, anything can happen. We've seen it. That's what I meant by "one of them" and "whomever" the R's put up.

            I agree Obama is the only viable candidate, the one who should be the nominee. Despite Obama being for coal mining and the bad 1872 Mining Law that Al Gore fights against. Obama must change his vote on that or can't be called an "environmental president." But I voted for him, and sent my money to him, and campaign for Obama anyway, despite that damn mining law and Obama not being for equal marriage rights for all. Two big strikes against him that his supporters don't really talk about. Yet I will vote for Obama.

            Is that enough, that I will vote for Obama despite disagreeing on major issues? My vote is because I think he will be a terrific leader and can bring a better America. That should be enough.

            •  I don't agree with Obama or anyone on everything (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              mayan, rrheard, physic

              If I found someone who I never disagreed with, it would almost scare me.

              Obama wasn't even my first choice.  Edwards was.  And I disagree with Edwards on a few things, too.

              The one thing I won't tolerate in a candidate is a lack of loyalty to the party.  

              My whole activation on the Net was my outrage at Loserman, who pushed me over the edge by his "we undermine the president at our nation's peril" speech.

              The more Hillary acts like Loserman, placing herself before the party, the angrier I get.

              I definitely don't expect liberal purity.  I'm far from a liberal purist myself.  I do expect partisan purity, which is something I've seen from Democrats as conservative as Lloyd Bentsen.  We are not seeing it from HRC.

              That said, to a point my anger is getting the better of me, because I'm tired of people posting (note that I'm not judging whether you are or not) that we should hold back our venom toward HRC.

              HRC deserves nothing but venom until she, at the very least, ends all attacks on the only person who can legitimately be nominated by the Democratic Party this year.

              Economic -3.50/Social -2.41 Guilt by association? How about Hillary's $3 mil from Murdoch then?

              by CenterLeft on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:47:54 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

      •  Clammyc (15+ / 0-)

        I don't think too many folks will be surprised when the primaries are decided and the graciousness is again on full display.   Kossacks young and old have always had a certain classiness not displayed on other blogs - hence the quantum of traffic.

        It is divisiveness and race and a certain style of campaigning displayed by the Clintons that is turning  many off here.

        Her scorched earth and kitchen sink approach is resulting in a take-no-prisoners reaction from Obama supporters.

        And yes, the US Presidential Election of 2008 is much too important to citizens of this planet.

        My Current Issues: 1. What is she hiding? 2. Why is Pat Buchanan still on MSNBC?

        by griz4u on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:19:30 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  The goal is (6+ / 0-)

        To convince SD's and others to abandon HRC so she has no choice but to drop out.

        I refuse to be civil toward HRC when she is trying to destroy the only person who, at this point, can legitimately be nominated.

        Right now HRC is helping McCain more than McCain ever could.

        Right now, she is the enemy, including to our chances of winning the general election.  She is trying to make sure the Wright story sticks to Obama.

        Until Hillary stops attacking Obama-- and attacking him more viciously than McCain is-- she is the enemy.

        Economic -3.50/Social -2.41 Guilt by association? How about Hillary's $3 mil from Murdoch then?

        by CenterLeft on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:44:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  but I am not the enemy (0+ / 0-)

          nor are others who are ok with attacking the things about Clinton that are accurate and deserve to be attacked.  But not innuendo and guessing (like the darkening of the Obama photo) followed by attacking those who ask for facts before accusations.

        •  Good point, some of us are still validly working. (0+ / 0-)

          ...for opposing goals.

          The goal is...To convince SD's and others to abandon HRC so she has no choice but to drop out.

          HR 676 or California's SB-840 - the only health reform proposals worth my vote.

          by kck on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:33:02 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I personally TRY... (0+ / 0-)

            (and at times fail, but usually succeed) to retain civlity toward those posters who have opposing goals as long as they're consistent with wanting Dems to win.

            What I refuse to even try to do is to be civil in my comments about HRC herself, even if that causes supporters of hers to take it personally.

            I do, however, like to say that given HRC's and the DLC's views on bloggers, that "Bloggers for Hillary" makes me think of "Chickens for Col. Sanders" or "Unions for Wal-Mart."

            Economic -3.50/Social -2.41 Guilt by association? How about Hillary's $3 mil from Murdoch then?

            by CenterLeft on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 11:37:43 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Dead on (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Comte de Saint Germain

        Listen to Obama's speech from yesterday-we can riled up with shallow 'outrage' over some trivia-like the 'fairly tale' comment-or we can stay focused on advocating FOR our candidate.  

        Here' where I'm at.  If Obama somehow where to not get the nomination, I'm voting for Clinton in a heartbeat, because her policies are way closer to mine than McCain's are.  I don't like the way she's run her campaign at all-but better her than Bush's third term.  No-brainer.

        Plus it would piss off all the right wing talk radio haters no end to have Bill Clinton back in the White House.

      •  Your tag line answers your question (8+ / 0-)

        The following facts are indisputable:

        1. McCain is a thoroughly dangerous devout neocon;
        1. HRC publicly vouched for his CIC bona fides on 3 separate occasions; and
        1. A lot of people here have a major problem w/ having someone who publicly vouches for McCain as our standard bearer.

        When those 3 facts are thrown into the already combustible mix of racial, sexual, party organizing philosophy (top down/bottom up) and other issues, the result is foreordained.

        Some men see things as they are and ask why. I see things that never were and ask why not?

        by RFK Lives on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:09:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The CiC hyping of McCain is inexcusable (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          RFK Lives, peraspera, mayan, Uberbah

          Now, supposing she wins the Democratic nomination (unlikely, I know), how can she even begin to take on McCain when she's already said he has a "lifetime of experience" and passes the commander-in-chief "threshold."

          She wounded Obama for short term gain, with a line of attack that would boomerang if by some weird quirk, she won the nomination.

          Clammy, this is the icing on the cake for Hillary resentment around here, at least from me.

      •  Understand what you're getting at, BUT... (4+ / 0-)

        ...I focus a lot on her campaign because I believe she needs to be defeated so we CAN move on to take on McCain.  Obama tried to take them both on before Texas and Ohio, and paid for it by getting the kitchen sink thrown at his face.  Now, he's having to fend off vicious right wing smears, while also taking on Clinton in Pennsylvania.  To say that Hillary isn't helping is a huge understatement.

        So yes, I agree that maybe I need to focus more fire on the Right.  A visit to a Politico message board today reminded me of how revolting those on the far Right really are, and of the lengths they'll go to smear.

        However, I don't think Obama can effectively take them while still having the fend off kitchen sinks from Hillary.  If my comments directed at Hillary's campaign are bit harsh, I mean no offense to her supporters her.  I am just firmly of the belief that she needs to quit the race for the good of the party.  So far, she hasn't seen the need to do that, and looking at recent polling, both candidates are suffering for it.

    •  IMO Hillary never "endorsed" McCain but... (6+ / 0-)

      ...she stipulated the obvious, that McCain has a long history in national defense in the military and the Senate. Just as Obama admitted today. They didn't opine on the quality or success of McCain's experience. Stating the obvious takes a little air out of it.

      HR 676 or California's SB-840 - the only health reform proposals worth my vote.

      by kck on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 06:48:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Very interesting point: (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      drmah, Uberbah, oldliberal

      If Hillary had been going after McCain and the Republican administration, would she have done better in the primaries and caucuses?  I mean, isn't that what  Dems have been waiting for these past 8 years?  Someone who will stand up and fight back against all Bush/Cheney have done?

      Strong leadership - in tone, in actions, in careful direct criticism - may have been a much better tactic for her to take, rather than tearing down fellow Dems.  For example, renounce her Iraq vote as stupid, attack Bush as berefit of any quality of leadership and as a coward afraid to face a crowd of real Americans, relying instead on staged scenes.  Demonstrating the qualities that people are looking for may have served her better than endlessly repeating "I'm tested. I'm ready."  All the "I" talk got old real fast.  

    •  Missing the point (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      clammyc, kck

      you are.. It does not matter what Hillary says.. your duty as a Democrat, and a patriot is to make sure a democrat is in position to trounce McCain- because the alternative is 4 more years of Bush. When will you start trying to unify the party even if Hillary is not playing by your rules. I very much want Obama to win, but you are hurting him. You folks fail to see the big picture. Thank you Clammy for a great post.

      "If a man does not keep pace with his companions,perhaps he hears a different drummer" Thoreau

      by angry hopeful liberal on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 10:33:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site