Skip to main content

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

Comment Preferences

  •  I really didn't want to write this (138+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Spit, hester, GOTV, pHunbalanced, Dvd Avins, mattman, sara seattle, RAST, Sherri in TX, TooLittleSleep, DemfromDaBronx, lzachary, Creosote, ralphie, Bugsby, memberofthejury, elveta, Mlle Orignalmale, Bensdad, JT88, Bearpaw, mayan, resa, oldjohnbrown, Dallasdoc, pat bunny, Chamonix, Red Wind, inclusiveheart, dkmich, walkshills, Hardhat Democrat, bablhous, homogenius, Sassy, donailin, TexMex, vcmvo2, joanneleon, tovan, marina, 3goldens, escapee, DianeNYS, blueyedace2, SherwoodB, panicbean, frandor55, Valtin, zbctj52, YucatanMan, Calgal, boofdah, Mz Kleen, LNK, Sharon in MD, lotlizard, QuickSilver, sunbro, FunkyEntropy, cerulean, MajorFlaw, The Fat Lady Sings, Hane, Brubs, maryru, LeftOverAmerica, trashablanca, BachFan, plum, Califlander, Ellicatt, InsultComicDog, dougymi, mango, fiddler crabby, kck, greenearth, Lashe, gooderservice, nilocjin, justalittlebitcrazy, Dauphin, oakroyd, Turbonerd, kurious, Picot verde, Bush B Gone, phidda, slksfca, NonnyO, timmyk, C Barr, blue armadillo, Nick A, Kathie McCrimmon, godislove, UU VIEW, NovatoBon, edsbrooklyn, la urracca, flumptytail, NCDem Amy, bethyb, carpunder, Predictor, Blue Boy Red State, rogerdaddy, sk4p, gzodik, condorcet, TheFatLadySings, Foundmyvoice, Rick Winrod, lineatus, TokenLiberal, ankey, Tam in CA, LaEscapee, Fallon, StrangeAnimals, Scubaval, ZhenRen, ryangoesboom, litoralis, gdwtch52, BoiseBlue, DemocraticOz, Valhalla, katz5, PamelaD, beijingbetty, RyuX, llamaRCA, rbile, majhula, 4water, AkaEnragedGoddess

    but frankly, I have been close to fed up lately.

    •  Yeah, well, if we were better than this, you (17+ / 0-)

      wouldn't have needed to write this at all, would you?

      "The road to gas chambers starts when good people find excuses to justify torture and murder. Feinstein and Schumer are enablers."- Larry Johnson -8.25, -6.21

      by Jacques on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 06:48:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Define: "We"!? (47+ / 0-)

        I consider those who post so much vitriol against HRC here to be infiltrators from the Republican side. Like 'concern trolls'.......

        Recently I met some totally Progressive, respectable and high ranking citizens with decades of public service experience and they gave me their reasons for supporting Sen. Clinton. Totally credible. And no vitriol for Sen. Obama.

        And yes they do disagree with some of her campaign's tactics.

        So, dear clammyc, if "We're better than this" means us as we, yes, we are....

        Best Diary of the Year?

        by LNK on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:14:08 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

          •  yea... (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            racerx, xtrarich, gdwtch52, llamaRCA, majhula

            the loud and rude folks dont represent either candidate or the community

          •  Then what's your suggestion, exactly? (12+ / 0-)

            When those good Progressives make assertions not backed (and often contradicted) by facts; who, when the facts are calmly pointed out, only dig in their heels and make the same assertions over and over while attacking those who disagree, what is you plan? What's the "right" way to handle it?

            The goal is not to bring your adversaries to their knees but to their senses. -- Mahatma Gandhi

            by kingubu on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:31:58 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  walk away (6+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              bethcf4p, Simplify, plum, kurious, llamaRCA, majhula

              ignore them.

            •  It's called disagreement (7+ / 0-)

              about what the facts happen to be. Your "facts" may not be viewed as factual by another. To expect everyone to immediately accept your point of view as factual, without argument or question, meets the definition of hubris and arrogance.

              [requisite dkos disclosure: not a Hillary supporter]

              "The one thing that doesn't abide by majority rule is a person's conscience." -To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee

              by ZhenRen on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:24:09 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  I tend to challenge them, (6+ / 0-)

              especially if they're my Obama-supporting peers and go over the line.  I'm not alone in that conscious habit.

              Else, I just ignore folks when they're in gang-whack mode if the volume is overwhelming, knowing they'll calm down, eventually.

              It's a tough job fighting almost pure emotions, of course.  Better to address their needs and get back to an actual dialog, I feel.

              To that end . . .

              clammyc's diary is good, stuff I've heard others say recently and certainly bears worthwhile repeating in a Recommended way, though I also feel there's a context missing here:

              1. We've done all this before at DKos, even among Democratic supporters.  Brown vs. Hackett was almost a warmup exercise, for example.
              1. Good-minded people have been so incredibly beaten over the past 7 years, emotionally and even financially, that there are naturally heightened sensitivities against ANYTHING which seems to minimize our chances for removing Republicans from the White House via this election.  Any candidate seen as knee-capping the other Dem with relation to the GE is not going to get an easy ride for doing so.
              1. Both sides have some supporters who have settled into truly hardened positions, but many of the people here seem willing to debate with pride, assertiveness and open thinking for their candidate's positions.
              1. The two campaigns have some philosophies and implementations which do not overlap in an evident fashion - points of exclusion vs. inclusion for voters and planks have been valid to debate among supporters, as have been feelings of various voters feeling ignored by one candidate vs. another
              1. Issues of race and gender in this unique Democratic Presidential nomination run are running both underneath and in full view of all involved.  Without being addressed in constructive manners, I feel.  As Sen. Obama recently made open and plainly clear, these are areas not yet fully and deeply addressed across the entire nation - DKos may be a partial sampling of those issues still yet to be uncomfortable addressed in the USA, which further adds to built-in reflex attacks, defenses, etc. at a level so few people desire to grasp, let alone debate and find commonality upon.

              So, great diary for hitting on the highest layer of what is occurring!

              I'd prefer less anger at the community and more addressing of the issues which tend to tear us apart at these times, admittedly.

              "So, please stay where you are. Don't move and don't panic. Don't take off your shoes! Jobs is on the way."

              by wader on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:31:14 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  It's the paradox of choice. (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              MadLibrarian, kingubu, clammyc

              Or the "I could have had a V-8 Syndrome"

              You know what its like when you set out to buy a new car and you finally can afford to get rid of the piece of junk you've been driving?

              You might think you're ready to buy but then doubt sets in.Did I get a good deal? Did I buy the best car for my needs? Should I  have waited to get more fuel efficient model? Do I really like that color? It never ends.

              We've had a great slate of candidates to choose from.Any one would be better than what we have running the country and what the Republicans have to offer.

              Clinton and Obama have many good points to recommend them.They are both electable. All they need is our support.
              We need to keep the GOP trashers from convincing us they aren't acceptable.

              WE ARE THE DECIDERS. They need to stay out of our primaries and out of our business.
              Let them try to convince everyone their candidate is better but doing something other than trashing ours.

              Spend your energy on protecting your candidate from being sliced and diced by
              the media.

              Obama handled his business with Rev. Wright better than anyone could have hoped for.Hillary will come to terms with the Florida/Michigan delegate problem because she has to.

              Meanwhile, stay cool and be excellent to one another.

            •  good question (0+ / 0-)

              hopefully someone high profile and relatively neutral like me calling it out will spurn others to do it as well.

          •  Perhaps you miss the larger strategy?? (12+ / 0-)

            I agree in so many ways, clammyc. Either of our choices are better than theirs and vitrol accomplishes little.

            But there is a party strategy here that Clinton seems to have ignored. 50 states; local, state and national.

            I may be wrong but I think this is about control of the democratic party. I cannot imagine winning the White House to be faced with a split congress. If we really want to change our political discourse, then all offices, all states have to matter.

            I will not argue that passionate, informed voices have left here for other, valid reasons with the discourse here. But if we don't act as a party to reform ourselves and become relevant across all of America, will our nominee ever matter?

            "Don't have nobody to call my own; please, please bring me a dream."

            by MrSandman on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:32:40 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  mocking, scorning, ridiculing and attacking them (10+ / 0-)

            Running good progressives who are also Clinton supporters (think Alegre, for example) out of here. Or mocking, scorning, ridiculing and attacking them. That isn't cool....

            And the "good progressives'" postings of the most vile lies about Barack Obama is cool, huh?

            If I were running in this election, I'd be for change too. - George W. Bush

            by William Domingo on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:32:46 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I agree more than I disagree (8+ / 0-)

              So I rec'd this.  I'm no Clinton fan, for pretty much the same reasons as Markos.  However, I know the real enemies out there are much worse.  I was on a Politico message board today, and about puked at the bigotry, racism, and yes, fascism being spewed by commenters. It makes our primary wars seem like bean bag.

              As far as the strike goes, such is the primary campaign.  Supporters gravitate to where other supporters are found.  In a race this close and intense, I don't think there's anything wrong with it.

              •  Sure, I agree "in theory" too (12+ / 0-)

                It'd be great if "we could just all get along", and talk to each other nice all the time. But I don't see how clammyc can call out the Obama supporters' attitude towards some of the "good progressives" who "just happen to support Hillary" without acknowledging the reason for that attitude. It also drives many of us wild everytime Hillary sides with the Republicans, which she has a habit of doing, and these "good progressives" always deny that it ever happens and try to tell us Hillary is more progressive than Obama is.

                If I were running in this election, I'd be for change too. - George W. Bush

                by William Domingo on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:06:22 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Obamabot (8+ / 0-)

                  Cult member, idol worshipper, naive, blind....

                  I don't have a problem with putting it behind us and getting along in the general--I was here for the 2004 primary and I was a lot more vocal about support of my candidate--but I think it horribly disingenuous to say, "look how mean the Obama people have been to Hillary and her people!"

                  Yes, let's get going on this, let's define the real enemy, but let's make sure everyone knows it's a Republican, not a fellow Democrat.

                  tragically un-hip

                  -5.88, -6.82

                  by Debby on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:20:27 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Agree 100% (7+ / 0-)

                    I too have been accused of Cult membership.  Though that doesn't happen much anymore, during the vicious Edwards-Obama-Clinton wars of January, Obama supporters were on the receiving as much as they were on the giving end.

                  •  Cult member (9+ / 0-)

                    I'll explain what's behind that "Cult member" smear. It's the Karl Rovian tactic of attacking a candidate by his strengths. Because Barack is a good speaker who is able to inspire people, his detractors dismiss anyone who is inspired by him as a "Cult member". We need Party members who can inspire people to vote with our side so we can win elections, don't we? The last thing we need is to be ridiculing those that flock to our Party because they like what they hear as "Cult members". This is one of the many destructive behaviors to our side engaged in by others supposedly on our same side.

                    If I were running in this election, I'd be for change too. - George W. Bush

                    by William Domingo on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:34:22 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  This is the root of problem, IMO. (4+ / 0-)

                      There seems to be a concerted effort, not only here, but on many sites, to "call out" Obama supporters for putative intolerance, viciousness, etc. -- but then I think maybe I  missed something and look around the thread -- and the only nastiness I see are the Hillary supporters accusing people of nastiness. Some of this may be coming from Republican trolls as well, but it's not always easy to tell.

                      It's possible I'm biased, but I'm a typical mealy-mouthed liberal and quite capable of spotting rudeness from someone I agree with. And, yeah, I've been called a fake progressive and a concern troll by both Hillary and Obama supporters, but from everything I've seen, there is a subset of on-line Hillary supporters who really seem to take their cues, and there literary style, from Taylor Marsh, whose whole shtick is accusing Obama supporters of being clueless airheaded "fake progressives" in the  harshest and most insulting terms, which is weird because the progressive movement has gone by roughly a 70% margin for Obama if MoveOn is any judge.

                      I'm all for getting along and have no problem disagreeing pleasantly and civilly with anyone as long as they are the same to me. (In real life, it's quite literally true that some of my best friends, and my mother, voted for Hillary. How  could I hate all Hillary supporters?)

                      Forward to Yesterday -- Reactionary aesthetics and liberal politics (in that order)

                      by LABobsterofAnaheim on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:55:37 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Are you kidding? (0+ / 0-)

                        I've been called "Hillbot," a "racist son of a bitch," a "liar," a "dumb," "uneducated," "low-information voter," ordered to "leave this site" or "go on strike with everyone else," and more.

                        That's pretty nasty.

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

                        by SingularExistence on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 07:54:56 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  And I've heard the same thing (1+ / 0-)
                          Recommended by:
                          Particle Noun

                          from the other side.

                          I wasn't an original Obama supporter. I was a hold-out for Gore for a long time. Then I was split between Edwards and Obama. I was really sad when Edwards left the race and didn't gear up for Obama right away. I went through the 2004 campaign strongly supporting a candidate who dropped out and ended up strongly supporting our nominee and I wasn't interested in playing that game again. I have defended Clinton against unfair comments that I've seen. But often, when I've said something positive about Obama, I've heard the same things--Obamabot, naive, fluff, sexist. The premise from the diarist is that Obama folks have been mean to Hillary supporters. All I'm saying is that it's a two-way street. Should it stop? Hell, yes! But to call out one group over another is unfair. I'll take the chip off my shoulder if you'll take the chip off yours.

                          tragically un-hip

                          -5.88, -6.82

                          by Debby on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:47:40 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  What you said (0+ / 0-)

                            was "the only nastiness I see are the Hillary supporters accusing people of nastiness."

                            I'm just pointing out that you've missed a lot.

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

                            by SingularExistence on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 08:56:19 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Excuse me? (0+ / 0-)

                            Where exactly do you see me saying THAT? I admit I've been going on inadequate sleep lately so anything is possible but I sure as hell don't remember saying ANYTHING like that. I HAVE said that it's ridiculous of the diarist to point out the Obama people who have been rude while not also pointing out the Clinton people who have done the same. The post you're replying to says:

                            All I'm saying is that it's a two-way street.

                            If I said somewhere that all the nastiness is coming from the Clinton camp, I'd love you to show me where. Otherwise, you're putting words in my mouth and I don't care for that.

                            tragically un-hip

                            -5.88, -6.82

                            by Debby on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 02:06:27 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I totally apologize (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:

                            I was responding to LABobstero and thought that you were he/she.

                            I don't think I'm getting enough sleep either.

                            I am truly sorry.

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

                            by SingularExistence on Fri Mar 21, 2008 at 02:44:45 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                    •  Great Analysis on Cult Meme (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      William Domingo, blue armadillo

                      Another Rovian trick finding its way into the Dem Primary

                  •  Obama people have been horrible. (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    vcmvo2, clammyc, Catesby

                    Just because "others" have been horrible, it doesn't give you guys a license to sink to that level in gangs.  We adults are suppose to be able to deal with people without attacking them.  

                    ...once you're willing to say whatever it takes to win, you lose. ~~Dean

                    by dkmich on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 02:47:34 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  I thought that one of Obama's main arguments (0+ / 0-)

                  Is that he would cross the aisle and bring bipartisanship back to Congress.

            •  "Most vile lies" you say. (17+ / 0-)

              You see, this is where pretty much every true-beliver on both sides have jumped the shark.

              I've read Alegre's diaries and they are no more exaggerated and full of hyperbolee than most of Geekesque's diaries and yet because he says what you like to hear you give him a pass on whatever he says - no matter how much of a stretch it is.

              I thought the netroots and the grassroots movements were going to hold all candidates to a high standard and push them to be better Democrats.  We haven't done that.  We've lined up in cheerleading squads {except those of us who would prefer to be coaches offering constructive criticism (gasp! oh no! no critiques allowed!) and encouragement where appropriate} and have taken to discourse that is no better than that of a couple of firing squads.

              When Bush told me that the terrorist threat was "a struggle between good and evil", I thought he was a simple-minded idiot.  When people offer up the same strawman in the Obama v. Clinton contest - I think they are simple-minded.

              Sorry, but this hyperbolic hand-wringing about the choice between these two centerist Democrats is a tempest in a teapot as far as I am concerned.

              But carry on...

              •  no more exaggerated and full of hyperbole (0+ / 0-)

                No more exaggerated and full of hyperbole, you say? How about her diary on "The Snub"? What she didn't mention in the diary about "that brute Obama" was that Hillary had been acting that way towards him all year, but he doesn't "cry" about it to win votes. Martyrdom seems to be about all a lot of Hillary supporters got.

                Last winter, after news broke that he was thinking of running, he winked at her and took her elbow on the Senate floor to say hi, in his customary languid, friendly way, and she coldly brushed him off.

                It bothered him, and he called a friend to say: You would not believe what just happened with Hillary.

                Again and again at debates, he looked eager to greet her or be friendly during the evening and she iced him. She might have frozen him out once more Monday night had he actually tried to reach out.

                Here's a good article with more about that martyrdom.


                If I were running in this election, I'd be for change too. - George W. Bush

                by William Domingo on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:20:03 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  You can explain all you want, (5+ / 0-)

                  it still doesn't justify the behavior.  Nobody has us virtually tied up. We can walk away from whatever we disapprove of.  Maybe everyone just needs to shut up and walk away a little more often when they run out of patience with someone and can't be nice anymore.

                  ...once you're willing to say whatever it takes to win, you lose. ~~Dean

                  by dkmich on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 02:51:38 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I agree with you and clammy more (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    MadLibrarian, clammyc

                    than I disagree.  But what concerns me about your comment is that there used to be an expectation in this community that a diarist peddling demonstrable falsehoods were to be challenged in an effort to advance a reality based discourse.  

                    I don't think walking away is the answer.  Asserted facts should be challenged here.  

                    That said, many ... including myself ... have taken it too far at times.

                    We are the ones we've been waiting for.

                    by Same As It Ever Was on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:07:35 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  thank you so much for this comment (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                inclusiveheart, TokenLiberal

                at least someone knows where I am coming from.  But of course, I get attacked for "taking Clinton's side".


                •  Been there & done that too often lately myself. (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Spit, MadLibrarian, Catesby

                  I often get accused of being a "Clinton supporter" which is downright laughable on so many levels.  Just because I won't buy into outright lies and slanders that favor Obama people think that means I support Clinton.  Doesn't say a lot of good things to me about "the movement" people say they are so excited about.  The truth warts and all will always be more precious to me than any political candidate.

            •  no but do you see (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              Obama supporters getting attacked and hunted down around here?

              And just because one group may do it, that doesn't mean that ALL of her supporters do, or that the Obama supporters should.

              We are better than that, right?

          •  please clammyc... (29+ / 0-)

            i've always loved and recc'd your diaries since i've been here too....and that's been since December 2003.

            But it's a little hard to swallow when yet another person joins the Alegre woe is Me bandwagon what did I do bandwagon.

            She posted her fair share of ugliness, vitriol, and vicious b.s. against a good Democrat named Barack Obama.
            Some of her diaries made my skin crawl.
            And now you're actually trying to say she was driven off this site?
            After the crap she pulled?
            Please. For the love of god just please.
            That is not true.
            She would post the most outrageous accusations against him, and then act offended and hurt when she was asked to provide links or facts.
            And then she ran.
            And accused Markos and this site of being mean to her and all HRC supporters because it was made up of crazy cult members.
            So please.

            And for every diary like this that tries to paint kossaks as the bad guys who drove them off, I ask you to go over to Mydd and read what's posted there.
            That's where they went.
            The "strikers".
            The boycotters. And the banned.
            You tell me what you see.
            It's become a hate site so filled with venom and hatred towards Obama that I swear I'm at Free Republic.
            And Jerome cheers them on.
            And to this day Alegre is posting lies and and some ugly nasty stuff about Obama over there while you say we ran her, and them off.
            So on that on call utter total bull.
            The people that support Clinton and that did stay are not getting HC'd and harassed, and I refuse to buy into this spin that they are.
            Day after day after day I hear their whine and I've had it.

            And as for focusing on McCain - when did you become naive clammy...because I know you are so not.
            How do you expect Obama to be able to focus on McCain when he's being torn to shreds by one of his own?
            Honestly - and you are puzzled as to why this site is upset about that?
            Someone has to win this damn thing.

            Markos posted three weeks ago how great this was. Obama vs. Hillary.
            How it would keep us in the news.
            How McCain would be forgotten.
            I was horrified beyond belief when he wrote that and vocalized it it a few posts.
            I said this would kill us.
            He disagreed with me.

            I wonder how that's holding up now.
            The whole "this is great for the Democratic Party".
            Anyone who believed that was high on something.

            So you tell us, or you tell Obama, how the hell he can fight his real opponent when this cancer is coming from within.

            I think this is the first time i've disagreed with so much of a diary you wrote in since day one, and of course it's the one that's all peace, love and understanding so I'll come across as the bad guy here.

            "Oh changed your hair color? It's just so dark. You like it? And with your skin tone?" My Beloved Mom, December 25 2007, once again on notice.

            by Christin on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:00:03 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I have to agree (11+ / 0-)

              I stopped visiting Kos for a while.  Came back not too long ago and couldn't stomach Alegre's diaries.  At all.  They were hateful and spiteful and were almost always anti-Obama instead of pro-Clinton.  That made no sense to me.  Either promote your candidate by telling me why I should vote for him/her or move on.  Don't tear other candidates down.  I was on the fence, but her diaries, in part, helped me make my decision.

              But maybe she was, by that point, already on her way out.  Perhaps she'd been driven to these types of diaries.  I'm not sure.  


              I feel like I'm taking crazy pills! The AA stands for Ann Arbor.

              by Matt in AA on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:13:52 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  myDD has turned into a strange segregated place (4+ / 0-)

              Most of the diaries are pro-Clinton. There's a significant minority that are pro-Obama, now. People seem to mix less than you'd expect... Obama people on Obama diaries, Clinton people on Clinton diaries.

              And there's way too much rudeness, and sadly, much too much comes from Obama supporters. Yes, an awful lot from Clinton supporters, but as an Obama supporter it bothers me when someone hijacks a thread with off-topic pro-Obama ranting (and it's never polite, when it's a hijacking). It doesn't reflect well on us, and I don't care how much provocation there is.

              But it's a weird place now. I try to comment on both sides, but it's hard; the Obama threads are 90% Obama-is-great and the Clinton threads are 90% Clinton-supporter backslapping and mutual praise about how wonderful they are. It's worse than it is here, even at the most mutually-praising diaries.

              •  The "Michele Obama is a Welfare Queen" (6+ / 0-)

                Diary earlier this week was recc'd by most of the banned daily kos users.
                It was banned by almost all those who left in a hissy fit and are boycotting daily kos.
                I saw 20 names on there who recc'd that p.o.s who wrote goodbyecruelworlddiaries on here pssing and moaning that we were so mean to them.
                They also posted in alegre's temper tantrum.
                Those same posters were in the diary posting that Michele was indeed a welfare queen and that obama was the evil incarnate.
                It was the ugliest, most vile, most disgusting, more vicious,  most horrific diary I've ever seen written against any of our candidates.
                It occupied the top spot on mydd.

                I think the biggest group of hypocrites I have ever come across is Alegre and her gang.
                I truly mean that.

                "Oh changed your hair color? It's just so dark. You like it? And with your skin tone?" My Beloved Mom, December 25 2007, once again on notice.

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

                [ Parent ]

            •  (4) <-- I agree with you as well, Christin (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              churchylafemme, BlueInARedState

              _ yes he is. >> * | *

              by rhfactor on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:07:26 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Christin, I'm not a cancer (5+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              hester, vcmvo2, clammyc, BachFan, TokenLiberal

              Do you mean me?  Do you really mean me?  

              I don't talk about politics on DKos much anymore.  I don't get the Obama love.  

              This leaves me a choice: keep quiet about my thoughts here, or open myself to real misery here; being thought of as a cancer coming from within.

              I'm with clammyc.  

              "Republicans are poor losers and worse winners." - My grandmother, sometime in the early 1960s

              by escapee on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 04:33:16 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  nononononononononononooooooooooo (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                I did not mean you by that by the comment.
                I meant members of our own party.
                And I left her name out of the sentence as not in git anyone riled up. (HRC).
                It's why I said he was having a hard time fighting his real opponent:  

                So you tell us, or you tell Obama, how the hell he can fight his real opponent when this cancer is coming from within.

                I'm sorry if it came across that way.

                "Oh changed your hair color? It's just so dark. You like it? And with your skin tone?" My Beloved Mom, December 25 2007, once again on notice.

                by Christin on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 04:51:52 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  But you did (7+ / 0-)

                  even without speaking of anybody specific.  I am a Democrat.  I support Clinton.  I am the cancer coming from within.  

                  Yet I'm still escapee.  And you're still Christin.

                  If I could somehow, some way, get this across to the people on Dkos right now, I would be happy.  Some of us don't agree on politics.  But we're still the people we were, still the people whose lives revolve around our houses, our cats, what we had for dinner, and politics.  

                  There's so much we have in common - much more than what we don't.  

                  "Republicans are poor losers and worse winners." - My grandmother, sometime in the early 1960s

                  by escapee on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:16:52 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

            •  thanks and a few others pointed out about Alegre (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              The House, Particle Noun

              that her diaries have become what they were.  But.....take the "darkening of the Obama photo".  Never proven to have been done, done intentionally or done by Clinton's campaign.  People who were in that line of business, including dday and dhonig cast doubt on whether this was done in conversion to YouTube or on purpose.

              Yet, there was never anything other than an accusation, repeated by Markos on the front page, and no proof offered.

              And then there are people like me who just try and keep people honest and accurate here but get attacked.

              Even if you take out Alegre and others, it is still pretty inexcusable.

          •  What am I supposed to do with my gut feeling that (26+ / 0-)

            .... they really are ?

            , you would think that Clinton, A DEMOCRAT, is the enemy, or even more so - her supporters.

            I never thought that until South Carolina.

            But I was never an Obama supporter or Edwards supporter either. I, a "Dean Democrat", was of the opinion that with Gore out, with Feingold out the year before, I really didn't have a candidate I overtly supported. So for me it was pretty simple:  Vote for the Dem in November 08, make sure the Republican didn't win. Case closed.

            And nothing has changed on that. Given the constraints of America's 2-party system, and given my fundamental progressive values that completely conflict with republicans in every way, that has only left "the Democratic Party". But like you, clammy, I register non-partisan, because for me, overall, the Democratic Party lets me down constantly. I need not cite the details.

            Which brings me to Clinton and her supporters. Personally, I have never been that wild about her. And, starting out two-three years ago with this presumption of certainty perpetrated by the conglomerate media that she would be the Democratic nominee, I found that very annoying. I also couldn't stand her Iraq war vote.  I also found her disingenuous -- that's just the way she's struck me.

            However: (a) not wild about her, (b) annoyed by presumptive nominee, and (c) seems disingenuous never never equaled "unqualified to be President" or "I could never vote for her" or any extreme position like that. I've always seen her as professionally competent like a CEO, and despite the three tags I use above, I have been fine with the possibility that she would be the Democratic nominee, and there remains no shadow of a doubt that I would vote for her if she prevails... and no way would i vote GOP, nor some third party, and I'm not all that wild about abstaining.

            But. Starting with South Carolina, her campaign tactics really started to grate on my sensibilities. And with respect to her supporters, for those who were disappointed that her campaign started to take that tact yet nevertheless felt she was the best candidate for President, THAT was fine with me too. But those who dismissed those tactics, and began spinning their candidate, in complete denial that her campaign was in fact employing some really dirty tactics, and who came here and did their cheerleading  and rapid response diaries with the intent to push her into the winner's column, regardless of anything -- THAT began to be a flag of concern for me.

            Then came "not a Muslim... as far as I know" ... "hasn't crossed the CIC threshold" ... "McCain is experienced, I am experienced, and all he's got is a speech" ... "unqualified to answer the 3am call" ... and the 2nd injection of racist bait into the campaign, via surrogate Ferraro. And you know what? That has not been okay. Not at all. And that her supporters who cheerlead here have defended those tactics, or dismissed them, ignored them, written them off as "all's fair in politics", that is not okay either. That's really shameful.

            And it makes me seriously question the value systems of those people.

            At the end of the day, for me? simply "being a Democrat" is not enough to equal being moral, progressive, or integrity based. And there is only so much bending of those standards that I, as a person who has worked hard helping to build the new netroots campaign methodologies starting with the Dean campaign, can take as within the realm of acceptability for people who are supposedly on the team of the "good guys" as opposed to the GOP assholes who have traded all morality for power and influence, no matter what the cost, no matter what the damages have been to our Constitution or system of democracy.

            So I don't know what one is supposed to call those who are not on your team. Maybe they are not "the enemy" per se, but personally, I sure as hell don't consider them leadership worthy or even colleagues.

            Winning admirably matters. Winning fairly matters. Poisoning your "own" so that you might win and he might be crippled out of the race, that is not admirable, for me it's not moral.

            So, sorry, but cry me a river for all the apologists for the Clinton method of campaigning. What they do and what they say, on the whole, as expressed here on this site, has not been okay by me.

            I may be no better -- and people can critique the hell out of me, that's fine by me. But I'll be damned if I am going to just read all this "can we all get along?" crap while dirty campaigning is the rule by which Senator Clinton operates. Sorry, doesn't wash.

            But I will still vote for her if she is the Democratic nominee.

            _ yes he is. >> * | *

            by rhfactor on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:53:38 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Hear hear! (4+ / 0-)

              Cutting Obama off at the knees with that "Commander-in-chief threshold" shit really grated on me. I hate Republicans because of how they behave.  When a Democrat starts acting like a Republican--at the expense of another Democrat, no less--I just find that hard to take.

              My dogs think we're all totally nuts, but how do I explain Daylight Savings Time to them?

              by Shiborg on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:20:45 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  Bravo rhfactor (3+ / 0-)

              I agree with you lockstep except for your last sentence.

              I don't know if I'll vote for Hillary if she's the nominee at this point. I can't see how she would get there without even more nastiness and nominee-by-coup, so that's one thing. And finally, while I can get past the Ferraro misstep and frantic spinning and desperation, I don't know if I can forgive her and her surrogates for the mocking and deriding of Obama supporters. That's something that Obama and his surrogates have not done and I never thought I'd see on this scale among Democrats. I find it disgusting, like watching an act of cannibalism.

            •  Excellent Post (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              churchylafemme, Night Train

              If this is what a Progressive should do:

              "Progressives realize the bigger picture. Progressives shouldn’t be eating their own."

              then, by the action of her campaign, Hillary Clinton is not a Progressive. Ergo, criticizing Clinton is not eating one's own.

              And as you quoted:

              "you would think that Clinton, A DEMOCRAT, is the enemy"

              Clinton IS the enemy. There has been a racist bent to her campaign that, due to its systematic and constant nature, cannot be said to be accidental. Maybe for some around here that doesn't make her the enemy, but for me it certainly did. Just because John McCain is her enemy and John McCain is also our enemy doesn't necessarily mean that she isn't our enemy either. And in the end Clinton certainly is treating Obama, a Democrat, as the enemy. Maybe Clammyc should rephrase his/her question as "We're Better than Hillary Clinton, Right?" I would have to answer though that I feel little obligated to hold myself to a higher standard than that which the person seeking to lead the nation holds herself to.

            •  I agree with you, but that is not (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              CA Libertarian, Particle Noun

              what I am talking about.  I am talking about unsupported allegations being repeated and recommended (the darkening of the Obama photo, for example), even on the front page.

              Then there are people like me who just want all of the Obama and Clinton supporters to be accurate who are getting attacked.

              I truly dislike the campaign she is running - on every level.  But the level of vitriol and lack of accuracy around here is just stunning.

              •  clammy, i think you are being a good diplomat (0+ / 0-)

                here... which is one of your great assets. But I think it's pretty likely that you don't really agree with me. Because what I was expressing above was a complete challenge to the  idea that 'they aren't the enemy'. And I walked right up to the line but fell short of saying "Yes they ARE the enemy.. of democracy and fairness".

                I'm not asking you to agree with me; that's not what I am looking for (I also know you are super-jammed at work with tax crunch, so your thought-time and posting time is very limited.) I would, however, really appreciate your thoughts on my premise, which roughly goes like this:

                But maybe they really are an enemy of sorts.

                It's what I truly believe. I believe centrism and triangulation is the enemy of progressivism. Because it breeds dirty tactics and "end justifies means" mindsets. Howard Dean believed that (that DLC Dems were killing the party, and were necessary to defeat in order to "take back our party" as a means to taking back the White House and then taking back our country.) And even though I don't formally affiliate with the Dem. party (like you), they are  my best choice for getting where I want our country to get.

                I have to believe that Dean still believes that re DLC Dems, but he's in a role where he cannot and would not say that -- which is good, because he's there in part to be an arbiter of fairness, as well as champion the party overall.

                And if DLC Dems are an enemy of progressivism, then those who are using smear tactics here in these spaces to support such a DLC Dem at all costs, these are not people acting nobly or with integrity. And for me personally, people who either remain silent re Senator Clinton's tactics since South Carolina, or pile onto her tactics, or simply endorse her tactics as part of the fair-game process of fighting to win elected office, are not people whose personal tactics I can respect as congruent with progressive morals.

                So, if you have time, please give me your thoughts. Because it would be impossible to agree with me without disagreeing with many many parts of your own diary. :)

                thanks -- and regardless I appreciate fully that you maintain a high bar for decorum and respect, ande you walk that talk.

                _ yes he is. >> * | *

                by rhfactor on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 10:12:15 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  "good progressives" (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            I take it that your definition includes those who lie through their teeth between dogwhistle comments, then.

            I respect you, but I disagree strongly here. mockery, scorn, ridicule, and attacks are precisely what some of these fuckers have coming, and it doesn't pain me to see them get it. When they run away squealing and mount their narcissistic little "strikes," it shows them up for precisely the gutless mob sheep that they are. Would you seriously argue that this bullshit "strike" deserves anything other than mockery? Go over and read Alegre's latest repulsive screeds at MyDD and then tell me that not having him/her/it here is any great loss.

            I for one don't miss one of the "striking" pinheads. Let them rot.

            Clinton IS a monster.

            by RabidNation on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:15:52 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  If you tell them they are alienating (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            vcmvo2, Fabian

            the people whose support they will need in November, they'll just say

            "If you make your choice based on what you read on a blog, you're not smart enough to vote anyway."

            It seems that most of the assholes regard their handle as a carte blanche.

            •  Other wise known as (2+ / 0-)

              When are words "just words" and when do words really mean something?

              Answer: Whenever I say they do - or don't!  In other words - People think their opinions trump anything, including other people's opinions.

              Obama made some good points in his speech.  One of them was that division is bad because when people wall themselves off and stop talking to others, both sides lose.  We learn and understand by listening.

              I've stopped hanging around this place because people have walled themselves off, started shouting and stopped listening.

              It's not a win/win.  It's a lose/lose.

              Proud member of the Cult of Issues and Substance!

              by Fabian on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 12:36:47 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Obama made MANY great points, and you are just (0+ / 0-)

                too walled off (btw it's walled "in" or "out" not "off").  And you stopped "hanging around this place because people have walled themselves off"?  How mighty and heroic are you?  Btw, you mean that people walled themselves in here or you wouldn't have had to leave?  Why leave a place that you are in, unless of course you are the proverbial outcast?  Yes, another sad victim of some forsaken blog where they patronize Bill O'Liely, and Faux Noise for mentioning the unfortunate refuges from this blog (and please no mojo for this, people).  You are the phony because of your failure to listen.  

                "When power leads man toward arrogance, poetry reminds him of his limitations." JFK

                by yowsta on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 01:19:50 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  You are one of the shouters. (4+ / 0-)

                  I left because I want to listen to well reasoned, insightful opinions. (Note my sig line.)  I can still find them here, as long as I stay out of the campaign diaries.  People do still care about the issues - The Economy has made the Rec List regularly in the past week or two.

                  No one likes or wants to be shouted at.  So I get my campaign news from another location - talkleft to be exact.  You are welcome to join, but be warned that the site rules are different there and strictly enforced.

                  Proud member of the Cult of Issues and Substance!

                  by Fabian on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 01:35:17 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

          •  not buying it (0+ / 0-)

            take glee at running good progressives who are also Clinton supporters (think Alegre, for example)

            Prima donnas deserve to be mocked.    I hope she didn't let the door hit her ass on the way out.

            Joe Lieberman crossed the line and lost our support, even if he would nominate a pro-choice justice to the Supreme Court.  Hillary has crossed the line by talking about going after Obama's pledged delegates and talking down Obama while in the same breath talking up McCain.

        •  I agree. I did an experiment today! (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          TexMex, LABobsterofAnaheim, llamaRCA

          Sort of a devious little troll trap.  

          I posted a diary with a poll with two choices, one of which (in my view) no sane Kossack would choose.  

          about 20% chose that.  Now, either I'm wrong, or we have a pretty good population of lurking trolls and enemy spies, or at least pretty unsympathetic readers.  No reason to feel paranoid about that, after all, we wouldn't be doing our job if this weren't the case.

        •  i have been saying this, too (0+ / 0-)

          Far too many "I am Republican, but", "I am an independant, but", but nooooooooo.
          Whenever I raised the issue it was "But we want to expand the electorate" and "Well, they have to go somewhere and if they come to us, we will have more votes for Obama."  "We are bringing in new people"
          "Hillary is just old Democrat Dino."
          Billary, Clintonistas, etc, etc
          Sound like a bunch of Freepers to me!
          Plus I have also said that once McCain looked like he was getting the nomination, the "new independants" started to come here and do their dirty deeds and then post pootie pic diaries to get mojo for protection.
          "Oh that xxxxxitty is so sweet she loves cats!" When xxxxxitty trollrates for the hell of it.

          Catholics have Rome, Muslims have Mecca, evolutionists have Galapagos. Lineatus

          by TexMex on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:08:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Unfortunately, these are not republicans (5+ / 0-)

          who are trolling these sites.  You said:

          I consider those who post so much vitriol against HRC here to be infiltrators from the Republican side. Like 'concern trolls'.......

          These are either paid or unpaid obama supporters deriding Clinton.  It doesn't help that the site owner encourages this.

          •  That's not true (3+ / 0-)

            Clinton tactics have been questionable in this primary: ignoring the states she lost, changing the rules of FL and MI, choosing John McCain over Obama. Some of us need a place to vent! - No one is being paid.

          •  "vitriol aganst Hillary" (0+ / 0-)

            means for rational people, political positions, actions, and associations that people legitimately demand explanations for.

            Hillary is running for POTUS, remember? There's this thing called accountability that Democrats believe in.

            Don't blame us if your candidate is acting like she has a great deal to hide.

            Just hope that you don't feel like a fool if what she'd trying to hide ever gets to the surface.

            Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

            by alizard on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:47:55 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  So, in other words... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          ...if you're "totally Progressive, respectable and high ranking," you support Clinton.  If you dislike Clinton, you're an "infiltrator from the Republican side."


        •  I agree (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          clammyc, mdgarcia, Predictor

          people get vicious.  I think it's because the wignuts have been shelling it out and we just can't take the dissonence anymore.

          Saw a bumper magnet when I was driving into work with my hubby this morning, it said "some a**hole stole my magnet supporting the troops".  I looked at my hubby and said "never in my life have I wanted to steal a bumper magnet so much."

          The community needs more facts about both campaigns, not more flames.   Once the election is over, the concern trolls will receed and we can be a community again.

          Personally?  I check the history of every person I mojo or hide.  

          There may be tyrants and murderers and...they may seem invincible, but in the end they always fail. Think of it: always.

          by Dania Audax on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 05:56:26 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory (32+ / 0-)

      I have been repeatedly drop-jaw dumbstruck over the insistence of otherwise bright people here on Daily Kos to lose sight of the target in their efforts to blow one Dem or another out of the water.

      I am as disgusted as anyone on this site with the tactics of the Clintons in this primary season. But, let's face it folks, Clinton on her worst day in office will beat John "100 Years" McCain. Too many people have completely lost their perspective.

      Losing that perspective, if carried far enough in this age of transparency and instant messaging, has consequences:

      McCain leads 46 percent to 40 percent in a hypothetical matchup against Obama in the November presidential election, according to the poll.

      That is a sharp turnaround from the Reuters/Zogby poll from last month, which showed in a head-to-head matchup that Obama would beat McCain 47 percent to 40 percent.

      "The last couple of weeks have taken a toll on Obama and in a general election match-up, on both Democrats," said pollster John Zogby.

      Matched up against Clinton, McCain leads 48 percent to 40 percent, narrower than his 50 to 38 percent advantage over her in February.

      "It's not surprising to me that McCain's on top because there is disarray and confusion on the Democratic side," Zogby said.

      We who profess to be the "Democratic wing of the Democratic Party" need to be promoting conversation and dialogue on the issues - not shutting it down. That's what Republicans do.

      "Respect for the rights of others is peace." Benito Juarez

      by Blue Boy Red State on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 06:50:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  well said, but... (35+ / 0-)

        ...what more is there to discuss really?  hillary cannot win barring a "dead girl, live boy" scenario.  the superdelegates are apparently in no hurry to decide the manner even though it strains credulity to think they will support hillary en masse at the convention.  yet the primary goes on...  our nominee is currently being branded by the right wingers, but he must continue fighting a primary that, for all intensive purposes, he's won.  

        i am in no way condoning the ugliness of obama or hillary hyper-partisans, but what can be done?  the amount of hillary supporters that are pissed off because of perceived insults at daily kos are a miniscule portion of the voting populace.  they are not going to decide the election.  however, the longer hillary stays in the race, the more difficult she makes it for obama to win by damaging him on the national stage.  his ability to focus on mccain is hamstrung by her attacks.  at this point, she is quite clearly putting her own ambitions above the party and above the country.    

        •  Clinton is trying to take down Obama (12+ / 0-)

          She's losing, she's lost, and she's trying to take Obama down with her. She has said that it's either her or McCain, no blacks need apply.

          That's despicable. When she responded yesterday to Obama's speech, she didn't even give him the respect and courtesy of reading or listening to it before she offered her opinion on what he said. Much too busy, much too important to give him the time of day.

          The very definition of a Clinton supporter is someone who supports her candidacy and her campaign, no? So...those of you out there who think she's our best bet for the next 4 to 8 years, is this how you want to win it?

          I'm with you, Hound. Hillary needs to understand that the stakes are higher than her personal ambitions. She needs to get out. Now.

          And as for Hillary supporters, stop your whining. It's uncomfortable here for a reason. We don't like the tactics of your candidate and by extension, we don't like your support of those tactics.

          "The only deadly sin I know is cynicism." --Henry Lewis Stimson

          by Bugsby on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:26:07 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The two scenarios in which I'd vote for Clinton (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Christin, Bugsby, churchylafemme
            1. If she wins in either the delegate count or the popular vote.  Then, it would have legitimacy.  I would enthusiastically vote for her.
            1. If she wins by coup de superdelegate, and John McCain is competitive in Massachusetts (where I live).  If that awful scenario takes place, I'll do what I have to.  I won't be supporting any coups if it's not necessary though.

            And yes, I fully understand that a McCain administration would be terrible for the country.  However, I'd like our nominee to have some democratic legitimacy.  Overturning the will of the voters is something I can't support, unless it is absolutely necessary for me to do so.

            •  I would only vote for her on the first of you cho (0+ / 0-)

              On number 2.. hmm odd refrence.hehe.. no way. I just cannot respect that kind of manuver. Although I would not vote for Mccain.. I would vote third party.. like Nader etc.. I may even change party to some other party at that point.  I will still vote for progressive dems or any other canadate that is progressive.

              •  On number 2, if McCain is competitive in MA... (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:

                ...I would bite the bullet.  However, that is extremely unlikely.

              •  Hangingchad, I hope push doesn't come to shove (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Tamar, gzodik

                because the Democrats will need your vote to keep McCain out of the White House. We can't do it without you.

                Please don't let a Clinton nomination push you out of the party. Progressives are making gains from the bottom up and we will overtake the Presidency sooner or later. But we need you to help make us stronger.

                "The only deadly sin I know is cynicism." --Henry Lewis Stimson

                by Bugsby on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 08:46:22 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  If McCain is competitive in MA (0+ / 0-)

              ...and I'm from MA as well...he would be headed to a 47-state sweep. If either Dem has to fight in MA, it is all over. It's Reagan-Mondale Redux.

              "I'm not a musician. I'm a rock and roll guitar player."--Little Steven Van Zandt

              by ChurchofBruce on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 11:56:44 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  What can we talk about? (12+ / 0-)

          I'm firmly in the camp that believes the Clintons have always been running as the "Clinton for America" candidate. Delaware Dem had it right: the Clintons are the biggest narcissists this country has ever seen.

          But there are plenty of issues that this primary season presented for which we still lack closure and healing.

          Things like:

          Why is an "angry" black man in politics a threatening force to be contained, rather than an aggrieved human being from whom we can learn and be changed?

          Why do we still subject women politicians to a different standard when we have gladly suffered centuries of cold, calculating male politicians?

          Why is a candidate considered "flaky" when he proposes a Department of Peace?

          And, why, oh why, when our government can spend billions bailing out an ethically-challenged brokerage firm but balk at helping working people who are drowning in debt, could we dismiss a candidate who wanted to address these gross imbalances because he got a $500 haircut?

          The candidates may have left the stage. But the questions are still hanging around, like pregnant elephants in our midst.

          I, for one, would like some answers.

          "Respect for the rights of others is peace." Benito Juarez

          by Blue Boy Red State on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:27:51 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  rec'd but a minor quibble (16+ / 0-)

          "... but he must continue fighting a primary that, for all intensive purposes, he's won...."

          The intended idiom is "for all intents and purposes." I suppose that one could make the case that Obama's need to defend against attacks from the Clinton campaign constitutes an 'intensive purpose', but it would be a stretch.

          Sorry, it's one of my peeves, second only to "the proof is in the pudding". Grrr...

          "It may be true that the law cannot make a man love me, but it can keep him from lynching me, and I think that's pretty important." Martin Luther King Jr.

          by Arabiflora on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:34:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Close?? (4+ / 0-)

      Thanks clammyc.

      If the people lead, the leaders will follow.

      by Mz Kleen on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 06:53:04 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The only thing I would say is that (16+ / 0-)

      I would add to the frat boy mentality a complementary sorority girl style disdain for anyone not in the clique.  Other than that , spot on.  I've been called a hillary shill a couple of time too-it makes me almost laugh, since I care little for either of them, but support them completely over the gooper alternative.

      Having said that, Hell of a speech yesterday.

    •  Thank you, clammyc (13+ / 0-)

      for writing this.  You are not alone.  I have had a very similar perspective, and even statements such as saying that I will support whichever candidate is the Democratic nominee in November (which was once noncontroversial, and is at the core of the purpose of this site) have received responses such as "bah" or "you have lost your moral compass" or worse.

      I don't know what it will take for people here to realize how much worse off we would be with McCain than with any Democrat, and how much Obama or Hillary will need each other's supporters in the fall.

      I, too, support Obama strongly.  But yes, we can be better as a community than many have demonstrated here, and we will need to be unless we are content to have endless war, a disaster of an economy, the worst Supreme Court you've ever seen, and some even worse neocon or theocon a heartbeat from the Presidency.

      •  count me in (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Hardhat Democrat, clammyc, UU VIEW

        recently accused of being a "concern troll" and Hillary supporter.  
        Put me in the same bind as Obama when he's "accused" of being a Muslim.  
        I'm not a Hillary supporter but I don't think it's evil to be a Hillary supporter.  
        Well, actually I am a Hillary supporter in that I will support her if she's the Democratic nominee.  I'm just a whole lot more enthusiast about Obama.
        And yes, I don't much like the more recent tactics of Hillary's campaign.  Without getting into candidate wars, I really can't think of anything the Obama campaign had done to Hillary that's equivalently bad.

        If, in our efforts to win, we become as dishonest as our opponents on the right, we don't deserve to triumph.

        by Tamar on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 09:02:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I take your point, but please consider this (8+ / 0-)

      If we make civility our primary goal, and a political opponent does not, what then?  If an opponent appears to be seeking out ways to tear down and diminish all other aspirants to a political office, and we do nothing, what happens next?

      John Kerry springs to mind.  Please, while you are reacting to what is troubling you, consider the alternatives.  Oh, nothing is quite as clear cut as that, but think about it.  What this period has summoned up for me is what I did not like about the Clinton era, which I had sort of forgotten.  So shoot me.  I did not like  the sort of cheesy co-opting of pseudo-conservative stances, as a means of confusing your opposition.  It never felt right, I never felt it addressed the real problems, except political longevity.  Welfare reform, not as a matter of principle, but as a ploy?  Oooooo, not entirely comfortable for me.  There may have been reasons for reform, but that was not it.

    •  Silly Season is frustrating. (6+ / 0-)

      I am an Obama supporter.  And I can not stand the MYDD/kos feud.  I Have posted a few comments in Defense of Clinton but I must admit that I my comments have been increasingly anti-Clinton since the primary race turned negative.

      Negativity Breeds negativity.  The funny thing is I was on the fence until about 2-3 weeks before the VA Primary.  My mother, 63, was undecided until she pushed the button. My wife decided the day before the election.  My Dad, 68, and sister chose Clinton.  Some of the tactics of the Clinton campaign have put me off.

      Come election day I will pull the lever for the Democratic Nominee.  If for no other reason than out of the respect I have for my initial indecicivenes, my father and my sister and an understanding that she may not deliver the kind of change in the status quo that I am looking for, but she would do more to move the country in the direction that I would like than McCain.  

      If Obama is destroyed, I will likely change my mind.

    •  we are all fed up (12+ / 0-)

      7 years of dems keeping their powder dry and now this. Month after month of uncertainty in a year that should be a slam dunk/dems win election and here we are with no certain candidate to move forward with.

      But I only know this: Clinton was the least favorite choice out of the top tier candidates since kos has been polling us for 08 choices and that is because she is perceived as the worst choice in terms of progressiveness, electability and likability. I've been here since 04 too and i have learned a hell of a lot about Clinton, she is one of the politicians behind the gate that we have been attempting to crash. is it any wonder why this community--this well informed community -- is up in arms that there is a chance she may end up being our candidate???

      What will that have meant for all the thousands of us who have poured thousands of hours of our lives into preventing this very thing from happening???

      to me, it would mean defeat.

      A dem who acts like a republican, lies like a republican, manipulates like a republican, is, well, not a progressive, and is not change as I understand the word in terms of politics.

      What's at stake here is a matter of life and death, and folks who have paid close attention--the high info voters--feel the risk is more than just a choice between two good democrats. One is a fighter and will fight with the republicans and bring all that damn baggage with her and there and another is a uniter who's political skill to disarm opponents --even republicans --is unmatched.

      it is very difficult after almost eight years of total trauma from this administration with all it's hate and diviseness and fear to contemplate another president who is more of the same.

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

      by donailin on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:52:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  umm humm (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I have been feeling like that for a while......

      Catholics have Rome, Muslims have Mecca, evolutionists have Galapagos. Lineatus

      by TexMex on Wed Mar 19, 2008 at 07:57:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The has just begin (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      If I read the situation correctly, this is how it Hillary's crew will play the game.

      1. Hillary will hit Obama hard. increase negative until she is damaged and his national poll is lower than McCain.
      1. Win PA
      1. Then declare to superdelegate. He is beyond damage, jump and vote for me now so we can end this.

      Hillary is trying to convince the superdelegate now. Very dangerous.

      Obama better have a strategy because his negative is shooting through the roof!

      (Tell his balck pastor to show up with bunch of white people or something. The video is damaging)

    •  Progressives do not tolerate (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      the win-at-all-costs mentality that has characterized Hillary Clinton's campaign AGAINST ONE OF THEIR OWN.

      there's a case to be made for not even sanctioning the tactics her campaign has employed against Republicans, but it is totally out of bounds against a Democrat, let alone a promising young Democrat who goes out of their way to emphasize the things we all here agree with: competing for every vote in every state, ground-up grassroots participation and mobilization, and pushing our politics tactfully to the left rather than cringingly towards the center.

      the vitriol directed at the Clinton campaign here at DKos is a result of her attacks on the candidate who embodies the philosophy of DKos, so all of the vitriol worth mentioning (ad hominem attacks are to be disregarded out of hand no matter who they are directed at) has been defensive in nature.

      if we bend to these sorts of attacks (or pass over them without comment) on the ideals that bring us together here, if we embrace the win-at-all-costs mentality, we might as well just join the DLC; because we'll have lost our principles.

    •  Only close? I can't believe you got troll rated. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      clammyc, Predictor

      I have no candidate (Edwards was my pick); and I can't stand the nasty childish behavior. I think the mistake you make is to assume this is still a progressive site.  I don't think it is anymore.  Just like the primary, all the newbies coming in to dkos are Republicans and Independents.  They call them "new Democrats".  The most ironic thing of all is "I'm a born again Republican" hits the rec. list while Hillary supporters are subjected to "Freddie and the Chainsaw Massacres". But hey, its the new party politics.  Nobody gives a damn about liberals, those dirty f&cking hippies.  All they care about is winning over the Reagan people.  You know, the ones who caused the whole mess.  Quit being such a purity troll clammyc.

      ...once you're willing to say whatever it takes to win, you lose. ~~Dean

      by dkmich on Thu Mar 20, 2008 at 02:29:59 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  clammyc (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Predictor, joustchr

      I don't understand.  You were given a link to a progressive blog, which you posted on and responded to no one's comments.  There were more than 100 comments both welcoming you and hoping you'd post. You didn't respond to a single comment.

      Now this diary, where you say you are "close to fed up"....yet in your comments here to posters  you do nothing to dissuade or even convince anyone of your concerns with this site.  And you offer no support to people who actually support this post and comment on it.  You just let the bad behavior continue even in  your own diary.

      I have a lot of respect for you and had hoped a post like this might bring some sense forward.  It hasn't. And sadly, you offer no support to others who have experienced the same thing.

      Sigh. I like your diaries generally, because they are substantive.  This one, I can't believe you're as upset or concerned as you claim to be.  And this user has been around as long as you have.

      Good luck to you.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site