Skip to main content

This diary is not intended to be a Hillary love-fest.  I have no particular affection for her; like many people, I was groomed from childhood to loathe her.  While I have given to Obama, Edwards, and even Richardson (many months ago), I have not given Sen. Clinton a dime and do not intend to unless she is the nominee.

However, I am so freaking tired of the Hillary Hate that is so rampant among the VRWC and that is just as vitriolic among what appears to be the overwhelming majority of the progressive movement.  I am sick of the "Republicans want Hillary" meme from the right, the left, and the media.

I'm sick to death of candidate diaries and have enjoyed a day with relatively few of them, no need to rec this. Just hear me out.  I just think Sen. Clinton should know that if she prevails, we will work tirelessly to elect her President.  I know I will.

Hate from the Right
I have never quite understood the right's hatred of Clinton.  It has inspired countless books, including this disgusting piece of crap by the deceased spouse of our would-be Attorney General.  I think the hatred is mostly envy, fear, and sexism that the for-profit "health" industry exploited to create widespread loathing of Mrs. Clinton during her husband's administration.

In the saga of Norman Hsu, the present obsession of the NY Times, we are told that some of Hillary's big contributions came from "unlikely" sources:

The news comes on top of several new accounts of questionable campaign contributions in the wake of disclosures about Mr. Hsu. The Wall Street Journal also published an article today looking at another case of bundling donations (in and of itself not an illegal practice) for Mrs. Clinton:

   When Hillary Rodham Clinton held an intimate fund-raising event at her Washington home in late March, Pamela Layton donated $4,600, the maximum allowed by law, to Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign.

   But the 37-year-old Ms. Layton says she and her husband were reimbursed by her husband’s boss for the donations. “It wasn’t personal money. It was all corporate money,” Mrs. Layton said outside her home here. “I don’t even like Hillary. I’m a Republican.”

Keep on giving, Republicans.  Y'all clearly have no one you want to support, anyway.

Hate from the Left
Here is a woman who, in addition to being hated by half the country by 1998, suddenly became hated by another third for choosing to stay with her husband after an affair, a choice tens of millions of women have made, and a choice that is none of our business.  I cannot even catalog the disrespect and loathing for Sen. Clinton that persists right here on Daily Kos.  How many of us at this point in 2003 were thrilled about Dean and ambivalent about Kerry?  What did we do after Kerry emerged?  We got together, opened our wallets, and fought the good fight.  Very few of us threw up our hands and went into GBCW mode.

Hillary Rodham Clinton would be our most liberal president in over a half century.  Just like John Kerry would have been.  Perfect?  No.  But capable, honest, and true to herself.

Love from the Media Now - Hate from the Media Later
I think everyone knows what is going on in the MSM now.  They need Sen. Clinton because they need this election to be close.  I do NOT believe she is the most "electable" Dem, but I am in the minority.  I think they are dry humping her right now because an Edwards-Obama ticket would absolutely crush the GOP and the poor MSM would have nothing to talk about except OJ, Britney, and missing white girls.

So now, we hear about Sen. Clinton, the tenacious campaigner.  The moment she wins the nomination, it will be Sen. Clinton, the self-promoting, unprincipled shrill bitch and it will just get worse from the convention until the election.  They will tear her apart.  You can write it down.

My Commitment
Sen. Clinton, I disagreed with you on the war and there are definitely things about you I don't like.  I probably won't vote for you in the primary.  But I don't hate you.  I hold you in high regard as a person and as a public servant.  If you win the nomination, I will work hard to get you elected.

I hope everyone here will join me in that commitment.

The rest of you can enjoy the Guiliani Administration.  Or whoever.

Originally posted to Lucky Ducky on Thu Sep 20, 2007 at 11:15 PM PDT.


If Sen. Clinton is the nominee, I will...

45%37 votes
28%23 votes
16%13 votes
1%1 votes
8%7 votes

| 81 votes | Vote | Results

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Can I get an upperdown vote? (4+ / 0-)

    Otherwise I'll go nuclear!

    The Bush Administration: Restoring honor and dignity to the White House since... never.

    by Lucky Ducky on Thu Sep 20, 2007 at 11:11:03 PM PDT

  •  I Don't Dislike Her, I Disagree w/ Some Of Her (6+ / 0-)

    positions but that is it. I actually have a ton of respect for the women. She is intelligent. Got a great education and an advance degree before that was "common." She raised a wonderful daughter from everything I can tell. And she stayed w/ Bill when she could have walked away.

    I won't vote for her in the primary, but will do anything possible to get her elected if she makes it to the general.

    "It is not enough to win, all others must lose," Sun Tzu.

    by webranding on Thu Sep 20, 2007 at 11:16:09 PM PDT

  •  I've said it before (3+ / 0-)

    and I'll say it again. She's not my pick, I have reasons to dislike her, and they are my own, not some right wing talking point.

    That being said, if she wins the primary, I will do my damndest to get her elected in the general. No matter what I have against her, it is nothing compared to what I have against the Republican field.

    •  I've heard liberals repeat VRWC talking points... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Hairy Legs, moderate by extremes

      Such as making fun of the tone of her voice.

      Do you share my sense that she is scrutinized to an exorbitant degree?

      The Bush Administration: Restoring honor and dignity to the White House since... never.

      by Lucky Ducky on Thu Sep 20, 2007 at 11:24:41 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Very much so (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Lucky Ducky

        I just don't know why there is just so much rabid hate for her, on either side of the aisle.

        The most hilarious part about it is that the "Hill-haters" have such a wide disparity of why they hate her. I was listening to right wing propagandists-radio shows the other day (only station I pick up where I work) and they were calling her an outright communist. On the left she is criticized for being a hawkish Republican-lite. As far as I can tell, she's a leaning left (not as much as we would like), competent Senator, not the antichrist.

        My biggest problems with her are that she has not apologized for her AUMF vote (at least to my knowledge, though I would love for anyone to prove me wrong), and the whole YKos lobbyist thing. Neither of these things would prevent me from backing her in the general if she gets the nomination.

        •  DLC centrists (0+ / 0-)

          are going to be unpopular on progressive blogs, no matter how much MSM pundits love them.

          Doesn't matter what their last names happen to be, my problem with her is the public policy I expect from her if she is elected President. I have nothing against her personally, I suspect I'd like her if I knew her personally, I like being around strong, intelligent women.

          I just think that a President leading Congress into K Street-driven 'business as usual' with the marching orders coming from "lobbyists that represent real people" (i.e. real Fortune 1000 CEOs and the health insurance industry so high on her donor list) is a guarantee of disaster for the nation and for the Democratic Party.

          America may recover. The Democratic Party won't.

          But I'll hold my nose and vote for her if she gets the nomination.

          IMO, it'll settle the question once and for all whether or not the Democratic Party is a vehicle for the changes required for national survival as anything other than a failed state with a shattered economy or an obstacle to change.

          I think this is a question that needs settling.

          And we know that there is nobody running as a Republican who has the remotest inkling of a clue as to how to govern even under the most favorable circumstances, let alone a nation that's sliding towards the abyss.

          Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

          by alizard on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 03:24:02 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  She is running a great campaign (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lucky Ducky, Hairy Legs, PhillyGuy03

    which alone gets my respect

  •  Diaries like this feel like loyalty oaths (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    antifa, AUBoy2007

    Let the primaries run their course and then deal with convincing people to vote for the nominee. Why waste with with, If X happens, will you promise to do Y?

    This is beginning to sound and feel like a cult. And a cult is a cult is a cult.

    Why can't everybody just knock it off, because the reality is that very few people here are going to change their minds about much of anything.  And as they have no idea what, if anything, they'll do if Cheney attacks Iran sometime between tomorrow and a year from now, how they hell should they know what they'll do 11/08 based on a hypothetical?

    What FDR giveth; GWB taketh away.

    by Marie on Thu Sep 20, 2007 at 11:26:29 PM PDT

    •  On this site, I've noticed (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Hairy Legs

      a lot of "x is the only candidate who can win" diaries that seem a LOT more like loyalty oaths.

      I've just sensed a lot of GBCW sentiment here lately, with September being less than magical and Senate Dems in major capitulation mode...

      I just wanted to check the resolve of this community to support the major candidate who is, it seems to me, least popular and most derided here.

      The Bush Administration: Restoring honor and dignity to the White House since... never.

      by Lucky Ducky on Thu Sep 20, 2007 at 11:42:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  actually, a bigger concern to me (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Hairy Legs

        is there aren't all that many people thinking past the election, let alone what's likely to be going on in 2009 with Democratic control of at least the executive and legislative branches, probably with numbers strong enough to pack SCOTUS if need be.

        Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

        by alizard on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 03:25:54 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Passion isn't always hate (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    antifa, Tyrannocaster

    I'm passionately against Hillary Clinton for what I consider good reasons, some of which are: She wasn't "fooled" into voting for the war; she and Bill both and many of their "team" were advocates for it.  She's said she won't rule out first-strike use of nuclear weapons.  She's the DLC candidate, and I can't take 8 more years of their running the Democratic Party.  I don't believe she is a leader, but rather a pragmatic operative who'll do or say anything in order to win--I've had enough of that point of view and will not vote for anyone without having a sense of their basic idealism. And I believe that she is ruthless. I don't hate her for any of the petty reasons people like to think are the basis for her unpopularity.  It is my opinion that she's  so widely disliked because she's unknowable (as is anyone whose ideas are based on political speculation rather than on her own character and philosophy).

    No, I will not work for her nor contribute to her.  I'm praying for an Independent to run if she wins the primary.  It will be the first time ever I've not voted, or voted for a third party, and I resent those who voted for Nader, but I WILL NOT be blackmailed by the DLC into voting for someone I cannot believe in, someone who makes me feel hopeless, and someone whose ethical compass has been thwarted by cynicism.  If our next leader can't restore some elements of the idealism on which this country was founded and which all of us "oldsters" have lived our lives by, instead of gross pride and hubris, we're lost.

    •  Well said! (0+ / 0-)

      The diarist's poll above reflects the public polls on Hillary. One third of voting Democrats will not be able to vote for her in all good conscience.

      That is a problem that abusing these voters with a lively conscience will not solve.

      But the Hillarists are marching here on dKOS, pumping out blogmarketing diaries every day praising Hillary (and one another) for assumed brilliance in a sickening, saccharine circle jerk that only serves to turn off non-cultists.

      She's not anyone's nominee yet, and for her cult members to be whipping the membership at dKOS into taking loyalty oaths is highly improper.

      "The rule of the wise must be absolute . . . rulers ought not to be responsible to the unwise subjects." ~ Professor Leo Strauss

      by antifa on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 12:19:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I don't think you need be concerned about (0+ / 0-)

      8 years of DLC centrist rule led by HRC or anybody else.

      If America puts the Democratic Party in control of government with a mandate to fix things, it will either fix things or get run out of politics.

      Personally, I think it's time that elected Democrats are given the chance to deliver. . . or fail to deliver in public with nobody to blame but themselves if they don't.

      If any Democrat wins and governs as a DLCer with priorities driven by K Street instead of as a person with a mandate to fix the economy to give the middle class a chance , to fix foriegn policy to keep America out of stupid wars, and to fix global warming (we have ONE decade to get a handle on it), she's going to be a one-term President and I believe that she's going to take the Democratic Party into political oblivion with her.

      I suspect that the DLCers would rather see Democrats lose in 2008 so they can keep doing the will of the lobbyists "who represent real people", blame us for not being a netroots ATM for them, instead of their own policies intended to piss off the base, and keep on repeating the slogan "We will fix America when you give us the power".

      Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

      by alizard on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 03:34:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  The thing is... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lucky Ducky, DaleA, Caldonia, PhillyGuy03

    Obama and Edwards are hardly perfect either. The bar seems so high for Hillary compared to her competitors.  I suppose that is fair given her front-runner status.

    I'm voting for the Hill woman

    by masslib on Thu Sep 20, 2007 at 11:47:48 PM PDT

    •  I don't think it's fair (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Caldonia, PhillyGuy03

      I think she has had to endure scrutiny and criticism to an exorbitant degree.  If she is nominated, the VRWC will be out in full force to tear her apart, and the MSM will be right there to help along the way.

      If we nominate Edwards or Obama, the anti-lawyer types will be out in force, and the media will go after them to make the race seem more even, but it will be NOTHING like what Clinton has had to deal with from the right and the left for most of the past decade.

      The Bush Administration: Restoring honor and dignity to the White House since... never.

      by Lucky Ducky on Thu Sep 20, 2007 at 11:51:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hillary's front runner status . . . (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      comes from extremely high and extremely early funding from the Insurance industry, the Lobbyist industry, and the nationwide DLC political machine.

      It has been widely discussed in the media that her strategy all along was to get out in front early on so as to enjoy the assumed right to front runner status.

      Gore will not be endorsing her. Wesley Clark has damaged his reputation with  his endorsement, and getting lots of backlash for it.

      If Edwards and Obama come to an understanding to team up in some manner, Hillary will be out of the running overnight.

      As determined as the Hillarists are to see their wonder woman succeed, it is in no way a sure thing.

      She still has to get a whole lot of people to hold their noses, if they can, and pull the lever on America's future.

      "The rule of the wise must be absolute . . . rulers ought not to be responsible to the unwise subjects." ~ Professor Leo Strauss

      by antifa on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 12:24:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Wes Clark? (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        yeah, I told them to get me the hell of his mailing list when I heard of his HRC endorsement.

        Looking for intelligent energy policy alternatives? Try here.

        by alizard on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 03:37:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  She is a front runner because (0+ / 0-)

        she has withstood all the scrutiny and hypes surrounding her presidency and she has run a dame impressive campaign. She becomes more credible as people interact with her. That is not the case with some other candidates who simply don't have the substance to match the excitement.

        •  Hillary is the GOP's Dream Candidate. (0+ / 0-)

          The Rove strategy in 2000, 2002, 2004, 2006, and again in 2008 is the very same. He adds up every single precinct in the country, and rates them as to how close the race will be.

          Then he pulls out all the stops -- doing whatever can be done legally and illegally -- to get the percentages to within 8% or preferably closer.

          That's close enough to steal, plausibly.

          That's why Kerry was their dream candidate in 2004, and why Hillary is their dream candidate in 2008.

          Hillary has historically high negatives within the Democratic Party, and astronomically high negatives with the right wing and conservatives in general.

          If, God forbid, she actually becomes the Democratic candidate for the White House in 2008, that will drive huge chunks of Democratic and Independent voters to vote third party "ANYBODY BUT CLINTON!" or stay home and weep for our country.

          At the same time, her presence in the race will bring out the right wing voters like nothing else the Democratic side could do.

          Rove knows this, and has the right wing spin machine (which includes CBS and the major media outlets) saying Hillary Is It For 2008.

          And Hillary cannot win an American election in 2008 on the national level. She will be close enough to steal, and it will be stolen.

          If you want a Democratic President in 2008, don't hand Hillary to Rove on a platter. Pick someone who won't turn off the Dem voters, and won't turn on the GOP voters.

          Hillary can't win.

          "The rule of the wise must be absolute . . . rulers ought not to be responsible to the unwise subjects." ~ Professor Leo Strauss

          by antifa on Fri Sep 21, 2007 at 05:45:19 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks for this diary (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lucky Ducky, Hairy Legs

    Like you, I have some things about Hillary as well as other candidates with which I do not agree.  

    However, I am weary of the Hillary hating and bashing.  

    Some people say they can "never" forgive her for her vote.  I can't play that game.  Never is a long time and I did not walk in her shoes.  Like many others after 9/11, I was confused, in shock and not really sure of what I felt.  But then I wondered for a long time why the US supported people like Saddam.  I remember Rumsfield shaking hands with the despot.  I remember us supporting Saddam attacking Iran.  I remember the US supporting the "freedom fighters" In Afghanistan with arms (the same guys who formed the core of Al Queda and who were suppressing and treating women like cr*p) and being angry that the Reagan administration did nothing. I remember the US supporting Pinochet and the contras.  

    I guess what I am saying is that my frustration with foreign policy happened way before the Clintons came to town.   I feel there is much hypocrisy everywhere over HRC's votes.  

    My ideal candidate is probably Kuncinich but if anything I have learned as I age is that your ideal does no good at all unless A) they win the office B) they have a Congress and a populace backing them.  Since our country had veered so far to the right in the 80's, I have had to adjust my thinking when it comes to my vote.  With the consolidation of the media and the corporate control of the message, I think we are up against it no matter who gets in.

    I really do not believe a leftist has a chance.  I find it funny when I hear friends (and especially some of their macho husbands) go on a tangent about how "left" Hillary is.  It's speaks volumes to how ignorant of reality many are.  

    I believe we must nudge the country to left again. Bill won in some measure because he was centrist on so much.  I do think Hillary is much more to the left of Bill but has learned a lesson about how to present.  She also saw first hand how little a president can get done with a congress of right wingers.  

    I think blaming Hillary for getting us to the right and to center right is wrong. We got us to the center. By we, I mean the voters. Unless voters are educated, the vote according to knee jerk bytes from the right wing noise machine will continue.

    In order for things to change we need a democratic president and a democratic congress who together will regulate the monopolies and give the news business back their independence.   Maybe then, when people know the truth, they will move again to policies that are good for the people, and not good for serving the rich and powerful.  I believe ALL the democratic candidates including Hillary are strong on the issues of democracy and rights.  

    If stubborn the "my way or the highway" folks give away their votes to a third party or don't vote and give the presidency to a Guiliani type, I will blame them.

    I watched in my district as lazy dems did nothing or had temper tantrums because the only decent dem candidate we had running for Congress in thirty years was not sufficiently anti-war for them.  In the end, because he did not pass the "anti-war enough" litmus test, the seat went to a right wing, Bush rubber stamp, pro war, pre religios right nutcase.  

    Yes, right now I am donating to Edwards and working for him because he is the closest to me on most issues and has a chance.  But if Hillary gets the nod, I will work my arse off to get her elected.  I do not see how any liberal cannot do that.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site