Skip to main content

Update: I made the Rec list for the first time.  Thank you, everyone, for your support.  You need only look as far as these comments to know we are going to work it out.

Update 2:  In the comments, eclecticbrotha recognized that having an anti-Hillary sig line (or anti-Obama sig line) was not conducive to the Great Make Up of 2008.  And he/she changed it on the spot.

If you agree with what I'm saying, and what so many of you are saying, then let me ask you to do the same.  If your sig line is an anti-Democratic candidate sig, change it.  Make it about McCain.  Make it something positive about your preferred candidate.  But I think this will actually go a long way toward healing the rift.

So, good on ya, eclecticbrotha.


I'm ready.

I'm not taking the Hillary sticker off my car.  Not until she's officially out (and even then, you know, fuck it, I just might leave it there.  'Cause I'm still damned proud of the day I went to my caucus and voted for Hillary Clinton for president.)

But I'm ready to say it.  I'm ready to go there.  

I'm ready to vote for Obama.

Yesterday started like any regular day.  Democracy Now! in the morning.  (I found that show very shortly after 9/11, and it was the relief I needed from the drumbeats for war.  I have not stopped listening since.)

Then I shuffled down the hall to my office, since I work at home, and in between working, and playing with my cats (typical blogger, of course), I read the news, the blogs, more news, more blogs, blogs, blogs...

And then I read this great diary by Deoliver47.

I highly recommend it.

Deoliver47 wanted to know Does the D in MyDD stand for Dixiecrat?

And this simple question -- which was not even really the subject of the diary, as the diary addressed, very eloquently, matters of race and the history of the Dixiecrats -- was the moment things started to change for me.

Because it was the first time that I saw myself, an HRC supporter, through the eyes of the Obama supporters.

In the comments there followed a discussion of MyDD and other seemingly pro-Hillary sites.  And the "civil war" between the different 'bots.  (And no, I do not condone name-calling from either side.)

There was a lot of blustering.  But there were a lot of questions, real questions.  You really didn't understand us.  But a lot of you wanted to try to understand.  And better yet, to try to reach out.  

And so I saw comments like this:

Here at DKos, it seems to me that I see a renewed effort to keep the discourse on point.

And this:

I started to delete it before i posted it but i had the whole righteous indignation thing going ... sometimes we get emotional and can't let go... even if it would be for our own good.

And this:

I find myself heading over every day or so to see what's being said. I'll often substitute the word "Obama" for "Hillary" in a diary as a way to hold up a mirror to my own thoughts. Could that be me saying those things if my candidate was losing? ...if I felt backed into a corner?...if I thought the dream was slipping away and I had no power to stop it from happening?

And this:

Have I been guilty of doing what I deplore in the other side?  I've been angry enough...

And this:

I won't excuse the behavior and statements made on MyDD, but the hardcore Obama supporters on DKos can be just as bad.  I used to wonder how Republicans could be so blinded by party loyalty that they could still support Bush after all he's done, but the Obama hero worship around here has convinced me that it could easily happen for Democrats as well.  

And this:

I have been stunned with what I have read over there.

And so I tried to explain myself.  I do not dare to speak for other HRC supporters; I certainly do not want to be lumped in with the worst ones.  But I responded:

This HRC supporter isn't hiding.

First, thank you for your diary.

Second, let me try to answer the question posed about what is going on with MyDD (et al.)

The vitriol against HRC on this site -- and others -- has steadily increased for quite some time.  It's been difficult to have reasonable conversations about the candidates without it rapidly turning into flame wars.

Then there was Alegre's "strike", and a lot of Obama supporters took delight in that.  A comment in defense of HRC was often met with snide remarks like "Aren't you supposed to be striking?" and "Scab!"

Tempers are high all around.  I think a lot of the anti-Obama attitude is more about responding to Obama supporters than to Obama himself.  

It's the meta about the meta about the meta...and it's all pretty stupid.

There are some non-strikers.  I am among them.  But then, I've also come to accept that Obama will be the nominee.  I may not be happy about it, but I'm not going to reject reality just because it's not my first choice.

But I also understand the frustration of my fellow HRC supporters.  They are ridiculed, teased, insulted, chased away...And what might have started as genuine admiration for their preferred candidate has now turned into pure stubborness.  

They don't want to concede to you, the pro-Obama blogosphere.  That's sad, but I think that's what happening here.

I have conceded, in as much as I have accepted that HRC is not going to be the nominee.  That doesn't mean I'll stop defending her when I think it is justified, or that I will stop asking questions about Obama that I think are warranted.

But we are not all as bad as the worst of us.

We are not all as bad as the worst of us.

That is the point, isn't it?  We -- the activisits, the bloggers, the ones who spent hours upon hours at caucuses, who donated money we couldn't afford -- we've become so personally invested in the outcome of this race.  And it is personal.  I'm a woman who, for the first time, could actually see a woman in the White House.  You're damn right it's personal.

But I also know that when I went to my caucus in February, and I watched two very old black men sitting together, smiling, beaming, I choked up because I imagined -- and could appreciate -- they probably felt the way I did.

Of course it's more than that.  It's not just because either candidate is or isn't anything.  Black, female, old, new.  

Let's face it:  If we're here, in this virtual community where we sit around like a bunch of geeks talking about minute details because that's what gets us off, so to speak, then we're probably better read and more informed than the general public.  

We would not otherwise be here every day, fighting over every single word, digging up links, quoting laws and speeches, would we?

Now, two weeks ago I wrote a diary in which I conceded that Hillary would not get the nomination.  I called it A Moment of Silence for the Clinton Campaign.  

I acknowledged that Obama would be the nominee.  And I asked:

Please celebrate your victory with graciousness.  Please understand that for some of us, for many of us, there is a great sadness in realizing that Hillary Clinton will not be our nominee.  She will not be our president.

And I explained that I, at least, and probably other Hillary supporters, do need a moment (or a week or a month) of mourning our loss.  It is a loss for us.  As I'm sure many of you would feel if Obama did not win the nomination.

But I also tried to end on a high note:

I believe the party will come together again.  This country is amazingly resillient, and if we can unite after a long, deadly, bloody Civil War, we can certainly unite after a contentious primary battle.  

But as you celebrate, as you dance on her grave, as you post your diaries of triumph, try to have a little respect for those of us who consider this a loss and a disappointment.

No matter how much hatred you have of Hillary, her campaign, her supporters, and yes, even her husband, it is important to try to be gracious winners.  

I think even Obama himself would agree with that.

Since then, I have seen a change.  It is starting to happen.  Sure, there is vitriol still out there.  There always will be.  But I think, as Hillary supporters start to come to terms with reality, Obama supporters also are coming to terms with reality:

We need each other.

In past weeks, when anyone dares to express a "concern" about Obama, they were typically labeled as "concern trolls."  Or directed to Obama's website.  

But something different happened last night in this conversation.  A commenter actually invited me to explain my concerns:  

If you don't feel that posting your concerns here will be constructive or might result in you getting unnecessarily attacked, maybe you can ask someone like barath, or myself, if you can send us an email with your concerns and we can have a spirited, and hopefully enlightening discussion that way...We're not all vicious. :)

No "fuck off, troll."  An actual invitation to discuss differences.

And so I did (and fully welcome additional responses in the comments here):

My main concern about Obama has nothing to do with domestic or foreign policy differences, or any of the dumb little "gaffes" of the primary season.

What I'm uncomfortable with is, strangely, the very thing that I understand holds so much appeal for so many people.  

Simply, it is his talk of moving beyond partisanship, reaching out across the aisle, working together, compromising, finding common ground, et cetera.

I can appreciate that sentiment.  I think it's noble.  It's idealistic.  It's very Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (which is a movie I love, by the way).


I don't want to compromise.  I don't want to find common ground with the same people who think intelligent design is as legitimate a theory as evolution.

I don't want to come together with the people who think it's okay for pharmacists to refuse to do their jobs because contraception violates their "morals."

It's contentious of me, I know, but I don't want to get along with those people.  I don't want to compromise with them.

They are wrong.  Plain and simple.

And I haven't heard Obama explain how it is possible.

Politics is partisan business.  It's been ugly for most of my lifetime.  The persecution of the Clintons was wretched, and the Republican rule during the Bush years has been no better.

But that doesn't mean I don't want a president in the White House who will say, "On science, there is no compromise.  Take your Intelligent Design bullshit and shove it."

So I don't see how this unifying, post-partisanship thing works.  And I'm not sure it's even what I want.  Would I hate Karl Rove if he were fighting on my side?  I don't know.

Do you know what happened?

There was no hate.  There was no vitriol.  Instead, I received real, thoughtful, kind responses, especially from Bandaloo, Chumley, GMFORD, Dapremonster, and fumie, who even said my concerns were "legitimate."

They acknowledged my concerns.  Validated them, even.  And tried to help me understand them.  (Again, I invite more contributions on this subject in the comments below.)

What a difference.

What a relief.

We are coming together.

The final step, for me, was this morning.  I read kid oakland's diary on the rec list about his experience at the California Democratic Convention.

And kid oakland knows it too.

We are not all as bad as the worst of us.

And we are going to come together.

And we will put the animosity, the anger, and divisiveness behind us.  

We're not Republicans, for crying out loud.  We don't carry 30-year grudges.

We MoveOn.

So here I am, finally, finally able to express my concerns about Obama, have my peace and quiet to mourn the loss of possibility that I saw in Hillary, and have intelligent conversations with people with whom I do not agree without it getting ugly.  (And we've all seen how ugly it can get around here.)


I'm voting for Obama in November.  I'm not drinking Kool Aid just yet, but if you'll keep being patient with me, I just might help myself to a cup before too long.

Originally posted to Kaili Joy Gray on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:23 AM PDT.

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

  •  Tips? Recs? Hugs? (820+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Malacandra, Deep Dark, RichM, Mike, anna, Canadian Reader, Kitty, RobertInWisconsin, Angie in WA State, JWC, TheC, chuck utzman, boydog, DavidW in SF, Chris Andersen, Eidolon, aisling, tmo, TXdem, copithorne, kid oakland, pb, Sean Robertson, fcvaguy, Upper West, Peace JD, decon, Stevie, tundraman, ogre, Valerie, wystler, deben, bluecayuga, ks, leftcoast, gogol, G35Guy, Oregon Bear, el ganador, Anton Sirius, Geenius at Wrok, abarefootboy, lrhoke, MarkC, jimG, Char, TrueBlueMajority, tyelperion, Dave the Wave, scrape, Avila, superfly, Emerson, Wise Woman, sara seattle, littlesky, Debby, Shockwave, byteb, exotrip, ETinKC, mlharges, Jim W, micha1976, sharbutt, martianchronic, DCCyclone, John Campanelli, rightiswrong, eeff, dsb, iconoclastic cat, Ddeele, brn2bwild, acuppajo, cosmicrob, zenbowl, red moon dog, tithonia, Don MacDonald, TampaProgressive, marjo, nomad, theran, AustinCynic, Carnacki, reklemrov, bethcf4p, Walt starr, bumblebums, zeroooo, jancw, bookbear, louisville lisa, Bogleg, dnamj, Vitarai, goObama, mengelhart, bigforkgirl, flaky draky, xtrarich, maggiemae, DWKING, DaveV, housesella, amaliaalfie, Nathaniel Ament Stone, conchita, Mariposa, Athenian, zoopnfunk, anotherCt Dem, megs, understandinglife, ecostar, sja, DAVE DIAL, The 1n Only Leoni, Morague, biscobosco, RabidNation, highacidity, AlyoshaKaramazov, Melquiades, IndigoBlues2, Vermonter, Scoopster, mkfarkus, barath, high5, dgb, javelina, dmsdbo, chester, peraspera, sgilman, amanuensis, kanuk, superba, itskevin, Shaniriver, librarianman, Glinda, kimberlyweldon, bustacap, CyberHippy, navajo, high uintas, CocoaLove, hopeful, dksbook, Brit, wader, jdmorg, socratic, IM, worldwideellen, webweaver, mayan, ekthesy, dangoch, Getreal1246, MCL, emmasnacker, mwk, salsa0000, oldjohnbrown, AZGoob, jzso, Urizen, Eddie in ME, Tracker, Chicago Lulu, 2501, Nancy in LA, elmo, greenheron, commonscribe, rilkas, Seattlite, ccr4nine, alt hitman, john from vermont, churchylafemme, edie, chap, Sychotic1, Catte Nappe, joejoe, snakelass, renaissance grrrl, Jimmy Crackcorn, Lunaris, a gordon, PaulinSF, kalmoth, Liberaljentaps, Green Tea, daveholden, Democratic Hawk, Sophie Amrain, DelicateMonster, ChiGirl88, FlyingToaster, Donna in Rome, JayBat, ybruti, WV Democrat, Soviet Canuckistan, jforman, Kitsap River, Sopiane, SanDiegoDem, TheOrchid, kmbo, valadon, Twilight Jack, eve, eigenman, Wizznilliam, howardpark, pat208, MNPundit, schroeder, TexMex, sawgrass727, Gowrie Gal, ironpath, weelzup, rapala, joanneleon, Into The Woods, Bandaloo, jacortina, chumley, AngryOne, saodl, radarlady, Progressive Witness, Strat, Skaje, kingubu, Ckntfld, blueyedace2, Sparkalepsy, JanetT in MD, Pym, djscincy, PBen, Philoguy, Michigan Transplant, someone else, Jersey Girl, Melody Townsel, Luetta, Kdoug, dynamicstand, Brooke In Seattle, dj angst, wildcat6, Praxxus, devadatta, kldave, Claybow, daryln, Penman, IL dac, majcmb1, sallyfallschurch, hws, pasadena beggar, CarolynC967, Buffalo Girl, LABobsterofAnaheim, Inland, doug in texas, sheddhead, Little Lulu, lauramp, blue jersey mom, ivorybill, babatunde, Dapremonster, Cyber Kat, exmearden, Sharon Jumper, nevyn, Rydra Wrong, WisePiper, The Raven, ajewella, JavaManny, sodalis, sbdenmon, Tuba Les, Tex Kosmaniac Dem Lady, oibme, Shiborg, LisainNYC, ZinZen, Erevann, op, Brubs, timba, Pacific NW Mark, thiroy, Land of Enchantment, golden star, forbodyandmind, curiousted, jiordan, Uthaclena, Audio Guy, occams hatchet, elliott, Tismo70, refinish69, Jennifer Clare, gwilson, Icy, Debbie in ME, Fasaha, Sura 109, cybersaur, Activist Girl, bluerock, 417els, Crestingwave, bobnchitown, OH 09 Dem, Califlander, 4thepeople, mr crabby, Yellow Canary, seefleur, Dvalkure, victoria2dc, koNko, Hear Our Voices, Samwoman, Audri, redstatedemocrat, cotasm, taversoe, johnsonwax, Tiny Wurlitzer, Marcus Tullius, charlestown dem, tecampbell, MJ via Chicago, StrayCat, PomperaFirpa, aldpol, nilocjin, DumpDoolittle, NearlyNormal, BalkanID, CTLiberal, bleeding heart, Potus2020, smartballs, ER Doc, Andy30tx, MBNYC, txdemfem, foxsmartchicago, AnnieS, nicejoest, spotDawa, zeke7237, buckeye blue, cynique71, Grant Caesar Peters, Stripe, frankzappatista, ethanthej, MadMs, DCNana, muffie, bstotts, coolsub, christomento, blueintheface, miller415, Oothoon, sasher, Quicklund, illusionmajik, Pandoras Box, squelch, embra, Shesk, Tamar, Sapere aude, jjs98, factbased, karenz, pgm 01, littleHalo, Feeling Blue, recusancy, bvljac, donnamarie, khereva, auntialias, SweetAuntFanny, Loudoun County Dem, oklacoma dem, oscarsmom, Bob Guyer, Femlaw, keuka77, dmh44, moodyinsavannah, godislove, jarotra, leema, SemDem, offgrid, atlliberal, crankyinNYC, gloriana, EdSF, dallasdave, threegoal, drbloodaxe, Alfonso Nevarez, ebilm, dotcommodity, lynmar, la urracca, yowsta, kath25, Crisitunity, maven butterfly, Matt Z, flumptytail, greenchiledem, ezdidit, ballerina X, Uncle Moji, mystic, BluTXMom, holder, BetterTogether, gatorbot, malharden, Seneca Doane, Kentucky Kid, GMFORD, Ultraviolet Catastrophe, BlueInKansas, geejay, TheCorkBoard, Junglered1, gchaucer2, sqz23, GeorgeXVIII, echohotel330, madgranny, cal in cali, FXDCI, oxon, roycej, Empower Ink, bluesweatergirl, chicago minx, gizmo59, BustaVessel, trivium, sand805, MKinTN, kafkananda, MissyH, Dem in the heart of Texas, discocarp, chilipepper, KingGeorgetheTurd, edg, AnnieJo, Mad Kossack, berkeleymike, TX Freethinker, Pav, Blue Orb, ShadowSD, DraftChickenHawks, oolali, Blackacre, dotster, juancito, zerone, canoeist, shadetree mortician, Faheyman, Involuntary Exile, NewDealer, bythesea, saradoxical, pepper mint, jfarelli, Fe Bongolan, sploch, whirled peas, loree920, Pragmaticus, thetadelta, MiniGram, Akonitum, Judgment at Nuremberg, beltane, LarsThorwald, war is peace, Lujane, Challenger, CenFlaDem, pamelabrown, davekro, NMLib, slowthought, pickandshovel, landogriffin, pooh74, ankey, noddem, Gemina13, Drewid, jalenth, bubbalie 517, Hawkjt, pcags, RubyGal, tsqd, GWboosebag, Blogvirgin, MalachiConstant, jazzyjay, GoracleFan, omegajew, dogheaven, allie123, SteamPunkX, StrangeAnimals, Spidey47, Guadalupe59, slathe, Robobagpiper, OH NOT AGAIN, briefer, angelino, toom, Leo in NJ, Fight or Die, fayea, TennesseeGurl, maxcat06, mamamarti, JBL55, oldliberal, jedley, ryangoesboom, FudgeFighter, sjbob, 1BQ, tabby, Bule Betawi, artmartin, ksduck, Mr Tentacle, Fonsia, christine20, BennyToothpick, Texanomaly, Travis Stark, aufklaerer, tbird, ceebee7, Tim in CA, traviscs2k, writerswrite, juca, BoiseBlue, rockwilder, wovenbirds, sunhaws, Shhs, clambake, cantelow, Michael James, Moonwood, DemocraticOz, be the change you seek, Stranded Wind, Helenann, citicenx, futurebird, pvlb, WiseFerret, susanWAstate, Fineena, EvilAsh, slaney black, ScientistSteve, nwgates, FrugalGranny, smash artist, smckenzie23, jacurtz, history geek, Danny Daemonic, satori21, SciVo, vertexoflife, kat68, mrchumchum, shunpike, Deltones, Hopeful Monster, Jenai, insects8mybrain, azure, publiusrx, jorgepoemas, Pjeve, desertlover, ahania, newyorknewyork, asherrem, Bindle, oak510, missakat, T B J, smartheart, ancblu, el bandito, Kim from Pgh PA, Particle Noun, llamaRCA, BDsTrinity, Jentutsy, followyourbliss, avava, elziax, bookcat, olive and black, Ivey476, Aqualad08, Peace4All, verily, jarnikles, Maine Impact, owlies, dawnt, scotths, sarashina nikki, The Liberty of Meat, brooklynliberal, sab39, yoloensis, Alise, MrChris, Hope Monger, soms, jemjo, bourgeoisie, autolyse, Hyperborean, Robin in PA, MotherGinSling, IT Pimp, doctorgirl, obscuresportsquarterly, rdxtion, COwoman, allep10, Deoliver47, paintitblue, snarkyspice, denis diderot, europeandem, jackrabbitears, Shelley99, calalaila2008, exregis, synductive99, OffHerRocker, majhula, Munchkn, marcirish, yuppers, wasthatrhetoric, Eyz, dalfireplug, nomass, wasteland, Sinocco, BlueMama, XNeeOhCon, Losty, SnowItch, RadioGirl, Petey2, edgeways, stevenwag, amnesiaproletariat, aberghuis, notksanymore, goldbirdy, PalGirl2008, prsuasv, newdealdem, vadasz, acxtodd, sn, eclecticbrotha, RoCali, In search, Lib Noodle, camipco, diddosMN, Barfo, drumlanrig, archidem, Little Flower, Katie71, ILean Left, DaNang65, D Wreck, Denversk, louisev, haremoor, Sedi, lizabroad, jwhipple, fernan47, Mokumi, Nonconformist, reesespcs, Mardarkin, andrewjthomas, SheaG, disconap, jfromga, Snickers77, Integrity is fundamental, mcnamarm, Bene Gesserit1, mnleger, P Mikkelsen, Kelly of PA, Moo Means Hello, MizKit, Sarahsaturn, Livvy5, karma13612, schnecke21, carpediva, Geronimoot, gukegang, orangeuglad, winsock, hamsisu, davespicer, LSBuchanan, pinguin, The Honorable Freddie, voila, zenden, Tricky, daryl89, Edge PA, Dichro Gal, choosinghope, Dorey, Emalene, Abie, Silence Nogood, Critical Dune, citisven, TenthMuse, Qtrubb Bull, Kid From Vegas, physic, America Jones, johnnysapphire, warriorpoet, yeb, ljfxiki, Ambboogie, This, gigglinggirl, babykos, menthol, ericvsthem, ruscle, Julia C, ChaosSpiral, bhoov, MT in Austin, ProgressiveDL, ETF, Queen Alice, dtruth, Quilter, readergirl, Terrier Mix, marypickford, CalGal47, berkelbees, choochmac, sulthernao, CaliforniaTexan, Wyote, goreckm, brezinst, MarthaMyDear, marybluesky, amerikkalainen
    •  All of the above (14+ / 0-)

      Northern Illinois University: Kate's and Matt's parents meet, 1976

      by chicago minx on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:26:23 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What Chicago Minx said (10+ / 0-)

        It's diaries like this that keep me coming back to DKos even after I leave shaking my head muttering to myself "When did rational discourse go out of style?"

        Suburbia is where the developer bulldozes out the trees, then names the streets after them. -Bill Vaughan

        by Blue Orb on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:01:01 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I am still missing something (14+ / 0-)

          when is it ok to allow white women to vote for a woman because they are women and when black people do the same there is something wrong with that? He becomes unelectable, black people don't get it, are just Jesse Jackson types,  and all the other racist stuff that has been dug up about this guy... I don't even care that much about Obama as I care about people taking over the Democratic Party from the DLC and corporate lobbyists.  but the racism from white Clinton supporters has been really hard to swallow.  I was quite glad to see so many say they were planning to leave as I don't like racism or sexism.

          I thought the "bitch is the new black" to be pathetic and the SNL skit of a black faced white man that brings us back to the days of minstrals... is this the new Democratic Party... no it isn't.  it is Clinton supporters who are being racist and sexist.

          I am sorry but I find this all pathetic. Trying to make up to Clinton supporters by agreeing that Obama people were bad for pointing out all this racism and sexism as being divisive.  No that is not the compromise.  The compromise is Clinton people working through their racism and sexism and then apologizing to the Obama supporters who have always supported minorities and women as a priority in our quest for peace and justice.  

          It is not our fault that we are against the War in Iraq and stand up against it. The facts were always there.  It is not our fault that we are against racism and stand up when we see it. The attacks on Obama for his pastor with lines like you can't pick your relatives but you can pick your (read black) pastor are objectionble because they divide on race. it is not our fault that we are against sexism and stand up against it. Hillary's supporters should know that standing up against the war is not sexist just because we point out the obvious, which is she voted for Shock and Awe because she thought men would think she was not manly enough if she wasn't for the war... that is sexism being used to further the cause.   No... we have nothing to apologize for.  we have stood up to this assault and should be proud of ourselves.

          Is Hillary a monster? No that was wrong and Powers was fired.  But are Hillary's supporters using race ans sex to divide us.  yes. and it should stop.  

          don't link to MSM; support your alternative grassroots media by linking to them

          by john from vermont on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:39:58 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Two Parter (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sara seattle

            After Tina Fey gave the "bitch is the new black" line, Tracy Morgan, a fellow SNL alumni and co-star on 30 Rock with Tina, came on SNL and said "black is the new president, bitch". Methinks they were working in concert.

          •  Understood, but you miss the point (14+ / 0-)

            Let's take the poll numbers that keep saying 28% of Clinton supporters would vote McCain should Obama get the nomination. Think of the 72% that would still support Obama should Hillary lose. I firmly believe the venom you mention is being spewed from the 28%, not the 72%. I want that 72% to stay with us and not drive them away with our divisive fighting. Let the 28% race-bait all they want, the rest of us need to join forces and heed the call of my sig. There are more of us who want to end the war, fix the economy, solve the housing crisis and have a mature conversation about race than there are on the other side. It is time we moved past the bitterness of our words so that we can have a conversation about fixing this government of ours. None of us can take back what we've said, but just as in a marriage we need to see past what ails us in order strengthen what unites us. Do not let the lunatic fringe blind you to that.

            Fight the real enemy....the neo-cons!

            by eclecticbrotha on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:13:40 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Cognitive dissonance (0+ / 0-)

            I read an article today dealing with this primary and the behavior of the various campaigns and their supporters.

            It seems that we as humans are very good at self justifying our actions basically by "demonizing" the other side.

            It doesn't just apply to the Clinton supporters but to some of the more ardent Obama supporters here who will say things that normally they wouldn't dream of.

            Quite a good article and reasonably short. Located here

            A village in Texas is missing its idiot. Will they please come get him?

            by dotsright on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:11:07 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Ooops (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sara seattle

              Proper link is here.

              A village in Texas is missing its idiot. Will they please come get him?

              by dotsright on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:16:55 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Except for a few over the top (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                dotsright, shunpike

                slurs towards Hillary, I am still wondering why there is such a disconnect in describing Obama supporters as being anything but progressive supporters of minorities civil rights and women's rights.  To be for Obama does not mean you are a  monster Hillary hater.  It is Hillary and her supporters that are making the racist arguments that Obama is unelectable because he is black. If they believe that, then I welcome their departure from this site. Obama people of all people know not to say that Hillary is not electable because she is a woman. Most Obama supporters on this blog are feminists and support many progressive women for elected office. They think women can add a special dimension to many of the issues facing America in many cases.  So can African Americans too.  

                But when you have a women and an African American as the top two candidates it makes no sense to attack one as unelectable because of their race or gender.  That is what is missing in this conversation.  That is what many of the Clinton supporters are projecting and that I am afraid is racist and those attempts to divide us because of race are terrible. We support strong progressive women for elected office.  We shouldn't however support people who are Republican-lite like Lieberman when it comes to war in Iraq. Those are issues to stand up on whether one is a woman or African American.

                don't link to MSM; support your alternative grassroots media by linking to them

                by john from vermont on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:19:18 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  I would disagree slightly. (5+ / 0-)

        It's all about getting this country back on track. Winning isn't the most important thing. Winning in November is a means to an end and it's vital but it's not the most important thing.

        The true Ben Franklin quote from Poor Richard's Almanack is "Sell not virtue to purchase wealth, nor Liberty to purchase power."

        by Andy30tx on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:44:15 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The Battle Doesn't Stop on 1/20/09 (7+ / 0-)

          We're electing a President, not a Saviour; they have strengths, and they have weaknesses! It's up to us to push and pull them toward progressive directions when they balk. Government OF THE PEOPLE right?

          "You measure a democracy by the freedom it gives its dissidents, not the freedom it gives its assimilated conformists." -Abbie Hoffman

          by Uthaclena on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:00:19 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Absolutely! 1/20/09 is the start of the struggle (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            pgm 01, auntialias, Angry Mouse

            to wrest control of the country out of the hands of plutocrats and warmongers.

            Election day is just election day.  Otherwise, the election of '06 would have fixed everything.  We see now how little difference that made.

            Bush repealed Godwin's Law with a Signing Statement.

            by Mad Kossack on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:58:15 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  There is no doubt (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sara seattle

            that President Obama will take a position on something that will piss off the majority of Kossacks.  One of the reasons I support him is that he actually listens to and thinks about other points of view which means we might be able to get him to come around to our position.  It will be a big change from Bush and his completely idiotic inability to change.

            I am worried.  Global Warming is something that we need to address but given our current economic situation it makes even harder to address the problem. There are no easy answers but again, Obama has proven that he practices straight talk unlike McCain who doesn't seem to believe in anything anymore.  This mess started decades ago and it will take hard work to clean it up, but we can do it.  I think that it has become evident to a majority of Americans that we are on the wrong path, both Obama and Clinton are taking slightly different paths to the same goal while McCain doesn't see any problem with the current path. Democrats need to win this election.

          •  Obama is not going to save us (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sara seattle, Uthaclena, auntialias

            I do think, however, that he will go along way toward helping our country heal and we can save ourselves.

            "Throughout the world sounds one long cry from the heart of the artist: Give me the chance to do my very best."--Babette's Feast

            by lascaux on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 06:50:27 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Thank you. (34+ / 0-)

      I really enjoyed reading your diary.  I understand how this primary war has made it harder for Hillary supporters to come join us, and I hope soon that we can put the fighting behind us and start to come back together.

      I think there has been provocation and vitriol from both sides, and both Obama and Clinton supporters need to work within their own groups to tone down the rhetoric so that we can unify when this is all over.

      Full Disclosure: I'm an Obama Supporter

      by smash artist on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:29:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  yup (26+ / 0-)

      We are not all as bad as the worst of us.

      Great and gracious diary. I hope more follow your example and Kid's and that one about dixiecrats.  

      •  Some of us who love Hillary never left (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sara seattle, Debby, mayan, Wufacta

        just didn't comment much anymore.
        How ever I will maintain what I have said before.
        Far too many of the "worst of us" are not really us but Republicans and their lameo "indepentants" (hate McCainers).
        Came here to cange the discourse for the rest of us into something very nasty.

        I was shocked when day after day, many folks here would rather hug a Republican than a Democrat when all the time I said......
        Repubicans who hate McCain will go back their vote can not be counted on. While Hillary supporters always were saying they woul vote for Obama if he was the nominee.
        Only Republicans would vote for MacCain

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

        by TexMex on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:28:37 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Welcome to the Reunification Brother/Sister (32+ / 0-)

      Me against my brother.
      Me and my brother against our cousins.
      Me, my brother and my cousins against the world.
      --Bedouin saying.


      The Rev. SPX
      First Church of Democracy United, Deconstructed

      You're my kind of stupid.

      by SteamPunkX on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:34:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Gotta love the Bedouin (6+ / 0-)

        "We're trapped in the belly of this horrible machine, and the machine is bleeding to death."

        by Grass on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:46:12 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  A song on a similar theme... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        SteamPunkX Sid Kipper, entitled Hate Story...

        The underest dog is just as good as I am, and I'm just as good as the toppest dog. - Jimmie Rodgers

        by GreenCA on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:16:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  reminds me of an overheard conversation (7+ / 0-)

        from years ago:

        My "italian yankee" friend called his family in Detroit on Christmas Eve.  His brother answered the phone and they immediately started yelling at each other.  The language was atrocious, finally he said "Put pops on the phone, you stupid shithead, I'm tired of talking to you!"

        Then with the father on the phone, the same thing. Yelling and screaming and lots of foul language. Then finally "You're so full of shit, I can smell it all the way down here. Put ma on the phone, you senile old fart."

        Then there was much discussion with the mother about what a bunch of losers and wastes-of-oxygen all the family members were. This went on for a while and sank into the same screaming and name-calling and finally he says good-bye to everyone and hangs up.

        Then, with tears in his eyes he says

        "Damn, I miss them so much. How will I get through Christmas without them?"

        The holiday was saved through the judicious application of many bottles of homemade blueberry wine.

        Bush repealed Godwin's Law with a Signing Statement.

        by Mad Kossack on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:06:32 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I hope you don't mind (20+ / 0-)

      but it was my great pleasure to add "Recommended" to your tags.  Congratulations.

      My faith in the Constitution is whole, it is complete, it is total. Barbara Jordan 1974

      by gchaucer2 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:40:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Deoliver47's diary was a highpoint in (24+ / 0-)

      the debate on race and politics... and your arrival in that thread and the reception you received was reassuring.

    •  Tipped and rec'd and definitely time (17+ / 0-)

      for a big hug


      The most outrageous lies that can be invented will find believers if a man only tells them with all his might. - Mark Twain

      by mkfarkus on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:52:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  But do people flip the other way? (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sara seattle, mayan

        I flipped from Hillary to Obama. We hear these reports all the time of other flippers.  But what about the other way? Are there those out there who want to leave Obama and gravitate toward Hillary?  If there are, why do we never hear from them? Are they over at MyDD, a place I rarely visit?

    •  I still have "Kerry/Edwards '04 on mine (21+ / 0-)

      and I wear it with pride. There is no shame in supporting your candidate of choice. The shame for all of us, I believe, is in allowing the bitter partisanship that has dominated Washington circles for so long to trickle down to where it infects the rest of us.

      As an Obama supporter, I personally have been on the defensive ever since the words "Let's get real" were uttered on the campaign trail. We have been trying to defend ourselves ever since, and I confess that a lot of us turned that defense into an all-out offensive to fight back as hard as we could against unfair descriptions as naive, cultish, uninformed etc etc. Being a man of color - and an ordained baptist minister - I have bristled at the attacks on Rev. Wright and the nonchalant way even his defenders have accepted parts of the narrative against him while articulating their responses. It has not been a pretty sight to read many of the responses that have occurred since the kitchen sink was thrown.

      If you search my responses you will quickly see that I have responded aggressively to quite a few comments in defense of Senator Obama. I feel that we should fight as hard as possible to get him elected if we expect him to fight for us once he's in Washington. Having said that, I am not fool enough to reject an olive branch when its offered. I am of the same mind of media goddess Rachel Maddow: we need to wrap this up in order to collectively train our sights on one John Sidney McCain III. While I will continue to respond forcefully to any attempts by the race-baiters to derail our debate with their vile talking points and lack of reasoning skills, I will do my part to temper my comments in the future.

      Welcome to the discourse. May we always keep it civil.

      I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning. It smells like...Hillary

      by eclecticbrotha on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:53:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  common ground with creationists ? (25+ / 0-)

      Hi Angry Mouse (cool nick),

      I think even that may be possible (and I am dyed-in-the-wool atheist). It is not about foul compromises, like 'the earth is 4 billion years old' - 'no, the earth is 6000 years old' and so it must be 2 billions and 3000 years old:-)

      I would suspect that it is more about trying to understand what the creationists concern is, which I suspect to be things like 'where is our dignity, if we are just apes' and 'I really need a sense in life, and my dogmas deliver that for me'. The concerns are valid, even though the answers are nutty. So the common ground would be in adressing those concerns and not mention the nuttiness outright:-)

      •  environmental issues? (21+ / 0-)

        It doesn't matter how you think the Earth got here, we can all agree we need to take care of it.

      •  Bingo n/t (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Valerie, Sedi

        I was wise enough to never grow up while fooling most people into believing I had. - Margaret Mead

        by fayea on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:17:01 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  A thousand rec's for this comment!! (9+ / 0-)

        So often people see crass "compromise" as the only alternative to duking it out.  

        The best negotiators all know that if you keep digging down through layer upon layer of concerns on both sides of an argument, you will eventually find the place where the concerns intersect -- and it is almost always on these "big picture" issues of our most deep-rooted aspirations as human beings: respect, relationships, self-esteem, dignity, etc.

        Yes We Can! Because this time MUST be different.

        by NWTerriD on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:45:28 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

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

        We don't know if the world began ~6000 years ago or 13.7 billion years ago, we were not there at that particular time.  All we have to go on is the signs.

        Scientifically in every way we can measure, it just looks like it began 13.7 billion years ago.

        If you want to believe it started ~6,000 years ago great that is OK.

        Just don't deny that scientifically it looks like it began 13.7 billion years ago unless you have scientific proof and I won't deny that God could have made the world ~6,000 years ago and for some reason know only to him (you say he does after all work in mysterious ways) he made it scientifically look like it started 13.7 billion years ago.  

        But science produces things that happen to work very well, especially all that military stuff you like, so we need to teach science in our schools.  

        People who wear flag lapel pins should be called: bling-warriors.

        by NCJim on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:31:27 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  we do not know whether we will have 4 aces (0+ / 0-)

          everytime we play poker. But we certainly would do well not to rely on it. Of course we could all be just a computer simulation of some higher entities. It is just exceedingly improbable. Same goes for the 6000 years and assorted theories (He put the fossil evidence there to mislead the scientists). If you do not mind piling up the improbabilities beyond imagination you can indeed embrace this idea of a 6000 year old creation.

      •  Angry Mouse -- it's not caving to the other side (8+ / 0-)

        I'm in Illinois and I've followed Obama's career very closely.  He does not cave to the other side, or just "compromise".  He listens, with a deep breadth of understanding to tune into where the other side is coming from and -- here's the important part:  he crafts legislation that is basically progressive (if not totally pure, but let's be reasonable) and gets the other side to see how they will benefit.  It's an immensely different thing that he does -- it's why I know he will be a great president.  

        He was able to take the issue of videotaping interrogations; and by the time the legislation was passed, the law and order Republicans understood that it was in their best interests as well.  Which is why I believe he will be more effective than Hillary at actually getting legislation passed that we like.  And yes -- if the "opposition" has a point, he'll incorporate it.  He believes fervently in family responsibility, for example.  He also knows how impossible it is for some families to do enough for their children to get them started in school.  So he wants early childhood education programs that make up the deficit and help the parents learn as well.  You see, incorporating a "conservative" frame into something we all want to achieve.  

        Hillary is extremely tough and resilient at fighting against people, but I'm afraid not as effective at fighting for policies.  And not very effective at convincing people of what is in their best interests.  This is where Obama's rhetorical and diplomatic gifts are so important.  

        I did not mean to be critical of Hillary, but wanted to show you how I reached my decision to support Barack Obama.  

        Hope this helps.  You certainly have helped me today.  

      •  As an old fundie... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        I often cringe when I think about this issue. It's not so much that Obama wants us to smash two polarizing thoughts together into some bastardized policy. I don't think for a second he will give an inch in terms of the genuine substance of an issue.

        What he will do is to stop characterizing issues in a caricatured fashion. Ironically, Obama's message is very much like that of this diary, only it has a broader scope. We are indeed not all like the worst of us. That extends beyond intraparty differences to include interparty differences.

        Time lost is always a disadvantage that is bound in some way to weaken him who loses it. -Clausewitz

        by Malachite on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:57:44 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  In response to your concerns (12+ / 0-)

      I think those misgivings would be dead on the money if 45% or 50% of the population thought that intelligent design is as legitimate a theory as evolution, or that it's okay for pharmacists to refuse to do their jobs because contraception violates their morals.

      But it's closer to 30%.  Obama's point all along, strategically, has been to unite the other 70% into an overwhelming majority, making that 30% irrelevant.  This is a particularly compelling argument given the timing of a general electorate that supports better health care, a fairer economy, and ending the war in Iraq by 2-1.

      Do we really want another YEAR of trying to explain to everyone why the Democratic nominee voted to authorize the Iraq war before they were against it?

      by ShadowSD on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:58:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  or even more than that (10+ / 0-)

        I don't have a problem with allowing a pharmacist whose moral values prevent her from filling, say, a Viagra prescription to hand that prescription off to the pharmacist next to her. But if she's the only one there, I think she needs to suck it up and fill that prescription.

        It's all about respect, and putting yourself in the other person's shoes even if you don't agree with everything from their perspective.

        •  This could continue the OT (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          but your example of 'viagra' is silly.  You know that it is the morning after pill or birth control pills.  These pharmaceutical refusals effect women.  So your argument is just unrealistic.  And the person that should take some serious considerations or perspective is the person who knowingly studies to be a pharmacist, knowing they will not perform all the duties.

          •  what's your problem (0+ / 0-)

            if the prescription gets filled? It sounds to me like you're saying that people who feel this way just shouldn't become pharmacists, and I'm sorry but I think that's an unreasonably extreme position..provided that the customer is served and isn't inconvenienced.

            •  When pharmacists can choose to deny meds (0+ / 0-)

              ... on the basis of "personal beliefs," it means that they all become vulnerable to pressure to conform to those beliefs -- or pay a price.

              If every pharmacy must fill the prescription for birth control pills, or the morning after pill, then none are vulnerable to economic pressure.  If some can opt out, the ones who don't will face boycotts, pickets, and (quite possibly, given what we see at clinics that perform abortions) overt violence directed toward the pharmacies and their employees.

              •  you misunderstand my point (0+ / 0-)

                I have no problem with a particular pharmacist in a pharmacy handing off a prescription to another pharmacist for filling. This could happen behind the counter without the customer even having to know about it.

                I DO have a problem with a pharmacy refusing to fill certain types of prescriptions, or a pharmacist refusing to fill a prescription when another pharmacist isn't right there and able to do it.

      •  In support of those concerns (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sean oliver

        those misgivings would be dead on the money if 45% or 50% of the population thought that intelligent design is as legitimate a theory as evolution ... But it's closer to 30%

        I wish that were true but I suspect it's not. My brother gives credence to ID, and some otherwise intelligent people I interact with on a computer nerd forum either support ID or say they cannot disavow it because it might be true. American faces a major crisis of ignorance and superstition. If we don't acknowledge and address this, we're going to be an also-ran on the world stage.

        •  A major crisis, yes (0+ / 0-)

          Half the population, no.  Half the population over forty or forty-five, OK, but barely a quarter of voters under forty still think that way.  Times are changing; a Harris Poll recently showed 42% of Americans were at least somewhat doubtful of the existence of God, and the numbers were noticeably higher among the younger demographics.  

          Do we really want another YEAR of trying to explain to everyone why the Democratic nominee voted to authorize the Iraq war before they were against it?

          by ShadowSD on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:53:30 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Americans (0+ / 0-)

          seem to equate "Freedom of Speech" to mean "I have the right to believe anything I want no matter how stupid and crazy - especially if it's stupid and crazy and pisses alot of other people off!"

          That's why so many Americans say they "believe in" highly improbable things like bizarre 9/11 conspiracies, "Gun Rights", RightWing Xristianity and "Intelligent Design".

          It's as if they believe in these things not because they make sense or are obviously good things, but because they are somehow obligated by the Bill Of Rights to have goofy, wacko ideas. Otherwise, they wouldn't be excersising their right to free speech!

      •  Yes - our values are majority values! (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Throughout these primaries, I've been a Democrat who felt perfectly fine about all of the major candidates. I've supported Obama since January, but have not had a moment of doubt about voting for HRC in November if she turned out to be our candidate. (Yes, whoever it is, it's our candidate.) On Super Tuesday, I worked a streetcorner in downtown Brooklyn for Obama, and got along perfectly well with the Clinton guys who were working the same corner. And, since then, I've found the bickering around here (and at MyDD, of course) generally silly, and sometimes sickening.

        The deciding issue for me has been this: Obama's so-called "post-partisanship" is not a call for compromise with the forces of Republican reaction. This is so whether the issue is creationism, or pharmacists, or the war, or the constitution, or health care, or or or... I believe that his approach is based on a recognition that, on these and many other issues, our values are majority values. Obama's strategy -- and I hope he can pull it off -- is to go over the heads of the corrupt political class in D.C., who get it wrong virtually every time due to the (genuine) partisanship of the Republicans and the (bogus) partisanship of the D.C. Dems. Obama intends to take it to the country, defeating the inaction born of this corrupt partisanship with action based on our country's basically progressive values. By mobilizing popular support for majority/progressive positions, particularly on war, Constitution, and health care, the partisans of the right will be isolated. The Democratic majorities in both houses (please...) will stick together, and Republicans from purple states (at least, those who care about being reelected) will drift across the aisle, just as so many intimidated Democrats have done over the past 28 years.

        As I said, I hope he can pull it off. And if he can't, we won't be any worse off than with a more 'traditional' Dem who talks from the left but governs from the right.

        Though I like (my) Senator Clinton, I have always feared that she is too much a part of that failed system, and that the fairly strong partisanship of her speeches and policy papers turns into compromise (i.e. capitulation) when push comes to shove. That's what happened with health care in '93, with the Iraq war in '03, and with Kyl-Lieberman in '07.

        I'm hoping for more this time. And that's why all of the talk about "change" may sound a bit cliche, but it's profoundly effective.

    •  I've got your hugs here . . . (4+ / 0-)

      I loved all three of our finalists: Edwards, Obama and Hillary. She is a remarkable woman regardless of the meta and I will always watch her political career with great enthusiasm...


    •  Sooooo..... (21+ / 0-)

      You officially brought a tear to my eye.  Her I am, all 275 lbs of big, brown man, tearing up at work.  I'm so glad we could help.  Welcome aboard.

      May this find you in good health and good spirits, and if you're lucky, under the influence of the latter.

      by Dapremonster on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:01:46 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Angry Mouse... (16+ / 0-)

      you have always had my respect and admiration.  I'm sure it has not been easy going here but you have conducted yourself with dignity and discourse that has ALWAYS been a pleasure for me to read.  

      Those qualities shine forth in your current diary.  I have nothing but props for your fierce respect and support for HRC (although I do not share them) and I welcome your rationale in deciding to step over the creek bed to the other side.  (That we even talk about "sides" brings back PTSD from first grade but never no seems to be the dominant paradigm.)

      I'm glad you didn't join the "strike" and have stuck it out here.  I look forward to more of your writings and insight in the future.  


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

      by mayan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:09:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  All of the above (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Valerie, mayan, avava

      {{{Angry Mouse}}}

      God is in your spare change, your job is giving it to strangers. - Billy Jonas

      by Audri on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:22:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Good on you (6+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tmo, javelina, mayan, auntialias, GWboosebag, Sedi

      I had suggested that a lot of Hillary supporters may want to get off-line, do some quiet reflection and thinking, and read at least one of Obama's books, poke around his web site and look at his position papers, and read more about his bio and experience.

      This is essentially what I did when my first choice in 2004 crashed & burned in the primaries (and it happened virtually overnight). I came to find much to like about our 2004 nominee.

      Everyone has to find his or her own way.

      Thank you for this gracious and thoughtful diary.

      •  Ah, but it was being online that won me over... (5+ / 0-)

        the source of my angst was also my panacea.

        •  Good on ya, Angry Mouse... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          auntialias, Angry Mouse

          You stand out in my memory as one of the few partisans (on either side) who would engage in a good-faith conversation about the candidates' merits. You were concerned about the "movement" you'd heard so much about, and wanted to define it.

          Rather than discounting Obama supporters as cultists (which seemed to concern you at some level), you actually asked "where's the beef."

          More importantly, you engaged in a conversation about the substance of Obama supporters' enthusiasm, rather than discounting it as some sort of semi-religious fervor.

          I'd like to note that of all my (rather limited) interactions here, our discussions were among my favorites. I like snark as much as the next one, but there's nothing as cathartic as a civil discourse, after which we can all walk away happy. You and Trix are the Gold Standard for that sort of interaction, and for that, I thank you.

      •  I had to break from here to come to Obama (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sara seattle, auntialias

        It was impossible to separate him from some of his more "enthusiastic" supporters here.

        As an Edwards Democrat I didn't have a dog in this hunt and was weighing both candidates. At the time I made the switch the majority of booing was coming from Obama supporters, I know that later it got uglier on both sides.

        I stepped away and started really looking at the potential for an Obama candidacy and chose. But, Hillary and her supporters have stayed in my heart. They are just as invested as Obama people and we need them.

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

        by high uintas on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:47:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Great diary (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Valerie, mayan, Angry Mouse

      See you in November.

    •  Thanks, Angry Mouse (8+ / 0-)

      for your articulate diary.

      I have been one who has bemoaned the vitriol. A few months ago, I was indeed cheering and proud of the excellent slate of Democratic candidates.

      I'm still proud of both of the remaining candidates, although I ended up voting for Obama in WI's primary. But after 8 years of hatred from this administration, I'm not going to add to it by stepping up the vitriol on my own Dem candidates. Let the republics spend their time and money doing that.

      However, my conservative friends & family (yep, we all got 'em) ask, "What's wrong with you Dems? You're all fighting. We don't like them, but you've got some decent candidates. How come you're picking them apart?"

      I just smile and say they're still great candidates, I'd be proud to vote for either of them and Dems talk too much (to make them smile).

      My point: we don't know what we look like to the outside world.

      Oh, and a {{{ hug }}} for you!

      "You can count on Americans to do the right thing after they've tried everything else." -- Winston Churchill

      by bleeding heart on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:40:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Wonderful diary. (12+ / 0-)

      Regarding the issue of "compromise:"

      It is my opinion that finding common ground with our friends on the other side of the aisle does not, necessarily, translate to "selling out."  I don't even think it translates to "compromise."

      I believe strongly that most people in our great nation are fairly moderate in their political outlook--even if they don't recognize themselves as moderate.  Removing from the equation the extremists (flat-earthers and creationists, for example), on the whole we are moving, as a people, toward the political left.  I think, though, it's important to realize that most people aren't aware that they are "moderate" or even "left-leaning" and would balk at the notion that they are less than wholly Republican.  What I'm getting at, I guess, is that many, many people mischaracterize their politics as "conservative."  That is beginning to change, but I believe that it takes a voice of reason to allow people to awaken to their own progressiveness on their own terms.

      The stagnation in our government is born not only of an unwillingness to compromise but also with an unwillingness (or inability) to recognize and foster political awakening in the people.  Barack inspires people previously disenchanted with the system to learn how it all works.  As people learn, they clarify their own views and they become engaged.  They begin to call for reform, for change, for an end to stagnant politics.

      I believe that it is this awakening that will enable Obama to lead a progressive agenda in office.  I don't think for a moment that Obama will compromise certain key values--for example, I don't believe Obama will suddenly find "common ground" with creationists that leads to creation-curriculum in our public schools.  I believe Obama is more progressive than many give him credit.

      But more importantly, I believe that only by leading a steady and, yes, somewhat inoffensive political march toward the left will we end the stalemate.  Finding common ground does not have to mean compromising liberal values.  It DOES mean finding the place at which "conservative" America meets the left and working from that point to foster the progressive awakening.  Progressive values are American values--we just have to point it out to our less-informed neighbors without threatening to shake their core (read: moral) values.

      This, I believe, is the potential of an Obama administration.  

      •  Well said. (5+ / 0-)

        Thank you so much for your comments.

        This may well be the future of our conversations about Obama, once the primaries are over.  What are we willing to compromise?  What lines are we willing to draw?

        Hopefully, he will be able to show us how this is done.

        •  Yes, (8+ / 0-)

          I hope so too.  And I believe that we all must come to realize that politics is not and should not (in a democracy) be an all-or-nothing game.  We must begin, as progressives, to idenitify our most core values and push the rest of the nation to understand that our core principles are truly American--and universal in their appeal.  

          Liberals have gotten a really bad rap, you know?  Those mostly-moderates-who-identify-as-conservatives don't disagree with us on the most important issues, perhaps.  But they're afraid we'll tell them they can't go hunting and fishing, that we'll take away the importance of their Sunday morning worship, that we somehow scoff at their yard flags and yellow ribbons.  

          They're afraid we think they're stupid.  They think (or know) we're making fun of them.  And that, right there, halts the dialogue.  That, right there, causes them to go on the defensive when, in all reality, they have much more in common with us than either side recognizes right now.

          And while, yes, we do disagree with them on most issues and we DO sort of make fun of them...what Obama is telling us, I think, is that if we can just stop that nonsense...if we can just make the dialogue more moderate, be more open with our conversation, then perhaps a number of "conservatives" will be willing to listen, hear, understand, and agree.  We know the far-right extremists don't have it in them to hear us, but the moderates do.  It's up to us to be grown-ups and move the discussion forward without being assholes.

          Sorry I'm so long-winded.  I just think the issue of "compromising" as it pertains to Obama's candidacy is quite misunderstood.  ;)  I hope these discussions can continue, and that we can all begin to listen and hear and understand each other again--on our own side of the political fence.  There are alot of parallels to note.  

        •  AngryMouse, This is the best diary I've read (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sara seattle, kingubu, drumlanrig

          in some time!
           I want to ease your mind somewhat about this notion of working with the other side, because there is brilliance in that approach from a PROGRESSIVE point of view.
            Obama understands that there are many, many Republicans out there, particularly amongst voters with the best intentions, and believes in talking to them respectfully to glean out the common ground.
             See, when you work for the good of all, it moves the progressive agenda along, and the other side is happy too. It isn't necessarily "compromise."
              Also, when you open up dialogue, the give-and-take allows for people to gain understanding rather than having to be stuck always in positions due to emotions, ego, "righteousness," and so forth. The GOPers do this far more often than we do, but we are not infallible (gas) either.
              Finally, if people of differing points of view, and differing priorities were not able to work together, the USA wouldn't exist because the folks who put the Constitution together understood the value in working through opposing points of view to achieve the greater good.
           And HUGS too from out here in California. It's beautiful to see the family coming back together again. If we are united, "100 year war" McCain will be swept away, while clinging on to the defense of the worst presidency in our history!

          "We the People of the United States..." -U.S.Constitution

          by elwior on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:23:12 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Should be (gasp!), not (gas) (0+ / 0-)

            And BTW,
              As a former New Yorker, I believe that Hillary would be a great Governor, and I think she'll go for it! The next race is 2010 (assuming that Patterson makes it 'till then.
               And as a side note: Hillary Clinton would be the first Woman Governor of New York, but not the first Clinton. New York had a governor named DeWitt Clinton way back in the 19th Century.

            "We the People of the United States..." -U.S.Constitution

            by elwior on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:31:13 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Consider the current situation as an example (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          sara seattle, aldpol, drumlanrig

          Many parts of lefty blogosphere have divided into partisan camps. Among the the fiercest partisans, the disagreement isn't just about how their favored candidate is better (or the other worse) or pie fights over wonky policy details, its like they are arguing two completely different versions of reality.

          The reason for this, I think, comes down to a very simple idea: the presumption of bad faith.

          Two examples:

          One of the uber-partisan hits on Obama is that he is some kind of secret black separatist who is using his rhetorical skill to dupe naive white liberals and wet-behind the ears college kids. So, when he steps out to make a eloquent speech on the subject of race, HRC's partisans dismiss it out of hand with "well, of course he'd say that. It only proves my point!"

          Conversely, one of the uber-partisan hits on Clinton is that she blindly and destructively ambitious. So, when she steps out and says that she's in the race to the convention, BHO's partisans scream "See? she knows she's unlikely to get the nomination this year, she is only staying in the race to make sure Obama loses so she can run again in 2012!!"

          In both cases, the "facts" are fixed around the pre-existing presumption of bad faith on the other's part.

          Yet, as this very brave and wonderful diary shows, if you are willing to speak plainly and not presume that the other person is acting in bad faith, you can find people on the "other side" who will respond in kind and who are, in fact, hungry for a chance to work toward the common goal.

          Does this diary (and its response) mean that the partisans on both sides are going to just fold up their tents or that the more legit disagreements are going to stop? Certainly not. But it does put the legit questions in a sane context and pushes the uber-partisans to the margins while making them look small for obstructing real progress.

          Obama's "post-partisan" thesis is merely that principle applied to inter-party politics.

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

          by kingubu on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:55:17 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well said. (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sara seattle, kingubu, drumlanrig

            And for what it's worth, I acknowledged from the beginning that Obama's speech on race was excellent.

            I've also said I'd love him to give a speech that addresses sexism and gender in this country, perhaps once HRC is out of the race.

            If anything, this unique primary season has shown us that those issues that we like to think of as so last century really aren't.  They're still with us.  We have yet to resolve issues around race and sex, even if we're doing better than we were 100 years ago.

            •  Indeed. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Angry Mouse

              The truth is that real equality is probably generations away. The Boomers crashed the gate, we Xers held it open, and now the Millennials are rising up to charge through-- each generation relying on the last, each a little less militant than the one before. We'll get there if keep keep listening, empathizing, and focusing on what we can do now, today, to make the world a little better.

              You've done a very cool thing with this discussion, Ms. Mouse; my hat goes off to you.

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

              by kingubu on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:27:37 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  All of the above. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Valerie, Angry Mouse

      Well done -- very eloquent, level-headed, and classy.  Excellent diary all around, and thank you for the reminders.

      Totally with you on Democracy Now, BTW.  I think we discovered it right about the same time.

    •  We are honored to have you with us (5+ / 0-)

      First, thank you for printing my quote above about holding up a mirror to our own thoughts--I truly meant that. When I see people act out so negatively I understand their fear and frustration...we are all living on that edge until Obama is elected in November and acting out is the only way to have some control in this situation.

      Second, I respect your concerns about Obama but I trust in his ability to inspire and excite and to get people to think! People who just spew hate and ignorance about gay rights, or women's rights or  stem cell research can come together if they think about the subject a little deeper. For instance, if you believe that all people should be treated fairly and equally then you are not that far from accepting gay marriage. If you think a woman's right to life should supercede an embryo's you can be pro-choice and pro-life. Sure there will always be ignorance but Obama shows me time after time that he is willing to help us do that critical thinking. His speech on race was a perfect example. It reaches across the divide and gets people thinking beyond the hateful rhetoric and opens up a dialog.

      This blog and the one last night are perfect examples of opening up dialog and what an Obama presidency can offer. We are honored to be in this together with you!

      "DC...the chocolate city with the marshmallow center and graham cracker crust of corruption" - Stephen Colbert

      by foxsmartchicago on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:49:37 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Welcome aboard! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I want to apologize if I have said anything offensive in the heat of primary battle.

      Hillary Clinton: Running on Fumes!

      by Yoshimi on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:51:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Great diary. My two cents: (5+ / 0-)

      I have the same concerns about bipartisanship. But I think Obama may really be able to bring the country together at a middle ground that is well to the left of where the media has been telling us the center is.

      As Eric Alterman writes in his new book (and as he said on Colbert and as I heard him say in person last week), around 60% of the country agrees with the big liberal positions, but is afraid to call themselves liberal. I think Obama can get the support of that 60%, even ones that have been voting Republican.

      Also, as Gandhi once said, (paraphrasing) when negotiating with a bitter enemy, it's best to give them a way to concede without losing all their pride. I think many Independents and Republicans want a change but don't want to have to admit just how wrong they were for so long. And Obama's talk of bipartisanship gives them that opportunity.

      I still want to see much of BushCo indicted, but we should be careful not to (rhetorically) indict half the country with them.

      Deranged neoconservative militarism isn't the solution to nuclear proliferation; it's a cause. -- Glenn Greenwald

      by factbased on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:53:14 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hugs, Recs, Small Tears, and a list (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      high uintas

      Oh, buddy: ready to punish? You don't even know -you've got a WHOLE group of friends all over this Party who want a piece of that. Welcome to the club, I hope Diet Coke is okay.

      Here's my list:

      Commission of the Civil Service to root out all of the partisan appointments to GS jobs, just like Teddy Roosevelt did.

      Impeachment and eventual treason trials for the 4 living Supreme Court Justices who ruled for Bush vs. Gore, INCLUDING Sandra Day O'Connor.

      Long stays at Leavenworth for Brownie, Alphonso Jackson, Gonzalez, and any assistants found to be complicit in Katrina, Torture, Plamegate, or any of the other scandals that have names (as well as the ones we haven't found out about yet). If we're doing it right, there should be a whole wing devoted to the Bush Administration.

      That's a partial, right there. Feel free to collate it with your own.

    •  Hugs, yes, and an apology (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      high uintas

      Thank you for this eloquent post.

      I want to hear nothing from George W. Bush but breathing, and very little of that.

      by Gemina13 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:15:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I Think... (5+ / 0-)

      Will Rogers said it best:

      "Democrats never agree on anything, that's why they're Democrats. If they agreed with each other, they would be Republicans."

    •  Big Hug (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sara seattle

      Although I personally haven't been involved in any of this ugliness, other than as a spectator, it has truly affected me. In fact, my sig line is a direct response on my part to the vitriol I was witnessing here among people who really have so many commonalities and whom need to respect each other and support each other if we are to be successful as like-minded individuals coming together to create change in our ailing nation. Kudos to you and all the others who are realizing that this infighting is so hurtful.

      Unity starts with U...

      by IT Pimp on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:40:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I very much appreciate... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Angry Mouse

      ...the sentiments in your diary.  Things around here have gotten too vicious lately, with a very strong conformist streak.  I'm convinced that honest dialoging with HRC supporters, including giving credence to their objections to Obama, is the only way to get the Party back on track.

      The cynical side of me wonders, however, if your diary was recommended so highly primarily because of your unifying message, or the fact that you've come to support Obama...

      •  I've wondered as well. But... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        I prefer to think the best today.  So I'm telling my inner cynic to STFU for a few hours.

        •  Actually I didn't really get this diary (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          You are saying that you plan to vote for Obama in the general if he is the nominee?
          Who else would you vote for?

          Matt is on board with Hillary!

          by mattinjersey on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:27:56 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Let me try to explain... (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sara seattle, Debby, avava

            Yes, I will vote for Obama in November.  Without bitterness or resentment.

            I didn't feel that way a month ago.  

            But in order for me to get to that point, I really needed to have my concerns about Obama addressed -- which commenters last night and today have done in a way that I greatly appreciate it.

            As far as I can tell, NO ONE has called me a concern troll today.  (But hey, the day is still young, right?)

            This diary was about more than supporting Obama.  It was about how those of us who have not been Obama fans will find our way back to the party.  And it really does start with Obama and his supporters giving us a reason -- a real reason, besides just McSame -- to come back.

            It's not just a kumbaya diary.  It's what I hope is the next stage of our conversation -- honest discourse about our nominee.

            Thank you for reading.

      •  Amen (0+ / 0-)

        I'm convinced that honest dialoging with HRC supporters, including giving credence to their objections to Obama, is the only way to get the Party back on track.

        having conversations/honest dialogues is how we will get to understand each other - and respect each other.

        "Proud to proclaim: I am a Bleeding Heart Liberal"

        by sara seattle on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:52:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Mouse (0+ / 0-)

      While you have impressed me in the past with your dignity, intelligence, and gracious demeanor, this diary truly wrenched at my heart.  You are exquisitely articulate, thoughtful, and a one class act, however you decide to vote.  

      And I confess, deoliver's diary made me weep.

      Qui tacet consentit

      by RoCali on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:03:03 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  All three (tips, recs and hugs) and (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      how lovely and open and adult and good. Kudos and thanks to you, Angry Mouse.

      I didn't see your other posts (earning my crust) or the responses, so I may be covering old ground, but your concern about coming together  with people whose positions offend you makes all the sense in the world to this regrettably intolerant mostly progressive 50 yr old woman.

      A recent speech Obama gave in Pennsylvania reassured me somewhat, but I don't even know which speech it was (sneaking around the blogosphere at work, tsk, tsk). I'll try to find the link later, if you are interested. He talked about our similarities across all that divides us and then mentioned a few things we all believe (if you work, you should get paid; all children should have access to a good education and a chance to go to college; everyone should get a fair shot, an equal chance; equal pay for equal work, etc.) and then he said we can work together toward the things we share a belief in.

      That doesn't sound easy, but it does sound workable. Community organising principles, I bet: work together to make a difference, large or small, that you can all believe in and its not so much in spite of your differences as beyond them, including them, but not letting them define relations within the group or to the work. Oddly, the bigger the challenge, the better it seems to work, provided the task isn't impossible and natural leaders have had the space to emerge.

      So, for example, I might not work with an 'intelligent design' person on a curriculum committee right off the bat, but we might make common ground or reach across the aisle to work on 'night basketball' or making sure there are leadership or development programmes for young people available at their most dangerous hour: 3:00 in the afternoon. You get the idea.

      Anyway, I'll try to find a link. And thanks again for your invitation to be our better selves with one another.

    •  I know its hard (5+ / 0-)

      I have a some good friends that are/were Clinton supporters. And I'm sad to say that I'm the one Obama supporter they know personally that they feel like they could talk to. Everyone else is so caught up in rejoicing in their candidate's "inevitable annihilation" that they haven't felt it was safe to even talk to their closest friends.

      I've always treated them gently. These are my friends, my fellow democrats. I'd want the same from them. I've never lost sight that they want what they want as badly as I do and its personally excruciating to many of them to see this chance slipping away from them.

      Its called empathy and we need a lot more of it around here, elsewhere on the web, and in our personal relationships.

      All of them are now supporting Obama. Not because I strong armed them into it or dazzled them with math. But in part (I hope) because I gave them one friend they could talk to that didn't condescend to them or take joy in their caving. I'd like to think I helped because I tried to give them a peaceful positive environment to discuss their decision- a one person welcome wagon. I was willing to mourn their loss with them.

      I know that Hillary's campaign has been a long time dream for so many people and having your dreams fall apart sucks, especially when you have thousands of strangers mocking you and someone you believe in.

      Thank you for your diary and taking the chance that jerks could come out of the woodwork to hate on you. As naive as it sounds I just want this over so we can all be friends again. I look forward to fighting side by side to November.

      Without change, something sleeps inside us, and seldom awakens. The sleeper must awaken. - Frank Herbert

      by goldbirdy on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:15:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

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

        Read today that Obama had mentioned that he find it to be one of the most important values a person can have.

        Thank you for your kind words -- I am not surprised your friends came around to your way of thinking - it shows that you are a good friend and a good person.

        "Proud to proclaim: I am a Bleeding Heart Liberal"

        by sara seattle on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:48:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  well done and tactfully spoken (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sara seattle

      My first diary here was on the note of urgency of "Taking the Pledge" , asking voters to back the Democratic nominee and look at the big picture.  A week ago, that was not a very popular stance here at Dkos.  But the narrative is changing rapidly, and as it does, acceptance is dawning, and I am hoping my fellow Obamaniacs will grow more gracious as the Clintonistas grow more accepting.  Now - can you recruit a few more ?

      louise 'hussein' to you!

      by louisev on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:55:16 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hugs to an Angry Mouse (0+ / 0-)

      I don't like to see an angry mouse.  I want happy mice.

      hugs Angry Mouse

    •  "We are not all as bad as the worst of us" (0+ / 0-)

      That's something I've said, albeit less elegantly, since the "Deaniacs" were being trashed in 2003.

      It's the truth about every group that's been savaged - or has had members act in ways that are dishonorable.

      It's something we shouldn't ever need to say because it's something we should always remember about each other.

      But we don't.

      Thanks for this.

      The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty. - John Adams

      by Malacandra on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:52:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Tears in my eyes... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      more Eloquent than I could ever have hoped to be. Thank you for putting yourself out there, for being so vulnerable and for offering an olive branch big enough that we all can share.

      To every conflict there are Dead Enders, but I will do all in my power to resist that, invite others to do the same and MoveOn.

      Proud to be a hopeless hopemonger:)

      by Seattlite on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:02:12 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Oh this was a lovely diary (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sara seattle

      I enjoyed every minute of it.  As an Obama supporter who has often found myself defending Hillary (though less so in recent weeks), I really appreciate what you're saying about coming together.
      I went to visit my niece and her family in Philly (after we registered people as Dems to vote for Obama there).  Her husband, mother and father (my brother) are all Obama supporters.  She's a Hillary supporter.  And she feels somewhat hurt by the fact that no one else in the family (except my almost-8-year-old) is supporting Hillary.  She feels that many people are voting for Obama because they don't want a woman in the White House.  I don't doubt that she's right, but I'm sure there are just as many who don't want a Black president.  
      But she's coming to terms with it and I think is going to vote for Obama in the primary.
      I adore my niece.  She's a doctor (oncologist), an incredibly smart and caring person, wonderful mother, and very thoughtful and analytic.  She would never vote for McCain or anything in that ballpark.  So the fact that she so much admires and likes Hillary is a great endorsement.  
      So I too want to bring the divided party together to beat McCain in November.  I really hope that Bill & Hillary will campaign their hearts out for Obama.  I think they will -- but things have gotten so nasty lately, I'm not sure.  

      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 Apr 02, 2008 at 02:07:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  As the person quoted in the 4th quote (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sara seattle, Angry Mouse

      (as I was responding to the 3rd quote, which I found to be amazingly enlightening), let me just say THANK YOU for this beautiful, spot-on diary.

      THANK YOU.

      It is time to promote some healing within our party.  Even if you don't think the "writing's on the wall" about the nomination, you need to be as gracious a loser as you are planning to be if you're on the winning side.

      I honestly believe that we'll all be winners in the long run if we can save our ire for the GOP and McCain and stop demonizing other progressives/liberals/democrats who support a different candidate!

      So, again - THANK YOU.

      -6.63/-6.31 Please visit the Grieving Room on Monday nights to discuss issues of mourning and loss.

      by Dem in the heart of Texas on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:08:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  DAMN proud to follow HRC, & I will follow Obama (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sara seattle

      She was a tough lady--she NEVER would have been swiftboated and lame like Kerry.  That guy wouldn't allow people to attack Bush at his own convention, and left 14 mil in the bank on election day.  DAMN IT--it could have been her running a re-election campaign!

      But I think O wins this one.  I think HRC is going to drop out after an honorable win in PA--which is good, because the Dem network needed building there.

      Thanks for the diary!  It's time to come together!

      The Seminole Democrat
      A blue voice calling from the deep red

      by SemDem on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:38:18 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  A voice of reason! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Angry Mouse

      Thanks for the calm, civil post. It's been gettin' pretty hot in here, what with the HRC walkout, etc.

      I especially like your "Anti-McCain" sig file idea.

      "A society of sheep will in time beget a government of wolves." - Bertrand de Juvenal

      by curiousted on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:49:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Great diary, thank you. (0+ / 0-)

      Oceania was at war with Eurasia: Oceania had always been at war with Eurasia

      by daveholden on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 03:19:48 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not to be a killjoy but... (0+ / 0-)

      It sounds less as if you've come to Obama as feel that Hillary's lost. Hillary hasn't lost. You see diaries on here proclaiming "it's over" but then the next day you see a diary attacking Hillary, and the day after that another diary proclaiming the end. McCain gets a free pass in all of this, even though it's supposedly "over." Candidates aside, it's pretty silly.

      My problems with Obama is that America seems to love the unlikely Obama-- the 'who is this guy' Obama. But it doesn't know how it feels about Commander in Chief Obama. Unlikely Obama is the guy who draws thousands to rallies, his unlikeliness is a part of his message, the core of what attracts people to him. The moment he becomes likely, even favored, he begins to shrink down to regular politician status. At least, this is a danger with Obama, which has manifested itself at least twice now. He must somehow transcend it.

      The problem with mea culpa diaries is that there are perverse incentives. You never know if you're being genuinely hugged or just being used. And from the lines that people are willing to cross-- It's almost certainly the latter. That's okay. People will write these diaries anyway. The need to belong is too strong. De Tocqueville wrote of this 170 years ago and if America survives, so it shall be 170 years from now.

      The test of people's tolerance is not what they do when you write a mea culpa, or what they do when they think they've won. It's how far they're willing to go when the battle is fully joined. The people here have generally made up their minds long, long ago and shown a willingness to pull out just about all the stops to validate that choice. That is politics, fine.

      The irony is that if the netroots and the Democratic activists had decided to support Hillary from the outset, we would have a vetted candidate, a known quantity and a fighter ready to turn this country around with almost all the same policies that Obama is proposing, and she'd be cruising with probably a 5-10 point lead over McCain right now.

    •  A very thoughtful, heartfelt diary. It is moving (0+ / 0-)

      because it is so real...and not posturing or coming from a reaction.  It made me feel tears form because my heart swelled from your honesty.  Thanks

    •  I think this comment... (0+ / 0-)

      is worth reposting here on this diary

      >From 3/14:

      I AM firmly for Obama and pretty distressed at the direction the top end of Hillary's campaign staff has taken thing, I sincerely sad and sorry that things have become so viscious towards you and others who support Clinton.

      Through most of this, I've consciously refrained from participating in any thread that's devolved into a mess.

      I still maintain respect for most everyone who's felt slighted and abused to the point of this strike.

      I can't speak for anyone but myself, but I honestly hope it at some point comes to a reconciliation.

      I've enjoyed and found much value in the contribution of many Clinton supporters, as fellow Dems and Kossacks. Yourself in particular Alegre.

      Follow your conscience and keep demanding respect, you deserve it and you'll always get it from me.

      I do hope, that when the nominee is chosen, we can put an end to the infighting and train our cannons where they belong... to the right. :)

    •  Hugs from an ex-angry mouse (0+ / 0-)

      I want you to know that I signed up on DKos just so I could write to you to congratulate you on your recent - and dramatic - personal evolution!  Whether you're aware of it or not, I can tell you from my own experience that you've just taken a HUGE step away from being either "angry" OR a "mouse"!  (Good news from an older "sister"!)  And the change in what you're seeing is in LARGE measure only due to the changes going on in YOU!!!

      There are only two ways to deal with interpersonal conflict (and that includes all things deemed "political").  One is to attempt to dominate - to fight - and the other is to reason - to find the common ground and negotiate from there.  And there is no denying that your own experience of being "persecuted" by my fellow Obama supporters has shown you how attempting to dominate you has just made you even madder.  More importantly than that, you've acknowledged the fact that it is by FAR the better way to be mutually respectful (i.e., reasonable).

      Of stunning interest (to me) is the fact that you have just demonstrated that you personally favor Senator Obama's conflict resolution methodology (reason) to Senator Clinton's (fighting).  But that's not really the reason that I signed up so I could respond to you.  I wanted to share something very personal with you that has revolutionized my life - and the lives of everyone who comes in contact with me - beyond my dreams and for the better.

      Something that is believed to be "idealistic" is no longer that once it is proven possible - and I (along with many others) have done so, personally.  So can you!

      I, too, was an "angry mouse" for about 45 years of my total of 59.  One day, during my very nasty divorce (after 21 years of marriage), a very wise older woman shared a fact of life with me.  "Anger," she said, "is just a cover emotion for fear.  It makes you think you are responding with power but, in truth, anger means that you feel weak.  And the degree of your anger, dear, is in direct proportion to your sense of threat."  (If you're anything like me, mouse, what she said to me pisses you off, too.)

      But it's true.  ALL the anger that you're seeing out there in this pivotal political contest (and from fundamentalists of every stripe, too) - all the anger that you're feeling in yourself about this and ANY other matter - is really the fear of being powerless.  (And the wiser among us know it.)

      I didn't get it myself, either, until I realized one day that, when faced with a situation in which I knew I had the resources to deal with a problem, I just handled it.  (No problemo, as my Mexican grandmother used to say.)  But if the situation changed in any facet that put its solution beyond my personal resources, suddenly I got angry. And my anger was in direct proportion to the degree of my personal "power deficit."

      Please understand, sweet soul, that I am in no way devaluing YOU.  I am truly, deeply identifying WITH you and where you are right now, emotionally.  And I am here only to tell you that you have made a MAJOR breakthrough in your personal recognition that the value of people is SACRED - completely separate from and in no way connected to the value of the ideas they currently hold!

      I UNDERSTAND feeling helpless in the face of overwhelming opposition.  I UNDERSTAND the desire to defend - with every fiber of my being - my own power, safety and value.  I UNDERSTAND that the world expects that I will fight to the death to be right and make others wrong.  I also understand that it is that very same impulse that is destroying our last hope of saving our world.  And I get it that I have no moral "high ground" whatsoever in criticizing petroleum executives for defending their obscene profits if I, myself, am fighting for my OWN separate interests.

      I understand (COMPLETELY) your concern that Senator Obama's approach is "weak."  In the male dominated way of doing things, I know that it's seen that way.  But as a woman, one of the things that has always worked well for me is when I found ways to cooperate with others...found common ground and then built from there.  (It is, after all, the "woman's way" to find harmony in resolving conflict, ergo, men have usually rejected it.)  And that is why I am more than a little bemused by how the desire to dominate is (as far as this nominating process is concerned, anyway) so appealing to other women while the call to communicate about our differences is more acceptable (in general) to a greater number of MEN!  Pardon me for just a moment while I take my own "moment of silence" to contemplate the absurdity of this from my perspective...

      More than anything else I want you to know that I can identify with Senator Clinton's supporters fervent desire for the equality of women.  I just do not support them in their desire for some symbolic form of dominance (or, worse, retribution).  Senator Clinton truly DOES represent the old "fighter to the death" that I, myself, used to be.  But I got LOUSY results when I was that!  And from that PAIN, I grew.  

      And from THIS pain, so can you!  

      Just look at the power you are seeing when clenched fists turned into open hands!!!

      And that is why - more than anything else - I have (after much thought but little conflict) chosen to support Senator Obama, wholeheartedly.  His problem-solving modality is (to my mind) far more compatible with my nature (and far more productive in my experience, too).

      Anyway, I'm sorry if I took up so much of your time if you found this all to be just drivel.  But I hope and pray you don't!  You truly touched my heart, mouse.  And it's my hope that in some small way that I've touched yours.

      You really ARE a younger version of me, dear.  And I want you to know that I wish you only the best from this (and from everything else that is to come for you).

      We really ARE only trying to be whole and happy - that's the ONE thing that unites us ALL!  We just have different definitions of what happiness means and different beliefs about the best ways of getting there. (And understanding that, my dear, may help you deal with fundamentalists.* ;-)

      from a serene older woman who's reaching out to you with all her heart

      *Believing that you are so much like me, I think you might find something very interesting and helpful: please look up Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development.  We truly AREN'T represented by the "worst" of us.  Humanity (like almost everything else) really exists on a moral "bell curve."  cmc

  •  Welcome. (26+ / 0-)

    I know it is a hard decision, but in the end we need to win in November and look at reality the way it is.

    Thank you.

  •  Welcome. Glad to have you on board. (21+ / 0-)

    I'm not a big fan of the "drinking the Kool Aid" meme, but when you're ready for a cup, the coffee's on me. :-)

    "Oh, TV. Is there anything you can't do?" -- Homer Simpson

    by Melody Townsel on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:26:45 AM PDT

  •  that's a great diary (9+ / 0-)

    and I wish I saw more of that sentiment on both sides around the Intertubes.

    proudly representing the Anti-Racist Horseshit Wing of the Democratic Party. :)

    by amnesiaproletariat on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:27:36 AM PDT

  •  I am an Indian American supporter (26+ / 0-)

    for Obama and you inspire me Angry Mouse. Most Indian Americans are democrats or rather Clintonistas  and they gave me a hard time with me going for Obama , rather than Clinton. But I want to be my own person and I appreciate that you did too.
    We are coalescing and that's important.

  •  A voice of moderation. (8+ / 0-)

    Great to hear.

  •  Thanks for you diary (8+ / 0-)

    Unity in November.

  •  No matter who you support (8+ / 0-)

    It's obvious people like you will help keep the rest of this debate/campaign within the confines of decorum.


    by Grant Caesar Peters on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:31:20 AM PDT

  •  I have to say (20+ / 0-)

    that your comments on MyDD always made me smile.  You were persistently courteous, asked repeatedly for civility and contributed positively for your candidate.  I don't regret the "strike" except for the loss of some excellent Clinton voices.  I was very sad when belly left for MyDD -- her diaries were always well researched and supportive of her candidate without finding it necessary to bash another.

    Welcome, Angry Mouse.  And I loved Deoliver's wonderful diary as well.

    My faith in the Constitution is whole, it is complete, it is total. Barbara Jordan 1974

    by gchaucer2 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:32:34 AM PDT

  •  Great diary (7+ / 0-)

    It's true that the vitriol on both sites can get pretty bad. I'm not an Obama or Clinton supporter per se, but I will defend both of them against unneccesary attacks.

    I call myself an Obama-by-default supporter because I believe he's pretty much won this thing. But I'm not personally invested in either candidate, and the flame wars that have developed between the two camps are sometimes really astounding to me.

    I hope that if Edwards had been in the place of one of the two remaining that I would have never acted the way some of the rabid supporters on both sides can act, but I can't say that I absolutely wouldn't have.

    Just by .02. Again, great diary.

  •  None of us should drink Kool-Aid (9+ / 0-)

    If we want our government to work, then none of us can take it for granted OR think it can do no wrong.

    "I believe that ignorance is the root of all evil. And that no one knows the truth." - Molly Ivins

    by littlesky on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:34:21 AM PDT

    •  Kool-aid is good, but champagne is better. (10+ / 0-)

      I want to win in November.  I'll vote Dem.  No matter what.
        I want the war to stop.  I want healthcare for everyone.  I want corruption out of government.  I want us to stop using oil.  I want new green jobs for people who want nothing more than to work and support their family.  I want education, and accountability, and investigations, and all the things every Democrat wants.
      Both candidates can give me what I want.  The rest is just fluff.

      Auntie Em: Hate you. Hate Kansas. Taking the dog. Dorothy

      by haremoor on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:44:55 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I want a realistic set of priorities (0+ / 0-)

        and a congress working in 'congress' with the President to get things really done.  My concern about Obama is that I see in him things i saw in Jimmy Carter.  (My personal hero mind you but not a great president.)  So i agree with some comments that HRC in leadership in the Senate and on the same page with President Obama has a nice ring to it.

        The unbelievable laundry list that needs fixing can not all get down in 4 years.  Priorities!!!!!

  •  You write exceptionally well. (17+ / 0-)

    I posted something a while back on the whole "compromiser" thing. Don't have time to dig it up now, but my bottom line is I think a lot of people misunderstand and oversimplify Obama's approach. I'll chime in more when I have time; I get the feeling you'll remain open to the discussion for a good long while.

    Thanks for this diary.

    •  I'll look forward to that diary from you. (6+ / 0-)

      It really is my biggest issue with Obama, and although there were some terrific responses in the conversation last night, I would certainly like to hear more about how this "compromise" thing can work.

      •  You and I share the same "concern" there ;) (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Valerie, javelina, Angry Mouse

        There was an article in Newsweek a few months ago about that, and it made sense to me. I think they titled it "incremental change we can slowly work toward" or something like that. I'll try to dig up the link for you. It helped me understand his approach a little better.

        •  I'd appreciate it. nt (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Valerie, BoiseBlue
          •  One thought... (7+ / 0-)

            ...on "compromise" is that Obama doesn't mean compromising principles or goals so much as compromise in perspective.

            The example that is often cited, but apt nonetheless, is the Illinois bill on video cameras in police interrogations.  The purpose of the bill was to protect the suspects from abuse, and it met with strong resistance from the Republicans and the Fraternal Order of Police.  But the bill ended up passing unanimously in the end because he was able to sell it to the Republicans as being to their benefit, too: video cameras protect the police from false claims of brutality, etc.

            So he didn't compromise his position -- he just reframed the issue.

            •  The way I heard it (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Valerie, Emalene

              It was opposed not just by the Republicans and the FOP but also by Democratic legislators who were afraid of seeming "soft on crime". In other words he not only overcame resistance from the "opposition" but resistance among Democrats who had grown too used to capitulating to the Republican framing of the issue. That's something we desperately need in DC right now.

            •  My Take On "Reaching Across The Aisle" (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              kimberlyweldon, Angry Mouse, sab39

              Maybe I'm putting my own personal spin on it, but I view Obama's assertment about 'reaching across the aisle' is almost more about political discourse in the country rather than actual policy; that you can disagree with someone politically without questioning their motives.

              You can be a Republican and, just because you favor, for examples sake, tax breaks for corporations, it doesn't mean you're inheriently greedy or beholden to them for campaign contributions. You could just believe that that's the most efficient and effective way to create wealth.

              Now, I'd disagree with your politics, but not your commitment to a better America.

              And maybe this is the wrong place to post this, but I think that, like Hillary and Barack, Republicans and Democrats are, inheriently on the same team; that overwhelmingly, both sides want the same things: peace, prosperity, security, and just have greatly different methods for achieving them.

              Of course, this isn't the case on moral issues (abortion, evolution, etc), but on most other issues, I think the long-term goals of Republicans and Democrats are the same.

              And maybe when Obama says 'Reaching Across The Aisle', it's more about looking at Republicans as more than just greedy, power-hungry monsters.

      •  The "compromise" thing... (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tmo, javelina, PomperaFirpa

        Mouse, I think there's a whole lot more to Obama's compromise tone than meets the eye.  It has, I believe, more to do with the politics of dignity than tired calls for bipartisanship.  And I think that it goes considerably deeper than reclaiming disaffected "Reagan Democrats", though that narrative might satisfy some folks.

        I'll do my first diary on this phenomenon.  It's worth understanding, and incidentally it's a key reason why I was in the Edwards camp to start off the primary season.

      •  Reading this diary I think you understand (0+ / 0-)

        more about Obama's idea of working together than you think you do. (no snark)

        Obama knows that people will disagree about some issues but we have to be civil with one another to get things done on the things we DO agree about.  This is essentially what you just wrote.


        Hillary Clinton: Running on Fumes!

        by Yoshimi on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:39:07 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  You are one cool Mouse! (11+ / 0-)

    This could not have been an easy diary for you to write. I know if Obama were losing I'd be devastated. So I really really respect what you've done here and I hope other Obama supporters treat your gesture with the graciousness it deserves. So, hugs for you dear mouse and a piece of the best cheddar I have.

    Drinking the Kool Aid since 2004

    by bookcat on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:36:07 AM PDT

  •  Once a scab, always a scab (7+ / 0-)

    Haha - April Foo...

    Oh. Damn.  April 2nd already, eh?

    I think all of us around here understand the desire to not compromise with Young Earthers.  It's that moral righteousness that comes with knowing full well that we are empirically correct on a matter of fact.  But I think it's important for us to realise that this is the core of Senator Obama's insight - that the more we focus on those divisions, the less likely we can focus on getting the 70% of things we all agree on overwhelmingly accomplished.  

    When one conducts polls, the Democratic position always enjoys strong majorities of support.  So why aren't these policies enacted?  Because of partisanship.  I realise that partisanship will not end with Obama's election, but he has pledged to campaign on at least diminishing it somewhat - if he wins on this platform then he will have a mandate to enforce this vision.  If we can limit the partisanship even somewhat I think we can pass a lot of those agenda items that polling already shows the public wants - we can prove to the American people that government can be effective if we care about it and support it enough to come together on big items.  That's the hope Senator Obama has instilled in me - America is not perfect but it is perfectible if we keep trying.

    Give me liberty, or give me death!

    by salsa0000 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:36:23 AM PDT

  •  we gotta be good sports (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Matt Z, be the change you seek, soms

    and gracious winners, and treat Hillary supporters with respect. I personally believe that if Obama was in Hillary's position he would have dropped out already and not taken down the party, and that makes me mad mad mad. But we Obama supporters are the ones who are responsible for keeping this together - the Clintonites are mad and going to stay that way for a while. There's nothing Obama or the party leaders or supers can do to change it, and it doesn't look like Hill's going to do the right thing. So it is up to us to make a point of being gracious, and counting to 10 before responding to the bitterness and false accusations. We have to be gracious and give them a way to back down from their stubborn positions and change their minds and support Obama cause we need them in the general, and darn it, we like them too.

    Proud, well-oiled Obama-bot, at your service.

    by Christian Coulon on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:37:15 AM PDT

  •  In some ways...I hope... (5+ / 0-)

    that Obama wins PA so that the Obama supporters will stop blaming Hillary for all that is evil on earth...I still am not drinking any Kool-aid but I have always said I will support Obama if he is the eventual nominee...

    I frankly do not see a real easy way Obama can win without OH, Fl and not winning PA or MI, having to play defense on NJ.

    The only positive I see is that I believe he has a real shot at picking up Texas especially with Richardson as VP...even with Texas it will be a squeaker at best and

    ND, IA, NV, NM & CO are all nice but don't help with a lot of EV's

    The only other thing that Obama has going for him is a Recession and an unpopular war which McCain supports both...

    Peace...Go Democrats!!!

    Obama/Richardson '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

    by dvogel001 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:37:33 AM PDT

    •  Now you're following me! (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Shaniriver, ER Doc
    •  If he picked Richardson as the VP (0+ / 0-)

      I might just have to reverse myself and vote for Nader here in NJ.  Sorry, I think that there are a number of Clinton and Obama supporters who will support the other candidate in the general because they want to see a Democrat in the White House.   However, Richardson on the ticket would be too much salt in the wound for me.

      •  Can I ask why? (0+ / 0-)

        I mean, Richardson was running against Clinton for the Democratic nomination- he was trying to beat her and prevent her from winning for over a year while he was in the running.

        I'm making the assumption here that you don't like Richardson for his recent "betrayal" as opposed to other valid reasons-- There are a few, but I won't list them at this time since they are outside of the scope of this diary.

      •  Why is it that when ever someone (0+ / 0-)

        poses the possiblity that they would not vote Dem, (Nader or McCain)I simply freeze out anything else they say?  I know that is very closed minded of me but it seems to automatically happen.

        •  Because you remember 2000. (0+ / 0-)

          I voted for Gore in 2000, but I fully appreciated and understood where Nader (and Nader supporters) were coming from.  

          Remember, Nader told us we shouldn't have to choose between the lesser of evils.  We should expect more, demand more, of our representatives.

          But to many (and I do not include myself in this group), the reality of what happened in 2000 is that the presidential election is NOT the time for voting on principle.  The primaries, yes, but in November, one must be pragmatic.

          My guess is that's why you have a reaction to any mention of third party candidates.  But try to remember, those people are often on our side too.

        •  Ummm...because this is a pro-Democratic... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          site dedicated to electing Democrats

          Obama/Richardson '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

          by dvogel001 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:55:04 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Richardson was my 1st choice for POTUS... (0+ / 0-)

        and he would make a great VP...but one of the reasons I like him is that I feel he has a lot of the positive qualities of Hillary...

        Obama/Richardson '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

        by dvogel001 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:53:34 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Why do you worry about polls (0+ / 0-)

      that are 6 months behind how they'll actually look when the GE fever sets in??
      Even Dukakis and Gore had double digit leads this time in those election years.

      Anyway did you see the well-written sourced diary about the massive movement he'll launch to register voters all over the country in lieu of the GE.

  •  Bless you! Rec'd! n/t (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, bethcf4p, gchaucer2
  •  Tips for keeping it civil ... (5+ / 0-)

    ... although I actually think Garrison Keillor was onto something here, when he said something to the effect that "... the Democrats continue the longest primary in human history, which has left the pundit club and the blogoswamp with nothing new to say whatsoever. You might as well write about your sock drawer."

    In general, I think a candidate's supporters tend to mirror the personality of the politician they choose, so it is perhaps understandable that Hillary's people seem more combative to me than Obama's folks. Nevertheless, to quote Gen. Buck Turgidson of "Dr. Strangelove" fame, "We are rapidly approaching a moment of truth, not only for ourselves as human beings but for the life of our country. It is necessary now to choose between two admittedly regrettable, but nevertheless distinguishable post-war environments: one where you've got 50 million people killed, and one where you've got 350 million people killed." (That's as close as I can come to it, IIRC, anyway.)

    In less scorched-earth terms, we Democrats are facing that same decision with regard to how we handle our nomination contest now. But the results will be just as important for our legacy to the future.

  •  thank you (7+ / 0-)

    it is long past time to end this sickness and we can only hope to succeed by standing together.

    "Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter." ~ Martin Luther King, Jr.

    by Avila on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:38:14 AM PDT

  •  A brilliant diary (8+ / 0-)

    (I hate tearing up in the office.)

    This was beautifully, beautifully expressed and I intend to heed the advice herein.

    Thank you fro taking the time and having the openness to post such an important statement.

    "The Revolution Won't Be Microwaved."

    by Glinda on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:39:28 AM PDT

  •  Great diary Angry Mouse (9+ / 0-)

    There's been enough vitriol from both sides. I hope we're all done boiling over!

    To me, the absolute most important issue ANY of us has, and this nation has, is that we are currently being ruled by a gang of immoral war criminals. -Hornito

    by discocarp on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:40:29 AM PDT

  •  Sorry to lose you (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, WisVoter

    I plan to vote for the Democrat in November regardless, but I don't see the need to abandon your support at this point.   There are primaries that have to happen, and the question of Florida and Michigan to be resolved.

    I strongly believe that we need a Democrat in the White House next year, but I just as strongly believe that while we have two good candidates, my candidate will be a meaningfully better President and GE candidate than Barack Obama would be.   That is more than enough reason for me to do whatever I can to have her as the nominee.

    •  Oh, but we agree! (15+ / 0-)

      Don't get me wrong.  I think FL and MI need a real resolution, and the situation has me hopping mad.

      And you know what?  If HRC won 100% of the remaining votes and delegates and got the nomination, I'd definitely be doing my happy dance.

      And like I said, I have not taken her sticker off my car.

      So please, please keep working for HRC.  Keep making calls, donating money, doing whatever you do.

      But be ready to make peace with Obama and his supporters.  That is all I ask.

      •  I appreciate your sentiments and know that they (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Valerie, baudelairien

        are in the right place.  But for me now is not the time for reconciliation.  There is a contest to fight, and I mean fight hard, for this nomination.   I believe that this can be done civilly, and respectfully, but many Obama supporters will confuse civility with acceptance of the inevitability of their candidate.  

        So let's all treat each other with respect for the strongly held convictions we have, acknowledge that neither of these good candidates will be able to lock the race up until after all of the voters have been heard (including FL/MI in some agreeable form), and move through this process in an honorable way.

        I believe that how we conclude this process will be as important to ensuring unity in the fall as the actual winner.

        •  Reconciliation... (7+ / 0-)

          I want HRC to stay in the race until the polls close in Puerto Rico.  Make no mistake about that.  I have said many times that I think it is amazing that every single person (or Democrat, anyway) gets to participate in this rare primary.

          I'd like to see the rest of the primary season run differently, though.  I'd like to see HRC and Obama run as if they were on the ticket together (whether they ultimately are or not).

          Run together, against McCain, let the remaining millions vote, and then let's kick some McCain ass.

          •  I'd have a lot less problems with her staying in (10+ / 0-)

            if the rest of the race ran like that.

            Honestly its the tone that has most of us wanting her out. If they'd BOTH turn their guns on McCain I think very few would want Clinton out.

            To me, the absolute most important issue ANY of us has, and this nation has, is that we are currently being ruled by a gang of immoral war criminals. -Hornito

            by discocarp on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:57:09 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  absolutely! (3+ / 0-)

              I would love to see both candidates tearing McCain a new one on a daily basis all the time building up the party in states that have long been neglected. They would dominate the MSM and suck all the air out the room for McCain, and it would be 24/7 McCain being double-teamed by two super smart dems. HEAVEN!

              But sadly another route was taken. :(

              "I ain't so afraid of losing something that I ain't gonna try to have it." Zoe (Firefly)

              by geejay on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:07:14 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  I agree that it would be nice if there (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            could be an agreement between the two of them that they would campaign hard, run this thing out, and then let the superdelegates decide, with the understsanding that they would both be on the ticket.  If the only question remaining is who is on top, I think that we could have a far different final 2-3 months of this campaign, one that would probably do the party good.

  •  Amnesty (17+ / 0-)

    During this primary race, democrats on both sides have said things to other democrats that should never be said. I am sure that I have said some of them myself.

    When this primary is over, we need to extend an amnesty to both sides.  We need to forgive everyone for things that were said in the past, and move forward to working together in the future.

    Full Disclosure: I'm an Obama Supporter

    by smash artist on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:43:59 AM PDT

  •  Put an Obama sticker on your car (6+ / 0-)

    Then you can have a Hillary and an Obama sticker next to each other, symbolizing that we don't have to fight one another. Like some people have the Jesus Fish and Darwin fish right next to each other. You can have science and religion peacefully co-exist. So too, with Clinton and Obama.

    I was elected President of my Senior Class. I peaked.

    by greatn on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:44:27 AM PDT

    •  Very nice idea! (0+ / 0-)

      As a Committee person, on April 22nd, it is my duty and my honor to assist Democrats on Election day. I haven't been happy with some of the things I've been hearing and reading, and some things in particular really bothered me. But, on April 22nd, I'm a Democrat, first and my personal choice will not be a factor in how I assist voters in my precinct.

  •  Pro-Hillary diaries here at DailyKos (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pat208, ER Doc, oxon, RubyGal

    ..turned many into militant Obama supporters. I'm convinced of this.

    Remember, Edwards was the favorite here before he began to languish after poor results in South Carolina and back to New Hampshire.

    "A nation of sheep will beget a government of wolves."--Edward R. Murrow

    by Scarce on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:44:49 AM PDT

    •  I remember when Edwards announced (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Valerie, oxon

      It was very exciting here .. people were so happy to see him in the race..I was a supporter of Edwards at the beginning...but then Obama came along .. and wow...this is going to be  a different kind of president..he is so intelligent..

  •  Angry Mouse, I know how I'd feel if (5+ / 0-)

    it were Obama in the 2nd down position.  I hope that I would be as gracious as you are now, and I admire that you stayed committed to your candidate, through thick and thin--we've always needed more of that quality in the Democratic party.

    I know there've been lots of really horrible moments for you here on dKos, especially lately.

    What I just want you to know is that I'm proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with you, brothers in arms.

  •  Very gracious indeed (15+ / 0-)

    But sometimes you can't really force someone to do something they don't want to do. They will move when they are ready and they know it's necessary.

    Let me let you in on a little secret. I'm a pretty strong Obama supporter, but I have concerns about him too. If you are a critical thinker (or just critical, maybe) you'll have concerns about anybody. But they are type of concerns that while shouldn't be pooh poohed away, can be accepted. What has been most annoying in this primary is how both sides have turned to hyperbole about the perfection of their candidate and the evil of the other one because anything less would be considered "weakness" or something like that.

    Barack Obama will only become president if enough people pay attention, so pay attention, dammit!

    by JMS on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:45:30 AM PDT

  •  I am glad you are going to vote for (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Obama in November.  You won't regret that vote.  I understand how you could interpret peoples' support for Obama as being different from what we are used to...but, when I first heard him speak, my first reaction was, I have no problem whatsoever with this man...I didn't know him very well before I heard him speak and I heard him in person..What is remarkable about Obama is his depth of understanding of how we feel, those of us who opposed the war from the very beginning..before we attacked Iraq..those of us who were in the streets and who marched on the night of the invasion against this war..all of the woes of the country are directly attributed to the fatal mistake of invading and occupying Iraq..

    Hillary didn't get it...she was politically tone deaf to the notion that this was  a horrible idea..she may have calculated that the vote for the war was politically advantageous to her because she wanted to run for president..but it harmed harmed the country .. and she has not apologized for that horrendous vote..

    Hillary is also a member of the Family...the Fellowship in DC which is headed by Doug Coe..the Fellowship conducts the National Prayer Breakfast and is a right wing cult really..member of the Fellowship are Senator Brownback and Senator Inhoffe and Senator she reaches across the aisle in these areas..Brownback and Santorum are definately intelligent design wackjobs and Inhoffe does not believe that global climate change is a result of global warming..that also makes me wonder what has happened to Hillary..she has been associating with the cult since 1993...

  •  The post-partisan thing (19+ / 0-)

    Based on his track record, Obama seems to mean two things by it:

    1. Roping in ordinary Republican voters.
    1. Finding issues that do not lend themselves to a partisan divide and working with Republican elected officials on them.

    That's what he's done on things like ethics reform, weapons proliferation, death penalty reform, bird flu preparedness. Non-sexy things that aren't going to be on Hardball, off the media radar, but friggin' important nonetheless.

    Those are the two areas where he's been post-partisan. Despite having a very liberal voting record. So that's a different thing from, say, Joementum Lieberman's bipartisanship.

    The question is: what's he gonna do when something like healthcare comes up, where it is a hot-button issue? I don't know. But I will tell you this: from his background as a community organizer and a civil rights lawyer, no presidential candidate in recent history has the track record of grassroots progressive activism that Barack Obama has. Maybe no major-party presidential candidate ever.

    He knows how to cut a deal. But he knows where his principles are, too.

    "The jobs are never coming back, the illegals are never going home, but we're gonna have a lot more wars."

    by slaney black on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:46:44 AM PDT

    •  Thank you. (6+ / 0-)

      These are the kinds of responses I really appreciate (not that I don't appreciate them all).

      I'm still pissed about the 2000 Election.  So having someone -- even a Democrat -- tell me to put my anger aside...It's asking a lot.  Which is my problem with Obama.

      Which is why I really appreciate when someone like you helps me to understand exactly what he is asking me to do.

      (But he better not ask me to get over 2000.  Never gonna happen.  Never.)

      •  As a former "voting rights* litigator (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tmo, Valerie, javelina, geejay, fayea

        I'm pretty damn sure he wouldn't ask you to do that. ;-)

        "The jobs are never coming back, the illegals are never going home, but we're gonna have a lot more wars."

        by slaney black on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:53:26 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  getting beyond 2000 - (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        tmo, Angry Mouse

        we actually are - because we are fighting when that is called for - cooperating where that is possible - and not just getting stuck in our anger.

        I am still enraged about 2000 - but more because of the fact that we didn't fight it sufficiently then. It was a terrible betrayal of what the country stands for, our Constitutional rights and sense of fair play. It exposed weaknesses in our Constitutional system and the character of our leaders, as well as the perfidy of their "win at all costs" ideology and their "see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil" accomplices in political and economic greed.

        We didn't take to the streets then, when we should have, because we just couldn't believe how bad things truly were. As a result, our defense of the Constitution was weaker than it needed to be. But we have learned, and now we are far less likely to let much less egregious outrages pass by with whimpers. Witness the front page and diaries here and elsewhere, and witness the nationwide effort to organize at the Precinct level.

        I still think the individuals responsible for the Florida and Ohio travesties need to be held accountable, but in order to do so, we need to get beyond the anger to do real work. For example, the grass roots in California organized to elect our studiously "non-partisan" SOS Debra Bowen who is working to ensure that voting machines are safe and accurate. I'm looking forward to a new and uncomplicit administration that can fix the remaining loop holes, and expose the perfidy of that election among other assaults to our Constitution.

        The grassroots strategies that our Organizer in Chief is using to mobilize the country for his election will stand us in good stead. No longer will we rely on the good intentions of some distant CIC or CEO President. We are energized and watchful, right down to the neighborhood level. The terrible 2000 debacle, helped by this new technology, has energized a vigilant defense corps for the Constitution and the people. It will be a long time before we are lulled to sleep again, while ignoring corporate economic and political greed.

        I am looking forward to a paradigm shifting election - perhaps too much to hope for, but hope I will.

        •  I blame the Clinton-era party for FL and OH (0+ / 0-)

          Big State Strategy.

          Make everything about the Northeast and Cali suburbs. Go after the Jews and Cubans in Florida with patronizing hawkishness that many of them don't agree with anyway. Throw a couple token bones at the industrial midwest, and call it a day.

          And they wonder why the rest of the country is deep red.

          Never. F'ing. Again.

          "The jobs are never coming back, the illegals are never going home, but we're gonna have a lot more wars."

          by slaney black on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:04:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  Lieberman's bipartisanship... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      is nothing but equivocation and surrender to the neocon will.

  •  Voting for Hillary because she's a woman (0+ / 0-)

    Just like blacks may for Obama, and white males may for other white males (GOP anyone?)

    Is putting your personal emotions before everything else. It is disloyal to the country.

    And it is personal.  I'm a woman who, for the first time, could actually see a woman in the White House.  You're damn right it's personal.

    Sounds like bigotry to me... what bigotry isn't personal?

    Maybe I don't understand this reasoning because I'm a white male who has no problem voting for any other configuration of sex and race. But isn't that the best way to vote? Without a veil of bigotry?

    I wonder if others would think this way if white males were never POTUS.

    But eventually I stop all the "if" wondering and come back to the notion that anything else is bigotry.

    Strange, because Carol Moseley Braun didn't stir up this controversy when she ran for President in 2000. But then again, she's a black woman - that would require blacks and women uniting. Maybe that's the next chapter. (sarcasm).

    I am crass and hostile. If you want to be comforted and babied, unplug your internet connection and call your parents.

    by nanobubble on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:46:55 AM PDT

    •  It's not bigotry (11+ / 0-)

      I'm sure it is hard for white males to understand (and I don't mean that as an insult), but it is not bigotry, and is not being disloyal to the country.

      •  I have a hard time (0+ / 0-)

        Accepting your comment because there is no counter-argument.

        If I voted for white males because they were white males, I would consider myself a bigot.

        I am crass and hostile. If you want to be comforted and babied, unplug your internet connection and call your parents.

        by nanobubble on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:53:46 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  She said that's why it's personal (6+ / 0-)

          Not why she's voting. There's a difference, there. People are personally invested in this race because of the history of it.

          I'm quite certain that if Ann Coulter were running, Angry Mouse would not be supportive just because she's a woman.

          •  Umm.. wait a sec. (0+ / 0-)

            We're talking about Ann "Adam's Apple" Coulter here..

          •  So... it's classified? (0+ / 0-)

            Personal investment due to the history of it? That seems rather analogous to a state secret privilege, or essentially, that the reason is classified.

            I'm not asking anyone to share some sort of secret personal reason for wanting a woman to be President.

            But I am repulsed by the notion of supporting Clinton primarily because she has a vagina, or Obama because of his skin's pigmentation.

            Given the way Hillary's campaign has gone - a distinctly obsolete DLC approach riddled with lies and degradation against her fellow Democratic opponents - I have a hard time understanding why so many people support her candidacy.

            The bigotry thing makes sense.

            Just like the last 25% of America who still supports Bush. They built walls of prejudice and hide in their cave.

            The comment by the author is right before her observation of two black men going through the same routine - loving the candidate that is their demographic.

            "We -- the activisits, the bloggers, the ones who spent hours upon hours at caucuses, who donated money we couldn't afford -- we've become so personally invested in the outcome of this race."

            So this personal investment is because of volutneering and donations?

            If I volunteer and donate to someone who turns out to be a white supremacist, or a sock puppet for Coulter - can I use a carte blanche claim of state secrecy - I support them because ITS PERSONAL.

            Do women who blindly support Hillary have an inability to admit they are being bigots? Hmm.

            I am crass and hostile. If you want to be comforted and babied, unplug your internet connection and call your parents.

            by nanobubble on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:13:02 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Please refer to Obamas Speech (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Angry Mouse

              "A More Perfect Union"

              The part where he told white people why black people were pissed, and told black people why white people were pissed.  Women have a lot of the same grievances as everyone else who is not a white male.  

              I have been personally told that I could not have a job because it was a "man's job", told it would be a waste of time and money for me to go to college, because I'd just get married and stay home with my kids anyway.  I"ve had bosses tell me to "quit and give a man a job". Those experiences and many others have colored my perceptions in the same way that Rev. Wright's experiences colored his perceptions.  

              It was really tough for me in the voting booth this time.

              The terror threat color should be brown, for BULLSHIT! -7.00, -5.38 Support ePluribus Media

              by Jesus was a Liberal on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 03:08:10 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Well, in the speech (0+ / 0-)

                Wasn't Obama saying, in a very nice way, that those people were being bigots? And trying to paint the context of that bigoted resentment into the past history of slavery, and to say that it is shared and we need as a country to stop ignoring that bigotry and come together to heal?

                Or maybe we should vote primarily for sex organs and skin colors... like we have been.

                That seems to fly in the face of the purpose of Obama's speech.

                I've no doubt that many folks have experienced discrimination. I have too, though probably to a lesser degree than your experience.

                I'm not trying to deny women their reparations, but at the same time, being bigoted in the attempt to obtain them will just perpetuate the resentment that Obama was talking about.


                My password is: "transparency" This is a communal account. Everyone may play, few will win!

                by nanobubble on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 04:12:02 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Let me try to explain myself. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              I don't know if anyone is still reading, but just in case...

              For me, supporting Hillary was never based primarily on the fact that she is a woman.  Rather, it was the cherry on top.

              The main idea of affirmative action, as I have studied and understood it, is that when you have two candidates for a job or college admissions, all other things being equal, you want to give the opportunity to the one who has been disadvantaged by the system of privilege in our society.  

              All other things being equal, you give the job to the woman over the man.

              All other things being equal, you admit the Latina over the white male.

              But this depends upon, first and foremost, the idea that they are relatively equal in qualifications.

              This is why, for me, supporting Hillary was very much a personal choice.  Because their policy differences are few.  So, all other things being equal, yes, I, a woman, wanted to see a woman in the White House.

              (And for the record, I take great issue with affirmative action in its current state.  I would much prefer affirmative action based upon economics rather than gender or race.  But that is a heated debate for another time.)

        •  Counter-argument (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Jesus was a Liberal, Angry Mouse

          It is different because you come from a position of being part of the dominant group. I grew up Catholic. There was a ton of anti-Catholic prejudice back in the 50s. I remember when JFK ran and how proud and excited we were. Did some vote for him because of his religion? Absolutely. Was it bigotry? No. It was all about pride and the feeling that we were finally being accepted.

          There is a possibility that Senator Clinton could be the JFK for women. After years of striving for equality in our still sexist society, who could blame women for feeling pride in her candidacy and the hope that perhaps a person truly could be judged on merit and not gender. Yeah it's personal. It was personal for many Catholics with JFK, and it's undoubtedly personal for many women with Senator Clinton.

          Though I am absolutely not a fan of Senator Clinton (or her husband), I totally understand Angry Mouse's POV.

          Excess ain't rebellion. You're drinking what they're selling. - Cake

          by slatsg on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:46:41 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Hmm (0+ / 0-)

            Well, I guess I am just more accepting to people picking candidates based on policy choices, and this race-sex-religion stuff smells so republican (pro-life, religions fundamentalism, etc) and anti-policy that it is hard to swallow.

            I would want to say that if a muslim ran for president, I wouldn't be all about them because of their religion.

            Hillary supporters that support her for her sex just seem so bigoted their message never gets to me. Despite my attempts to listen.

            My password is: "transparency" This is a communal account. Everyone may play, few will win!

            by nanobubble on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 04:06:23 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I'm not saying that I don't see your point (0+ / 0-)

              What I am saying that I believe you may be mistaken in thinking of it as bigotry.

              As I said, I've been there - though I would never equate the situation Catholics were in as equivalent to the dicrimination faced by women or ethnic minorities.

              Believe me, it's quite empowering - intoxicating if you will. A major step toward the promised land. Now obviously JFK was a Democrat as were most Catholics. But Republican Catholics crossed party lines to vote for him.

              Senator Clinton is a Democrat so she is viewed as an acceptable choice - though to be honest both she and Obama have views that are much too centrist IMHO. And most of these Democratic women wouldn't vote for a Bushite like Condi simply because of gender.

              Excess ain't rebellion. You're drinking what they're selling. - Cake

              by slatsg on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 04:28:41 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

    •  Well, I'm a white woman (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      who's been supporting Obama since Edwards dropped out. My white parents-in-law were with Obama from the beginning.

      It's not enough to be a woman -- I have to feel that the candidate is the right woman for the job, and I just didn't feel that with Clinton. I don't think any Democrat woman in her right mind would support Liddy Dole or Condi Rice for presdient, solely on the basis of her gender. On the Dem side, who would support someone like, say, Dianne Feinstein? On the other hand, there are plenty of Democratic women who I could either support now (such as Barbara Boxer) or would like to hear more from in the future (Rep. Barbara Lee is one who comes to mind, or some of our female governors like Napolitano or Sebelius).

      The combination of some questionable votes (AUMF, Kyl-Lieberman), certain proposals (flag-burning, video-game censortship), and the knowledge that the name of Clinton would be a rallying cry for the right-wing, gave me serious pause when considering Clinton.  This country needs a new direction, and I feel that Obama has the best opportunity to provide it.

      "Old soldiers never die -- they get young soldiers killed." -- Bill Maher

      by Cali Scribe on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:59:19 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  It's really amazing what our "winner take all" (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, Geenius at Wrok, ER Doc, fayea

    political system does to us.  Win all or lose all--it makes enemies.

    Some of us have tried to defang some of the vitriol, to greater or lesser degrees.  I can say that if Hillary is the nominee, I would support her.  My daughter--who has been flapping, growling mad over campaign tactics said a few days ago that after looking into McCain's record, she couldn't see herself letting that guy get elected.

    So maybe people are coming around.  Everybody.  Not just you.

    A great diary.  Wonderful.

    "The race is not always to the swift, but to those who keep running."

    by Fasaha on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:47:40 AM PDT

  •  Thanks (6+ / 0-)

    I had the same concerns you describe about Obama. I am not post partisan. I am not partisan.

    I read something from The Audacity of Hope that got me to think that Barack Obama is a step ahead of me in his political thinking.

    He notes (paraphrasing) that division serves people who don't want government to work. People who want government to work to solve problems want unity.

    So is he going to get everybody to agree and get along? No. The appeal of the Republican party is the consolation of having enemies and people aren't going to give it up.

    But for us, we want to promote unity. Thank you for getting on the unity train. The way you did it was moving to me. I will take your inspiration for how I can contribute to keeping the unity train moving, full steam ahead.

    From an abomination to an Obama Nation

    by copithorne on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:48:27 AM PDT

  •  I've noticed you around Angry Mouse... (6+ / 0-)

    and I have a great deal of respect for your integrity and courage based on what I've seen. I'm so happy to see sane diarys like your's making the rec list and appearing with more frequency. Your empathetic nature --something that can be so hard maintain -- shines through this diary and presents itself as strength. Thanks for being so up-front about your thinking and, for what it's worth, coming to the decision you've made. Here's hoping we ALL win (even if we don't notice it at the time).

    "Ring the bells that still can ring, forget your perfect offering, there's a crack, a crack in everything...that's how the light gets in." -- Leonard Cohen

    by doug in texas on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:48:47 AM PDT

  •  Democracy Now is the only thing that kept me sane (7+ / 0-)

    during the run up to, and initial invasion of Iraq. For all the love (rightly) given here to Racheal Maddow, I would like to see the same for Amy Goodman. She (sorry KO) is the best in the buisness.

  •  Re: Obama as "compromiser:" (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    bubbalie 517, RubyGal

    I don't want to compromise.  I don't want to find common ground with the same people who think intelligent design is as legitimate a theory as evolution.

    Look at how Obama is standing firm on his position regarding the seating of the Florida and Michigan delegates.  There you have a real life example of how he adheres to his position with a smile on his face, and feels no need to compromise for the sake of compromise.  I don't think you need to worry about him being a pushover, Angry Mouse.

    •  True, though unprincipled obstinance (0+ / 0-)

      is not a virtue.   And for me, obstructing resolution to the question of FL and MI is unprincipled.   No one should cave to an unreasonable answer, but it seems that there have been a number of reasonable alternatives proposed and there has been no support offered to them.

      •  I'm not sure they were reasonable (0+ / 0-)

        even if the intent was honorable because all solutions that required a revote guaranteed a waste of financial resources at a time when party coffers ought to be going towards defeating John McCain.  Nobody was stepping up to the plate to fund those endeavors.

        The solutions that did not involve a revote in my opinion were patently unfair to any candidate other than the ones that went against party rules and placed their names on the ballot.  I'm not sure what Hillary's mindset was at that time.  I can't imagine she foresaw the mess she'd be in at this stage.  Obviously at the time it was Obama's only strategy to play by the rules because his financial resources were low and it's just not a good idea to buck the party when you're behind.

        It's easy to point fingers in this situation but, if you were Obama, what would you do or have done about Fl and Mich?

        "I still say a church steeple with a lightning rod on top shows a lack of confidence" Doug McLeod

        by artmartin on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:49:02 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  I'm actually not clear on that one (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tyelperion, highacidity

      My understanding is that fundamentally, it's up to the state legislatures to decide on revotes.

      But there is a principle at stake with the Michigan revotes - if there is to be a revote, then those who voted in the Republican primary but aren't Republicans should be allowed to vote in the re-vote.

  •  Thank you so much. <<Much hugs>> n/t (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, Scoopster, Angry Mouse
  •  The person who supports intelligent design (25+ / 0-)

    may also be supporting a local, organic farmer.

    We come together when we find that common ground on which we can agree.

    That intelligent design believer may also believe war in Iraq is wrong; it's common ground.

    That intelligent design believer may also feel homosexuality is wrong, and I'll stand up for my belief that human sexuality is not a choice, it's a spectrum. But if we can at least use our common beliefs to hold a conversation, I'll take the opportunity.

    Thank you for the beautiful, thoughtful diary. Thank you for dialogue.

    "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." George Orwell

    by zic on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:51:49 AM PDT

    •  Great points. I have a lot in common with (12+ / 0-)

      some of the hard-core second amendment folks when it comes to preserving our parklands and wilderness areas.

      •  Living in ME, I can understand that. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Valerie, pontechango, blue jersey mom

        We get lots of folks from down south, coming here to save our forests. While some of them actually understand what they're talking about, most just think cutting a tree is bad. Any tree.

        But hunters, they know they ways of the woods, and they want them rich with wildlife. And if it they were not here, we would have a much bigger problem with deer starving then we already have -- though that's partly because we've removed their former predator, the wolf, from the environment.

        "In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." George Orwell

        by zic on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:17:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Excellent points. Thank you. nt (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Valerie, zic, fhcec
    •  Exactly (12+ / 0-)

      Take Mike Huckabee.  On certain social issues I think he's...well, to be polite, I disagree with his positions.

      But on certain other issues, he's in agreement with many of us (he actually believes in that whole "helping the poor" part of religion, and that colors his political views).  He's something of a populist on many economic issues.

      Obama has worked with Coburn and Lugar in the Senate.  Doesn't mean he's sacrificed his core beliefs, but he's seen areas where he and they share common ground, and has engaged them constructively.  And that's how you get things done.

      Heck, if the Founding Fathers hadn't sought common ground, we'd be a bunch of small countries scattered across North America instead of the United States.

      Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery; none but ourselves can free our minds

      by synchronicityii on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:05:51 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I miss the Huckster... (5+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Valerie, zic, SherriG, redtex, novaseeker

        Is it just me? It was nice to see an actual, real live "Compassionate Conservative" at work. Plus - he was really charming.

        •  No he was the kind of (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Nonie3234, Angry Mouse

          conservative with whom, as Obama would say, we can disagree without being disagreeable.  He has some views which I strongly disagree with (many of his views actually), but I don't think he's a bad guy.

          That's kind of what Obama is saying as well.  Of course he disagrees with the conservatives in many ways and on many points.  But he doesn't think they are evil.  He refuses to demonize them, because he thinks demonizing them only makes it harder to get things done at the end of the day (and I think he's quite right about that).

          In many ways the real difference between Barack and Hillary, to the extent that there is much of one, relates to this exact issue: what is the best way to deal with the Republicans when we are trying to get our agenda passed.  And I can totally understand how reasonable minds can differ on that, with some people thinking that the only way to do it is to fight fire with fire, and others thinking that creative compromises can be found with the other side.  That's a key difference, I think, and it's quite understandable that people will have different views as to how to approach that problem.

          •  I actually do think he's a bad guy (0+ / 0-)

            though likable.  He signed on to things about women, etc. that are just horrifying.  That said, if he had a good position on a particular issue, even if it was only one, I'd be happy to have him on board.
            I tried once to think of one good thing, just one, that Bush had done, and couldn't come up with anything.  I could with Reagan, who was awful, and Nixon, who was truly awful, but not with Bush who is so beyond awful there are no words.

            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 Apr 02, 2008 at 02:14:54 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  I miss his one-liners... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Nonie3234, novaseeker

          but that's about it.

    •  True, but the young earth creationists (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      are fucking nuts!

    •  Many years ago, my organization got Henry Hyde, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      virulent anti-abortion guy, to sign on to a bill helping pregnant women and babies.  We might not have agreed on anything else, but we used his "protecting the unborn" to persuade him to help living children and their mothers.
      And Kennedy got Hatch, who I usually pretty much despise, to co-sponsor and strongly fight for the State Children's Health Insurance Program.  
      Domenici and some other Republicans have been good on mental health issues because of the mental illness of some close family members.
      So I agree, common ground on particular issues can move the country in the direction we want it to go.

      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 Apr 02, 2008 at 02:11:43 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Tipped and rec'd. (5+ / 0-)

    This is a gracious and thoughtful diary. Many, many thanks.

  •  Thank You For Your Comments (4+ / 0-)

    It should have been the Obama supporters reaching out en masse to the Hillary supporters. We did have
    Kid Oakland make a distinction between Clinton and her supporters. It would be wonderful if Hillary realized she was not going to win, and encouraged her followers to unify behind Obama.

    So far, that is not happening. But at some point in the future, we are going to need you and her supporters to be on our team. With, or without Hillary's encouragement. So we should do everything we can to not antagonize her followers, instead, we need to reach out to them. Sure, we have differences, but in the long run, the Hillary supporters will be our allies and help us defeat John McCain. We need them.

    This is the path that will lead to an Obama victory in November.

    Remember, THEY hate us for our Freedom! The freedom for the President to do as he damn well pleases.

    by Tuba Les on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:52:26 AM PDT

  •  Hugs ;-) (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, bustacap, pamelabrown

    Thank you for being one of those "Better angels" we hear about.  Great diary, honest introspection.

    The problem with Us vs. Them...there IS no Them.

    by Maori on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:52:53 AM PDT

  •  Cheers Angry Mouse (19+ / 0-)

    I will also throw into the mix this.

    I am a huge Obama supporter. I liked the guy back in early 2004, when I heard his name for the first time as one of the original Dean Dozen.

    I had high respect for Howard Dean when there was so little hope for us and so much pain in the country, coming off 9/11 and seeing that so manipulatively twisted into the suffering that has become the Iraq War. When I checked out why Dean would support this no-name politician back then as part of a next wave of politicans who could bring change, I liked what I learned about Obama: spoke out against the Iraq War when few pols dared, a solid progressive, and also had a reputation for reaching out across the aisle to work with Republicans (the Illinois Senate was majority Republican for awhile). And I also loved that he was multiracial. I am too, and I feel like I have a similar worldview to Obama, possibly because of that.

    My impression was formed before he won his seat to the US Senate.

    Since then, those core impressions of him haven't changed. I've learned even more about the politician that leads me to think he will be a good President. I learned about His doggedness in thinking through other perspectives on a policy problem. His activist past: what a great perspective to bring to the White House -- a respect for community organizing.


    Obama is a politician. Perhaps an atypical politician, but still.

    As an Obama supporter, I greatly value criticism towards Obama. Because I do not believe he will never vacillate on important issues. I do not believe he is immune to corporate or political pressures. Or that he is without flaws. Or can be overly cautious where we need him to lead.

    In other words, being a politician is Obama's job. But it's OUR JOB to remember that he is one, and that we are supposed to, in addition to giving him support, also challenge him when he's not living up to what we need him to do. Because he will fail us sometimes. And we will help effect bigger changes if we keep that in mind that he has flaws as a politician.

    •  Thats my rambling way of saying (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Valerie, highacidity, drumlanrig

      If you've offered constructive criticism of Obama as a Clinton supporter (key word being constructive) in the past, I thank you for it, even as an Obama supporter.

      And thank you for the diary.

    •  Abso-fucking-lutely. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Valerie, pamelabrown, drumlanrig

      Your last paragraph really says it all.

    •  This is why transparency is so critical (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      In other words, being a politician is Obama's job. But it's OUR JOB to remember that he is one, and that we are supposed to, in addition to giving him support, also challenge him when he's not living up to what we need him to do. Because he will fail us sometimes. And we will help effect bigger changes if we keep that in mind that he has flaws as a politician.

      If there was one selling point. one issue that reassured me. it was transparency. Because with that tool, we can do our job - the people's job - which is oversight of the government.

      If government remains secretive and closed, it won't matter who we elect, we will always be helpless to hold politicians accountable for their actions.

      "I ain't so afraid of losing something that I ain't gonna try to have it." Zoe (Firefly)

      by geejay on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:56:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This is a lovely diary (9+ / 0-)

    Even if it didn't ultimately have you coming to Obama, it was just a wonderfully written and thoughtful diary.  

    Thank you.

    "2009" The end of an error

    by sheddhead on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:55:01 AM PDT

  •  I hope this is the start of the Great Chillout (7+ / 0-)

    Personally, I am surprised that the current level of bile hasn't collapsed.

    There's no reason to become alarmed, and we hope you'll enjoy the rest of your week. By the way, is there anyone here who knows how to run a government?

    by iconoclastic cat on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:57:06 AM PDT

    •  it's being driven by a very active primary (0+ / 0-)

      there's going to be continued tension and friction as long as the primary campaigning is negative. We should seek to try to temper our responses and make the atmosphere as positive as possible, but it's unrealistic to expect sweetness and light when the campaigns are slugging it out in sometimes bitter and hurtful ways

      "I ain't so afraid of losing something that I ain't gonna try to have it." Zoe (Firefly)

      by geejay on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:01:05 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks for this (4+ / 0-)

    I have long been an Obama supporter and I fully admit that I am emotionally invested in his campaign.  If he too were thisclose behind the frontrunner I would be heartbroken to have come so close and yet not make it.

    I would need to grieve, too.  Thanks for posting this.  You have a lot of class.

  •  Quite possibly one of the most (4+ / 0-)

    heartfelt and touching diaries I have read in my short time here.  Thanks for poignantly reminding us all what the real prize is in this contest.

    Welcome aboard & I hope you enjoy the ride.

    Perspective: available by the pint at your nearest pub.

    by IDrankWhat on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:58:06 AM PDT

  •  thank you (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, orangeuglad

    great diary appreciate it very said it all so nothing for me to add....

    ~whatever we need is what is given

    by petercjack on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:59:10 AM PDT

  •  As an Edwards supporter, the need to mourn (18+ / 0-)

    is something I can understand, as is the sense of, how did the Dixie Chicks phrase it, not being ready to make nice with republicans.  

    But I had about 10 days to decide in advance of my primary, and unenthusiastically voted for Obama.  I'd had it with the triumphalism and ageism of his supporters here after ONE caucus victory, and with the sophistry and smugness of Clinton supporters.  So, for awhile afterward, I stayed away.

    But I'll tell you something about Obama.  He grows on you.

    At first a perfunctory supporter, and though still happy to criticize some of his positions, I would now follow him anywhere.

    I don't know how else to say it.  He is a candidate of uncommon potential, in an umcommon historical moment, and together we can move mountains.  Together we are the change we've hoped for.

    All this by way of saying welcome home.  Take your time.  Get comfortable.  

    •  I found the sane thing about Sen Biden (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      But I'll tell you something about Obama Biden.  He grows on you.

      He has a bad rep here for afew of his votes. And those votes were bad. But I learned a lot about him before the Iowa primary and unbeknownst to most Kossacks, his biography offers much to admire.

      What do Senators Biden and Obama have in common? They are the 99th and 100th richest of the 100 Senators. (At least IIRC and that info is still current.)

      Now Sen Obama has had only a few years to get his beak wet, but Sen Biden by now could have squirreled away a fortune. (Squirrels got beaks?)

      Take your fear and shove it, it ain't workin' on us no more.

      by Quicklund on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:16:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  What a gracious, thoughtful, kind diary (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, pat208, orangeuglad

    Thank you, angry mouse.

  •  Thank you for this (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    barath, pamelabrown, bubbalie 517

    And welcome!  I'm an Obama supporter, but I was originally for John Edwards.  I moped for a bit when he dropped out; so I understand what you mean by needing a mourning period.  I think that's natural for anybody who passionately supports a candidate.

    I just posted a long comment on one of Alegre's diaries over at MyDD, inspired by Deoliver47's diary this morning.  We all have to remember who the real enemy is.  It's not Clinton, and it's not Obama.  It's John McCain.  Period.

    Self-criticism is the secret weapon of democracy. ~ Adlai E. Stevenson

    by writerswrite on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:00:22 AM PDT

  •  Never drink the kool-aid (7+ / 0-)

    I have only been an Obama supporter for about a month, since right before the Ohio election, in which I voted for him!

    However, I would recommend never drinking the kool-aid - of any candidate - at least not too much of it. Too much Kool-aid has a dangerous way of blinding and deafening the drinker to real concerns that AVERAGE voters might have, concerns that kool-aiders gloss over call silly or absurb. They are real concerns if average voters think about them and they affect their decision in November.

    I like a lot of what Obama has to say, I like a lot of what Hillary has to say...but, I honestly think that Obama will be a better President.

    Are his ideas and plans perfect or even close to it? Oh, hell no! But, I think he's the best we're going to get this election.

  •  Here's to civility and mutual respect! (4+ / 0-)

    We are all Democrats.

    You are a child of the universe; no less than the trees and the stars... Desiderata

    by byteb on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:01:14 AM PDT

  •  Oh my---the fake accent....pew she stinks.. (0+ / 0-)

    A fake Southern accent for NC.  Ick.  It's like Madonna and her phony English accent after living there for like 2 weeks.

    •  What a lying demagogue (0+ / 0-)

      She just said:

      "I didn't understand why Senator Obama and some of his supporters wanted to prevent you and other states from actually being able to vote."

      I know this diary is conciliatory and I respect what Angry Mouse is trying to do here, but this is just one more example of Clinton's lies and demagoguery. Saying that Hillary should concede has nothing to do with whether the people of North Carolina get to vote and have their votes counted. Plus, Obama himself has said the exact opposite -- that she should stay in as long as she wants. It's one lie piled on top of another.

      And it's typical. Typical. Like the whole NAFTA-Canada bit of ratfucking when, if anyone, it was the Clinton campaign that had made the backchannel statements to the Canadian Embassy. Or the attacks on Obama's pro-choice credentials.

      Lordy. Angry Mouse, if you are reading this, you have to understand that the hostility people feel for Clinton results directly from the things she says and does. She's vile.

      Her whole campaign has become an appeal to resentment.

      Vote for Hillary, dump Howard Dean, bring back McAuliffe, end people-powered politics and restore triangulation.

      by expatjourno on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:04:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  After reading some of the dust up over MyDD (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        expatjourno, orangeuglad

        I went and checked it out. There is way more Obama support and dessent on that site to the Hillary squad than I expected or that writers here had made it out to be. Way more for sure than there has been a pro Hillary contingent on DKos for a while.

        But what I found consistant is that predominantly the jibes and slights and general negative perceptions flung from Clinton supporters are not toward Obama but toward his supporters, and that is not true for the pro Obama bloggers. Their ire is predominantly directed straight at Hillary.

        Maybe that's partly due to her losing. But it tells something about how this dynamic and animosity has built up and played out, with the strike and all.
        I think the exhuberance over Obama caused a lot of resentment in other candidate camps.

        •  Interesting observation. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          I can't bring myself to go over there, since I don't want to raise my blood pressure, so I'll take your word for it. It certainly jibes with my experience.

          I was for Edwards, but the exuberance of some Edwards supporters, who seemed to chronicle what he had for lunch in diaries here, really grated. It was not unusual to see three or four Edwards diaries on the rec list at the same time.

          And then, when he started to fall behind, all too many Obama supporters whote comments and diaries saying that Edwards should drop out and back Obama because it had turned into a two-person race.

          Of course, before that, in the gray mists of time before Iowa, Clinton supporters smugly informed all of us that Hillary was going to be the next president and we should all get used to it.

          Vote for Hillary, dump Howard Dean, bring back McAuliffe, end people-powered politics and restore triangulation.

          by expatjourno on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:52:33 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well this Obama supporter never suggested Edwards (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            drop out because I suspected most of his support would go Hillary's way. Not in the blogospher but in the corn belt and South. Which didn't make sense to me ideologically but made sense pragmatically.

            I didn't mind the Edwards majority, except the few overly aggressive assaults on Obama's liberalism. I never saw attacks on Obama's conservative sympathies credible. But then I never saw Edwards as the uber liberal he was portrayed as.

            What's clear now and what I've always believed about this election is that the major issue is not ideological, it's political, it's about how and for whom power is obtained and managed first and formost. The ideoligical devides in our government have proved largely a sham, disengenuous at best. I think the ideological profile of our policy will follow the distribution of power not the other way around. While I very much appreciate Edwards campaign I think it's message was misguided in proposing a forced ideological shift would redistribute power to the people. I think Obama's appeal to empower to the broadest swath possible is a self fulfilling prophesy of policy that will represent us. A more effective means to the same supposed ends.

            •  You're more patient than I am. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              I minded the Edwards majority even when I was an Edwards supporter. I don't know if Obama's means are going to be more effective, but I agree with you about power and am 100% convinced that Obama's approach is worth a try. I don't think there will ever be a more effective advocate and I don't think there will ever be better timing.

              Vote for Hillary, dump Howard Dean, bring back McAuliffe, end people-powered politics and restore triangulation.

              by expatjourno on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 04:12:07 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  concerns about partisanship (9+ / 0-)

    I'm a former Edwards supporter. I had the same concerns about Obama that you have -- ie his talk of bipartisanship kind of didn't sit well with me & worried me, especially when contrasted with Edwards' more forceful, blunt talk of taking vested interests on, etc. A lot of folks like me were attracted to Edwards for this reason. And I would guess that a lot of Edwards folks, like me, are much more liberal than he is. And yet that affirmation and acknowledgement -- and legitimizing -- of the fight that awaits us if we take on the tough issues and special interests -- boy, was that appealing! He also in a way legitimized partisanship -- the good kind, as opposed to partisanship for the sake of beating your opponent into a pulp, but in the service of getting things done and making big change for people who work for a living. I really appreciated that about his campaign.

    It took me awhile to warm up to Obama's less partisan message. I still have concerns, but less so. But I also think it's a fair point that for most voters who aren't political junkies and strong partisan Dems -- like you and like me -- that more toned down message is probably a winning message. And if that helps Obama actually get elected -- which Edwards couldn't manage to do -- then we are all better off.

    The other thing that has really inspired me about Obama's campaign and has helped, for me, to get on board, is the nature of the campaign he's running. Having worked my behind off for a year for Howard Dean's campaign, only to see it crash and burn, and to see Kerry reject the grassroots strategy in 2004 -- it is just such a wonderful sight to see: a truly grassroots, 50 state campaign that is attracting so many young people, longtime non-voters, etc. Wow, just wow. And in the long run, whoever wins the Presidency, they will need that grassroots army to fight the 24/7 GOP slime machine, the media, the special interests, all of it. Clinton or Obama -- they will both face the battle of all battles to accomplish ANYTHING. The only hope is that they will have an army of supporters to stand behind them and DEMAND action, and fight the media BS, etc. Even then it will be a battle royale, let's not kid ourselves. I think back on Bill Clinton's presidency, where he didn't have that kind of citizen, grassroots backing for most of his term -- think what he could have accomplished if he did -- if MoveOn had been around in 1992, for ex. Also think what we could have demanded he not do -- Telecom "reform", NAFTA, welfare reform, gays in the military, etc. Clinton or Obama will not only need to be supported and defended but held accountable to actually implement real reform. They will both disappoint us. They will both need to be pressured -- just like the Dems in Congress. So the greater the grassroots army that gets them there, imho, the better shot we have to actually hold them accountable. In theory. :-)

    Thank you for posting such an honest and thought provoking diary.


    "The country we carry in our hearts is waiting." ~ Bruce Springsteen

    by abs0628 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:01:25 AM PDT

  •  A Voice of Reason . . . (4+ / 0-)

    Thank you so much for your diary.  It helps me immensely because I find myself getting very angry and I don't want to be one of "those" people.  We must come together.  We are more alike than we are different.  We all have a right to our views and choices but, in my opinion, we are serving no purpose by attacking each other.  We are liberals, after all, we value hugs over fights.  I do anyway.
    If Obama wins, no gloating on my part, guaranteed, just relief that it's over.  Then onto the next phase of this marathon, taking back the White House.
    Hug, Cheers & Peace to you for your courage and reason . . .

  •  great diary (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, peraspera, bustacap

    You've spoken my own unarticulated thoughts!

    Housing is a human right.

    by maki on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:06:06 AM PDT

  •  An uninvited contribution.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I appreciate that you have concerns about Obama.  I do not believe our current political process can create a candidate that would concern none of their followers.. McCain is the concensus Republican nominee, and you'll be hard-pressed to find a Republican who doesn't worry about what sort of President he would make.

    But the time for a subtle evaluation of Obama's potential flaws has long since past.  Despite some people's view, the 2008 Presidential race is a choice between the policies of Republican John McCain.. and Democrat Barack Obama.  Hillary has absolutely no chance at the nomination in any manner that does not set the entire party on fire.  I think that more and more people are realizing this, and accepting it as fact.

    Once you move beyond this "reality threshold".. Obama's manner of dealing with those who do not agree with him should pale in importance when compared to McCain's plans for our country.  If you are concerned that a Democratic advantage might be lessened with a conciliatory attitude (not that I make that claim, but just saying it for the purpose of this argument).. and you think that a better solution would be to elect the Republican himself.. I don't imagine anything I say would be able to dent that shield of faulty reasoning.

  •  Thanks for posting this. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, peraspera

    For the last week or so, I've been trying to put myself in the shoes of any HRC supporter. I'd originally thought I'd lean toward her myself, but then decided to back Obama. However, I've been trying to picture how I'd feel if I was going to have to switch candidates. It's made me increasingly more sympathetic toward Clinton's supporters.

    There's been a lot of idealism in this campaign. On both sides. We're both blessed and unfortunate having two strong candidates. But regardless, I thank you for this reasoned post, and for providing hope that we will move beyond this supposed "rift" in the party.

    Change in 2008!

  •  Thank you for a thoughtful (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, peraspera, pat208

    intelligent diary.

    I'm sorry that some Obama supporters may have been obnoxious in their exhuberance in candidate diaries, but that doesn't mean that Edwards, and now Hillary, supporters should be insulted.

    Big hug, and welcome aboard!

    All aboard the O train!

    by xyz on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:07:40 AM PDT

  •  Thank you so much for this (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, Angry Mouse

    We won't take you for granted, and we'll be right with you when President Obama seems to be making compromises that we can't afford.  What a relief.

    It's the stupid, stupid.

    by Bindle on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:07:59 AM PDT

  •  More thoughts on Obama as "compromiser" (17+ / 0-)

    I wanted to address your concern about how Obama plans to reach across the aisle -- and does that mean compromising important principles.  To me, this is where the light bulb went on.  This is Obama on abortion rights, when a pro-lifer asked him a question about the thousands of babies being "murdered" and likened it to Michael Vick and his dogfighting:

    "Now, this is one of those areas – again, I think it’s important to be honest – where I don’t think you’re ever going to get a complete agreement on this issue. If you believe that life begins at conception, then I can’t change your mind. I think there is a large agreement, for example, that late-term abortions are really problematic and there should be a regulation. And it should only happen in terms of the mother’s life or severe health consequences, so I think there is broad agreement on these issues.

    "One area where I think we should have significant agreement is on the idea of reducing unwanted pregnancies because if we can reduce unwanted pregnancies, then it’s much less likely that people resort to abortion. The way to do that is to encourage young people and older people, people of child-bearing years, to act responsibly. Part of acting responsibly – I’ve got two daughters – part of my job as a parent is to communicate to them that sex isn’t casual and that it’s something that they should really think about and not think is just a game.

    "I’m all for education for our young people, encouraging abstinence until marriage, but I also believe that young people do things regardless of what their parents tell them to do and I don’t want my daughters ending up in really difficult situations because I didn’t communicate to them, how to protect themselves if they make a mistake. I think we’ve got to have that kind of comprehensive view that says family planning and education for our young people and so forth – to prevent teen pregnancies, to prevent the kinds of situations that lead to women having to struggle with these difficult decisions and we should be supportive of those efforts. That’s an area where there should be some agreement."

    He didn't waver from his pro-choice position, but he nodded to the concerns of pro-lifers in a calm, neutral way, and then found the common ground -- prevented the unwanted pregnancies in the first place.  That made a big impression on me.

  •  Thats a great story (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Canadian Reader, Valerie

    There's a lot in there about human suffering and the response to it. The role of empathy in human interaction, making an effort to see as others see, is soooo important to a healthy society.

    I too do not want to compromise with the issue of ID/Evol , one side is CLEARLY wrong. I have come to think however that there can be a way to address the concerns of most of the ID defenders and not yield any ground from evolution.
    The key is discussing evolution intelligently and not relying on half assed scientists to lead the way. People are not stupid because they fear a world that is seen as totally random might lack meaning, however they are wrong if they have been led to believe that evolution is totally random. No credible evolutionary scientist has ever claimed evolution to be a completely random process. Evolution needs to be taught properly.

    I do believe there are ways through the partisanship with most of the people, although 7-15% of either side are just going to be unreasonable jerks who never want to get along.

  •  I felt the same way (8+ / 0-)

    before Iowa, and I preferred Edwards for his anger. Eventually, I saw that 1)Obama was, in effect, proposing to realign the center by moving it to the left, and that going toe to toe with the right in a shouting match almost always favors the right.I thought it was strategically masterful to absorb the right, more or less. Only Obama has that gift.It seems less likely that he will be able to do that now than then, but, I do believe he will overwhelm McCain with new voters, and that he will partly win by embracing McCain in a sort of  bear hug, pointing out McCain's reformist tendencies and alienating him from his base.

    1. It occurred to me that the Clintons only got the support of the Democratic left by lining us up with them against the "vast right wing conspiracy." The right hated the Clintons for all the wrong reasons: they are now wise to the fact that Hillary is not their ideological opposite number. The fact is, they would not only prefer her as an opponent-they would probably prefer her as president.

    3)Here is Obama in Pennsylvania yesterday: "I’m tired of playing defense. I know the AFL-CIO is tired of playing defense. We’re ready to play some offense. We’re ready to play offense for a decent wage. We’re ready to play offense for retirement security. We’re ready to play offense for universal health care."

    •  I'm ready to play offense too. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Progressive Witness, drumlanrig


      •  Offense, yes. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Charging straight at the enemy macnine guns no.  The direct attack strategy on WW One is analagous to the Edwardsian propopsal to confront the 'entrenched interests.'  It is an easy strategy to describe but it is very costly in practive.

        The indirect attack is generally superior.  In WW Two, fast-moving forces would attack and break through at a weak point.  Then istead of attacking the enemy army directly, they would sweep around to attack theis supplie sources of food, fuel and ammunition.  Thus starved the enemy soldiers would be forced to surrender.

        The polical analogy in this context is to break through at the weak point (find a point of compromise) then leverage that point of agreement into a larger piece of legislation.  How?  By threaening the opposition's source of supply (ie votes.)

        For example take Health Care.  Even the GOP concedes costs are getting out of hand.  Expect a President Obama to begin a dialogue by describing where teh two sides already agree.  Once this is done the GOP is on the record agreeing Change Must Occur.  At that point the Democrats press the point - public support for reform is overwhelming.  If the GOP drags their feet at that point the backlash in 2010 will be fatal.  The GOP will be forced to cave in, lest they see the Democrats with a veto-proof, fillibuster-proof Congress in 2010.

        This method will not work forever.  But it should work long enough to get major progress on the Big Three: Health Care, Iraq, Global Warming.  

        Hope this helps or at least makes sense to someone besides me. :)

        Take your fear and shove it, it ain't workin' on us no more.

        by Quicklund on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:33:21 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Thank you Mouse. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, Pandoras Box

    We can change the world. Let's start with America. Obama for America '08

    by Blogvirgin on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:10:37 AM PDT

  •  The healing starts with us. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, Pandoras Box, Angry Mouse

    It has to. We have been influencing the MSM narrative in so many ways. It is time for us to use the blogosphere to promote the healing our party needs.

    Represent, people. The whole world is watching.

    Fight the real enemy....the neo-cons!

    by eclecticbrotha on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:11:12 AM PDT

  •  It's The Policy Stupid (0+ / 0-)

    The politician is only a vehicle to get the policy that the voter is looking for. You want to get invested in personalities, join a fan club or root for a sports team.

  •  Great! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, Pandoras Box

    This is why I am not worried about jilted Edwards and Clinton supporters coming out for Obama in the general.

    We are all Democrats, and we must be united if we are to help the country heal and not be destroyed by the other side.

    You know who's hoping we don't get our shit together? His name rhymes with "McSame."

    100-foot tall robotic Obama vs. mini-Ditka. Who wins?

    by droogie6655321 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:12:26 AM PDT

  •  Thanks for a meaningful diary... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, pat208, Angry Mouse

    and thanks for sticking around for the spirited conversation!

  •  Welcome, and thank you. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, Angry Mouse

    As I said in k/o's diary last night:

    Second, remember how things felt for us last summer.  Or fall.  How hard it was that no one thought we had a chance.  That every story we read was about being back in the polls.  About how much the structure of the race favored Clinton.  How hard and painful all that was, and how we never believed it.  We knew our candidate, we believed in him and we weren't going to pay attention to what everyone else thought.  Were we bad people?  Delusional?  No.  Lots of people support Clinton for good reasons.  Think about how they feel now.    Frankly, they might not want to even see the olive branch.  But it's still worth extending anyway.

    If the roles were reversed and I had to let go of my vision of Obama winning, I know it would be very hard to accept that.  I hope I could do it as gracefully as you have done here.

  •  to the obama supporters (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, Psyche, FORUS50

    It's bizarre the way Obama supporters conflate themselves with him.

    People who vote for Obama are voting for HIM, not his SUPPORTERS.

    Surely you see the difference?

    When someone chooses to support Obama (or Hillary or Edwards or my Aunt Lucy) they aren't necessarily jumping in bed with the supporters. (Maybe they are, like Angry Mouse, but that's the Mouse's choice.)

    (Psst. Just so you know, you guys aren't going to get tours of the WH and decoder rings. You aren't going to have any power. All you're going to get is the realization that you voted for someone much, much more to the right than you imagined. But you would realize this if you paid more attention to his proposals, than his pretty smile.)

    I understand that a site like Kos can nurture a tribe mentality. And that's a good thing. Other than when, as we've seen during the primary, the tribe splits in twain; then it ain't pretty.

    Strap this on for size; it's possible to support Obama whole-heartedly and still dislike many of his supporters.

    That's pretty much where I stand right now.

    I was an Edwards supporter, and when he dropped out, so did I. I'll vote for whomever is the nominee. I don't really care which one. (Although Barack has stunning potential.)

    The antics from the Hillary campaign, and the Obama supporters, have been both entertaining and horrific to watch. But hopefully all that will stop soon so everyone can get onboard with an all-out media blitzkrieg against McCain.

    Tally ho.

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

      "People who vote for Obama are voting for HIM, not his SUPPORTERS."

      That's weird, because as an Edwards supporter, it was watching the kinds of voter turnout and caucus support that Obama's campaign has drummed up which brought me around to him. Not that the dude isn't a stunning public speaker and his perceived personality is obviously playing into some support, but nonetheless, Edwards was out right before California, so it was Obama or Clinton. I'll go with what is getting record levels of voter engagement.

      I take anything I read on the internet re: flaming and hyperbole with a grain of salt. The people going over the top on both sides could be anyone, from a lifelong dem having a bad day to a republican taking the 2 seconds required to make a new account just to stir up flames. People have taken a lot of what is patent nonsense posted here and on myDD far too seriously.

      I do want a secret decoder ring, though. That would be awesome.

  •  Good show (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, Shakludanto

    I think a poster at MyDD actually sums it up quite nicely with his/her sig line that I'd paraphrase as:

    Dem1 > Dem2 >>>>>>>>> John McCain.

    It matters not whether one places Obama or Clinton as Dem1 or Dem2 in the occasion above -- it's the pure function that matters.

    No need to drink the Kool-aid - I think Obama really can be a epochal President, one that can recapture some turf we lost to Reagan (i.e., the sunny optimism and unity cachet)  -- but no one need believe he's a messiah of any type.

    I guess everyone's got their own blog now.

    by zonk on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:14:48 AM PDT

  •  You hit the nail on the head with this! (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, discocarp, Angry Mouse, COwoman

    reality:  We need each other.

    Truer words were never spoken.  We really do!

    "Stupidity is the great equalizer!" - NonnyO

    by Pandoras Box on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:15:37 AM PDT

  •  Nice job, and glad you stayed (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, Angry Mouse

    As for your concerns about Obama, if I may:  do not confuse his call for unity as an indicatation that he will compromise on every issue we hold dear.  I think sometimes that when a leader is a good listener, he is mistaken for being "soft".  I have heard Obama's responses to various pro-lifers on Roe v. Wade, for instance, and while he listens and expresses his understanding of their position, he always unequivocally reiterates his belief in a woman's right to choose.  That will not change.  The bipartisanship he has demonstrated in the Senate is, I believe, the approach he advocates:  finding common ground on the issues we can all get behind, and working together toward solutions.

    Again, thanks for your diary and also your posts last night.

  •  I still go to myDD and read (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    discocarp, orangeuglad

    But it's not easy.  And I can't seem to post there, so that's not good.  

    But I think a lot of the negative tenor was fed by the negative tenor of the campaign(s).  If our candidates would be more positive about the campaign, have more integrity,
    it would be harder for bloggers & others to be so acidic.

    Not just words: Tax returns. Earmarks. Donor List.

    by Lib Noodle on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:17:31 AM PDT

  •  You don't have to drink the kool-aid.. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    You don't have to be an Obama supporter, or obamabot as they say, to exist here.

    You just have to keep an open mind, engage in vigorous self-examination, and occasionally test to see if someone's spiked your latte :P

    I'd say that goes for everyone regardless of which candidate they support.

  •  After all that you're still an... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, javelina, Sychotic1, COwoman

    "Angry Mouse"


    Thanks for sharing.  I understand a bit more now.

  •  A House Divided Against Itself Cannot Stand (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, LynneK, orangeuglad

    Lincoln also said, in his final speech before assasination:

    "No one man has authority to give up the rebellion for any other man. We simply must begin with, and mould from, disorganized and discordant elements. Nor is it a small additional embarrassment that we, the loyal people, differ among ourselves as to the mode, manner, and means of reconstruction."

    Now some interpret my fascination with the American Civil War as some type of accusation that Clinton supporters are all racists, or Southernors are evil, or what have you. Frankly, I'm simply just fascinated with the Civil War and think many if not most of the issues over which 19th century Americans were obsessed remain at the forefront of the public debate today. Not only the obviously racial ones, but less sensational ones as well, such as the nature of state's rights, or a fair tax system, or the limits of presidential power during a time of war, or even what happens when  or how to deal with the decline of one economic order and the rise of a new one, or what happens the Democratic party enters an election cycle bitterly divided among other issues. (Hint, Republicans win.)

    And while our history is far from perfect, I do have to reflect upon the fact that Obama suppoters and Clinton supporters haven't been killing each other by the hundreds of thousands for the past couple of months,  so we probably shouldn't complain overly much about the bitterness we'll have to overcome to be one again.  It can be done, and it definately shouldn't take us ten years to do it.

    Of course, keeping with the analogy, Obama has yet to accept Hillary's surrender at Appomatix. The war is still being fought, but Vicksburg has fallen, Gettysburg has been decided, and outside of the increasingly unlikely scenario of European intervention, its becoming increasingly obvious to observers how the war is going to end.  And so both camps are sending out peace-feelers, but  no man (or woman) has the authority to give up the rebellion for any other man. And while I'm hopeful we'll be one party again, I'm lament all the casualties we're still likely to suffer before guns fall silent again.  

    As I lament the fact the diversity of voices on either side of lines can, and unfortunately come to be viewed as, some sort of unified hatred emerging from either side of the lines.

    But such is human drama.

  •  One more thought about "Compromise" and (13+ / 0-)

    "BiPartisanship" - how he plans to do it is NOT to compromise, it is to CONVINCE. He believes firmly that Liberal Values are basic AMERICAN values, and he has the ablilty to convince people that this is - very simply - the right thing to do. It's all about FRAMING:

    George Lakoff

    First, triangulation: moving to the right -- adopting right-wing positions -- to get more votes. Bill Clinton did it and Hillary believes in it. It is what she means by "bipartisanship." Obama means the opposite by "bipartisanship." To Obama, it is a recognition that central progressive moral principles are fundamental American principles. For him, bipartisanship means finding people who call themselves "conservatives" or "independents," but who share those central American values with progressives. Obama thus doesn't have to surrender or dilute his principles for the sake of "bipartisanship."

    Judge Him by His Laws

    Consider a bill into which Obama clearly put his heart and soul. The problem he wanted to address was that too many confessions, rather than being voluntary, were coerced -- by beating the daylights out of the accused.

    Obama proposed requiring that interrogations and confessions be videotaped.


    ...the bill itself aroused immediate opposition. There were Republicans who were automatically tough on crime and Democrats who feared being thought soft on crime. There were death penalty abolitionists, some of whom worried that Obama's bill, by preventing the execution of innocents, would deprive them of their best argument. Vigorous opposition came from the police, too many of whom had become accustomed to using muscle to "solve" crimes. And the incoming governor, Rod Blagojevich, announced that he was against it.

    Obama had his work cut out for him.

    He responded with an all-out campaign of cajolery.


    Obama proved persuasive enough that the bill passed both houses of the legislature, the Senate by an incredible 35 to 0. Then he talked Blagojevich into signing the bill, making Illinois the first state to require such videotaping.


    ...Obama's campaign claim that he can persuade us to rise above what divides us is not just rhetoric.


    "Central progressive moral principles are fundamental American principles."

    •  Thank you for this. nt (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Valerie, Nonie3234, paintitblue
      •  No - thank YOU. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Angry Mouse

        It's a good question you had, and one that concerned me as well. I found those articles a while ago, and they helped me feel better about this issue. Like you - I was concerned about giving even an INCH toward wrong-headed ideas just to make nice. When you start reading about what he did in the Illinios Senate, I think you will feel much better about him.

        Here's another - written in 1995, long before he was a "rock star":

        What Makes Obama Run?

        What makes Obama different from other progressive politicians is that he doesn't just want to create and support progressive programs; he wants to mobilize the people to create their own. He wants to stand politics on its head, empowering citizens by bringing together the churches and businesses and banks, scornful grandmothers and angry young.


        "What I liked about Barack immediately is that he brought a certain level of sophistication and intelligence to community work," Owens says. "He had a reasonable, focused approach that I hadn't seen much of. A lot of organizers you meet these days are these self-anointed leaders with this strange, way-out approach and unrealistic, eccentric way of pursuing things from the very beginning. Not Barack. He's not about calling attention to himself. He's concerned with the work. It's as if it's his mission in life, his calling, to work for social justice.

        "Anyone who knows me knows that I'm one of the most cynical people you want to see, always looking for somebody's angle or personal interest," Owens added. "I've lived in Chicago all my life. I've known some of the most ruthless and biggest bullshitters out there, but I see nothing but integrity in this guy."

        Here's a diary here from an Edwards supporter that I saved:

        A Dozen Reasons Why This Edwards Supporter is Backing Obama

        Thank you for starting this conversation. We've had so many hurt feelings on both sides, it's really time to heal.

    •  Yes! Just had to repeat this (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      He believes firmly that Liberal Values are basic AMERICAN values, and he has the ablilty to convince people that this is - very simply - the right thing to do.

      This is what made me pull out my wallet for a candidate for the first time in my life.

      "I ain't so afraid of losing something that I ain't gonna try to have it." Zoe (Firefly)

      by geejay on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:20:15 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Me too. First time EVAR...and I am by no means a (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        geejay, redtex

        youngster. When I went to hear him speak here in Tampa, I waited in line between two women. The one in front of me (older, white) came from a long line of Republicans. The last time she voted was for Reagan. The woman behind me (much older, black) hadn't participated in any campaign since Angela Davis.

        We are all AMERICAN.
        Together, we are America.

        If there's a child on the south side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it's not my child. If there's a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for her prescription and has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it's not my grandmother. If there's an Arab American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties.

        It's that fundamental belief - I am my brother's keeper, I am my sister's keeper - that makes this country work. It's what allows us to pursue our individual dreams, yet still come together as a single American family.

        "E pluribus unum." Out of many, one.

  •  Great diary - in my househld things have been (8+ / 0-)

    tense.  I work for a local Democratic Party and have found myself becoming more excited by the prospect of a working for a candidate who rises above the usual trench warfare, who brings in new younger voters, who redefines the way campaigns should be conducted and puts an unhappy era behind us.  I'm an "Obama gona win guy"

    But my significant other is staunch Hillary supporter.  For her, Hillary represnts the realization of a dream, a dream she's now watching die.    She's in her mid- fifties and has worked all her life, she's dealt with the realities of misogyny in very personal ways.  At the moment she's angry, she feels betrayed by the Deomcratic Party.  She sees no humor in the barbs of Olberman and Matthews.

    She see's what to her is the better qualifed and more experienced woman going down  in flames and finds in that the reopening of many old wounds.  She's threatening to vote for  McCain.

    When I try to say in Presidiential elections that the issue of experience and qualifications has always been secondary to the ideas and philosophy presented by the candidates, it doesn't fly in her eyes.

    When I see the vitriol expresseed at times here I cannot help but think of her.  We cannot afford to lose people like her.  

    Youth sometimes is arrogant without much justification.  That is apparent here at times.

  •  Thanks for "soul" searching. (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, peraspera, Angry Mouse, soms

    It's often painful but more often productive.  Enjoy yourself today.  I think you've got alot of people echoing your sentiments.  I'm writing this with a smile on my face.

    John Stuart Mill: "...I did not mean to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative...

    by nolalily on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:20:46 AM PDT

  •  This is an amazing diary (6+ / 0-)

    I had a similar experience with angrymouse and we were able to find some common ground and on the rest, we agreed to disagree respectfully.  I really think this is what Obama means about finding commong ground.  He doesn't mean splitting the difference in how old the Earth is, but about finding the spaces in the debate where you can meet.  I think you could look at the dkos/mydd world as a microcosm for the political arena.  Bashing the crap out of each other gets very little done.  You may not agree, but you can treat your colleagues with respect.

  •  Your concerns with Obama are noted... (9+ / 0-)

    And they are legitimate, if only for the fact that so many Clinton supporters have voiced this concern.  I have a different take on this.  I work in an academic setting where I hear many people lecture and make speeches.  Usually, the lectures become something of an exercise in rote memorization.  I'm sure you remember the feeling of being in a class and listening to a lecture where nothing connects to you and nothing excites you.

    I would submit that Obama lectures in his speeches, but these speeches have an additional component, aside from giving out policy points.  They are designed to inspire.  Written words can also inspire, yet I can't remember the last time I saw 20,000 people sitting in a convention center or stadium, reading a speech and getting excited.

    Speeches and Obama's way of communicating to the voters is necessary and required.  I think he is sincere in what he says and what he writes.  Sometimes, when you support one great candidate or the other great candidate you'll be balancing what either of them say.  And if you are an Obama supporter, the scales may be biased a bit towards the benefit of the doubt for any specific issue, or any specific speech.

    I also do not want to compromise with Republicans.  I can't stand how they do business... and when they say that government just doesn't work for the people -- what they really mean is that a government run by Republicans just doesn't work for the people.  Governance under Democrats works just fine.

    Yet, there is room for compromise.  Let's say that for some reason Andrew Rice running for Senator Inhofe's seat in Oklahoma is defeated.  I don't want any compromise with Inhofe on climate change, as he is a certified idiot (at least in his public statements ridiculing global warming), but he may be helpful with other issues such as SCHIP or infrastructure improvements.

    This is the kind of compromise I'm looking for.  Not compromising our core Democratic values but finding a middle ground with specific Republicans on distinct issues.  They may not be the same Republicans on every issue, but I think that while our Democratic majority in the Senate, at least, is less than 61 (to allow for Lieberman to do his thing) we need to reach across the aisle on an issue-by-issue basis.  Clinton would do well at this, but when Congresspeople go back to their districts to sell the legislation, I think they would be hearing it from people still bitter with the Clintons.  Obam comes with no such baggage and his willingness to vie for voters no matter where they fall on the political spectrum is the kind of unity that was sorely missing after 2001.

    I think our two sides will come together before the convention and we will leave Denver feeling that a great work has just started, as all the work of the two campaigns will finally start seeing the light of day... all the calls to voters and the local organizing and the mobilization of voters and the stand-by plans for Republican voter suppression... we'll see all of that this fall.  I can't wait to vote out the last vestige of this failed Republican experiment in November.  And I'll be happily standing next to past and future Clinton supporters when I do it.

    ... false hope. But in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope. Obama 2008

    by BasharH on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:22:17 AM PDT

  •  Coming from the Edwards camp (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, BlueInARedState, BoiseBlue, soms

    I fully understand.
    And I still have my Edwards sticker on my car. Probably will for a long time.

    God is in your spare change, your job is giving it to strangers. - Billy Jonas

    by Audri on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:23:38 AM PDT

  •  I sure agree with you about this: (6+ / 0-)

    Simply, it is his talk of moving beyond partisanship, reaching out across the aisle, working together, compromising, finding common ground, et cetera.

    I can appreciate that sentiment.  I think it's noble.  It's idealistic.  It's very Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (which is a movie I love, by the way).


    I don't want to compromise.  I don't want to find common ground with the same people who think intelligent design is as legitimate a theory as evolution.

    I don't want to come together with the people who think it's okay for pharmacists to refuse to do their jobs because contraception violates their "morals."

    It's contentious of me, I know, but I don't want to get along with those people.  I don't want to compromise with them.

    They are wrong.  Plain and simple.

    The very first diary I wrote was a criticism of an Obama diary along exactly those lines. The original title called Obama's diary "appalling," but I was persuaded to tone it down. So I definitely know where you're your coming from on this part. I mean, I was for Edwards precisely because he was the most confrontational of the top three candidates.

    But I've been persuaded that Obama is being personally conciliatory without compromising principles. His outreach is really aimed at Republican voters more than Republican politicians. There is good reason to be skeptical of this strategy, but there are two important things in its favor.

    First, the Republican Party is not always as batshit crazy as it is  now. There are probably some Republican voters who aren't happy with the direction their party has taken but out of reflexive loyalty or out of a feeling that Democrats are unfit or unappealing, they vote Republican anyway. Basically, the GOP has always been their team. These people can be persuaded to join us for an election or two until their own party swings back to the center. Some of them will even discover that we aren't so bad after all and will stay.

    Second, for many people, Obama is as magical a speaker as JFK. I find myself moved beyond words by his speeches. I'm not sure why, but I think it's his appeal to our best instincts. I think it's possible that Obama can awaken the better angels within many Republican voters. And if he does, they are going to genuinely side with us on some issues. Not all issues, but some.

    I think it is at least worth a try. And if Obama can't succeed in this, then probably no one can and, fine, let's go back to politics as usual. Hillary Clinton is very good at that kind of politics and would make an excellent president if that kind of politics is all we can hope for.

    Vote for Hillary, dump Howard Dean, bring back McAuliffe, end people-powered politics and restore triangulation.

    by expatjourno on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:23:44 AM PDT

  •  As far as the compromising goes (6+ / 0-)

    I always think of his example of roe v. wade.  He is not willing to compromise on changing what is in place.  Rather he says lets work on reducing the number of abortions through education, info for adoption, etc.  Of course that was not nearly as eloquent as he puts it but I hope that I represented it okay enough.

  •  It's weird to be mentioned by name in the diary (10+ / 0-)

    I appreciate the sentiments of your diary.  I've thought about it recently and realized that if Obama were in Clinton's position now, I'd be despairing.  (Of course, since Obama was always a long-shot, if he had lost earlier on, I would have been more able to understand it.)

    But yes, I really think we can, as online and offline supporters alike, "disagree without being disagreeable", and eventually, hopefully, not have to dwell on what we disagree about, but rather, the great amount that we agree about.

  •  We need each other, true always, forgotten (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, peraspera, Angry Mouse, soms

    frequently. One of the underlying forces in the progressive side of the political world is the recognition that we all need each other. We are not at heart dividers, sitting in an opulent corner office, amassing goodies we collect and imagine make us special. We all see on many levels how we are all connected and that life is far richer when shared.

    You wrote a beautiful diary, thank you for being vulnerable, we all are and we all need to be reminded that we are people first. I have a friend who is in similar emotional circumstances, she a HRC supporter who sees the chance of a woman as president in her lifetime slipping away. It hurts. I am happy Obama is ahead and has a clear path to the nomination that is growing while Hillary's is closing off, but I love my friend and I really feel for her.

    Love = Awareness of mutually beneficial exchange across semi-permeable boundaries. Political and economic systems either amplify or inhibit Love.

    by Bob Guyer on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:26:16 AM PDT

  •  Thank you for such a thoughtful diary. (11+ / 0-)

    Obama is bringing a community organizer's sensibility to national politics. It has nothing to do with sucking up or caving to the opposition but listening to what they say. Additionally, ommunity organizers know that it takes large numbers of grass-roots, engaged voters and transparency to beat big-monied interests which are key features of Obama's campaign and entire political career.

    Mark Schmitt explains Obama's approach quite well in an article in the American Prospect. It may allay some of your legitimate partisanship concerns about Obama. Hostile, confrontational politics isn't always the way to win the political end game.

    But let's take a slightly different angle on the charge that Obama is "naïve" about power and partisanship. Suppose you were as non-naïve about it as I am -- but your job wasn't writing about politics, it was running for president? What should you do? In that case, your responsibility is not merely to describe the situation exactly, but to find a way to subvert it. In other words, perhaps we are being too literal in believing that "hope" and bipartisanship are things that Obama naively believes are present and possible, when in fact they are a tactic, a method of subverting and breaking the unified conservative power structure. Claiming the mantle of bipartisanship and national unity, and defining the problem to be solved (e.g. universal health care) puts one in a position of strength, and Republicans would defect from that position at their own risk. The public, and younger voters in particular, seem to want an end to partisanship and conflictual politics, and an administration that came in with that premise (an option not available to Senator Clinton), would have a tremendous advantage, at least for a moment.
    What I find fascinating about his language about unity and cross-partisanship is that it is not premised on finding Republicans who agree with him, but on taking in good faith the language and positions of actual conservatism -- people who don't agree with him. That's very different from the longed-for consensus of the Washington Post editorial page.

    The reason the conservative power structure has been so dangerous, and is especially dangerous in opposition, is that it can operate almost entirely on bad faith. It thrives on protest, complaint, fear: higher taxes, you won't be able to choose your doctor, liberals coddle terrorists, etc. One way to deal with that kind of bad-faith opposition is to draw the person in, treat them as if they were operating in good faith, and draw them into a conversation about how they actually would solve the problem. If they have nothing, it shows. And that's not a tactic of bipartisan Washington idealists -- it's a hard-nosed tactic of community organizers, who are acutely aware of power and conflict. It's how you deal with people with intractable demands -- put ‘em on a committee. Then define the committee's mission your way.

    The entire article is more than worth the read for anyone interested in how political power is wielded.

  •  Making Peace With Friends (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, peraspera

    I've made my peace with a Hillary Clinton supporting friend of mine. A very close friend, he stayed as a supporter of her throughout our primary. We never became heated with each other, but you could tell a slight discomfort had set in. Then the primary came and went.

    What a load off our shoulders. Whew.

    Since then he has been talking of looking forward to voting for Obama in November, and has been a fine sport about the election. There were numerous amounts of times I wanted to shout and scream about the latest oddity from the Clinton campaign, but reserved myself as I knew that approach wouldn't change minds. Instead I knew my candidate reflected through my own actions, and instead found the policies and ideas that we have in common to talk about, and to build and plan upon.

    It has been a very rewarding and educational experience that will weather me through other choices in my years as a voter to come.

  •  Now see, this is the problem. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, churchylafemme

    If all the HRC supporters who will post and write rationally become BHO supporters, all we'll have left to fight with are the whacked out delusional ones, and we'll redescend into total vitriol.

    For the sake of the site, you've got to at least PRETEND to support HRC still, so we can be rational back. :P

    hee hee

    And, btw, I didn't get around to responding, but I believe you answered me the other day when I asked you, as an HRC supporter, to explain what she would bring to a joint ticket.  And your responses were thoughtful and honest.  So kudos ;)

    Got a problem with my posts? Email me, and let's resolve it.

    by drbloodaxe on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:30:32 AM PDT

    •  I'm still an HRC supporter... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      Don't get me wrong.  If she pulled off some sort of Huckabee-esque miracle and actually won this thing, I'll be dancing for joy.

      And I will continue to defend her when I think it is appropriate.

      And I will continue to criticize those Obama supporters who are cruel.

      But I've come to the realization that (a) I will vote for Obama and (b) I really am okay with it.

  •  I could see (4+ / 0-)

    that this was hard for you.  I remember some of your other diaries and I remember some of the other comments that you have made.  I admire you for your change of heart and the fact that as a HRC supporter you were always respectful of other points of view.  I am glad you see that this election and what is at state is bigger than all of us.  United we stand!

    "One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors." -Plato

    by Snickers77 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:31:53 AM PDT

  •  We Obama supporters are full of shit... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    OK, the subject line is a bit over the top, but what the hell.  It's true, we are.  IF HRC were on the cusp of winning the nomination, then all you HRC supporters would be full of shit as well.

    What we are witnessing is a phenomenon in politics where once the opposition is effectively neutralized or loses outright, then suddenly s/he wasn't so bad after all.  Recall in 2000 when Gore fianlly gave his concession speech, all the conservatives came out of the woodwork and sang his praises - what a thoughtful and well spoken man this tremendous fellow Al Gore is (now that he's out of the way).

    The victors are always condescendingly gracious towards the defeated candidate and his or her followers.  It disgusts me every time I see it.  I disgust myself when I see myself engaging in the practice.  It's disingenuous.  

    But alas, it is also necessary, as the diarist has rightly pointed out.  I just hope that many HRC supporters don't see right through the bullshit or, failing that, choose to ignore the gracious victors bullshit that we will be feeding them.

    •  not sure (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Valerie, Hedwig, orangeuglad

      I think this sounds a bit cynical. There's some truth in it to be sure, but we have to believe there's some room for movement towards each other whatever the electoral environment may be. I disagree with HRC, and vehemently on certain things. I don't like the campaign tactics I've seen here, and things I perceive as less than honest. That said, her ideas about government aren't nearly as far from mine than what we see on the other side of the aisle. Her ideas and her platform are much more similar to Obama's, for instance, than they are to McCain's.

      In that much alone, I think she's owed some respect and some recognition from Obama people (like myself) if and when there's a concession. It's not disingenuous. It's a simple acknowledgment that doesn't have to carry any powerful sentiment one way or the other. Just my opinion.

  •  MyDD: GOP Troll Infestation (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Shakludanto, pylonsound

    I believe some of the most persistent people trying to flog the Reverend Wright story are merely recruiting for McCain among the Hillary supporters. They have got the tone of wingnut trolls, the endless repetition of RNC talking points, all the symptoms.

  •  Great Sentiment (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, peraspera, Angry Mouse

    As an Obama supporter, I think it's a bit cloudy as to whether people love this diary because it validates their candidate or if it simply captures the unity that we all had in the not so distant past.

    I applaud the tone and the candor of the diary, and admit that we have to elevate the dialog within the Party to assure a healing that allows us to carry on to victory. My objections to HRC have always been attached to philosophy, rather than spite. I don't like her involvement in the DLC or her support for NAFTA. I don't like all the lobby money she's taken since going to Washington. I don't like the Clinton brand of politics that have turned this campaign a bit petty.

    But, more than that, and much more importantly, I think Barack Obama is a transformative character. His brand of unity isn't a concession to (un)Intelligent Design or any of the extreme Right Wing platforms that we oppose. It's the openness to dialog with everyone, free of vitriol and bitterness. It's listening, even when what's being said is nuts or divisive or just plain wrong.

    Listening is a simple skill that we all seem to forget (as we see in this primary campaign), but it's something that goes a long way when going against someone else's desired path. It's a quality that elevates our national discourse to a place of dignity, even when the arguments are less than dignified. It's a quality that takes us out of the "fighting" that gets us nowhere and replaces it with struggle. Fighting and struggling are two different things. One wins by virtue of beating the opponent into submission, while the other acknowledges concessions, while demanding the same from the opponent. It makes us all stronger without insisting on a dominant/submissive paradigm.

    That's the choice to me. Forget the wonky campaign arguments. It's about statespersonship, stupid.

  •  Hey I'm still pissed Wes Clark isn't the nominee (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I resent hillary being in because it kept out my first choice, wes clark.  

    It's never easy to change candidates.  I had a hard time working up enthusiasm for Kerry.  But I'll never forget the day in tacoma with garrison singing to us, waiting for wes and John kerry to arrive.

    it's always good to be among fellow democrats.

    but i've got to tell you. .. i saw both hillary and barack at the forum in harrisburg.  the crowd is much funner at a barack obama rally.  

    barack! barack!

    May George Bush rot in hell for what he has done to Abdul Hamid Al-Ghizzawi

    by FilipinoMonkey on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:33:52 AM PDT

  •  Self-contradictory? (9+ / 0-)

    I believe the party will come together again.  This country is amazingly resillient, and if we can unite after a long, deadly, bloody Civil War, we can certainly unite after a contentious primary battle.  

    I don't want to compromise.  I don't want to find common ground with the same people who think intelligent design is as legitimate a theory as evolution.

    (substitute: with those who ignore Sen Clinton's establishment views just because she is a woman)

    I don't want to come together with the people who think it's okay for pharmacists to refuse to do their jobs because contraception violates their "morals."

    (substitute: with people who think it's okay to attack another sovereign country pre-emptively.

    Like you, I was leery of Sen Obama's talk of reaching across the aisle.  And like you, I chose a fighter, Sen Edwards, because I was so fed up with the compromising Democratic Congress.  But I was misunderstanding Sen Obama and perhaps you are too.

    Sen Obama is not talking about compromise--my gosh, Bill Clinton is the great compromiser, was supposedly his greatest strength.  Sen Obama doesn't start from the "perceived" center, like the DLC: he's a liberal.  What he's talking about is diplomacy--not sacrificing principles--but bringing everyone to the table so that a way to tackle problems can be found. Yes, it may involve compromise in the end, so long as everyone compromises (under the DLC reign, Democrats have done all the compromising). He's talking about diplomacy as opposed to war--both internationally and domestically.  And I suspect that that's what you and I both believe in, if we ask ourselves what kind of country we want.

    It wasn't until the last debate, in Texas, that I really "got it" about Sen Obama's philosophy of community and negotiated peace.  When he spoke so simply about the participation of the people being necessary to bring about change, and to participate they must pay attention to what their government is doing, I realized I was hearing "my" president, the one I have been waiting for. I hope you'll come to see him not as Sen Clinton's opponent, but as someone you want to help become president, and then to become a great president.  We need you.

    •  You're right. (0+ / 0-)

      I do seem to be contradicting myself.

      Maybe I should say that the party, the progressives, the majority of people in this country who believe in the Constitution, clear air, health care, et cetera...They (we) will find a way to come together.

      That small minority, though, who still think Bush is a good president, and evolution is "just" a theory, and Saddam attacked on 9/11...

      I don't want to compromise with them.

      I guess the good thing, though, is that their numbers seem to be shrinking every day...

  •  WELCOME !!!! (0+ / 0-)

    I campaigned for Hillary in 2000, and in spite of all the rhetoric against Tasini, one of the most outspoken progressive activists in the U.S. labor movement, I persisted, until I could not resist the facts against Hillary any longer.  

    Her AUMF vote, and her previous New York State environmental lobbying (for corporate polluters in New Hampshire, of all places) did it.

    I was done with her in early 2006 when her centrism, her indefatigable bolstering of corporations for corporate support, pay-to-play, became all too clear.  She became, for me, just a corrupt politician. For all the good that she was "trying" to do, she was a corporate enabler,!!!!

    Her speech at the Council on Foreign Relations in October 2006 used BushCo talking points!

    Her statement in February 2007 at the AFSCME debate that she would have health care for all "by the last year of her second term" betrayed her outright disdain for the life-and-death needs of her constituents. And her hubris as the inevitable candidate, her conceit.

    I know this is not what you wanted to provoke, nor is it now a time for you to hear this, but my judgment is based upon evidence and on the issues, not on smart-alecky racist comments by her idiotic herpes-ridden philandering husband.  

    Now seen on youtube and in her own words, Hillary is an outright liar!  And if that seems extreme, I couch that judgment within a background of lies and hypocrisy about real progressive issues that make for life-and-death decisions in back-room deals and lawyering deceitfulness that goes back more than 25 years.

    And that is the experience that she brings to the table::: duplicity.

    But you have to  go back, you have to read a lot, sort through the professionally conflicted mess that she made of her life with Bill before Chelsea, when she was a lawyer, to realize it.  

    Yes, it started in Arkansas, as early as '83, and, with her threats to provoke civil war within the Democratic party she now proves that she is not done burning her bridges yet.  

    And if that's hate speech, welcome to the real world. Hillary, however, is the real hater, so she brings out the worst in her opponents: that's the artlessness of the politics of personal destruction, and I do indeed now admit, I hate her for bringing politics to its lowest ebb.

    First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win. -Mohandas Gandhi

    by ezdidit on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:35:09 AM PDT

  •  scab!! (just joking! welcome aboard! :) ) (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, orangeuglad

    Welcome aboard!  I'm glad some of the in-fighting is settling down and some of the wounds are healing.   We have 'em on both sides.   I'm an Obama supporter, but was much more pro-Hillary than I am now, mostly because of things she's done during the campaign, but also because of some of the treatment I got from Hillary supporters.  I had some old friends who've known me for years start slinging "sexist!" at me just 'cuz I liked Obama better.  And they should know me better that by now;  I've fought against sexism everywhere I've seen it, and sexism has nothing to do with my dislike of Hillary.   Just as racism has nothing to do with most Hillary supporters' not choosing Obama.  There's a lot of reasons to pick or not-pick a candidate... it's not always (or even usually) the worst possible reasons, so I dunno why those are the ones people always jump to ascribe.

    Anyhow, I'll vote for Hillary if I end up having to, and I'm glad you'll vote for Obama if that's how it plays out. :)

    "I am a comedian and poet, so anything that doesn't get a laugh ... is a poem." - Bill Hicks

    by shadetree mortician on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:35:18 AM PDT

  •  Oh, and remember (5+ / 0-)

    Once he does get in office, we all unite again to be critical of him and push him in the correct direction at times he wanders too far off to the right ;)

    As with Stewart, Colbert, and Olbermann, it is OUR job to constantly be criticizing our government for mistakes and missteps, no matter how hard we campaigned to get them in office in the first place.

    Got a problem with my posts? Email me, and let's resolve it.

    by drbloodaxe on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:35:43 AM PDT

  •  Can we ever get enough of gracefulness? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    tmo, Valerie, Angry Mouse

    Beautiful diary.  I think we need to help each other through all of this in the next few months.  And I think Barack and Hillary need to help each other throught this when the time comes as well.

    I am a huge supporter of Barack as he brings --as Ted Kennedy said -- "grit and grace" to his campaign.  

    Having said that, I cringe every time I think back to him saying to Hillary in that debate "you're likeable enough."

    People can be great leaders or bad leaders.  In that instance unfortunately, he was a poor leader because I think the Obama supporters heard that and used it as an opportunity to deliver it with vitriol in the weeks and few months since then.  He was a leader at that time and didn't fully realize it and we followed him in the wrong direction.  One bad moment and I would like to think that one that he regrets.  

    I think that they both need to demonstrate unity above all else after a few more primaries play out.

    Peace and love and unity.

    I'm from Illinois but I want to be insignificant like everybody else.

    by FORUS50 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:36:19 AM PDT

  •  here's my thought (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pontechango, LynneK

    I suspect you've never been one to get all nasty about Obama.

    That right there makes you just fine, even if you STILL supported Clinton.

    I started this process as not caring one whit.

    In my mind, a trained monkey would be preferable so long as there is a D next to it.

    But over time, I have to say the Clinton campaign has turned me off and turned me into the Obama camp.

    Perhaps because I ignore uber-supporters of both sides, I dont get into the whole who's supporters are worse, yadda yadda yadda, meta as much as others.

    I have had my opinions affected I think solely by the conduct of the two campaigns and I think I mirror that unidentified SD who said of the two campaigns, one is clearly throwing more negativity than the other.

    •  "Supporter" is an extremely vague word (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LynneK, pylonsound

      that could include employed campaign staff, a woman who two other candidates a $50 donation or somebody who hasn't even voted for Obama.  I volunteered for Obama in New Hampshire and shook hands with Rep. Hodes but I'm still very much an outsider.  Judging a candidate by their "supporters" is rather unfair way to judge the candidate.  Especially when we're talking about anonymous commenters on a blog.

      I think you raise an excellent point here.

  •  Coming together without compromise (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bandaloo, FilipinoMonkey, mikeplugh

    First of all, let me thank you for a lovely, gracious diary.  I've felt frustrated by the partisanship around here and I remember how mad I was when Dean was downed in 2004.  But I also have seen that the vast majority of dKos folks are gracious and inclusive.  And I know how disappointment — and also relief, and excitement — can make us all a little out of control of our words.

    After taking many formal classes, I am studying for my credential in mediation.  Mediation seeks to find creative solutions that do not involve compromise.  This sounds like an impossibility, but you'd be very surprised how many times I've seen solutions to real problems where both parties walked away saying, "I got what I needed."  Often the solutions are monumentally creative, and not anything the parties could have thought of when they sat down at the table.

    Mediation is a strong force in international affairs, and I've seen Obama's history of using mediative techniques both in community organizing and in the Illinois legislature.  He is basically liberal in his views, but he has worked together to forge solutions that address both liberal and conservative needs — a very different solution to watering down problems to the "middle ground."  This is my strongest reason for supporting Obama.  I feel he has the mediative experience to help Congress get real work done by moving past positions to real interests.

    Obviously, mediation doesn't always work (though its documented success rate is high — about 85% for civil, legal, and social cases, not sure about government issues).  But when it can, it is our best hope for moving forward together as a country.

  •  I wouldn't discount HRC yet (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, Angry Mouse

    I still believe she can win. She still has a chance.
    And my diaries don't concede just yet.

    But I give it to you Angry Mouse, your diary had to cost you a lot to post.

    Ce qui embellit le désert, c'est qu'il cache un puits quelque part...

    by gigglinggirl on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:37:53 AM PDT

    •  Don't concede yet. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I think it's important that HRC stays in until the end.  To do that, she needs the continued support and time and money she's still getting.

      We all have to come to terms with accepting Obama as our nominee eventually.  When you do that is up to you.

      And I applaud you for standing by your (our) candidate, even when it gets hard to do so.

  •  yay (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, LynneK, orangeuglad

    We could all, including myself, be so gracious and considerate.

    Disobedience to Tyrants is obedience to God

    by HomegrownDem on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:37:53 AM PDT

  •  Gracious and well done (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, LynneK, orangeuglad


  •  on bipartisanship (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, vbdietz, Angry Mouse

    Awhile ago, Mark Kleiman wrote an interesting post on his blog about what Obama really means when he talks about working with Republicans, Style, substance, and "kumbaya"

    His conclusion:

    But all he's promising conservatives is R-E-S-P-E-C-T. Insofar as they're deeply committed to conservative policies (rather than conservative values) he fully intends to screw them. He's just willing to kiss them first. And tell them how much he loves them afterwards.

    Hilzoy at Obsidian Wings also has some great thoughts on this:

    According to me, bad bipartisanship is the kind practiced by Joe Lieberman. Bad bipartisans are so eager to establish credentials for moderation and reasonableness that they go out of their way to criticize their (supposed) ideological allies and praise their (supposed) opponents. They also compromise on principle, and when their opponents don't reciprocate, they compromise some more, until over time their positions become indistinguishable from those on the other side.

    This isn't what Obama does. Obama tries to find people, both Democrats and Republicans, who actually care about a particular issue enough to try to get the policy right, and then he works with them. This does not involve compromising on principle. It does, however, involve preferring getting legislation passed to having a spectacular battle.

    Both bloggers have written on this issue more than once and their posts really helped clarify my thinking on this issue. I hope you find this helpful!

    Hope is passion for what is possible. -- Soren Kierkegaard

    by lauramp on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:40:06 AM PDT

  •  I have faith in us. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, sara seattle, pat208

    Thanks for this thoughtful diary.   I really enjoyed reading it.

  •  Big Hug (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Valerie, sara seattle, orangeuglad

    I for one am embarrassed by my behavior in past months.  I would make a snap remark and then try to back off and be civil, only to lapse again (like an alcoholic).

    Your diary shows a level of self reflection that is very commendable, especially given how personal we have all been taking this primary.  I know how hard it is to step back and see the big picture.  So "no", you mustn't say "finally" are one of the first and, by your words, one of the best.

    I hope the rest come back.  There is no such thing as an Obama supporter or HRC supporter.  

  •  Enough with the Kool-aide metaphors. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    A thousand people died.

    It's just inappropriate. Those people had families.

  •  Love it. (4+ / 0-)

    Just love it. Love that you're angry mouse, that you can support Hillary Clinton, talk about it in a diary, say 'fuck it' and make me laugh. And I watched your comments on Deoliver47's diary with admiration and respect.

    I've had enough of the anger here. I have had a really hard time with the Clinton campaign. Reconciling that I'm a feminist, and that I couldn't support her. Not only that I couldn't support her, but that that I vowed to leave my party if she were the nominee. I think I even went into my kitchen raving one day and my husband said "You wouldn't vote for McCain, would you?" And I yelled back "Maybe I will!". He looked at me like I had been smoking crack. And one minute later I felt like a moron. Because I would never vote for McCain.

    Imagine my surprise that in the last few weeks I've found myself being appreciative that Hillary is in this race. That she's tough and nails and that she's made Obama better for it. And will make him a better general election candidate and president. And my surprise that I completely agree with her about Florida and Michigan. And my surprise at starting to think that she might save the Democrats from themselves by forcing that issue. Time is a funny thing.

    The more respect and openness we all have, the better off we'll be. Don't get me wrong. Obama is my candidate all the way, and I 100% believe he's best for the Democratic party and larger ticket. And I'll support him all the more proudly when the clouds of my former raging at Hillary have cleared away. They linger, but at least I can see through them now.

    •  Right on. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      barath, avava

      I think the prolonged race has most definitely made Obama a better candidate.  

      Just look at the debates.  For all the complaining about how many of them there have been, can anyone argue that Obama is WAY better at debating now than he was in October?

      And that means he's going to be WAY better against McCain.

      And when he gets the nomination, he's going to turn to McCain and say, "I just beat the Clinton Machine.  Now I'm going to eat you for breakfast.  Let's go, old man."

    •  avava (0+ / 0-)

      another lovely voice of kindness and grace - thank you for your kind words to me along the way - much appreciated.

      "Proud to proclaim: I am a Bleeding Heart Liberal"

      by sara seattle on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:27:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Here's a hug (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    And an encouragement. I've only dropped in on candidate diaries lately to request that the rhetoric be toned down a little. I've slammed some strong creative efforts, and I know I hurt some feelings, because the time for the hard infighting is over.

    I'm doing my part to make this a good place for the members of Team Hillary to return to. All of us will have to come together, unite, and beat the tar out of John McCain. So welcome to the Obama campaign, Angry Mouse. Let's make some history.

    Every day's another chance to stick it to The Man. - dls.

    by The Raven on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:49:03 AM PDT

  •  Angry Mouse (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    thanks for this thoughtful and gracious diary.  You know, it really is personal for many of us who spend time in the political blogosphere.  We wouldn't devote that time if it weren't.

    I know how I felt almost sick at heart last September through December when I would come to Daily Kos and see Edwards so dominating the rec list and Hillary so dominating in the MSM coverage.  Not that I didn't think that they were good candidates that I could vote for.  I did think that and still do.  But my heart wanted Obama and I wasn't sure he had a chance.  

    I know that feeling, the sick-at-heart, probably overly-sensitive feeling to every post and comment that isn't positively pro-Hillary, probably overwhelms many HRC supporters who have frequented dkos.

    Someone in one of the many diaries of the last month or so commented that there are many here for whom this is the first time they've been so absorbed, so bound up in supporting a candidate in a primary campaign.  And so they have yet to learn how to deal with the hurt that comes in the process when one candidate wins out over the others, over their own choice.  Having been through it, I agree. It's a hard lesson but a necessary one.  

    And you've just helped make it easier for others to make those same steps.

    Thank you.  


  •  A Moment of Silence for Hillary's Campaign (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

    I love your diaries.  No matter how much or how little I agree with any of your points, they're stated with the same graciousness and clarity that I often lack, and I admire you for that, and envy how many thought processes you're able to put yourself through before hitting the "post" button.  It's a gift I can only covet.

    Please celebrate your victory with graciousness.  Please understand that for some of us, for many of us, there is a great sadness in realizing that Hillary Clinton will not be our nominee.  She will not be our president.

    I'd love a graceful victory celebration.  I look forward to people being happy and stomping McCain in the general election.  But this is not possible if Hillary and her mouthpieces are praising John McCain to make Obama seem smaller and making GOP attacks on the Democratic nominee seem more legitimate.  Can't happen.  She's been wading through Joe Liberman waters for the past few months, using the enthusiasm of her supporters to take them with her into Liebermania, and that alone is ripping the party apart.  She and hers have already said and done things which I could never get over enough to be happy about her being in public life.

    The moment of silence you're looking for will come as soon as Clintons stop making noise.

  •  My take... (4+ / 0-)

    Regarding the (very legitimate) concern:

    My main concern about Obama has nothing to do with domestic or foreign policy differences, or any of the dumb little "gaffes" of the primary season.

    What I'm uncomfortable with is, strangely, the very thing that I understand holds so much appeal for so many people.  

    Simply, it is his talk of moving beyond partisanship, reaching out across the aisle, working together, compromising, finding common ground, et cetera.

    I can appreciate that sentiment.  I think it's noble.  It's idealistic.  It's very Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (which is a movie I love, by the way).


    I don't want to compromise.  I don't want to find common ground with the same people who think intelligent design is as legitimate a theory as evolution.

    I think Obama confuses a lot of people when he talks about unity.  I don't hear him saying let's hold hands and sing kum-by-ah or give in and accept some odious amendment just for the sake of getting a deal done.

    Obama doesn't want to write off anyone, even if they are far afield from the majority of his positions because there may be a way to find common ground on some other issue on which there is agreement.  Take for example.  This was created by Obama and Tom Coburn.  Per Wikipedia, "Coburn's Senate voting record is as conservative as his House record. He received a perfect 100% rating from the American Conservative Union for the year 2005."

    So, instead of refusing to do any business whatsoever with Coburn because of his views on abortion or that he is one of the most conservative people in the Senate, Obama found common ground with him on open government and transparency and we now have a website that lets ordinary people see where the government is spending our money.

    That, to me, is what Obama means when he talks about unity.  That, as you pointed out so eloquently, there is more that unites us than divides us.  Based on all that I have seen, I don't think Obama will sell out any of his core principles, especially since he is being funded by masses of people making small dollar donations.

    For the record, I have been adamant in my opposition to Hillary's candidacy, but I have to say, I really do hate it when I see supposed Obama supporters making comments about her appearance or calling her names or in any way straying from substantive issues.  Pointing out differences is fine, but insulting people is not the way to get them to be on your side later.

    I further realize that becoming active in supporting a candidate forms a strong emotional tie.  You are to be commended for making your struggle with this campaign avalable for discussion in such an open forum and I thank you for being willing to support Obama, even though he was not your first choice.

    Don't base your vote this time on fear...The game of politics is to make you afraid so that you don't think." - Michelle Obama - Council Bluffs Iowa - 8/17/07

    by Michael James on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:56:49 AM PDT

  •  A big welcome! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    We are so going to achieve great things this year!

  •  On the subject of bipartisanship (4+ / 0-)

    I understand where you are coming from, Angry Mouse, in your lack of enthusiasm for cozying up to the Republicans in order to get things done.  I, too, want a fighter.

    And I feel like Hillary Clinton is the candidate who is doing too much cozying up to the far right.  The mere fact that she condescended to sit in the same room as Richard Scaife, much less speak cordially to that..that...(wait, we're raising the level of discourse, we're raising the level of discourse, <deep breath>) MAN, just astounds me.

    It is also known that she and Bill Clinton took steps to get on the good side of Matt Drudge and other conservative commentators.

    Barack Obama, on the other hand, refused to participate in the Fox News debates, as a form of protest of their uneven coverage.

    I don't think Obama will throw us all under the bus in the name of bipartisanship.  I agree with you:  we need someone in the White House who has the cojones to tell the Intelligent Design people that, unless they will also teach the Flying Spaghetti Monster, they need to shut.the.hell.up.

    Thanks for your diary, and I truly hope we all do come together in the end.

    Ahh, I love the smell of oversight in the morning. -Christy Hardin Smith, FDL

    by Exurban Mom on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:59:05 AM PDT

  •  Thank you for a beautiful diary. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I read Deoliver 47's diary last night, too.  Went over and snooped around MyDD to see what all the hoopla was about, what I saw was that somethiing has changed over there.  Numerous mentions made about people being deleted or banned for anti-Obama vitriol, and as I looked over the diaries accessible through the front page at that time, I didn't find any of it.  I think you're absolutely on target about the need for courtesy all around.

    "It's contentious of me, I know, but I don't want to get along with those people.  I don't want to compromise with them."

    What a good point you make here!  I feel the same, you know.  Thing is, even though we're used to the idea that politics is inherently partisan, especially given the recent administration, finding common ground doesn't have to mean coming to total agreement.  It's just a good place to start from when you're trying to gather a bunch of differing viewpoints towards reaching solutions to problems.  So the place to start from would not be science vs. intelligent design, but pointing out that all children in this country deserve the opportunity to have a good education.  How many people are going to disagree with that?  You can point out that in order to achieve good education, it's important to fund it, and to attract good teachers.  There are loads of places to reach common ground without stepping on someone's religious beliefs, and progress can be made towards achieving the bigger goals without needing to call the whole thing off because of disagreement on something waaaaay down the heirarchy of priorities.  Thing is, when people develop a degree of trust, and the habit of finding ways to solve problems together, the sticking points eventually lose some of their emotional stickiness.

    Mull it over a bit.  People in real life do this 'coming together' all the time, it's not revolutionary, really.  Husbands and wives can disagree about all sorts of things, it doesn't mean they have to divorce.  They just focus on the things they agree make for a mutually beneficial marriage and find sympathetic friends when they want to grumple about the hot issues.

  •  Thanks for this great diary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    As an Obama supporter, I'm actually perfectly happy for Hillary to stay in this as long as she wants, provided that the two candidates and all of their supporters realize that the time for negative campaigning has passed and we must focus on promoting our Democratic ideas and on drawing our distinctions with McCain.

    This diary is a big step in that direction. Thanks.

  •  Oh Happy Day! (0+ / 0-)

    Welcome aboard.  I think we conversed on a civil level about the relative merits of the two candidates.

    This diary was my plan for a ...

    The Grand Bargain

    ... that would recognize the contribution and the "wings" or "factions" represented by the candidates.

    No quarter. No surrender.

    by hegemony57 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:00:34 AM PDT

  •  Good, very classy diary (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LynneK, orangeuglad

    In an effort to assuage your concerns, let me offer a couple thoughts.  Mull them over or reject them as you see fit.

    I don't want to compromise.  I don't want to find common ground with the same people who think intelligent design is as legitimate a theory as evolution.
    I don't want to come together with the people who think it's okay for pharmacists to refuse to do their jobs because contraception violates their "morals."

    You don't want to reach an understanding with these people, or with these ideas?

    As a private sitizen, you can afford to shun anyone you please. A candidate running for President, in a time that will strain the national sinews, cannot afford to shun tens of millions of American citizens.  That being said, the desire to be inclusive towards citizens is not the same thing as a desire to be inclusive toward every oddball agenda.

    And I haven't heard Obama explain how it is possible.

    How a President Obama achieves his objectives is pretty straightforward.  It is basic politics.  Win big, declare a mandate, and use the 'honeymoon' period to ram through the key legislation the nation needs.  Speak softly and incluseivly in public.

    In private, play hardball with the stubborn obstructionists.  For fence-sitters, point to all the first-term Congresspeople in town, such as Reps Foster (IL) and Edwards (MD), and drop meaningful hints about the 2010 elections.

    There is one way to achieve big changge in Washington DC and that is to arrive in town on a wave of popular support. "Fighting", in contrast, makes for stirring campign rhetoric but when transferred to governance it leads to gridlock and bone-deep obstructionism.

    Here's the thing. "Fighting" without any suggestion of compromise makes things very easy for the opposition.  They are backed into a corner with nothing to lose.  under those circumstances their strategy becomes one of parlimentary delay after delay all designed to ensure nothig gets done.  If there is no way for the GOP (or certain segments of the Democratic PArty even) to secure small victories, they have nothing to lose by ensuring nothig gets done.  With nothing to lose, the opposition will just try to ride it out to the 2010 and 2012 elections.

    This is where the Obama approach is superior to teh Edwards or Clinton stance.  Their promise of "my way or the highway" plays well to crowds but it is unrealistic for genuine and reaching reform.  

    Major advances require a resounding electoral victory. Sen Obama and Sen CLinton mighthave equal chances to win in Nov, but Sen Obama has a much better chance to win big. To seal the deal on major reform, some minor compromises must be made fr the other side of the aisle. I fully believe a President Clinton, despite her rhetoric, would also make these compromises. That is how politics works. The difference is, Sen Obama is offering a more realistic view of how the politics will actually work.

    Well, I hope this has been of some interest.  Take it FWIW.

    Take your fear and shove it, it ain't workin' on us no more.

    by Quicklund on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:00:38 AM PDT

    •  What an insightful question. (0+ / 0-)

      You don't want to reach an understanding with these people, or with these ideas?

      You know, I'm not sure how to answer that.  I'd like to think it's just the ideas I don't want to compromise with, but then, I'm human and emotional, and when I think of, say, Bill Frist making his bogus diagnosis on the floor of the Senate, there's a powerful part of me that says, "I don't want to have anything to do with that guy or any of his ideas."

      But your point is certainly well taken.

      So...I'm going to try to separate the people from the ideas to the best of my abilities.

      •  Thanks (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Angry Mouse

        Risking one more utterance...

        It is exactly in this distinction that our  opportunity lies to put the intramural devisiveness behind us and join forces to crush the GOP in the fall.  That, and time of course.

        Thanks for your brutally honest answer, btw.  With that power of honest introspection, you will think your way through this.  I am now entirely confident of that long-range, Fristian diagnosis. ;-)

        Take your fear and shove it, it ain't workin' on us no more.

        by Quicklund on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 03:31:33 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  About compromise... (6+ / 0-)

    I don't want to compromise.  I don't want to find common ground with the same people who think intelligent design is as legitimate a theory as evolution.

    Obama's notion of working across the aisle is much more complex than simply conceding half our principles to serve the other half.  That's the Clintonian style of compromise: meeting conservatives half-way.  That's not what Obama's about at all.

    Just listen to how Obama appeals to conservatives in speeches.  He doesn't do it by moving his policies to the right.  He does it by showing them respect, and most importantly showing them that he shares some of their motivating principles and concerns.  He frames liberal policies in ways that give them universal appeal by stressing principles conservative voters like, such as personal responsibility and national service.  Pro-choice is pro-small-government.  Anti-war is fiscal responsibility.

    As much as I want to smack everyone who buys into intelligent design -- and believe me, I do -- there is nothing wrong with finding common ground with some of them on ending the war, reducing dependence on foreign oil, ethics reform, etc.  Right now the level of partisan polarization we've got leads conservatives to adopt certain positions as a monolithic bloc, but someone like Obama can start breaking that bloc up.  When individual conservatives like him personally and feel like he respects their viewpoints, they're going to be more willing to rethink sticking to the Republican party line on every issue.  When Obama makes sense to them on an issue they'll feel less obligated to oppose him just because he's a Democrat.

    He doesn't need to win over all Republicans, just 5-10% of them.  Imagine the extra margin of victory that gives us in down-ticket races and Senate battles.  And it doesn't have to be -- in fact, it won't be -- the same 5-10% for every issue.  When he lightens the taboo on working across the aisle, he'll find all kinds of little pockets of agreement.

    Obama really knows what he's doing.  He's done this kind of stuff already in Illinois, and in his time in the U.S. Senate.  There's no "Mr. Smith" naivety behind his talk of conciliation, no matter what Hillary says.

    "If Obama is the nominee, we are doomed." -Rush Limbaugh
    "Always speak before Barack Obama, not after Barack Obama." -Olbermann

    by Troutnut on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:00:58 AM PDT

  •  Bipartisianship (4+ / 0-)

    Firstly I think this is a great little post and think its important for all democrats to realize that any democrat will be better than John McCain for our country and for the world.
    I'm sorry if this has already been said as I havent read all of the comments above. I think that the idea of not compromising is quite appealing but has no possibility of success. Think about it when has a party or an idea been stuck to so vehemently and miraculously won over all non-believers (look at the way Republicans have approached politics in the past 30 years they have won their battles but havent convinced democrats that they are right). It doesn't happen you cant convince people that their deep seeded beliefs are wrong and that you are right regardless as to how inane and ridiculous their beliefs seem.
    Convincing people of facts always must first start with listening to their beliefs. I think that is what Obama's appeal is, he isnt stating that he is going to agree with what people who are crazy are saying but that he is going to listen to them. It angered me when I initially saw the ACLU defending neo-nazi's but i realized that if you want to even attempt to convince someone that you are right you have to treat them with respect and not simply dismiss their opinions as stupid. This is what a lot of Obama and Clinton supporters have done to each other and it isnt appropriate. As a party founded on understanding and equality we must treat each other with the same respect that we tout so loudly that others must show to minorities.

    a great quote from a movie
    "You want free speech? Let's see you acknowledge a man whose words make your blood boil, who's standing center stage and advocating, at the top of his lungs, that which you would spend a lifetime opposing at the top of yours. You want to claim this land as the land of the free, then the symbol of your country can't just be a flag; the symbol also has to be one of its citizens exercising his right to burn that flag in protest." Show me that, defend that, celebrate that in your classrooms. Then you can stand up and sing about the land of the free.

  •  These hyper-emotional ooey gooey (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    blog break-up and reunion threads are a bit juvenile aren't they?  Permeated with a seriously inflated sense of self-importance?  Great some anonymous guy decided not to be a spiteful little brat and vote republican.  STOP THE PRESSES!

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

      Of course, I'm highly jaded after arguing with Hillary supporters on other sites, being subjected to their denial, ignorance and at times, flat out stupidity. It's not just republicans pushing the Obama is a Muslim' issue folks.

      Regardless, congrats to the writer for embracing reason and taking that first, all important step forward.

    •  Just to clarify... (0+ / 0-)

      I never said I'd vote Republican.  

      And I have tried to control my spite and avoid being a brat.  I may have failed, at times, but I've tried.

      •  I was trying to be general (0+ / 0-)

        not necesarily lampoon you specifically, as I agree with the spirit of your diary.

        There have been a whole spate of these super dramatic "strike" threads and "capitulation" threads and "make fun of MyDD" threads and so much animosity on both sides that is just so patently juvenile it's like I'm watching an old re-run of Beverly Hills 90210 or something every time I log on to a progressive blog these days.

  •  hey (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cali Scribe, orangeuglad

    I felt like that with Dean.  I was extremely committed to having him become President and was very disappointed when he did not become the nominee.  I really really did not want Kerry and was not happy with the Kerry(bots?).  So I mourned for a week or so and then supported Kerry in the general because there was no way that I would ever vote for Bush.

    * 4010 *

    by BDA in VA on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:02:25 AM PDT

  •  No need to drink any Kool Aid. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    At any point.  It would be completely unfair for somebody like me, who's been on the Obama bandwagon since the 2004 Convention, to expect somebody like you, whose candidate is still in the race even as it appears to be winding to its conclusion, to share my enthusiasm or my views.  I know what it's like to have that kind of dream.  I was there for the conversation in Deoliiver47's terrific diary, and the only thing I need to know is that you're a Democrat, and you're willing to roll up your sleeves and start taking on the real fight.

    It's a nice bonus that you do so with class and intelligence.

    This, right here, is the antidote to all the pie throwing.


  •  I know its a hard decision (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse, orangeuglad

    Angry Mouse, I know you've been struggling with this for a while.  I enjoyed talking with you about the vitriol from both sides.  Don't worry about sipping the kool-aid, but know that there are a lot of us out here that are cheering you on.

    Of course I was on your side no matter who you were form but  I respect you a lot for being able to change you views and to have maintained a respectful dialog all the way along!


  •  Obama is not talking about COMPROMISE... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    2501, Catte Nappe, arielle, orangeuglad

    Obama is not talking about compromise with Congress Republicans, but about a NEW progressive majority.

    He appeals to the ordinary citizen that share his goals for the nation, be they Republican, Democrats or Independent. And armed with this majority he will be able to gain the (forced) support from Republicans in Washington. That has been his whole philosophy. Change coming from the bottom.

    This is how he will fight: ....He explains it quite clearly:

    You use transparency at every level of government and use public pressure to shame opponents to vote for what their constituencies want. Please note the reference to independents and republicans OUTSIDE of Washington.

    Then again, reality has a well-known Obama bias.

    by magatte on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:05:15 AM PDT

  •  One Hillary voter at a time n/t (0+ / 0-)

    Click on the Barack Obama Fact Wiki, contact me if you have anything to add, and pass it on.

    by Nonconformist on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:06:43 AM PDT

  •  Probably not a popular thing to admit here... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bindle, Angry Mouse, orangeuglad

    but the single best thing about Barack Obama, for me, IS his message of unity, of coming together.

    (I apologize in advance for the length on this.)

    I totally understand your concern about some sort of compromise with people whose beliefs are completely antithetical to most of ours here--certainly mine--and yet it is precisely because I want to bring those people over that I like Obama so much.

    See, Obama, to me, is that rare someone who can change the subject and change the debate. I'm not just pulling that out of my ass, either.  I'm from a bunch of purple states and one red state (Nebraska) and I've grown up my whole life surrounded by not just Republicans, but many far right Republicans. Amazingly, a lot of them are my friends. And even more amazingly--an awful lot of them have told me they voted or are voting for Obama this year.

    As one of my friends said to me, "I don't agree with Obama on almost any of the moral issues, but I certainly do agree with him on the economy and the war. And I just like him."  This is the same friend that voted both times for Bush because he was pro-life.  

    Unlike Kerry, and partially helped by the dire straits we find ourselves in in 2008 (apologies to Mark Knopfler)Obama is a transformational figure, one who I really think can make a lot of those single issue voters forget about their issues this year. Especially because he's inviting them in, telling them to come to us and all will be forgiven. For so long, people like my friends have felt alienated and hated by the Left, just as much as we felt hated by the Right. But with Obama, it's safe to come over. They feel welcomed.

    And I agree--I want a President, for once, who believes in science.  But he or she will also have to be a President for the people who DON'T, not catering to their beliefs or compromising, but simply providing other benefits that they need. Bringing our troops home, for example, and helping us be good stewards of the earth, and helping them put some more money in their pockets and keep their jobs from going overseas.

    I've had seven years of a President who did NOTHING for me or any Democrat the whole time he was in office. I would never wish that same thing on Republicans, no matter what goofy shit they may believe in.

    •  Okay. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      I'd like to be where you are, I really would.  I'm a pessimist and a cynic, and I've spent the past 8 years being SO angry...

      I really applaud your ability to rise above it.  I hope I'll be able to get there one day too.

      •  Don't worry, most of the time I feel the same way (0+ / 0-)

        ...and I've had some pretty vicious fights with people I love about religion, reproductive rights, and other "moral issues."  

        It's hard to rise above it, and most of the time I can't. I think what's makes me want to try-- just the fact that I've been so angry the last seven years. I think I just got tired of being angry. Still a cynic--just a weary one. :)

  •  lol @ kool aid (0+ / 0-)

    it's berrylicious.

  •  I give you a RECCOMEND (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse, orangeuglad

    because you have the right idea.

    This country has tried to become so politically correct in all aspects of our lives that we have become unbending and rigid in our beliefs. And afraid to change those beleifs once they are set in fear that we become ridiculed and put down.

    We all need to lighten up a bit here. We need to rediscover our ability to laugh at ourselves and admit our failings and mistakes without shame. That used to be one of our greatest gifts as a nation. One of our strengths.

    One comment that you made


    I don't want to compromise.  I don't want to find common ground with the same people who think intelligent design is as legitimate a theory as evolution.

    I don't want to come together with the people who think it's okay for pharmacists to refuse to do their jobs because contraception violates their "morals."

    It's contentious of me, I know, but I don't want to get along with those people.  I don't want to compromise with them.

    They are wrong.  Plain and simple.

    Don't you realize that this is what our country is all about? This is one of the reasons the Pilgrims first came to our country, because they thought differently than what others beleived and wanted a place to have the freedom to worship as they wished. Our country has always been a melting pot for every religion, belief, and ecentrisity out there.

    Again, this is what makes us strong as a nation. Not because it is easy to live with others who are different from us. But because it is hard.


    And realizing that fact, makes us grow and change and learn. Hopefully becoming tolerant and better human beings.

    Just one more time, we all need to lighten up a bit.

    Thanks for a great diary.

    ...strength is not without humility. It's weakness and untreatable disease, and war is always the choice of the chosen who will not have to fight. Bono

    by Peperpatch on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:08:29 AM PDT

  •  Hi Angry Mouse (4+ / 0-)

    Glad to be working with you!

    Several people close to me supported Hillary, and one -- my mother-in-law, who is as smart and savvy about politics as anyone I know -- still does.

    So no one deserves inherent disrespect for supporting HRC.   I really appreciated your comments yesterday, and hope that both Obama and Clinton supports can discuss their preferred candidates with more facts, and fewer cheap shots.

    "Nearly all men can stand adversity, but if you want to test a man's character, give him power." -- Abraham Lincoln

    by chumley on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:10:01 AM PDT

    •  Chumley (0+ / 0-)

      it has been so wonderful to read this diary - it is like having the old DailyKos back - I have been so thankful for your comments in response to mine along the way - you have made a difference for Obama

      "Proud to proclaim: I am a Bleeding Heart Liberal"

      by sara seattle on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:31:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Make-up voting (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

    Could be the new make-up sex

  •  Wonderful diary. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I'd urge you to consider posting it on MyDD as well.

    We are the ones we've been waiting for.

    by Same As It Ever Was on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:12:18 AM PDT

  •  Thank you.... (6+ / 0-)

    for bearing your soul and sharing it with us.  Proud to have YOU on board!!!!!!!!!!!

    Your story about the two black men is a similar story  of when I was at the grand opening of the Wilkes-Barre office. A whole bunch of us were working on Obama items getting ready to pass them out at the St. Patrick's Day Parade when suddenly and elderly black man walked in.  He stood there with tears in his eyes as he said, "Oh lordy, I never thought I would ever see so many white people working so hard to get a black man elected President of the United States.  Thank You, Thank You, Thank You!!!"  Bringing tears to many of us in the room.

    Being an older woman it would be WONDERFUL to have a woman President, but Obama more so than Hillary made me feel a real sense of HOPE for this country, a real sense of belonging to something new. Watching so many of the younger generation get so passionate over politics is something I thought I would never see at the age of 60!   I know Hillary has touched many women, but for me, buying into the idea she had to be tougher, stronger than a man was so unnecessary.  I have lived all my life with men like this and I’m tired of it.  I want someone who is more nurturing, who is strong, but not having to wear their toughness on their sleeve, who is comfortable with their soft side and who makes us want to reach for our better angels!

    That being said, should Hillary become the nominee......I have no doubt I would vote for her over McCain any day!

    "Spying on the populace is a giant step toward totalitarianism." -- Bob Herbert

    by hws on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:12:59 AM PDT

  •  It's very difficult to leave someone you (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cali Scribe, orangeuglad

    really have invested in, whether through monetary donations, working in the campaign or voting for that person in a primary.  I know.  I was a John Edwards supporter, still am in my heart.  I was on the fence between HRC and BHO.  The Obama supporters here almost made my decision to go with HRC.  Fortunately, I was able, after some deep thought, to realize they only spoke for themselves, not Obama.  Then, I made my decision to support him and will vote for him in my state's primary in May.  I have also volunteered for his primary campaign here, but there is no organization in my area and I can't do it alone.

    The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all - JFK- 5/18/63-Vanderbilt Univ.

    by oibme on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:13:12 AM PDT

  •  It's not about compromising with the intelligent (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catte Nappe, brein, orangeuglad

    design people in my opinion. My brother is a Bush Republican. He's still a 28%er who approves of Bush/Cheney. He was pretty comfortable with Obama when he thought Clinton was going to be the nominee, but now he hates him for no good reason. I do not engage him in political conversation anymore...

    Those people are gone. They are (political) enemies. That's it. No matter what Obama, his campaign, or his supporters say, they will always find a Rev. Wright or a flag lapel pin, or a Michelle Obama to be angry about.

    But...  there are people who have voted Republican in the past who should not be treated as enemies. They may be reluctant to come on board based on one wedge issue. There is room for compromise and dialogue in these instances and I think that Sen. Obama has had success in gaining trust and respect from these people where someone like Sen. Clinton cannot.

    One more thing, I have to take offense to the kool-aid comments and similar comments about cults that Clinton supporters and the media like to use about Obama supporters. Obama is not a messiah. We are well aware. If he were, he may have at least been able to get a higher bowling score than my 6 year old niece.

    He just happens to be the best viable candidate for President in 2008. Anyway, thanks for the thoughtful diary and I hope we can all come together by November. I think we can too =)

  •  the race isn't over yet (0+ / 0-)

    I hate to keep pointing this out, but the race isn't over yet.  Hillary has vowed to fight this to the convention, and Obama does not yet have the delegates he needs.  Although it's difficult to imagine a scenario in which Obama is not the nominee, the battle is far from over.  Any declarations such as "Obama will be the nominee" or "Hillary has lost" are premature. This is not the time to be lulled into complacency.  Right now I am only focused on Obama winning the nomination.  Later on I will worry about healing the deepening divides in the party - divides that are almost totally of Hillary's doing.

  •  Thank you so much for this! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I know that we all can come together!

    Thank you, Howard Dean!

    by Ruth in OR on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:21:19 AM PDT

  •  I loved your post (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse, orangeuglad

    Thank you!

    We need more people like you in the world. And don't rule out the Kool Aid just yet - it's powerful stuff ;-)

  •  Appreciate your diary (0+ / 0-)

    I've been an Obama supporter since November. Before that I was in the "hoping-for-Gore" camp. I live in Seattle and did some phone calling for Obama before our caucus in February.

    My wife is the PCO of our precinct and she remained adamantly uncommitted thru the entire process. Our precinct almost sent an uncommitted delegate to the LD caucus, but after spirited discussion enough uncommitteds moved to Obama to sway that delegate to Obama.

    Afterwards, my wife continued to be uncommitted thru February and March. She was never really a Hillary supporter and nominally claimed to support Bill Richardson. I was unhappy about it for a while, but then I backed off. Other good friends of ours supported Hillary in the caucus, but more supported Obama.

    Then the other night, I had dinner before the Springsteen concert (Yay!) with a couple who had both supported Hillary. The guy said that if Obama were the Dem nominee he would support McCain, mostly because of the security/toughness/terrorism stuff. I was biting my tongue to let him make his case and then I made mine as well, but in, I think, a respectful way.

    These experiences have helped me to understand different people's perspectives on Obama and Hillary and the political landscape in general. These are people who are good friends and whom I respect and like, so I had to take notice.

    So, I really appreciate your diary, particularly your expression of the need for us Dems to respect each other and come together.

    Thanks a lot.

  •  Why I decided to support Obama over Hillary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    First, I applaud your diary and appreciate very much what you have experienced and gone through.  And I very much understand your reasoning for supporting Hillary.

    It is interesting because one of the reasons you cite for supporting HIllary -- her  repeated statements about "fighting" for everything -- is what turns me off.  I want someone who has the ability to compromise.  I don't view Barack as willing to compromise on things that are "plain wrong" but I do see him with the ability to "compromise" to move us towards our Democrat ideals (as an example being able to work with Lugar, etc. on important issues).

    I am tired of all of the combativeness I see in politics today (I live in California and our state legislature is way too polarized, so that a lot of times nothing gets done).  So I want out of this mess and see Barack as the person who gives us the best chance to achieve this.

  •  We are fallible, imperfect creatures (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    who for the most part, are good at bottom. It behooves us to do our level best to understand each other. We may never get to 100% understanding, but with open lines of communication, possibilities become more viable.

    We need more people like Obama who seem willing to find common ground with the worst of the worst.

    Your post reveals a portrait of an open minded thinker - someone with whom, I'd enjoy a cup of green tea and your honesty is much appreciated.


  •  The only way a Hillary Supporter can make it to (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    signals, gigglinggirl

    the Rec List is if s/he is coming to Obama.

    •  yup (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sara seattle, Larry Bailey

      I am truly sorry not to see fellow HRC supporters here. I have just discovered this site not long ago, just after the "strike".
      I think the site has become impoverished by driving away the dissenting party. It's really sad.
      Many of the people left behave juvenile and immature. While HRC supporters offered deeper insights and analysis of the race, being the core Democrats since forever.
      A lot of the youngsters here had an opportunity to learn a lot from them.
      It doesn't bode well for the Democratic party in the future.

      Ce qui embellit le désert, c'est qu'il cache un puits quelque part...

      by gigglinggirl on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:43:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I wish the Hillary supporters would come back! (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        I miss their input.  I tried to go over to MyDD and say to a couple of the more thoughtful posters to write a diary here on how they felt about Obama, because then I figured Obama supporters would be able to know and understand how they felt and it would make this place less of an echo chamber.  I'm 24, and I know that I am missing the opportunity to learn from Hillary's supporters, as you point out.

        Then I got banned from MyDD and TalkLeft, which put an end to my attempts to reach out.  (Literally, all I said was something along the lines of the top paragraph of this comment.)  I still wish more people would say, like Angry Mouse did, what their specific problem or fear about Obama is.

        The thing to remember about DailyKos is that alegre and the other so-called strikers left of their own accord - they weren't banned.  So the dialogue needs to start here, because as I found out, the moderators won't let it start elsewhere.

        •  I am still here too (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          nice to meet you

          "Proud to proclaim: I am a Bleeding Heart Liberal"

          by sara seattle on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:38:36 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Nice to meet you too (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            sara seattle

            I always look out for comments by Hillary supporters - not to bash them, as I hope you'll see from my comment history - but to see whatever piece of news it is through their eyes and remind myself that there are two sides to everything and I'm not necessarily on the right side of everything.

            Good on you and Angry Mouse for sticking around, and I am all admiration of how you all manage to keep your tempers in the face of some truly mean comments.  It will end soon, it must, it must.

      •  Nobody was driven away (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        cal in cali

        Clinton supporters made a lot of claims about why they were leaving, none of which they could substantiate. When asked, they could not provide even a single link to back their claims of Obama supporters lying about Clinton, or Obama supporters bullying Clinton supporters. There's an old saying: "Sour grapes make great whine".

        First Dead show: Felt Forum 12/7/71

        by jhecht on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 03:42:00 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  rec'd. love, an obama supporter. (0+ / 0-)

      I am really sick of having to disclaim that I support Obama whenever I defend Clinton in any way.  Not to get my comment rec'd, but just to avoid getting yelled at!

  •  God Damn, I Love Daily Kos (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    avava, IT Pimp, orangeuglad

    It will be interesting to see where things go. I feel I should mark my calendar.

    I hope this feeling continues.

    But it will probably cycle.

    Nevertheless, it's been very nice to watch a day of open discussion and the beginnings of reconciliation.

    It merges nicely with the Texas County Caucuses this past weekend. Yeah, there were some rancorous ones, but there was also a lot of people just getting together (for HOURS!:)), and having to sit with each other and talk, because we were divided by precinct rather than by candidate.

  •  Still in tears (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse, orangeuglad

    Thank you for this thoughtful and moving deconstruction of why some of may be feeling crazed right now.  It has taken me 2 1/2 hrs to read it because of constant interruptions but I persevered because I felt it was going to be sooo worth it.  Cheers also to Deoliver47 whos diary was similarly brilliant.

    My tagline is referring to my hero's commentary on Reagan's first election - safe topic I think?

    Well the first thing I wanna say is mandate my ass! - Gil Scott Heron

    by Electric Blue on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:30:38 AM PDT

  •  I've so shared your Obama concerns (0+ / 0-)

    ..and voiced them here many times as I argued for Edwards' candidacy. It may be something we need to work very hard to hold Obama's feet to the fire about.

    It's kind of the reverse of Hillary's perceived need to look "tough" and not "too liberal" so that she can be seen as someone who can protect the country... The dynamic of Obama needing to not-offend, to not be seen as a strident black man (especially when cast against the "militant" Wright or Ayers).. I have been terrified it would make him compromise in unacceptable places.

    We must stay close on him about this, and help him grow as a candidate and as a leader. Like Obama says, it's not just about him. It's about "us."

    Thank you for your diary. Welcome.

    How we know Daffy Duck is Republican: "It's mine, understand? Mine, all mine! Get back down there! Down down down! Go go go! Mine mine mine! Mwahahaha!" --BiPM

    by rhetoricus on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:32:02 AM PDT

  •  listening doesn't mean blind compromise (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    valadon, orangeuglad

    I think one thing that is safe to say about most Democrats is that we think we have better ideas than Republicans. We also think that a great deal of conservative positions (prejudices, voting against one's economic interest, seeing the only "patriotic" position as pro-war, etc) come from a position of ignorance or misinformation (thanks to the MSM), then it follows that most of us probably think we can win a lot of conservatives over if only we have the proper opportunity to educate them.

    But, if you want a chance to explain your position to someone and actually have them listen, first you have to show that you are willing to listen to them.  If we truly believe that our ideas are better, it doesn't really put us at risk to listen to their ideas too. And we have to be willing to listen, or they will never be willing to listen to us.

    For my own part, I started off this year supporting Edwards because he was the most openly anti-corporate. Just like with Dean in 04, it seemed that being openly anti-corporate was the best way to get the media to hate you.

    When Edwards dropped out, I was already leaning to Obama because I felt like Hillary had already started to use some Republican tactics against Edwards (mostly the straw-man arguments tactic), but I was open enough that I gave her a chance. She lost me, more than Obama won me over, but once I went for Obama and started to look deeper and deeper into his record and past, I actually realised I would have supported him over Edwards from the start, had I known more about him.

    I thought what I'd do was, I'd pretend I was one of those deaf-mutes...

    by 2501 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:34:50 AM PDT

  •  Wow! Thank you again! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catte Nappe, IT Pimp

    I remember your post from 2 weeks ago, and was very impressed with it; it gave me a lot of pause for thought.

    Regarding Obama and how he will cross the aisle:  here's my understanding:

    First, he starts by respecting the other person and their ideas, opinions, values, etc.

    Then he says, ok, what have you got?  Show me the validity of your argument.  If you've got nothing, it will show, so I'm not worried about him moving to a position that he totally disagrees with.  

    Here's a great article I read about Obama that helped cinch it for me: The Obama I Know

    He may compromise a bit, but then again, he will at least get stuff done (this one really impressed me; read especially page 6): Vanity Fair: Raising Obama

    Here's one of my favorite articles about him -- the one that made me realize he was going to be an amazing president, if he gets the job: The "Theory of Change" Primary

    I've got lots more great links similar to these, should you want any more, but that's a good start, IMHO.

    For me, knowing these things about him, I cannot support any politician who does things the same old way they've always been done, when the chance to change how Washington works by electing Obama looks so promising.

    From my perspective, Obama is a game-changer, and with the world of hurt we'll all going to be in due to the Bush years, the Iraq debacle, global warming, the end of cheap oil, and the economic meltdown, I think Obama is the best chance we have for surviving the upcoming challenges, hopefully more-or-less intact.  I agree with Richardson, too, that Obama is a once-in-a-lifetime candidate.

    I hope you can come to see Obama as I do, and I thank you for your extreme reasonableness.  And I'm sorry for your grieving about Hillary; I have thought a lot about what you said two weeks ago; I too would be absolutely devastated if the candidate of my choice lost.

    Barack Obama respects your opinion.

  •  You know what I really wanted? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

    The dream ticket: Clinton/Obama.  That would have virtually assured 16 years of a Democratic White House, which would have swayed the SCOTUS to a more progressive leaning, and it would have broken the Republican sound machine forever.

    •  I've argued for that too. (0+ / 0-)

      (And yeah, I've written diaries.  You can read 'em if you're interested.)

      I actually think they are rather the perfect complement of each other.  Idealism and pragmatism.  Freshness and experience.  

      And they are both very, very, very smart.

      I also think it is a panacea for the division of the party right now.  And it pissed me off when Pelosi said it wouldn't happen.  Sort of like when she said impeachment was off the table.  Never say never.

      But even if HRC is not on the ticket, she will (I believe) be a great asset to President Obama in the Senate.

  •  Well... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I used to be that way, and it's one of the reasons I was an Edwards supporter.

    ....what kind of recipe for success is it if 50.1% of the electorate has it's boot on the neck of the 49.9% of the population? That's the way Bush has governed and even if instead of shredding the Constitution it was passing higher CAFE standards, it assures that if that 49.9% ever reaches 50.1% then it's their turn to keep the rest down in a cycle of escalation. Why not just divide the country into two ideological states then?

    Along with obliterating the respect for the minority, it makes sure that we're so busy keeping power that we can govern with minimal effectiveness, and existential challenges like Global Warming mean we just can't afford that right now.

    No mercy for people who undermine the system but that's different than ideological disagreements.

    There's something attractive about invincible ignorance... for the first 5 seconds.

    by MNPundit on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:38:34 AM PDT

  •  Hillary is the one who has caved in to Bush (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shigeru, orangeuglad

    Angry Mouse:

    First of all, a great post and I, like you, welcome the united front against McCain. Although I supported Obama right from the start, I always welcomed open discussions about the strengths and weaknesses of the two candidates.

    I do understand your concern about Obama. However, I must respectfully disagree with you on it. Hillary may "talk" about opposing and fighting the republicans. But her voting record and stance in the senate has been very centrist. Hillary has caved in with the Bush administration on the most important issues of the decade such as the Iraq war, Patriot Act, Kyle-Lieberman ammendment, and not bothering to show up for the wiretapping legislation. Obama opposed the Iraq war, filibustered the Patriot Act and helped in watering it down (Clinton opposed the filibuster on the patriot act), and did not vote for the Iran war proposal.

    Moreover, I also do not agree with your black and white characterization of republicans. There are many moderate, centrist and reasonable republicans who would be great to negotiate with (e.g. Chuck Hagel, Dick Lugar, Olympia Snow, Lincoln Chaffee--ex-senator etc.). If we want to get any substantive legislation passed in the congress, we will HAVE to get their support. Moreover, a compromise bill is so much better than no bill (look at what happened to Clinton's healthcare fiasco).

    Hillary has destroyed her bridges with the republicans so badly that even the reasonable and centrist republicans will have to oppose her strongly to survive. On the other hand, Obama's open minded and bipartisan attitude will help us get the support of these centrists. The intelligent design believers represent the radical (nutty) right, not moderate and centrist republicans.

  •  Big Hug (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Although I personally haven't been involved in any of this ugliness, other than as a spectator, it has truly affected me. In fact, my sig line is a direct response on my part to the vitriol I was witnessing here among people who really have so many commonalities and whom need to respect each other and support each other if we are to be successful as like-minded individuals coming together to create change in our ailing nation. Kudos to you and all the others who are realizing that this infighting is so hurtful.

    Unity starts with U...

    by IT Pimp on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:45:09 AM PDT

  •  In The Wake (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse, orangeuglad

    of this sincere diary and beyond this diary, I sense a paradigm shift in the last few days.  I am hard pressed to explain exactly why in any detail at's just something I sense is in the air.  Things just naturally evolve when people come into agreement with one another. Now, I am really feeling the strong attraction of hope.

    No doubt there will continue to be some real degree of frustration, anger will rear up for sure, but we are learning.

    Thanks to everyone who consciously chooses to contribute in a way which offers and anticipates respect.

    "Nothing can stand in the way of the *power* of millions of voices calling for change" Obama

    by SherriG on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:47:50 AM PDT

  •  Bien dicho (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Well said mouse.

  •  I have followed some of your postings (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse, orangeuglad

    and I have always found you to be a voice of gentle reason (dispite the name Angry Mouse).  Whether you support Hillary or Obama, I am sure you support Democratic causes, and for me, that is more than enough.

    There are bagels in the fridge

    by Sychotic1 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 11:54:14 AM PDT

    •  I support liberal causes... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      which, unfortunately, seem to be neglected by some of our weaker Democrats.  The way Democrats have behaved in the past 8 years -- and since 2006 especially -- is, to me, simply embarrassing.

      More, better Democrats.  That's the key.  The D is not enough.

  •  Welcome! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    While I don't advise drinking Kool-Aid of any flavor, I hope that you can now come to see how we who've always supported Obama see him -- as a truly transformative, once-on-a-lifetime candidate. I strongly feel that an Obama presidency will change our nation and our world for the better.

    Let's change the world!

  •  As a Hillary supporter - nice diary... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sara seattle, bten, Nomobama

    I am someone who continues to support Hillary, but also would support Obama if he becomes nominee.

    One need not drink the kool-aid to make a sober decision to support Obama when and if the time comes.  You don't have to follow the light and climb aboard the spaceship.

    Obama has tremendous qualities and great potential.  I simply think at this point in time the Clintons are a better fit for the times we are in.

    I say this bearing in mind that Obama, should he win election, will be facing something no incoming Democratic President has had to face - ever.  That is withdrawal from a shooting war that will likely be wrenching and unpredictable, domestically and abroad.  I think that despite his intelligence, Obama is going to find rationality and logic little help in dealing with the Middle East, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Russia, China/Tibet, etc.  We are talking a hell of a lot of damage control here and some unsavory lose-lose propositions (e.g. China/Tibet, Kosovo).

    Why everyone is eager to throw a talent like Obama, a man whose strengths it seems to me are mainly for domestic renewal, into such an unpropitious foreign affairs meat-grinder is beyond me.  The likelihood is very high that whoever the Democrats nominate in 2008, if they win, will be in for a terrible battle for relection in 2012 if even half the things that need to break positive in Iraq/Afghanistan fail to do so.  The Clintons can manage something like this.  

    A Clinton-Obama team would be even better - there is work enough to go around for the three of them.

    •  Appreciate your candor (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      novaseeker, orangeuglad

      I know this is a warm and fuzzy discussion, but I have to interject.  Sorry in advance to all those in mid-hug.

      The fact that you refer to your candidate as "the Clintons" is telling.  Why not refer to Obama as "the Obamas"?  In fact, that sounds funny because it is never said.  

      If HRC is elected the nominee I will support her, but that support is for the nominee for President, not her husband.  Please stop doing this, it makes HRC supporters seem like you are supporting a ruling family, not an individual.  I assume that is not the intention.

      On foreign policy experience, Barack Obama was right on the most important foreign policy decision since 9/11.  HRC still has yet to admit regret for giving Bush military authorization in Iraq.  That is why Obama supporters give him the edge here.  

      Please, I beg of you, give me one example of HRC's foreign policy experience.  Give me an example of how she's made the right decision under pressure on a diplomatic issue. I've researched this heavily, as a voter, and I cannot find anything.

      BTW, how much foreign policy experience did Bill Clinton have prior to stepping into the White House?  Let's keep this in perspective, lighting a Christmas tree and accepting a tea pot is not diplomacy.  

      Do you really want a President that has a selective memory as Clinton has displayed lately with her Bosnia story, with NAFTA, and the military authorization in Iraq vote?

      Again, I want to keep this civil, but I have to point out these things for the sake of accuracy.  Besides you don't wanna go around calling your candidate "the Clintons," it's just silly.

      Every war when it comes, or before it comes, is represented not as a war but as an act of self-defense against a homicidal maniac. -Orwell

      by Fight or Die on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:13:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The race is over... (0+ / 0-)

      "Clinton/Obama team," my ass...


    •  Cool, but (0+ / 0-)

      I see nothing with Hillary that suggests she is better at dealing with foreign affairs than anyone else.

      Unfortunately, her lies about this as her primary strength further undermine her credibility.

      What is so hard about Iraq? You get on ships and go home. See what result and either have an enemy to kill or a country with which to continue diplomatic ties. If there is a threat, use force. If not, use diplomacy.

      Bush used threat against a non-force, and Hillary supported it.

      Clinton can't even manage an election. She uses obsolete strategy. She seeks loyalists over common sense and strength of unity. She lies. She perpetuates the washington-lobbyist complex.

      I have a hard time accepting the tremendous qualities and great potential in Hillary because of the sunshine that her wrong-headded campaign has exposed.

      To me, you are either supportive of the DLC's mission or you are not. This campaign drew those battle lines rather firmly, and I am pleased to see Obama on the right side. Hillary has a lot of recovery before she can truly cross it.


      I am crass and hostile. If you want to be comforted and babied, unplug your internet connection and call your parents.

      by nanobubble on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:07:23 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  There would not be two Clintons. (0+ / 0-)

      There would be a President and First Gentleman.

      I have never heard that articulated before and believe that it is a dangerous concept, ill-advised and probably unconstitutional. Unless of course HRC would try to have WJC confirmed as a Cabinet member.

      The concept raise more questions than it answers and hope that you are not serious about it.

      BTW: IMHO Obama would have to be suicidal to accept a VP post in the scenario you outlined. Sweet Jesus.

      "The fact which the politician faces is merely that there is less honor among thieves than was supposed, and not the fact that they are thieves." Thoreau

      by shigeru on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:56:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Please, please, please, on the off chance (0+ / 0-)

      that HRC is our nominee, please do not spread this notion. I don't know where you live, but you probably don't live outside of a liberal bastion if you think that advertising WJC as co-president will help HRC. I can think of no quicker way in a GE for us to lose the presidency than to have the illusion that that WJC would be a co-president.

      Aside from his obvious "indiscretions," it would make a laughingstock of HRC's candidacy.

      Please put this to rest.

      "The fact which the politician faces is merely that there is less honor among thieves than was supposed, and not the fact that they are thieves." Thoreau

      by shigeru on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:52:14 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thank you for your thoughtful post... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse, orangeuglad

    It is indeed unpleasant to bash a fellow-democrat. I have found myself doing that here and elsewhere, and it feels literally FOREIGN to do so. I can't imagine how upset I would be if Obama were losing right now. I would check out completely, probably, and be in the fetal position under the covers. And I've never really respected the fact that HRC supporters could feel this way too--mostly because she has been around for longer, and I think the passion that we're feeling as Obama supporters comes with the notion of "newness." So it just never registered that anyone could feel this level of passion for someone we've all known for decades. This is why I appreciate your post so much. Thank you.

  •  I understand what you are saying (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I posted about The Clinton Stages of Grief the other day. You are ahead of most Clinton supporters and you've made it to the acceptance stage. Thanks for posting this. Let the healing begin.

    Only small minds want always to be right - Louis XIV

    by Jamais Vu on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:01:13 PM PDT

  •  I reached this realization (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

    months ago--that we need to be gentler to the folks behind the other candidates. They are fellow Democrats and mostly very good people. Then things got crazy and nasty in the nomination fight. It has been fun to trash Hillary and make fun of her here. After all those years of supporting the Clintons when they let us down over and over, it felt good, but you are right, Angry Mouse. We need to be gracious winners now AND if we win in November we need to be gracious as well.  That is the message behind Obama's campaign.  He is sacrificing a lot to campaign on unity because at heart he is a very progressive person on the issues BUT we need to listen to the other side and compromise to save the planet, the economy and provide health care for all.

  •  Ok I am game (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nehark, orangeuglad

    In the interest of open, honest discussion I am more than willing to set aside the vitriol and enter into the spirit of reconciliation.

    I am an Obama Supporter.  Here is what has made me the angriest from the Clinton campaign.  When the Clinton campaign came out with the statements that McCain would be a better candidate than a fellow democrat.  I am officially opening my mind.  How is this ok?  And I know I am still showing some anger.  But like I said--my mind is open.  Perhaps a Clinton supporter will enlighten me as to how I have misunderstood.  And look--I loved the Clintons.  I hated Ken Starr.  Hated Hyde.  I always said about Hillary that while I knew plenty of people that hated her, not one of them could really articulate why they hated her.  I always thought she got a raw deal.  I loved her opening of "I am the most famous person you know nothing about."  But when the Supreme court is in the balance, how the Clinton campaign could push that meme of McCain being a better choice than Obama was beyond me and decidedly anti Democrat.  And here is the difference--as angry as I am, I would delightfully vote for her over John McCain.

    The other thing is concerning the Florida/Michigan problem.  I can honestly say that if the numbers were reversed, I would still be saying that we CANNOT seat those delegates.  What state would ever have respect for the rules and the calendar if we did not enforce them?  

    To those of you who insist on seating those delegates (and once again I ask this with an open mind ready to learn)Please answer these questions:

    Which disenfranchises more democratic voters?  Changing the rules mid contest to benefit Clinton over Obama

    or Not seating Fla and Mich delegates?  

    I feel like particularly Black voters will be asking What happens to a dream deferred indeed.  That in my mind will affect the GE way more than not seating Fla and Mich.  

    What will be the incentive for states in future contests to respect the calendar and rules?  

    How do you allow for candidates whose names were not on the ballot?  

    How do you allow for voters who respected the rules and crossed over to vote in GOP primaries?

    How do you allow for voters who assumed that the rules would be enforced and stayed home?

    If you have a new contest, how do you allow people who crossed over to vote in the GOP primary to vote in the new contest without allowing GOP voters to Freep the primary?  And if you just open it up to everyone, are you not allowing voters who would have been disenfranchised to have EXTRA influence since many would have voted in BOTH primaries?

    I just don't see how Hillary's positions on these various issues are not harmful to the party as a whole.  Particularly pushing McCain over Obama.

    Having said all of this, If somehow Hillary wins the Nom, I will vote for her and support her and embrace her.    

    •  Thanks (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tyelperion, chap, nehark

      I've been trying to keep an open mind about what to do about MI and FL, and I already agreed with most of your arguments; the one that I missed was

      Which disenfranchises more democratic voters?  Changing the rules mid contest to benefit Clinton over Obama

      or Not seating Fla and Mich delegates?  

      I was aware of all the detailed arguments, but somehow missed the bigger picture that I think you're making here: that changing the rules mid-game actually disenfranchises all of the voters who played by the rules.  That's a LOT of voters (by my no-doubt-inaccurate calculations so far, about 25 million!).

      Did I understand that correctly?

  •  Thanks for this diary (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chap, Angry Mouse, orangeuglad

    It brought tears to my eyes and made me smile at the same time.

    A thought occurred after reading it, having to do with the concern of reaching across party lines. I do understand that concern, but in a sense, we can take your diary's topic of Clinton and Obama supporters needing each other and extend it out even larger and although it may be a bit more difficult, we as Americans all need each other too (both dems and repubs).

    I know, I know, I feel the same anger and disgust for the views of the other side, but I also know that I have loved ones who are republican... and I love them anyway. They do have a right to hold their opinions and we discuss politics in order to understand each other and find the ways in which we do agree. I think Obama's idea of "reaching across the aisle" is like that. I will never adopt any of the views of my loved ones, but it is important to listen and talk about things so we can understand each other. We need each other... Obama & Clinton supporters, just as Republicans and Democrats need each other as Americans.

    If getting shot at by sniper fire qualifies you to be president, there are thousands in the military way more qualified than Clinton to be our next president.

    by GoracleFan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:07:41 PM PDT

  •  I love public discourse. I have to talk (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GoracleFan, orangeuglad

    to my father who is a staunch neo-con who I am trying to rework to the other side. I continually have to remind him he voted for JFK. I know I am making some progress since he no longer sends me ________ (place a neo-con name here) links.

    If I keep him engaged with love and understanding he'll get here in time for Novemeber.

    Thanks for your post

  •  Here ya go (0+ / 0-)


    This message has not been approved by the corporate media.

    by jre2k8 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:12:08 PM PDT

  •  I think the tone has improved because HRC (6+ / 0-)

    has stopped her insulting behavior toward Obama. Going after him the way she did and praising McCain was a HUGE mistake. I liked her far better during the debate when they were on stage together after Edwards dropped out and she said she was "proud" to be there with Barack.

    The enemy is McCain, not each other. I'm glad we've backed away from the circular firing squad somewhat.

    Sometimes the magic works.......sometimes it doesn't

    by Unrepentant Liberal on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:16:57 PM PDT

  •  Read "Audacity of Hope" (0+ / 0-)

    Here you are with a handful of holes, a thumb up your ass and a big grin to pass the time of day with.

    by jazzence on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:25:20 PM PDT

  •  Wow, beautiful diary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I feel the same way as you.  I have been an Obama supporter from the beginning but I also like Hillary as a candidate.  I have also been concerned with the tone of the discussions and I have felt sad that we had polarized into the Obama-sphere and the Clinton-sphere.  I would have voted for Hillary, proudly and happily.  I'm really excited about the possibility of "President Obama."

    I have been trying to avoid the primary diaries because I really didn't want to get caught up in the bitterness.  Thank you for writing this and thank you Hillary Clinton for serving your country so well.  I look forward to seeing what Ms. Clinton will do in the future.

    McCain: Less jobs, more war.

    by Unstable Isotope on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:29:59 PM PDT

  •  Welcome, Angry Mouse, to the legions of Obama (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nehark, GoracleFan, orangeuglad

    supporters.  I always thought I would be happy to vote for either candidate, once the primaries were over, but I lost my taste for Hillary once her campaign took what I view as too many wrong turns.

    Regarding your concern over Obama's reaching across the aisle, I believe it's really one of his greatest strengths.  I honestly, after reading both his books and as many of his speeches as I could get my hands on, believe he is a true statesman and an honest diplomat.  He's made it his life's work to see things from both sides, so he can communicate with both sides.  He doesn't compromise his beliefs, but he learns to address the beliefs of others without denegrating them, which opens the dialogue up, rather than slamming it shut.

    In fact, I would say your journey of acceptance of his candidacy over Hillary's is your willingness to listen to the other side and then open a calm, understanding dialogue, rather than call names and throw stones.  For me, at this particular time in this nation's history, Barack Obama is the antidote to nasty, name-calling, denegrating politics.  Barack Obama uses respect rather than ridicule when talking to or about the opposition.  He acknowledges that the opposition has a right to their views and then explains where he differs and, in that explanation, not only raises the dialogue to a higher level, but educates us all as a result.  He's set a really fine example for me, since I've been frothing at the mouth with hatred for all things Republican since 2000.  Barack Obama has shown me that I needed to dial it back and still win.  Great, great example of someone I believe is an exceptional, unique and gifted human being.

    Thanks for this post.  It gives me great hope for 2008!!!

    •  Are you sure the diarist picked Obama... (0+ / 0-)

      ...already?  Or, is diarist saying he/she's ready to vote for Obama "in November"?

      •  You are correct. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Larry Bailey, Little Lulu

        Please note that this is not about me turning away from HRC.  As I've said in other comments throughout this thread, I'd still be pleased as punch if she won the nomination.

        However, I am a realist.  And I don't think she's going to have knock-out in all the remaining states.

        Which means Obama will be the nominee.

        This is about me coming to terms with him.  And learning how to support him.  And learning how to assuage my concerns about him.

        But this is NOT a statement of me choosing Obama over HRC.

        •  Thank you AM. From the comments... (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Angry Mouse

          ...I thought there was some misreading of your words in that regard.  Great diary, BTW.  Suits me perfectly: if HRC doesn't win this thing, I'm all for Obama.  Some of the Obama folk don't seem to understand that -- to some, it's a fight to the death, so to speak.  For others like us, it's about havingt two great candidates and we stand ready to support the one who wins the Democratic nomination.

  •  why the hell not? (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GoracleFan, Bindle, Angry Mouse

    Not until she's officially out (and even then, you know, fuck it, I just might leave it there.  'Cause I'm still damned proud of the day I went to my caucus and voted for Hillary Clinton for president.)

    I still smile when I see an old, tattered Gore sticker, and think what might have been.
    (I've trained my eyes not to see That Other Name.)

  •  I'm truly sorry for your loss. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nehark, Angry Mouse

    I, too, lost my candidate early on, and made the jump to Obama. Hopefully, there will be no more loss.

  •  Late to the thread, but I will point out (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

    that if Clinton does wind up our nominee, some of us are gonna need you even more, to rally us and get us excited and convince us of her promise and potential! I promise to be a committed, open-minded Democrat if HRC is our nominee -- just get me jazzed up about it, 'k?

    Liberal parenting funnies at The Hausfrau Blog

    by jamfan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:42:44 PM PDT

  •  we are not all as bad as the worst of us (0+ / 0-)

    we are not all as bad as our worst moments of responding in haste or anger either.

    I want to be part of the great makeup.  You don't ever have to drink the KoolAid as far as I'm concerned, Angry Mouse, but I appreciate your tone and the thoughtfulness in this diary.

    Politics is like driving. To go backward, put it in R. To go forward, put it in D.
    Give to Populista's Obamathon 2.0!

    by TrueBlueMajority on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:47:36 PM PDT

  •  I had the same concerns (0+ / 0-)

    about his ideas of "bipartisanship" -- then I remembered that there are reasonable Republicans out there who aren't totally under the sway of the neocons and theocons. And if Obama can bring out a sizable number of voters in their districts and states, they might be able to support Obama's policies because they know that Obama was elected by the will of the people.

    I remember a day when "liberal" wasn't a swear word or a mental disorder (thanks for nothing, Michael "Savage" Wiener). And I remember an era when Republican wasn't a synonym for "wingnut fundie asshole". The politics of "us" v. "them" and "divide and conquer" are probably the worst legacy of the Bush misAdministration from "Bush's Brain" Karl Rove. It started in early 2001 when the new administration ignored the briefings from the Clinton administration because, well, they weren't Republicans after all. It continued with emphasis on missile defense and disregard of the threat of terrorism. And after 9/11, instead of looking to find consensus on how to fight terrorism, Bush took the stand of "it's my way or the highway" and "if you're not with us, you're with the terrorists." So instead of talking about the issues that threaten our nation, we stop talking to each other altogether. And the national motto of "out of many, one," becomes "every man for himself, sucker."

    It's going to take all of us, Republicans and Democrats, to repair the 8 years of damage Bush has done to the national discourse, to our country, and to our world. We're going to have to work together to reclaim our heritage. As Ben Franklin said, "We must all hang together or, most assuredly, we shall all hang separately."

    "Old soldiers never die -- they get young soldiers killed." -- Bill Maher

    by Cali Scribe on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:48:32 PM PDT

  •  Obama & Hillary this Friday in ND... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    They are both attending the ND Dem-NPL state convention in Grand Forks.  The ND Democrats are ecstatic... and the ND Republicans are green with envy.    And it’s damn big news in North Dakota... to have both candidates attending.  It’s actually unheard of.  Especially considering that the state already held its caucus in February.  

    My wife is a Clinton supporter and I’m for Obama.  As I said earlier today... the barbs flying back and forth between the two camps have been quite painful for us.  It’s like having parents fighting.  What child wants to choose sides?

    Thanks for your diary Angry Mouse... and to Kid Oakland for his earlier diary today.  It’s about time we all came to our senses.

  •  Democrats all voting for BHO is not the problem (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Nonie3234, orangeuglad

    At the end of the day, 95% of both Democrats and Republicans will vote for their canidates party.  The election will be decieded by the Independents.  By accident the Republicans nomiated a candiate that appeals to Independants, of which I am one.

    If it is BHO I vote for him.

    If it is Billary I vote against her.

    It is that simple.

  •  Only when people stop voting for her and Clinton (0+ / 0-)

    drops out will I support Obama.

    Sorry I have to run to the Senate floor to abolish torture.

    by bten on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 12:57:15 PM PDT

  •  Totally agree with this diary- no more hate :-D (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

    Now, I'm a little late on the uptake, but maybe someone'll see this.  I just wanted to address your concern that "coming together" or unifying with those we don't agree with - finding common ground- is impossible without compromising.  I wrote this a few days ago.

    If you read Obama's book The Audacity of Hope, you'll see how he talks about abortion, and other values.  He's unequivocally pro-choice, but it's hard to disagree with his assertion that he knows he could be in the wrong about most things like that.  There are some fantastic points he makes.  

    I think that people who disagree with me about abortion aren't thinking about it the way I think about it, for the most part; I look at it as a matter of women's rights, but I don't think pro-lifers think of it as limiting personal freedom. Pro-lifers can't get past the fact that the fetus which would otherwise be born is being "killed"- and I can understand how that would be a moral dilemma which they might even want to step in to stop happening- I just don't see it that way, and I think the living woman who has to suffer is more important than an unborn fetus which can't feel pain.  But it really is a huge dilemma of an issue- if they really do think it's murder, of course they'll be against it.  

    The fact is, the two sides of the argument don't see eye to eye.  Obama has the rare ability to bridge those divides and understand that you can disagree with someone adamantly about an issue- but that doesn't have to divide you on everything, and there may be some common ground to cover- such as trying to work harder at avoiding unplanned pregnancies through contraception information, or providing more help to the women who do choose to have their babies instead of an abortion- without backing down on the issue.  You can be both pro-life and pro-choice and support these ideas.

    And I think most issues have similar common ground, possible to achieve and agree on without backing down from our principles.  We need to find the ways we agree, and move beyond just stating the ways we disagree- because that just leads to virulent rhetoric.  

  •  You give us hope (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I am a die-hard Obama supporter and I can't tell you how much I appreciate reading your post. Obama himself would certainly not approve  of the vitriol and ugly bashing that some of us have indulged in. Following his lead I have recently learned not to jump down the throat of people I know who support McCain,  for instance. I've learned to find out their concerns and discuss them which has been much more productive. Interestingly, after reading Obama's "Dreams From My Father" I realized that he feels the deep, deep injustices of the world and believe me, he probably emotionally feels a lot like you do about those "across the aisle". He's found that in order to really bring about the change he sincerely believes in he must try to understand them and reach out. The stakes are too high to alienate those he disagrees with. Once again, thanks for your thoughts- you made my day.

  •  Anger, Fear & Hope (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

    In the past few months, I have been angry.  It started during the Nevada Caucus when the Clinton supporters legally challenged the at-large caucus sites in the Las Vegas Strip resorts because they did not get the major union endorsement.  As a former casino worker, I valued how our state party was reaching out to the average casino worker, I had pride in my state party and the role we would play as the "3rd to vote/caucus" in the nation.  From that point on, I grew angrier and angrier with each Clinton campaign tactic... that I took very personal.

    The fear set in when I thought we could lose this election to the GOP when we seemed like we were giving McCan't ammo to use against us in the general election.  A sound bite from Hillary saying Obama sucks is a lot more powerful than a sound bite from McCan't saying it.  Then the fear intensified as the chatter grew louder... "I will never vote for him/her, I'd rather vote for McCan't or sit home.  My 70 year old mother said the same thing!

    Then, in the last week, I notice a change in the tone of the dialogue, and it hit home when I read Deoliver47's diary.  After reading your diary my hope is further  overshadowing my fear, and my anger has pretty much disappeared.

    It all starts with one person reaching out, then another, then another.  We are Democrats, and our time has come... time to mend fences, time to reach out to each other, and time to claim our rightful place in leading this great country!  Together, we will help America fulfill its promise to our future generations... Yes, we can!!!

  •  Refreshing, Raging Rodent! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

     I knew I liked you when I first saw you :-)

  •  I've always thought Senator Clinton (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    has done an excellent job as Senator, and wanted her to continue (and I'm not a New Yorker, either).  I was entirely happy with the idea of her winning the nomination, though I'm a real fan of John Edwards - to the extent that I had been planning to vote for him when the Oregon primary rolled around, since I changed my registration to be able to vote in the Democratic Senate primary race.  I changed my mind when I sat at my computer and watched the video of Obama's More Perfect Union speech.  I'm old enough to remember John Kennedy, and I haven't felt that way after a speech ("Ask not what your country can do for you ....")until now, which is all I'm going to say about that.

    In actual fact, I am entirely convinced that most of the original set of Democratic Presidential candidates would have made excellent Presidents, and the rest would have been pretty decent.  And I am not basing this on the low standard set by the current administration, either.

    As things stand, I want John Edwards for Attorney General, whoever wins the nomination.  And I want single payer health insurance.

  •  Obama has said he will (0+ / 0-)

    talk to those that disagree and try to find common ground, but he won't give up on the real important issues.  He's not going to change his stand on a woman's right to choose, but he will sit down with pro-life folks and try to find ways to get the number of abortions down.  You can find common ground and compromises where progress is made, but the underlying issue remains.  

    You need to be able to discuss differences with people not be so contentious that they won't talk to you about it.  No progress is possible that way.

  •  What a nice diary. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

    And it would be a nice diary if our positions were switched and my candidate was losing. I wish none of us had to be upset over our candidate losing, and I'm sorry that you're feeling that Mouse, because I've been there plenty of times. We all have.

    Together we're moving in a direction that's a little different from the one you would've preferred, so it's our job to help YOU see the wisdom in that without dismissing your questions/concerns. It won't happen overnight but I hope we can win your enthusiastic support because we could really really use it this year.

    "I seriously believe we have to start asking questions about his mental health." - Dennis Kucinich

    by Ivey476 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:15:35 PM PDT

  •  asdf (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

    What I'm uncomfortable with is, strangely, the very thing that I understand holds so much appeal for so many people.  

    Simply, it is his talk of moving beyond partisanship, reaching out across the aisle, working together, compromising, finding common ground, et cetera.

    I can appreciate that sentiment.  I think it's noble.  It's idealistic.  It's very Mr. Smith Goes to Washington (which is a movie I love, by the way).


    I don't want to compromise.  I don't want to find common ground with the same people who think intelligent design is as legitimate a theory as evolution.

    Obama-style compromise isn't the same as DLC-style compromise.  He wouldn't look at the scientific community, look at the religious community, and say "Ok, let's compromise! We'll teach Darwin for a week, and crea-er, ID for a week!"

    An Obama compromise - at least, the way I see it - involves two things.  The first is finding common ground where it already exists.  Pat freaking Robertson is on our side, insofar as the global warming debate goes.  And great, his voice will reach a lot of people who would otherwise not listen.

    The second is an aspect of what you said in the closing of your diary:

    There was no hate.  There was no vitriol.  Instead, I received real, thoughtful, kind responses, especially from Bandaloo, Chumley, GMFORD, Dapremonster, and fumie, who even said my concerns were "legitimate."

    They acknowledged my concerns.  Validated them, even.  And tried to help me understand them.

    It's that quality of acknowledging the others' views.  Of disagreeing without being disagreeable.  It doesn't mean you roll over and cave, as the word "compromise" has meant so many times in the past (and in the future).  It means acknowledging that the person on the other side of whatever disagreement is indeed a person, and that maybe if you'd had their breadth of life experience instead of your own, maybe you'd feel the same way.

    I'm sure this has already been said in some form or another, I just wanted to put my own perspective out there.

    Jumping on the bandwagon: (-3.63, -3.03) - Does that make me part of the right wing here?

    by someone else on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:29:26 PM PDT

    •  Thank you. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      someone else

      I guess, after watching the Democrats "compromise" for the past 8 years, I'm wary of that word.

      If Obama can find a way to redefine it so that the headlines aren't about Democrats being "caving in" or being capitulating wusses, I could learn to like compromise.

      But he's got a big job ahead of him on that front.

  •  Sig line (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

    Mine's not intended to slur Clinton, though it is a take on something Bill said.  Fact is, the stupidity factor of the last 8 years is the great uniting force in our country right now.  More powerful than specific policies as a focal point. Even the war, hated for so many good reasons, is largely hated for its stupidity. When Bill was in office he disapointed me many many times, but I was always impressed that we had elected someone who knew how to think. Obama can do that, Clinton can do it, and McCain/Bush can't.

    That said, I'm changing my sig, as it might feel divisive.

    It's the stupid, stupid.

    by Bindle on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:37:25 PM PDT

  •  keep that bumper sticker on your car (0+ / 0-)

    What can it hurt? I still have my Edwards 08 sticker on, and I smile when I see some other car with the same sticker. I still see people driving around with Dean for America stickers.

    Healing will be needed, because hurtful things have been said on both sides. However, I think the Obama supporters will need to make extra effort to be gracious, because they are winning.

    John McCain: 100 years in Iraq "would be fine with me."

    by desmoinesdem on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:39:33 PM PDT

  •  I know it's too late to have any real impact on (5+ / 0-)

    this discussion...I've been out all day...but what the hell?

    I don't want to compromise.  I don't want to find common ground with the same people who think intelligent design is as legitimate a theory as evolution.

    I don't want to come together with the people who think it's okay for pharmacists to refuse to do their jobs because contraception violates their "morals."

    It's contentious of me, I know, but I don't want to get along with those people.  I don't want to compromise with them.

    They are wrong.  Plain and simple.

    And I haven't heard Obama explain how it is possible.

    Politics is partisan business.  It's been ugly for most of my lifetime.  The persecution of the Clintons was wretched, and the Republican rule during the Bush years has been no better.

    Yes, politics is--no, has become--partisan business, it is--no, has gotten--ugly. And it started to do so before Clinton, and it has not only been Republicans who have notched it up, though clearly it has gotten even worse in the last seven years.

    With that in mind, let me ask a very serious question: How has that been working for us?

    Have we tackled and solved any big problems lately?

    No. We have not. Global warming is still trying to kill us. More and more Americans are without health care. We are more dependent on foreign oil than ever before. We are fighting more wars due to our dependence on foreign oil. We still have no viable alternative energy sources.

    But yeah, let's keep to the ever increasing partisanship and ill will toward those people. That's clearly been working for us, right? (Sorry for the sarcasm, it's the only way I know to make that particular point.)

    The first time Hillary attempted to make headway with health care, how much of that defeat do you think could be blamed on partisan bullshit?

    Perhaps more important, how long are you willing to put off solving these important problems because you are unwilling to put your partisanship aside? The clock is ticking: the atmosphere is heating up, the uninsured are literally dying in the streets, and we are losing more American lives in Iraq every day.

    But that doesn't mean I don't want a president in the White House who will say, "On science, there is no compromise.  Take your Intelligent Design bullshit and shove it."

    As a scientist, I would agree that when dealing with the Republicans on issues of science, there need be no compromise: facts are facts, as you say. And Obama would agree.

    But on issues of, say, the environment, or on issues of health care, should we not extend a hand to those same people? Or should we say, "I'm sorry, but your stand on Intelligent Design precludes me from dealing with you on other issues?" Because if your partisan desires run that deep, then I sincerely doubt we will ever solve even the smallest problems we face, much less the big ones.

    I'm not saying that Obama will be able to build the consensus he would like on these main issues--your skepticism is shared by many of his supporters, I suspect--but is there any other choice? Do you really think a partisan approach to global warming or health care will yield our desired result? Perhaps Obama's approach is naive or wishful thinking, but extending that hand is our only chance.

    And, of course, there's this: Partisanship begets partisanship. If the next Democratic president and Congress take a partisanship approach to governing, will we be able to cry foul when those Democrats are eventually replaced by Republicans who then take a partisan approach to governing? If Jeb Bush becomes the 45th POTUS must we remain silent while he pushes partisan bill after partisan bill through Congress?

    My answers to these questions left me no choice but to support Barack Obama. I'm not certain he can do what he wants to do, I do have doubts that creep up on me late at night. I do wonder if at some point in the next 4 or 8 years, I will finally decide to expatriate to Europe (something I've been considering for seven years now) simply because I no longer have any confidence that we will be able to solve the huge problems that face us. I worry we will not be able to get out of Iraq. I worry my kids will not live to see their 25th birthday. I worry that one day I, too, will have no health care.

    And the only reason I a still here, fighting, is that I believe that a grass-roots powered, bipartisan approach to tackling these problems is still possible, and that if anyone can do it, Barack Obama can. If he doesn't, well, then, I'll start learning French. But for now, I am willing to believe that if anyone can, Barack Obama can.

    I don't know how else to put it. To me, his approach, as naive or silly or unrealistic as you want to believe it to be, is in my mind the only chance we have.


    -7.88 -8,77 Just a wine sipping, brie eating, $6 coffee drinking, Prius driving, over educated, liberal, white, activist, male New Englander for Barack Obama.

    by EquationDoc on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:43:50 PM PDT

    •  Better late than never. (0+ / 0-)

      Your points are certainly appreciated.  

      Several commenters have addressed this issue of compromise in a way that I find quite persuasive.

      Thank you for being part of the solution.

      •  OK but note that I was not talking about... (0+ / 0-)

        compromise, which necessarily involves mutual concession. Instead, I focused on consensus building, which in a sense is the anti-compromise: rather than focusing on what each side differs on and must therefore be compromised to some extent, consensus focuses on the common ground between all.

        That is to day, we do not need to compromise on science vs. Intelligent Design in order to come to a consensus on, say, health care.

        However, I think it's important to recognize that Bill Clinton's policy prowess revolved heavily around compromise--and that's exactly the reason I did not get any warm fuzzies from him. Obama would not have caved immediately on the issue of gay patriots and heroes serving in the military, which is exactly what Bill Clinton did in order to get a half-assed policy in place. That is to say, if Bill Clinton's two terms are any indication of a Hillary Clinton presidency (and I'm not saying it is), then compromise would be her bread and butter.

        By the way, the Kool Aid isn't so bad.

        Mine was grape. :)


        -7.88 -8,77 Just a wine sipping, brie eating, $6 coffee drinking, Prius driving, over educated, liberal, white, activist, male New Englander for Barack Obama.

        by EquationDoc on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 06:29:26 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Check this out (0+ / 0-)

    It's a great photo essay on why we need to vote for the Democrat in November - no matter who that is - A few reasons to support the Dem nominee, whomever it is.

    Pictures worth 16,000 words

    (Old White Woman 4 Obama)
    OWW40's Unite!

    by Cyber Kat on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 01:57:21 PM PDT

  •  we really are trying (0+ / 0-)

    thanks for your thoughts. We really need more diaries like this - not because they say "I'm voting for X", but because they expand the dialog about useful and welcoming behavior

  •  No one will bring the purple Kool-aid, promise. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I think a lot of us Obama supporters totally latched on to him as a person, and to a grass-roots, bottom-up campaign, and felt so committed to him and his campaign that we couldn't see why everyone didn't feel the same way we did.  But it's clear that many didn't and still don't.  And a lot of us "there from the beginning" folks are seeing that, and acknowledging those feelings in HRC supporters.  I'm sure that's eased by the feeling that Obama may be close to winning.  So now it is our job to make sure that we don't become a polarizing, smug group of "we told you so" types.  If Obama does indeed win, we need to take the energy we put into canvassing, phone-banking, fund-raising and just representing the campaign in general, and direct it towards being helping, healing hands who make every Democrat/progressive feels welcomed and heard.  That's the only way to ensure a progressive victory in Nov.  

    The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams. - Eleanor Roosevelt

    by Jentutsy on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:04:06 PM PDT

  •  He'll try this unity thing for a while... (0+ / 0-)

    Then President Barack will get disgusted at the lack of integrity and intelligence across the aisle and use other tools, including reaching out for public support, to see progress made.  At least that's how I see it playing out.  And I sincerely hope the Secret Service doesn't go out and get bombed out of their minds like they did on Nov 21, 1963.

  •  My signature line is a homage to William Carlos (0+ / 0-)

    Williams and is focused on the impending victory in November which will feel 10 times as good as the 2006 congressional victory.

    This is just to say Forgive us victory tastes delicious so sweet and so cold

    by Dave the Wave on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:16:42 PM PDT

  •  Ardent mouse not angry (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Mariposa, ebbinflo, Angry Mouse, Livvy5

    Thank you for making me get out the tissues.
    And a big Hug to you as well.

    I was moved yesterday when the dialogue you were part of began.  I'm glad you came back to tell folks what your concerns are.

    •  Great job Deoliver47 (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Bandaloo, Deoliver47

      For your wonderful diary yesterday and it looks like it struck a cord with someone... You deserve praise for taking a chance at DD then coming over here afterwards.. Hopefully to stay  :)  Yes. We. Can!

      It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong.Voltaire-1694-1778 GO Cubs!

      by ebbinflo on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:44:20 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Look I'll vote for Obama if he is the nominee (0+ / 0-)

    but I am telling you there are alot of lifelong democrats who cannot abide Obama, that have told me they will NOT vote if he is the nominee.  This situation is just bad all around.  I wish Gore or Edwards had just been the nominee.

    •  Those "lifelong democrats" you speak of (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      can go ahead and switch their registrations to Republican.  Obama has run an incredibly positive and gracious campaign considering the Clintons' character assassinations he's had to put up with.

      I suspect these "lifelong democrats" are the same idiots who helped to repeatedly nominate sure losers like Dukakis and Kerry.  I respect both of them, but one had to be delusional to believe that either of them was a good candidate for the general election.  

      "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

      by Subterranean on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:35:00 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  These "idiots" have genius level (0+ / 0-)

        IQs...They didn't think Dukakis or Kerry would win either.

        They aren't switching their registration to Republican - they are LIFELONG Kennedy loving Democrats who have always voted Democrat, who will for the FIRST time NOT vote Democrat.  And FTR they don't feel that Obama has run a positive OR gracious campaign.  They see a person that makes nice scripted speeches, who has a LITTLE political experience & who doesn't handle himself well in off the cuff situations. They see the smear that has been perpetuated against someone (Clinton) for over 20 years in an unprecedented way that our own party is buying into @@ & it makes them angry (you know as a woman I can't help but feel there is a certain level of misogyny present & it is insulting but I  try to keep them big picture of the G/E in mind).  They see a Richardson endorsement that was very likely due to a deal to get the VP nomination from Obama.  They see a biased press that completely shut out Edwards from any coverage & is anti Clinton so provides Obama better coverage.  They see that once Obama gets the nomination the GOP is going to have him for breakfast & the only candidate who has dealt with the GOP's crap for any substantial period of time is Clinton not Obama. They are angry Democrats who are angry that the party has chosen to get behind a candidate & instead has abandoned someone who has been a great champion for the party & is probably the only fighter that can take the GOP on.

        And FTR I wasn't aware that so many votes were so disposable but I guess you feel differently.  I personally disagree with that sentiment.

        •  Yeah, but... (0+ / 0-)

          The problem with all of that, Jrsy, is that all of those opinions are based on their PERCEPTION of things, and not in actual facts - the "nice scripted speeches" meme is something that Senator Clinton put forward herself, despite pages and pages of detailed policy positions available on Senator Obama's website, because it was an easy line of attack - the media covers the "pretty speeches" because they're easier to cover - nuance and context are not our media's strongest suits, no?

          The issue of experience has been a thorny one for Senator Clinton - she's only got one full term on Senator Obama, and therefore wants us all to accept that 8 years as First Lady should count as Presidential-level political experience, and then puffs up even that experience beyond any shred of credibility.

          Does misogyny play into some of the anti-Hillary backlash?  Yup.  Is it at least reasonable to suggest that racism plays into some of the anti-Obama backlash in the same way?

          And "press bias" is SUCH a lame copout.  Doesn't it seem at all odd to you that quite literally EVERYONE in this country, regardless of political affiliation, seems to think that the media is biased against them?  The press doesn't have a bias except for their own ratings.  They play up conflict and anger, because that's what SELLS.  

          Finally, I think it's terribly unfortunate that so many Clinton supporters are willing to suddenly denigrate a guy like Bill Richardson - when he was the ONLY Democratic nominee taking the other nominees to task for what Senator Clinton framed as "the boys ganging up on the girl" (and what I might suggest was simply "the rest of the pack ganging up on the presumptive front-runner, because that's what the heck you do when you want to get elected"), he was everybody's best buddy, and a stand-up guy.  Now, suddenly because he's changed his position, he's a "Judas" who must have cut some despicable backroom deal?  Doesn't that line of thinking seem a little, well...Rovish to you?

          Just some thoughts...I'm really not trying to slam anybody else's position.  I do happen to think there are reasons that a reasonable person might prefer Senator Clinton as a candidate (differences on their healthcare policies, etc.), but those don't ever seem to be the arguments I see coming out of her supporters - and I wonder why that is.

          •  Actually a number of people said that Obama (0+ / 0-)

            does well with a scripted speech & not so much off the cuff for a while now - perhaps it has been pointed out b/c it is true? I WANT to like the guy - I WANT him to win if he is the nominee b/c we need the GOP out of the White House & I observed these things for awhile.  And  how is it Rovish to point out the obvious; that something may be off with the Richardson endorsement?  If he did do a backroom deal it is icky to say the least.  And before anyone used the phrase "Judas" when I first heard the endorsement it was my kneejerk reaction.

            You know Clinton wasn't some empty dress as a first lady - she was heavily involved in policy. This wasn't a Laura Bush tenure - she gained excellent experience in the White House, the Senate, not too mention her many years of political activism prior (which everyone loves to forget about). What about her place in the impeachment of Nixon for God's sakes?? Maybe some of the issues with Obama are real concerns that have been pointed out by the Clinton camp & have been voiced from an early time on.  I have always said it was insane for him to run now - he should give it at least another election cycle - he has time to demonstrate his capability & his electibility.  I can assure you; noone that is considering abstaining  the vote if Obama is the nominee is doing so due to perception issues; especially given the bias of the MSM it isn't POSSIBLE!

            Honestly, if we are going to be honest here - I don't know how Obama will do as president - to me it is ludicrous NOT to vote Dem if he is the nominee (there are too many other issues present). But I literally got my LAST choice candidate & will vote to oppose the GOP only.

            Clinton would actually be a good president, like her husband was (remember how good times were?) but instead we will turn our back on the candidate who has a much better proven potential & intimate that it is bigoted not to vote for Obama. And then God Forbid even if he loses every state in the G/E we will hear from the talking head pundits about what a great moment this still was in our country's history that we had so many people support him & how it  brings us closer to a more progressive time. Yeah great but we will still have the GOP in office which is a pretty awful thing for this country.

            You know maybe Clinton was crying for real; crying for the future of our country, b/c as I see this unfold it makes me want to cry & I am not one given to hysterics.  I just unfortunately have an uncanny ability of predicting the bad things before they unfold & I really just want to be wrong one of these days.

            •  Again, yeah but... (0+ / 0-)

              Jrsy, I never suggested that there isn't a difference in quality between Senator Obama's prepared speeches and his "off the cuff remarks", just that it doesn't necessarily suggest a lack of depth of understanding of the issues, as Senator Clinton suggests.  I've read his policy papers, and I like a lot of what I see, and disagree with some of it, too - but I fail to see how a difference in "eloquence" suggests a difference in knowledge.  

              Like most people, I'd imagine, he puts those ideas into context more clearly when he (and his speechwriters) have time to put together a coherent argument.  Yes, the diffence in quality exists - but does it actually suggest anything substantive about the candidate?  No, not really.

              I never said it was Rovish to have a "knee-jerk" reaction or a suspicion about Bill Richardson, merely that having someone affiliated with the Clintons immediately calling him "Judas" and accusing him of something without any actual PROOF was Rovish.  I understand that Carville has no official connection with the campaign, but I've heard it enough from Senator Clinton's supporters to feel that it's prevalent - and particularly unfair, given the existing relationship and the amount of graciousness that Governor Richardson showed to Senator Clinton during the debates, and again when he made what he called a difficult decision to endorse Senator Obama.  To me, it suggests a sense of entitlement - that anybody who has the temerity to think that Senator Obama MIGHT actually make a better president than Senator Clinton is either foolish, or has an ulterior motive - and as someone who believes very strongly that my support for Senator Obama comes from a reasoned examination of both sides, I find that pretty damn insulting.

              As far as the "empty dress" thing goes, I never ever suggested that Senator Clinton was - only that being first lady, even an unprecedentedly politically active one, is NOT the same thing as being President, or being a Senator, or any other kind of high-level political experience.  I acknowledge Senator Clinton's role in her husband's presidency - I just wonder why she found it necessary to embellish that experience if she's as proud of it as she seems to be.

              You say you don't know how Senator Obama will do as President - and I can say honestly that I don't think ANY of us know how ANYBODY still in the race will perform as President.  Who could possibly have predicted any of the challenges that the current office-holder faced?  

              I know it's easy to look at where we are now and see the Clinton administration as "Camelot Redux", but the bottom line is that the economic prosperity we had during that time had more to do with technological advances (remember the "tech bubble"), than any specific Presidentially-advanced policy, and that we paid pretty dearly for some of that prosperity later, in terms of the deleterious effects that NAFTA has had on American jobs, the "bubble" bursting, and some of the de-regulation that has influenced our current economic problems.  

              As far as policy goes, it should be noted that when Senator Clinton says that Senator Obama "talks about change", and that she can "deliver change", I'm frequently reminded of two of the major changes that she and her husband promised America in 1992:  Universal Healthcare, and a repeal of the ban on gays in the military.  Senator Clinton HERSELF failed miserably on the former, and what we got on the latter was a despicable semantic re-wording of the existing policy wrapped in the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" package.  That is part of her track record, whether she likes it or not.  So where's the "delivery on change"?

              Senator Clinton is an incredibly talented and knowledgeable policy wonk (and I really do mean that in the nicest way possible), I just don't think she's as good of a LEADER as Senator Obama is.  I base that on style - I base that on eloquence - and I base that on an ability to see multiple viewpoints into an argument.

              I'm sure Senator Clinton was crying for real - I've never once doubted that she loves this country.  However, my primary difference with her is a philosophical one - she presents herself as the person who's going to give us all of the answers, while Senator Obama presents himself as the person who wants to try and inspire US to find the answers within ourselves as citizens.  That, frankly, is the only way America, or any society, has ever really progressed.  

              When President Kennedy spoke of landing on the moon one day, he didn't say "and here's how we're going to do it!"  He merely trusted in the expertise and the spirit of the American people to get the job done.  MLK & Gandhi didn't come armed with policy proposals.  I'm not comparing Senator Obama to any of those leaders, but I do see a similar philosophy.  That's why he's got my vote.  

  •  Angry Mouse (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pat bunny

    Thank you for your gracious reflections and your courage.  We are all worried about our country and concerned about what havoc has been wrought over the last eight years.  The concerns that unite us are a lot more vital than any divisions between us.  Above all I salute you as an involved Patriot.


  •  Good to see (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    some more balance return to this site. Full disclosure: I am an Obama supporter and I cannot stand Clinton.
    That said, it seems like just a couple months ago Clinton, Obama and Edwards supporters seemed pretty well balanced on Daily Kos. Since Obama started winning primaries, it seemed like Clinton supporters kind of dried up on here.
    It is good to see some Clinton supporters standing up and saying on this site "I support Hillary and I'm proud." It's even better that supporters of both candidates seem to be reining themselves back in, saying WHY they support their person, and not just flaming the other candidate.
    My advice, and this applies to everyone: Don't get all your news or political commentary. Look around, sample the spectrum. Spending all your time on one site is like sticking your head in the sand.

    When will children learn to let their wildernesses burn?

    by fredo on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:22:46 PM PDT

  •  Sig line changed.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

    I took about 3 weeks to get over Edwards' departure.

    So - I understand the process that people will need to go through.

    -6.5, -7.59. HRC as the Terminator: "I cannot self terminate"

    by DrWolfy on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:24:36 PM PDT

  •  Very nicely said. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

    As an "Obamaton" who's been trying to keep things as civil as possible, it's nice to see folks on both sides of this thing reaching for reconicliation, regardless of outcome.  You have my personal word that should something crazy happen in the next few months and Senator Clinton winds up as our nominee, I will respond with the same level of class and grace you've shown today.

    After all...if John McCain can put aside his hurt feelings over what the President did to him during the 2000 campaign and graciously assist the President in destroying every last shred of this country's economy, respect for the rule of law, standing in the international community and military readiness, us REASONABLE people ought to be able to put aside our own differences and work for what's right.  

    •  OR... (0+ / 0-)

      "reconciliation", and not whatever semi-English word I just typed above.  Sheesh.  Too much coffee today.

    •  LOL! McCain - the godfather of reconciliation. (0+ / 0-)

      You cracked me up.  Let's look to McCain as an example of how to embrace one's enemies.  I love it.

      God, it's so much more fun when we can all agree to hate the same person, isn't it?

      •  To be fair, I don't hate John McCain. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        I'm incredibly disappointed in him, though.  

        I live and work in Philly, and stage managed a couple of the RNC events during the 2000 campaign, and had a chance to see McCain interact with delegates and some of his staff.  

        I probably would have voted for THAT version of John McCain in 2000...I don't even know who this guy running in 2008 is anymore.  I actually think he might be one of those Disney the drummer from the Rolling Stones.

        •  You're right. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          I don't hate him either.  I sort of pity him.  Look at the way he has disgraced himself for the better part of the Bush years so that he could wind up where he is now -- the Republican nominee whom even Republicans don't like.

          I had a lot more resepct for him in 2000 than I do now.

          But it's still going to be fun to take him down in November.

  •  The problem (0+ / 0-)

    with these "can't we all get along" diaries is that they inevitably ignore the very real and urgent problem of HRC's campaign.  We have a democrat running against another democrat's race.  This is a tragedy for the democratic party and if we just ignore HRC's racial tactics then we are in effect setting a precedent for such tactics within the democratic party.  

    I for one cannot simply forget HRC's racist campaign.  Our party is better than her and her slime strategist advisors.  To be honest, since HRC began tweaking the latent racism of dem primary voters, I really don't even consider her supporters to be true democrats.  

    "When I was an alien, cultures weren't opinions" ~ Kurt Cobain, Territorial Pissings

    by Subterranean on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:27:59 PM PDT

  •  Do We Care? (0+ / 0-)

    Daily.Kos is the Menninger Clinic of blog homes.
    What in the world do we care who this poster is for and why? I think, like most posters,Angry (Loud) Mouse is on the usual ego trip. WHY should we care who you vote for?  Only your analyst should know.
    Good Luck. Poor America; will we ever get it right?

    •  Actually, you make a good point. (3+ / 0-)

      You shouldn't care about me.  I would hope that you would consider the ideas I've put forth.

      My diary was an attempt to do more than say why I support one candidate or another.

      It was an acknowledgment that one of those candidates is going to be the nominee.  And that means the supporters of the other candidates need to find their way back into the party, so we can get the nominee elected.

      And that also means that Obama (and supporters) WILL have to start addressing the concerns of those who do not yet support him.

      I appreciated the willingness of various commenters to do that in a thoughtful and respectful conversation last night.

      But you're right.  It is not about me.  

      It is about our country, and how we save it.

  •  Thanks for this diary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I'd like to apologize on behalf of my fellow Obama supporters who got a little too worked up this primary season.  I don't feel any differently towards Clinton supporters than I do towards Edwards supporters.  We're all Democrats, we all want to win in November, and we can't blame people for sticking with their candidate as long as they want to run.  It hurts to lose, most of us already felt this way in 2004 when our favored candidates dropped out one by one and we were left with Kerry, who was almost no one's first choice.  But we got back together and almost defeated a wartime incumbent president.  I feel pretty confident the vast majority of us will unite after this primary in our desire to defeat McCain and start turning our country in a progressive direction.

    Keep that sticker on your car as long as you want.  Hillary Clinton has already made history.

  •  It's not (former and current) Clinton supporters (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NY Dem

    like you that I have a problem with. I.e. ones who might be very passionate about their support for Clinton and criticisms about Obama, but are also are open-minded, rational and respectful. It's the ones who keep repeating lies and distortions about Obama and his supporters, and insulting him and them so viciously, that I have a problem with--a huge problem. Especially seeing as many of them are her top-level supporters, who I think are deliberately trying to stoke anti-Obama hatred among her rank and file supporters.

    These people should know better, and I believe DO know better, and yet continue to do this knowingly and deliberately, because it's who they are. THESE are the Clintonites whom I most object to and have huge problems with, not levelheaded supporters (former and current) such as yourself, whom I assume constitute the majority of Clinton supporters.

    Specifically, I'm talking about people who call Obama supporters cultists and fools, who claim that he praised Reagan to the rafters (he did not), who say that he has zero experience, that he's not a real Democrat, who keep making more of Rezco than is there, who hypersimplify his "reach out across the aisle" rhetoric to mean that he'd make nice with and cave in to GOP scum (he would not), who are now trying to stokes fears among whites and Jews that he's an America-hating anti-Semite (he is not) who would help destroy Israel (he would not), and so on. It's these liars and poo-flingers that I have a real problem with, and will continue to call out and harshly criticize when I come across them. NOT decent and fair people like you.

    And, since you ask, my take on Obama's "reach out" and "unity" rhetoric is that what he means by this is that, as president, he'll reach out to and be willing to talk to anyone on the other side of the aisle who's open-minded and willing to talk and compromise with us (the majority party), and NOT that he'll cave in to or make nice with the worst of them. I.e. he'd work with a Chuck Hagel or Dick Lugar to end the war in a responsible way, but he would NOT accomodate warmongers like McCain or Graham who want to stay there for centuries. I also think that he's speaking much more to more moderate, non-wingnut rank and file Repubs and indies, who are sick of the GOP and ready for something and someone different and better, whom he's trying to reach out to and bring over to our side, at least on some of the bigger issues of the day, and NOT to the GOP's most despicable and uncompromising scumbags, like Rove, Cheney and Inhofe. At least, that's my take on what he means by "reach out" and "unity". He's not dumb, or as naive and weak as some Clintonites like to pretend that he is. Plus, any discussion on this topic cannot ignore the fact that on something as important as Iraq, it was in fact Obama who did NOT cave in to the GOP, but rather Clinton, not only in her war vote, but in her speeches preceeding it, in which she bought into every GOP talking point. And, as always, actions speak louder than words.

    My two cents, adjusted for rhetorical inflation.

    "I will vote for the Democratic candidate for president--period." --Me

    by kovie on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:52:36 PM PDT

  •  I'm still gonna TR people like Universal (0+ / 0-)

    who spew forth Racist and Race Baiting attacks against Obama the same way I would TR anyone who started making arguments about Clinton's electibility based upon her Gender.

    But for Clinton supporters who are willing to talk about issues, and are willing to try and understand why Obama supporters are offended - strong kudos.

    Rec'd and Tipped.

    Flowers Bloom for my Ex - though Honeybees are pretty cool too.

    by Yoshi En Son on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 02:58:12 PM PDT

  •  Former Hillary Supporter Here Too, Switched Right (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    KayCeSF, Livvy5

    After Obamas victory speech in Iowa.

    If you all dont think I was hardcore Hillary, my UID was "hillary42008", used the same nick since Dean ran for president, so I kinda predicted the future, I had the feeling Hillary was the best we had, but I found out after that particular speech the wood Barack Obama was made of and boy I bit the hook hard.

    I have lots of respect for the Clintons, they are tough as nails, but this country needs healing and neither Hillary or McCain offers that, we need a leader who can really put the shattered pieces of this country back together, be it Iraq, the economy, healthcare, we are all very polarized.

    I mean if you read what republicans at RedState write about Obama and what some of us here at DKos write about McCain, it's all in the end pretty sad. Wouldnt if be nice if we could all disagree without being nasty and divisive and work for all the good things we have in common, look for real concensus. Thats what Obama brings to the table and that is why I support him 100%.

    Obama '08 YES WE CAN
    God Bless America. God Damn George Bush

    by DFutureIsNow on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 03:01:37 PM PDT

  •  No bragging rights until a dem beats Mccain! (0+ / 0-)

    I thank you for your honesty, your articulate essay and your being a much bigger person than I for having opened up your thoughts to us, but with all due respect, I suspect that the many flaws I see made in your arguments are more or less what I have believed to be endemic to hillary's camp.

    Oddly enough, my main concern for hillary is the very same concern you have for Obama. You are worried that he will somehow lean too far to the other side and compromise on those issues that the right wing nut jobs deem as acceptable. Wasn't this what happened when Hillary voted for the war? A calculated move she made for her own selfish interests rather than for the country's, knowingly and unapologetically? How is this underlying motive any different than that of the Bush administration? Hillary would be better than Mccain of course because we on the left happen to agree on most fundamental issues she would support as the right agrees with Bush's, but her tactics, as we now have seen completely exposed throughout her campaign, are no better than Rove's. And so you answered your own question when you asked yourself if Rove wouldn't be so bad if he were on our side.

    If you are concerned that Obama is too naive (which seems to be the case for many) about how he will achieve this unity, I can assure you, we all have the same concerns.He is a politician and that we cannot forget, but what a shame it would be if we were to pass up on the only opportunity we have to try and make it right again. And what would the rest of the world think if we squandered this rare opportunity? If Obama does not live up to his promises or if he concedes on any issues to which we on the left hold sacred, he will have to answer to the electorate again in 2012 and we will not be voting anyone back in again who concedes on our progressive values which is precisely why we are not voting for Hillary now - she already sold out.

    This has absolutely NOTHING to do with voting for an african american or a woman (and this is not directed at you) but it drives me crazy when the media dumbs it down to such ignorant rhetoric - as if the last 7 years of our own POW captivity haven't been long and hellish enough for us to be motivated to make a thoughtful and logical decision.

    And I do believe that there is a huge difference between Obama and Hillary - at least there is with the way they run their campaigns and where their donations are coming from. I believe Obama's campaign is the most successful grassroots campaign we've ever seen so much so that WE are carrying him to the white house.

    I understand why you would prefer not to reason with those on the other (rep) side, however, have you not noticed how Obama is able to enlist people that were once our opponents to crossover? All of the new young voters who would have probably never thought to vote - again on the dem side. We are not the ones crossing over.

    Now that we are all paying attention it will be much more difficult for the dems to keep acting like republicans! In any case, neither side will have any 'bragging rights' until after we beat Mccain. HRC supporters have been working just as hard to get people fired up to vote and this too cannot go unnoticed or unappreciated and is key to our success in november. No Obama supporter should be belittle that and every hillary supporter should know (if they should lose the nom) their efforts will still make a difference in the end.

  •  Thanks for this (0+ / 0-)

    I've found that I'm a little shagged out from all the screaming, shrill verbiage that seems to populate a lot of the diaries around the horn (and I'm not innocent). So I've developed my own little therapeutic process for dealing with headlines that provoke me like an annoying itch. I go to the diary, read as much as I can stand, then I post a comment noting my affiliation, but mentioning something in the vein of unity. Example: "I can appreciate how dedicated you are to your candidate. I am equally dedicated to mine and would defend him with all my mettle as well. I hope you will bring that fire and loyalty to whomever the Democratic candidate is." Then I leave.

    I don't think it's useful anymore to argue with staunch partisans whose minds won't be changed. And it only attracts more people to their diaries if there is an abundance of commentary threads where people are hurling insults at each other.

    It's time for the wise to leave the circular firing squad. If the partisans want to stay and stroke each other, there's no harm in it, and if there's no one around for them to get a rise out of, maybe they'll actually start thinking about things rather than just reacting.

    I don't know if this will work for everyone, but it's saving me a large part of my day that was wasted bickering with people over things that won't matter soon enough.

    "Hey, wait a minute, there's one guy holding up both puppets!" -Bill Hicks

    by Tismo70 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 03:21:50 PM PDT

  •  I never thought for a secont that HRC supporters (0+ / 0-)

    In general we're like the worst ones online -- a lot of this battle is entirely caused by the nature of online communication, I think.

    What really seems to have happened is that one or two bloggers (no need to name them) have set a tone that some people have taken up which is very negative and hurtful -- and usually starts out by accusing the Obama supporters of being very negative and hurtful, whether or not anything like that has been said in a particular thread. (This is  far, far worse on certain general news sites than here, btw. HuffPo is far worse, I think.) This, in turn, engendered a very negative tone that ranged from appropriate ire at the bad actors and drama-causers -- like, IMO, many of the "strikers" -- but which quickly turned, at times, into something almost as bad as the worst of the original bad actors, with simple disagreements getting troll rated on at least one or two occasions that I complained about.

    It's really like a bloodless, invisible civil war -- except one that is much easier to settle with great people like this diarist.

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

    by LABobsterofAnaheim on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 03:22:19 PM PDT

  •  I salute you, Angry Mouse... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    historys mysteries, Eloise

    While I switched from Edwards to Obama before the California primaries, and since then have signed up for the Obama campaign, I too see a lot of the issues as you do.

    I was a big Paul Krugman fan, and was following his arguments against Obama's kinder gentler plans on healthcare as somewhat naive. I don't believe the insurance industry will give up the great scam they have going w/o a fight. In terms of my own experience with insurance (not healthcare I admit - we have a very good one through my wife who is a Howard Hughes Medical Institute employee) but other areas like homeowner's insurance, I am convinced that the insurance industry is a scam. In terms of healthcare, after seeing Michael Moore's SICKO, it makes me feel a lot more vulnerable, even though I am amongst the lucky 250 million that are insured. Insurance companies can deny major claims at the drop of a peanut and he documents sufficient cases of them having done so in the very recent past. When Canada, UK, France, Germany and other EU nations can treat people with pre-existing conditions, how has the insurance industry been allowed to make this seem legitimate to deny people buying insurance? So against this backdrop, Krugman's articulation of the potential ineffectiveness of Obama's healthcare strategy seemed to hit home with me. I do realize Krugman does not have the monopoly on wisdom, and other savvy economists have taken issue with some of his points. I also realize the even Edwards tougher negotiating stance would probably be tempered with more prudence once he was in office - it seems like he was veering towards a slightly softer approach.

    But more akin to your concerns, after 8 years of Bush and 14 years of Republican thuggery, I was NOT interested in compromises with what I consider essentially a fascist party. Prior to the Gingrich revolution, I felt that unlike the other large democracy in India, my birth country, here all segments of the society have agreed to subsume their differences to advance the greater good. Thus Republicans in Congress were as eager to throw out a Republican president when he was behaving no better than a common crook. Even before the Gingrich revolution, I was revolted happenings during the Reagan presidency - it was OK to lie if you could be cloaked in patriotism. Under Bush Sr. I was appalled at the selection of Clarence Thomas as the replacement for Thurgood Marshall! Here was the most cynical choice but all done in the name of preserving the racial balance on the Supreme Court. The intervening years have shown how poorly Thomas has performed. There were SO MANY better qualified AA candidates for this the most important of positions.

    Then came the Gingrich revolution and the tacit understanding that America comes first broke down. It was Republicans first, America second, and Democrats last. The Exterminator DeLay reinforced that at the same time the Republican house of cards was slowly disintegrating one by one under the weight of their own scandals. So how can the first hopeful Democratic president sit down with this bunch of fascists and negotiate from the very beginning? Look at all the 2008 Republican candidates - except for Ron Paul, they all supported all the fascist tendencies demonstrated by this Keystone Cop administration - double down on Gitmo, Bomb bomb bomb Iran.

    But slowly I changed my mind about whether this might be a more effective strategy than my visceral hatred for McVain. (That will not diminish - I have sufficient weight of evidence against him - but eventually he will be a non-entity in politics in this country and will fade away - so till November and slightly beyond, I am perfectly happy to nurse my sentiments against this old fool) Recently the well known travel writer Pico Iyer was interviewed on NPR on his new book on the Dalai Lama. The Dalai Lama has consistently maintained that his non-violent path will ultimately win, even on the face of Chinese intransigence for 50 years. While there is reason to doubt it, there is also reason to see the wisdom in his ways. Recently 25 academics within China wrote to their national government asking them to stop calling Dalai Lama a "splittist" or whatever the epithet-du-jour is, and start negotiating on good faith. Maybe it will not come to much, but at least it changed the minds of several thinking people.

    This makes me believe that Obama's middle way might in the near future be a more effective way at blunting the fascist tendencies in those who support the Republican party TODAY. At least I am praying and hoping so.

    I think it is flawed to never question one's leaders - however good they might seem. It is healthy to ask questions, though it has to be done in a respectful way. Your diary today makes me think deeply within myself as to what kind of a dialog I would like to have with Hillary supporters, and perhaps even those misguided Dems and Independents who are contemplating voting for McVain. I have already made one couple change their minds, and several Republicans (in Orange County, CA) actually voted for Obama in the primaries (since they are registered as Independents - later they were asking me if Obama would win the Dem nomination - since they only see the print and broadcast media).

    Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts - Daniel Patrick Moynihan

    by Suvro on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 03:25:57 PM PDT

  •  great to see. great post. (0+ / 0-)

    This was a great read. :)

    And yes, just say no to headache-inducing, counterproductive vitriol between Hillary & Obama supporters.

  •  This is the first time (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    historys mysteries, jfarelli

    a diary really brought tears to my eyes...
    thank you, speaking for ALL Democrats.  We need this victory in November SO badly; this country needs it so badly...this democratic republic needs it so badly.
    We all need to fight together.

    I was just over at Salon, reading Glenn Greenwald's blog about John Yoo's torture memos, and they were disturbing to say the least.  If not for the ACLU, they would never have seen the light of day.  If we don't get a Democratic White House and a filabuster proof Senate, this type of lawlessness will continue, along with the war.  It's not about Clinton vs. Obama, but all of us against the machine.

  •  Obama a Compromiser? Maybe Not (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Bandaloo, Livvy5

    Well done...

    Here perhaps is a possible answer... Lawrence Tribe is supporting Obama (Harvard Law Prof... represented Gore in 2000)... He said about Obama first that he was one of the smartest students he had taught there in all his years as a prof, but also that he was a great compromiser, not in the sense of cutting the baby in half or taking the Left and the Right and coming to some point in the middle but by coming at a problem or issue in a perpendicular kind of way... out of the box.

    Will it work?  May not.  Is it a worth a try?  Every bit as much as Obamamaniacs and Hillary supporters listening to each other...and talking to each other.

    We share the same country with the Republicans.  They are not going away.  Not all of them are Karl Roves... So only if we can hear their concerns and see which are justified are new solutions going to be possible that perhaps we all can live with.  At least that is the goal.  Is it going to be possible?  Maybe not.  Maybe the differences on too many issues are too stark.

    But what Barak has been saying and what all of us can see is that we have been distracted from confronting those issues by garbage... Willie Horton ads for those of you old enough to remember.  Swiftboating, the Wright uproar ...(Wright is not running for President and why do we not hear from the Right wing press about the offensive statements of McCain supporters or HRC's religion of The Powerful Elites>)... so we get distracted, as we all know...

    Look at how gracious Huckabee was... Now lots of things about the man's positions I don't agree with.  But I for one would rather deal with a person who I think is basically decent, honest and fundamentally open minded (and many of his statements led me to the conclusion that he was) than someone who agrees with me on everything but whom I do not trust for reasons of judgment or temperament or fundamental values.

    So is what BO is trying to achieve going to work?  May not.  Is he too naive for our good?  Maybe.  But where has not being naive gotten us?  Where has being closed minded gotten us?  Not to very good places as a society.  

    So welcome aboard and let's try to win this Novemeber.

  •  Impressive (0+ / 0-)

    This was a very thoughtful diary.  As an Obama supporter, I appreciate your sentiments and acknowledge that it gets very heated at times.  It will be folks like yourself that help to bring us together.


  •  you are right, although I have felt the (0+ / 0-)

    same way as HRC supporters, I have felt insulted by some of my acquintances who question me for not voting for a women (stick together kind of thing) so I reacted as condecending and I felt treated, wrong, I know, but there is so much at stake, it is difficult to have HRC no conceding when reality is in our faces and the negative impact of her hanging in there makes a lot of us really frustrated because there is so much critical work to be done and we are wasting money, time and energy...Your diary is very on target and awakening about the stupidity of our behavior, guess we never stop being children after all.

    Thanks for writing it.

  •  Absolutely Grand Diary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I have thought all along that we Democrats would unite once we have a nominee.

    I understand your concerns, don't think you've been alone worrying about his message of reconcilliation with the right. What turned me around was the hope he was inspiring in our young people. As an old lady it was my way of reaching out to the kids. IMO they deserve their JFK moment, and that is how I think of this.

    I can honestly say I haven't been nasty about Hillary and I've been appalled at some of the things that people have said. Some of us have started to sound like the GOP and I think that some of us need to have a good think about this.

    Thank you for such a fine diary. You have the absolute right to mourn for your loss.

  •  I know how you feel, I was part of the Edwards (0+ / 0-)

    camp. I woke up to reality after he dropped. the truth hurts. but the truth is better than the alternative.

  •  regarding your concerns (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Here's my 2 cents...

    The way I understand Obama's process and language of moving beyond partisanship is not based in compromising ones beliefs or values or politics. What I understand him to be saying is that he will meet each person regardless of their politic with a basic empathy (see below) and respect, and therefore be able to listen more openly and to consider how his politic is being received. I have never once heard him say that he intends to compromise or consider another's view no matter how ridiculus (i.e.intelligent design) or abhorrant (i.e. torture) it is - but that he, rather then ridiculing them, will at least attempt to understand where they are coming from, what has shaped their belief structure, their fears etc. and work with them to bring them around. This may sound very cumbaya - and it probably is. But I think the worry is less that he would give away that which is important to us progressives, and more that their simply is a limit to the reality of a post-partisan America. But if anyone is going to have a chance at it, certainly his way with words gives him an advantage.

    Barack Obama's use of this word "empathy" has deeply impressed through out campaign. I have never heard another politician use it regularly as he does. In his speech at Ebenezer Church on MLK day, he spoke of the "deficit of empathy" in this county. I think your diary speaks to this need, a need we could all do some good to think about.

  •  excellent diary (0+ / 0-)

    you earned that spot on the rec list !
    this is a very well written diary.
    I guess that's been said a couple hundred times already!

    I completely stay out of the arguing/fighting
    I believe you helped a lot of people moveon as you call it!!

    I didn't think I could vote for Hillary when this stuff started over a year ago. It didn't take long for Kos himself to put a stop to that thinking!

    If you claim to be a Democrat You should be voting for which ever Democrat is on the ticket & for which ever position they are running for PERIOD.
    yeah there are some bad ones out there. Time will take care of them if we as a party work to make the party better.

    Thanks for posting! I really enjoyed reading this

  •  Despite my problems with Hillary Clinton (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I was struck, when I cast my vote in Texas, at how far we'd come. My son is just over a year old, but I took him with me when I went to vote because it's something I'm committed to doing for as long as I can. And I'll admit it, the historical implications of this Democratic primary got to me.

    When my dad voted in first election after my birth, in November 1972, his choice was between three white men--Nixon, McGovern and Wallace. Now, I have nothing against George McGovern, he's one of my heroes, but he didn't exactly break the mold. And though Shirley Chisholm ran in the Democratic primaries, could anybody argue she ever had a chance?

    But 36 years later, my son in tow, my choice was between a woman and a multi-racial man. Between someone who's had an overall solid career in the Senate, despite votes I strongly disagree with, and who'd been probably the most influential first lady since Eleanor Roosevelt; and someone who gave what may be remembered as one of the great convention speeches (perhaps even greater than Bryan's "Cross of Gold" speech if Obama ends up in the White House) and who, for the first time in a long time, set out a vision of what America could be.

    We have a long way to go. But damn, we've come a long way! I try to remember that when the trolls  come out of the woodwork and the pies start flying.

    "Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight. You've got to kick at the darkness until it bleeds daylight." --Bruce Cockburn, "Lovers In A Dangerous

    by AustinCynic on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 04:20:49 PM PDT

  •  I'll be glad to put aside my divisiveness! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MAORCA, Dragon5616

    Hopefully, Hillary herself will do the same and stop saying that McSame is a better candidate than Obama.

  •  your diary (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

    Angry Mouse,

    Thanks so much for the great attitude.
    Your comments go a long way toward bringing us together.  I've always felt that as soon as the Democratic Party decides on a nominee, the Obama and Hillary camps will find a way to come together.  For all our differences, we still like each a lot more than we like the Republicans.

  •  Any word on whether (0+ / 0-)

    Sheila Jackson-Boo will change her endorsement to the pledged delegate leader?

  •  Would love to see a diary on the discussion... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    NY Dem, Dragon5616

    From my side?

    I don't think Obama is talking about compromising with the thugs at all! I don't believe he'll "compromise" with Tom Delay, or Rick Santorum.

    But there are many, many, people who consider themselves Republicans and vote against their best interests AND their conscience. I don't know why. But I believe Obama can pull those people into a reasoned conversation, without the fear-mongering, that can turn some of them to our point of view. Those "obama Republicans" - like the "Reagan Democrats" - are critical to getting beyond a 50:50 country, and actually getting things done.

    Like he says: Is providing everyone access to healthcare really a "Liberal" philosophy? Is making sure that Trade Deals don't only benefit the rich, a "Liberal" philosophy? Is killing innocent people in faraway lands really a "Liberal" philosophy?

    •  You're right, of course. And it's the (0+ / 0-)

      "fighting fire with water" thing that someone explained.  Vengeance won't get us anywhere.  We have to win voters to our side.  The Republican voters are not our enemies, they are as much victims of the Republican neocon agenda as we are.

      I can't understand why the fact that Obama wants to engage Republican voters  in a national conversation is seen as a bad thing by some.

  •  What you said is exactly how I felt: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    This is why I supported Edwards over Obama:

    Simply, it is his talk of moving beyond partisanship, reaching out across the aisle, working together, compromising, finding common ground, et cetera.


    I don't want to compromise.  I don't want to find common ground with the same people who think intelligent design is as legitimate a theory as evolution.

    I don't want to come together with the people who think it's okay for pharmacists to refuse to do their jobs because contraception violates their "morals."

    It's contentious of me, I know, but I don't want to get along with those people.  I don't want to compromise with them.

    I was not ready to "make nice."  Still not.  I'm still dreading the day when the new President will say, "let's put all this past behind us in the interests of unity," because I want investigations, damn it.  I want justice.  I won't be satisfied until Bush and company are on trial for war crimes.  Seriously.

    But Edwards dropped out.  

    I was already in disagreement with Hillary about AUMF (unlike Edwards, she never apologized) and stuff like the Kyl-Leiberman, bankruptcy bill, flag-burning, etc.  I saw her as too insecure, trying to hard to appear "tough" and "centrist."  But I also was defending her against media attacks, etc.  I admired both Clintons after defending them for years against the right.  I was also worried, frankly, that either a woman or a black man could not get elected as easily as a white male like Edwards.

    But then I saw some video of her saying "shame on you" to Barack Obama, and the same weekend, making fun of those people who had hope and idealism for the future (the "celestial choirs" comment).

    I'm not really that hopeful or idealistic anymore.  I am 50, a white woman who SHOULD be in Hillary's constituency.  But the tone of her anger and mockery  started to change how I saw her.

    I listened to a whole speech by Obama, and liked what I heard.  I liked that young people were excited and coming into the process.  I liked how he conducted himself and what he stands for.

    Then I heard Hillary start to praise McCain and talk about her "experience," which I didn't really see to be that different from Barack's.  I read a quote from Bill that Hillary and McCain were good friends, and my hope that Hillary would fight tooth and nail against the Republicans dimmed.  She seemed to be acting more and more like them.

    I like the idea of a woman President.  I like the visual, if you will, of having Hillary giving a State of the Union speech, for example.  But what really turned me against her was how dismissive and hateful she seemed against Barack, something I really wasn't seeing from his campaign in the same way.

    The more I learned about Obama, the more I liked.  The more I liked about Obama, the uglier her campaign's attacks seemed to be.

    I would still vote for her as the Democratic nominee.  But in re: to your sadness about your candidate losing, about your dream of a Hillary presidency dying... There is something you are underestimating:

    How much sadness I feel, too, that the Bill and Hillary I liked don't seem to be quite the same people I thought they were.  I really hate that.  I've lost that dream, too.

    McCain is not a moderate, a maverick, or a man of integrity.

    by marjo on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:09:30 PM PDT

    •  Ground up! (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      The problem, however, is that we can all make nice, but until the whole Clinton Campaign is willing to make nice with the rest of the Democratic party, instead of whining about their entitlement to the 'crown', then there's nothing doing.

    •  Except that I never supported Edwards, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      you have expressed my sentiments exactly.

      I was very angry with Clinton for a while.  Now she's just becoming pitiful.  I hope PA will see that they can end this thing, and I hope they do it.

      McBush: "War is swell!"

      by Dragon5616 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 07:09:22 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thank you (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    annan, eclecticbrotha, Dragon5616

    for a beautiful, heartfelt diary.  I haven't read all (or even a majority) of the comments yet, but I wanted to post a few thoughts about your concerns about Obama.

    I don't venture to speak for the campaign or Obama by any stretch of the imagination, but here is my take on the bipartisanship issue.  I think, and hope, that when Obama talks about joining together and working across party lines, he's talking about 2 categories of action.

    One is "across the aisle" bipartisanship.  This seems to be where your main concern lies, in that those on the Republican side of the aisle often appear to hold viewpoints with which we cannot and should not compromise.  I would submit that Obama has a track record, both in the US Senate and the IL State Senate, of putting forth progressive, dare I say, liberal legislation, and getting people to agree that his ideas were the right ones.  Not compromising those ideals at all- convincing people.

    The day before the Iowa Caucus, I saw Senator Dodd giving a speech on CNN's Ballot Bowl.  In response to a question about why the Democratic Senate was getting so little done, he said, "We need to stop crafting policy that we think is in the middle and that in fact nobody likes.  We need to put forward good policy and convince others that it's good."

    I think, based on his past record, this is what Obama is talking about.  Not, forgive me, a 1990s view of compromise, where we triangulated to a position that compromised our principles.  Rather, of saying, "My idea is a good idea, and here's why. What are your concerns? How can we answer them?"

    I really believe this is what Obama means when he talks about bipartisanship.  But you'd be right to ask, in today's political climate, is it possible?

    That's where the second category of bipartisanship comes in: reaching out to people who call themselves Republicans.  Saying to them, and to Democrats who doubt this idea, exactly what you said above:

    We are not all as bad as the worst of us.

    There are many voters out there who call themselves Republicans, who have voted consistently for Republicans, but are not as bad as the worst of them.  Obama speaks to those voters, and says, we're not going to vilify you.  We're not going to say you were an idiot for voting for Bush.  We're going to say, "Here's how my ideas help you.  Here's what America can be, and how I want to get there.  And here's what you can do as a citizen."

    At the top of every page on Obama's website is this quote:

    I'm asking you to believe.  Not just in my ability to bring about real change in Washington...I'm asking you to believe in yours.

    This is the fundamental core of the Obama campaign.  That change comes from the bottom up, from the grassroots.  In all honesty, that's why I think he's attracted so much of the blogosphere, because the whole concept of grassroots/netroots action is central to the blogosphere's existence.  

    If voters can feel connected again to the process, then maybe, finally, we can have a real discussion of issues.  Maybe it's a pipe dream. But it's worth fighting for, and I think that's what Obama is fighting for as well.

    Wow, that was long :)

  •  What an absolutely wonderful diary. I'm going to (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    annan, Angry Mouse, Dragon5616

    read it again, and maybe a third time, and then I'll probably comment further.  But just wanted to get this much down - whoever you are, diarist, you are a remarkable person, with remarkable insight.  Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts with us.

  •  A perfect Song to go with the theme (0+ / 0-)

    "Yes We Can Can" by The Pointer Sisters. Its an oldie but a goody. Enjoy.

    Fight the real enemy....the neo-cons!

    by eclecticbrotha on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 05:53:15 PM PDT

  •  Ok, Mouse, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse
    Tip, rec, and sig change.
    Welcome home.

    We are going to beat the absorbent undergarments off of Mr. 895th in his class of 899.

    by emmasnacker on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 06:19:33 PM PDT

  •  Kool Aid. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse, RadioGirl, Dragon5616

    Hey, I know that lots of people are sure we've been drinkin' the Kool Aid.

    It took me a while to get here, too. Obama wasn't my first choice or my second, and I grieved.

    But now that I'm here I swear it feels like basking in sunshine after a cold, hard winter.

    The sun will disappear again. More clouds. More gray days. More thunderstorms. I know that.

    But today ... today I'm standing in the sunshine.

    And I will remember what this feels like forever.

    Nicely done, mouse. Nicely done. Here's to hoping that you discover sunshine, too.

    "Let us not look back to the past with anger, nor towards the future with fear, but look around with awareness." James Thurber

    by annan on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 06:32:32 PM PDT

  •  Rec this diary (0+ / 0-)

    over at mydd, if you got an account there.

  •  Bravo! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

    I'm glad to see your onboard.  Obama wasn't my first choice either, but he will be a very good nominee and I think has the potential to be a great president.  I hope that Clinton & Obama can patch up their relationship and that she will also play a major role (either in the White House or as Senate Maj. Leader.)

    "It is time to be patriotic about something other than war" - John Edwards

    by Valhalla on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 06:45:35 PM PDT

  •  You need to do this more often (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse, Dragon5616

    I don't read many diaries all the way through. I've learned a great deal from this one. I hope you keep it up.

  •  Long, Thought-out Response to Bi-partisianism (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    susanWAstate, Angry Mouse, fernan47

    I don't post much on DKos. I often find the number of one-liners distracting.   But your diary entry was touching, and relevant and it is something that I've had to question, too.  So I can relate to your issues with Obama about "Reaching across the aisle" to right wingers.  

    I'll try to keep this short.  Like you, I found Democracy Now (after the first Bush election was stolen) and I was so relieved to find a voice of sanity on the Radio.  In this 2008 election, I was so excited Kucinich was running, after one of the early debates, I gave him $100. A month later, he dropped out. (Shut out by corp. media.)   After that, I started liking Edwards' message.  And I thought if I gave him $100, I could maybe help him get more air time to stay competitive.

    I saw Hillary and Barack as candidates the right-wing media was pushing so that when the election was stolen a THIRD time, they would have a plausible explanation as to why the exit polls were 13 points off.  ("Well, you see, they said they supported Obama (or Hillary) but when they got in the privacy of the booth, old prejudices kicked in and they went for the white guy.)   I still think that's a possibility.  

    When Edwards dropped out, shortly after taking my donation, I was despondent.    That left the two choices I feared the most.

    And then Obama made the "Regan" statement and I said, "Screw him."

    I was for Clinton.  

    I talked two black friends into voting for Clinton.  And I waited for Obama to fall.   But he didn't.  And after watching some of the debates, I thought, well, both of these candidates would do.  If they can get past the MACHINE.  (FOX et al.)  Since Barack's chances were looking better, and he might be the candidate, I bought an audio copy of his book (Audacity) just figuring I needed to know more about this guy.  

    After listening to that book.. and watching Obama skip the cheap shots he could have taken at Clinton (that are often taken in these blogs)... I've come to get a better understanding of his quote on Regan and his idea of reaching out to others. No doubt Regan was bad for the country.  But he reached out to people with humor and with a kind of folksey inclusiveness.  He was inviting.  That is how Regan did it.   He got people to like him (or his image to be more exact.)  

    Our country has been fractured.  We only have to look at our own party to see it happening here.   And that is how Bush came to power.  A fractured, sometimes ignorant citizenry allowed him to be installed as president.  

    It is the weakest part of our democracy...this separation from each other.   As corny as it sounds, United We Stand. Divided...

    That doesn't mean that EVERYBODY has to be right or be included in a decision.   If 3 people want to drive straight, and 1 person wants to drive into the ditch, you don't compromise by driving part way into the ditch.  

    I'm a humanist.   And I hate religion in politics.   I found Obama's take on religion particularly reassuring.   He says that while he hopes that he sees his mother again someday (in some form of heaven) he doesn't think his beliefs need to be enshrined into law... or that others should be forced to believe what he hopes for.  

    He is a big proponent of science and logic and reason.   He's open to changing his plans for a better set of plans.  To learning.  He is a teacher after all and he loves it.  Teaching and learning runs in his blood.  

    And when he is talking about listening to everyone, that is a smart way to handle things.  Listen to everyone, discard the insane ideas, use scientific reasoning to find which direction is the best and give that a shot.  

    Listening shows respect.  It is a wise tactic.  Turning your back on a person signifies you don't care what they think or want.   It creates enemies.  

    Obama also indicates (as do many progressives) that we all want the same things: security, a job, our health, food, a place to raise our families, freedom, privacy, peace, clean air and water...peace.    In fact, most people in most countries want those same things.  Even Iraqis want those things.  (And they would be thrilled if we really helped them achieve them instead of just creating chaos so we can steal their oil. Thank you Naomi Klein for point this out so clearly in your last book.)  

    People on both sides of the aisle want these things.   And if they think Obama can help them get them, then SOME of those people will join him, regardless of the fact that he is black or not black enough or a Democrat or whatever label you want to try to pin on him.    

    True, there are ideologues who can't be persuaded by any amount of reason.  And some are just looking out for the rich -- their base -- the haves and have mores.  

    But most people want what is right for the country.  And if enough of us join together -- unite -- we can achieve those things.    The extreme religious right will not be on our side.  But some very religious people are coming around to see that the earth is not here to be used up by them.  Green is a holy idea.  

    The extremely rich won't be on our side. And don't count on corporations either.  

    But people.  Genuine, real, people... like you in your blog here... you get it.  We have to come together.  

    I've watched this race very closely, as most of us on here have,  And I see a wisdom to Obama's ways.  They seem odd after I've become familiar with the past 20 years of gotcha politics.  The way we elect people in this country is insane.   But Obama's managed to navigate that with a grace and elegance that few could.  His handling of the Rev. Wright issue brings this into high relief.  He didn't say "you're wrong" if you didn't like Wright's words.  He didn't deny that he went to that church.  He didn't deny race and the feelings that surround it.  Or say he wasn't going to talk about it anymore.   He simply pointed out the truth, that race (like gender and other labels) is used to separate us from each other so we won't work together to solve the problems. And the Wight doesn't quite get that the possibility is right in front of us to solve these problems.  Obama pointed out that many of the problems are cause by corporate dominance -- I'll add: of airwaves, of information, of finance, corporate profiteering, etc.  Other problems are caused by the corporations called Religions.  

    I used to tell people that if corporations never die, and people do... then the eventuality will be that corporations will own everything.  All property, all companies, all media, all everything.   Because they can live for 500 years and not only amass wealth and power, but merge with other companies... like have 5 or 10 weddings.   How can we stand up to that, as individuals?

    We can't.   We can only do that if we come together, work together, recognize our differences and our strengths and utilize them in the best possible way.  Being gay, I've often believed that America's strength was it's diversity.  

    I also see Obama's campaign igniting a fire under the youth of this country like nothing I've ever seen before.   It is undeniable.  And it is something that we need.  We need EVERYONE to be involved in this... not just the older generations.      

    Sadly, in the past few months, I've come to see Hillary as an old school politician.  She's a fighter.  There's no doubt about that.  And she has some great qualities.  But as I've watched her deal with problems, and I've watched Obama, I see that... we've had enough fighting.   We've had enough political divisivness.  We've can't operate on the 51% idea anymore.  We need to be more united.  Obama doesn't write off a state because he can't win it.  He takes a bus ride through it.  

    Sure there is 20% of the population that would love George Bush if he ripped the heads off babies and drank the blood.  We don't have to reach out to them.  But that means there's still a good 29% who might -- if we reach out, if we listen to their ideas and explain ours intelligently and fully -- might join us in moving towards a more progressive, inclusive, healthy, safe, free society.  

    An overwhelming majority that they can't steal elections from, that they can't suppress, that that can't ignore or control with fear.  

    So don't think of Obama's reaching across the aisle as sleeping with the enemy.  See it as, finding those in the enemy's camp who are not really with the enemy, finding those who just need better information... or in some cases, just a welcome.  

    They need... exactly what we need in this progressive Democratic party that is right on the cusp of solidifying into a real force for change... a party that for the very first time has the chance to elect a woman or a black man as president... they need an invitation.    

    It is an invitation you extended to many through you diary entry.   As I said, you touched me with that.  I get your pain. I hear your concerns and I've had the same.    

    Let's elect Obama as president.  (That seems the be the direction we are headed in) and use his call for inclusiveness and his ability to articulate and to teach to get as many people on board as possible... men, women, gay, straight, black, white, brown, young, old... we are all in this together.   We all want the same thing.   We are all tired of watching the corporations own our country and dictate our course.  

    So let's do this together.  It's the only way we can.  

    And... we must.  

  •  Thank you, Angry Mouse (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse, Dragon5616, ruscle

    I know how you feel. John Edwards was my first choice and I donated money I couldn't afford and hoped where maybe I shouldn't. I was turned off by the rhetoric here about Obama and Clinton. I did FINALLY drink the kool-aid and am very comfortable supporting Obama now. We need to come together and we need to get control of our collective selves. McCain must not be President. Our country can't stand another Republican term. I sincerely believe that, and I would vote for Clinton without batting an eye. At the end of the day, I mark the ballot for a Democrat. We cannot afford to fail.

    To me, the absolute most important issue ANY of us has, and this nation has, is that we are currently being ruled by a gang of immoral war criminals. -Hornito

    by BlueInKansas on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 07:14:08 PM PDT

  •  Obviously, Mouse, you have (0+ / 0-)

    grasped the reality that HRC won't win.

    Please help me understand why so many supporters continue to deny this truth.

    More importantly, why is HRC continuing?  Her only hope of winning is the superdelegates, and they keep coming out for Obama.  I really don't get it.

    McBush: "War is swell!"

    by Dragon5616 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 07:20:48 PM PDT

    •  Technically, she could win. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      brn2bwild, fernan47

      We all know that.  The superdelegates could make her the nominee.  That is what HRC supporters continue to hold on to.

      However, I think we are all aware that doing so would have severe consequences unless she had a lead in pledged delegates and/or the popular vote.

      Without FL and MI, that is an impossibility.

      Personally, I would not be comfortable with the SDs choosing her in such a circumstance (you know, unless Obama was found with a dead under-aged hooker alien or some crazy thing like that).

      But for those who are still holding out for HRC...I think they are holding on to that technicality as a last hope.

      As for HRC staying in the race, that is another issue.  And I fully support it.  I think it is a unique opportunity for everyone in every state to be able to participate.  I think it makes the Democratic party look, you know, democratic.  

      I would prefer that HRC and Obama finish the primary season together, as if they were on a joint ticket (even if they ultimately are not).  I think the two of them running together against McCain for the next few months would be fantastic.  

      •  Thanks for your reply. (0+ / 0-)

        I have no problem with that as long as HRC stays away from

        1. Attacking Obama on other than real issues.
        1. Praising McCain (except thanks for his service).

        I was fine with Clinton until the kitchen sink tactics took over shortly before TX and OH.  I am also upset about the MI and FL controversy, which I consider a broken promise by HRC that has damaged the party.

        A clean race is a good thing for the grassroots of the party.  The more people get to know Obama, the better. You will enjoy supporting him.

        Thanks again for your post.

        McBush: "War is swell!"

        by Dragon5616 on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 12:23:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Angry Mouse, good to hear the "other side" (0+ / 0-)

    Especially with such reasonable positions.

    The only thing I would say is that we can NOT have a moment of silence because there's a great deal of noise still coming from the Clinton camp.

    I'm not going to bash her or turn this into a flame fest. That would degrade the spirit of your well-written diary.

    But I am concerned that the Clinton campaign will continue to do damage and hurt Obama in the General Election. I think the source of most of the flaming isn't so much personal, anti-Clinton feelings. It's the feeling that the General has started and it's Obama vs. McCain/Clinton.  

    Lil' Bush: "We can't have a black man in the Whitehouse begging for change!"

    by USArmyParatrooper on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 07:31:59 PM PDT

  •  Hugs from Washington State (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sara seattle, Angry Mouse

    You said:

    No matter how much hatred you have of Hillary, her campaign, her supporters, and yes, even her husband, it is important to try to be gracious winners.  
    I think even Obama himself would agree with that.

    Senator Obama, especially, would agree with that.  

    I'm looking forward to November 5th, 2008

    by susanWAstate on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 07:36:18 PM PDT

  •  Although, after great debate, I voted (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    for Obama in my primary, a part of me is sad that HRC will not be the nominee.  I thought BC was a very good president (though not perfect), and always stood up for HRC when both right- and left-leaning friends derided her.  I have relatives and friends on both sides of the isle in her senate district who think she is a fine represenative of their interests, and I was (and still am, though more reluctantly now) happy to vote for her if she were the nominee.

    I supported Obama in my primary, because I think he's a better candidate, and it says a lot about how much Obama impressed me that he overcame my general good feelings about HRC.

    Also understand that a part of me is sad because my former extremely positive opinion of the Clintons has been damaged, and I am also extremely angry and upset at HRC and the way she's run her campaign (especially recently).  One reason I so desperately want this primary to be over is that I think it will be easier to heal wounds the sooner the fighting ends.

  •  Our anger is counterproductive, but just. (0+ / 0-)

    If we can unite after a long, deadly, bloody Civil War, we can certainly unite after a contentious primary battle.

    I would point out just how long it took us to unite after the Civil War, that the reunification was initially by military force, and that the result was a century of lynchings and chaotic relations.

    This is no Democratic civil war. But it may take us longer than a few meager months to "heal the divide" (as all the pundits say). I cannot help but feel the greatest force driving Obama supporters to unflattering ends is the continuation of a dead campaign, whose only rational purpose--as I see it--is a 2012 run against a Republican incumbent. Hillary Clinton seems convinced that Obama cannot beat McCain, and that has the incredible danger of becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. That is why I have come to hate Hillary Clinton. This act, however she justifies it, is inexcusable. There is scarcely a more serious political crime than the destruction of the Democratic Party's prospects in the 2008 general election, even if one has been deluded into thinking the cause is already lost.

    The alternative is that Clinton and her core are not operating as a rational player, that they are so blinded to the reality of the situation that they are acting in accordance to a massive base of false information. In this case and this case only do I rescind that accusation. In this case they show a certain ineptitude, but their position can still be morally sound. I don't think this is the case.

  •  my 2 honest cents ( remember I said honest) (0+ / 0-)

    When this primary started, I was not a Hillary hater. I simply started out pro-Obama. But I admit, I have become a Hillary hater.

    I do not want Hillary as President, Majority Leader, Chief Justice, and frankly not so hot about her being a Senator either. New York is a big state, I am sure there know, people FROM New York that would be a good progressive Senator.  While I agree with her on most issues, I do not like her style, her tone, or the company she keeps. I like Bill less and less. I don't like Begala, Carville, neither of the Harolds, Ford nor Ickes...none.

    Her continued campaign is not good for the D party. We should be spending McBush into the ground, painting him into a corner, defining him. We should be pounding the guy. But no. Instead, we are following her Bosnia lies, the Monica blow jobs are back in the news, all the while McBush runs around chumming up the media hacks.

    Saying Obama can't win because he can't win the white vote? Uhhh, guess what...Hillary cannot win without the black vote! And if she usurps the nomination, she will lose. Not because I will take leave of my senses and vote McBush as a protest, I won't. But a huge chunk of D supporters will be demoralized into apathy.

    I simply ask Hillary supporters to step back and look at the bigger picture. She lost! I am not here to gloat. She underestimated the Obama campaign. Who didn't? I am an Obama-bot, and it still stuns me that he has come this far. So what, she lost. No great shame in that. Losing sucks, but losing both a race and her dignity is far worse. Take me, now I want NOTHING to do with her on any level. Yes, yes I would still vote for her as the nominee. But that ship has sailed. I like Ohio State football, always will, but we lost the title...(gulp)...twice! The sun rose.

    I fear many Hillary supporters (I do know a few) are getting to the point where they want Obama to lose in Nov in order to say "I told you so!" I told you so...the most loaded utterance in the English language. I believe that fear of that sentence is what keeps us in Iraq. Bush fears "I told you so." People hate to hear it, LOOOOOVE to say it.

    In summary...Hillary, get out!

    •  She hasn't lost (0+ / 0-)

      Neither candidate is going to meet the magic number.  I am glad she is still in the race.  I am also happy that Howard Dean as show some cajones finally, but he still didn't solve the situation in Florida, which is very important to me.  

      I have noticed how the Obama supporters have attacked her very viciously in a lot of cases.  I thought I was reading hate mail from neo-cons.  With all of the accusations that Hillary was going negative, I couldn't believe what I was hearing and reading from the Obama side.  

      You mention that if Hillary were the nominee, there will be many demoralized people.  The same goes for if Obama becomes the nominee.  I doubt that this is going to change because the damage is done.

      On a different subject, I watched a video from independent Lou Dobbs tonight about the negative media coverage of Hillary. He was so correct in his observations.  She has been treated like crap by many in the media, and that is unforgivable.  While they were bringing her down, they were inadvertantly doing the same to the whole of the Democratic party.

      Finally, progressives scoff at the other members of the Democratic party.  It makes you all appear elitist, and it is not appreciated.  Like it or not, there are many different opinions in the party.  

      •  Lou Dobbs is "independent" now? Independent from (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        bemclau, DemocraticLuntz

        reason, logic and non-bigotry? Sure. Everything else? not so much.

        As for the rest, well if you're the same person with your name whose work I've also seen on YouTube, MyDD, Huffington Post, TPM, etc., well, I am going to do my bit for unity and say that you are not representative of all the Hillary supporters I know personally. And thank goodness for that. Thank goodness for the rest of us that will get our collectively Dem selves to come together and collectively kick some Rethug ass come this November.

        •  Agree (0+ / 0-)

          Hillary obviously has many women supporters, women who I imagine hold Roe v Wade and reproductive choice near and dear. Think about the best SCOTUS from McBush, and then the worst choice from Obama...think long and hard about that. We have Gerson calling Obama a pro-choice radical or somesuch. The SCOTUS is why even I, as a guy, will vote for the D nominee. This is where we as progressives end the wet dream of the far right, Christian dominionist.

          PS Lou Dobbs voice of independent reason...OMG, make it stop!

          PPS Hillary lost. Let the healing begin with me.

      •  Why is she treated like crap in the media? (0+ / 0-)

        No one, male, female, no one other that Hillary Clinton could be behind on SO many measures and still be considered viable. She should thank the media everyday she wakes up and has a campaign.

        And please stop the whining about how she has it so bad. Obama supporters are meanies. How wonderfully ironic it is for me to say this...YOU THINK THIS IS SO BAD, WAIT TIL THE REPUBLICANS START IN ON HER!!!

        I love Dean, he needs more cajones...either split FL and MI 50/50..or do nothing.

        Your gripe is with the Florida legislature. Start electing some Democrats!

  •  Welcome aboard! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sara seattle, bemclau

    You know, I have friends who are Hillary supporters..

    I have tried not to attack people but to attack ideas.  But I do have to say two things:

    1.  This quote:

    I don't want to compromise.  I don't want to find common ground with the same people who think intelligent design is as legitimate a theory as evolution.

    Saying they don't want to compromise is saying they don't want to succeed.  Of course, it will depend on how the house and senate composition turns out.  How many Senators will be tapped by Obama for the cabinet and other positions is a real concern to me but I trust him to look at all the angles and make the right choices.  But even if the Dems make real headway in some pink states, not compromising might cost them their seats next election.  There's a lot of stuff I won't cede (evolution, right to choose, the next two-three Supremes) but other things, we'll have to.  

    1.  I'm sorry you're hurt about Clinton's apparent loss.  But could you and her other supporters please stop trying to shove her down Obama supporters throats as VP?  Seriously, I don't want her as VP, I think her negatives are too high and I don't want Bill back near the White House.  I don't hate Hillary Supporters but I do hate the Clintons.  To me, it's politics as usual vs the chance for real see change.  Maybe the chance is slim, but I cling to it and in order to achieve this the ticket will have to be two less divisive folks.  

    I do understand your feelings about seeing a woman in the White House, I was for Hillary a few years ago and was very excited about the prospect myself.  But when I had to actually sit down and think about all the baggage that came with her, I just couldn't support her candidacy.  I went first with Edwards, but when I saw that Obama (with whom I've been so impressed that I almost moved to Illinois so I could live somewhere he would represent me) was making a serious play for the Presidency, I had to get on board the train.  

    But, really it's a nice train.  Hope is a nice thing.  I'd forgotten what it was like to have hope again.  I hope you can make the leap from accepting Obama to being happy with him.

  •  It is pretty cool to watch (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Angry Mouse

    the gradual evolution of thinking from people like Angry Mouse and EmperorHadrian over time.  I'm sure every other Obama supporter will agree that there will be no grudges held, and all are welcome aboard the Obama train!

    Very cool diary, Angry Mouse.  I also was very impressed by Deoliver's diary.  I'm glad it made a difference to at least one person.

    Never give up! Never surrender!

    by oscarsmom on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 08:19:13 PM PDT

  •  I saw Michael Dyson speak tonight, (0+ / 0-)

    and during part of it he talked about Jesse Jackson's presidential runs in the '80s and how in many ways he was the one who did the initial heavy work so Obama could be where he is today politically. He was loud and got on people's nerves and took a lot of flack.

    As Dyson spoke I could see analogies to what Clinton is doing currently. She is paving the way to make the next female candidate all that more plausible and viable. Whoever comes after her will benefit from her trail breaking, from allowing the real possibility to enter into people's heads and get comfortable there. It is not as gratifying for the in-the-moment supporters, but long term there is value in a legitimate and honest loss.

    I hope the next female candidate is smart and capable and able to learn from this race.

    I am from MN, and if you think our caucuses were "undemocratic" I got a lake to introduce you to.

    by edgeways on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 08:42:53 PM PDT

  •  Sorry (0+ / 0-)

    But you gave up too soon.  

  •  Not sure I believe it (0+ / 0-)

    For a real come-to-Obama conversion, shouldn't there be some glossolalia?

    I think you're also supposed to formally renounce the devil (i.e., Clinton).

    And if you're a real Democrat, I think you're supposed to wait until Obama is so badly damaged by Clinton's mainstreaming of outrageous/vicious attacks that McCain has all but locked up the election (that is, built enough of a lead to make his election inevitable, but not so much of a lead that we won't still blow another $150 million in the effort) -- so your conversion seems suspiciously early...

    ...though you could just be a better reader of the damage already done.

    For the record, we still have more than enough petroleum to trigger runaway greenhouse effects before the stuff runs out for good.

    by Minerva on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:58:19 PM PDT

    •  I am not renouncing HRC. (0+ / 0-)
      And I'm not sure I'm even comfortable with the word "conversion."  It implies that I have stopped believing in HRC and what she stands for and what a fantastic president I think she would be.

      That has not happened.

      Rather, I am coming to terms with the reality that Obama will be the nominee, and that I need to learn how to support him.  

  •  I've always liked your common sense, Angry Mouse (0+ / 0-)

    As I've said before, I voted for Hillary in February and still hope that by some miracle she can pull it out without leaving huge bitterness behind.  However, I was always willing to vote for Obama in November should be be the nominee, which is why it bothered me when some Obama fans got hostile when I tried to defend Hillary.  Seriously, though, my overarching goal is to support the Democrat, not the one who would be Bush's successor.

  •  Thoughts about your concerns (0+ / 0-)

    There are a lot of people out there who don't like the idea of being 'post-partisan'. For some people, it's about anger. We've been kicked around so we want to be the ones to do the kicking. For others (like yourself, I belive) it's more sober than that. You want someone who isn't going to compromise on their progressive values. This is a legitimate concern about any potential candidate, are we going to get a dem in the White House who will turn around and cave to the right wing?
    Although I could write pages on why I oppose Hillary for this exact reason, I'm going to stick to Obama on this one.
    Obama's post-partisanship doesn't necessarily mean compromise or triangulation. But what he sees going on in this country has GOT to change. Bill Clinton thrived in his presidency by ducking, dodging, and avoiding. He played with the meanings of words, giving himself enough room to wiggle out of any previous position or statement. By doing so, he succeeded personally, but he was also unable to move the country to a progressive viewpoint.
    Obama is a completely different animal. He has the ability to MOVE people. Not just emotionally, but their positions. He sees labels of all kinds as counterproductive. He won't argue whether a position is progressive or liberal or conservative. Usually he'll choose a position (congressional oversight, for instance) and ask why that's liberal. He understands that, for many, once something is labeled as 'liberal' or 'conservative' a LOT of people stop thinking. So, by abandoning the labels, he gives people a chance to look at ideas anew.
    This makes commentators nuts, by the way. They LOVE labels. So when they ask about a position of his, he usually has to clarify the position before he can answer the question.
    I've seen him stand his ground on a number of ocasions. Speaking with Iran, going after Bin Laden in Pakistan, refusing to use nukes on terrorist camps, defending GLBT rights in front of Iowans, Texans, South Carolinians, (none of which are really known as hotbeds of the gay rights movement.) I also know that his core positions and his way of approaching politics has NOT CHANGED in the last 15 years. That's astonishing to me, in a world where politicians routinely reinvent themselves and their positions for changing times. (I'm thinking Edwards, McCain, and yes, Hillary).  
    While his rhetoric can be lofty, his ARGUMENTS for his positions are doggedly pragmatic. He is also one of the few politicians I've encountered where I not only know WHAT he supports but WHY. (In comparison, I have no idea why Hillary believes any of the positions she supports.)
    This has also caused some problems in progressive circles, including this site. Obama's arguments aren't made to make his base happy. His arguments are designed to convince people who don't already believe in his positions. This is how someone who, by all records, is a liberal progressive, has won over a LOT of independents and some republicans.

    THIS is his gift. By treating those with opposing viewpoints (abortion, civil unions, etc.) with dignity and understanding that their position is deep and heartfelt, it opens the door to a conversation and, eventually, a conversion. MOST pro-lifers aren't really all that pro-life, they just don't like abortion personally and have been radicalized by the all-or-nothing, hate babies or hate women dynamic of the argument. By treating others as reasonable human beings, he soothes a LOT of fears and allows people to let go of their preconcieved notions and THINK for a minute.
    The beauty of this approach is that WE'RE RIGHT. Most people, when they slow down and think things through, really aren't opposed to legal rights for gays, or abortion rights in most cases, or even affirmative action. But the first step to this conversion is ACKNOWLEDGING that their point of view isn't evil, or stupid, or insincere.
    Is this going to work for everyone? Of course not. But it will work for a LOT of people. Obama's bet is that this approach will work for a significant majority of the country.
    Which takes me to the next point. Far too many presidential candidates see GETTING to the presidency as the prize. Obama sees it as just the next step. He doesn't just want to be president, he wants to change the whole conversation for a generation or more. The way you do that is with a national mandate.
    This means that he doesn't just want to squeak by, he wants to win BIG. He's already beginning to mobilize his volunteer base (which is enormous) for the general election. Imagine, for the first time in thirty years there will be democrats knocking on doors in Idaho, Utah, Texas, Kansas. He might not win them all, but I don't doubt that he could pick up a few suprise victories in those traditional red states. And even if he doesn't win them, McCain is going to have to spend time and money defending them. Obama's goal is to win with 40 states or more, with a whole lot of downticket dems coming along for the ride.
    With a mandate, and the country at large behind him, congress will likely follow his lead. If they block him, he'll take it to the voters. He wants US to be his muscle, forcing our representatives to do what we want.
    This is his goal, this is his style. The man is unorthodox, but he's the only one I've seen who even has a shot at pulling it off.

  •  Wow (0+ / 0-)

    I have to note the response over at mydd to this diary was a lot more assholish than you got here.  Too depressing.

    Your political compass Economic Left/Right: -4.88 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.15

    by bythesea on Thu Apr 03, 2008 at 01:39:21 AM PDT