Daily Kos

Does anyone here dare post a pro-Hillary Diary anymore?

Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:41:51 PM PDT

Not many, I would say.  Many great past members have left the scene.

It's not that there are fewer Hillary Supporters in the general population.  Polls don't bear that out, although the vicious and biased media onslaughts from the MSM don't help.  But the truth is that nearly half (and perhaps more) Americans still stand behind Hillary.

It's really amazing to me that a woman who was vilified from the day she arrived as the wife of the newly elected Governor of Arkansas - 17 years ago.  The right hated her then, just as they do now.

Bill and her went on, regardless, to win the best 8 years of Democratic rule in a long time.  They brought us prosperity, lower unemployment, higher wages, fewer wars, and international respect.  They pulled us out of a deep deficit that Reagan had promised to never create (but he did), into a surplus.

The Clinton years were GOOD years.  Our wages rose, unemployment went down, way down, and, even in the midst of the most vile attacks and endless searches for Clinton wrong-doings, amounting to over $100 million dollars spent on investigations to find corruption, financial wrong-doings, etc. - all they had was a blue dress stain.

Oh the glory of it.  Finally, something that will bring him (them) down.

JFK, of course, had the courtesy of the press back then to refrain from publicizing his affairs, and my bet is that every president, with the exception of perhaps Jimmy Carter, has had affairs.

Now we have a new short-attention-span audience to just either forget about this, re-punishing Hillary for not divorcing her husband at the time, even her vows ring far more true to true marriage than the Republicans with one, two, or three past marriages, or even gay stuff (you know), preaching to us that marriage is sacred etc.

If you really look at it objectively, it's the Clintons who kept their vows.  I see true love between them - and forgiveness.  In my humble opinion, that is what makes marriages work.  I have no doubt in my mind that Bill loves Hillary, and Hillary loves Bill.  They experienced a lot of what all marriages experience.  Theirs was in public.  And they chose to stick together, because family is more important than a sexual encounter.

That just reminds me of the narrowness of our thinking.  On one hand we're supposed to fight for families togetherness - and on the other hand we're supposed to abandon them when they forgive each other for mistakes.

Which is it?

This is a late-night diary, and I need to go to bed.  Take care all of you.  It's not hit and run.  It's just something I needed to say before I go to bed.  Thanks.

Oh, the hypocrisy.

Tags: Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 185 comments

  •  See Alegre's below. n/t (6+ / 0-)

    I love the smell of impeachment in the morning!

    by gabbardd on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:42:37 PM PDT

  •  The truth is her path to victory is gone (19+ / 0-)

    and drawing this race out is getting a little silly.

    •  Well (3+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      mcfly, lenzy1000, Shhs

      I personally didn't have a very good decade - but I recognize that just because I'm not jumping turnstyles to afford to get to work anymore --- as I sometimes had to do in the 90s, doesn't mean the macro numbers weren't good.

      I guess everyone's got their own blog now.

      by zonk on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:48:13 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  And they weren't Hillary's years (5+ / 0-)

      unless she also wants to assume responsibility for things like NAFTA. Id you want us to consider Hillary on her merit and not revive arguments about whether she's riding on Bill's coattails, you can't assign the "Clinto years" to her.

      Indeed, it would be possible to post a diary here about Hillary but the tone of many of them was triumphalist, gloating and condescending. Needless to say, the tone became more belligerent as the road got rougher for Hillary. This diary is a sort of pity party. No, "half" of voters and certain not "more than half" don't support Hillary right now. she's run hard but she's not winning.

      This persecuted tone isn't helpful. It's possible to not be high-handed or to act like you deserve the nomination. Some of Hillary's followers can do that (the committed Hillary supporter and activist who made a beeline for the Obama campaign staffer at our meeting tonight to make sure the campaign could send a representative to the candidates night she was organizing in her county) and some can't.

      We're retiring Steve LaTourette (R-Family Values for You But Not for Me) and sending Judge Bill O'Neill to Congress from Ohio-14: http://www.oneill08.com/

      by anastasia p on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:51:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hillary wasn't president then (4+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      TheJohnny, jdigs84, psilocynic, Shhs

      And Bill isn't running now.

      So she can't exactly take credit for those years, nor on the strength of his years, promise more of the same.

      Not unless she's going to give Bill a prominent role in her administration, which would figuratively put an asterisk on the administration of the first female president.

      "Spoken like a true smartass."

      by ChiGirl88 on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:51:32 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  article for you (4+ / 0-)

    You might find this from Slate of interest.  I happen to be for Obama, mainly because Edwards dropped out, but it's good that you say your piece, even if you may well get smoked for it.

    "It's only in books that the officers of the detective force are superior to the weakness of making a mistake." (Wilkie Collins, The Moonstone)

    by chingchongchinaman on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:45:01 PM PDT

  •  Here's one (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Jimdotz

    Bill had Bimbo eruptions ... Crazy John has Rambo eruptions

    by kbman on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:47:12 PM PDT

  •  NAFTA, TANF, Ricky Ray Rector, Lani, (6+ / 0-)

    Tax cuts for the wealthy, the IMF sacking of East Asian economies, the embargo and bombing of Iraq,,,, hardly good years.  They only look good in comparison to Bush and Reagan.

    Workers of the world unite--back by popular demand.

    by Kab ibn al Ashraf on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:47:31 PM PDT

  •  No one likes a cheater. (10+ / 0-)

    No one.  Don't expect her to get any sympathy after blatantly threatening to cheat.  She even threatened to sue to reseat Florida and Michigan delegates.  After our party has had two elections stolen from us in a row, many of us are appalled.

    Don't blame us, blame the dirty politics and cheating threats.

  •  I thought she wasn't running on her husband's (9+ / 0-)

    record. She wants to be considered on her own merits. OK, she can't run a successful campaign... what makes you think she can run a country?

    We the People ordained our Government to promote our General Welfare;
    If We the People want Health Care for All, Government should provide it.

    by Jimdotz on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:47:45 PM PDT

    •  Without her husband's name... (0+ / 3-)

      ...Hillary would be nowhere. She would never have had the 'experience' of living in the White House, she certainly would never have been elected a senator from New York State as Hillary Rodham and she absolutely would not be running for president. She is who she is because of who she married and she used her husband's name and fame to get elected to a Senate seat from a state than had a convenient opening. Sorry, but she does not deserve to be president.

      It would not surprise me in the least if the Clintons divorce over the next few years. She hung on in a humiliating marriage for the sake of her political possibilities. Those appear to be dwindling. She can continue to be a senator and I doubt very much if being divorced would affect her re-electability there. In fact, people might admire her more.  

  •  Your version: spin. Reality: HRC = Mike Huckabee (4+ / 1-)

    Recommended by:
    revbludge, andydoubtless, Shhs, Hope08
    Hidden by:
    dadanation

    Time to go home.

    Go back to the Senate. Where you can be primaried.

    It's like they take pride in being ignorant.

    by jkennerl on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:47:56 PM PDT

    •  if HRC = Mike Huckabee, then (4+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      jiml, tecampbell, Shahryar, Shhs

      does BHO = John McCain?  I think HRC > Mike Huckabee.  I think

      HRC > Mike Huckabee + John McCain + Ron Paul + Mitt Romney + ...

      (-8.00,-7.85) "Jesus Christ was the first nonviolent revolutionary." --S. Stills

      by bubbanomics on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:50:08 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yes, she is better. But it's time to be done. nt (0+ / 0-)

        It's like they take pride in being ignorant.

        by jkennerl on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:53:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  unfortunately... (2+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          litigatormom, murrayewv

          I'm afraid you're right. Damn she would have been a wonderful president.

          •  She'll make a great Senator from New York (2+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            musicalhair, andydoubtless

            Until we find a primary challenger.

            It's like they take pride in being ignorant.

            by jkennerl on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 09:07:10 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Good luck with that (0+ / 0-)

              Wars not make one great. - Yoda

              by Volvo Liberal on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 09:21:21 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

            •  You won't get one (1+ / 0-)

              And what are you going to primary her for, in 2012?  A vote in 2002?  Or just for the sheer audacity of having gotten in Barack Obama's way?

              The voters of NY like her. Unless she takes a seriously different tack in the next four years, they still will when she's up for re-election to the Senate, assuming that's what she's doing in 2012.

              "Mom, did you hurt yourself, or are you yelling at the TV again?

              by litigatormom on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 09:31:22 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Maybe you're right (0+ / 0-)

                I do get carried away when I think about her the candidate as opposed to her the senator.

                However, if she does find a way to win the nomination via a calculated, anti-democratic superdelegate strategy, I will open my wallet to all Democratic comers in her Senate primary.

                That's a promise I'll keep.

                It's like they take pride in being ignorant.

                by jkennerl on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 09:45:21 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  The superdelegates are free agents (0+ / 0-)

                  and they were put there to be free agents. You can call it undemocratic, but its undemocratic in the same way that the Electoral College is undemocratic. Those are the rules, however regrettable one may find them.

                  As a practical matter, however, unless the candidates are very very close in the delegate count, the superdelegates won't matter one way or another.  If the totals are close, then I think they are fair game. Especially since even the leader in elected delegates might need superdelegates to get him/her to the "magic number"  because there are no delegates from Michigan or Florida.

                  I'm not advocating here that those delegates should be seated based on the votes that have already occurred. I'm just pointing out that the number of delegates needed to win is based on a total delegate count that includes those two states. Not entirely logical, and it makes the superdelegates more important than they would otherwise be.

                  "Mom, did you hurt yourself, or are you yelling at the TV again?

                  by litigatormom on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:03:07 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

    •  Bullshit (4+ / 0-)

      Hillary is like Huckabee? Just what have you been smoking tonight?

      •  Struggling against political reality (0+ / 0-)

        I mean it in the way that she will hang around, and around, when it's time to go home.

        It's like they take pride in being ignorant.

        by jkennerl on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 09:11:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oh come on (1+ / 0-)

          Recommended by:
          wiscmass

          McCain actually has the delegates to get the nomination.  Huck has very very few. And he has never been anything but a fringe candidate.

          Clinton is behind, but not that far behind. She still has a lot of support throughout the country, if not on DKos.  

          BTW, the reason why neither candidate may reach the magic number after all the primaries is that the magic number assumes delegations from Michigan and Florida.  Whatever you do about those states, not counting them, and keeping the magic number the same, doesn't quite make sense.

          "Mom, did you hurt yourself, or are you yelling at the TV again?

          by litigatormom on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 09:35:13 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  wtf? HRC = huckabee (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      Gabriele Droz

      have we come to this now, where anyone with a quick, albeit inane, HRC slam can post it here and not get hydrated -- but rather get up-rated?

      come on

      plenty of legitimate reasons to criticize the senator from new york, but to equate her to an anti-evolutionist fundamentalist is beyond the pale.

      hydrated for the invective.

      _______________

      it's their screen name because they couldn't figure out how to spell "moran."

      -9.75 (e), -7.18 (s)

      by dadanation on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:29:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I wasn't a fan of the Clinton years (5+ / 0-)

    but I was willing to give Hillary a chance - assuming she'd be different from Bill.  I'll be sorry not to have that chance to see her in action.  

    I'm an Edwards Democrat!

    by invisiblewoman on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:48:31 PM PDT

  •  Not all Obama supporters are the same. (22+ / 0-)

    My husband feels the same way - he is hating the Hillary pile-on. I don't like it either.

    DKos is not the real world.

    I have volunteered for Obama & have met wonderful people who have no ill will for HRC or Bill.  

    And there are some, if not many, Obama supporters who don't do the pile-on.  We just work hard for our candidate & hope for the best.

    Peace.

  •  its not about affairs anymore (4+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    jkennerl, mijita, tecampbell, madgranny

    I honestly don't think the affair is an issue with anyone voting in the primaries right now. At least, I've never heard or seen it brought up in any of the places I frequent IRL or online.

    I applaud your bravery and loyalty. I go for Obama, but I'll be happy when we can unite behind a single person and be one big happy family again.

    In the doppler effect red means running away while blue means coming closer. Which would you rather live in, a red or blue state?

    by 808 on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:48:50 PM PDT

  •  Who cares about their marriage? (4+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    jkennerl, TLS66, revbludge, andydoubtless

    Does anyone care about their marriage one way or the other? I've always defended them and their privacy - but I have to admit, I'm totally bored and indifferent to whatever their emotional relationship is.

    The real thing is that she has run a destructive and petty campaign and alienated a lot of people who used to be supporters (like myself - I did vote for her twice.)

  •  past versus future (1+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Shhs

    all of the things you say are true. But that doesn't mean she is the one to lead the country right now. This isn't her time.

    All extremists are irrational and should be exposed

    by SeanF on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:49:19 PM PDT

  •  DaleA does, doesn't he? (5+ / 0-)

    As for some of the other well-knowns...

    It's not our fault that Universal, LC Johnson and Susan Hu are authoritarian--meaning mean-spirited, blatantly so to anyone who's not already on their side, whether oppposed, on the fence or indifferent--and shallow thinkers, making the moss ass backwards arguments.

    It sucked being an Obama supporter on here, I thought.  When I was making the same electability arguments, the same war arguments, the same health care arguments that are now finally tolerable about a year ago. They were well received.

    This throng of Obama support on here was earned.  For every mistake, Obama supporters had to make two better impressions on the crowd here.  

    We are not unified and that is largely our own faults.  But it is unfortunate that there are so few Hillary supporters to reasonably make her case here

    That said, the "visible" majority of her supporters have made it clear that seething hatred for anyone in her way is acceptable.

    And that's why MyDD looks the way it does.

    Plus, he knows what crapped out means, which will help him explain his condition on the morning of November 5 - PBCliberal

    by Nulwee on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:50:04 PM PDT

  •  I am not going to say anything (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    andydoubtless, Shhs

    positive or negative about Hillary.  I sincerely believe Obama represents the future I would like to be a part of.  I have been saddened by the attack posts in dKos for and against everyone, but I suspece that Obama will win the nomination.  If that does not happen, I will cast my vote for Hillary.  I once thought I could vote for McCain, but his most recent statements have made that impossible.  

  •  It's time to stop thinking support for Obama (15+ / 0-)

    is an insult to Clinton, a memory dump of anything good that came from the Clinton years, or even a moment of popular delirium.  

    It's just not the case.  Many great politicians and  statesmen have lost nominations and general elections.

    A vote for Obama simply means support for Obama on the part of a majority of the people who vote for him.  Few of them, I think, vote for Obama because they hate Clinton.

    I respect Clinton and just don't think the time is right for her.

    NetrootNews coming soon!

    by ksh01 on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:51:48 PM PDT

    •  Adlai Stevenson (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      mijita, madgranny

      was not by no means as hawkish as Clinton. Al Smith? Eugene McCarthy? Gary Hart? Jesse Jackson? Al Gore? Howard Dean? John Edwards?

      Plus, he knows what crapped out means, which will help him explain his condition on the morning of November 5 - PBCliberal

      by Nulwee on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:57:02 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  If only that were the case (2+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      mijita, Gabriele Droz

      Again, another good comment from an Obama supporter. And another person with a low ID#...Have you read comments from your fellow Obama supporters in the 140,000 - 150,000 range? Everything is a Clinton insult to them...

      Wars not make one great. - Yoda

      by Volvo Liberal on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 09:28:38 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  that's unfortunate. That kind of stuff (2+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        mijita, Over the Edge

        is really screwing up the site.  And I know it comes from both sides, but a little grace would be nice.

        My vote was a hard decision for me and one that I made on the basis of who I thought could win the general. There are things both candidates have done that I disagree with, but I think some folks have gone overboard with Hillary hatred.

        NetrootNews coming soon!

        by ksh01 on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 09:34:40 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Plenty of folks have gone overboard with Obama (0+ / 0-)

          hatred as well.

          Trying to "find fault" is pointless---look how well it has worked in the Middle East.

          Tom Daschle: "John McCain has George Bush policies, a Karl Rove campaign, and a Dick Cheney attitude".

          by Azdak on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 09:44:38 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I know... it sucks (0+ / 0-)

        A lot of people (myself included) try and counter it.  But it's harder to write substance than cheap nasty crap.  

        The flip side is, people naturally see the crap and are hurt by it way more easily than they feel good about positive comments (human nature).  

        I'm just not sure what the answer is.  In my own case, I'm way more offended by people who are also supporting Obama posting mean and rude stuff than I am by it coming from Clinton supporters, mostly because I feel tarred by the same brush.  

        the third eye does not weep. it knows. Political compass: -9.75 / -8.72

        by mijita on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 09:42:58 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  You should go over to myDD (4+ / 0-)

    and ask them why there are no pro-Obama diaries.

    Hillary has been busy making sure that the Dems lose the general election this fall, the plagerism crap was the last straw for me with her, I used to at least respect her.

    •  You like Al Gore? (0+ / 0-)

      Who do you think first attacked Dukakus for letting Willie Horton out of jail.  Yeah, it was Gore during the primary of 1988.

      That what happens with primaries, folks.

      •  Does that excuse Hillary? (2+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        jkennerl, Shhs

        Desperate doesn't even begin to describe her campaign recently...

        •  It's not a matter of excusing... (0+ / 0-)

          Primaries are always hard fought.  Bush Sr. called Reagan's Economic plan, Voodoo.

          He was right, but it was harsh.  This is seen as part of political life.

          Hillary is toast here, so whatever she does, says or doesn't do, is castigated.

          That's life, so we may as well accept it.

          If you have a statistical bent, you might want to look at some results from a diaryyesterday that illustrates this.

          •  It's killing the party (0+ / 0-)

            ...in a year when the Republicans have no business being anywhere near the White House.

            I'm not trying to be a trouble maker, I've always liked the Clinton's and I think Bill was a great President but I never actually believed that they would put their own interests ahead of the parties like this.

            I guess I should have listened to the people who said that they would.

      •  Gore never mentioned Horton by name (0+ / 0-)

        nor did he mention his race.  And it's Dukakis.

      •  You're wrong (0+ / 0-)

        http://mediamatters.org/...

        You are repeating a Sean Hannity/Laura Ingraham fiction. Stop it. Those aren't people we respect here.

        We're retiring Steve LaTourette (R-Family Values for You But Not for Me) and sending Judge Bill O'Neill to Congress from Ohio-14: http://www.oneill08.com/

        by anastasia p on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 09:18:37 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  no it was not (0+ / 0-)

        In fact, as Media Matters for America has documented, although Gore did ask Dukakis about "weekend passes for convicted criminals" during a 1988 Democratic primary debate, "Gore never mentioned that Horton was black; indeed, he never mentioned Horton by name," as Slate.com "Chatterbox" columnist Timothy Noah noted on November 1, 1999. Further, as Daily Howler editor Bob Somerby has documented, Gore never mentioned Horton's crime but specifically mentioned two other criminals who committed murder after escaping from their prison furlough.

        It was the Bush-Quayle '88 campaign that first used the Horton case against Dukakis.

        from the media matters site

        i added the emphasis for emphasis

        _______________

        it's their screen name because they couldn't figure out how to spell "moran."

        -9.75 (e), -7.18 (s)

        by dadanation on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:35:59 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I never expected any more than I'm receiving (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    mystic, madgranny, jay w

    from all of you.  I just had to tell you how I feel about this whole thing.

    Go at it.  Free speech is our common right.

    It does not take many words to tell the truth. - Chief Joseph - Nez Perce

    by Gabriele Droz on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:52:06 PM PDT

  •  Such a diary would be a waste of effort... (0+ / 0-)

    Call it group dynamics or Mob Mentality, but nothing critical of Obama or praising HRC will be accepted here.

    His some analysisof a poll that shows this.

    Much criticism, but no cogent arguments against my thesis.

  •  One thought to you Obama followers (5+ / 0-)

    By all means - keep it up - be as nasty as you can - get it out of your system

    because each time you launch your attacks - you just lost a future an Obama supporter.

    For someone that wants so desperately for Obama to win - you are costing him a lot of good will.

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

    by sara seattle on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:52:48 PM PDT

  •  Well, jesus h. christ. You don't get it. (5+ / 0-)

    It's really amazing to me that a woman who was vilified from the day she arrived as the wife of the newly elected Governor of Arkansas - 17 years ago.  The right hated her then, just as they do now.

    You know, that's the real problem with Rovian politics....you figure out who you hate, and then vote for the candidate that will drive them crazy.  It's the way the republicans have gotten middle america to vote against democrats for years.  We're sick of the culture wars.  

    Bill and her went on, regardless, to win the best 8 years of Democratic rule in a long time.

    "Bill and her"? Well, only one person can be president, and guess what? It's not going to be Bill.  And even Bill isn't Bill any more.  You know who is the heir to his hope, his themes, his skills? Obama.  

    "For a man who will turn 72 this month, he's a surprisingly immature politician--erratic, impulsive and subject to peer pressure"-Newsweek.

    by Inland on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:53:22 PM PDT

  •  Clinton definitely does have a strong . . . (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    mystic, Mike Taylor

    base of support within the Democratic party.

    But to suggest that there is a poll anywhere saying that more than half of the population is behind her is to perpetuate a fantasy based on no evidence.  

    Her national numbers have never been more than 46-47% of the population and she has never been able to expand her base in any real way beyond core support groups within the Democratic party.

  •  I'll welcome you. (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    jkennerl, mijita, LarsThorwald

    I love Bill Clinton of Arkansas, the man from Hope, the Comeback Kid. I adore the guy.

    And I have respect for their marriage -- though honestly, I do think it isn't for the best to have that marriage at the center of the White House.

    And Hillary is a fantastic Senator and when I see her, I have a smile on my face.

    From an abomination to an Obama Nation

    by copithorne on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:53:41 PM PDT

  •  I like Hillary, I just like Obama better... (4+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    jkennerl, dadanation, mijita, getinthek

    ... and I really wanted John Edwards anyhow.

    I hope the ticket winds up Obama-Edwards, but I'll vote for Obama-Clinton as well.

    I believe the Clear Light is the consciousness of the quantum vacuum.

    by Sharkmeister on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:53:46 PM PDT

    •  best we can be (1+ / 0-)

      Recommended by:
      spookthesunset
      Barack Obama seems genuine and sincere and I have been supporting him for several months now because I believe he will inspire us all to be the best Americans that we can be....in terms of taking steps to protect our environment, help provide tax breaks to the lower and middle classes, and improving our schools.

      not just on day one, but throughout the future.

  •  I can't tonight, but I have an idea for her. (2+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    LarsThorwald, spookthesunset

    Hillary Clinton is light years smarter than her rhetoric.  It's not that her rhetoric is terrible, so much as she's a brainiac.  She's forgotten more about dozens of issues than any of us will ever know.

    So, at she stares into the presidential abyss, she needs to demonstrate her unique intellectual capacity to lead this complicated country.  She'll never do this on the stump, or in our asinine debates, or via her hamhanded political operation, or through MSM mouthpieces.

    What she needs to do is buy MASSIVE TIME on all network primetime to talk for 15 minutes minimum, 30 minutes maximum about her signature issue, health care.  I'm talking PEROT-STYLE.  We need to see PIE CHARTS, trend lines, number crunching.  AMERICAN ADULTS WANT TO LEARN about the issues that affect their lives.  Hell, we don't even need to be able to understand half of what she's talking about.  Hillary needs to teach, not speechify and vie for camera angles.

    It'll cost a ton.  But the promotion will be free, and if she wants to be president, she's got nothing else to spend her dough on.

    If Hillary buys half an hour to teach me about health care, as an Obama supporter, I'll watch every minute.

    •  Intelligence doesn't always translate into... (0+ / 0-)

      leadership. There are different types of intelligence. Mastery of a wealth of facts does not equal the ability to see the big picture or to inspire others to follow a greater vision.

      If I were putting together a Jeopardy team, Clinton would be my first pick. But if I were putting together a leadership team, I'd want Obama as the CEO.

      Tom Daschle: "John McCain has George Bush policies, a Karl Rove campaign, and a Dick Cheney attitude".

      by Azdak on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 09:54:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Sure. But my point is, she's not selling her (2+ / 0-)

        Recommended by:
        dadanation, spookthesunset

        strong suit.  Her strong suit isn't retail politics.  Her strong suit is policy mastery.

        Her campaign team has disserved her terribly.  It's her fault, ultimately.  But Mark Penn shouldn't be able to find a game of jacks between Boston and DC.

        •  I am not sure her "strong suit" improves her... (0+ / 0-)

          electablity. Maybe it would--a lot of people are susceptible. I hear her talk policy, and I think: this is way too micro for an executive.

          I find that the more she talks, the more diminished she becomes as a possible president in my eyes. I was listening tonight on the radio to her speech and all I could think of was "this is AWFUL". I had to switch stations.

          I know that sounds negative, but I really don't mean it as criticism. My "intelligence type" is similar to hers. There is a place for that type of person and they are extremely valuable. I just don't think being President is the best fit.

          Tom Daschle: "John McCain has George Bush policies, a Karl Rove campaign, and a Dick Cheney attitude".

          by Azdak on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:16:08 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well, she's staring into the abyss now. (0+ / 0-)

            Retail politicking has failed her.  It's Hail Mary time.  Perot proved that with 15-30 minutes and charts full of X's and O's, he could sway 20 percent of the electorate to his campaign, most of them independents.  Because of this success, I think HRC can confidently copy it, and present it as novel and compelling.

            Even if all she manages to do is create buyer's remorse for Obama, she will have galvanized the country around her signature issue and made it easier for him to campaign on it in the general, and then get legislation passed with her in the Senate when he's president.

  •  i look at all the things that i know now (0+ / 0-)

    about the clintons and their past legislatively and inspirationally and say - that is so yesterday. the baby boom generation only cares about themselves and i am so tired of the finger wagging and bull crap that i just want to be rid of the clintons.

    they are so arrogant and classless (or should i say snooty and high minded) that i would like to take a chance with the outsider.

  •  the Clinton years were not good years (7+ / 0-)

    for the Democratic Party.

    and the economic bubble burst, although it was good while it lasted.

    in all seriousness, I think the proHRC people have gone to MyDD.

    I don't wish Hillary Clinton ill.  I don't hate her.  I just don't think she is the right candidate for this time in history.

    Politics is like driving. To go backward, put it in R. To go forward, put it in D.
    76 days until the '08 elections. Let's paint the country BLUE!

    by TrueBlueMajority on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:55:39 PM PDT

  •  here is why many of us opposed her (3+ / 0-)

    it is a long list but I think that it is important to see because to many of us (who aren't evil people for not supporting her) these are some pretty convincing reasons:
    (and I've posted this list a couple of other places tonight (but not on DK)

    -DLC
    -Terry McAwful
    -supporting Joe Lieberman
    -playing the gender wars card (from the early nineties) and dividing progressives to fulfill her sense of entitlement
    -playing the race baiting card in South Carolina showing that her courting of the African American community was all politics and they could be thrown under the bus if they wouldn't support what seems like a big sense of entitlement
    -trying to game the rules and get delegates seated that she agreed would not be seated.
    --the way that Hillary and Bill fought against Gov Dean becoming head of the DNC (that alone tipped me against her)
    -the negative attacks in Wisconsin
    -the chance that she has always been lying about things like the cattle futures trading (a political friend of her husband turned her $1000 investment into $100,000 in a few months and this was never investigated and the Republicans will bring it up, guaranteed).
    -the suspicion that she is crooked.
    -our perception that she will do anything or say anything to get power.
    -the fact that Obama is CONSISTENTLY rated by voters as better able to beat McCain in the general election
    -her unwillingness to congratulate Senator Obama when he wins primaries like VA, Maryland, DC, Wisconsin
    -her negative numbers across the board among voters which she cannot turn and would be handicapped by in the general election

    AND YOU WONDER why we are flocking to a candidate promising change and hope???

    It is time to turn a new page in America. It is a shame that the first significant female candidate was so tied to the politics of yesterday. But the race is too important to ignore all of the above just because is a female. Barack Obama will be a better president for all of us, female and male, black white etc, straight and gay.

    It is time for change and she was the candidate of the past.

    http://denniswine.blogspot.com

    by denniswine on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:56:37 PM PDT

  •  Not a Clinton supporter... (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    mijita, tecampbell, mystic

    But..its not because I didn't appreciate the years when Bill Clinton was president or her role as a First Lady. I actually think she was one of the great First Ladies. She was smart and accomplished and not afraid to show us all..unlike many other First Ladies who are just pretty faces.

    I also don't blame Hillary for Bill's indiscretions. And I would never presume to believe she should divorce her husband. If she can forgive him and the two can work it out, the more power to them. I have many friends who chose to work things out after their husband's had affairs and I in most cases, it worked out well. No one is perfect. I think Hillary showed great courage and poise through the entire situation. I was very proud of her at the time.

    I am not voting for her because I think at this moment in time, Obama would be the better candidate. He will bring this country back together again. I have heard the arguments against him from the Hillary campaign but I don't agree. And I have heard very little reasons to vote for her other than to relive the Bill Clinton years.

    And while there were many good things, especially in his first term, there were a lot of nasty things too..not his fault or hers really. But I don't want to go back there again.

  •  Hillary is a tough candidate to beat, (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    mijita, Shahryar, Liberal Pride

    and she deserves respect.

    She is not my fav, but of course her voice is welcome.

    Soon we'll all have to work together.  I hope we don't forget that.

  •  Well, the McCain presidency will certainly change (5+ / 2-)

    the tenor of DK. I suspect the Obama love will decline ever so slightly at that point.. but not by much.

  •  More strawmen... (0+ / 0-)

    Look, I have a big problem with Hillary's weaseliness on the Iraq war, on the Bush mafia's general lawlessness, and specifically on wiretapping, use of torture, and Guantanamo Bay.  I think she ought to have been in the forefront, leading the opposition on all of these.  But instead, she chose to step back.

    But she's still a fine democrat, and a great American.  I'd be happy to vote for her, and if she wins the nomination, I'll send her money and might even volunteer for her campaign.

    But I just prefer Obama, for the reasons I gave above.  He's not much different from her, so it's not a very strong preference.  But on the above issues, he was sufficiently different that I voted for him instead.

    Let's not put up strawmen about how people just hate Hillary.  Lots and lots of people here have clearly stated how they like Hillary, but hate her campaign's tactics.  Many are quick to blame Bill and Hillary for such campaign sleaze, with scant evidence.  But many others clearly blame her advisers.  And those advisers are certainly problematic.

    But no, I don't hate Hillary.  Or Bill.  Far from it!

  •  Sometimes I wish there could have been (3+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    mijita, murrayewv, tecampbell

    a Hillary without the Bill.  When she made the baking cookies comment, I can remember applauding in agreement, but she was attacked so much for that comment that I think it stifled who she was.  I have a nothing but respect for the people who support what she stands for.

    "Hope is that thing inside us that insists...that something better awaits us if we have the courage to fight for it." --Barack Obama

    by loree920 on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:57:17 PM PDT

  •  Oh, the horror. The Horror! And horrible writing (2+ / 0-)

    Fragmented sentences. Sentences that are incomplete ideas.

    That's without even touching on the substance of the piece, which I reject entirely. Hillary isn't being "re-punished" or even punished for not divorcing her husband. outside of the diarist, no one is suggesting that "we're supposed to abandon them when they forgive each other for mistakes."

    This is the most simplistic piece of crap I've read in a while. It's written by a child, with an early bedtime, who sees the world in such infantile ways.

    People are voting for Obama beacuse they prefer him. I didn't give Clinton's marriage a single thought when I decided to push the square next to Obama's name, and I doubt anyone else did -- at least, not in the way the diarist suggests. I suppose some folks are simply tired of the family's public conduct. But, it's got nothing to do with their private business. That's just playground foolishness. Try writing grown-up thoughts next time out.

    Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

    by FischFry on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 08:57:53 PM PDT

    •  Nasty. Unnecessarily so. n/t (0+ / 0-)

      •  And so was the diary. (0+ / 0-)

        Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

        by FischFry on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 09:40:32 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  No, it wasn't. You don't have to agree with (0+ / 0-)

          the diarist's point of view. But your response was pure fucking nastiness. YOU are one of the reasons people are writing "what the fuck is going on here" diaries that implore people to be civil.

          •  I don't agree with the tone of FF's comments... (1+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            FischFry

            but there is nothing civil about the tone of this diary.

            Tom Daschle: "John McCain has George Bush policies, a Karl Rove campaign, and a Dick Cheney attitude".

            by Azdak on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:03:21 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Perhaps you didn't read the diary (0+ / 0-)

            Apparently, the only reason they vote for Obama instead of Clinton is because they disapporove of the the Clintons' relationship.

            Either the diarist has belittled the perspective of everyone who voted for Obama, or Obama's supporters are some awfully small-minded people.

            Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

            by FischFry on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:07:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  No, perhaps you didn't read the diary (0+ / 0-)

              Most of it was about the fact that people were better off economically then than they are now. And by the way, my step-father said one of the reasons he doesn't like HRC is because she should have divorced her husband. He is a professor of Philosophy at the Univ. of PA and is certainly not small-minded.  

              •  Most of it? (0+ / 0-)

                There were two sentences about the economic situation. In truth, though, there was really only one, since the two sentences said the exact same thing -- wages went up (This is actually wrong, except for the top 10%, but let's not quibble), and unemployment went down (though many of the "new hires" were people working second and third jobs, or new jobs that paid less and with fewer benefits than previous ones, but let's not quibble).

                The diarist said the same thing in two different sentences, but even if you give her credit for saying the same two things twice, it hardly represents "most" of the diary.

                Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

                by FischFry on Tue Feb 19, 2008 at 10:27:23 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  The problem here isn't a lack of civility (0+ / 0-)

            It's a lack of reasonableness and honesty. Except for just a few thin-skinned folks, I haven't read any complaints about incivility. On the other hand, I"ve read a bevy of diaries that are profoundly critical of the way supporters of the two remaining candidates have tried to scandalize everything that has happened in the campaign, manufacturing outrage at every turn -- practicing scandal-mongering, while hypocritically attacking the other campaign, or its supporters for similar conduct. I've read a bevy of diaries that bemoan the demonization of one candidate or the other, and conjuring up apocalyptic visions of the future should that candidate win.

            It's the complete and utter falseness of all these candidate diaries and comments that is the problem, not whether they reflect good manners. Take this from an Edwards' supporter. If there is some substance, fairness and honesty to a criticsm, I'll appla