A house divided

My husband and I are approaching political estrangement over these two candidates. We're both as liberal as it possibly gets, but he wants to keep fighting the GOP until they're dead, basically, and then kick them a couple more times to make sure.

I have no problem with that, but they're doing that to themselves right now, so they don't seem to need our help.

What's dividing us is that Kevin thinks Hillary brings the big fight and Obama's all talk.

So let's talk about that.

Kevin thinks Hillary's the better fighter, the proven warrior, the one who's not only perfected the defensive game, but the one nominee who can nail the coffin shut on the neocons and put them in the ground for decades to come.  And for a 40-something guy who doesn't like his mother (issues!!), it kind of amazes me that he's rooting for Hillary.

He's taking a lot of offense to the idea that suddenly we're all going to get along, like nothing the GOP did over the last couple decades should be held accountable, like it's all water under the bridge, can't we all just along?  He thinks it's naive and ridiculous.  The GOP will never go down without a fight so brutal you do not want to be there.

And he's right.  

But me, I don't hear appeasement or surrender from Barack. He reminds me of how I felt watching the horrific coverage of Katrina - those people suffering through that insufferable event were our fellow Americans.  We are not divided.  We are all in this together.  We have more in common than we could ever imagine.  We are all going to suffer great storms, we are all going to rely on our neighbors at some point.  We have to quit wasting our time kicking dead horses and recognize the reality of our future.

Kevin wants revenge, but I want to move on.  Is this happening in anyone else's house tonight?  

•  I Want Justice

  Great big steaming piles of Justice for the criminals who have made a mockery of what this Country stands for. And those who enabled them.

  by The Baculum King on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 11:46:42 PM PDT

  •  I do too.

    I'm not quite ready either to say, okay, let's all just rise above the horrors of the Bush years and pretend like they never happened.  That's definitely not okay.  There has to be accountability.  There has be transparency, and it has to be retroactive.

    by k2winters on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 11:52:24 PM PDT

    •  You are right to say that the GOP have brought

      their demise upon themselves. But it's not enough to just declare victory (preemptive I know) and shake hands. This is where your other half is right. Those reasons for the GOP's failures need to be hammered home. Hard.

      Start from the extreme right, and work your way to the likes of Clinton. Yes I know she is a leftie, but in the last 30 years, the left has moved right. Don't stop kicking until you get to her position...

      Of course, that in itself is a 30 year plan. But if you can even get half way there, the GOP is finished as an ideology.

      That being said, TBK has a good point. All the criminals in this maladministration must be held to account (finally - most of them are retreads from the Nixon days), otherwise the infection will just fester and poison from within.

      For me, Obama is The One [cue Matrix theme].

      :D

      by Clive all hat no horse Rodeo on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 02:14:28 AM PDT

      •  that's a good point that the left has moved right

        I'm going to be using that.  Thanks.

        by k2winters on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 11:12:07 PM PDT

        •  :) you're most welcome. Sorry I didn't get

          to tip you back...

          by Clive all hat no horse Rodeo on Sun Feb 10, 2008 at 03:09:16 AM PDT

  •  Move To a Different Planet.

    Our system of government is spectacularly bad at this.

    Never, never, never, never going to happen.

    by Gooserock on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:12:18 AM PDT

    •  I Can't

      I'm not even allowed to leave the Country right now...

      by The Baculum King on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:14:31 AM PDT

  •  Not going to happen

    Neither Hillary or Obama will prosecute Bush, Cheney or anyone in the BushCo cabinet. It will never happen, take it to the bank.

    by VClib on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:22:51 AM PDT

•  I have to agree with your husband. I do

  think it is naive to believe that we can put our country back together with rhetoric, no matter how beautifully cadenced, no matter how inspirational.
  I like Barack Obama, but I do believe that his experience does not stand up at this time in our history.  When push comes to shove it will be only one person alone who will be fighting their way through our entrenched system of government and Hillary understands this , Hillary knows how to fight the good fight and come out on the other side still standing strong.

  by PamelaD on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 11:52:35 PM PDT

  •  But Hillary makes me feel so cynical.

    I'm a woman who would love to vote for a female president.  But Hillary plays everything so safe.  She hasn't done anything to inspire me.  She's the definition of "safe."  I'm a liberal feminist, but that's what she brings out in me.

    by k2winters on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:03:53 AM PDT

    •  I think there is a difference in politics between

      playing it safe and playing it smart.  She is very measured and methodical, but I don't see these as negative qualities in a President.

      by PamelaD on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:05:53 AM PDT

      •  And honestly, Obama makes me feel cynical

        His words aren't always in sync with his actions. He claims to be different ~ above political games~ and he is soooo not.  I find that disingenuous, if not dishonest.

        by PamelaD on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:10:41 AM PDT

        •  how so

          I always here people say this.. yet only one campaign has truly played dirty..

          You aren't really gong to compare the honesty of obama and hillary clinton are you?

          by Capt Morgan on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:52:18 AM PDT

          •  Both campaigns have played 'politics' equally ~

            only one campaign talks about changing the 'tone' and 'not the same old..." that is disingenuous ~ and ~ How can he cry foul re his 'Reagan' remarks being distorted/misinterpreted after what he and his surrogates did with Hillary's MLK/LBJ or Bill's fairtale remark. And the fact that you can say one campaign has played dirty?

            by PamelaD on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 05:46:54 AM PDT

  •  Wow

    I don't know where these false memes came from.. but I seriously encourage you to do some more research on barack obama..

    He's not just rhetoric or an empty suit.  IMO he's by far the most substantial canidate in the race.  Hillary is competent and a manager.. but obama is a very deep thinker, a leader and a visionary

    Read the audacity of hope.. watch the interviews on c-span.. review his legislative record.. To be honest.. obama has far more substantial legislative experience than hillary.. he's done more in the senate since 2004 than she's done in her entire career (and I dont mean that as a slam on her)

    Hillary is not going to help us face the storm to come.. this isn't her time

    by Capt Morgan on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:51:23 AM PDT

•  Kevin

  is fun, but, let's get serious.

  The only fight Hillary has to bring is one in which she may, or may not win, given the whitewater, blackwater, gennifer flowers, and other scandals which I would prefer to stay silent.

  Obama is fighting for real progress.

  The Republicans know exactly what to do in order to beat Clinton.  The Republicans will have exactly 6 months to figure out what to do against Barack Obama.  So far, I see him as the clearly obvious choice in terms of electability.

  by Yomberto on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 11:57:38 PM PDT

  •  I think that you are misreading the republicans

    I think that they are scared to death that Hillary will be the nominee.

    by PamelaD on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:01:27 AM PDT

    •  that's a very foolish statement

      It's all out there for us to see... they are scared to death of obama... I have tons of republilcan friends.. and they know exactly who our strongest canidate is (just like we know mccain was theirs)... heck some of them are planning on voting for obama.

      Why can't we see the obvious?  Obama is the strongest presidential canidate we've had in a very long time..He's not just stronger than hillary clinton.. he's stonger than bill clinton.. who is a wonderful politician.

      The republicans are PRAYING that hillary gets the nominee... they've said as much.. she is their only hance for victory

      I can give you the canidate preference for most independents in this country

      Obama - McCain - Clinton...

      It may not make sense.. but it's true

      by Capt Morgan on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:55:19 AM PDT

      •  I don't know how this can be made more obvious

        than it already is.  The Republicans are scared shitless of facing Obama in the general.  By contrast, they've been arming themselves for Hillary for year and years.

        Her supporters say it means she's "vetted".  I say it means she's "damaged goods".

        by sidwood on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 02:05:04 AM PDT

        •  And how exactly is that so obvious? If they are

          so afraid of Obama - why do they praise him so profusely ?  Why do they say ~"We don't know how to beat him?"  They know that they cannot beat Clinton.

          by PamelaD on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 05:53:44 AM PDT

    •  disagree wholeheartedly

      In 2004, I listened to various Rethugs insist that they couldn't wait to run against Howard Dean if he was the nominee.  In the meantime, the Club for Growth swiftboaters were putting out horrible ads about him in Iowa.  Why?  Because he was a HUGE threat to Bush's reelection.  Until the 'scream that never was,' Dean was changing the political landscape.

      I rarely hear the Republicans going overboard with their desire to run against Hillary.  What I DO hear is a laundry list of past Clinton scandals (whether real or imagined) that will be used against her vociferously in the G.E.

      When it comes to Obama, it's a mixed bag.  Some of the Republican talking heads (Bill Bennett, Joe Scarborough, etc) say "I'D NEVER VOTE FOR HIM because I don't believe in his policies, but man - this guy is inspirational and could possibly win." There are others who say "I'd never vote for him because he's the most liberal Democrat in the Senate, but he really transcends that because of his charisma and speechifying."  (Which means it's all either faction of the Republican party can come up with).  I haven't heard any of the Rethug talking heads - not the more moderate OR the 'true wingers' saying anything negative about Obama except for the whole "inexperienced and liberal" tags.  And call me naive, but I think a lot of them actually have an admiration for Obama because he's managed to take on the Clintons - without even having to spend billions of dollars trying to dig up imaginary dirt on them (a la Ken Starr) - and keep this thing close.  

      I definitely think they're more afraid of him than Hillary in the general.  And the worst part is, if McCain goes nasty against Obama, (or if any of his surrogates do), they run the risk of looking racist if the attacks are based on anything but Obama's voting record and/or experience (sorry to bring the whole race card in, but you see how well it worked for Bill Clinton right before So. Carolina. Can you imagine the backlash if the Republicans tried pulling it?).

      And because Obama has pretty much stayed above the fray and tried to return some sense of civility to politics, the Republicans will also suffer the "PR War" if they start going all negative. (The perception is that McCain has also run along more positive lines... apparently America is just hungry for some type of reconciliation and healing... can you imagine that?).

      Now in the general election, that might all change.  But at this point, if the Republicans try to smear Obama - with nothing more to go on other than the fact he's one of the dreaded 'libruls,' they'll lose.  If they choose to go after Hillary with guns 'a blazing, they could still win - primarily because it won't be perceived the same.  We're used to the Clintons being the target of the "vast right-wing conspiracy."  It will just seem like the Clintons and the Republicans are picking up the game where they left off in 2000.  And unfortunately, there's enough REAL ammo amidst all right-wing bs, to make honesty and trust HUGE factors in the general.  McCain has the aura of being the truth and honesty candidate, whether it's true or not.  If you took a poll of who Americans thought was more honest and trustworthy - Hillary Clinton or John McCain - I don't think there's even a question who would win that poll by a landslide.  Like I said, perception is everything.

      The Republicans won't have nearly half that advantage, however, if Obama is our nominee. I think his being young and somewhat new to the world stage actually works in our favor against McCain. Obama is inspirational.  He talks about uniting a very divided country.  His charisma is undeniable.  And he's BRILLIANT. AND he's not a Clinton or a Bush.  

      Just my $.02

      by chelle in mo on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 05:45:27 AM PDT

  •  Hey, you don't have to convince me.

    Kevin's been a democrat his entire life.  He's leaning toward Clinton this year while I'm definitely caucusing for Obama on Saturday in Washington State.  I posted this diary because apparently the democrats are split 50-50 nationwide, and they certainly are in my house.

    by k2winters on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:12:52 AM PDT

    •  My best friend

      is for Hillary.

      Luckilly, he could not vote, as he is a canadian citizen.

      There is not much more to be said, aside from the idea that Hillary supporters are delusional.

      Good day.

      by Yomberto on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:17:33 AM PDT

      •  Oh, let's not call them delusional.

        Please? Otherwise they get to call us a cult, and I don't care for that too much.

        by scardanelli on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:28:52 AM PDT

      •  I don't they're delusional at all.

        I think Hillary supporters have valid arguments.  She's got the experience and she knows what she's up against, no one can deny that.  

        Yet when Edwards dropped out, Kev and I had to chose new teams.  He moved to Hillary to continue the fight and I moved to Barack because I want something different.  That's where we are here in k2winters' house.

        by k2winters on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:31:38 AM PDT

        •  The only

          counter-argument I would make with respect to experience is that, she spent years on the board of Walmart after Bill passed NAFTA, her main years of experience apparently came before Bill was president, (if during then it's questionable what role she played and/or whether we can blame her for mistakes Bill may have made) and her 6 years in the senate which she ran primarily in order to have clout to run for the presidency were marked with voting for the Iraq war and voting for Kyl-Lieberman.  Bottom line, if Kevin thinks she has a free pass to the presidency he's unfortunately mistaken.

          by Yomberto on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:49:02 AM PDT

          •  She was on the board at Wallmart when?

            While Bill was president?  hmmmmm

            by crazyshirley2100 on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:53:46 AM PDT

            •  You are correct

              it was 86-92.  Before Bill's presidency.  I stand corrected.

              by Yomberto on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:07:44 AM PDT

          •  You're helping me make my case.

            I think she's too entrenched, too establishment to be able tout herself as the "change" candidate just because she's a woman.  That's how I feel.  

            Kevin doesn't think she's got a free pass by any means.  He thinks she's been preparing for this fight for over a decade and is ready for whatever they throw at her.  He doesn't think Obama's even going to know what hit him.

            I'm not trying to stir up candidacy shit here - this conversation is truly ongoing between two liberals who love their country and each other - I just wondered what was going on everyone else's homes.

            by k2winters on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:06:05 AM PDT

            •  Well

              It's going to be close with Clinton.  Obama, on the other hand, is doing something historic.  I truly believe he can get Republicans and independents on board this election.  He's an inspiring speaker, and he's got a clean record.  I can't speak to the same for Clinton.  I think it's great that a woman is running for president, but I just think she is the wrong woman.

              by Yomberto on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:13:51 AM PDT

            •  Any Democrat elected

              is going to bring change to this government.
              I like Obama's vision of change and hope, but I just don't think it's realistic to expect that after all these years of fighting, the Republicans are going to roll over like submissive dogs.

              by skohayes on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 04:36:36 AM PDT

        •  The experience myth

          The fact is hillary does not have much experience

          She's accomplished very little as a senator.. Obama has been in elected office longer and authored more bills than clinton has ever voted on.

          Can you name one substantial piece of legislation that clinton authored and got enacted?

          I can name severl for obama... ethics-reform being #1

          by Capt Morgan on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:56:58 AM PDT

  •  Good idea to stay silent

    The Clintons were exonerated in the Whitewater investigation. Gennifer Flowers? - is Hillary tarnished by her husband's sexual escapades? Or do you really think Bill and Hillary are one and the same person?

    It's a pity that right-wing smears are taken as truth here of all places.

    by denise b on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:16:01 AM PDT

    •  Well

      for the record I never believed those things against Bill Clinton.  On Hillary's side, whether they are true or not is somewhat irrelevant.  The Republicans have something to run against her (some of it is, in fact true, I have seen it with my own lying eyes during this primary) and there is little or no evidence that they have any significant dirt on Obama yet, although I expect them to have some smears against him, as well.

      by Yomberto on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:22:54 AM PDT

      •  They didn't have dirt on John Kerry

        so they made shit up.
        Whether they have any real "dirt" on Obama is irrelevant.

        by skohayes on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 04:38:27 AM PDT

•  I wrote something about this earlier...

  I don't think the purpose of a presidential election is to elect a president who will punish the supporters and enablers of the previous administration; I think the purpose of a presidential election is to select the person who will be best for the country. That doesn't mean electing the candidate who will govern Democrats better if one is a Democrat, or who will govern Republicans better if one is a Republican. It doesn't mean electing a candidate who will declare a 51% victory a mandate, and proceed to preside in tyranny. This back and forth bickering only serves to further divide the country, and make it ever more difficult to pass legislation that will truly drive this country forwards. It hasn't worked for eight years, and the thought of electing someone to refight tired battles and govern in vengeance strikes me as a poor solution to the problems we face as a nation. I want a leader to govern the entire country, enact progressive policies, and drive this country forwards, not backwards.

  My two cents.

  by haruki on Thu Feb 07, 2008 at 11:59:22 PM PDT

  •  And you think that will happen without a fight?

    by PamelaD on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:02:21 AM PDT

    •  I think it's more likely

      if half of the country and half of the legislators in congress don't see our president charging at them with a broadsword. I really think the only way we're going to be able to move forward as a nation is if we show people how much better things can be with a Democratic president, instead of spending four years trying to posthumously destroy the Bush cabal. The more we do that, the more divided the country becomes, and the longer it takes to get anything done. Revenge is a poor reason to elect a president, and a very good way to usher in an equally vindictive president on the opposite side when the 50% of the country president 1 alienates decides to play payback four years down the line.

      We can do better. I believe we can, which is why I'm for Obama.

      by haruki on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:26:25 AM PDT

  •  We Turned the Other Cheek in '92

    Bill Clinton refused to go after the criminals of  the Bush I Administration, and gave us Cheney and Rumsfeld and their ilk.

    If Republicans don't learn that criminality that harms this Country WILL be punished they will just lay in the weeds and wait their chance. Again.

    by The Baculum King on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:03:56 AM PDT

    •  I don't think we can blame Clinton's failing to

      spend his first (or second) terms haranguing Bush I for Bush II; if anything, I'd say the polarization at the end of Clinton's term (between people for him, and those against him) was the biggest factor in W's election. Four years later, the country was even more divided, but 1st time voters for W, deeply distrustful of Democrats, were just as eager to elect W again. Eight years later, we've got a chance to hop on the vengeance bandwagon again, and further turn this into a red-blue country, or try something different, and show a lot of red-people how much better the country can be when they try blue. I'd rather try that. Vengeance (that cheating slimeball!) made Clinton a liability in '00, which meant Gore keeping his distance, which meant Bush winning the election. Vengeance (9/11! 9/11!) got us into Iraq, which we have yet to leave. Somehow, what was supposed to be a Gore presidency turned into an eight-year Bush presidency. Vengeance doesn't work; it just sets us up for another huge fall. If we spend eight years attacking and arresting Republicans under a future Democratic administration, we will pave the way for another eight years with a Republican president.

      We can do better than that. We can't spend forever trying to avenge ourselves against Republicans; our best interests are to deplete their voter base by showing Republicans Democrats aren't the enemy, but simply people with a lot of good ideas for the country.

      by haruki on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:34:51 AM PDT

      •  That's why we MUST elect Obama

        People who haven't read his writings.. don't understand what he is about.. it's not necessarily about compromising with republican lawmakers...

        Obama will show the republican voters themselves.. that our way is better....

        Once you wake up the republican sheep voters.. their masters lose their power

        Look at what's happened to the limbaughs and hannitys of the world?  They've been completey marginalized because their principles have been shown to be intellectually bankrupt.

        This is our chance to capture these republicans who feel betrayed and are lost in the wilderness.. .Obama offers that chance.. Hiilary will regalvanize them against us

        by Capt Morgan on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:06:23 AM PDT

        •  That's why we MUST elect Obama

          HIS WRITINGS? THE GUY IS AN EMPTY SUIT. THEY ASKED A FOCUS GROUP WHAT OF OBAMA'S ACCOMPLISHMENTS WOULD MAKE THEM VOTE FOR HIM, THE FIRST ONE SAID SHE DID NOT KNOW OF ANY. THE SECOND ONE SAID SHE WOULD PASS. THE THIRD ONE SAID HE WOULD VOTE FOR HIM BECAUSE HE WAS BLACK. WHO ARE THE SHEEP? THE ONLY REASON HE WILL GET ELECTED IS BECAUSE PEOPLE WILL NOT KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT HIM, THANKS TO THE MEDIA DROOLING ALL OVER HIM AND GIVING HIM A PASS ON HIS SO-CALLED 'POLICIES'.

          by BLUE AVENGER on Tue Feb 12, 2008 at 08:39:27 PM PDT

    •  Clinton wasn't progressive

      Clinton sold us out on a lot of things also

      NAFTA, DMCA.. etc. etc

      by Capt Morgan on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:01:39 AM PDT

      •  Wouldn't that be called "compromise"?

        Why is it "selling out" when Clinton works with the republicans, but Obama does the same thing and it's called "change" and "a new way of politics"?

        by skohayes on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 04:42:03 AM PDT

•  The best revenge is educating the American public

  Transparency + knowledge = we win

  by FrostyKotex on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:04:59 AM PDT

  •  Sure it Is, Which Is Why the Vast Corporate

    comunication system is protected from the people by the parchment-era rights of press and speech.

    You can sooner deliver the Moon to the nearest star than inform the American public under our Framers' system.

    by Gooserock on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:21:37 AM PDT

    •  You figured out what's up

      I have faith that the rest of the American people can too.

      by FrostyKotex on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:27:54 AM PDT

•  Moving on is the best revenge.

  There's no question in my mind that Obama wants to nail that coffin shut - the difference is, he'll do it with a smile on his face, and with most of America seeing it, not as an act of political warfare, but as something that just makes good practical sense.

  What a lot of people dismiss as his rhetoric - as if this longtime community activist and Harvard Law graduate knows nothing but pretty words - has the power to bring about a change in political sensibility more devastating to the right than anything Hillary can hope to achieve. IMO. Not all fights have to be won head on.

  by scardanelli on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:13:07 AM PDT

  •  exactly

    The idea of "new politics" vs. "old politics" is his best idea. One of our biggest mistakes has been to legitimize our opponents' ridiculous ideas by engaging in binary debate and thinking we can out fight them. When you argue with a fool it becomes difficult for an observer to tell you apart. All this has done is muddy the water and allowed the repubs to get the American people to vote against their self interest. When we go on tv and argue with them, we legitimize them as our equals. When they come with their tax cuts for the rich bullshit and 100 year occupation we need to shake our heads and chuckle about them engaging in the old politics. Note, the repub are great at doing this: "unhinged" "anti-American" "bush derangement syndrome" etc.

    by FrostyKotex on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:20:41 AM PDT

    •  And be ready for the press

      Have you noticed the mutterings from our ever fickle press in the last couple of days?  Obama is starting to be taken seriously.  He may well emerge as the official front runner after Saturday.  

      The GOP is starting to ratchet up the slime and the media whores will happily dish it out because slime sells.  So get ready for the attack on his strengths.  

      The mutterings of cultism are harbingers of what is to come.

      by crazyshirley2100 on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:29:33 AM PDT

      •  oh, I don't know.

        When the New York Times managed to headline their super Tuesday article "In Vote, Obama Fell Short of Fervor" after he outperformed every expectation and won 13 states, I think we still have a while before we risk being taken seriously...

        by scardanelli on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:33:49 AM PDT

        •  Marginalizing is part of the game

          For right now, keeping the Democrats fighting over the nomination is good for the media and good for the GOP.

          by crazyshirley2100 on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:44:05 AM PDT

      •  I hope they do

        I am eager to see what happens.

        by FrostyKotex on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:38:51 AM PDT

  •  AND

    Obama will get the greatest revenge of all... he will turn their supporters against them.. and build an entire new generation of progressives

    by Capt Morgan on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 03:00:57 AM PDT

•  I am voting for Obama

  But will vote for Clinton without a thought if she gets the nod.  I believe both will fight like hell for us.  

  My parents voted opposite many elections.  It did not kill them and they were married for 40 years and 1 day when we lost my Dad to cancer.  

  The thing you have to do is not buy into the rhetoric of my way or the highway.  If Obama wins, great.  If Obama (or Clinton) remains in the Senate, or takes the vp slot, great.

  We will not lose either Obama or Clinton as advocates for the Democratic party over this election.  

  Just remember to vote your heart and love your husband enough to let him vote his.

  by crazyshirley2100 on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:24:27 AM PDT

•  The only thing my family CAN agree on

  is that we want Obama. I'm serious. My Wife and I and my three Sons will fight over what color of garden hose to buy. Big damned fights!

  What to name the new cat? We'll slam doors and yell about that.

  Obama as the next President of the United States?

  Peace in the valley!

  by Fishgrease on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:34:32 AM PDT

  •  Wow, enjoy your political contentment

    because it ain't happening in my house. We're off tomorrow to the WA state caucuses as a family so that I can register for Obama and so that Kevin can register for Clinton, and we're bringing our 3 sons along so that they can register their complete and utter boredom.

    by k2winters on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 11:34:46 PM PDT

•  Obama is an excellant fighter.

  His message of inclusion is a clever and somewhat deceptive tactic. On one hand he gives his political opponents nothing to attack. He doesn't insult them nor does he sound the battle cry. On the other hand he quietly opens the door to the very people who give his opponents power...voters. Some of the most conservative friends I have love the guy. Like Reagan did with Reagan Democrats, he is able to bring them in and put to use their support. I believe that if Obama get the nomination he will win the general by 10% and his coat tails will bring in a great many Democrats down ticket. At that time he will offer Republicans inclusion as in, This is what we are going to do. Do you want to get on board or do you want to get run over? Of coarse he'll be very nice about it and give them lots of love when they make the right choice.

  by crystalboy on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 12:35:48 AM PDT

  •  YES YES YES

    You understand.. I think people really underestimate obama and don't fully understand what he is doing.. this isn't about capitulation or kumbayah.. he knows that the biggest problem with the left is that we suck at SELLING our ideas..

    Obama knows how to sell our ideas... he's turning republicans into liberals and they don't even realize it yet..

    Instead of smashing heads.. he's disarmed and outflanked them

    by Capt Morgan on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 02:59:24 AM PDT

•  I supported the fighter

  when the fighter was Edwards.  Now I support the guy who will help us fight local battles by turning out young people who vote our way.

  by cjallen on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:12:59 AM PDT

•  Not a fighter? Look at how far Obama has

  come in such a short time. And remind your husband of that.

  Obama is doom for the conservative movement. Hillary is a shot in the arm. You don't fight fire with fire, you fight fire with water.

  by SleepingWillow on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:32:06 AM PDT

•  How can anyone say Obama isn't a fighter

  after seeing him come so far in such a short time?

  by SleepingWillow on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:36:28 AM PDT

•  It's happening in my head. /nt

  by opendna on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 01:37:08 AM PDT

  •  Me too. nt.

    by k2winters on Fri Feb 08, 2008 at 11:37:21 PM PDT