Daily Kos

HRC Supporter says--Enough is enough!

Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 12:41:10 AM PDT

As a moderate Democrat, I have supported HRC since the early days of the campaign. I think a review of the few diaries that I have written will confirm this.

It was a difficult decision--I agonized over the decision for quite some time. I liked both candidates. Nearly all of my friends are huge BO supporters.

Still, I questioned the experience factor and came down in favor of HRC just barely.

Now I say...

Enough is enough

I am thoroughly convinced that BO will be the Democratic nominee and that it is vital to put the interests of the American people first and foremost--certainly above the individual aspirations and ambitions of a candidate, whether that be HRC or anyone else for that matter.

With each passing week, HRC is simply laying out the groundwork that the GOP will be following. To those who argue the contrary, I would simply state: one way to win a political argument is to engage in the "Big Lie." History is replete with disingenuous political figures who were able to captivate the public with repeating a big lie multiple times over and over again until the lie permeates the conscience.

This is what is now occurring. By openly questioning and attacking the patriotism of BO, HRC is unwittingly stating arguments which can only be given strength by the neo cons who are surrounding JM. In fact--her arguments are providing the essence of the GOP and their 527's swift boat goons with sound bites.

Is BO the perfect candidate?

There is no such thing.

Is his campaign perfect?

There are flaws in every campaign.

The last straw--the one that broke the camel's back--was HRC's comments castigating Democratic activists.

Mrs. Clinton--I am one of those activists. I stood by your husband even at the height of his impeachment. I stood by when the GOP took over Congress during his first mid-term election.

And I stood by you even though the writing has been on the wall the past few months that BO was riding a tidal wave and this just was not in the cards for you.

I stood by you when President Clinton engaged in tactics which appeared to inject race into this campaign. I argued with my friends and others that this was simply magnified by the media and by a skilled BO campaign.

But now you have attacked my brothers and sisters--men and women who also stood by President Clinton. Men and women that made it possible for him to win two terms. Men and women who came forth with their hearts, their sweat and their pocket books to support him during the darkest days of his political career.

Perhaps this is only fitting.

I for one implore the people of Pennsylvania to end this charade. It is time for the Democratic Party to do everything possible to ensure that we do not face Bush's third term.

It is vital that we do everything to preserve the lives of our troops--to reunite them with their families.

It is vital that we punch back at the GOP and their 527's who are already getting their ads together to smear and tarnish the reputation of BO, whose only sin was to aspire to a political position that has been coveted also by a former first lady.

There are no coronations in America.

Being married to a president does not entitle one to take his role. This is not a monarchy. This is a democracy.

This is a land where a child whose father deserted can grow up to become the first AA editor of the Harvard Law Review and can become President of the United States.

Sorry for the rambling message.

I have a lot that has built up inside of me for the past several months.

I now feel like the weight of the world has been lifted from my shoulders.

Mrs. Clinton--please do your country the best service you could have ever imagined.

Work for the defeat of a Bush third term.

Stop smearing a truly decent man destined to be President of the United States.

This former HRC supporter says quite simply what my mother used to say to my brothers and sisters when we used to act up--

Enough is enough

Tags: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, swiftboating, MoveOn, 2008, President, Recommended (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 466 comments

  •  It's a great Obama ad. (252+ / 0-)

    Recommended by:
    Paolo, pundit, Mogolori, tankej, ks, TrueBlueMajority, livosh1, mattman, sara seattle, Psyche, billlaurelMD, kpardue, sharbutt, GayHillbilly, Bexley Lane, blksista, bethcf4p, malc19ken, anotherCt Dem, Cassandra77, sfgb, mellowinman, highacidity, jaysunb, sgilman, skertso, kanuk, wishingwell, fumie, kitebro, rioduran, Brit, jdmorg, mayan, dejavu, Joe Bacon, oldjohnbrown, exiledfromTN, cosette, betson08, snakelass, onemadson, rlharry, kiss my left behind, TheJohnny, walkshills, ybruti, Ameranth, donailin, humphrey, bloomer 101, historys mysteries, Elise, CTPatriot, Mad Mom, mjd in florida, Alice Venturi, Cynical Copper, ChemBob, eaglecries, sheddhead, blue jersey mom, Cyber Kat, janew2, rb608, JavaManny, jilikins, oibme, rsr, LisainNYC, ZinZen, chiefsjen, StarkyLuv, curiousted, berko, Mother Mags, MsCasey, third Party please, SoniaS, aloha and mahalo, Clytemnestra, BlueInARedState, Kimball Cross, koNko, Samwoman, InsultComicDog, Triscula, DarkestHour, wild hair, StrayCat, agnostic, Libby Shaw, JVolvo, NY John, Potus2020, Nedsdag, Cenobyte, wargolem, means are the ends, WarrenS, RantNRaven, shaharazade, AmySmith, crystal eyes, blueintheface, Pandoras Box, GoldnI, beaukitty, pgm 01, goheelsgodems, hooper, Loudoun County Dem, oscarsmom, drmah, NovatoBon, EdSF, Wino, tbirchard, deepeco, rkelley25, mystic, MI Sooner, brentmack, GMFORD, keenekarl, Oreo, Bridge Master, citydem, skod, BasharH, sable, Casey in TN, trivium, sand805, kafkananda, Dem in the heart of Texas, John Poet, dotster, calibpatriot, puffy66, ozkid, foggycity, Rick Winrod, Johnny Rapture, Akonitum, hedgeapple, beltane, pamelabrown, pickandshovel, ankey, kyril, GWboosebag, Virginia mom, DixieDishrag, omegajew, nklein, A Man Called Gloom, StrangeAnimals, cactusflinthead, shortgirl, princess k, JCAinCLE, TennesseeGurl, jedley, Fonsia, MoNut, writerswrite, juca, gdwtch52, Discipline28, ronnied, Shhs, Moonwood, DemocraticOz, Norm in Chicago, pvlb, Partisan Progressive, Ohiodem1, txdreamer, jacurtz, Hugo101, nwodtuhs, wethepeople, teyigdhk, MingPicket, mkor7, Jenai, cultural worker, sleepyjean, Fawkes, eddie233, makanda, Night Train, T B J, BlueSky221, Kim from Pgh PA, redtex, heart4idaho, obiterdictum, Aqualad08, jarnikles, mksutherland, DClark4129, mhsteacher1, Leslie in KY, allep10, MAORCA, drlevant, TLAD, Shelley99, calalaila2008, OffHerRocker, majhula, Munchkn, marcirish, notquitedelilah, SilenceISGolden, SnowItch, RadioGirl, Brelee, Lava20, yaddab, Donise, cachola, haremoor, Tortmaster, reesespcs, zenmasterjack, jfromga, Integrity is fundamental, nancat357, independo, mahakali overdrive, MizKit, Sarahsaturn, myelinate, orangeuglad, CountyMayoDem, Wisteacher, wtguy, 3O3, gigglinggirl, ruscle, Clyde the Cat, dissertator, BetMyCitizenship, RomeyDa, ObamaManiac2008, Alohilani, chrisjp, kcandm, seattlegirl

    You hit all the right notes.  Congratulations.

    (Did I ever mention that I loathe commercials?)

    Proud member of the Cult of Issues and Substance!

    by Fabian on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 12:43:15 AM PDT

    •  "Please do your country a service"--LOL (41+ / 0-)

      I don't think the concept exists in the mind of Hillary and those allied with her, especially at the most top levels of government and her campaign.

      It's all about HER, HER, HER, and her ambition, with the interests of the country coming a distant third.  (Second, after herself, of course, will be the interests of her corporate contributors.)

      Do your country a service?  That's a doozy of a laugher as far as HRC is concerned.  She is constitutionally incapable of any such thing so long as her personal ambition is on the line.

      •  No it is all about... (10+ / 0-)

        her opinion that she is the only candidate who can save the Democrats against John McBush...you may disagree but that is her heartfelt and patriotic POV

        Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

        by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:18:16 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Then she is deluded (54+ / 0-)

          Who is HIllary to tell the entire country what to believe?  We were sucked into their family dramas that damaged the country for 8 years.  She may believe she's the only answer; but that kind of hubris is frightening, delusional and without the judgment that would make her a competent president.  

          We all believe things -- we don't drag the country through the mud with us.  It's now painfully clear that that is what they did in the '90's and are doing it again.  

          It has to stop.  Please.  

          •  You mean... (4+ / 0-)

            Recommended by:
            joejoe, drmah, GMFORD, DixieDishrag

            bringing the country out of recession and creating the best economy and having the largest surplus in our century...yea that was awful.../snark

            Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

            by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:57:01 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

                •  Gore crippled Gore's candidacy... (5+ / 0-)

                  if Gore was 1/2 the man he was today he would have won 40 states...he was his own worst enemy...

                  Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                  by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:16:49 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  that's a load of malarkey (28+ / 0-)

                    for a much clearer view on why Al Gore did not serve as the 43rd president, get yourself to the archives at DailyHowler.com ... you'll understand better that the performance you saw from the Mouse network last wednesday wasn't an abberation, but merely standard discourse

                    The next fantasy: Obama/Dean (please let it be)

                    by wystler on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:39:03 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I have read all of those analyses... (3+ / 0-)

                      Recommended by:
                      bwintx, Nedsdag, DixieDishrag

                      and disagree with them...I voted for Al Gore...was on his NJ campaign volunteer...I was very involved and have first hand knowledge.  There was ancedotal evidence of some relationship between WJC's Lewinsky problem and the election, but the big reason was Gore's internal polling issues in terms of trust.

                      You can make any argument that makes you happy.  I look at Gore's internals you look at WJC's personal negatives...we disagree on what was the fundamental reason for his narrow victory.

                      When it came to election day...people voted for/against Gore not anything to do with WJC...

                      Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                      by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:44:01 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  your argument belies your claim (16+ / 0-)

                        thank you for working on Al Gore's campaign in NJ.

                        still: you're not at all familiar with Bob Sommerby's writing, are you. there's nothing much there about anecdotes, Monica, or internal polling on trust.

                        there's a wealth of information, however, documenting the failure of our media. that was the major political information pipeline for most voters then, and still, to a large extent, remains so.

                        When it came to election day...people voted for/against Gore not anything to do with WJC...

                        you're right about this, as far as you go with it. but it's how the voters received their inputs leading up to November 2000 that determined the result. (that, and a ballot design in south Florida, Ralph Nader, a scurrilous Supreme Court majority, and too many Democrats who rolled over and took what the GOP dished.)

                        so go along and remain in your own isolated world.

                        The next fantasy: Obama/Dean (please let it be)

                        by wystler on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:04:47 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Yes I saw the polling about WJC's negatives... (2+ / 0-)

                          Recommended by:
                          Alfonso Nevarez, delillo2000

                          but more important was Al Gore's negatives that is what lost the election for him...he sucessfully and incorrectly distanced himself from the WJC POTUS policy record and people did not give him credit for the great accomplishments of the WJC Presidency... Had he just said something like...I denounce WJC's personal decisions and failures but I was part of the greatest Presidency in our century of Peace and Prosperity...it would have been a different election...but instead he chose out of fear to run away from the WJC record because of WJC's personal negatives...

                          The analyses do not take into account what I believe was the biggest blunder strategically of the Al Gore campaign was campaigning on fear...not like Obama is campaiging on hope today.   The analyses that have been done do not take my POV into consideration (because they can't analyze the choices that Al Gore did not make)

                          Peace...Go Democrats!!!

                          Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                          by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:29:28 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  It was a combination of (6+ / 0-)

                            facts, he ran like Kerry afraid to be a Democrat. He listened to the 'consultants. I heard one of them say that they didn't use the L ward even though Bush like McCain, lied like a rug. The Third Way and the DLC, offer no one a choice. After he lost the real Al came out. Now there is a candidate. Why run on there play book. This time were not, and it's working.  

                            "And if my thought-dreams could be seen They'd probably put my head in a guillotine" Bob Dylan

                            by shaharazade on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:59:33 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Al Gore let the neo-cons and the press define him (4+ / 0-)

                            n/t

                            This union may never be perfect, but generation after generation has shown that it can always be perfected.

                            by Batbird on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:03:36 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  YOU are the deluded one; sheesh {N/T} (1+ / 0-)

                            Recommended by:
                            wystler

                            GWOT - Global War on Terra(-firma) - Bush's War on the Planet.

                            by grndrush on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:12:22 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                            •  Obviously... (0+ / 0-)

                              to you anyone who has a contrary opinion to yours is deluded...I do not think you are deluded...you just have a different POV to me....

                              Peace...Go Democrats!!!

                              Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                              by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:41:02 AM PDT

                              [ Parent ]

                              •  not at all, friend (0+ / 0-)

                                you've missed the point that Bob Sommerby has spent years hammering home: that the Traditional Media (a.k.a. Mainstream Media; a.k.a. So-Called Liberal Media; a.k.a. Bunch-O-Lyin'-Sack-O-Manure Pundits) created, out of thin air, "common knowledge" based on utter falsehoods

                                they're scrambling like mad to try to pull the same shit on Obama, but it's not sticking

                                you owe it to yourself, assuming you really do care to learn, to block out some time to page through Bob Sommerby's wondrous archives. until we ALL realize that the crap that Gibby and Stephie tried to pull wednesday was merely the same-old, same-old from the lazy elitist asses who direct our national discourse (which is all that most of the voting public gets still), we're still behind the 8-ball. character assassination is not a brand new toy when it comes to our prize pundits, whose own personal motivations are certainly reproachable.

                                The next fantasy: Obama/Dean (please let it be)

                                by wystler on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 11:23:02 PM PDT

                                [ Parent ]

                          •  baloney (9+ / 0-)

                            Gore wasn't campaigning on "fear". He was running on a progressive platform and populist theme ("People, not the powerful"). He was saying that the prosperity that evolved during the 90s should be expanded to reach more people (improved healthcare and in particualar covering all children, raising min wage, securing social security, etc). Those are positive/progressive messages. Please stop making   things up.

                            Bill Clinton scandal circus/fatigue did handicap Gore in many ways:

                            1. it started Gore off to double-digit deficits (15-20%)
                            1. probably because of (1), Gore's fund-raising suffered (he was out-raised by Bush significantly; $190mn to $130mn)
                            1. made it rather hard for Gore to take credit for the efforts he himself had put in to make some of those successes possible, without also carrying the scandal baggage of Clinton
                            1. made Bush/Rove "restoring honor and integrity" theme stick.

                            Bill Clinton should not have been reckless in having an affair in the whitehouse, knowing fully well that the rightwing was looking under every stone to bury him, Gore and the Democratic party.

                            While Gore and the Gore campaign made some mistakes (as does every campaign), those mistakes were mostly minor compared to the three major factors that were not of Gore's doing and which badly hampered Gore:

                            1. Clinton scandal/impeachment
                            1. Media's specious and smearing of his character
                            1. Nader factor

                            More details here.

                            Just say NO to BAYH (for VP)! Here's why!

                            by NeuvoLiberal on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 10:01:16 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                            •  He was afraid of ... (0+ / 0-)

                              taking credit for the Clinton legacy and denouncing the negative personal parts of the Clinton legacy...had he done that he would have won...in the end they thought he was an empty suit because he distanced himself so far from the Clinton administration...his strategy worked...nobody believed he had any advantage over GWB...  the 12 major factors that hampered Al Gore were:

                              1 - 10. Al Gore

                              1. Ralph Nader
                              1. WJC Issues

                              In that order...

                              He was so afraid of being tainted that he ran away...he could have faced it straight up similar to the way that Obama handled the Rev Wright issue...but he did not because he was afraid...in the end he lost because he was less like WJC than Al Gore...

                              WJC was a great fundraiser...he could have raised 30 - 40 Million for him...again fear stopped Al Gore from availing himself of that.

                              He was in charge of the re-inventing government program that saved billions of dollars but you would have never known it from his inept campaign...again fear drove that decision...

                              It was the classic as we know now fear over hope...he could have overcome all these things by separating the POTUS Clinton administration from the personal WJC and Bill would have supported that...instead he asked Bill for a virtual divorce out of fear...IMHO it would have worked...so you can quote all of the research you want but it proves nothing because Al Gore did not employ the correct strategy...

                              Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                              by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 02:35:40 PM PDT

                              [ Parent ]

                              •  Response: part 1 (2+ / 0-)

                                Recommended by:
                                wystler, Night Train

                                "He was afraid of taking credit for the Clinton legacy"

                                Clinton's "legacy" then was reflecting very poorly with WJC's horrendous favorables "as a person". Yes, WJC had high job approvals (as did Gore) but he also had miserable personal ratings and a politician in office needs to have healthy ratings on both job and personal fronts:

                                WaPo

                                1. Do you have a favorable or unfavorable impression of Bill Clinton as a person?

                                               Fav.   Unfav.   No opin.
                                10/22/00  LV      33 60        7
                                ...
                                1/26/00  34     61   5
                                ...
                                3/14/99  30 67   4

                                2000 exit polls
                                Opinion of Clinton as a Person
                                Favorable: 36%
                                Unfavorable: 60%

                                "and denouncing the negative personal parts of the Clinton legacy"

                                I don't think WJC would've liked "denunciation" from Al Gore, given that we running around gloating that a Gore presidency would be bext best thing to a Clinton third term.

                                I think the main problem Gore had was that Clinton lied to the public, wagging his finger in that "that woman, Ms. Lewinsky" rant of his. It's hard to embrace a horrible looking lie in public like that, as the Republicans would've then turned the election into a debate on Clinton's affairs and people's private parts instead of a debate on the issues.

                                Gore did mention the accomplishments of Clinton-Gore admin (such as the 22 million new jobs created etc) often.

                                "in the end they thought he was an empty suit because he distanced himself so far from the Clinton administration"

                                To the contrary, Gore has very high rating on competence (and understanding of the issue) in exit polls.

                                It's Clinton that sullied their joint administration with a tawdry sex scandal. Had Clinton not messed things up, Gore would've proudly engaged Clinton in his campaign.

                                "the 12 major factors that hampered Al Gore were:"

                                Gore overcome double digit deficits he inherited from the Clinton scandal to win the popular vote:

                                NBC/WSJ Poll

                                   Date Gore Bush

                                   12/9-12/99 39 50
                                   10/23-25/99 39 49
                                   9/9-12/99 35 52
                                   7/24-26/99 37 50
                                   6/16-19/99 36 51
                                   4/17-19/99 35 53

                                   3/4-7/99 34 52

                                   12/3-6/98 40 50
                                   10/24-27/98 40 48
                                   9/10-13/98 39 49
                                   6/18-21/98 40 44
                                   4/18-20/98 41 44

                                   9/97 45 39

                                   --------

                                   Before the Scandal (9/97): Gore by 6

                                   After the scandal/impeachment (3/99): Bush by 18

                                   Gore's loss in polls during the scandal period (1/98-2/99): 24 points against Gore

                                   Election day 2000: Gore by .5%
                                   Net improvement by Gore and his campaign from 3/99: 18.5%

                                proving that he ran pretty campaign and overcame the adverse factors of Clinton scandal, media smears and the Nader factor.

                                "He was so afraid of being tainted that he ran away"

                                He kept Clinton at bay likely because Clinton was getting 65% unfavorables as a person, and polls were clearly showing that Clinton campaigning would've hurt Gore:

                                Clinton campaign effort could hurt Gore more than help, poll suggests

                                   CNN, From staff and wire reports
                                   October 24, 2000

                                   Among independent voters, the net loss for Gore could be far greater: Gallup's survey indicated that 45 percent of independents would be less likely to vote for the vice president if Clinton were to campaign for him, while only 10 percent said they would be more likely to support Gore. Another 37 percent of independents said Clinton's efforts would make no difference.

                                If you were running for office, and someone had as bad personal ratings as Clinton did, I would strongly advise you to keep that person off your campaign trail. It seems that almost all Democrats running 2000 (except for HRC who was running in NY, and who also polled lower than Gore in NY) did keep Clinton at a distance.

                                "WJC was a great fundraiser...he could have raised 30 - 40 Million for him...again fear stopped Al Gore from availing himself of that."

                                HRC's senate campaign sucked up $30mn. I am not sure how eager WJC was to raise money for Gore instead of HRC. From Gore firing MArk Penn (who was HRC's confidant), I suspect that a lot of nonsense was going on under the surface; I suspect that HRC wasn't exactly pulling for Gore to win. Given that, it really isn't clear where WJC stood in terms of commitment to help Gore.

                                "He was in charge of the re-inventing government program that saved billions of dollars but you would have never known it from his inept campaign...again fear drove that decision..."

                                Gore did a lot of things in the C-G admin besides the RIG initiative. You're spreading false myths: while Gore kept Clinton at a safe distance, he DID talk about the accomplishments as eg here:

                                Gore @ the convention:
                                For almost eight years now, I've been the partner of a leader who moved us out of the valley of recession and into the longest period of prosperity in American history. I say to you tonight, millions of Americans will live better lives for a long time to come because of the job that's been done by President Bill Clinton.

                                (APPLAUSE)

                                Instead of the biggest deficits in history, we now have the biggest surpluses, the highest home ownership ever, the lowest inflation in a generation, and instead of losing jobs, we now have 22 million good new jobs, higher family incomes.

                                (APPLAUSE)

                                Above all, our success comes from you the people who have worked hard for your families. But let's not forget that a few years ago you were also working hard. But your hard work then, was undone by a government that didn't work, didn't put people first, and wasn't on your side. Together, we changed things to help unleash your potential, and unleash innovation and investment in the private sector, the engine that drives our economic growth. And our progress on the economy is a good chapter in our history.

                                (APPLAUSE)

                                But now we turn the page and write a new chapter. And that's what I want to speak about tonight. This election is not an award for past performance. I'm not asking you to vote for me on the basis of the economy we have. Tonight I ask for your support on the basis of the better, fairer, more prosperous America we can build together.

                                Gore struck the right balance between the record and the future, as any candidate should do.

                                "It was the classic as we know now fear over hope..."

                                Read again:

                                Gore: Tonight I ask for your support on the basis of the better, fairer, more prosperous America we can build together.

                                If that isn't hope, then I don't know what hope is.

                                "he could have overcome all these things by separating the POTUS Clinton administration from the personal WJC and Bill would have supported that...instead he asked Bill for a virtual divorce out of fear...IMHO it would have worked...so you can quote all of the research you want but it proves nothing because Al Gore did not employ the correct strategy..."

                                You seem to forget that elections involve an opponent. The Rove strategy was to employ the "restoring honor and integrity to the whitehouse" meme to subtly remind people of Clinton's extra-curricular activities. It was in fact their strategy to attack Gore hard with Clinton's scandal full-frontal, had Gore put Clinton front and center.

                                As I said, Clinton distanced himself from playing a helpful role in Gore's bid (after having benefited from Gore's help in winning in 1992, and Gore's hard work thereafter) with his lie to the American public:

                                Just say NO to BAYH (for VP)! Here's why!

                                by NeuvoLiberal on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 03:07:42 PM PDT

                                [ Parent ]

                                •  Response to your response... (0+ / 0-)

                                  I don't think WJC would've liked "denunciation" from Al Gore, given that we running around gloating that a Gore presidency would be bext best thing to a Clinton third term.

                                  This is where we have a differing opinion...WJC was great a capartmentalizing things, if Gore had been bold and talked to him about it he would understand...if anything WJC is not stupid and would have done what was politically expedient.  But Al Gore the wimp did not have the forethought and cajones to even ask...

                                  in the end they thought he was an empty suit because he distanced himself so far from the Clinton administration"

                                  To the contrary, Gore has very high rating on competence (and understanding of the issue) in exit polls.

                                  Partially true, everyone knew that Al Gore was intelligent but in the end nobody trusted him to continue the successful policies of the Clinton presidency because of is communication style and distancing from WJC...

                                  9/97 45 39

                                  This is an often quoted number from 1997 which is just a beauty contest over 2 years before the primaries...that is pretty weak evidence.  There are many reasons for that meltdown...that have nothing to do with WJC and more to do with GWB getting more name recognition for 1 thing and Al Gore going out on the stump by himself and acting stiff and gaffing all over the place.  I don't buy the tenious relationship there that is often quoted.

                                  He kept Clinton at bay likely because Clinton was getting 65% unfavorables as a person, and polls were clearly showing that Clinton campaigning would've hurt Gore:

                                  He never tried the Obama Rev Wright approach because of fear over hope.  What is Rev Wrights personal ratings?  Had he taken the brave Obama approach it would have worked out much differently...but we will never know...it worked for Barack...

                                  CNN, From staff and wire reports
                                    October 24, 2000

                                    Among independent voters, the net loss for Gore could be far greater: Gallup's survey indicated that 45 percent of independents would be less likely to vote for the vice president if Clinton were to campaign for him, while only 10 percent said they would be more likely to support Gore. Another 37 percent of independents said Clinton's efforts would make no difference.

                                  So what this is another fear over hope...Barack's brave and great response to Rev Wright instead of running away from him because of his low ratings he made a great speach and moved on.  The Al Gore of today would have made 1 bold speech denouncing the behavior and saying that the stakes are too high to jepordize everything we have done due to a personal failure...and it is not my personal failure it is his.  My marriage to Tipper is strong.  Bill and Hillary will work out theirs now lets talk about what is important to this country...Get the idea...instead he sneaked around the issue afraid to even talk about it.

                                  HRC's senate campaign sucked up $30mn. I am not sure how eager WJC was to raise money for Gore instead of HRC. From Gore firing MArk Penn (who was HRC's confidant), I suspect that a lot of nonsense was going on under the surface; I suspect that HRC wasn't exactly pulling for Gore to win. Given that, it really isn't clear where WJC stood in terms of commitment to help Gore.

                                  WJC said publically on several ocassions and I take him at his word that he would have done anything Al Gore wanted him to do...but he felt pushed away...again it all comes back to the failed big picture strategy of being bold instead of campaigning from fear...the Obama approach of dealing with Rev Wright.  Hillary was her own fundraising machine...she was in no mood to have WJC around at that time...that is a non-issue.

                                  Gore @ the convention:

                                  Al Gore's convention speach was the highlight of his campaign it was a great and bold speach that I was proud of and almost pulled it off in terms of winning the presidency by enough margin...no argumen there...but that was to little too late...that was the bold speach that he needed 6 months earlier to knock the Monica stuff out of his campaign so he could be bold with the nation...

                                  Before the convention speach he tried to be too much Al Gore and not enough continuation of the C-G presidency.

                                  Gore did a lot of things in the C-G admin besides the RIG initiative. You're spreading false myths: while Gore kept Clinton at a safe distance, he DID talk about the accomplishments as eg here:

                                  Agreed, I was just citing a specific example, it was not intended to be all inclusive of Al Gore's accomplishments.

                                  Gore: Tonight I ask for your support on the basis of the better, fairer, more prosperous America we can build together.

                                  Again great convention speach...no argument there...my issue is that his fear over hope should have been much earlier in terms of facing the WJC personal failings head on like Obama did with Rev Wright...not that he was not full of hope at the convention.  Prior to that he had so many gaffs and caracetures that it was too late to change things around...although he almost did.  And he had spent the last 6 months running away from WJC instead of embracing him and denouncing the bad things...so when he took credit at the convention it was hard to pull back independents.  

                                  Finally, the selection of Lieberman and his wife's going against the music industry for lyrics pushed many progressives to consider Nader...even though the reason for Liberman was to win FL...probably a wash at the end of the day...but it probably did not help in TN and AR where they did not appreciate an East Coast Jewish VP that much...

                                  You seem to forget that elections involve an opponent. The Rove strategy was to employ the "restoring honor and integrity to the whitehouse" meme to subtly remind people of Clinton's extra-curricular activities. It was in fact their strategy to attack Gore hard with Clinton's scandal full-frontal, had Gore put Clinton front and center.

                                  Well not exactly...the Rove playbook is to put as much dirt on your opponent to define him/her in a negative way...which they primarily did with the stiff/I invented the internet crap.  Secondly, they introduced substantial doubt that he would be able to continue the success of the C-G administration which was made much easier by the virtual divorce of Al Gore from WJC prior to the convention due to fear of polls...The integrity was Al Gore's personal integrity remember the "Monk fundraising scandall"?  All these things added up to providing enough doubt to allow them to say, hey we have someone different just vote for GWB he is not that scary...

                                  As I said, Clinton distanced himself from playing a helpful role in Gore's bid (after having benefited from Gore's help in winning in 1992, and Gore's hard work thereafter) with his lie to the American public:

                                  Disagree with that characterization...Gore Distanced himself from WJC out of fear...WJC would have been fine with carpmentalizing and working with Al Gore on areas that he could have helped on...but Al Gore chose to wear that albatross instead of dealing with it straight on like the successful fearless strategy of Barack Obama in the potential Rev Wright scandall..

                                  That is what I mean that the Al Gore of today would have dealt with the situation much differently and would have won a 40 state victory...by being bold and unconventional...like he is today...

                                  Peace...Go Democrats!!!

                                  Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                                  by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:58:14 PM PDT

                                  [ Parent ]

                      •  "Trust"? Uh, it was the media, spoonfed by the (0+ / 0-)

                        RNC, that slandered Gore as some serial liar based on false and purposefully misconstrued statements regarding the Internet.  That, and so much more as been throughly documentedat the Daily Howler.

                        Do you know anything except bullshit pushed by the Reich Wing and Corporate owned Media?  A media that portrayed Bush as some "'compassionate conservative' good 'ol boy from Texas that you would want to have a beer with"!!  At the same time, blasting Gore on lies about his real, vital and critical, role in the internet!  Whining about him wearing a brown suit!  Bitching that he was too cerebral, too intelligent!    Mocking him for trying to protect Social Security with the concept of a "Lockbox"!

                        Even with all that, and the Nader factor fucking up a few states, he really did win Florida.  It was stolen by the worst Supine Court decision in history, a decision they knew to be so foul, so wrong, so unlawful that they stated it not be used as stari decisis in future cases!!

                        Now, could Gore have done things better?  Sure, but hindsight is 20/20, afterall.  Is Gore an even better, wiser, more capable, more beloved man today?  Certainly.  Regardless, his campaign was fine to beat Bush, and it did.  You may have worked on Gore's campaign, but it appears you knew jack-shit about him!!

                        You don't negotiate with fascists, you defeat them in the name of democracy. --Ambr. Joe Wilson

                        by FightTheFuture on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 05:02:49 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                    •  Disney needs to be put on notice (1+ / 0-)

                      Recommended by:
                      brcr29

                      Since they decided to get in to the foray of big people programming (can't even say adult programming anymore - porn took that over)  They need to know that what they allow ABC to do could affect Mickey!  I for one have stopped my purchase of disney product and will continue to do so until a formal apology comes-- guess i cancel that trip to Disneyland too.

                      They need to hear from us Dems - Clinton and Obama supporters alike - that was NOT journalism.  A Hard questions would've been for both of them.  Specifics on how they're going to pay for this healthplan and all the other stuff they're proposing.  How are they going to get the economy back on track and what makes them think their ideas will work.  THOSE ARE TOUGH QUESTIONS -not the idiotic lapel pin and "characaturization" of Rev. Wright.

                      •  Me too!!!!!!! (0+ / 0-)

                        I totally agree about boycotting A.B.C and Disney.I am boycotting them and have sent email telling them why.If every Democrat would boycott both of them they would apologize.

                        Anybody want to drink a cold one with Bush now?

                        by brcr29 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:28:34 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                    •  this article really opened my eyes (0+ / 0-)

                      Politics is like driving. To go backward, put it in R. To go forward, put it in D.

                      by TrueBlueMajority on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:29:02 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  No, Gore's worst enemies in '00 (25+ / 0-)

                    were the MSM, led prominently by SNL. Once you've been painted as "lying, sighing, wooden, tree-hugging... [etc.]" in one hit-job after another (including, IIRC, a particularly damning Frontline just a week or two before the election), it's hard to win. It's even more difficult if you have to carry the baggage of your boss having been unable to keep his damn pants zipped in the Oval Office.

                    And, uh, the shenanigans in Florida and Ralph Let-Me-Just-Throw-A-Bomb-Into-This-Election-And-See-What-Happens Nader do come into this conversation somewhere.

                    Was Gore's candidacy perfect in '00? Of course not. As the diarist says of Obama's '08 run, there is no such thing as a perfect candidate. Was Gore '00 his own worst enemy? No way.

                    Electing conservatives is like hiring a carpenter who thinks hammers are evil.

                    by bwintx on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:03:20 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  And the Shrum Curse. (10+ / 0-)

                      Seriously. The moment I found out that Bob Shrum (a terrific primary consultant and speechwriter) was onboard for Kerry I knew we were screwed.

                      I do blame Gore for taking the advice to turn himself into whatever the focus groups said he needed to be. It was ridiculous. He never appeared comfortable in his own skin until it was all over. Same with Kerry for that matter.

                      At least Obama has a sure sense of himself and will not (I hope) allow anyone "help" shape his image in the general.

                      News Pundits - The Dopplerless weathermen of our time. Jon Stewart

                      by mentaldebris on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:36:52 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  That is Al Gore's fault for not... (0+ / 0-)

                      properly managing the MSM and he let these misconceptions fester and become reality...the MSM will do what the MSM will do...the candidates need to manage the message...

                      Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                      by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:38:47 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Aren't Clitonites whining all over (5+ / 0-)

                        the place that the media is biased against her?

                        Then, in YOUR words, isn't it Clinton's fault for not properly managing the MSM and she let these misconceptions fester and become reality...the MSM will do what the MSM will do...the candidates need to manage the message...

                        You can't play victim in HRC's case and expect Gore to have god-like powers to control everything the media did or said.

                        ~~

                        The media victim card by the Clinton campaign is specious one. The reason Clinton gets poor treatment is because:

                        1. she has run a horrible campaign, squandering 20-30% leads
                        1. she has been running a horribly negative campaign against Obama since he emerged as a serious threat to her in Nov/Dec.
                        1. she lies often and with ease, as for eg in her Tuzla/Bosnia lie.

                        Just say NO to BAYH (for VP)! Here's why!

                        by NeuvoLiberal on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 10:07:38 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Check, check, and check (5+ / 0-)

                          all three of your points are correct, neuvo.

                          Really, for all the flak Gore and Kerry got (and I did have issues with their campaign in some regards), the Clinton campaign has been far worse with regards to how their campaign has been run

                          Barack Obama for President '08

                          by v2aggie2 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 10:48:26 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  typo: should be 'Clintonites' in the title. (2+ / 0-)

                          Recommended by:
                          kyril, Night Train

                          Just say NO to BAYH (for VP)! Here's why!

                          by NeuvoLiberal on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 11:44:32 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                        •  I was talking about Al Gore not Hillary... (0+ / 0-)

                          but no doubt, strategically, Hillary has run a terrible campaign and has made a lot of tragic mistakes...

                          I am not apologizing for Hillary...just do not think she is evil and WJC is an American hero for the great work he did for our country...

                          I love both Barack and Hillary and will support either in the GE with great excitement...

                          Peace...Go Democrats!!!

                          Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                          by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 01:10:20 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I was (0+ / 0-)

                            a strong supporter of Clinton for nearly 10 years. Back then, I was proud of HRC for taking on the healthcare project but was later disappointed that she failed deliver; in retrospect, WJC should've given that project to Gore instead.

                            I supported HRC all the way until I came to know about her war/AUMF/IWR vote and came to be better informed about how the war came to take place. She was even one of my top choices for President 3 years ago. I didn't support her for 2008 after learning more about the war and the DLC, but I didn't seriously oppose her until her Kyl-Lieberman vote despite knowing how the Iraq war turned out. Then the negative and race-baiting attacks on Obama did it for me; barring a miracle, I can never be a supporter of the Clintons again.

                            If she somehow pulls off an upset and wins the nomination in a way that reflects the will of the Democratic primary voters, I will vote for her in the GE. If, on the other hand, she steals the nomination by some nefarious game playing after the votes have been cast, I am not sure what I will do in the GE.

                            Just say NO to BAYH (for VP)! Here's why!

                            by NeuvoLiberal on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 02:09:38 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                            •  I understand your POV... (0+ / 0-)

                              and I am sure others will defect in some way either way...I hope it will be a relatively small number no matter who the nominee is...

                              Peace...Go Democrats!!!

                              Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                              by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 02:39:22 PM PDT

                              [ Parent ]

                    •  Gore should have won his home state, though. (3+ / 0-)

                      Recommended by:
                      zett, historys mysteries, Up to here

                      If he had won Tennessee, he wouldn't have been stopped by Florida.  Even though Gore was victim to a media smear campaign in TN, a person running for president needs to be more effective in countering smears.

                      Neither Gore (00) nor Kerry (04) fought these smear campaigns as effectively as Obama is fighting them in this election.

                      (...Now if only Hillary would stop doing the smearing...)

                      Impeachment is a duty, not an option that can be taken off the table.

                      by bushondrugs on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:45:57 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Can't disagree with THAT one, bushondrugs n/t (1+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                        bushondrugs

                        Electing conservatives is like hiring a carpenter who thinks hammers are evil.

                        by bwintx on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 10:22:03 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  Gore was trying to win 270 electoral votes (2+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                        bushondrugs, Night Train

                        all told.

                        He had to come from behind because the Clinton's scandal handicapped him to double digit deficits nationally (and probably large ones in TN as well) and the media smears perpetrated the same. Once Gore started recovering from the convention onwards, Nader became a factor as he started threatening in must win states like WA, OR, WI, MN etc. In order to secure those must win states, Gore had to pull (he was cash-strapped compared to Bush) from states like TN, MO, WV, etc.

                        Please see here for more on the various complicating factors at play in 2000.

                        "a person running for president needs to be more effective in countering smears."

                        Barack is doing a pretty good job with the media (and in addressing smears) this time (although there are area where even his campaign can improve), but he has the benefit of hindsight from the experiences in 2000/2004, but more importantly, he has some structural advatanges that Gore didn't have:

                        1. the netroots being here (they hadn't evolved in 2000), we help in setting the record straight (and in disseminating) and getting Barack back
                        1. media itself is behaving far more responsibly (often self-correcting and self-censuring, eg Chris Wallace) and that's partly because of the netroots
                        1. internet, youtube, etc, serving as alternate outlets and channels of information and news (remember who championed/advanced the internet in the halls of government?)

                        Just say NO to BAYH (for VP)! Here's why!

                        by NeuvoLiberal on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 10:22:03 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                      •  Clinton-Gore barely won (2+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                        sharman, NeuvoLiberal

                        TN in 1996 (by a mere 2.41%, according to Wikipedia), and put more resources than they should have needed to into doing so... and that was pre-Monica/impeachment, not to mention pre-Faux News.  Tennessee is currently aligned with the old Confederacy as the GOP's home base, at least in federal elections, and will remain there for at least a couple more cycles.  

                        IOW, Tennessee's a lost cause for the time being, what with the God/guns/gays fanatics and smug suburbanites holding so much sway.  I'm going with Tom Schaller and saying that it's not really worth going after the hardcore types because it weakens us too much in more friendly areas (although of course Dems should compete hard downticket to build the party).

                        "Conservative principles" are marketing props used by the Conservative Movement to achieve political power, not actual beliefs. -Glenn Greenwald

                        by latts on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 11:02:45 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                  •  Uh... Gore won (3+ / 0-)

                    Or didn't you get the memo.   The MSM conspired to hide that fact from Americans and the Supreme Court stepped in where they have not jurisdiction (state vote counting) and stopped the election.  

                    So I guess Gore is twice the man you think he is.  

                    •  Duh. (0+ / 0-)

                      Everybody here knows Gore won. But he should have won by a much bigger margin. There are reasons why he didn't. That's what's being discussed here.

                      For an election to be stolen, first the results must be close. The results in 2000 should not have been close.

                      "Lies return." - African proverb

                      by Night Train on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 12:18:50 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Um, yeah. But that's not Gore's fault. (1+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                        FightTheFuture

                        It's squarely the fault of the American electorate. There's no avoiding it: American voters screwed up big time.

                        There were reasons. We all know them. But reasons are not excuses. There's such a thing as civic duty: voters have a responsibility to do some basic due diligence before voting. Too many of them didn't. There was no excuse for letting themselves be suckered into thinking Bush was even in the same league with Al Gore.

                        Folly is fractal: the closer you look at it, the more of it there is.

                        by Canadian Reader on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 01:40:27 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                  •  Gore in 2000 (2+ / 0-)

                    Recommended by:
                    NeuvoLiberal, Fozzie Bear

                    As a Democrat who did not vote for Al Gore in 2000, let me tell you how many of us felt.  We were so very tired of the Clinton Administration and the dishonorable way they behaved and how they wasted such a great opportunity  (e.g.health care was promised in 1992 but Hillary had no clue how to bring it about) for many changes that could have helped this country.  I knew that the Clintons would demand favors from Gore, since that's the way they are.  I didn't want them to have anything to do with the government!
                    I did vote for GWBush, and I now regret that!  At the time however I was influenced by his father.  My son was in the USMC in 1991 when the Persian Gulf war started.  GHWBush said the war would end by June (I think or May) and it did.  I felt he was an honorable man and thought his son would be too.  I also thought Al Gore was honorable, but I knew the Clintons were not. (I live in the Washington DC area, we hear a lot).  
                    Al Gore did not lose my vote, Bill Clinton did.  I hate to admit all of this, but I truly feel that Al Gore without the Clinton connection would have "won" by much more than 200,000!  I think you all should understand that I was not alone.

                  •  Gores advisors were Gores worst enemy. (0+ / 0-)

                    n/t

                    Rebuild America. Obama 08!

                    by dieharddemocrat on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 04:35:55 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Also, (0+ / 0-)

                  centralizing party power and destroying the grassroots so thoroughly so that it not only left Bill Clinton with no one to get his back in the drive to impeachment but all led to the rubber-stamp congresses of the first six Bush years so that his administration could wreak havoc on the country unobstructed and destroy our election systems and our constitution in the process.

                  And pushing for NAFTA which turned out to be a disaster.

                  And signing the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which admittedly snuck media consolidation into a huge bill, but the diastrous effects of that have lingered over our political landscape, creating an unbalanced playing field that's virtually uncorrectable. The broadcast companies are too big and powerful to care what WE think about last Wednesday's debate -- or anything else.

                  Because he was confronted with an openly hostile congress determined to destroy him, Bill Clinton was forced unto some anti-progressive moves whose damage gathered force and was magnified under Bush.

                  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 Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 12:32:52 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  In order to save the country... (3+ / 0-)

                Recommended by:
                wishingwell, bwintx, bushondrugs

                from neverending debt...he sacrificed the Democratic congress to pass the tax increase that historically balanced the budget...I would trade that in a heartbeat again...

                Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:15:44 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  sure (7+ / 0-)

                  trading those few short years that made Billy look good, for decades of ruin thanks to the legislative actions of that sacrificed congress was a great fucking idea.

                  The trick is in what one emphasizes. We either make ourselves miserable, or we make ourselves happy. The amount of work is the same." Carlos Castaneda

                  by FireCrow on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:18:55 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  If the SCOTUS had not stolen... (3+ / 0-)

                    the election the country would be in great shape now...Actually in some ways a Democratic POTUS and a narrow Republican congress can lead to balanced budgets by the Republicans helping to control spending...although at this point we need a large Democratic majority to turn around the GWB policies.

                    It did not just make WJC look good it was the best for the country...country is most important party is 2nd

                    Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                    by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 06:39:51 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Are you really saying (4+ / 0-)

                    that the 90's tax increases "made Billy look good"?  Heck, I've got my issues with Bill Clinton (NAFTA and plenty of other things), but that was just plain good, sound policy that had a direct positive effect on the nation.  And hiking taxes that way sure wasn't politically expedient.

                    That said, I don't think Hillary is all about herself.  I think in terms of what she would try to accomplish as President, and in terms of the genuine content of her character, she's top notch.  I just think she's surrounded by all these people who have led her to embrace some really wrongheaded political tactics; That's what the MoveOn bashing is about.  It's about advancing the DLC frame, and trying to win over conservatives with a stupid "I'm not one o' them Libruls!" thing.  Because these people believe that's how you win an election.

                    I hope at some point she realizes that this is NOT how you have to do politics.

                    •  my reply was directed (2+ / 0-)

                      Recommended by:
                      jimreyn, esquimaux

                      at the notion that it was a good idea to trade away congress for a few short years of a balanced budget.
                      It wasn't.

                      he sacrificed the Democratic congress to pass the tax increase that historically balanced the budget...I would trade that in a heartbeat again...

                      The trick is in what one emphasizes. We either make ourselves miserable, or we make ourselves happy. The amount of work is the same." Carlos Castaneda

                      by FireCrow on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:14:33 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Of President Obama... (0+ / 0-)

                        gave a speach to the country that said in order to balance the budget we might lose the Democratic majority in congress next election...I would support his decision as well...it is that important to me....more important than Democratic control of congress...

                        Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                        by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:34:29 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Well, that's just shortsighted. (0+ / 0-)

                          Because as soon as the Republicans took over again, they'd squander that balanced budget and then some.

                          •  In your heartfelt opinion... (1+ / 0-)

                            Recommended by:
                            Canadian Reader

                            It is the American people's fault for allowing the Republicans to squander the surplus because of greed...not WJC's fault...we cannot not do the right thing out of fear that if we get thrown out of office the other party will do the wrong thing...I thought Obama supporters did not act out of fear???

                            Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                            by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 01:07:11 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                •  It didn't work out that way (6+ / 0-)

                  because Clinton never tried to ensure that his successes would be permanent.  And within 6 months of his successor taking office, what little good Clinton managed to accomplish was easily undone.  And all that money that we worked so hard for 7 years to save...vanished into the pockets of the multibillionaires.  

                  This is what "failure of vision" looks like — along with trigger locks, school uniforms, and a "bridge to the 21st Century" — whatever that means.

                  •  That was another failure of Al Gore... (0+ / 0-)

                    he was never able to convince the American people that a balanced budget and paying off the deficit was important and a risky tax cut was a recipe for disaster...He lost that debate and the American people got fooled...WJC is not to blame for that...unless you believe that WJC is to blame for all ills of the 21st century as many of the DKos Clinton haters believe...

                    Peace...Go Democrats!!!

                    Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                    by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 07:37:03 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  As I recall... (4+ / 0-)

                      Recommended by:
                      billlaurelMD, zett, dawnt, evdebs

                      ...Gore won that election.  

                      I completely lost faith in Bill Clinton very early on, when he gave up on trying to get an economic stimulus package through Congress, but boy he still had the fire in the belly for NAFTA.  

                      It also didn't help with me that not much later he went out of his way to try and defend a despicable state initiative from Colorado designed to deprive gay people of their 14th Amendment rights.  

                      The Clintons threw me under the bus a long time ago.  I'm quite happy to see them get theirs, finally.

                      •  I agree Al Gore won... (1+ / 0-)

                        Recommended by:
                        bushondrugs

                        but not by enough to prevent the SCOTUS and Republicans from stealing it from him...

                        Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                        by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 08:42:51 AM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  that was the first time... (0+ / 0-)

                          the Republicans were so overt about it.  So he should have anticipated that they'd steal the election and won by a bigger margin?  Sheesh.

                          I suspect there's an element of truth to just about everything that's been said here about Mr. Gore's situation.

                          Political compass: -5.50 econ, -5.79 libertarian/authoritarian

                          by billlaurelMD on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 10:34:13 AM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                    •  Gore made the point about the importance (3+ / 0-)

                      Recommended by:
                      Canadian Reader, latts, zett

                      of balanced budgets and how Bush would give tax cuts to the wealthy and endanger balanced budgets, over and over.

                      However, IMO, people took the prosperity during the Clinton/Gore forgranted and assumed that the prosperity would continue forever and hence fell for the bait by Bush.

                      Just say NO to BAYH (for VP)! Here's why!

                      by NeuvoLiberal on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 10:32:31 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                •  We still have neverending debt (1+ / 0-)

                  Recommended by:
                  esquimaux

                  it's juts that now the poor and middle class will be the ones paying it all back/suffering the consequences.

                  To think that anyone remotely progressive (and excuse me if I'm incorrect in assuming you share some progressive values) could hold this POV.  It's like a parent saying watching their kids starve was a worthy sacrifice for the chance to buy an overpriced house that is now being foreclosed on.

                  "Bipartisan usually means that a larger-than-usual deception is being carried out." - George Carlin, R.I.P. (1937-2008)

                  by Alfonso Nevarez on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 09:30:01 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  That is GWB's fault and... (1+ / 0-)

                    Recommended by:
                    bushondrugs

                    Al Gore's fault not WJC's fault...

                    Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                    by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 09:30:57 AM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Bill Clinton should not have been reckless (2+ / 0-)

                      Recommended by:
                      Fixed Point Theorem, lyingeyes

                      in having sexual relations with "that woman, Ms. Lewinsky."

                      By doing so, he harmed the Democratic party.

                      Just say NO to BAYH (for VP)! Here's why!

                      by NeuvoLiberal on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 10:36:20 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  We have been through this before... (0+ / 0-)

                        I agree he should not have but disagree that is something that is horrible and takes away from his amazing accomplishments for this country during his presidency and after his presidency with the great work of his charitable foundation...

                        Obama/Whoever He Chooses '08 Winning Change for America and the Democratic Party

                        by dvogel001 on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 01:20:59 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I think that (0+ / 0-)

                          I can compartmentalize things fairly well. Give credit where due, but critique where  criticism is warranted and well-founded in facts.

                          "his amazing accomplishments for this country during his presidency"

                          Bill Clinton was a pretty good policy wonk (he had good help from many, certainly including at the top, Al Gore), but I think he (apparently based on HRC's poor advice; HRC probably brought in Dick Morris in 1994 since he was a close associate of hers in AR, apparently) took the wrong lesson from the 1994 midterms rout: he turned right and started triangulating vigorously, instead of working to rebuild the party from the ground up (as Dean would do 10 years later); that was taking the path of least resistance.

                          Hillary took that several steps further when she turned into a war hawk once getting election to senate.

                          "and after his presidency with the great work of his charitable found"

                          After all the strange stories we hear about contributions to the Clinton library and the CGI (such as the Kazhak Uranium deal, Mark Rich pardon in return for contributions to the library and HRC's senate run, etc), I am not sure what to think of the potential goings on behind the scenes on his post-presidential ventures.

                          The Clinton campaign should release contributions to both the Clinton library and the global initiative in the interest of openness and honesty.

                          Just say NO to BAYH (for VP)! Here's why!

                          by NeuvoLiberal on Sat Apr 19, 2008 at 02:23:28 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  'once getting elected to the senate' (0+ / 0-)

                            Just say NO t