I'm begging you, please stop

New Intro:

I have my objections to Hilary, I know others do to from many diaries. For Barack's sake, it's time we stop harping on her issues and move on.

   We've heard your arguments (and mine as well)...She's been lying (or mispeaking), she's gone crazy for power, she's vindictive etc. etc.  Guess what, it's all been written, regardless which situation it involves.  And guess what, those here that support her don't agree or maybe don't care, so what are these now accomplishing?

  Listen all, I am an Obamite, a naive Obama follower, or whatever other condescending slur people want to call it. I'm also a realist, none of these people are perfect. Neither are any of us supporters. We're humans, which means we make errors, we hurt, we sometimes believe our view is the only one that holds weight. Guess what, I'm also frustrated. I wish this primary campaign would end. I really wish this administration would end, and McSame would not carry it on. And guess what guys, you're making it impossible.

  Here's the crux of the situation in my view. You've tried to convince her supporters that she is flawed, and you may have succeeded with a few, but the rest now just feel like you are continously punching them in the face, and would you vote for someone whose supporters did that to you? I wouldn't, which is where my disdain for Clinton has come from. So what's the use in continuing if you are true Democrats?

  This is the time for Obama pumping, not Hilary dumping. It's time for McCain's weakness disecting, not Hilary's latest ploy. It's time to shed light on the criminals in  the White House. It's time to convince those people we may not be their first choice, but we are their second, even if they may not be ours in some cases. The battle is over, the chips now need to fall where they may. Guess what, we now stand a better chance of losing by continuously alienating the people in 2 months we will need, and they know deep down they need us. We've spoken, they've heard us and think we are wrong about her. It's time to move on and work towards those things we can control! Anything else is futile and alienating IMHO! I know many may have said it better, many could come from a none HRC basher background like I have repeatedly done, but please take the hint and leave it alone, for the sake of the person you claim to support. You're not helping, and in recent cases, maybe neither was I.

•  What's wrong with this picture?

  I truly have come to believe Hilary is pure power mad, plain and simple but please stop with these attack diaries.

  by Trix on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:48:56 PM PDT

  •  LOL!!

    Well said, Trix.

    Some simply cannot stop themselves.

    Hate is a drug.

    I see the same by a few on MyDD, just aimed at a different candidate from the one attacked here.

    by TomP on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:51:52 PM PDT

    •  I hate the idea of Mark Penn as a key Dem

      decision-maker.  I hate having a party dominated by $2,300 contributors.  I hate seeing a candidate support NAFTA in '93 and then blast her opponent in '08 for accurately pointing out that fact.  I hate "dog whistling" appeals to peoples' worst racial instincts. I hate nominating someone who voted for the IWR and compounded her mistake by voting for K-L.

      Go ahead, call me a hater.

      by RFK Lives on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:01:49 PM PDT

      •  She's over

        Can't you be magnanimous in victory?

        by Fairy Tale on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:08:36 PM PDT

        •  Until she says it herself...NO!!!!!!!!!! eom

          by Lava20 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:16:01 PM PDT

        •  She w/drew? Why isn't it on the FP?

          by RFK Lives on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:20:10 PM PDT

        •  The problem with that

          and this

          The battle is over, the chips now need to fall where they may.

          Is that it's not over. She keeps threatening to steal the election. She says she'll throw the kitchen sink at him, and she does. She says he's unelectable and that she'll make him unelectable.

          No, we can wish it was over, we can even hope it'll be over soon, but it's not over yet.

          by dawnt on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:59:33 PM PDT

      •  errr

        1. - Mark Penn's just a pollster and message-man, and the only reason he has the position he does is cause he helped Bill in 1996. Recent events in the news prove that her policies aren't determined by his firm's clients.

        2. - She may have focused on large contributors in the past but recently she's raised it mostly from small contributors.

        3. - NAFTA is a reasonable trade deal that just needs amendment. I don't hear Obama saying we should pull out of it unilaterally. Protectionism isn't the solution to America's long term economic challenges.

        4. - Bill made some offensive comments about Jesse Jackson, but the Clintons' supposed racism has been greatly exaggerated.

        5. - Hillary's foreign policy is relatively moderate but she's no warmonger. Her brand of tough diplomacy may just be more effective than soft diplomacy and do more for the cause of turning to diplomatic solutions in the long run.

        I get the feeling that a lot of Obama supporters don't like Hillary but they feel he's the grassroots candidate and she's not. It's not that stark. The truth is, she has a grassroots as does he, and he has wealthy supporters as does she.

        by Wufacta on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:54:26 PM PDT

        •  What matters:

          We need to remember what matters, and that is to start focusing our attacks now on John McCain. That's the battle that really matters, since there is a huge gulf between us and McCain, while we have a lot more in common with Hillary Clinton.

          by Eternal Hope on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:00:10 PM PDT

          •  exactly!

            That's why I'm not boycotting this site. I dont really support any candidate anymore.

            by Wufacta on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:02:24 PM PDT

        •  What IS her position on NAFTA?

          Was she for it before she was against it, or was she against it before she was for it?  I didn't address the merits/demerits of NAFTA--I addressed the fact that she's about as credible on her shifting positions on it as she was about her trip to Tuzla.

          by RFK Lives on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:02:27 PM PDT

          •  Her position's about the same as Obama's rightnow

            What was Obama's position on NAFTA in 1993? Anyone?
            More importantly- anyone care? Let's MoveOn.

            by Wufacta on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:04:54 PM PDT

            •  A lot of voters in OH seemed to care about it

              I still recall Obama stating: "Shame on you, Hillary Clinton".  I'll be thrilled to move on as soon as Obama has 2025 or HRC w/draws, whichever occurs first.

              by RFK Lives on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:09:47 PM PDT

            •  In 1993 Obama

              was organizing laid off steelworkers in Chicago and registering people in the poverty-stricken parts of Chicago to vote. He was speaking out against NAFTA and other policies that cost good people their jobs.

              Yes, it does matter. It matters to all of us who care about the regular joe who lost his job, who lost his house, who lost everything because Hillary and Bill shoved NAFTA down the throats of the American people.

              It matters.

              by dawnt on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:02:15 PM PDT

      •  Oh give me a break, RFK.

        Who do you think you are talking to?

        If you write personally demeaning shit about Clinton, then you are.  If you write issue oriented stuff, then you aren't.

        Do you recall my diaries criticizing Senator Clinton on almost every one of those issues?  I write very tough diaries.  I even criticized her about "planting" questions.  K-L and Mark Penn were among my favorites.

        But the personal and sexist garbage I read by some is over the line.  If you cannot tell the difference, then I feel sorry for you.

        Ae you a progressive who supports Obama or are you an Obama follower?  Make up your mind.  Even among those who worship him, not all are haters.  It is aonly a few.  I certainly never saw you as one.

        One can oppose a person politcially without personally hating.  

        Just this week, I wrote this:

        Change to Win: It's Long Past Time for Mark Penn to go

        In August 2007, this:

        Tell Hillary that Mark Penn Must Go: Uniform Justice for Cintas Workers

        Or this in November 2007:

        Edwards on Clinton's Planting: "That's what George does" & Another Plant Revealed

        Or this in October 2007:

        Update: Edwards says Clinton "aided and abetted" Bush and Cheney’s "march to war

        Hard hitting, but not hate.

        Around here, the Obama delusion seems to allow all kinds of hate.  It's wrong, whether done by an Obama supporter or Clinton supporter.  

        And you know it.

        by TomP on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 10:32:27 AM PDT

  •  The battle is not over; she's fightin' dirty

    And it is time to frame the media narrative and get this story to break out big, just like the Bosnia sniper story.

    In the immortal words of Jimmy Crackcorn: "Liar, liar, sniper fire!"

    Incoming!

    by jhutson on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:53:03 PM PDT

    •  you don't frame anything

      The media hates Hillary all on their own, but if they didn't, nobody on this web site would make a difference.  Are you making a difference in their love affair with McCain?

      Don't take yourself so seriously.  The media knows that this is a site full of deranged Hillary haters, so why would they care about anything that is said here?

      by markusd on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:54:43 PM PDT

      •  Does the media hate Hillary? Really?

        Which media is that? You mean the Richard Melon Scaife-owned parts of the media?

        by jhutson on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:02:04 PM PDT

        •  really, they do

          Anyone with a shred of objectivity knows that the media has ripped her endlessly this year, and many in the media have themselves said so.

          by markusd on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:06:44 PM PDT

          •  What has the media ripped her for?

            Snipergate?
            NAFTAgate?
            Ferarrogate?

            Those are all things she created herself.  

            by Lava20 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:17:54 PM PDT

            •  um, no

              1. - one lie out of multiple lies that all the candidates have been caught making. Her campaign put out a memo listing a whole bunch of Obama untrue statements and none of 'e got the same coverage.

              2. - she supported NAFTA in her role in his administration but she opposed it privately

              3. - Ferrarogate? LOL you have got to be kidding me. One statement by a person who hasn't been on the national scene in a quarter century to some obscure local newspaper, which just happens to contain some truth to it, and is blown up into a massive racist "-gate" by the media.

              Thanks you've just proved markusd's point. Have fun sucking the MSM's shlong here at your 'alternative' blog news source. You guys are really breaking the mold!

              by Wufacta on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:00:30 PM PDT

              •  Swing and a miss...

                1.  Cite source please?

                2.  She was against it before she was for it?

                3.  Multiple statements that she refused to truly distance herself from until called out by KO?

                But thanks for showing who is actually rec'ing his and your silly type of posts.

                You still haven't addressed snipergate.  You skipped over that.

                by Lava20 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:09:35 PM PDT

                •  ok

                  1.

                  http://www.ksee24.com/...

                  2.
                  No, that's not what I said. She may have opposed it or had reservations about it in private but since she was not an elected official decided to speak out for it anyway to support her husband.

                  3.
                  She said she disagreed with the comments immediately. Ferraro didn't apologize because that's what she thought, but it had nothing to do with Clinton. The rest is just part of the media spin game.

                  I did address "snipergate", that was the point of #1.

                  by Wufacta on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:45:53 PM PDT

                  •  LOL!!!!!

                    Wow, that was really funny.

                    The sight states that Obama is lying.  They have proof...just ask a HILLARY spokesperson.

                    Then they attack Obama for working with Republicans to get legislation that is good for the enviroment passed.  Yeah, going it alone has worked  wonders for our lovely planet so far!?

                    Are you kidding me?

                    2.  No as an unelected official she choose not to shut the fuck about the NAFTA that she really hated.  No she decided to go to bat for it.  Woman of principles she is.

                    3.  She weakly disagreed.  KO had to call her out on her filth before anyone said anything.  Please.  She's so full of it.

                    1.  WHY DID SHE LIE ABOUT SNIPER FIRE?

                    Throw up all the distractions you can.  I feel I can go to bat for Obama.  I thought I could for Hillary, until about 8 weeks ago.

                    But I have a open mind about most things.  One thing I know I won't wiggle on is a person who lies about Sniper fire, in detail, multiple times, then jokes about being caught.  I'll have to pass on that one.

                    by Lava20 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:57:18 PM PDT

                    •  Look, the media focuses on Hillary's

                      bad stuff and Obama's. Do they focus on McCain's? NO.

                      That's the point of how the media hates Hillary.

                      by doinaheckuvanutjob on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:11:42 PM PDT

          •  Why is she being treated different from Ron Paul?

            who also still considers himself in it because of a plot to throw state conventions?  Like Hillary, all sane people know he can't win.  Hillary has as much of a path to victory as RP.  Why is the media treating her like a viable candidate and RP like a loon (when they pay attention to him at all) if they are not biased in her favor?

            Any honest person who decries Hillary's treatment as unfair should also be sticking up for Ron Paul as both are in the same situation.

            by VelvetElvis on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:18:38 PM PDT

            •  you can't be serious here...

              comparing clinton to ron paul is really too outrageous.

              she may be a lot of things, but last i checked she was no anti-choice racist.

              _______________

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

              -9.75 (e), -7.18 (s)

              by dadanation on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:10:14 PM PDT

              •  To be fair:

                I don't think that he meant it that way; he was just saying that she was lost just as much as Ron Paul is.

                by Eternal Hope on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:12:22 PM PDT

                •  yes, no, yes, no...

                  i see your point.

                  and i also see VelvetElvis' point.

                  just making sure i suppose that the ron paul is a loon meme is NOT somehow dampened down or let slide by the wayside...

                  _______________

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

                  -9.75 (e), -7.18 (s)

                  by dadanation on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:15:13 PM PDT

              •  the issue is mediaq bias

                the stances of each candidate on issues doesn't matter here.  Neither has a chance of winning the nomination by traditional accepted means.  One of them is being treated by the media as a valid candidate and the other is not.

                If the media were not biased in favor of Hillary, she'd be treated the same as Paul.

                by VelvetElvis on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:14:00 PM PDT

                •  see my post above. n/t

                  _______________

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

                  -9.75 (e), -7.18 (s)

                  by dadanation on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:15:43 PM PDT

        •  no, they're kissing her ass. seriously.

          by jj24 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:33:48 PM PDT

    •  The battle is over

      She doesn't know it but it's over. It's not only in the pledged delegate lead, also the superdelegates will massively fall on Obama's side. I think we should call off criticisms of Hillary, no matter how justified these are.

      Let's focus the fire on McCain from now on.

      by Fairy Tale on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:12:32 PM PDT

      •  Plenty of shooting goes on after the battle ends

        The shooters are called... what's the word?

        Oh, yeah: snipers.

        So the battlefield is not safe when the battle ends, but when the sniper fire ceases.

        by jhutson on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:24:13 PM PDT

        •  The battle isn't over.

          No question, Obama is ahead and has the momentum. But he doesn't have a plurality of the pledged delegates or even a plurality of pledged and publicly confirmed unpledged delegates. So the battle isn't over.

          Not only that, but Obama isn't saying the battle is over. Why are you?

          by homogenius on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:26:57 PM PDT

      •  Hillary rises from the dead

        I disagree, the moment anyone lets their guard down, she comes back aiming for the knock out.

        I will give Hillary credit, she is tough, and she has fought hard.

        It is not time to back off until she withdraws.

        by Kiku on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:48:42 PM PDT

      •  .

        

        by Eternal Hope on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:17:47 PM PDT

  •  That's my belief, I'm not claiming

    I am her supporter anywhere in the diary...Do you feel it effects the rest of the diary and the point I'm making, we're beating a dead horse?

    by Irixsh on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:53:12 PM PDT

    •  I feel that...

      if you want to write a diary decrying attack diaries, your first sentence probably shouldn't consist of an attack followed by a call for an end to the attacks.

      by Trix on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:54:46 PM PDT

      •  I can delete it, I figured it gives an indication

        of where I am coming from. Not really calling for an end of attack diaries per se, but I could be wrong, I often am. I thought it was more for background.

        by Irixsh on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:57:29 PM PDT

        •  Well...

          It gives an indication where you're coming from, alright.

          by Trix on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:58:18 PM PDT

          •  Any better?

            As I said, I'm definitely not perfect.

            by Irixsh on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:04:15 PM PDT

            •  Yes... it's better

              Unfortunately, it's probably too late.

              That sentence pretty much undermined your entire diary.

              by Trix on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:12:21 PM PDT

              •  Probably, sometimes we make mistakes trying to

                prove a point, thanks for being civil

                by Irixsh on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:16:14 PM PDT

                •  no one can be perfect Irixsh

                  by Wufacta on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:16:52 PM PDT

                  •  Some of us *looks at self* are pretty damn close

                    ;-)

                    by Trix on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:18:01 PM PDT

                    •  you're hyperactive Trix!

                      you just cover up your mistakes with more posts :)

                      by Wufacta on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:19:01 PM PDT

                      •  LOL :) n/t

                        by Trix on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:19:26 PM PDT

                      •  Diversions

                        The rest of us use cat pictures.

                        by Ray Radlein on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:35:46 PM PDT

                    •  the only reason I read this

                      Is I didn't look close enough and thought you wrote it. The names looked similar.

                      by woodstock007 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:20:33 PM PDT

                      •  Heh

                        It is pretty close.

                        :-)

                        by Trix on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:21:23 PM PDT

              •  well it could have been interpreted differently

                I interpreted as just 'I agree with this opinion, so that's another reason we don't need more of that even if you believe it'. If it had been interpreted like that it wouldn't have undermined anything.

                by Wufacta on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:16:24 PM PDT

        •  How about a smple edit

          remove the attack - claim you support obama early on but would like to see an end to the attacks

          by ETinKC on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:59:37 PM PDT

        •  I dont like attack diaries

          that just attack her. but diaries with direction really are useful. JedReport is a perfect example and his videos are all over the Web and beyond.
          If she has done something dishonest, it needs to get out and we do have a part in that.

          by snowbird42 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:11:28 PM PDT

      •  It's necessary

        because lately in order not to be labelled a troll here if you say something that goes against the flow, you have to establish your anti-Hillary cred first.

        by Catesby on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:02:47 PM PDT

        •  Do you know if there are any places

          someone can go where they can talk about both sides of the issues and stuff without being locked into a certain stance first? Like a fair place for people who are still considering all of the options and don't want to be attacked and punished for not establishing a certain "cred" first?
          Like, say you have questions and concerns that you are not permitted to talk about here? (So like my family of origin, LOL.)  Because you are right, you cannot do that here.

          by armenia on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:27:51 PM PDT

          •  yeah, I have found openleft is evenhanded,

            and talkleft is soso...but it is starting to get better here.

            Theres still some here who think this is some kind of game involving sniper fire, foolishly forgetting that the other half of the party must be back in the fold to win us Democrats the GE.

            by dotcommodity on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:36:17 PM PDT

            •  .

              

              by Eternal Hope on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:37:03 PM PDT

          •  I wish I could tell you

            it is only my long history here that keeps drawing me back.  It WILL get better once the primary is over.

            I have poked around other sites, and it seems everyone has been drawn into opposing camps.  I feel bad for anyone who has not made up their minds and is looking for objective information.  

            And you know what, if John Edwards hadn't been in the race, and I hadn't already voted, I might still be fence-sitting.  I have serious problems with both of the remaining candidates (so I feel free to criticize and defend at will!)  All I can say is if you see another site criticized, go there, read and see what their perspective is.  Read as many differennt sites as you can.  

            And somehow, between all the mudflinging, you might be able to come to a conclusion of your own.

            And I get you about family history - lol - I'm Irish on my father's side!

            by Catesby on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:37:12 PM PDT

        •  Or if you disagree with the treatment of Clinton

          you have to say "I'm an Obama supporter, but ..."

          by raboof on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:51:17 PM PDT

          •  I say that because it's true

            and the Clintons have really, really pissed me off this primary season.  But I still don't like to see them or their supporters mistreated.

            by unterhausen on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 10:29:03 PM PDT

      •  It's not an attack

        It's a defensive mechanism. Everyone who posts anything here that is not an Obama cheerleading diary seems to feel the need to declare themselves not to be a Hillary supporter in the hopes of warding off attacks on themselves.

        by Free Spirit on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:12:22 PM PDT

    •  An Appeal For Fewer Attacks

      That leads off with an attack...

      by The Baculum King on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:55:13 PM PDT

      •  Like an Ass-Whipping for Nonviolence

        A war for peace...

        by The Baculum King on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:57:34 PM PDT

        •  Whores Against Promiscuity

          by The Baculum King on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:58:24 PM PDT

          •  Republicans Against Corruption

            by The Baculum King on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:06:52 PM PDT

            •  Best one yet...

              Please continue....

              Lawyers against lawsuits?

              by Hedwig on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:10:13 PM PDT

              •  Hunters Against Bloodsports

                by The Baculum King on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:13:37 PM PDT

                •  Lesbians Against Women

                  by The Baculum King on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:14:23 PM PDT

                  •  Homos against good taste.

                    (And rapier wit.)

                    by homogenius on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:31:00 PM PDT

      •  Bad choice of words, I apologize

        by Irixsh on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:11:37 PM PDT

  •  How is pointing out facts...

    considered bashing?

    Most of the diaries about Hillary are pointing out that she has been lying.  And for the most part there is verifiable proof.

    This is normal primary vetting.  They are doing the same on other sites.

    And candidate diaries are pretty easy to avoid.  I've yet to be tricked into reading one single candidate diary.

    Unclear diary titles are corrected so quickly it makes your head spin.

    I say take a deep breath and move on.  We understand your sentiment.  But try to understand ours.

    by Lava20 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:02:10 PM PDT

  •  Nothing Trix

    Irixsh's just saying that you've all convinced him/her of your arguments already, we know what you're going to say next etc. etc. so that's another reason to stop.

    by Wufacta on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:13:53 PM PDT

  •  Hehehehe.

    Another diary sure to win the hearts and minds...

    by Pager on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:43:10 PM PDT

  •  I'm so past this, but help me understand...

    Are we saying that Hillary's supporters are going to vote on the next president of the free world on how they feel about supporters?

    Geez, division is the least of our problems as a party...

    by ILean Left on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:08:19 PM PDT

    •  Oh please.

      This has been debunked repeatedly. The biggest problem isn't that Clinton supporters will refuse to vote for Obama in Nov. based on a few of his supporters who are major gaping assholes. It's that by being sore winners they are making it harder for Clinton supporters to let go and fall in behind him. What's more important--being right or getting the job done? Obama is ahead and increasing his momentum. But some Obamabots are addicted to bashing Hillary and can't let it go.

      by homogenius on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 09:39:19 PM PDT

      •  I think we've become insular on the net

        We should all log off and go talk to real people in person.  It's not so bad and we can and do get along.  We just act differently behind a keyboard.

        It doesn't excuse people who are rude, but let's be honest, they'll be jackasses relative to other things as well.

        But really folks, so we see things differently?  It is possible that we are inadvertently amplifying the issue by consistently declaring this a bigger problem than it really is in the real world.

        Love you Hillary supporters!!!

        by ILean Left on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 01:23:18 AM PDT

•  Brava!

  by Barry in MIA on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:51:02 PM PDT

  •  of course you realize that this is a two

    way street....

    by ETinKC on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:56:39 PM PDT

    •  Mutual respect and responsibility ???

      Whatta concept !  LOL

      by Barry in MIA on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:57:59 PM PDT

      •  yup - a majority of us here have been there for

        awhile - still waiting for some folks to join us.

        by ETinKC on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:01:02 PM PDT

        •  You're just more evolved.

          Be patient - - God isn't finished with me yet.

          by Barry in MIA on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:02:25 PM PDT

        •  Don't hold your breath waiting for Barry.

          by Scoopster on Sun Apr 06, 2008 at 06:58:40 AM PDT

•  by definition.....

  all politicians and candidates are power mad, compared to the average citizen.

  And no Democrat can hold a candle to the Bush clan, Cheney, the Neocons, etc. when it comes to being power-mad.

  by LNK on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:53:59 PM PDT

•  This is already happening

  Relatively few diaries attack Clinton on anything other than policy differences or obvious misstatements.  More attention is being paid to McCain, though most of the diaries are still pro-Obama pieces.  Also, I'm not convinced that Clinton is evil, but instead that she believes (incorrectly, in my view) that she is the only one who can win in November.  As long as she keeps away from statements that seem like McCain endorsements, let her run through June 3 (if she has enough money to do so).

  by Sedi on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:54:18 PM PDT

  •  you'll "let her"????`

    How very generous of you.  I'm sure you will be so relieved to know that you will let her.

    by markusd on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:56:56 PM PDT

    •  markusd,

      why do you keep coming to dailykos?

      This is a deranged hate-Hillary site.  The lies and slander are repeated endlessly because most of you are obsessed with your hatred for her.  

      by fivefouranonymous on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:58:15 PM PDT

      •  Masochist in search

        of a sadist.

        by gchaucer2 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:05:11 PM PDT

      •  Are you sent?

        How do you explain her lies?
        Please tell us.

        by snowbird42 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:14:12 PM PDT

    •  I didn't say that "I" would let her keep running

      She can do whatever she wants, obviously.  I'm not an idiot who thinks that I have the power to decide who stays in and who drops out of the race.  My point was that an implied "we" shouldn't be making repeated calls for her to leave the race.  Please read a comment carefully before you slam somebody for what you perceive to be a slight.

      Frankly, I think your reading of my comment was highly uncharitable, at best.  I was making a legitimate point about people not getting on her case asking her to drop out, and you read my statement as some kind of declaration that I've now given her permission to continue.  Sheesh.

      by Sedi on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:09:55 PM PDT

      •  I read your comment

        It is totally condescending.  Maybe you just don't see it.

        by markusd on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:22:54 PM PDT

        •  .

          

          by Eternal Hope on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:24:10 PM PDT

  •  There was a time when the word 'evil'

    was saved for the likes of Hitler.

    Now since the advent of Bushco, it seems to have become common currency, even amongst us Democrats.

    I know you said you don't believe she is evil, but many here do, and the term slips off your tongue quite readily.

    They've managed to drag us down with them.

    by Catesby on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:01:06 PM PDT

    •  Please read my comment carefully

      I was not saying that I thought that she was evil.  Indeed, I explicitly rejected that sentiment, which the author of the diary had put forth.  The diary has since been updated to remove the statement -- which I applaud, because I think it was distracting -- but I was very clearly not saying that she was evil.  Perhaps the diary was changed before you read it, but there is a whole thread up-post about it.

      I agree that too much strong language is being thrown around these days, and in fact I was trying to tactfully argue against it.  I was postulating a completely reasonable explanation -- Clinton thinks she has the best chance of winning in November -- for her recent actions.  I don't mean to be snippy, but I'm not sure how you could tell that it slipped "off [my] tongue quite readily" when I didn't actually say it, I wrote it.  I do not use the word "evil" lightly, and in fact rarely ever use the word, even in reference to someone like Hitler.  Very few, if any, actions can only or best be understood with the term "evil".  If one calls them evil, one probably hasn't understood them.  No worries, I'll chalk it up to a tense primary season and an atmosphere in which harsh rhetoric is all too common.

      by Sedi on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:23:45 PM PDT

      •  .

        

        by Eternal Hope on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:25:03 PM PDT

      •  You are right

        I get you.  It just gets to me when I see the word "evil" bandied about here so often.

        I was literally shocked when I first heard Bush use it, and now it seems to have become so common, even amongst us.

        So I apologize for picking on you.  I was venting, and you didn't deserve it.

        by Catesby on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:49:50 PM PDT

        •  Thanks

          And I couldn't agree more with your reaction to "evil" being used surprisingly often in everyday conversation.  When I read my son superhero stories I even feel bad about the gross oversimplification of "good" versus "evil" because real life just isn't that simple.  The whole "Axis of Evil" thing irked me beyond belief, in part because it reduced three very different, and each themselves complex and varied, societies down to a single misleading adjective: evil.  I can't wait for November.

          I'm sorry for the confusion.  It seems I've been misunderstood twice this evening, so I'll be a bit more careful about throwing around such heavy words, even when I think that I'm rejecting them.

          by Sedi on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 08:10:32 PM PDT

•  eh

  candidate diaries are fine. the primary continues and there are still issues to be addressed.

  that said, the relative lack of mccain discussion should be remedied.

  by fivefouranonymous on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:55:56 PM PDT

•  Nice Stopping stop

  Nothing more to say stop

  by C Dawgg on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 06:59:05 PM PDT

•  Just like the teacher in the Peanuts strip...

  --Wha wha wha wha WHA?

  by jvantin1 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:01:49 PM PDT

•  The problem is...

  ...that the people still engaging in these attacks are not motivated by anything other than pure venom. They don't care about Obama, they don't care about Hillary, they don't care about Daily Kos, they don't care about the Democratic Party or the country.

  So you really have no basis for persuading them to stop. They will keep it up as long as their diaries continue to get a reaction.

  by Free Spirit on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:09:35 PM PDT

  •  Well, tell Barry in MIA or markusd that.

    Because they are two of the worst offenders.

    by Eternal Hope on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:10:44 PM PDT

    •  It is here for them to read. n/t

      by Free Spirit on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:16:29 PM PDT

  •  Perfect...

    Maybe the diarist should review Hunter's diary from Thursday. It won't be, but it should be the last word on any of this metagasming.

    http://www.dailykos.com/...

    by Hedwig on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:13:47 PM PDT

  •  I disagree to an extent, i would say some would

    say the same about me a month ago, and even after my poorly worded intro. I'm hoping I can reach those people somehow (dumb I know). Sometimes we get so caught up we think we're trying to convince people to see our side, we end up hurting more than helping. Just an attempt at amends I guess

    by Irixsh on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:14:10 PM PDT

    •  Yet one more reason...

      ...I will never affiliate with a political party.

      The partisan, when he is engaged in a dispute, cares nothing about the rights of the question, but is anxious only to convince his hearers of his own assertions.
      Plato, Dialogues, Phaedo

      by Free Spirit on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:20:26 PM PDT

•  Right On !

  We need to focus on the REAL race between Obama V Mc Cain and just let Hillary be. At this point , I really don't know what she's doing in this thing or why.

  The General Election has begun and the race is betweem Obama and Mc Cain. We cannot keep letting Hillary distract us. Everyone else is focussing on Obama V Mc cain so let's do that.

  by WeBetterWinThisTime on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:12:01 PM PDT

  •  .

    

    by Eternal Hope on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:13:03 PM PDT

    •  love ya eh!

      by woodstock007 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:13:37 PM PDT

    •  Its a cat carrier,

      not a clown car!

      by woodstock007 on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:14:25 PM PDT

    •  What happened....

      ...to the ponies?

      I miss the ponies... :(

      by Hedwig on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:14:39 PM PDT

      •  .

        

        by Eternal Hope on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:20:51 PM PDT

        •  Now...

          ...that's just mean! :)

          I want a pony! I want a pony now! If I don't get a pony I'm going to cry and hold my breath and start writing meta diaries everyday until I get MY pony!!!

          by Hedwig on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:24:21 PM PDT

          •  .

            

            by Eternal Hope on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:25:36 PM PDT

            •  I see the problem...

              ...someone is in their cat directory and can't find their way back to their pony directory. The horror! The horror!

              by Hedwig on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:27:25 PM PDT

•  Here's the crux of this issue for me....

  I have tried to be civil and respectful when pointing out Sen. Clinton's lies and support of McCain while trying to break Sen. Obama's political kneecaps in the same sentence.

  The crux of all of this for me is that for 8 years, I have been accused of being unpatriotic, ridiculed and debased for standing up and speaking out about what I know is wrong.  What is wrong is the war in Iraq that never needed to be fought.

  I expect no special dispensation, but I am a vet...been there, done that and bought the T-shirt.  To have chickenhawks...of either party...support unnecessary war just does not sit well with me.  I plan to continue to speak out about what I feel is right.  I'm a life long Democrat.  I should have at least as much right...we do have a 1st. amendment, don't we?...as chickenhawks like Sen. Clinton.  Pres. Bush pulled the trigger to send us into an illegal, immoral and unnecessary invasion and occupation of Iraq, but Sen. Clinton voted to give him the power.  Yet today, she cannot bring herself to admit that was an incorrect decision.

  4000 of my brothers and sisters in the military killed...over29000 wounded a third of whom with wounds so severe that they will never live even the semblence of a normal life...100's of thousands of Iraqi civilians killed in a war that never needed to be fought in Iraq.

  I will not be censored.  I may be an insignificant citizen, but I will continue to speak out against arrogant, power hungry politicians of both parties.

  Sorry Clinton supporters.  Feel free to hate me.  Feel free to disrespect me, but you sure as HELL are not going to shut me up.

  No one twisted Sen. Clinton's arm into lying about the sniper fire in Bosnia.  No one twisted Sen. Clinton's arm about trying to skewer Sen. Obama while at the same time gushing about how much she respected Sen. McCain.  No one Twisted Sen. Clinton's arm to vote to allow Herr Bush to take us into a war that never needed to be fought in Iraq.

  by El Tomaso on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:12:20 PM PDT

  •  A call for civility I guess

    You have every right to do whatever you would like, but alienating her supporters may not be a great election strategy IMHO

    by Irixsh on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:21:47 PM PDT

    •  It will take some time to work it out

      But what you are doing here is quite essential in my view. Thanks for that.

      by Fairy Tale on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:24:38 PM PDT

      •  Too bad I somewhat messed it up

        with a bad intro I thought would point out my personal feeling to make my call more genuine, boy did it backfire...

        by Irixsh on Sat Apr 05, 2008 at 07:27:07 PM PDT

        •  She will never say it

          She's too stubborn. She can never admit to a mistake or a lie or a primary defeat, let alone the nomination defeat. So why do we have to wait? Let's make dKos more welc