Starting today, you are going to begin to see a lot of posts across the Blogosphere that call for party unity. It is, after all, critical that the two competing camps become reconciled with each other and, as much as possible, become united in the joint purpose of taking back the White House for the American people. So, posts calling for unity are appropriate. But you won’t be seeing any from me.
I see a few articles suggesting that the Clinton campaign is resigned to defeat but I see no overt signs of it. Instead, I see a smear campaign against our candidate’s wife. I see continuing signs that the Clintons are encouraging their supporters to see Obama’s victory as illegitimate, as if he cheated in some manner. At best, they see their loss as due to outside forces, like institutional sexism, rather than any strengths of the Obama campaign or mistakes of the Clinton campaign.
I’m willing to be reconciled, but I am not willing to stop fighting until I see a white flag and an acknowledgment that Barack Obama won this contest fair and square and according to the rules. When I see Hillary Clinton stand up and admit that she lost and that Obama’s victory is 100% legitimate, then I will stop fighting back. I hope to see it soon. And then, I hope, the Clinton supporters in the Blogosphere will stop peddling in hate and unsubstantiated innuendo. We all understand hardball tactics, even if we don’t always respect them. But this contest is coming to a close. And anyone that keeps up the fight against Obama after today is working for McCain. And that includes Hillary Clinton.
Update [2008-6-3 12:21:13 by BooMan]: And lest anyone think I am unsporting, the Associated Press reports that Clinton is not conceding.
Hillary Rodham Clinton will concede Tuesday night that Barack Obama has the delegates to secure the Democratic nomination, campaign officials said, effectively ending her bid to be the nation’s first female president.
Obama is 40 delegates shy of clinching the nomination, but he is widely expected to make up the difference Tuesday with superdelegate support and votes in South Dakota and Montana. Once he reaches the magic number of 2,118, Clinton will acknowledge that he has secured the necessary delegates to be the nominee.
The former first lady will stop short of formally suspending or ending her race in her speech in New York City.
She will pledge to continue to speak out on issues like health care. But for all intents and purposes, the two senior officials said, the campaign is over.
Most campaign staff will be let go and will be paid through June 15, said the officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to divulge her plans.
The advisers said Clinton has made a strategic decision to not formally end her campaign, giving her leverage to negotiate with Obama on various matters including a possible vice presidential nomination for her. She also wants to press him on issues he should focus on in the fall, such as health care.
Universal health care, Clinton’s signature issue as first lady in the 1990s, was a point of dispute between Obama and the New York senator during their epic nomination fight.
What kind of message does that send to her supporters?
And, of course I know that the vast majority of Clinton supporters are not peddling hate, lies, and smears, but that is what I’m seeing at the online Hillary supporting blogsites.
Booman,
The AP headline is misleading. Hillary won’t be conceding the race tonight. Because further down in the article, the AP reports:
“The former first lady will stop short of formally suspending or ending her race in her speech in New York City.”
In other words, Clinton won’t be suspending or ending her campaign. What she will do is acknowledge what everyone already knows: Obama will be the nominee.
Oh, you got that…never mind.
Booman,
If you’re visiting NQ, please stop. I’d stop linking to them too. Sometimes ignorance is bliss, and this is one of those times.
Hear Hear!
You are 100% correct. The truth is, it’s not in their nature to reconcile. I’ve raised a child, I know the mindset. I’ve live through nearly 8 years of Bush–I know unmovable stubbornness when I see it.
We can’t rely on Hillary and Bill for any help in this election–quite the opposite. Do not trust them for one second, no matter what happens this week. They need to be marginalized as much as possible, and we need to win this DESPITE them.
we do not, however, want to marginalize rank-and-file supporters of the Clintons. Only the people that are continuing the fight against Obama.
Absolutely right, BooMan … all of us need to recognize that the net is not representative of the electorate … often it’s not even representative of how an individual acts … you vent online, then vote with a clear head.
I have to add one thing as a long-time (all the way back to the Dem Senate primary in 2004) Obama supporter … he had numerous opportunities to close this thing down and has failed repeatedly. I chalk a lot of that up to residual good will among older Democrats for the Clintons. But some of it is unease about Obama and we need to recognize it.
The Obama endgame of this nomination fight hasn’t been impressive. And I think Clinton wants some acknowledgment of her strong close before she exits stage right.
The strategy is to play with our heads, keep us guessing.
The Clinton camp leaked this morsel to the Drudger:
HILLARY CAMPAIGN EXPECTS 25-POINT WIN IN S DAKOTA, TOP SOURCES TELL DRUDGE… DEVELOPING…
The people continuing the fight against Obama are marginalizing themselves.
I believe that the rank and file HRC supporters need to ask themselves one question, who do you want to choose the next supreme court justice, Obama, or McCain. Hell, I wouldn’t even mind if it was Hillary, that would sure stick in the Republicans craw.
about McCain.
If I do, I will be very dissappointed. I am waiting until tonight to hear how strongly and clearly Hillary pledges her support to Barack.
If she does, I’ll buy her a case of double shots 150% proof.
Talk Left is filled with commentators gleefully promising to vote McCain. My little foray to NoQuarter yesterday revealed even more bile frothing up.
They want us to beg them for their vote. As soon as one engages them though one quickly realizes that there is no appeasing them. Nothing will make them happy.
So the best bet is to ignore these people. Give them their space. And punish with extreme prejudice those who are actively fighting against the Democratic nominee.
I believe left leaning blogs should stop supporting Talk Left or No Quarter. Punish them for stirring up racist hatred. Don’t link to them and take them off your blogroll.
They’re sufferers of CDS. a repost
I have more of a layman’s diagnosis: they are CUCKOO for Clinton. And no doubt love the attention the ditto heads are lavishing upon them as they visit those sites. Unfortunately for them, it’s a very short-sighted strategy for a blog. I doubt 6 months from now there will be middle-age female Hillary supporters doing the blogging thing on TalkLeft. In fact, I’m sure the typical middle-aged supporter of Hillary is diametrically opposed to Jeralyn’s criminal defense positions.
That’s the sum of these people. It’s why a lot of them have animosity towards Obama; he didn’t directly pander to the blogosphere, so they felt ignored and marginalized. So they want to be all Veruca Salt about everything and don’t care how they look. Sad.
That Veruca Salt bit made me laugh. 🙂
Yes. And a lot of these “senior” women have become celebrities in their own minds. They haven’t had that much attention, fun, or impact (at least in theory) in their lives.
Yeah, I agree with this approach. We should be reaching out to the rank-and-file Clinton supporters. And Obama should reach out and engage Clinton herself. But we should not in any way engage or support, by default with links to their blogs, No Quarter, Talk Left, or any of the other rabid anti-Obamists.
These people have boxed themselves into a corner of their own making. They want to threaten to vote for McCain, against their own self-interests, fine. Let them have their tantrums. But they are becoming more irrelevant by the minute.
Oh, and Clinton should concede the race asap and begin campaigning for Obama. I believe that’s how we’ll reunite the party.
There is NO reaching out to people like this. NONE.
They are never to be trusted again.
I get an mail from NQ.
A recent sample of their insanity:
John Fund of the Wall Street Journal was on Laura Ingraham’s show this morning, talking about the bombshell, according to our own No Quarter author Bud White.
Bob Beckel, Democratic analyst for Fox News, reported on TV already that a “bombshell” is coming out tomorrow
VIDEO BELOW. Here are written reports to date (and I will ADD MORE as they come in) — and I am adding the DEVASTATING electoral college projections up at HillBuzz that further underscore Obama’s unelectability. Obama is toast.
John Fund, Wall Street Journal:
“Indeed, rumors are swirling on the campaign trail that a new video will soon surface featuring Mrs. Obama appearing on a panel with radical speakers during which she makes more controversial statements.”
Bob Beckel on Fox News, via HillBuzz blog:
he has been told by numerous people,(enough and in a way that convinced him) that a bombshell will be dropping tomorrow about Michele Obama.
The Friends turned white and asked what it might be…was it worse than a college thesis? Bob said–Oh yes, in a BIG way. He said that the Repubs were behind it and it was dumb because it meant that Mrs. Clinton would be the nominee. …
READ THAT ONE AGAIN: “it meant that Mrs. Clinton would be the nominee …”
I AM PUTTING THE VIDEO BELOW THE FOLD TO LESSEN STRESS ON THE SERVER:
(more…)
A.P. Is Wrong — and KARL ROVE’s Analyses Are SPOT ON! Obama is limping, wounded … cannot win in November
Posted: 03 Jun 2008 10:33 AM CDT
OFFICIAL STATEMENT FROM CLINTON CAMPAIGN:
The AP story is incorrect. Senator Clinton will not concede the nomination this evening.
(We know the source of this story, don’t we. It’s Barack Obama’s Chicago-corrupt machine trying to suppress voter turnout in South Dakota and Montana — they are freaking out at his HORRIBLE poll numbers. Obama and his GANG OF THUGS campaign staff will do ANYTHING to win. AND this team of THUGS has regularly used VOTER SUPPRESSION TRICKERY.) NOW KARL ROVE — BRILLIANT and spot-on analyses from Fox News last night:
LOL! She is never going to live down those photos.
I just head Terry McAuliffe is going ballistic saying Hillary will NOT concede, that she is still campaigning (to her TV set, the commentators joked).
We’ll see. I won’t believe it until I see it, at this point.
And I’m with you. No unilateral disarmament. She wanted a fight to the finish? She’s got one.
From Reuters:
At this hour the countdown is 35.5 needed.
As per Politico: It’s a day long surge
A tsunami of superdelegates is poised to rush to Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) over the next 12 hours, giving him a mathematical lock on his party’s presidential nomination.
I suspect that upon reaching the magic number that if she doesn’t then concede, the media will finish the job by painting her in a particularly unflattering manner.
And you know what?
She’s now somewhere between 20 million and 30 million in debt. She should be going hat in hand to Obama and his supporters. She’s in no position to threaten anything.
For a woman of her political standing, she needs to end this on a high note and, preferably, with an offer of some sort. Obama is smart to reach out to her and her campaign staff to help reunite the party.
Frankly, Obama can’t win in November without the majority of Clinton supporters voting for him.
If Obama clinches and Hillary still won’t get out of the way, will the party (Reid/Pelosi/Dean) finally step in and make it clear that this is over? Perhaps the best way would be to tell Hillary’s lieutenants that they are endangering their future in the party by continuing to work for her as a primary candidate?
Obama’s in a bit of a tight spot–he needs to get this over with, but he doesn’t want to alienate her rank and file supporters. Hence the need for the other powers in the party to do some dirty work.
That she believes in what she has been saying.
That about 50% of the Democratic voters in these primaries are due about 50% of a voice in what goes down next and that she is damned well going to keep trying to represent them.
Duh.
What is WRONG with you people?
Booman writes: “:…we do not, however, want to marginalize rank-and-file supporters of the Clintons” with one hand and then with the other continues to try to demonize their candidate.
Get real.
Or get beaten in November.
LORD, what fools these mortals be!!!
AG
show me the white flag Arthur. Where’s the tape?
Arthur — American politics doesn’t work that way. You win an election, even by one vote, delegate or elector — you obtain 100 percent of the power. It would be an enormous mistake for Obama to move into the General Election in the prone position, begging Hillary to deliver her supporters.
If Clinton supporters truly, honestly believe that John McCain better represents them … by all means, vote for him. Obama should not have to beg for your vote.
I was a Gary Hart, Al Gore (’88), Bill Bradley and John Edwards supporter in past elections. I loyally supported the Democratic nominee and didn’t expect the winner to grovel. I get the feeling that some Hillary supporters have been with the winner so often that they don’t know how to behave when the shoe’s on the other foot.
This is not an election.
It is a primary that is supposed to be constructed in such a way that its winner(s) is/are the most likely candidate(s) to win the general election.
You were a Gary Hart, Al Gore, Bill Bradley and John Edwards supporter?
Good work, chicagodan.
And because of that litany of losers I am supposed to pay attention to you?
Get real.
AG
AG, are you writing from Mars pinned down under the Phoenix?
For sometime now you’ve been offering us the Queen of Mean…the mother of Selfishness. Once again, No.Thank.You.
Hillary should run as McSame’s VP so we can be rid of the sleazy, scumbags she and her husband Bill represents.
It’s time to end the Clintons using the Democratic Party as a personal tool…to secure money and power.
Arthur, are you really as democratic and as Democratic as you make yourself out to be? She needs to go on representing the 50 per cent who voted for her? How do you propose she represent them? Arthur, as we used to say in ancient times, you’re a total put-on, even with some high ‘falutin anguish about the foolishness of all the mortals committing political suicide all around you. Stop speaking in tongues and then you might find out for yourself what you’re really getting at. She is now putting herself on the path of running as an independent (think of Liarman gone national) or destroyng her political career in NY State.
AG–
You’re always so quick to establish Obama’s support as a bi-coastal/big city/yuppie sort of deal.
I say that having read your last diary of a few days ago where you said if one drives a couple hours outside the cities, you’ll find these stereotypical Clinton/Reagan democrats.
I think your attitude is patronizing.
I live in a town of 27,000 in north Iowa–Des Moines is 110 miles south and Minneapolis is 120 miles north. And, yes, pickups are the vehicles of choice, beer and brats is weekend fare, and so on.
But . . . . Obama is extremely popular here, yep, in the Motel 6’s, the bars, the cafes, the schools, etc.
So quit with the mythmaking you know nothing about.
thank you for pointing that out.
Yes, I think most people would be surprised that Iowa is not the Appalachia.
I find it very interesting that the Upper-Midwest is coming back to its progressive roots. Hopefully for good.
And I also hope Iowans are taking note that Hillary hates her some caucuses.
I saw Clinton speak here twice, with nothing but praise for the “democratic/grass roots nature” of the caucuses.
I have seen otherwise.
All OVER this country. (I travel for a living.)
All I can believe is my own experience. Just like you.
Y’pays yer money and y’takes yer chances.
Right now if I were a betting man I would give about 5 to 4 odds that McCain would beat Obama without Hillary on the ticket unless some REALLY fine VP candidate appeared…and I do not consider Clarke or Edwards anything but liabilities in a general election.
They are both just too goddamned creepy.
Gore too.
I would make it maybe 6 to 5 that Hillary would win if she ran with a passable VP candidate. maybe even 8 to 7.
That’s not good enough either. Too close, and too many ways to lose.
And I would make it about 2 to 1 that if Obama ran w/ Clinton in the VP spot t they would not only win, but it would be a rout.
That’s what I see.
Yoiur results of courtse may differ.
But the only results that will really COUNT are those that happen in Novrmber.
Feelin’ lucky?
Make his day.
AG
Not to mention that Obama was elected Senator in a state with a substantial population of rural whites, with whom he proved extremely popular.
The notion that Obama was doomed, doomed to lose the votes of those people in the general election, when he proved so handy at winning them in Illinois, has always seemed to me one of the weirder memes of this primary season.
Wikipedia
Keyes was the worst POSSIBLE candidate.
Obama got lucky.
He’s also very good at what he does.
One might be tempted to call Keyes a patsy. Sometimes I really do wonder at Obama’s miraculous rise from relative obscurity to presidential candidate in 4 short years. Has the fix been in for that long?
Hmmmm…
Sure was a nice coincidence, this young legislator getting that kind of exposure just when he needed it most.
Y’never know these days…
More Wikipedia, this time about the miraculous demise of Obama’s Ratpub opponent’s campaign for the Senate in 2004. YOU know…the real one, before that buffoon Keyes showed up. The one who wasdeep into it before the campaign became an Illinois version of a Roadrunner cartoon.
Hmmmm…
He sure is lucky, ain’t he? This Obama guy?
Our young Knight in Shining (Teflon) Armor?
All around him the dirt flies, and nothing sticks to him at all.
Yet. (Rezko Rezko Rezko Rezko Wright Wright Wright Wright Michelle Michelle Michelle Michelle Farrakhan Farrakhan Farrakhan Farrakhan…I can see the Fox News crawls now.)
So I repeat…are you willing to gamble your mortal ass that he is good enough, lucky enough and protected enough to win the Presidency without Clinton’s active help and presence on the ticket?
I’m not.
Hmmmm….
AG
Yes. We know. The presidency hangs in the balance and we are all fighting to get our man or woman in there. You believe Obama will lose the GE to McCain while the rest of us believe Obama will beat McCain.
It’s a respectable opinion and I understand it. Democrats should follow Bill Clinton’s lead in the 90s and move the party to the right. The Democratic party has been having this debate since 2000 and has always sided with the likes of you. Finally, the party is coming around and trying a different and more aggressive approach and standing up to the GOP campaign of hate and fearmongering. So we will see if this small departure from the typical Democratic campaign will work. But we’ve tried your approach for 8 (or actually 16) years and it’s been an abysmal failure.
The funny thing is I bet you would be throwing the exact same tizzy fit if Democrats nominated Kucinich instead of Obama. In other words you fall for the GOP headfake strawman argument every time. Obama is not the radical bomb thrower that the Clinton people or the dittoheads are characterizing him to be. Hell, the dittoheads would be calling Hillary a “socialist”, despite the fact she has done her best to morph into a Republican. So the fact you take the dittohead complaints seriously says more about you than it does about us that are sick and tired of being scared of immoral little bullies like Bush and Rove and Cheney.
It is not about his so-called “radicalism”, SFHawkguy. It’s just about branding.
I actually wish that he were more “radical”. I wish he’d stand up and say “Fuck ALL ‘a you motherfuckers. Look what you have done to this country. Look what you have done to the world!!!”
Maybe then he wouldn’t need HRC’s help.
Or of course…maybe then he would be so far gone that no amount of help would do him much good.
Damned if I know.
But I DO know this.
His youth, his act, his name and his skin color all brand him
Older, relatively badly educated commoners of Protestant/Catholic/Jewish European descent see him as a threat.
A “furriner”.
He cannot do a damned thing about it.
And there are a lot of them.
And they VOTE!!!
These people see Hilary as someone who is at least close to the trailer park mean. Check it out. She may be an Ivy League multimillionaire, but she is white, Protestant, and she married good ol’ Trashy Boy Bill an’ stuck wif him through thick and thin.
They can RELATE TO HER IMAGE.
In media-poisoned America, that’s about as good as it’s going to get.
Sorry.
And Obama is going to need some help.
Sorry twice.
Deal with it.
AG
Obama isn’t going to need any help. John McCain is going to need some help. John McCain better pick Spider-Man for his running mate or he’ll be lucky to win his home state.
I hope you are right.
And I hope Spiderman doesn’t work for the wrong people, too. Previous history does not reassure me on the latter point.
AG
I agree it’s not about the actual “radicalism” of Democrats but the branding of them as radicals. Republicans have been winning elections and policy battles because they have successfully painted their opponents as something they aren’t–radicals. I am not arguing with you over this fairly obvious fact. What we are debating is how BEST to break this cycle of GOP deceit and Democratic failure.
And I don’t need to get used to it because my entire adult life (since 1992) I have been subjected to this caricature of Democrats as socialist moonbats. It is firmly entrenched in my mind.
I just take away a different lesson from this history. I know a lot of good people have and will fall for the GOP game of pointing out that Obama is black and went to an Ivy League college. But they are not as dumb and racist as you think and there aren’t as many as you think. Sure, Hillary attracted a few racist white Appalachians that would otherwise vote GOP. But the white racist crowd that would vote for Hillary but not Obama is not that large and even if it is, I don’t want them to decide the Democratic nominee.
What makes you a David Brooks-like expert on middle America?
I get my name, SFHawkguy, from doing battle on an Iowa sports message board where I got to debate those Iowans that fall prey to the GOP racist gutter politics (as well as the many that are on the left and the even more than fancy themselves in the middle). So I am not ignorant of what makes people like Elroy below tick. I engage them and hang out with them on occassion and some I am stuck with as family members. But there are a lot of people that are sick and tired of these GOP tricks and really want someone on the left to fight and stand up to these thugs That’s the message I take away from the salt of the earth middle America folks that you claim to know so well. If they had a liberal that was not afraid of his own convictions and stood up the Republicans they might give him a shot. But it will take the entire Democratic party to make this change if we want full scale change. And parties change slowly. Too slowly sometimes.
That’s why I wanted Kucinich. You have to play for the long term and now is the time for liberals to make their case, without apology. Obama doesn’t go far enough for me, but he is definitely going in the right direction. Hillary is more of the same–appease the right-wingers and continue to allow the Democrats to be improperly branded (but she benefits because she buys into the branding while simultaneously undercutting those to the left of her).
You’re on the wrong side of history Arthur.
Obama would have destroyed Jack Ryan as well.
He was leading him in the polls when Ryan had to resign.
The Republican Party in Illinois is as dead as the Hillary campaign.
Want proof. The Democratic Governor is a moron and crook. And he still beats the Republicans handily. They have no one to run.
Obama got “lucky” in that race in the same way that he got “lucky” and was “handed” this race. Which is to say–NOT.
Why do people gloss over the fact that it was a what…4-way primary? And that he was NOT favored? Not by a long shot, I might add.
That was the fight, and it was not a sure bet he’d win.
Of course, if IL could be the first state to elect a Black woman to the Senate, then they could do it again with a Black man. But it was never a done deal nor was it a cakewalk.
Folks need to remember that. There’s been an awful lot of attempts at re-writing history.
I agree it’s a thorny issue. On the one hand you don’t want to disrespect 50% of the Democratic party. But on the other hand you can’t just let Hillary do what she wants, which would be to undermine Obama as much as she can and to simply linger on until Obama is brought down. She would be John McCain’s left flank against Obama. Which would be a potent weapon.
Which is why Democrats need to deliver the death blow. Democrats are tempermental wimps that aren’t used to delivering death blows even to their hated enemies, the Republicans, so I know how hard it is to deliver the death blow to a Clinton. But Dems absolutely need to relearn how to play hardball politics. If they want to ever win again.
Politics is a contact sport. People get over it. Look, I’ve been on the verge of leaving the Democratic party a few times the last couple of years because the party did nothing (and actually enabled) gross violations of the law and constitution by the Bush administration. But here I am, supporting a Democrat for president again, because the Dems are still the best option even if they leave a lot to be desired. Hillary supporters will make the same calculation and move on.
The vocal 5% of middle-aged women who support Hillary that will now support McCain can’t be helped. They are conservatives that vote Democrat or Republican but simply liked Hillary because she is a woman of their generation. We don’t need to appease them.
Show me the evidence.
Where’s the beef?
All talk, no walk.
Full of emptiness.
Frove it.
AG
Show me the evidence.
Where’s the beef?
All talk, no walk.
Full of emptiness.
Prove it.
AG
Evidence? The fact that the two of us are discussing Hillary Clinton instead of Obama vs. McCain. The fact that Hillary will definitely not concede tonight and will keep hope alive for her cadre of supporters who will no doubt continue attacking Obama until she quits. Obama is getting attacked by both McCain and Hillary supporters. We know that the Republicans are going to run a character based campaign because they would get killed on the issues. So they will dust off the old play book and attempt to portray Obama terrorist-appeasing, socialist, racist who consorts with anti-Americans and is married a black bitch (funny thing is she will be the new Hillary–why is it that only Democratic first ladies are fair game?). For an e.g. of how this will play out, see Elroy’s post below. It’s so painfully obvious I am surprised you don’t recognize the play you’ve seen countless times before.
Hillary is not staying in the campaign to push for her issues. She is not attacking Obama based on the issues. All she has left is to mimick the Republican attack on Obama: he’s not experienced, he’s a pussy that won’t fight and will give in to the bad guys, he’s a socialist, he hangs with scary black people, he is an elitist who drinks __ (fill in with elitist drink of day, O.J., wine, latte—not beer or shots of liquor). Hillary is running a character based campaign that at this point that is indistinguishable from GOP attacks; both are free of “issues” except vague assumptions about Obama’s “character”.
Here’s the true question: what issues matter to Clinton supporters other than Mrs. Clinton’s nomination, which is now off the table? If all they want is Clinton, then only time will heal the wound. But if there are specific policy issues on which Obama can give some ground that’s a different matter. It pays to give something to people who can get you elected. The question is finding out what it is, and whether it is compatible with your own goals. We know that some of Clinton’s biggest donors are strongly pro-Israel, and that some will go to McCain in consequence. But it’s just their money; the votes are too few to matter. On health care, that should be in Congress’s hands, where it belongs. The executive is suppose to execute law, not make it.
So the question is: what exactly to the Clintonites want, besides power?
Sorry, I see no reason to embrace Mrs. Clinton and her circle. No, she will not concede. Health care issue: as if she has a monopoly on it or understands it as none other. Why then, did she and her husband let it fail way back then? Still, if somehow Obama stumbles or is brought down, she will be standing there with a dormant campaign ready to get revved up again. I predict she will not have the simple politeness and generosity to concede. Oh, this is politics not a tea party. No it’s not, but within the party this kind of behavior is obnoxious and noxious. Such a lot of attention-seeking by calling a bigwig meeting in NYC on the night that Obama will probably claim the nomination! It stinks. Look everyone, I’m still here. Bill too. Yes, we all have to come together. Yes, we only have to come around Obama. This applies to the Clinton gang as well: they’re only route now is support of Obama gainst McSame, self-aggrandizement or destruction of everything and everyone around them. Let them say what it is openly. You think I’m an old sour puss who can’t let go of my anger? Tell me after a few days if you still think that.
Mixed messages as I’ve seen in a long time. Party elders need to rebuke her and as well her key supporters who place party loyalty as paramount especially in election cycles.
Today Mccain praised Hillary. Hillary has signaled she is working for McCain’s election so she can say, “I told you so”
The Obama camp should consider very carefully working with her to:
I haven’t given money to the Obama campaign to pay Mrs. Clinton’s debts. If she’s a profligate, let her suffer the consequences. If she’s so strapped, let her sell some of her jewels.
Your campaign money to Obama couldn’t be used to pay off Clinton’s debts. That would be illegal. If Obama were to offer to help pay off Clinton’s debts…what he would do is hold fundraisers for that purpose.
Oh, I see. Thanks.
Still, if somehow Obama stumbles or is brought down, she will be standing there with a dormant campaign ready to get revved up again.
You mean if giant pill bugs eat Obama on the way to the convention? Jus when Clinton couldn’t any worse, she says she’s staying in the race in case Obama is assassinated. Talk about wishful thinking. Unbelievable.
Tonight will be about Obama. The focus will be on him. He’s our presumptive nominee! Let’s celebrate.
I actually admire the fight in Hillary. I want Dems to fight their opponents until the bitter end. That’s how you win long term political battles. You have to have the courage of your convictions and the courage to fight until the bitter end.
The main problem I have with Hillary fighting on is that she fights only for her personal vainglory and not for Democratic principles. She did not draw a line in the sand against the Bush administration and fight until the bitter end. No. She only has the courage to fight until the bitter end when it looks like she may lose an election.
Yes. Bill and Hillary fight only for themselves and they are furious that they didn’t come out on top. And they will find any and every way to screw Obama that they can.
Which is sad because they both have so much talent. I’m starting to see that Hillary was the brains behind the team but Bill was the show horse. Bill mastered the third way triangulation politics that was perfect for the 1990s. And I bet Hillary was instrumental in encouraging Bill to take that tact.
Problem is Hillary can’t pull it off as well as Bill and it’s a terrible strategy for 2008. She should have ran in 04.
Once again…
Show me the evidence.
Where’s the beef?
All talk, no walk.
Full of emptiness.
Prove it.
AG
“Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.”
I think this is true in the case of Hillary and of her core supporters. There is nothing you can do to appease them. They will be striking out for “revenge” whenever they can.
And I have to say, if Obama is coerced into taking Hillary on as VP (and I believe he’s too smart for that) I couldn’t vote for that ticket. Even in the face of McBush as president.
Hillary will have plenty of support from the DLC, though it may be covert, because this is a major wound to the DLC and the Blue Dogs. They will not give up their power in the party easily.
I can only hope that the new voters Obama brought to the party will outweigh the dwindling number of die-hard Clintonistas.
I don’t think Obama would offer Hillary the Veep spot, maybe a cabinet post. Besides, why would Hillary want to be VP? She’d have very little power there.
Now THERE’S some sexist bullshit if I EVER heard it.
Good work, “Susan”.
You bought into it.
Nice.
AG
Oh, AG, STFU. You already ruined MLW with you eternally negative, nasty comments. Go soak your head.
You know, that “Hell hath no fury” thing is one of the few Shakespearean quotes that do not stand the test of time.
Times change, Susan.
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news.
Now…”Hell hath no fury like a blogger pinned…?”
THERE’S one for the ages.
AG
P.S. Cheer up.
I didn’t “ruin” MLW.
It was always a soap opera.
i just helped to eliminate a couple of egregious villains from the mix.
Your comments are neither informative nor intelligent. Your comments irritate me past all bearing, especially when you comment on MY comments. I’m sure I have several decades and several I.Q. points on you, AG. So peddle your manure to somebody else. If you don’t like what I write, well, too bad. I didn’t write it for your edification or approval. I try to skip your comments, except when you pick at mine. You are not the arbiter of everything. And, despite your apparent certainty, you are not always correct.
Now I’ve had my say and I’ll ignore you, just as I did at MLW.
Bet on it.
Feel free.
I don’t know about the decades OR the IQ points, though.
In which directions do you mean that statement?
AG
Lotta troll-feeding going on here.
With the usual results, I might add.
It is amusing to see the democratic party suffering from the same type of smear, mis-statements, and cut throat tactics that they have employed against George Bush and his administration for the last 8 years. What is even more amazing is that none of you see the hypocrisy in yourselves.
Many of you cried out that the war in Iraq is unjust when democrats during the first Iraq War called for Saddam to be ousted due to the clear evidence that he had WMD’s and that he was in Amnesty International’s decription a tyrant and was guilty of crimes against humanity. If this sounds contrived go back and listen to Al Gore and other US Senators and their statements about Iraq. Amnesty International now codems the US for doing it. I wonder if they wouldve done that if ol’ Billy boy had been Prez?
Most of you cried “War for Oil!” and now we pay $4.00 per gallon. If anyone pointed to this and corrected you, I am certain a socialist would say Bush’s plan backfired. The reality is that oil prices did not see their mercurial rise until the socialists gained both houses of congress.
Most of you shouted that the surge wouldn’t work. That it just more Cowboy diplomacy, but now that it is working…you maintain the same old rhetoric about how Bush has ruined America. And you do this without trying to really discover the facts.
When Katrina happened, socialists screamed “where is Bush?” The fact that The Mayor of New Orleans and the Governor of LA (both Democrats) were both in the general vicinty and failed to respond is ignored and forgotten. Hell Nagen is still Mayor. It always seemed odd to me that when natural disasters happen in other States, the governor calls up the national guard and calls for federal assistance. It is not presupposed that the President shuld arrive on the ground within minutes or hours to assist. The Governor of LA hesitated and hesitated and hesitated until all of New Orleans was utter chaos. This is not to mention Nagen’s failure to put people on school buses in New Orleans and move them inland to other LA city’s shelters. Or, even more astounding would have been if poeple had used their legs and walked out of New Orleans, but they just knew the gubment would come to the rescue. Socialists can thank their media machine that their party got a limited amount of the poo-poo filled flood waters in their face for the Katrina fiasco. It was all reserved for George W. Bush.
Socialists think that Obama will unite America. This could not be further from the truth. If he does somehowe get to be president, he will do nothing but divide America. Most of Obama’s ideas rest in the concept of entitlement which is another word for socialism. The American Dream was never intended to be given but earned. For those of us who actually work, support our families, and want the government to stay out of site and mind, and especially out of our wallets, we will be flipping the heaviest tax bill of all time for the psuedo-unifier with the black shield.
The reality is that everyone will pay. He says that he will take care of the middle class. I think he means lower class. And even they will pay since he has already said he will increase the payroll tax. That means that everybody will be pay for the communist dream he is so earnestly trying to hide.
Ben Franklin once said you can judge a man’s character by the company he keeps. Lets see, Obama’s family and his money have supported a socialist coup in Kenya. His preacher likes to “goddamn” America and hates whites. This is a minister he listened to and prayed under for 20 years but none Mr.Jeremiah’s ideas took? right. He has association with known terrorists, and his wife is a rascists who more than likely believes that whites need to be subjugated or killed.
Here’s hoping and praying to God…that would be Jesus Christ! that Hillary stays in this thing and fights tooth and nail. The more she does to discredit and dimean Barack Hussein Muhammed Obama (his real name at birth) the better.
One last note. if Barack becomes President and is assasinated, Americans will get to live in a more dangerous time than we have ever lived in before. I dont think civil war will describe what will transgress in the months following his death. Here’s to hoping if he is President that they always have 200 well armed men around him at all times.
All you have is tired stereotypes. Socialist! He hates America! Hussein! Osama! Muhammed!
Well. Bring it on punk.
I suspect that not even you believes this tripe that passes for your “points”, although I do give you credit that you went beyond the cries of “socialist” and that Obama hates America and actually pointed to some policy issues you fault Democrats for. So good on you even though you obviously have little understanding of these issues. Democrats raised gas prices? Did you get your economics degree from McCain University? Or that other Arizona institute of higher learning?
And you don’t like hypocrites? Well, you’re going to hate John McCain then. He opposed Bush’s tax cuts for the rich. He opposed torture and illegal spying on Americans. Well, that is before he had to appeal to people like you and he, um, reversed course. Are you bringing your flip flops to the Minneapolis?
you’ve got a dark vision, elroy. You’ve got some facts in there but a lot of distorted facts, too.
Presidents often fail to live up to their campaign promises or do things that they didn’t say they were going to do. That’s partly because no one ever got elected president without pandering and its partly because they have to live with Congress and what Congress is willing to let them do.
But Obama’s stated positions on the payroll tax is not that he will raise the rate, but the amount of income that is subjected to the tax. So it will effect people making over about 93,000 a year.
His income tax proposal would cut taxes on the middle rates and raise the highest rate from 33 to 39 percent. Again, this will only effect the richest people in the country.
So, you may not like higher taxes, but some people will be getting lower taxes.
As for the hypocrisy charge, it’s not hypocritical to fight hard in a campaign and object to the other side using sleazeball tactics.
And you’ve imbibed a lot of sleazeball. Obama isn’t some white-hating politician. Does he hate his mother? His grandparents? Does he hate half of his sister and half of himself?
Michelle Obama doesn’t hate white people either. She married into a white family, remember?
Just relax, Elroy, President Obama won’t hurt a bit.
A lot of bad facts indeed. Standard operating procedure by the ditto heads. It would take forever to unpack the faulty premises and facts in his comment. That’s why he throws out words like “socialist” or “communist”. I bet he barely even has a definitional understanding of those words let alone does he have a more complete picture of modern economic theory. Almost every American politician is far from being described as a socialist. I don’t know any serious person that would call the modern Democratic party socialist. It’s laughable. The word has no meaning except as a slur to him. He might as well be saying “Obama is a big poopy pants.”
And if he is going to throw the “socialist” or “communist” label on Obama, then to be consistent, he should also put that label on Ronnie Reagan, because Obama wants to tax us at about the same rate as Reagan did.
Brutal,
Oh shaddup.
Oh, Hillary wants to be the VP to socialist Obama LOL!
Of course she won’t go away. She is running for 2012.
But just ignore her. She will become a national joke in no time.
And sorry to Hillary supporters, but you have got to get over it. We have nothing against woman, I would love a woman president. It just won’t be a lying, race-baiting smearjob like Hillary.
Obama will reach the woman. What he does is listen and will work for all their causes.
What he will never get is the inbred, appalacian, racist vote. And he will do fine without it.
They were never fans of Hillary, they just hated the black guy more.
So here’s the deal. To all the appalachians. Free bottle of moonshine if you stay home on election day.
Done. Landslide Obama.