Top Leaderboard, Site wide
Shop the Truthdig Gift Guide 2014
December 20, 2014
Truthdig: Drilling Beneath the Headlines
Sign up for Truthdig's Email NewsletterLike Truthdig on FacebookFollow Truthdig on TwitterSubscribe to Truthdig's RSS Feed

Get Truthdig's headlines in your inbox!


Loss of Rainforests Is Double Whammy Threat to Climate






Truthdig Bazaar
Geronimo

Geronimo

By Robert M. Utley
$30.00

more items

 
Report

Maybe It?s a Guy Thing

Email this item Email    Print this item Print    Share this item... Share

Posted on Mar 31, 2008

By Marie Cocco

    WASHINGTON—Have you noticed something similar about those Barack Obama campaign surrogates and the media soothsayers who have started a drum-beat to force Hillary Clinton out of the Democratic presidential contest? Hint: They tend to share a certain anatomical attribute.

    I guess the boys are just being boys again. They’ve failed to dispatch Clinton in the race thus far—remember, they were predicting the fall of the “house of Clinton” in New Hampshire. Then Kennedy magic was supposed to transform Obama into the anointed nominee on Super Tuesday, but star-power appearances in California by the women of Camelot failed to help Obama there, and not even Ted Kennedy could deliver his home state of Massachusetts. Clinton won decisively in the Bay State and took all the big states on Super Tuesday, except Obama’s home state of Illinois and Missouri, where he edged her by a single percentage point.

    Clinton then was supposed to bow out after March 4 if she did not win the crucial states of Texas and Ohio. But darn! She messed up their game plan again by winning both of those states—and Rhode Island, too.

    Those looking ahead now see no way, based on current polling and the way the demographics of Pennsylvania break down, that Obama will win that next mega-state on April 22. Those looking even further ahead see only more uncertainty—a series of contests lasting until June in which some states seem to naturally favor Clinton (Kentucky, West Virginia) while others seem to favor Obama (North Carolina, Oregon).

    Since we’re talking boy-talk here, we might as well get right into their rhetorical comfort zone: Obama now is ahead by a field goal in the third quarter. But the fourth quarter has yet to be played and who knows what the score will be at the end of regulation? So here’s their plan, hatched in the locker room: Push Clinton off the field now so that Obama can take his early victory lap.

Advertisement

Square, Site wide
    Obama denies that he is personally behind this strategy. But let’s face it. The pronouncements by Sens. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., and Chris Dodd, D-Conn., both big-name Obama supporters and superdelegates, that Clinton needs to limp away with her head held low looked terribly orchestrated.

    Leahy was particularly odious when, after declaring Clinton had “no way” to win the nomination, he offered her a very warm seat. It happens to be one she already holds and it is, of course, comfortably below the glass ceiling. “Frankly, I feel that she would have a tremendous career in the Senate,” Leahy declared.

    If it weren’t so galling, it would be amusing to watch the Democratic men shuffling nervously in their television studio chairs, trying to conceal the audacity of their arrogance. For they have something in common besides their anatomy: It’s Hillary Clinton. For nearly two decades, she’s raised more money for more Democrats than anyone except, perhaps, Bill Clinton. She’s certainly done more obligatory “Women-for-(Your Candidate’s Name Here)” events than, say, the Obama girl on YouTube.

    Now Clinton’s methodical, dogged history of work for the Democratic Party is treated just like the methodical, dogged histories of so many women in the workplace: Having come this far she must not go too far. She must step aside to take the smaller office, with the lesser title and the lower pay to make room for the younger guy with the thinner résumé. And please, would she just go quietly like a good girl?

    Maybe it is true that Clinton has no realistic way to win the nomination. But Obama hasn’t won it either—and contrary to the myth his campaign has spun, Obama can’t win without superdelegates to put him over the top.

    Somehow the Obama campaign has come to believe that insulting Clinton is the same as beating her. It isn’t. And insulting her supporters—especially women and, in particular, working-class women, who have clung to her candidacy all these months—isn’t much of a general-election victory strategy. Women were 54 percent of the electorate in the presidential election of 2004. Without their support, Al Gore would not have won the popular vote in 2000 and John Kerry wouldn’t have come so close in 2004. Women voters put Democrats in control of Congress in 2006.

    So, the Obama campaign can continue trying to get its allies in the media and various party pooh-bahs to push Clinton aside early. Or Obama can welcome the fight—and win it like a man.
   
    Marie Cocco’s e-mail address is mariecocco(at)washpost.com.
   
    © 2008, Washington Post Writers Group


New and Improved Comments

If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.

By bert, April 4, 2008 at 12:11 pm Link to this comment

cyrena replies to my proof that Obama campaigned in FL with this little gem:  <<<  “because neither Obama or his campaign sanctioned the ads, and they didn’t run long.”  >>>>>

The Obama campaign PAID for the ads out of the Obama campaign treasury. How is that NOT sanctioning the ads? You are talking out of both sides of your mouth and another orifice on the human body. The “rules’ said NO campaigning. PERIOD. Campaign ads that didn’t run long is still campaigning, and there is no way round that.

Look. Your candidate lost FL big time even with ads. Hillary did not break the rules and she clobbered him without any ads.

Obama will still need FL to win in the November.So he and you should not be writing Fl off.

Report this

By cyrena, April 4, 2008 at 11:47 am Link to this comment

Outraged,

I can only say that Bert can’t spell, and is either too stupid or too arrogant to use a spell checker.

And, no I can’t explain why she doesn’t understand the rules that were established long before the issues in MI and FL came about.

She is right about ONE thing. The ads that were briefly aired in Florida ‘featuring’ Obama WERE aired on CNN and MSNBC. So I had THAT part wrong, and I stand corrected.

I’ll only add that it doesn’t matter worth a flying fig ANYWAY, because neither Obama or his campaign sanctioned the ads, and they didn’t run long.

Oh, should I add the part about how it doesn’t matter anyway, since the rules were already determined long before then, that the FLIPPIN’ VOTES WERE NOT GOING TO COUNT?

And I guess I could also say that bert could give less than a damn about the actual goings on in Washington DC, or who the president actually is, or what effect any of that is going to have on the rest of us.

BECAUSE…bert is just the confrontational and combative type person, mad at the world all of her life, who simply NEEDS the chaos and negativity of a gutter fight.

My mother would call her a shit-starting agitator. My dad would say she thrives in the gutter, and only in the gutter, wrestling with the snakes and the alligators. I would say that she probably even WINS sometimes with those snakes and alligators.

But THEN, even after she ‘wins’, she’s still pissed off, and has to go pick a fight with a skunk. AND, I’d bet she can out-skunk the best of them as well!!That is where she thrives.

And check this out, she’s as much as already conceded the primaries to Obama. Claims he’s gonna lose in NOVEMBER!

So, she and lib in Tx should see if they can get a discount on a shared room at the psychiatric facility of their choice. Haters like them get along with each other. At least as long as there’s a swamp or gutter nearby to keep them entertained.

Report this

By Paracelsus, April 4, 2008 at 10:31 am Link to this comment

Not at all. I heard Conservative Yankee talk about Massachusetts and I thought I would give something back. I think I will enlarge the album some more.

Report this

By bert, April 4, 2008 at 9:53 am Link to this comment

<< Obama DID NOT campaign in Florida, and he didn’t run any of his OWN campaign ads in Florida. >>

WRONG

<< RATHER, the ads that were televised in FLorida, were ads created by the DNC,  >> 

WHAT DNC ADS? PROVE THAT WITH A CITATION.

<<  and long before any campaigning actually began ANYWHERE! CBS and ABC chose to air those ads, >>

WRONG AGAIN CYRENA. THE ADS RAN ON CNN AND MSNBC.

MY CITATIONS FOR ABOVE COMMENTS BELOW

The Obama campaign aired PAID television advertisements on national cable a CNN and MSNBC buy that includes advertising in the state of Florida.

****citation****** From Time magazine’s on-line blog, Swampland; Jan. 21, 08 .:  “Also today Obama began running national ads on CNN and MSNBC, a buy that includes Florida.”

Even though this was a regional buy, it is and was possible for Obama to ask that the FL market be blocked from the buy.

There is no question that these ads were a clear and blatant violation of the early-state pledge that Senator Obama and Clinton signed.

The early state pledge was crystal clear in its prohibition against any kind of campaign activity (outside of FUNDRAISING) in states that did not adhere to the DNC calendar.

Among the list of prohibited activities are “electronic advertising that reaches a significant percentage of the voters in the aforementioned state.” (According to Nielsen, there are 6.6 million TV households in Florida that receive CNN through either local cable systems or satellite dishes. This represents 92% of all Florida TV households.) The Obama campaign knew this, but chose to violate the pledge regardless.

So cyrena, once again you are caught playing loose and easy with the facts. Fundraising was not a prohibited activity in FL. SCORE ONE FOR HILLARY.

But electronic advertising was prohibited and Obama clearly engaged in that. NAUGHTY NAUGHTY. I think we should penalize Obama by counting the FL vote actually as it is.

MAYBE BEFORE YOU DO SO MUCH PONTIFICATING AND BSing YOU SHOULD JUST DO A GOOGLE.

I may be a lousy typist, but by and large I get the freaking facts correct. I’d rather be correct on my facts than spell lies, propaganda, and pure ca ca correctly.

Report this

By Sue Cook, April 4, 2008 at 9:25 am Link to this comment

Thank you for the lenghtly tonque lashing.  I promise my reply will be less winded.

Can you repeat that please?  Whew! you must have a LOT of time on your hands!  Sorry, but I don’t.

I’ll say it again, ALL politicians LIE!

I like Hillary and you like Barack, and after reading all stats you put forth on them both, I don’t know why either of us bother. 

Peace.

Report this

By lib in texas, April 4, 2008 at 8:29 am Link to this comment

Outraged, you comment on God but no comment on destroying all whites???? Where’s your concern about that???? Apparently there is none!!!!

Report this

By bert, April 3, 2008 at 11:28 pm Link to this comment

Can’t deal with the substance of my comment, eh, outraged? So you try diversion. Works for Obama. But I am not as easily duped as his adoring crowds.Good try though.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, April 3, 2008 at 10:10 pm Link to this comment

I know you explained the other thing Cyrena, but I’m still confused….  Can you explain these words to me I don’t think they taught me them in elementary school.

  “cheaying”, “antidotal”, “Whay”, “satte”, “ppliticians”

In “bert’s iconoclastic verbiage:

“NO, I DON"T UNDERSTAND THAT !!!!!!!”

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, April 3, 2008 at 9:47 pm Link to this comment

Cool Paracelsus, I like that. I love rural America, wherever it is.  Having been busy with the more cantankerous among us, I hadn’t had the chance to check them out earlier, I did notice your post though. Thanks!  A breath of fresh air…

Report this

By cyrena, April 3, 2008 at 9:35 pm Link to this comment

Bert writes:

“....And you are right, the candidates only agreed, as you state, not to CAMPAIGN in FL. Yet Obama campaigned by running TV ads in FL. Whay was he not penalized….”


And, for about the umpteenth time, I respond with…Obama DID NOT campaign in Florida, and he didn’t run any of his OWN campaign ads in Florida.

RATHER, the ads that were televised in FLorida, were ads created by the DNC, and long before any campaigning actually began ANYWHERE! CBS and ABC chose to air those ads, as the basically now PRIVITIZED media that all networks have become. They didn’t ‘ask permission’ of the Obama campaign to air those ads, they just DID.

And, it wasn’t for long either. As soon as the Obama campaign got wind of it, they stopped airing them.


HILLARY was IN Florida, in the flesh, during the Florida primaries. She was in attendance at two PRIVATELY SPONSORED FUNDRAISERS. (read PAC’s)

I don’t know where Obama was at the time, but it damn sure wasn’t Florida.

Report this

By bert, April 3, 2008 at 9:26 pm Link to this comment

April 3 at 4:50 am #

<<<<<<<<<<  Florida vote

I had to be in Florida for during the primaries . . . I heard a lot about how HRC was perceived to have ‘cheated” by having her name on the ballot when everyone agreed not to campaign there . . .  >>>>>>>

SINCE OBAMA WAS ALSO ON THE BALLOT IN FLORIDA THEN HE CHEATED TOO.  Thanks for confirming that for all of us wordsonfire.  smile  smile  smile

Your hearing a lot about cheaying is only antidotal and as such pretty much meaningless.

And you are right, the candidates only agreed, as you state, not to CAMPAIGN in FL. Yet Obama campaigned by running TV ads in FL. Whay was he not penalized.

<<<<<<<<<  Does everyone understand that Florida and Michigan made their beds and knew the consequences of their early primaries?  >>>>>>>

NO, I DON"T UNDERSTAND THAT !!!!!!!

The voters in MI and FL were at the mercy of their respective satte legislatures, ppliticians, and courts. The average voter had no say in the matter.

PLUS both NC and MV also broke the Dems rules but they were NOT penalized. So why FL and MI?

Report this

By bert, April 3, 2008 at 9:14 pm Link to this comment

<<<<<<<<<  Senator Clinton lied in a very self-serving way about events in a public appearance as a representative of the US.  >>>>>>>>>

Obama lied in a very self serving way in public appearances as a candidate for a U.S. office when he lied repeatedly about Wright. And he only fessed up after the tapes surfaced. Now that is self serving in a save my ass political way.

Plus no one is saying Obama has to pass a religious test. But he has, for many of us, has failed a judgement test. He remained a active memeber if this church and had Wright as a spiritual mentor and advisor.

BIT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO

Report this

By bert, April 3, 2008 at 9:03 pm Link to this comment

You make a lot of good points. Maybe I feel that way because I am one of those white women Democrats over 40. I did not know that we make up the largest voting block in the country. Do oyu have a source for that. I knew that we have been voting consistently for Hillary. (Although originally I supported Edwards, but by the time my state held its primary election only 2 candidates were left and so I went with Hillary because as Joe in Maine so eloquently put it on a different thread here, “she can beat the snot’ out of McCain. And she can given the chance.

So thanks for the support and the great post.

Report this

By bert, April 3, 2008 at 8:54 pm Link to this comment

<<<<<<<<<<<  I think you mistake god with religion.  It is possible to believe in god without believing in any certain religion and the various credos? >>>>>>>>>>>>>

I think so. I do. While I am not religious I am spiritual. I am just not in to any organized religion.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, April 3, 2008 at 8:34 pm Link to this comment

lib in Texas

I’m curious… what makes you think I’m racist?

Report this

By lib in texas, April 3, 2008 at 7:41 pm Link to this comment

Outraged, Destroying the white race doesn’t even deserve a comment.  I see you racists calling everyone else that when in fact it is YOU!!!!!!

Report this

By lib in texas, April 3, 2008 at 7:38 pm Link to this comment

Well mill, Obama had twenty years to figure it out so my only conclusion is   He like it!!!

Report this

By mill, April 3, 2008 at 7:04 pm Link to this comment

Do you believe that Senator Obama holds the views that you assign to his alleged mentors?  Does he support or advocate their point of view?

You guilt by association attack on Senator Obama is unfair and misleading. 

Almost every national level politician has had the company of someone who’s beliefs or actions shock most people.

Report this

By mill, April 3, 2008 at 6:45 pm Link to this comment

“So all you woman out there…”  “Don’t fail Hillary or yourselves, you have the power and chance of a life time to make a huge difference in how woman who rightly belong have been shunned again and again due to male superiority and big ego’s and yes SEXISM! “

Simplistic sexist thinking is not the way to overcome the good-ol-boy sexism giving the NY Senator problems

I plan to vote for a candidate who wants to be president of the boys as well as the girls. if you are as she is, why would any male support your candidate, whether we are feminists or red-necks?

Report this

By mill, April 3, 2008 at 6:26 pm Link to this comment

Senator Clinton lied in a very self-serving way about events in a public appearance as a representative of the US. 

Senator Obama, when he discusses anything about his religious life,  suffers unwarranted intrusions into his First Amendment-protected private religious life, what ever the rationalizations by the inquisitors.  I’d rather he ignore any more questions about religion.  He’s not running for national pastor/rabbi/imam

The Constitution states there shall be no religious test for public office -  if only.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 3, 2008 at 2:24 pm Link to this comment

I think you mistake god with religion.  It is possible to believe in god without believing in any certain religion and the various credos.

Report this

By vcjpolitics, April 3, 2008 at 1:55 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Let me see if I understand you: if my opinions on Hillary do not coincide with yours, then I am bitter? Perhaps you should check your condescending attitude at the door. It doesn’t take any thought or maturity to be snide; it does to present a compelling argument.

I find it interesting that you did not address or deny any of the issues that I broached regarding Hillary Clinton. Instead, the best that you could do is point the finger and whine, “They do it, too!” That didn’t fly in kindergarten, and it won’t wash now. I, however, will address your post point-by-point.

If you consider lying about being shot at is nothing more than “a little white lie,” I suggest that you go and spend time with people living in urban areas right here in the U.S. These people, on a daily basis, live with the reality that they or their children might be shot while trying to go about their normal lives. Compare that with HRC using a completely false story to win political brownie points, and it doesn’t take a cynic to see how cold and callous she is.

As for Obama’s “very liberal record,” you would do well to compare his and Hillary’s voting records against liberal and conservative groups’ criteria. Project Vote Smart keeps aggregate statistics for numerous groups and issues covering the political spectrum. You will find that Obama and HRC are rated within single-digit percentage points of each other on the ideology of their votes; in fact, their scores are identical on a majority of the line items. Overall, neither of them would be the darling of “very liberal” or progressive voting blocs, as you will see under the LIBERAL category on PVS’s website. You can view all the ratings via the following links:

Obama: http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=9490
Clinton: http://www.votesmart.org/issue_rating_category.php?can_id=55463

Addressing Obama’s voting “present”—anyone remotely familiar with the Congressional Record knows that votes are not recorded as “present.” They are recorded as “yea,” “nay,” or “not voting.” Not voting includes present, not voting, excused, or absent. Not all votes are roll call votes, nor is a member of Congress needed to or required to vote on every piece of legislation that comes down the pike. Hence, a member can indicate present to show that s/he was in chamber but did not need or was not required to vote on the bill. Not voting is an abstention. Excused and absent are self-explanatory.

Do you give your opinion on every subject someone asks you about? Of course not, because you do not always have the time or enough information to weigh in intelligently. Indeed, a member may have a legitimate or, yes, a politically expedient reason for not voting on a bill. These people do have to run for re-election; even the most innocuous of votes can come back to haunt them. This is an unfortunate political reality. Nonetheless, if you look at the votes of each Senator for the current session of Congress, you will find that six of the top seven who missed votes were running for President in the primaries. Miss votes while campaigning? Shocking! Obama missed 37.5% of his votes, while Hillary missed 26.9%—neither of which is out of line for primary candidates. If you want to be alarmed, check out John McCain’s 56.4% missed-vote rate. (By the way, the top vote-misser was Tim Johnson, who was busy recovering from a near-fatal brain aneurysm. I am sure that he will contact you shortly to beg your forgiveness.)

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/110/senate/vote-missers/

Oh, before you go off-topic again by saying, “I meant when Obama was in the Illinois state legislature,” I’ll let Keith Olbermann take you and Tony Snow to school on that one:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23926746#23926746

As for Obama being a savior, I am not looking for a Deliverer. It is time for a change, and I am willing to give Barack Obama his shot. God knows that he cannot do any worse than his four predecessors.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, April 3, 2008 at 1:47 pm Link to this comment

Well, “lib in Texas” you’ve got this partially correct.  It just goes to show you how religion divides instead of uniting people.  However this “killing of god” is directly the same as the killing of the “darker skinned Jesus”, which we know historically, is accurate.  White christian churches have definitely “killed the darker Jesus”(the historically accurate Jesus) and replaced him with a white Jesus.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, April 3, 2008 at 1:37 pm Link to this comment

Funny Chalmers, that you speak of “god’s love”. I thought you hated the Christian Zionists and the Israeli Jews.  You have consistently spoken out against them.  Which “god” are you talking about? You’ve claimed in the past to have “a spirituality” but not an actual god.  Have you changed your position?

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, April 3, 2008 at 11:42 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Mr. Chalmers says:

“Pity those who would reject “god’s love”, though, lib in texas. That is at the very core of our existence - all of us!”

All, Always, None, Never, Everyone, no one… all words which should be avoided, for with 6, going on 7 Billion people these words just don’t work.

God is a fairy-tale (To me) his “love” is non-existent, and the concept of religion is based on the the unfair aspect of bad things happening (all the time) to good or totally innocent people.

James “Whitey” Bulger won the Massachusetts lottery the hit was for 14 million of which Bulger claimed 25%!

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, April 3, 2008 at 11:03 am Link to this comment

By lib in texas, April 3: “Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community…”

“Righteousness” in English language white parlance once meant something like being spiritually sensitive. But usage over the generations has meant that ‘self-righteousness’ has utterly corrupted that ideal.

That is a lower state of mind altogether than any genuine spirituality. It has its basis in doing for oneself rather than for others. That is the great failing….

Spiritual complacency is not doing for others either, though, and that is where most churches, black and white are so limited. That’s only ‘good time’ religion…....

But perhaps the love of God is ‘destroying’ white cvilization anyway? Everything is in a state of flux and the next awful thing that poor downtrodden black Americans will have to face is a world ruled over by China and India.

If there is one thing these people DON’T have a problem with, it is the color of their skins. Pity those who would reject “god’s love”, though, lib in texas. That is at the very core of our existence - all of us!

Report this

By Douglas Chalmers, April 3, 2008 at 10:43 am Link to this comment

Nobody can handle religion, Sue. Its basically over most peoples’ heads…....

Report this

By JC Andrews, April 3, 2008 at 9:13 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

People should stop whining about how Hillary is using tough tactics.  Hillary is teaching Obama how to fight in a campaign.  She looks like the teacher and he looks like the student.

This is powderpuff.  Did anyone notice how the Fox news channels were running the Wright story?  The Clintons know how to fight the Republicans.  At the beginning of this campaign, Obama wasn’t ready for the big leagues.

How can Obama reach across the aisle if all his votes are liberal? You cannot reach across the aisle unless you compromise.  Hillary has cast Republican votes, where a Liberal vote wouldn’t matter anyway.  For the young people out there, that is called politics.

I notice Obama is against gay marriage.  Is that because he really thinks it is bad?  Or because it is politically expedient? 

White women democrats over 40 make up the largest voting block of any in the country. And, the party is casting them off like nobody cares. I think it is great that African Americans are voting for Obama, but the vast majority live in red states.  And college kids, well, the population is the US is shrinking. 

Stop pissing off older white women!  They already feel like people throw them aside like useless rags.  They are the democrats who have been teachers, nurses, social workers, etc.  Many of them have been abused by male bosses.  Their lifetime of anger will surface at the voting booth, and I think Obama will have a harder time winning than he thinks.

Report this

By Sue Cook, April 3, 2008 at 9:13 am Link to this comment

here, here! I say, BRAVA!!!

Report this

By Sue Cook, April 3, 2008 at 8:59 am Link to this comment

“Reasonable people of average intelligence are NOT going to elect a president that has already proven, (by her Senatorial voting record) that she’s willing to sell every last one of us down the swamp in order to obtain the ‘POWER of the office’.”

If you think by your last sentence that this just applies to Hillary, than I question YOUR average intelligence on political figures.

Report this

By Sue Cook, April 3, 2008 at 8:49 am Link to this comment

What about Obams’s lie regarding Rev.Wright?

It seems that is a much larger conflict vs Hillary and her “sniper” story.

Report this

By bert, April 3, 2008 at 8:15 am Link to this comment

AMEN Sue. You tell it like it is. But your truth will fall on deaf ears here with many.

Report this

By lib in texas, April 3, 2008 at 8:06 am Link to this comment

Oh yea, thats what it says.Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill gods who do not belong to the black community
... Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.
Please Google this stuff yourself as I would love to be proved wrong.  Check out Jim Davis at News Max,
Rod Dreher, Dallas Morning News, Obama Mentors, James Cone,founder of black liberation theology, Kamau Kambon, N Carolina St University proffessor, Quote at Howard University “We have to exterminate white people” Khalid Adul Muhammad honored ancestor of Kambon, but someone with the name of Khalid is somehow involved in getting Obama into Harvard.

Report this

By lib in texas, April 3, 2008 at 7:22 am Link to this comment

wordldNetDaily /april 3, 2008


Rev. Jeremiah Wright in interview last year on ‘Hannity and Colmes’
Barack Obama’s suddenly radioactive pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, has defended himself against charges of anti-Americanism and racism by referring to his foundational philosophy, the “black liberation theology” of scholars such as James Cone, who regard Jesus Christ as a “black messiah” and blacks as “the chosen people” who will only accept a god who assists their aim of destroying the “white enemy.”

“If God is not for us and against white people,” writes Cone, “then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill gods who do not belong to the black community.”

Report this

By Sue Cook, April 3, 2008 at 5:55 am Link to this comment

You sound bitter.

But, let me remind you also that Obama has told his share of little white lies too.

They all do, that’s politics for you.

And his very liberal voting record, (when he wasn’t voting “present”) might turn out to be a burden to him.

I like Barack, don’t get me wrong, but he is not the saviour people like you make him out to be.

He’s a politician like the rest, capable of all you accuse Hillary as being.

End of story

Deal with it.

Report this

By wordsonfire, April 3, 2008 at 5:50 am Link to this comment

I had to be in Florida for during the primaries . . . I heard a lot about how HRC was perceived to have ‘cheated” by having her name on the ballot when everyone agreed not to campaign there . . .

Does everyone understand that Florida and Michigan made their beds and knew the consequences of their early primaries?

BTW did you hear the testimony of Goodling yesterday anyone?  Where she says “I broke a few rules.”  and her examiner says “you broke a few laws, not rules, laws?”  it was brilliant!

Report this

By wordsonfire, April 3, 2008 at 5:42 am Link to this comment

We still get to say it . . . that’s my theory Cyrena!!!  smile

I did an “amen sister” on the other thread and thought . . . hmmm I’m an athiest, can I still say it!

I decided not to disclaimer it, but am laughing now, because clearly you and I have very much in common in how we think and write!

m!

Report this

By bert, April 2, 2008 at 11:41 pm Link to this comment

<<<<<<<<<<  End of story. >>>>>>>>

Promise.

Report this

By bert, April 2, 2008 at 11:38 pm Link to this comment

<<<<<<<<<  connection between Hillary Clinton’s voting record, and her UNPOPULARITY with US citizens of all classes, ages, and genders, >>>>>>>

Gee, I didn’t think that a popular vote total (so far) of 12, 638, 126 Americans meant some one was unpopular.

By that calculation I guess 13, 355, 209 votes means you are unpopular too.

The reason you don’t like facts is they show how full of it you really are.

Report this

By Paracelsus, April 2, 2008 at 11:33 pm Link to this comment

I decided to displayed some pics of Massachusetts countryside. smile


Mass Album

Report this

By cyrena, April 2, 2008 at 10:15 pm Link to this comment

Bert hon, I think this was what Purple Girl was referring to about Hillary losing all hearts and minds of caring and intelligent people. Actually, she even said it in her post, and then vcjpolitics backed it up in her post, with this..

•  “…Hillary Clinton lost what little residual integrity she had left when she voted in favor of both the Patriot Act and the Iraq War. She proceeded to compound her errors by trying to out-hawk the Republican hawks, ostensibly to show how “tough” and patriotic she was.’…

So, it’s not a ‘gem’ that anyone ‘made up’ – hon! It’s just the facts. It’s what is in the Congressional record!! You don’t even GET THAT, do you hon?

Now for at least the 3rd time, (maybe more) on just this thread only, the connection between Hillary Clinton’s voting record, and her UNPOPULARITY with US citizens of all classes, ages, and genders, amounts to stuff like this..

She voted for the illegal authorization to commit an aggressive invasion and occupation of another sovereign state. In this case. Iraq. THAT is one of the ‘votes’ that we’re talking about here bert hon, and it’s a whopper.

HRC also voted in FAVOR of the Patriot Act which has repealed the basic rights of citizens afforded by the Bill of Rights. That has been an obscene act of treason AGAINST THE AMERICAN POPULATION. In short bert, the Patriot Act was among the first undoings of the democracy as we knew it prior to the highjacking of our country by the gangsters that are continuing to hold us hostage. The Patriot Act is a crime against the Constitution of the USA, and Hillary was perfectly willing to go along with it.
Now this is important EVEN for those callous and uncaring among us, who don’t even care that millions of people have been left dead, or had their lives permanently destroyed by the illegal war on Iraq, which Hillary also approved.

Are you following this so far hon?

Yes, I could go on about the other ‘votes’ that Hillary has ‘racked up’ in her time in the US Senate, that affect not just New Yorkers, (her adopted state since 8 years ago, because we know that HER ‘home’ state is Arkansas). I could (again) mention her recent support for the Kyle-Lieberman amendment, which basically provides an authorization to attack Iran as well. (as does the original authorization to do war on Iraq). I could mention her approval of new bankruptcy legislation that has reigned even more strife and distress on millions of hard working Americans. I could mention her approval (vote) for a legislation that would allow lenders a supposed ‘cap’ as high as 30% on credit card interest. (that’s the one she said she voted for, but ‘hoped wouldn’t pass’).

I could mention many more of HRC’s votes for legislation that has put us all in danger, from terrorists and oligarchies. Her support for such measures has resulted in an economy that has left the entire nation in shattered tatters. (except for her ‘group’ of course).

But, this should do it for now bert. So lay off the sauce, and stop giving us all of these bullshit statistics on alleged votes in MI or FL that Hillary and the rest of us knew would not be recognized, before they even happened.

Reasonable people of average intelligence are NOT going to elect a president that has already proven, (by her Senatorial voting record) that she’s willing to sell every last one of us down the swamp in order to obtain the ‘POWER of the office’.

Report this

By Mary, April 2, 2008 at 10:08 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

...is right here on Truthdig: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080331_the_clinton_backlash/

Can the Dems ever resist the opportunity to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?  The Repugs should have no chance of winning this election except for the damage that will be done to the Dem nominee by the OTHER DEM CANDIDATE well before the convention is even held!!!

As a New Yorker I can recall that in 1990 we had an opportunity to get rid of the execrable Sen. Alfonse D’Amato which went down in flames after several Dems, including Elizabeth Holtzman, Gerry Ferraro and Robert Abrams, beat the stuffing out of each other before the primary.  So much mud was thrown that it was impossible for the survivor to win the election, thus we were stuck with this cavone for another six years.  Hillary did not live here then or she would know this.

This is merely an analogy, as it was by no means as catastrophic as a Repug victory would be in 2008.  Can we possibly survive a McCain presidency?  Do we really want to find out?

And by the way, unlike the general election’s anachronistic electoral college, primaries are not “winner take all”.  Even if Hillary “wins” Pennsylvania by 10 points, both candidates wind up with some delegates.

I have no problem if Hillary wants to keep running (although hell would freeze over before I would ever vote to put another Clinton in the White House).  What is unacceptable are the bald opportunism and gutter tactics to which she and Bill have stooped, and the notion that the superdelegates should have and exert the power to overrule the voting public, threats against Pelosi, etc.

Report this

By cyrena, April 2, 2008 at 9:08 pm Link to this comment

vjcpolitics..

I love it!!!

I would say AMEN, except that I’m an agnostic. So, whatever you can imagine to put in its place, that’s what I mean. wink

This is the best part…

“...For you to come up in here with this spurious sexism argument when there are women who are truly suffering from sexism and sexual harrassment is an insult and an affront.”...

I hear ya loud and clear. wink


Amen!

Report this

By Paracelsus, April 2, 2008 at 9:08 pm Link to this comment

This side of the Atlantic will get its own Maggie Thatcher then. The agenda rolls forward.

Report this

By cyrena, April 2, 2008 at 9:03 pm Link to this comment

Well, this is helpful information CY. I never really.

Or, at least it’s interesting to know where the Tax-a-chusetts came from. It was long ago when I heard that, (over 20 years) and at the time, I was thinking of relocating there. But then, I realized I couldn’t afford it.

But, I like Massachusetts. It’s one of my favorite places. So, visits will have to suffice.

Report this

By Paracelsus, April 2, 2008 at 8:06 pm Link to this comment

She attended a Bilderberg meeting at Lake Lanier, GA in 1998. I am sure she will have the best in security.

Report this

By Paracelsus, April 2, 2008 at 6:27 pm Link to this comment

Jesse Ventura has the idea that the shadow government will have Obama assassinated.

Report this

By mill, April 2, 2008 at 6:26 pm Link to this comment

“And unlike Obama’s totals the majority of Clinton’s votes are from Democrats and blue states. “

I’m an independent (small i) who is drawn to Senator Obama’s relatively positive ways.  If Senator Clinton is stronger to the Democratic party base, that gives to Senator McCain some people close to my point of view - I’m conflicted about the “I was sniped at” credibility of Senator Clinton at this point.

Report this

By bert, April 2, 2008 at 6:06 pm Link to this comment

<<<<<<<<  Hillary’s chance of Winning the Hearts & Minds of the Dem Base was Dashed as Soon as she started Voting in the Senate.  >>>>>>>>>


Well, hon, I’d like to know where you got that little gem? Make it up? Projecting your bias onto the rest of the electorate? Wishful thinking? Hope???

Hillary has won the hearts, minds, and voyes of a lot of Democrats.The facts are these:

From USA Election Polls:

TOTAL (w/o FL & MI - w/ caucuses and territories)    O -12,891,604   C -12,217,745

TOTAL (w/ FL&MI;, w/caucuses) 
      O -13,460,645   C -13,403,104

TOTAL (w/o FL & MI - excludes caucuses)   
      O - 12,535,451   C -12,058,560

TOTAL (w/ FL & MI - excludes caucuses)   
      O -13,104,492   C -13,243,919

These numbers represent a virtual tie.

And unlike Obama’s totals the majority of Clinton’s votes are from Democrats and blue states.

Don’t confuse me with the facts, I already have my mind made up seems to be your and many Obamabots motto.

Report this

By bert, April 2, 2008 at 5:52 pm Link to this comment

The nonpartisan Center for Media and Public Affairs has found that since last December, 83 percent of the reporting on Senator Obama was positive. Only 53 percent of the reporting on Senator Clinton was positive.

30% is a significant difference!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIcvcz9Dkps&eurl=http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/04/02/anti-hillary-media-bias-proven/

——- and here———

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DH6jjj2YfEI&eurl=http://noquarterusa.net/blog/2008/04/02/anti-hillary-media-bias-proven/


I personally liked when Bill Schneider kept trying to bring the issue back to the Obama talking point that Clinton will need super delagates to win. Dobbs would have none of it and said and pointed out the obvious. OBAMA CAN’T GET THE NUMBER OF DELEGATES NEEDED TO WIN EITHER SO HE TOO WILL NEED SUPER DELEGATES.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 2, 2008 at 5:46 pm Link to this comment

If Hillary were a man she’d be John McCain.

Report this

By lib in texas, April 2, 2008 at 4:15 pm Link to this comment

right on Sue Cook..
Black men could vote 1n 1868.  Women not for another 52 years August 1920.
Its time for a well educated, smart, experienced woman to be our next president.

Report this
PatrickHenry's avatar

By PatrickHenry, April 2, 2008 at 4:15 pm Link to this comment

What misandry?

Report this

By vcjpolitics, April 2, 2008 at 12:19 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

You know, women like you make the rest of us look harping shrews. The only time that your kind of “feminist” rises to the challenge is when a white woman’s “rights” are at stake. I gave up on the feminist movement 20 years ago when it was made obvious to me that women of color need not participate unless white women needed tokens to legitimize their latest rants and perceived slights.

Hillary Clinton lost what little residual integrity she had left when she voted in favor of both the Patriot Act and the Iraq War. She proceeded to compound her errors by trying to out-hawk the Republican hawks, ostensibly to show how “tough” and patriotic she was.

Well, in the words of Rev. Wright, her chickens have come home to roost. One reaps what one sows, and Hillary is reaping bumper-crop harvests from the death, lies, and discord that she and other gutless Congressional Democrats fostered. She stood by Bill Clinton as he paved the way for Dubya by passing the TelCom Act of 1996, welfare reform, disproportionate sentencing of minorities and working-class whites for lesser crimes than middle- and upper-class whites are sentenced for, NAFTA, corporate deregulation, etc. Now she wants us to believe that she didn’t support any of Bill’s decisions? Don’t piss in our collective ear and then tell us it is raining. Or, better yet, don’t tell us that when she lied about dodging bullets in Bosnia, she simply “misspoke.”

Hillary has a credibility issue…a can’t-tell-the-whole-truth issue…a I-will-be-President-by-any-means-necessary issue. In short, she cannot be trusted. For you to come up in here with this spurious sexism argument when there are women who are truly suffering from sexism and sexual harrassment is an insult and an affront.

I will put my trust in Obama because I BELIEVE him. I TRUST him.

End of story.

Deal with it.

Report this

By Sue Cook, April 2, 2008 at 11:56 am Link to this comment

Hillary has been the focus of sexism from day one.
It’s getting worse now because Marie is right, the male ego’s are starting to sweat.

Hillary is the woman for the job, and the time for a woman president is right now! If she loses, there won’t be another for a very long time if ever.

So all you woman out there, here’s your chance to make history!  Woman through Hillary can now boast a proper place in this up till now male dominated business world!

She wants this bad, and because of it she will work very hard for us.

Don’t fail Hillary or yourselves, you have the power and chance of a life time to make a huge difference in how woman who rightly belong have been shunned again and again due to male superiority and big ego’s and yes SEXISM!

Don’t listen to the media and polls, that’s what they’re hoping. Don’t listen to all the pettiness, it’s all nonsense!

WAKE UP!

Vote for Hillary!
Join the fight!

HILLARY 08’

Report this

By tdbach, April 2, 2008 at 11:43 am Link to this comment

Judging by what you wrote, there’s barely a hair-on-a-can-of-Coke’s difference between you and Justice Thomas. Prejudice? Ha! It just makes you stronger! Right?

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, April 2, 2008 at 11:21 am Link to this comment

Hey… are you going to be alright…?  Take care yourself and get some rest, we can hold down the fort, It’ll be harder but we can do it.

Report this

By Gatsby, April 2, 2008 at 10:12 am Link to this comment

Sir/Madam,  My original post said “cunt” but Truthdig in its infinite wisdom rejected it. Thank you anyway for your editorial help.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, April 2, 2008 at 8:54 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Not until 1966, when Johnson signed the civil rights act, did all Black FOLKS, women and men have the right to vote in Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Georgia, The Carolinas, Virginia, Arkansas, and parts of Texas. Before the civil rights act a white person could vote by virtue of skin pigment, but a black person might be required to recite the constitution from memory as a qualifier. If by some chance they were able to memorize the Constitution, they would be asked to do increasingly difficult tasks, until they failed to correctly answer a question, then their voting PRIVILEGES would be revoked.

There is sexism in the United States, I’ve seen it, and I hate it. My Mother was far better educated than my father, but Dad brought home more money… When I rode the train to New York from Westchester in the 50’s and 60’s, there were NO women aboard the commuter.

I know sexism, and Hill-the-business-shill is not its victim but one of its enablers.  In eight years on the Walmart board of directors she never mentioned the wage disparity this company uses to pay men more than women for the same work…

Guess you might infer, from this,that Hill is a sexist…

Report this

By Paracelsus, April 2, 2008 at 8:38 am Link to this comment

I can’t support that Bildeberger attendee. I have a sense of serenity knowing that voting for any major candidate is a waste of time as they are all networked into an agenda. I don’t have to waste time voting. I believe like Don Corleone that one’s real strength is in the family business. Ordinary politics will not solve social problems, but if you have an offer no one can refuse then you are well provided for. I know that if Clinton or McCain get elected that it won’t make feel like I failed in anyway. I refuse the house odds, and I won’t play with loaded dice. There is a calmness in that that frees up my energies to do other things.

Report this

By nonna, April 2, 2008 at 8:16 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Tony you said
  “I don’t want a woman as president who has to show us she has balls”.
    What you are saying is that it would be preferable to have a man with “balls”, right?  My impression of Obama at this point is that it is questionable that he is so endowed.  He appears to be pretty wimpy.
  My vote goes to the strong woman.  Perhaps McCain who has indeed proved his masculinity would meet your criteria.

Report this

By RdV, April 2, 2008 at 8:05 am Link to this comment

That’s the best you can do? Accuse me of being a man because I am not goose-stepping behind your Queen? Because I am not crawling across the floor to kiss the hem of her garment? A male Republican, huh? I doubt a male Republican would’ve gone to prison for a month for civil disobedience. In fact, I doubt Hillary would either—so shove it, pal, “bitter” is generally the term Republican men use in demeaning outspoken women. Jerk.

Report this

By lib in texas, April 2, 2008 at 7:51 am Link to this comment

collea-devi, Well thought out and I back you 100%.

Report this

By wordsonfire, April 2, 2008 at 7:48 am Link to this comment

look how divise this has all become . ..  her skills as a “uniter” are very substantial clearly . . .

Do I want her “uniting” with Mellon Scaife?  That’s a bad thing for all of us I’m pretty sure of it . . .

Report this

By lib in texas, April 2, 2008 at 7:40 am Link to this comment

cshel718, you are spot on !!!
Black men could vote in 1868 women not until 1920!!

Report this

By lib in texas, April 2, 2008 at 7:37 am Link to this comment

I would absolutely LOVE it if another woman was running.  The MSM wouldn’t know which way to turn.
Chris Mathews wouldn’t have any tingles running up his leg. That would be the perfect scenario. The women WHO are bitches wouldn’t know who to be against.  They’d have to ask their man!!!!!!!!!!!

Report this

By lib in texas, April 2, 2008 at 7:22 am Link to this comment

Your a women ??? Sound much more like a republican to me. A male republican.  That was pretty bitter crap.  You DON"T have the right to belittle ANY WOMEN WHO BACKS HILLARY.  You are part of the the good ole bays club.  Your anger is pretty disgusting.

Report this

By tdbach, April 2, 2008 at 6:21 am Link to this comment

Get a grip. This isn’t the journalism of a news by-Get a grip. This isn’t the journalism of a news by-line. It’s opinion. And she’s raising an important issue that you should be entirely sympathetic to, were you not so wound up to a fever pitch with this campaign.

And speaking of “uninformed” commentary:

Either your memory is shockingly poor or unsurprisingly convenient, but all the pundits were predicting NH would be won decisively by Obama after his win in Iowa. It was, according to all but the very few hard-core Clinton advocates among the talking heads, the beginning of the end. Start up the band, Obama’s coronation was underway. Do you honestly not remember how stunned the MSM was that Hillary, who only a month before lead in polls in NH by 25 points, actually won? Marie 1, Cyrena 0.

Yes, the Bay State is indeed Massachusetts. I know you hear Tony Bennett crooning “by the bay” in your sleep, but we in MA have a copyright on Bay State. You need to be better informed. Marie 2, Cyrena 0.

There’s more, but I’m tired of keeping score.

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, April 2, 2008 at 6:16 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

By Collea-Devi, April 1 at 6:13 am

“She wants everyone to prosper - not just special interest groups.”

Boy, that’s a stretch. She served eight-years on Walmart’s board of Directors,(about the same time-period as a two-term president) and during her “terms” did and said absolutely NOTHING for that company’s employees. No talk of providing Health care benefits, no discussion about a “living wage” and not even a suggestion that this paternalistic entity pay women the same rate as men when doing the same job.

Hill is a Business shill. A corporate whore. She is concerned about HER period!

Report this

By tdbach, April 2, 2008 at 6:01 am Link to this comment

Liz, As a formal NOW leader, you have all the bona fides to argue against Marie’s thesis, but instead you simply dismiss it. “This election is not about the old problems between the sexes. It’s about more than that.” Yes, of course, it’s “more than that.” But is pervasive and entrenched sexism not an important issue – all the more so because it has gone mostly “underground”, making it more insidious and harder to combat? You, of all people, should understand that. And isn’t it fair to point out the shadows on Plato’s cave wall that is HRC’s candidacy to make the case that sexism is far from defeated, but like insurgents in Iraq, the impulse has merely withdrawn into hiding, sniping when opportunity comes? The reason blogs and opinion columns enrich our thinking is because they look at the same things with a myriad of different perspectives and foci. I think Marie’s is worthwhile because it zeros in on one facet of today’s news: there is a growing chorus of big names calling for Hillary to quit the race, and, oddly enough, they are virtually all men. Does that tell us anything?

Don’t let your bitterness about Bush’s Iraq crimes cloud your judgment. Be happy that there are still voices calling attention the a cause you once held dear, because this isn’t an “old problem” if by that you mean “no longer a problem.” It’s very much with us.

Report this
Purple Girl's avatar

By Purple Girl, April 2, 2008 at 5:53 am Link to this comment

Listen Sister,
Hillary’s chance of Winning the Hearts & Minds of the Dem Base was Dashed as Soon as she started Voting in the Senate. I was Po’ed when she supported the Iraqi INVASION (hostile Takeover), I was Po’ed with her Vote for the blanantly Obvious UnConsitutional “Patriot Act’ , I have been disgusted by th elack of Oversight from the Armed Services Comitte (con), and Most esp her silence regarding th eCrimes of this Adminsitration. I’d have still voted for her in ‘04, bu tnow I can’t stand her- She’s defected to the other side and is a covert Operative- Just review her REAL record!
As for her Being Picked On ( challenged further to prove herself) ....Do You Work in the Real World. I have worked in the Horse Industry- male dominated, I know what it is to have the Bar set intentionally Higher- but LOVE when I clear it with out so much as a Tick. and I have EARNED my Respect. it is not handed to me, Because “it’s Easy to Pick On A Girl”
I’m disgusted with woman who supporter her Just Because she has a Vagina! Reverse Sexism is Still Sexism.Feminist want Revenge, Libbers aren’t afraid to be judged- but would appreciate the Bar being at the same level (But LOVE when e Prove We are EQUALS)

Report this

By Conservative Yankee, April 2, 2008 at 5:47 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Cyrena

“I’ve heard residents from there call it ‘TAXachusetts” though. That could make it similar to California.”

Massachusetts (The “Bay State” That’s Cape Cod Bay) was referred to as “Taxachusetts” by the former Editor/Owner of the Manchester Union Leader (Now the New Hampshire Union Leader) New Hampshire has neither Sales nor payroll tax (They do tax investment income, and income from Real Estate.) Funny though, Bill Loeb CHOSE to live in Prides Crossing, a North Shore town with immense houses and HUGH golf-course-sized lawns… Massachusetts caps property tax at 2.5 percent of value while New Hampshire has no cap. 

Massachusetts actually has the second lowest tax burden in New England, and the highest per capita income.

Report this

By Expat, April 2, 2008 at 5:27 am Link to this comment

^ nice post and here, here!

Report this

By MainSpark, April 2, 2008 at 5:25 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

“As a woman, from Pennsylvania, no less, may I suggest that perhaps what matters most about winning is based solely on character. Haven’t we had enough of this dirty, arrogant, selfish lying & bullying throughout the Bush years? And who wants to return to the sleazy era of the Clintons?”

Besides being a woman from Pennsylvania, you, ma’am, are an idealist.

Report this

By Expat, April 2, 2008 at 5:18 am Link to this comment

^ thought!

Report this

By Palema, April 2, 2008 at 4:42 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

I like G. Anderson’s remarks about Clinton v. Obama, which are similar to my perceptions.

I decided a long time ago I would vote for whichever of the Democratic candidates won the nomination, because although I have my preferences, the country can’t take more years of Republican rule. As it is, we will be hamstrung for years by a judiciary and federal bureaucracy riddled with right-wing appointees.

Cyrena: “The Bay State” is the Massachusetts nickname. Your misunderstanding does not make the author wrong or misleading.

Please remember: Democrats are not our opponents.

Report this

By RdV, April 2, 2008 at 4:36 am Link to this comment

the sexist attitudes towards men in this article really offend me.
  Queen Hillary has been given a wider berth to act out her selfish fantasy and active sabotage of Democratic party strength and unity than would be tolerated for any other hopeful. And I note that you failed to note the bullying threat to Madame speaker Pelosi from Clinton’s fat cats, in your Katha Pollitt brand of cuteness masking pettiness. How girly. and how about the shot to the “women of Camelot”. Some catty stuff there that doesn’t conform to your opening salvo attacking “certain anatomical attribute” like it was exclusively some kind of guy thing.

  As a woman, from Pennsylvania, no less, may I suggest that perhaps what matters most about winning is based solely on character. Haven’t we had enough of this dirty, arrogant, selfish lying & bullying throughout the Bush years? And who wants to return to the sleazy era of the Clintons? Surely the Democrats would want to embrace a strong, resounding message, a meaningful and relevant identity and not the ultimately weak triangulation strategy that sells the soul for short term gain that marked the DLC brand of centrism. Women that rally around Clinton based on gender forfeit their greater humanity and insult all women who put character and decency above gender. It isn’t the odds that concerned many about Clinton’s ongoing campaign—it was the dirty, unethical sabotage and the aiding and abetting of the Mccain candidacy that outraged many on the left—regardless of gender…or race or anyother angle you want to pin to it.

Report this

By cyrena, April 2, 2008 at 3:13 am Link to this comment

So you don’t recognize me, eh?

Well, I’ll have you know that I’m a “soon-to-be RESIDENTIALLY CHALLENGED” elitist! So there!

And on top of that, I’m ALSO an elistist with pneumonia and no health insurance. (well except for medicare, and no real physicians accept that for much other than a ‘tip’ - not that I can really blame them.) They probably get like .47 cents after processing the paperwork.

So THERE!

OK, I have to fix myself a hot toddy now, and try figure out if there are any pneumonia remedies growing in the yard. (anybody’s yard).

Report this

By Collea-Devi, April 2, 2008 at 1:44 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Great job Marie! Having been the only female for many years in a typically male job, It’s still out there
I think 937 lies to Congress count - true some few did vote against it, but 937 lies were very persuasive to the rest - I believe Obama would have gone along as well - but it’s easy to blame others when the option to vote based on current information doesn’t come around to you.
Some Reasons Why Hillary??
1. To end the war in Iraq. To combat terrorism, strengthen our military and care for our veterans effectively. To restore America’s standing in the world and repair our alliances. To build a more tolerant, united America, working to achieve big goals again with a President who is ready for change and ready to lead from day one.
2. She is a moderate and is experienced in working with all sides of the aisle; can work well with global leaders; is intelligent and has good manners where it counts.  She has proven herself a diplomat when visiting more than 80 countries, working with Congress and all interests. However you view Bill, he is a global asset to this country. She is the only candidate with enough EXPERIENCE to lead this country. You can trust that she will do and CAN accomplish what she says she will, because she has already demonstrated that
3. She is strong where it counts. She has learned from her mistakes, knows how to ask for directions and from whom, and has devoted her ENTIRE adult life to serving this country and its people. When she speaks she deals with the ISSUES not slimy muck and only responds ~ appropriately ~ when absolutely necessary to answer unfounded, erroneous and/or malicious gossip.
4. To achieve universal, affordable healthcare. To create good jobs for middleclass Americans with the right investments in modern infrastructure and in new, clean, energy efficient technologies that reduce our dependence on foreign oil and combat global warming.
5. To provide world class education from universal pre-kindergarten to affordable college for all. To promote 21st century scientific innovation, including stem cell research.
6. To return to fiscal responsibility, move back toward a balanced budget and safeguard Social Security and Medicare for future generations. To restore competence and end cronyism in government with a President who cares about and works for Americans who have been invisible to this administration.
7. MOST IMPORTANT TO ME. I believe that she will end our current “Disaster and War Economy” paradigm and replace it with a Universal Scientific Research /Trade / Production / Scholastic / Artistic economy that will be profitable to everyone while making the other changes that will promote a NEW paradigm.
I believe she is the ONLY one who can make the necessary changes for our great nation. She has more than rhetoric, she has a strategy and the experience that will work — For an America that works for ALL Americans there’s only one: Hillary Clinton - President 2008.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, April 2, 2008 at 12:39 am Link to this comment

Sure, I hear ya.  Except I don’t recognize you, aren’t you the ELITEST whatevertheycalledyou…?  LOL

Seriously…  I found it hillarious.  So what type of elitest are you again..?  I couldn’t find it.

Report this

By cshel718, April 2, 2008 at 12:14 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Obviously Marie gets that the gender issue is just as pervasive as the racial one…but unfortunately, more accceptable. 

If Hillary were a man, they’d be applauding her tenacity instead of trying to drum her out.

Report this

By cyrena, April 2, 2008 at 12:08 am Link to this comment

But Outraged, the ‘BEST’ man or woman almost NEVER wins.

I mean, if we think about it, isn’t that the upside down ‘standard of the times’ now?

Report this

By David R. Wilbur, Esq., April 2, 2008 at 12:05 am Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Until about one month ago I felt that the ongoing primary season was good for the Dems. It was clearly giving a lot of good press to the issues and both candidates.

However, as of late I understand why so many are calling on Hillary to leave. It is not because of her ongoing campaign per se. The reason is because she has jumped into the mud and is trying to drag Obama down there with her.

Where is that bright eyed enthusiastic first lady of the early 1990’s? That person could campaign right up to the convention and it would be good for the party, both candidates and the issues. But sadly, that Hillary got lost somewhere along the way.

So I say, clean it up Hillary-stop campaigning for McCain-or leave before you permanently tarnish yourself and kill whatever future you may have as NY Senator!

Report this

By cyrena, April 2, 2008 at 12:02 am Link to this comment

Expat, there is some poetic irony in your statement here..

“...If one can’t stand the heat, then get out of the fire.  If anyone knows this; it’s Hillary.”...

Hillary actually DOES know this!! I paraphrase from a recent interview..

“If a player is not ready (or able) to WIN the game, then the player should GET OFF THE FIELD!”

It was something very close to that.

So yes, she DOES know this, which makes us wonder all the more, why she doesn’t follow through with her own judgment.

BUT, it was her ‘same’ judgment that elected to say Yea, to the illegal war on Iraq. Obviously, she at least THOUGHT that she could or would ‘win’.

That she hasn’t recognized the error in all of these judgments, is only further proof of her unsuitability for the office that she seeks.

Anyway, not to repeat myself, (even though that’s what I’m doing) I too believe that she should continue her campaign. I think the Democrats will survive it, and it might even make us a better (and more united) party as a result.

It’s long past time to move it along, and get to PROGRESSIVE, and dump the ‘liberal’ lable anyway. I’ve long maintained that these ‘descriptives’ of conservative/liberal/traditional/etc, no longer provide accurate meaning, and far too much becomes lost in the translation.

Report this

By cyrena, April 1, 2008 at 11:49 pm Link to this comment

I hadn’t read your comment Jonas, before making the same point myself.

Hillary did NOT ‘win’ Texas.

Report this

By cyrena, April 1, 2008 at 11:33 pm Link to this comment

Well CY,

I’m certainly not ‘mad and stuff’ (though others may be). It’s probably because I’m used to this from you now.

And..I suspect that well, you’re pretty much out there on your own in your suggestions, and with the malcontent.

Just wanted you to know that, that at least I’m acknowledging you.

I don’t think Barack Obama is a ‘savior’ by any stretch of the imagination, and he’s made the same point himself, about himself.

On the other hand, he’s the best chance we’ve had in at least 8 years, (Al Gore) and we blew that. If you think there are even a handful of folks ready to blow it again, after the 8 years we’ve suffered under this gangsterism, then you’re totally nuts, but I still like you.

Meantime, Barack Obama’s resume is actually starting to look better and better. Most folks read pretty well.

Report this

By cyrena, April 1, 2008 at 11:24 pm Link to this comment

Bravo Liz Sheehan!!

Thanks you for SUCH a clealy precise opinion, that I personally believe speaks for MOST of us, including progressive women of all ages.

Report this
G.Anderson's avatar

By G.Anderson, April 1, 2008 at 10:03 pm Link to this comment

Obama’s message is one of hope, Clinton’s is one of reason..

While it seems reasonable to believe that Clinton’s vision is the answer to the lack of rationality in our current government, it is my perception that her reasons betray a calculatedness and a desire for poltical power. The Clintons are too much a part of what is wrong with this country now. They are no longer outsiders. They are top down.

Obama on the other hand offers hope that we can do something, that our efforts matter, and that we matter. That our dreams have a future. That we won’t remain objects of corporate greed, and financial subjegation forever. 

Quite frankly, it will be dificult for either candidate to accomplish anything in Washington, because our government is not owned by us. And the corporate crooks that run things will not let go, no matter what the consequences to the American people or to this country. They will not go quietly.

Report this
Outraged's avatar

By Outraged, April 1, 2008 at 9:26 pm Link to this comment

“She’s not a man” is a sorry argument for Clinton’s self destruction via vicious tactics. Remember Marie, everyone knew she was a woman from the get-go. And as hard as her supporters worked to “make it an issue”, it just wasn’t for voters. So she tried the Muslim religion thing, then she called out the racists, she doesn’t pay her bills, her husband can’t control himself, she lies about things she doesn’t even need to lie about(Bosnia), she has mounds of precarious baggage and on and on and on.  I try not to think about it.

She is not being asked to step aside because she’s a woman but because her antics are destroying the party. Which if successful could mean a republican win in November.

This is the woman who cried those crocodile tears at one point “because she was soooo worried about what was happening to her country”.  Then turned around and advocated the use of every malicious trick in the book be used against her opponents no matter what the outcome!

People don’t like her for a reason…she’s vicious.  Which for us down here in the real world translates as ANOTHER tyrannical imperialist.

And with the exception of a few, her supporters are just as vicious.

That said…I’m inclined to agree with Expat:  “Actually, the best man can’t win because “they” were eliminated long ago.

Report this

By cyrena, April 1, 2008 at 9:21 pm Link to this comment

Marie, this is almost VERBATIM to what Hillary has claimed herself.

“I guess the boys are just being boys again”..

I swear. I wish I could find the article that QUOTES HER DIRECTLY, (and yeah, I’ll look for it when I have time).

Still, this is overwhelming what she herself (so we can’t even blame it on her ‘surrogate supporters’). Yep, it’s the big boys just trying to ‘force her out’. That was her (standard) response to Sen. Leahy’s suggestion that she should quit the race for the good of the party.

It’s also ludicrous for you to make this claim, and I’d even call it disingenuous propaganda hype:

“….remember, they were predicting the fall of the “house of Clinton” in New Hampshire….”

This is total bullshit, and you should be ashamed of yourself for saying as much. Nobody in their right mind would have been ‘predicting’ the “fall of the ‘house of Clinton’ as early as the New Hampshire primary. (only the SECOND state to conduct a contest). That is flat out stupid, and it’s an insult to intelligent people – EVERYWHERE.

As if this ‘start’ to the piece wasn’t bad enough, Marie continues to make herself look foolishly uninformed..

“Clinton then was supposed to bow out after March 4 if she did not win the crucial states of Texas and Ohio.”.. But darn! She messed up their game plan again by winning both of those states—and Rhode Island, too.

How sad! Marie is obviously uninformed about the results of the Texas primary, (still being calculated) or that Obama has picked up more delegates in that state SINCE March 4, as a result of the caucuses there. (It wouldn’t hurt for a political journalist/pundit to pay attention to these things.

Hillary DID win conclusively in Rhode Island. Her ‘win’ in California however, was never this…

•  “Clinton won decisively in the Bay State and took all the big states on Super Tuesday, except Obama’s home state of Illinois and Missouri, where he edged her by a single percentage point.”

So, is she calling California the ‘Bay State”, (we’re actually the Golden State with a City by the Bay) or does she mean Massachusetts? Yeah, Massachusetts has several Bays as well. Maybe that label for Massachusetts “The Bay State” never came up in my geography lessons. I’ve heard residents from there call it ‘TAXachusetts” though. That could make it similar to California.

Meantime, what’s with the ‘single’ –percentage point- where Obama ‘edged her’? Was it in Missouri, or his home state of Illinois, which isn’t really his ‘home state’?

Marie, you’re doing the IED’s: (insinuation/innuendos, exaggerations, and distortions). And, that’s pretty disgusting from a journalist, because it comes across as indiscriminate cheerleading, and it insults the reading public, since we know better.


Last but most importantly, I don’t know of any specifically ‘Obama supporters’ or Obama ‘surrogates’ who are calling for Hillary Clinton to quit the race or her campaign. Barack Obama has specifically said himself, that Hillary should STAY IN THE RACE AS LONG AS SHE WANTS!!

I have said the same,(even as an Obama supporter) EVEN BEFORE HE DID. My own reasons are multifold, but the primary reason is that those voters in states that have NOT YET had their contests, SHOULD BE ABLE TO VOTE and have their votes recognized. (minus MI and FL, since that was long ago decided). My other reason ‘NOW’ is because I’m sick of Hillary and her supporters whining that she’s being forced out.

I want her to have all of the chances the fair undertaking of these primaries can afford her.

This is a very unsatisfying piece of journalism, if in fact any measure of objectivity still remains as a goal for journalists.

Pity…it’s not the first time for Marie.

Report this

By Paracelsus, April 1, 2008 at 8:43 pm Link to this comment

I had girlfriend in college who called it pudendum. I told her don’t call it that for it means shameful thing in Latin. Call it a cunt and you can feel more proud of yourself.

Report this

By JC Andrews, April 1, 2008 at 8:30 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

Marie, good article, you are right on target.  This is exactly how Hillary’s supporters feel.  Once again a more experienced woman is being asked to step aside for the young smooth talking guy with the thin resume.

Drea, you are criticizing Hillary and you are probably a college student who cries when you have to talk in front of a class. Running for president is not as easy as it looks.

Men on this site call Hillary “Billary” and wonder why women think they are sexist.

Hillary is a loyal democrat whose policies are actually more liberal (helpful to the less fortunate) than Obama’s, and men hate her more than George Bush.  Now why is that exactly?  Men in politics engage in all the same tactics you are complaining about all the time.

I like Hillary,  but I would support Obama.  I have to admit I try to avoid reading these types of posts because when I read what Obama’s supporters write, I vow never to vote for him.  Obama’s give him a bad name. It is not Obama.  He seems like a decent guy.  His supporters need to get a grip.

You all gripe about the way Hillary runs her campaign, the Clintons are the only people who have been able to stand up to the Republicans in the last 30 years.  Perhaps you perfer John Kerry? 

Obama has the same elitist, arrogant, sexist style that Kerry had in 2004.  Obama could use Hillary’s help.  They should work together and my guess is that is what will happen in the end.  So get over it.  A strong woman that you don’t like (too bad!) might end up in the White House.

JC

Report this

By Tony Duncan, April 1, 2008 at 8:24 pm Link to this comment
(Unregistered commenter)

thanks . I received that email and found it a little hard to believe. It really bugs me that people will exaggerate pointlessly to support their position.

there is a great site http://www.votesmart.org  that lists each representative in congress with their full voting record, speeches, ratings from lobbys and all sorts of other information. Both the NRC and NDC encourage their members NOT to co-operate with giving this non partisan site information because they don;t want their candidates to have to actually be accountable in a publicly visible easily accessible forum

Report this

By bert, April 1, 2008 at 8:17 pm Link to this comment

Great post Douglas Chalmers. Interesting LA Times article.

This paragraph was the BEST part of the post. Thanks for sharing.

    We know less about Senator Obama than about any prospective president in American history. His uplifting rhetoric is empty, as Hillary Clinton helplessly protests. His career bears no trace of his own character, not an article for the Harvard Law Review he edited, or a single piece of legislation. He appears to be an empty vessel filled with the wishful thinking of those around him.

So true. So sad.

Report this

By bert, April 1, 2008 at 8:04 pm Link to this comment

<<<<<<<<<<<< allied herself with the men of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy >>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Allied herself with these guys? Where do you get this stuff. Out of thin air?

She has not aligned herself with Limbaugh and it is not her doing that this nutcase asked folks to change parties and vote for her just to get his jolies. Obama has Farrakhan’s REAL endorsement, Hillary has Limbaugh’s FAKE endorsement, which he will recant as soon as she gets the nomination. 

And she has not aligned herslef with Scaife. How do you folks make up junk like this. I think American idol or Access Holluwood has roted your brains. Hillary was invited to Scaife’s newspaper editorial board for an interview, something all candidates for President do. Scaife was there, you see, he OWNS the newspaper. Hillary not only charmed him, she had a grasp of the issues of the day and solid plans about how to deal with them. Scaife simply wrote about this in an op ed. How do you get from that she has ALIGNED himself with her. NO WHAT THIS REALLY SAYS IS THAT SHE HAS EXPEREINCE AND GREAT ABILITIES, TRIED AND TRUE, TO BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER AND WORK TOGETHER FOR CHANGE. (UNITE)

Hillary does not have to try and convince people with words of hope and chnage - she is a true change agent. She is a real uniter. Its not just words for her.

Report this
thebeerdoctor's avatar

By thebeerdoctor, April 1, 2008 at 7:57 pm Link to this comment

Tony Duncan thank you for pointing out some very good reasons not to support the New York Senator. The United States refuses to sign the ban on land mines. The United States makes and distributes cluster bombs, which Senator Clinton was a key advocate for the restocking of Israel. Hearing her faux commander-in-chief, ready from day one, at 3am, I am reminded of this quote:
“There can be no compromise with war; it cannot be reformed or controlled; cannot be disciplined into decency or codified into common sense; for war is the slaughter of human beings, temporarily regarded as enemies, on as large a scale as possible.”
JEANNETTE RANKIN, 1929

Report this

By bert, April 1, 2008 at 7:49 pm Link to this comment

I support Hillary because she has the best chance of beating McCain. Her sex has nothing to do with it for me. But I can’t help noticing that a lot os sexisn is still alive and well in this country and it is VERY apparent in the MSM.

I will forgive Iraq vote to beat McCain. Plus I believe she is sincere about getting us out. More flag oficers and former military support Hillary than Obama. That should tell you a great deal.

Report this
thebeerdoctor's avatar

By thebeerdoctor, April 1, 2008 at 7:33 pm Link to this comment

Sorry lib in Texas, but there were 23 Senators that said Nay to H.J.Res. 114, 23! To belittle their wisdom just because Obama was not around seems short sighted at best. Whether or not he would have voted for that resolution you can leave to speculation. But one thing is for sure, the Senator from New York refuses to admit that vote was a mistake.

Report this
thebeerdoctor's avatar

By thebeerdoctor, April 1, 2008 at 7:25 pm Link to this comment

Liz Sheehan, very well said! It is not about gender but about a person’s irresponsible vote to authorize an invasion and occupation that should have never happened. As I pointed out on a piece posted at Newscloud, Senators Boxer, Mikulski and Stabenow said Nay to H.J.Res. 114. If any of them were running for president, I would support their candidacy. The idea that she is qualified because she was husband-president’s enabler makes a mockery of the entire process. Thank you for reminding me what this election is truly about.

Report this

By lib in texas, April 1, 2008 at 5:56 pm Link to this comment

Audacity of Hope quoted from Rev wright. Most intelligent women would not call you a traitor just a totally uninformed madly in love with Barack Obama. I don’t know how old you are but you sound like a love sick teenager.

Report this

Page 1 of 2 pages  1 2 >

 
Monsters of Our Own Creation? Get tickets for this Truthdig discussion of America's role in the Middle East.
Right 1, Site wide - BlogAds Premium
 
Right Skyscraper, Site Wide
Right 2, Site wide - Blogads
 
Join the Liberal Blog Advertising Network
 
 
 

A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion   Zuade Kaufman, Publisher   Robert Scheer, Editor-in-Chief
© 2014 Truthdig, LLC. All rights reserved.

Like Truthdig on Facebook