Instead of attacking Hillary who hasn't even declared her 2016 candidacy yet...

[Cali_Democrat]

perhaps time would be better spent attacking John Boehner and the crazies in Congress who have blocked EVERY SINGLE liberal initiative and are presiding over the least productive Congress in US history.

Food for thought.

[FSogol]

1. K & R. Seriously. Or maybe promote your favored candidate instead.

[Cali_Democrat]

2. Yup. nt

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

41. This ^ ^ ^ ^

[warrior1]

3. Amen

kick

[liberal N proud]

4. There is a lot of time wasted on an obsession over Hillary

Can't imagine what it will be like once she announces. Some here will go all ape on everyone.

[Scuba]

5. Maybe we can ride Boner's ass and vet the 2016 Democratic candidate at the same time.

Some of us can multi-task.

[Cali_Democrat]

11. Look at the first page of GD

How many threads are going after Boehner and how many threads are going after Hillary?

It appears folks here do indeed have problems multi-tasking.

[leftstreet]

6. If she can't handle the scrutiny, she shouldn't run n/t

[Cali_Democrat]

7. What makes you think she can't handle scrutiny?

She's been under the spotlight since the early 1990's.

But it's not Hillary who is blocking liberal legislation from getting through Congress, it's the GOP.

[raindaddy]

25. She dodged sniper fire....

Handling scrutiny shouldn't be a problem.

[ZombieHorde]

9. She seems to handle it better than many of her supporters. nt

[frylock]

22. word up

[bigwillq]

36. Obama and Hillary Supporters are cut from the same (very thin) cloth (nt)

[JaneyVee]

10. But she can handle the scrutiny, so she should run?

[leftstreet]

16. Right. That's how she won the 2008 primary. Oh wait...n/t

[hrmjustin]

52. Will you support her if she is the nominee?

[leftstreet]

53. Everyone on DU supports the nominee n/t

[hrmjustin]

54. A few have said differently but thanks for answering.

[redqueen]

8. K&R nt

[tea and oranges]

12. I Thought We Were Discussing Hillary

as Dems will do. As the current frontrunner it seems a natural thing to do.

You're the one using the inflammatory word "attacking."

[snooper2]

13. Are discussions on a random message board on the intertubes on either topic going to sway anything?

me pretty much thinks no

[onehandle]

14. Exactly. Joe Biden is clearly who we should be attacking.

What did he know and when did he know it!

Why is he so interested in trains? He needs to reveal his portfolio of train-based investments.

Benghazi!




Heh...

[politicaljunkie41910]

15. Thanks for saying what I've been thinking for a while now.

Dems can always be counted on to try and inflict maximum damage on their own candidates. The stuff I read here, lately, just makes me cringe at times which is why I spend less and less time here. I wouldn't blame her if she didn't run, but I hope that she will ignore the rantings of her perfect critics and throw her hat in the ring, but on her own timetable.

This seems like a good opportunity to recall Theodore Roosevelt's “The Man in the Arena” which tells us that the man we should praise is the man who’s out there fighting the big battles, even if those battles end in defeat. In our day, when cynicism and aloof detachment are considered hip and cool, TR reminds us that glory and honor come to those “who spend themselves in a worthy cause.”

“The Man in the Arena”

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

http://www.artofmanliness.com/2009/02/28/manvotional-the-man-in-the-arena-by-theodore-roosevelt/

Now I'm sure someone here will quickly school me on the fact that Hillary Clinton is no Teddy Roosevelt, but I doubt that even Teddy would fare well in this day and era of instant messaging and armchair quarterbacking.

[canuckledragger]

17. I wonder if the Dems are playing smart politics here...

...And using Hillary as a lightning rod for all the expected attacks and such, keeping the repubs on their toes because they don't know what to expect or who's really going to run.

It would stealthily pave the way for Someone like Warren or Bernie Sanders to run, as the repubs exhaust their money and time chasing ghosts.

[woo me with science]

18. Very silly argument, designed to try to protect the neoliberal status quo.

Of course now is the time to expose fake populists and do everything we can to ensure that we are not stuck with another neoliberal in a Democrat suit as the Democratic candidate in 2016.

Corporatism is coming from both parties, and it's gutting America. Liberals don't have a lot of control over who Republicans will be running. We do have a chance to make a difference right now about what kind of candidates Democrats choose to run.

[Mojorabbit]

31. Yep. Plus, we can multitask! nt

[jeff47]

19. I'd love to talk about something else. Unfortunately, there's several of her supporters

who would prefer to talk about her instead of more pressing issues.

If they keep steering the conversation back to Clinton, then the conversation is going to be about Clinton.

[obxhead]

20. We've been doing that.

We don't want another d (yes lower case d) running things.

We've had enough of corporate profits built on the backs of the broken middle class about to become the impoverished.

[stonecutter357]

21. K&R

[Maedhros]

23. But Republicans won't listen to us, and so attacking Boehner is a worthless exercise.

Everyone on DU hates him anyway, so what is the point?

On the other hand, if Democratic Party operatives see a strong, steady dose of opposition to a Hillary presidency, they they may conclude that she's not a winning ticket and we stand a much better chance of getting a higher-quality candidate.

[Hoppy]

24. Apples and oranges. Why not do both?

[RufusTFirefly]

26. Face it. For HRC's apologists, there's no good time to raise objections

We saw this with the current president.
When we sounded the alarm about troubling policies, we were warned among other excuses

1) that it was too early
2) that it would affect the mid-terms
3) that we didn't understand three-dimensional chess
4) that we were pony craving purists
5) that it would provide ammunition for the Republicans
6) that we were actually stealth Republicans
7) that it would interfere with his re-election
8) or that if we just sat tight that everything would be rosy in the second term.

As Yogi Berra said, it's deja vu all over again.

[Boom Sound 416]

27. Why can't we walk and chew gum?

[Cali_Democrat]

29. People aren't doing both at the same time, my dear

There are many more attack Hillary threads than attack John Boehner threads in GD.

[Boom Sound 416]

30. Or maybe Hillary is dominating the news cycle by her own design

[Cali_Democrat]

33. Ya:

New today:

Boehner to sue Obama in executive authority dispute

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/06/25/boehner-suing-obama/11355639/

I blame Hillary.

[Boom Sound 416]

34. Ok, I'm with you. Post it.

[ljm2002]

42. Where is your OP in this important topic?

If you haven't posted one, why not? Wouldn't that be walking the walk, not just talking the talk?

[Cali_Democrat]

46. I can't post OP's on everything

Sure I post more OP's than your average DUer, but I'm only one man

Here are my OP's in the last month which attack Republicans and their operatives. You can find them doing an advanced search.

How The GOP-Controlled U.S. House Committee On Science Is Waging War On Science

Republican Arizona Lawmaker To Hold Hearing On 'Chemtrails'

Cheney to Critics: Don’t Waste Time ‘Debating What Happened 12 Years Ago’

Hannity lures Muslim woman bullied at Benghazi panel to his show for more bullying

BOOM: Prosecutors allege that Scott Walker was at the center of a nationwide criminal scheme

Fox News didn't ask Hillary a single question about Obamacare in the interview today

Now GOPers are saying Obama is using Benghazi to distract from everything else

America Is Globally Shamed For Its Pathetic Minimum Wage

With the defeat of Eric Cantor, 100% of Congressional Republicans are Christian and all are white...

Lindsey Graham: The Next 9/11 Is Coming from Iraq...and it's 'inevitable' (here we go again)

George W. Bush Won’t Weigh In on Iraq

McCain calls on Obama to fire his national security team and replace them with Bush-era neocons

Is there anything Dubya touched that didn't turn to complete shit?

Flashback: GOP blasts Obama administration after Homeland Security warns of right wing terrorism

Sen. Warren applauds Obama's executive order on student loans, says he needs more help from Congress

Republicans Frantically Scrub Their Praise Of Bowe Bergdahl

Conservatives Call For Obama's Impeachment Over Bergdahl POW Exchange

Greenwald echoes GOP talking points on Benghazi, says there should be an investigation

House GOP Votes Down Measure Aimed At Curbing Wage Theft

Funny thing, I don't recall your name in any of my threads. How many OP's have you created in the last month attacking GOPers?

Class dismissed.....

[ljm2002]

48. See, the difference is...

...I'm not the one telling others what to post. You, on the other hand, make OPs specifically telling people what they should or should not be discussing here. This OP is a case in point. If you like Hillary, great. Post about that. Why carp at others who have a different opinion? Let things stand or fall on the merits instead of complaining about what others post.

Also, if you don't want people on this board talking about her apparent candidacy then why continue to post OPs on the topic? Seems a bit counter-productive.

[djean111]

32. We have no control or influence on Boehmer at all. None.

Some of us would like to have some influence on who our next candidate for prez is.
Looks like that is not encouraged, eh?

[JackRiddler]

58. Because that wouldn't be good for her prospects.

[Boom Sound 416]

59. True

[Vattel]

28. Noooo! Now is the time to begin looking for a good Democratic candidate for President.

That requires evaluating potential candidates and pointing out their flaws. How can we fight a bad nomination if we don't attack the record of bad candidates?

[morningfog]

35. Hillary and her supporters insist on putting her in the headlines every single day.

She is a story. For better or worse.

I would much prefer that we focus on passing progressive legislation, attacking the repugs, and staying out of wars than discussing the flavor of Hillary's most recent fart.

Face it, her campaign has started, it will be all Hillary all the time until November 2016. And that will include the Democrats criticize that which they disagree with.

[A Simple Game]

37. What makes you think a Democratic message board has any sway over Republican candidates?

Democratic candidates on the other hand?

At this point in time opposition and/or support of a candidate are serving the same purpose. You want someone to run and others don't want that someone to run. The democratic process means we should let the candidate know either way.

You don't want to suppress the democratic process do you? Don't others have the same rights as you to oppose or support the candidate of their choice? Many think the better candidate won in 2008 and many seem to want a better candidate again this time, would you deny them that choice?

[Cali_Democrat]

38. So what you're saying is that in order to have sway over Republicans

we should infiltrate GOP message boards and attack them that way? Because only a GOP message board would have sway over GOP candidates.

Hmmm.....


Perhaps some folks are doing that here....

[ljm2002]

45. "Perhaps some folks are doing that here...."

You should be ashamed of yourself. Seriously. Someone points out that this is a Democratic discussion board, and therefore it has more influence on Democrats than Republicans. Seems pretty straightforward. And you use it as a springboard to impugn the motives of (unnamed) fellow DUers.



Way to go.

[RufusTFirefly]

56. +1

[A Simple Game]

47. If you think John Boehner is waiting eagerly for my next post I really don't know what to say.

But there is no doubt in my mind that at least some Democratic candidates are monitoring, and even posting, on DU.

As for posting on Republican message boards, I give you permission to join all of the Republican message board you want to join. It would be an interesting experiment, let us know how it turns out. Sorry I can't help you with any links.

It is just as sensible to oppose as to support a candidate that hasn't declared yet. Maybe you should abandon this thread and start another about Boehner if you think it would be so productive.

Hmmm... As for am I an infiltrator? You tell me, I make no attempt to hide the fact that I'm not a Democrat, I am a liberal. The Democratic party took a right turn quite a few years ago and I kept going straight. Do you have a problem with my being a liberal on a liberal message board?

Here's the first line from the About Page Mission Statement linked below and on every DU page.

Democratic Underground is an online community where politically liberal people can do their part to effect political and social change by:

The bold is mine. And just for a kicker, here's the last sentence from the mission statement.

We are always looking for friendly, liberal people who appreciate good discussions and who understand the importance of electing more Democrats to office. So sign up today!

The bold is again mine. Friendly? Does that mean you shouldn't insinuate that fellow members are actually Republican infiltrators? And that word liberal again, don't usually hear that word in the same sentence with Hillary Clinton do you? If you don't understand the significance of a mission statement, please look it up.

So at least on this Democratic message board it is both right and proper to support the most liberal candidate before the general election. Say, maybe you have a good point with this infiltrator idea. You know what they say about Republicans and projection.

I realize DU is hardly the liberal bastion it once was but I feel there must still be a counter to all of the conservatives that now populate it. Being a short timer you may not have noticed that DU took a turn to the right about the same time you joined... nah, must just be a coincidence.

As for the questions I asked you in my first post, don't worry I knew you wouldn't answer any of them when I wrote them.

[LanternWaste]

39. I remember my grandfather telling me in 1971, "stand behind the man who fights for what he loves...

I remember my grandfather telling me in 1971, "stand behind the man who fights for what he loves. Avoid the man who fights against what he hates. The one is an adult. The other is not..."

[pampango]

40. Republicans seem to spend a lot of time attacking each other - tea party vs. establishment. Perhaps

we don't want to let them have all the fun. Sure they take obligatory blasts at Obama and liberals but it seems that they are more emotional when attacking their own.

[LWolf]

43. More food for thought:

Instead of promoting HRC as a 2016 candidate, thus triggering complaints, criticism, and attacks from those who don't want to give up hope yet, perhaps time would be better spent attacking John Boehner and the crazies in Congress who have blocked EVERY SINGLE liberal initiative and are presiding over the least productive Congress in US history.

That highway goes both ways.

[William769]

44. kick & recommended.

[Vincardog]

49. Agreed and to be commenced as soon as the "Defenders of HRC" quit calling every word against her

Policies an ATTACK on Her.

[DFW]

50. You ask much

That's asking an awful lot of common sense in one single thread.

[hrmjustin]

51. She committed the sin of writing a book.

[grahamhgreen]

55. What's her position on the new Iraq war?

[JackRiddler]

57. "declared"

Gimme a break. Of course she hasn't declared but it's obvious she's started running and she has her virtual volunteers running a campaign right here, 24/7. Oh yeah, you're pretty much there for her as well. So if you don't want threads about Hillary (all of which you will call "attacks" insofar as they are not enthusiastically supporting her), DON'T START'EM.