I am 50 years old

[sandnsea]

Why in the name of god do you want to live the next 4-8 years the exact same way we've lived the last 16? Why do you want the sex scandals? The fundraising scandals? The cozy business associates who have been convicted of crimes? The hateful divisive tactics. The names are out there. Hsu. Burkle. Chatwal. Giustra. I'm not making this up. It's all real and it's all out there.

For what?

Our loss of manufacturing jobs are directly related to their PUSHING China trade, globalization and increased immigration. They have huge relations with wealthy Indian businessmen, like Chatwal. They aren't going to stop outsourcing.

They promised that the Hope College Tax Credit would allow every American to go to community college for 2 years. How'd that work out for you? Why are you relying on a tax credit to provide universal health care?

She specifically had a screaming match with Russ Feingold over various aspects of campaign finance reform and opposed the reform Obama attempted to implement. She's never passed ANY legislation on open government or open budgeting or ending earmarks. Why the hell do you think she's going to do any of it as President?

She not only voted for the IWR, she repeatedly expressed support for the actual war, for years. When John Kerry was introducing a plan to get out of Iraq in 2005, she was saying we had to "stay the course". When he was proposing timelines and benchmarks, she was fighting it. She didn't support any real withdrawal strategy until it became clear she couldn't get elected otherwise.

This is what the last years of my life are going to be? Living in nothing but bickering and scandal and nothing substantially changed at the end of the day.

WHY??? Why are you supporting this woman? It makes NO SENSE. She is everything DU has been against since the day I got here. You have fought ME over the positions you now defend in her.

I don't get it. At all. Somebody has got to explain to me what the hell you see in them, now that you know what the result of their policies are. I just don't understand why you would inflict them onto the country.

[lligrd]

1. I'm With You - I Don't Get It

either. I use to really like Hillary but her votes for the IWR and to give my rights away are unforgivable.

[sloppyjoe25s]

108. DU is funny subset

This is a slightly strange thread.

I agree strongly - the Clintons are an embarrassment - it's interesting that all the "accomplishments" people list (even ignoring the very bad aspects of what they gave us) - are Bill's, not hers. This "experience" myth of Hillary is really out of control. She did a terrible job of trying to get universal health care the first time, and leaves me with little confidence she would do it if elected.

Hillary's vote for George Bush's "No Credit Card Company Left Behind" - Bankruptcy 'Reform' bill - was equally reprehensible as her IWR vote to look "tough" for an presidential election she was running in even back then. The bankruptcy bill - which Obama strongly opposed and voted against - did more to hurt poor any working class people than any law in past 40 years.

What the Clintons did leading up to SC was revulsive. Race-baiting & appealing to the lowest form of bigotry trying (desperately) to tarnish Obama as the "black candidate". It was simply sickening to see, and to say "it was just Bill showing love out of control for his wife" is crazy. Billary are so smart and astute, to think these things are note done with mallice aforethought is beyond naive.

Many here are ignoring that Obama's current weakness is not the issues listed in these threads.

Only DU writers are obsessing about ethics, integrity, and the IWR vote. I count myself with those obsessions, and they have driven me permanently from the Clintons.

Obama's weakness is still "lunch pail" democrats and name recognition. He has had very little "soak time" with them, particularly middle aged votors. Working class people who don't obsess about politics, don't like the war, but frankly don't even know the candidates voting records, and don't follow the ins and outs of scandals. To them "Clinton" is simply a well known brand name. The Clinton Machine locked up a huge humber of party official endorsements long before Iowa (like the Super D's). They did it by not-so-subtle arm twisting - to try to make her "inevitable". Those local politicians are well known by working class dems - so it's still a huge huge advantage - especially in primary states.

Obama is making strong inroads though. Big gains with Latinos in Arizona and New Mexico. Big gains with whites, and in lower income groups. Big gains with women. Yes she still won those groups yesterday - but a week or two ago she would have won them by much much much larger margins. His ability to make big gains in these areas is undeniable.

As people get to know Obama - he does better and better. All he needed was to fight to a draw on Super T. He did much more winning 14 states to her 8. That was a HUGE victory to him. His momentum in these upcomming states will be strong.

I suppose this thread is really aimed at lingering Edwards supporters?!? - to whom I say - PLEASE look at Hillary's vote on Bush's Bankruptcy law. It really did hurt poor people. Obama voted against it. Please also look where her money comes from. Is his perfect? No, but it's cleaner than hers by miles and miles and miles.

Edwards got enough votes to matter yesterday, and I know other edwards votors sat home. Please don't sit home. Vote. Please reconsider Obama.

[Yael]

122. I am one of those to whom you speak

and am looking closely with fresh eyes at the remaining candidates.

[Tatiana]

141. This is a powerful, well-reasoned statement. I wish I could rec it.

Many here are ignoring that Obama's current weakness is not the issues listed in these threads.

It boils down to name recognition and the voters' familiarity with him. As you correctly indicated, as people get to know him (AND HIS POSITIONS... the argument that he lacks substance is completely false), they vote for him. This is why he does so well at the caucuses.

[ooglymoogly]

193. Bill belongs to Rocket=fellers' tr!lateral Commi$$ion.

along with virtually all the neocons and the world order for the rich kinda people and alas D!ane Fe!nste!n. We are being had....nuff said. I voted for JE

[jjr5]

196. I totally agree - !

His record is much cleaner than hers. Obama isn't perfect, but he's run a cleaner campaign with a premise that inspires people. That says a lot.

[StClone]

203. Clintons are NOT an embarrassment

They are a national, if not international, treasure despite their failings. It is just their time has come and is now waning. I would support Hillary if not for Obama in a change, a clean break. In a move away from the mess that Bush has made, the well-heeled mouthpieces (Rush, Hannity, Beck) will be there at the least real or imagined weakness to slowly denigrate any move from Plutocracy offered by Obama. With Hillary it only makes it easier for them as she unites the Radical Right as much as any one single factor.

[Straight Shooter]

2. You're 50, so the last years of your life are probably going to be another 30 to 50.

It's not like bush is winning or stealing another election again.

Enjoy tonight. Your guy did very well, and is poised to keep doing well. No need for this wailing and gnashing of teeth on either side.

[sandnsea]

3. I want answers

You don't know my health. I want to know why I may well live my last years in a country that's a cess pool of partisan bickering and scandal and nothing getting done.

[Straight Shooter]

7. I truly am sorry about your health. I didn't mean to be flippant.

But think about this: we never know what someone is going to be like in a job until they get hands-on into that job. I'm just as leery of Barack as you are of Hillary. I don't know what's going to pop up out of his past, or Michelle's past, or an associate's past, or some made-up crap by the right wing.

No matter what, the right wing will never ever ever stop hounding whatever Dem is in office. Never. That's part of the fabric of America now. We have all said it, and it's true, if Jesus were the candidate the right wing would demonize him.

I'm going to support Hillary to the best of my ability, but if Barack becomes the nominee, I'm going to focus on what's good about him and try to convince people I know to vote for him.

All I care about is the Supreme Court. I trust both Hillary and Barack to make wise choices for such a profound decision. Everything else can probably be repaired if mistakes are made.

[sandnsea]

9. No, I want an answer

I'm serious. I do not understand.

I gave you real names of real people who ARE going to pop out on the Clintons. Guaranteed.

And you still choose them.

You don't care what they did in Iowa or Nevada?

You don't care that she's claming victory in FL & MI?

None of these ethical lapses matter to you at all?

You don't have to even answer any of that.

Just explain to me what it is that you ARE supporting. I do not get it.

[caligirl]

17. Its like my MIL says, they all do it? thats how she rationalizes her votes for Bush. I

hate it, I completely agree with your points and would also like answers to this. How can people choose to ignore lapses in judgment and vote for her? She will unite the conservatives faster than any church.

[sandnsea]

23. I suppose

I've just never believed it because even in the midst of huge scandals, like Abramoff, many many more people were innocent than guilty.

[Straight Shooter]

24. I wish I could list everything, but it wouldn't change your position anyway

I can't sit here and type for half an hour defending Hillary. What about Feingold trash-mouthing Edwards? He's no saint. Everybody's got feet of clay. Everybody.

Florida and Michigan, I'm not going to weigh in on because that's Howard Dean's helm to take, and I'll be satisfied with whatever he says. I trust his judgment.

I don't trust Rahm Emanuel. He's supposed to have endorsed Hillary, but he's best friends with Axelrod and he's looking to gain Barack's Illinois seat. And since I don't trust Rahm, I think he's a weasel to the nth degree who never gave Howard Dean credit, so that makes a big negative in my mind. Seems like there was some manipulation in the house as to minority leader where Rahm was involved, as well. He's two-faced.

My candidates that I have strongly supported in the past have been Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, and now Hillary Clinton. I did vote for Kerry, but only because Dean was out, so it was more of a vote against bush, although I think Kerry would have been a very competent president. I did not vote for Bill Clinton, it was a vote against george h.w. bush. Bill Clinton never impressed me one way or the other, I was then and remain neutral to him.

I think I have a good track record for ascertaining strong character in the face of adversity and defining what is, for me, a good choice for POTUS. I still adore Jimmy Carter and Al Gore, and I hope to always have positive feelings for Hillary Clinton, as well.

One other thing, and then I have to shut this computer down. I look at Chelsea Clinton, and I respect her. I absolutely respect her. With all that Hillary has been through, if Hillary were really such an awful human being, then I seriously doubt Chelsea would have grown up to be such a fine young woman. That means a lot to me, for my own reasons.

If you want to extend this conversation at a later date, I'm happy to discuss it with you. But I do have to log off because right now it's looking like I'm only going to get 4 hours of sleep.

[caligirl]

36. i love Carter too, Gore as well. But I see Hillary as a departure from that

list, to me Obama is closer to Gore and Carter. Their kids have had some minor problems(one or two and I don't object to them). I just can't see Hillary winning the Peace Prize or hammering away with Habitat for Humanity. So maybe I'm missing the vein of comparison your using. As much as I like the fact that their daughter is a good example and recommends them as parents well, I don't think I can carry that over to dismissing the role the Clintons played for years in the manufacturing job losses that hurt families, many with kids in college or braces, and they are just as special as Chelsea here in the Silicon valley.) They hurt this community and will continue to help CEOs here ship cheaper help in and work out with the millions they have taken from respective interests. Food and educations and homes were taken out of the mouths of kids and parents and college graduates while Bill took 3.3 million from an Indian business interest now high up in the campaign. To say nothing of the advisors she is using for guidance on Iraq, they aren't the ones I would trust with ending this war soon enough to save the military(see a story coming out tomorrow from military leaders, it all but says they military is broken)

Now if Hillary changes her ways in the WH great, but her habits don't fall in line with that notion.

Real people feel real pain and she is partly to blame for it, Bill some as well. Many others but they aren't running for office. No I see a record I can't trust, Chelsea is irrelevant in this. Obama's kids look nice to don't we think?

You've been so polite, thank you.

[rucognizant]

96. How about the Nixon Girls?

They turned out very well, a trifle conservative for my taste but.............Pat Nixon was a woman I admired. I voted for the Dem. but I can't remember who it was???
Kids don't always reflect their parents...... we can only do our best to help them grow up well; sometimes it works sometimes not no matter how hard we try, no reflection on us.
ANd yes, this is a nice discussion

[clarence swinney]

85. Total Character Counts

President Clinton at Nixon Funeral "You should judge a man by the Total life not just a small part" Amen.
CHARACTER IS A COMP0SITE OF MANY VIRTUE
30 CLINTON CHARACTER LIST
Thank you –For caring for
Children
Elderly
Poor
Students
Schools
Educational Infrastructure
Disabled
Small Business
Americans who suffered losses in natural disasters
For 22.4 Million Net New Jobs
For better paying jobs
For increasing the Minimum Wage
For keeping our servicemen and women out of harm’s way
For making America a proud nation thru the eyes of friends
For having a popularity rating of 98.5% in a Moscow Poll
For having the highest poll ratings of any Peacetime President in Europe-Africa-Asia
For being an active church attendee
For carrying your Bible to church all your life
For carrying your small brother to church each Sunday
For being a devoted and successful father
For giving America Hillary to serve us
For trying to de-politicize politics
For not having a Mean bone in your body
For not being vengeful toward your opponents
For your sincere faith in a living God
For being polite and gracious to all persons you meet
For a sincere, caring attitude toward my family
For a being worse golfer than I
For having, in eight years, only one member of your administration “convicted” of a “felony” which was “committed while working for you”.
For standing up, without a whimper, to the attacks which spent $110,000,000 in a failed effort to destroy your administration.
For you and Hillary being my choice for my-- Lifeaholics Of America Award-- for a quarter century of Service To Mankind.
For Working For A Life Not Just A Living
Just know this Mr. President Hundreds of millions in this world LOVE YOU as does GOD.
Clarence Swinney
PO Box 3411
Burlington NC 27215 [e-mail]
President-Retired
Lifeaholic of America---(work for a life not just a living)
“

[beezlebum]

157. welfare reform, NAFTA, and other neo-liberal/DLC policies

basically nullify apparent "caring for":
Children
Elderly
Poor
etctera,

since so many starved and were put on the street and forced off of their farms and forced to work in substandard maquilladoras thanks to those policies.

try telling some poor farmer and his family in mexico that bill clinton's policies that so drastically affected their lives can be attributed to a minor character flaw, he's such a good guy outside of that policy. :hug:

try telling some poor single mother who was forced into the streets with her children that bill clinton "cares" about her and her kids, his welfare reform can simply be attributed to a minor character flaw, but otherwise, he's a great guy. :hug:

try telling the elderly and sick who suffered due to medicare and medicaid cuts that he "cares" about them, it was just a minor character flaw... :hug: etc. etc. etc.

character flaws that persisted for the better part of a decade, only to continue and worsen under his new BFF's son, W, for the next decade, and possibly under his wife.

the worshiping and excusing is nauseating.

it reminds me of carter- i once admired jimmy carter. he made some nice gestures, towards the poor, toward blacks, he was a supposed champion of human rights, you could probably easily pull up a thousand pretty quotes from international leaders praising carter, but that too was nullified with his behind the scenes armament deals, draining national wealth, his support for the vietnam war up until its end, and protection of the wealth & power of corporations. all the while, preaching about peace and poverty, and yet his administration was arming militants and sucking massive corporate penis.

why does it seem that so few see through the thick and heavy charm and charisma? they may qualify as nicey nice character traits, and you may be able to quell a few ruffled feathers with warm fuzzy sentiment such as the garbage above, but i for one absolutely refuse to buy into the propping of of poli's as gods and saints when they are so far from it.

[clarence swinney]

86. LEADERS JUDGE LEADERS

Good Comments on Bill Clinton

1.Billy Graham at Oklahoma City-“His quick mind and warm personality impressed me immediately. Seldom have I seen anyone express, so movingly and sincerely, a genuine sense of compassion and sympathy to those who were hurting.

I felt that he, not I, was the real pastor that day.

We spent much of the afternoon talking about the Bible and what it days about God’s plan for our lives. It was a time of warm fellowship with man who has not always won approval from his fellow Christians but who has in his heart “a desire to serve God”.

2. James McDougal On Larry King—“Bill Clinton’s charisma and caring for others is real. He has always been that way.”

3. Hillary Clinton—“He is the most optimistic and gregarious person I have ever known or heard about. He likes people, all people, with no pettiness or preferences.”

4. John Brummitt—Author of ”High Wire” and Editor of Republican Arkansas Democrat Gazette—“Bill Clinton is no phony. He truly cares for others. I will repeat it for the umpteenth time that Bill Clinton is no crook. You may disagree with him but he does not hold it against you. He has no interest in financial things.”

5. David Maraniss-Author of Clinton Biography “First in His Class” and reporter for Washington Post. “Bill Clinton truly likes people and feels their pain .He doesn’t know how to hate. He doesn’t have a mean bone in his body.”

6.Jack Nelson—Washington Bureau Chief for Los Angeles Times for decades—“ I have known Bill Clinton since he came to Washington but I know of nothing he has done that impugns his integrity. His integrity is as good as Bob Doles. He has to compromise from his original position to get things done and his critics crucify him for doing what every president must do.” This comment was before Monica.

7. James Stewart—Author of Bloodsport—“The Clintons commited no crime in their investment in the Whitewater land purchase.”

8. Pillsbury-Madison Soutra Report—Paid 3.4 million by RTC to investigate Madison Guaranty S&L. Their final report-“We found no culpability on the part of the Clintons or the Rose Law Firm.”

9. James McDougal-President of the Whitewater Development Corporation—“There was no crime committed in the purchase and selling of Whitewater property.”

10. Robert Novak—“I think Bill Clinton is terrific.”

11. Newt Gingrich—“Bill Clinton charms me. It takes me days of detoxification after a meeting with him.”

12. D’Amato—Chair of Senate Hearings on Whitewater—There was no crime. Many allegations, insinuations and smears but no crime.

13. Clarence W. Swinney-Producer of ”Lifeaholics-Work For A Life Not Just A living”-
President Bill Clinton is one of our all time great presidents. He is no whiner like President Bush. He is intelligent unlike President Reagan. He fights like a pit bull for his programs unlike President Truman. His record of success on his basic programs is phenomenal. The right wing National Review wrote “President Clinton absolutely ate the cake of the Republican Congress in 1997”.

14. Sarah McClendon—Author of “Mr. President, Mr. President”—I think Bill Clinton may go down in history as one of our really great presidents. Bill Clinton’s allure comes from the unmistakable feeling that he genuinely likes you.

The presidency has been broadened by Mr. Clinton from his high summitry on war and peace. International trade and foreign policy to include such matters as abuse of women, teen-age pregnancy, youth gangs and even schoool construction. His actions extend a helping hand to those living with the problems in homes, communities and the job world.

Mr. Clinton has taken on a lot more than he had to. He does not want to be anybody’s enemy and he hates to hear you talk badly about anyone.”

15. Don Imus-“President Clinton has a great heart. He truly cares.”

16. Gennifer Flowers—“Bill Clinton would never do what Paula Jones said he did. Bill Clinton has respect for women and is a perfect gentleman at all times around women.”

17. Susan McDougal—“Bill Clinton was not interested in the Whitewater account. My husband, Jim. Said “everytime I tried to talk business with Bill Clinton his eyes rolled back in his head. He had no interest.”

18. Ronald K. Anderson—Arkansas State Trooper—“I guarded Governor Clinton for 8 years, night and day, and sometimes seven days in a row and I never saw him do anything wrong. The three of us that guarded him most of the time were paid $80,000 by Richard Smith and were offered a potential $700,000 each by Cliff Jackson to trash Bill Clinton”.

19. Dick Morris-Clinton adviser for years—“I was with Bill Clinton probably 1,000 days and 10,000 hours and I never saw him express any interest in any woman except Hillary and he would fight you over her.”

20. Carolyn Yeldell Staley—closest lifetime friend—“Bill sees religion as an important (but intensely personal) part of life. Bill is a Christian and his personal faith has grown and deepened through his adult life. Bill is private about his faith and does not trivialize it by overly publicizing his church attendance. His faith is very personal and real.”


21. Douglas Eakeley—Fellow Rhodes Scholar at Oxford—“Bill’s potential for leadership was apparent. My first impression was “is this guy for real”. It didn’t take long to find out. He was (and remains) one of the most gregarious persons I have ever met. Bill’s interest in others conveyed a sense of understanding and sympathy that gave him an ability to relate to people of all walks of life.”

22.Stephen Oxman-Fellow student at Oxford—“I remember how interested he was in talking with people and how much he enjoyed it. He displayed an unusual ability to engage people from many different backgrounds in friendly, substantive conversations.
I think this skill arises from Bill’s inherent liking for people. He finds in others a great source of life’s richness and potential, and he gives of himself so that others find this in him as well.”

23. Douglas Eakeley—fellow student at Oxford—“His anguished decision to give up his draft deferment and subject himself to the draft reflects a combination of courage, integrity and a sense of calling that is so typical of Bill Clinton.”

24. Don Pogue—Fellow student at Oxford—“Bill’s warmth for people always seemed to help him maintain a balance in difficult times. My amazement at how well Bill maintained a balance during the war events. He talked with people. He listened. He read and he seemed to be reading a new book each week. He seemed to have a reserve of decency towards everybody he met that just kept him going.”

25. Congressman Thomas Allen—Classmate at Oxford—“When I was with Presdient Clinton at Oxford he had greatness written all over him. His character, personality and leadership were obvious. You never felt he was patronizing or trying to gain something personal. He was impressive as a person who wanted desperately to do good for all. He has been that same person all these years.”

26. Britt Hume—“Bill Clinton is the most charming man I have ever met. You cannot be around him and not like him. He makes Reagan look dull.”

27. Nelson Mandela—“President Clinton is one of the most decent men I have come across and he has got a thick skin and strong nerves.”

28. David Gergen-Reporter—“ Ass someone who has worked with and known the man for more than a dozen years, I believe that in a crisis Bill Clinton steps up to the challenge. He can certainly do the damnest things but down deep he has a good heart and tries very hard to serve a higher good.”

29. Republican Rep. Asa Hutchinson—long time opponent of Clinton—“when my family came to Washington in 1996, the Clintons invited my family for a tour of the White House. It was a great treat for mom. I will never forget the time Governor Clinton stayed at a town meeting until 1 a.m. discussing environmental problems in the small town of El Dorado. It just impressed me. His interest and commitment. I was also impressed when, in 1992, he ignored the advice of professional politicians and kept his campaign and transition team in Little Rock. His roots in Arkansas have always been very important to him.”

30. Prime Minister Netanyahu—“President Clinton is a warrior for peace. He never stops. He never quits. He has boundless optimism. I mean he does not stop. He has this ability to maintain a tireless pace and to nudge and prod and suggest.”
31. Sept 2007-Human Rights Specialist highly respected UN Secretary-General’s deputy special envoy for tsunami recovery said this on Clinton-“I have never seen a leader with his combination of skills—to empathize, to inspire, to convene, and to chart an effective way forward. Perhaps no one beyond the affected communities themselves is in a better position to evaluate the scale of Clinton’s contribution—in conception, special values, and executive ability. For President Clinton, equity in the process of (tsunami) recovery was critical-it was absolutely essential that money being sent to the region be used to improve the conditions of the poorest and the most vulnerable.”
32. Dick Morris-9-5-07 at Women’s National Republican Club—“Bill Clinton is brilliant. His domestic achievements were outstanding. He doesn’t have enemies. He lets criticism roll off his back. He tries to like everybody.”
33. General Wesley Clark—MSNBC-9-21-07--As Nato Commander I worked with President Clinton and I never saw any man work so hard at his job.”
clarence swinney
political historian
lifeaholics of america-retired
burlington nc
[e-mail]

HOW CAN ONE NOT LOVE THIS MAN.

[sandnsea]

93. Thank you

I still see a very flawed couple, very flawed, but I see your side of it. In comparison to Reagan and Bush, you're looking for the 8 years of progress you know. I personally think Obama would provide even more than what you believe the Clintons did - without the scandals - but I can understand your point of view a little better too. Thanks!

[bigscott]

98. how do you know

Obama wont have scandals of his own? We cannot know that. Please don't tell me he is a better person than that - we have no way of knowing what he will be like in the WH. If you dont like/trust HRC, that is fine and I, for one, will never criticize you for that. But please keep an open mind that perhaps BOH is not the saint some make him out to be

Peace S&S

[sandnsea]

120. His Record

There are people who are honest. I'm sorry you don't believe that. I think you don't believe that, in part, because of the terrible scandals of the Clintons.

If there were dirt on Obama, they'd have found it and thrown it. Don't doubt it for a minute, they play for keeps. There isn't any.

I gave you the names of the dirt on the Clintons, that hasn't been thrown yet. I'm asking you to look at facts and live in the reality those facts create. You, like almost everyone else, are basing your decision on rationalizations of possibilities that simply don't exist.

[jhrobbins]

165. I think you are a bit naive if you think they are done with Obama-

especially if he is the nominee. He is a human being and in 2008, no one is safe from some human failings; and more importantly, safe from having them dredged up for all to see.

[dugggy]

211. What about Rezko?

Rezko engineered Obama getting a specially low cost plot of land
near his mansion.
How about his self declared abuse of cocaine & pot?
Why did he dump his white girl friend? Was it a political move?

But compared to the Clinton scandals, Obama comes across as a saint.

[hfojvt]

100. it's pretty easy to not love that man

For one thing, you are quoting people like Superstar Billy Graham and Don Imus? Also Gennifer Flowers and Dick Morris? Are those four really good character references? And Britt Hume?

Then, there is his centrism and constant betrayal of the working class
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/71

[ChiciB1]

174. Haven't Read All The Posts Here.... BUT I Can't Even Imagine What

Obama can do?? I once felt he stood for a certain idealism, but that soon went by the wayside. Now it seems he talks out of both sides of his mouth. HOPE & CHANGE are ONLY words!

Face it, with either one of them... it's more of the same! The way I look at it is... CLINTON has so many BIG BUSINESS ties that she can be effective, but for WHO??

Obama has many powerful people in Congress pushing for him, but he thinks after he's elected they'll fall in line behind him and help. NEWS FLASH!! I seriously DON'T think that "dream" works! Our Government has been bought and sold and we have let THE MEDIA decide THE OUTCOME OF THIS ELECTION!

Having said that, THE MEDIA is only doing what THEIR CEO'S want them to. The word gets sent out, and THEY fall in line! If I hear "we want to make HISTORY" one more time, I think I will LITERALLY THROW UP!!

Making history is NOT about what SOME ONE tells us "making history is!" I truly believe we should have woman or a person of color elected, but NOT these two. I feel Obama may have started out with the thought of "reaching across the aisle" thing, but he's not that person anymore!

Let's get real here, those who REALLY wanted to CHANGE things got the SHAFT!! How many here wanted Kucinich or Edwards or Biden or Dodd?? Or any of the others? From where I sit, it was decided and then determined by "people in high places" that Democrats were going "to make history" come hell or high water. And so, word goes round, far too many people only listen to MSM and they tell their friends, and those friends tell another friend... and most don't EVEN KNOW about issues.

I'm done!

[GMFORD]

236. Nope.

I think you wouldn't LITERALLY THROW UP if you didn't LIBERALLY DRINK SO MUCH.

Just sayin'

[ChiciB1]

246. Good Luck On Your Venture!! n/t

[bagrman]

160. Flawed, yea and they hope you are forgetful also.

From Diane Rigali
2-6-8


Hillary Clinton has been telling America that she is the most qualified candidate for president based on her "record," which she says includes her eight years in the White House as First Lady - or "co-president" - and her seven years in the Senate. Here is a reminder of what that record includes:

HILLARY, As First Lady, assumed authority over Health Care Reform, a process that cost the taxpayers over $13 million. She told both Bill Bradley and Pat Moynahan, key votes were needed to pass her legislation, that she would "demonize "anyone who opposed it. But it was opposed; she couldn't even get it to a vote in a Congress controlled by her own party. (And in the next election, her party lost control of both the House and Senate.)


HILLARY assumed authority over selecting a female Attorney General. Her first two recommendations (Zoe Baird and Kimba Wood) were forced to withdraw their names from consideration, and then she chose Janet Reno. Janet Reno has since been described by Bill himself as "my worst mistake."

HILLARY recommended Lani Guanier for head of the Civil Rights Commission. When Guanier's radical views became known, her name had to be withdrawn.

HILLARY recommended her former law partners, Web Hubbell, Vince Foster, and William Kennedy for positions in the Justice Department, White House staff, and the Treasury, respectively. Hubbell was later imprisoned, Foster committed suicide, and Kennedy was forced to resign.

HILLARY also recommended a close friend of the Clintons, Craig Livingstone, for the position of director of White House security. When Livingstone was investigated for the improper access of up to 900 FBI files of Clinton enemies (Filegate) and the widespread use of drugs by White House staff, both Hillary and her husband denied knowing him. (FBI agent Dennis Sculimbrene confirmed in a Senate Judiciary Committee in 1996 both the drug use and Hillary's involvement in hiring Livingstone. After that, the FBI closed its White House Liaison Office, after serving seven presidents for over thirty years.)

HILLARY, in order to open "slots" in the White House for her friends the Harry Thomasons (to whom millions of dollars in travel contracts could be awarded), had the entire staff of the White House Travel Office fired. They were reported to the FBI for "gross mismanagement" and their reputations ruined. After a thirty-month investigation, only one, Billy Dale, was charged with a crime - mixing personal money with White House funds when he cashed checks. The jury acquitted him in less than two hours.


HILLARY also assumed the duty of directing the "bimbo eruption squad" and scandal defense:


...She urged her husband not to settle the Paula Jones lawsuit.


...She refused to release the Whitewater documents, which led to the appointment of Ken Starr as Special Prosecutor. After $80 million dollars of taxpayer money was spent, Starr's investigation led to Monica Lewinsky, which led to Bill lying about and later admitting his affairs.


...Then they had to settle with Paula Jones after all.


...And Bill lost his law license for lying to the grand jury.


...And Bill was impeached by the House.


...And Hillary almost got herself indicted for perjury and obstruction of justice (she avoided it mostly because she repeated, "I do not recall," "I have no recollection," and "I don't know" 56 times under oath).


HILLARY accepted the traditional First Lady's role of decorator of the White House at Christmas, but in a unique Hillary way. In 1994, for example, The First Lady's Tree in the Blue Room (the focal point each year) was Decorated with drug paraphernalia, sex toys, and pornographic ornaments, all personally approved by Hillary as the invited artists' depictions of the theme, "The Twelve Days of Christmas."

HILLARY wrote "It Takes a Village," demonstrating her socialist viewpoint.

HILLARY decided to seek election to the Senate in a state she had never lived in. Her husband pardoned FALN terrorists in order to get Latino support and the New Square Hassidim to get Jewish support. Hillary also had Bill pardon her brother's clients, for a small fee, to get financial support.

HILLARY then left the White House, but later had to return $200,000 in White House furniture, china, and artwork she had stolen.

HILLARY played the "woman card" in the campaign for the Senate, by portraying her opponent (Lazio) as a bully picking on her.


HILLARY'S husband further protected her by asking the National Archives to withhold from the public until 2012 many records of their time in the White House, including much of Hillary's correspondence and her calendars. (There are ongoing lawsuits to force the release of those records.)

HILLARY, as the junior Senator from New York , passed no major legislation. She has deferred to the senior Senator (Schumer) to tend to the needs of New Yorkers, even on the hot issue of medical problems of workers involved in the cleanup of Ground Zero after 9/11.


Quite a resume, isn't it? Sounds more like an organized crime family.

[e-mail]

[anitar1]

192. Trolling ?

Many of these things have been disproven.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

207. You believe everything you read in an email?

That stuff's been disproven. Especially the part about the christmas tree decorated with drug paraphernalia.

And "It Takes a Village" is socialist propaganda? So that means that your children have NO CONTACT WITH THE OUTSIDE WORLD??? No contact with neighbors, teachers, grandparents? That's the opposite of "it takes a village".

That's what www.snopes.com is for.

Don't spout this stuff if it's lies.

[ursi]

52. the Clinton camp lied and cheated in Nevada with the assistance of Harry Reid

[elixir]

88. These issues have been veted and dismissed. Relax, you'll live longer.

[stillcool]

101. The only issue dismissed...

was the lawsuit.

Politics
Judge Dismisses Nevada Caucus Challenge

By KEN RITTER, The Associated Press
2008-01-17 19:43:44.0
Current rank: Not ranked
LAS VEGAS -

Democrats with ties to Hillary Rodham Clinton failed in court Thursday to prevent casino workers from caucusing at special precincts in Nevada.

The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge James Mahan was presumed to be a boost for Clinton rival Barack Obama in the Democratic presidential caucuses Saturday because he has been endorsed by the union representing many of the shift workers who will be able to use the precincts on the Las Vegas strip.

"State Democrats have a First Amendment right to association, to assemble and to set their own rules," Mahan said.

Nevada's Democratic Party approved creation of the precincts to make it easier for housekeepers, waitresses and bellhops to caucus during the day near work rather than have to do so in their neighborhoods.
----------------------------------------------------
The Democratic National Committee ratified the state party's rules in August.
--------
The Culinary Union said the suit was an attempt to disenfranchise its members. "Backers of Hillary Clinton are suing in court to take away our right to vote in the caucuses," a union flier said.
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistribute
http://www.examiner.com/printa-1164208~Judge_Dismisses_Nevada_Caucus_Challenge.html

[phantom power]

67. Here's the problem.

Obama can't "reach across the isle." He might want to, but that's not relevant. The reason for the "partisan bickering" is the GOP. The reason for the "sex scandals" is the GOP. The reason for the "real estate scandals" is the GOP. All of that, all of those things you can't stand anymore, have been deliberately manufactured by the GOP, and their plutocrat supporters.

I don't mind if you prefer Obama to Clinton, but if you think that Obama is somehow going to fare better than Clinton against this machine, I think you are deluded. If Obama is elected, the GOP will happily proceed to do to Obama exactly what they did to the Clintons. The question really isn't whether he thinks he can reach across the isle, but whether we think he can bring his gun to a gun-fight.

[crazylikafox]

68. Bingo

[Recursion]

70. Just a second

The reason for the "sex scandals" is the GOP.

No extramarital sex would have meant no sex scandals.

Was the Democratic party the reason for the Maccaca scandal?

If Obama is elected, the GOP will happily proceed to do to Obama exactly what they did to the Clintons.

As I mentioned above, you're acting like the Clintons aren't giving them objective and real targets: they have and are. He listed about a half-dozen, which you haven't addressed. This isn't paranoid Vince Foster stuff. These are real names we already know are going to come up, investigations that we already know are going to happen.

[phantom power]

75. See? They did their job so well that you've internalized it yourself.

And by next November, millions of people will be saying: "Well, it was clearly Obama's fault for giving the GOP objective and real targets." If you doubt this, you don't properly understand GOP politics.

It's not about whether Bill's BJ was "real." It's about why his BJ became 24/7 national news, and led to his impeachment, while literally dozens of prominent GOP philanderers went completely ignored by the news, even while those same philanderers impeached a sitting president for the exact same behavior they were engaged in. And got away with it.

Let's take another more recent example: John Kerry. Remember how Kerry's distinguished military service was supposed to make him immune from the GOP "Democrats are too pacifist" meme? And then they broke out the Swift-Boaters and the purple-heart band-aids, and the rest is history.

If you think they can't do that to Obama, or any other Dem candidate, think again.

Understand, I'm not trying to bash Obama for anything. I would be happy to vote for Obama in November. I'm saying: all this happy horseshit about politics of unity, or reaching across the isle, is fucking ridiculous. Nothing in the behavior of Republicans since at least 1992 supports the idea that any of them are going to "work with" Dems. Nothing.. Obama had better be walking into this with more than Kumbaya for a governing philosophy.

[Recursion]

76. So I'm supposed to not mind what he did?

I'm apparently now a right-wing shill if it bothered me that he had an affair with a 20-something intern?

It bothered the hell out of me.

A) It's wrong (it's harrassment, for that matter) and he should have known better
B) It was a tremendous risk when a lot was at stake
C) "I did not have sexual relations with that woman" ... "I did have a relationship that was improper. Indeed it was wrong"

I'm tremendously disappointed in him over this, have been for a decade now. And it's simply absurd to me to call that "internalizing" RW garbage. No BJ would have meant no impeachment. The impeachment was ludicrous (and, you'll note, ended up costing Gingrich and Livingston their jobs), but his horrible judgment let it happen.

[phantom power]

79. I don't think you are a right-wing shill. I do think you are missing the point.

The point is, they were going to take him down no matter what. The BJ was just the particular thing they found first that did the trick. Remember, they spent eight years and tens of millions of dollars trying to nail him. For something. For anything.

Are you going to get angry over whatever dirt they dig up (or make up) about Obama? I hope not, because that's how the GOP stays in power. On a related note, I also hope you aren't thinking that if we can just find a candidate who is pure enough, that the GOP will be unable to stop them. That would be an unfortunate blunder.

[RuleOfNah]

133. "See? They did their job so well that you've internalized it yourself."

:headbang:

[jhrobbins]

168. Hear, hear!!!

[NashVegas]

136. Please, The Last President We Had That Never Slept Around Was Jimmy Carter

And the country laughed when he confessed to "having lust in his heart" for other women.


There is a genuine, legitimate fear on the part of Dems - and I'm one of them - that Obama will, indeed, bring a water-pistol to the fight. With Hillary, I have no doubt she'll bring cannon.

[Recursion]

150. Then it's time for another one who won't sleep around n/t

[caligirl]

135. I stick with Obama, you seem to argue they will both get the GOP mud . Equal chances?

[phantom power]

137. I don't really know about chances...

The thing about Obama's campaign that strikes me as wrong-headed is this: He seems to have made "I'm the candidate to end partisan politics" the centerpiece of his campaign. That only happens if the GOP cooperates. Why would they? What is Obama going to do that will change their behavior?

[caligirl]

176. Well you have a point,. Rove is a loose cannon now. The repugs

are already brainwashed to charge against Hillary in the ballot box. Obama is not as likely to get that, though the Rove tactics won't be spared for him I'm sure.

[Triana]

164. BINGO! Give that Phantom Power an Oscar!

Cause he just told us where the bull shit in the buckwheat.


And he's right. STOP BLAMING Hillary and Bill for all that bickering and rediculous lawsuits - it was the Goddamned GOP that kept that crap going - they manufactured it - they perpetuated it.

And about Obama - wants to 'reach across the isle' to 'em?


Gooooooooooood Luck Obama. Pfffft!

[bowens43]

171. Don't blame it all on the GOP.

We here at DU are as far left and as unyielding as the freepers are in the other direction. The same gos for many of those in congress. We now have Hillary who who will do nothing but perpetrate more of the same. For healing our nation, McCain would be a better choice then Hillary. Obama is the only chance we have. It's cynicism like yours that prevents us from moving forward. Obama knows that it's not going to be easy, he also know , like we all do if we would only admit it, that it's also necessary.

[varelse]

175. Right on the money

You've nailed it, phantom. "Reaching across the aisle" will only put Democrats even more off balance - just the way the GOP wants them.

[For PaisAn]

202. Precisely

n/t

[shellinaya]

222. "Here's the problem......"

I love your post about the intention of "reaching across the aisle" and how that won't occur unless the GOP complies. Can I quote you on another forum? (my little one)

Personally, this cult of personality that has grown up around Obama has me feeling discombobulated. If he becomes the nominee and we all expect him to play nice and saintly against the massive Republican attack machine, he will lose if he lives up to our expectations. I want a candidate who can be ruthless against that machine and still bounce back mostly unaffected and do their work in a realistic way. Hillary Clinton has earned a lot of respect in the Senate because of her hard worth ethic and her toughness. I wonder, though I don't know, if Obama has earned equal respect. It will matter, if he really thinks he can "reach across the aisle." Norm Coleman said those very words when he ran for the Senate and he turned out to be incapable of doing that. That's the thing about politician's promises..... they are mostly all the same and they often amount to nothing. Obama is the same, that's what people don't realize.

[lisainmilo]

232. then why aren't any senators supporting her? n/t

[phantom power]

243. quote me? sure.

flattery will get you everywhere.

[northzax]

155. so you are planning on exiling Republicans?

because they will not be interested in a new 'spirit of cooperation' you know this, right? it's very noble to refuse to fight, but you know what happens? you tend to lose if the other guy wants to fight anyway.

personally, I think the republicans in the Senate and House are going to be so charmed by Obama that they will stop being the obstructionist fucks they are, and everything will be hunky dory. and the right wing machine is just going to lie down like a lamb. yup, maybe that will work.

[RiverStone]

90. I'm almost 50 - and plan to live another 50!

And I'm figuring Obama will be my president anyway - the 50's will be great!

[krispos42]

111. There are more Bushbots on the way....

Aside from Jeb floating around, there are 3 or 4 more Bush family males in the NEXT generation, neocon psycho warmongering egomaniacs all of them.

The uber-right-wing and those centrist/DLC policies must be dragged out into the street and shot, now, before we start seeing more Bushes on the ballot.

[MadBadger]

4. Do you Like to KICK, Stretch, and KICK!?

[racaulk]

134. ROFL!

I love her! :loveya:

[redqueen]

143. Hahahahahahahaha

Thank you for that. :)

[kid a]

151. lol!!!

[Recursion]

5. I'm trying to be positive tonight, but damn, I've been thinking exactly that

(only, at 20 years younger)

I'm not resentful of, angry at, or disappointed in Clinton supporters. I'm just genuinely mystified.

[sandnsea]

6. You've got time

Young people are discouraged that they've always lived under Bushes and Clintons. Well that's all I've had all of my adult life and it may be all I ever have. That gets a little nauseating to think about. I'd like to try someone from a different generation who might have a better clue on how things have changed.

[rucognizant]

107. Yes, that a crying shame!

Back in the mid-seventies a friend's teenage daughter said or did something, that bothered me for it's lack of understanding.. ( Sorry, don't remember what it was) Her Mother said to me, "How can she miss something she has never known?" Too true!
I was fortunate to live during FDR's time & Truman's ( yes I know the bombing, but that didn't hang like a pall over the country like the current fear, that has been pushed.) ANd Eisenhower's, and go to Germany with the American Friends Service 10 years after the war ended, and sit in the shadow of the new Peace Palace in the Hague, that housed the newly formed UN. There were teens from all over Europe sitting int e square there; COMMUNICATING with each other, in wonder that it would mean no more war, deaths, starvation, homelessness......The Marshall plan was working very well, Life was good! ( in spite of Joe McCarthy! ) That was dealt with, Nixon was dealt with..............As a ssingle woman running a small business during the Carter admin.business was good, profits grew every year, I was empowered as a single businss woman.....Then 1/20/81, life changed: even tho business grew for another decade, I could see the cracks in the levee, and sure enough in 1987 they burst, we over 50 were washed away in the flood and life hasn't been good since!
I have judging by my family members, ( all who give lie to the TV fiction that people are living longer now)I have another 20 - 25 years.....It certainly would be nice to say once again "Life is good!"

[Eurobabe]

8. GoBAMA! Change is good.

Going backwards is not. :hi:

[kid a]

234. kick

[lynch03]

10. But...but I want a Women in the white house

sigh

[sandnsea]

13. I can accept that

If that's it, then at least I know. I think it's incredibly selfish, but at least I'd know.

[divineorder]

73. Why Hillary, though.

There are strong Dem women in a position to win outright in a few years. Claire McCaskill, Sebelius, Napolitano. I think we will get a Dem Governor of Missouri, and maybe Pennsylvania. These don't have the Clinton baggage and have real records of governing behind them and have won a few more elections to boot. I would like to see Obama choose one of them as a running mate, although the racial implications may be a bit too much.

[sloppyjoe25s]

109. Michelle Obama in 2016!

I want the first woman president too! Just not Hillary.

Heck we can put Michelle in in 2012 if Barack does not deliver ;)

[Donnachaidh]

117. caught up in that *Idol* rush, huh?

Gee --

Can y'all step back to reality? Just turn OFF the TV set.... I know missing American Idol is hard. Try reading a book. :eyes:

[sloppyjoe25s]

119. More education on my Pinky than in your whole family tree

loser - I've got 3 Masters degrees from Stanford & speak 5 languages - 3 fluently - and have lived and worked in 5 countries for real periods of time, and that was after graudating Suma Cum Laude from top liberal arts school, and being a Fulbright Scholar overseas. I was doing General Relativity (not that i expect you to even know what that is), writing C++ compilers (again, you would not have a clue), and reading Kafka in Russian and Garcia-Marquez in Spanish while you were figuring out your ABCs, and struggling to figure out what "symbolism" was in your baby English lit class...

..which is probably why you drooled your way into backing Edwards.... let me guess - you are a slavish Krugman reader who probably failed math, and never understood a syllable of micro.

Anyone supporting Edwards - who ran far to the right of the right, legislated to the right and co-sponsored IWR - and then thinks he is a progressive needs their head examined.

Glad he has all you "educated" people thinking hes oh-so-progressive?!

You like many on here are totally out of touch with real America - which does watch Idol, does shop at Walmart, does go on MySpace, and is going to pick your next president. Like it or not elitist nanny.

[BobTheSubgenius]

225. I love General Relativity.

Keeps me grounded.

[magatte]

148. Well in 2016 Michelle might also have enough "experience in public service", so who knows

For information, Michelle Obama has already spent MANY more years working in the non-profit sector, serving people, than Hillary has.

"She left the corporate law world in 1991 to pursue a career in public service, serving as an assistant to the mayor and then as the assistant commissioner of planning and development for the City of Chicago.

In 1993, she became the founding executive director of Public Allies - Chicago, a leadership training program that received AmeriCorps National Service funding and helped young adults develop skills for future careers in the public sector.

Michelle began her involvement with the University of Chicago in 1996. As associate dean of student services, she developed the University's first community service program. Michelle also served as executive director of community and external affairs until 2005, when she was appointed vice president of community and external affairs at the University of Chicago Medical Center. She also managed the business diversity program."

http://www.barackobama.com/learn/meet.php

[sloppyjoe25s]

173. Michelle is awesome.. incredible speaker - and sharp as heck,

...and a darned sight more impressive to listen to than Hillary.

I would love to see Michelle Obama in office - but I don't know if she's interested.

[0007]

185. It takes brains to read and understand, but when your fifty ya think

life is over. In reality it is just starting.

[mike_c]

129. yup-- me too-- but HRC is the WRONG woman....

eom

[lynch03]

131. That post was mocking the stupid reasons people choose a candidate for (namely hillary supporters)

I wasn't serious

[dailykoff]

229. You already got one and her name is Condoleeza.

Let's quit while we're ahead.

[caligirl]

11. I'm fifty too. and I voted for Obama because I like him and the above.

People are afraid to take chances with an unknown I guess, more afraoid than to face what the Clintons have done and will do again. Cognitive dissonance

[kid a]

184. exactly!

[Onlooker]

12. It's a victory for women

I'm a 50 year old guy and grew up in a house where women's voices were often marginalized. There is still so much discrimination against women in the job market, in our cultural mores, in our health care system, and so on. Hillary Clinton is no different than Barrack Obama in that they both represent a triumph of fairness over discrimination. As is often the case, the leaders who manage to overcome the great obstacles before them are tough fighters who understand how to play the game against the white male power structure. Your criticism of her reflects the reality that a woman candidate must contend with in order to get elected. Both Obama and Clinton are playing a very similar game in this regard, more or less promising to preserve the status quo so as to make the idea of their candidacies less threatening, and in that they've succeeded. They are to some extend framed by their opponents to look worse than they really are. For instance, both are for gay rights and abortion, both want the war ended as soon as possible, and both favor access to health care for everyone. But, both also embrace the corporate politics (which is why Edwards was such a refreshing alternative) because they need support from the white male power structure. The real question is: Given their liberal records, how will they react once they're in office? (Saul Alinsky, who they both admired, believed you had to play along with the power structure until you got to the position where you could effect change.) Both Clinton and Obama are transforming our power structures, which will lead to better candidates than them in the future, but they are the best ones to overcome the 230 years of sexism and racism that has defined the presidency.

[sandnsea]

18. My family wasn't like that

Every one of my aunts knew their own mind and lived their lives as they chose. Maybe that's why the whole woman in the White House isn't as important to me as someone who wants to include everybody in the process and bridge ALL divides.

But like I said, if it's just that she's a woman, I wish people would just say so and stop making 100 excuses for her because it drives me batty.

[Onlooker]

22. I do think there's an enormous about of zealous dishonesty at DU

I support Obama, but like Clinton very much. I'll feel bad for whomever loses. It's frustrating here that for so many people they build their candidate up by putting the other one down. There are way too many political lies being spread by both sides.

When I was a kid, my parents and older siblings would engage in heated arguments about Israelis v. Palestinians, and the women would be cut off or drowned out all the time. I found it so sad and sexist. But, even now, I know that I have had advantages because of my race and gender (and my Irish last name helps in Massachusetts). One thing I feel certain of is that if Obama or Clinton get into the White Houses, our court system will become far more fair and issues of discrimination will get a far higher profile. This is still a white man's country, but one look at the Republican campaign shows how decrepit it's become.

[sandnsea]

27. I just made a list

of very real ethical lapses with the Clintons. But you like her very much. That's what I mean. I don't understand. When someone has done the things she's done, in just this campaign alone, how can you continue to think of her as a good person. It baffles me, it truly does.

[Onlooker]

64. In an article I read awhile ago ...

... it said that Clinton campaign felt she could not apologize for the IWR vote because, as a woman, she could not afford to be called soft or weak or terror. In other words, she did not back down because of sexism. In fact, when she shed the tear in NH, John Edwards (of all people) raised the question of whether she had the strength to be CiC. So, to overcome the white male values that predominate, she cannot act weak. And, in fact, I think most people would agree that she's tough and strong enough to be CiC. In other areas, too, as a woman performing in the epicenter of white male power, she had to play by their rules. She has done nothing different than other presidents, but is being held to a higher standard.

Now, Obama, has never reached the epicenter of power and he has 14 fewer years than Clinton as an adult, so his record is cleaner, but clearly some of his present votes were strategic, his ties to Rezko were economically necessary for him to pursue his goals, he does take money from lobbyists, and some of his war votes and war comments were clearly designed to assure the American people that he's tough on terror. Furthermore, his use of at least two high-profile homophobic pastors in his campaign was designed to win over black (and other) religious conservatives and deal with the bigoted "accusation" that he's a Muslim.

I voted for Obama for many of the same reasons hlthe2b (next post) did, but also for the simple reason he's run an excellent campaign, and I think it's the campaign that's more important than the candidate (otherwise we would have never had Bush or Reagan).

[sloppyjoe25s]

114. It's not 'puttin her down' to talk about her votes

agreed nobody likes bashing and name calling and slamming someone like Hillary without reason

but she has voted in really really bad ways:

George Bush's "No Credit Card Company Left Behind" Bankruptcy 'reform' law - which did more to hurt working class families than any law in past 40 years. She voted for it. Obama voted against it, and spoke strongly against it.

Iraq War resolution - to try to "look tough" because she was already thinking about her "electability" profile in a general election. She admits she did not even read the evidence.

I agree with the posts on the Clinton's ethics - and what they did leading up to the SC primary was revulsive and race-baiting. But if you consider that all "bashing"

please at least consider her votes on the above items - and ask yourself if that represents judgement or someone thinking about politics?

[hlthe2b]

53. Insightful post, Onlooker

I think you've put your finger on a major point. To some degree, we will have to put some pure trust in either candidate-- that they will do and be what we ardently hope, given the fine balance both walk to move beyond the bias and stereotypes that have haunted women and African Americans in this country.

As for me, the decision was NOT easy. I labored over it right up to the moment I walked into last night's Colorado caucus. Unlike the OP, I find lots of positives in Hillary, though I have clearly been disappointed as well. Like the OP, I also have qualms--substantial qualms. And, I am not sure how many of those qualms, Hillary SHOULD own. Many are baggage, not of her own making... Her assessment early on, that she had to go all "Maggie Thatcher" to get past the bias against women in terms of their ability to defend the country (have men ever really seen a mother bear with her cubs? I digress) undoubtedly colored her judgement on IRW and related stands. To what degree it was a forced mistake that she will move past, never to repeat, I couldn't say. But, I continue to see her through a very complex prism, knowing what extreme difficulties a woman like her faces trying to rise to the ultimate office and how extreme the misogyny can be by those who feel threatened.

In the end, I did vote for Obama. I have concerns with respect to him too. Idealism and the ability to inspire are forces that can be corrupted, yet when harnessed for "good" they are qualities rare beyond compare. Like Hillary, Obama has had to show that he is not a "threatening" candidate to those who hold those stereotypes towards black Americans. He, too has had to be pragmatic in ways that make me fear he will be far more DLC-like than progressive. In the end, though, I came to realize that either Obama or Hillary will be sending the message for women AND racial/ethnic minorities. The era of "good ole boy" politics must and will come to an end.

But, I came through last night somewhat pleased that things are tied up between the two. I voted for Obama, but I am fully prepared to put my full support behind Hillary Clinton if she gets the nod. In the end, it is a requirement to trust that they represent the dramatic change that their flowery speeches and promises offer. Looking past the bullshit they must weave in and hoping they stay true to their core values.... We will have no perfect candidate. No perfect Presidency--especially given the mess we are in. Incremental steps, though... And, I feel either candidate will start us on a dramatically more progressive path...

[Onlooker]

65. I agree

I think we went through the same process. I was fairly committed to Obama, but really did not make up my mind until I went out to vote. I look at him as a Democratic Reagan, a great communicator who might not be ready for the job but who will be smart enough to surround himself with people who are, and as someone who has run a better campaign than Clinton, so therefore has the better shot at beating the Republican.

The good news is, whether it's Clinton or Obama, we will open up the presidency in the future to another half (women or people of color) of the population, and that should fundamentally change our country.

[Auntie Bush]

125. Good thoughtful post.

The only thing that could be better is if you had voted for Clinton. lol

[hlthe2b]

179. Thanks, Auntie Bush....

I may yet get that chance....:toast:

[still_one]

14. I don't get it either, however if she gets the nominatin I will vote for her

Unfortunately, I believe the constant references to the Bill Clinton lying under oath is all we will hear from the right wing media machines, and that will lose us the general election

[sandnsea]

21. There's so much to choose from

I personally think we'll lose it on her health care mandates, but it could be anything and will probably not even be anything from the 90's. There is truly so much new to choose from and they don't need much.

[druidity33]

57. have you read the Krugman article?

re mandates?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/opinion/04krugman.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin

=snip=

"But while it’s easy to see how the Clinton plan could end up being eviscerated, it’s hard to see how the hole in the Obama plan can be repaired. Why? Because Mr. Obama’s campaigning on the health care issue has sabotaged his own prospects.

You see, the Obama campaign has demonized the idea of mandates — most recently in a scare-tactics mailer sent to voters that bears a striking resemblance to the “Harry and Louise” ads run by the insurance lobby in 1993, ads that helped undermine our last chance at getting universal health care.

If Mr. Obama gets to the White House and tries to achieve universal coverage, he’ll find that it can’t be done without mandates — but if he tries to institute mandates, the enemies of reform will use his own words against him."

=snip=


It's worth reading the whole thing. There's a rebuttal at TPM, and then a Krugman rebuttal to that as well.

What i don't understand is why don't we have experts from other countries that have working models, come and work on the Plan with us? They could explain the intricacies and options to Congress and the public. If the process was as TRANSPARENT AND PUBLICLY VISIBLE as possible, how could anyone really argue with the end result?

Right now, i take everything that HRC and BO say as a campaign promise, which means to me that they will do whatever they damn well please once they're in office regardless of what they said to get there.

I've been trying to do more with community groups and local candidates lately...

:shrug:

[tabasco]

15. Incomprehensible, but tonight should give some hope.

Still, I am dumbfounded that people see her as a solution rather than part of the problem.

[rodeodance]

16. Suggestion. Objectively think of Hill as her own person with her own ideas and

ways of doing things. I am serious and not trying to be flippant.
Think one for while. You might just see some things differently.
rd

...I don't get it. At all. Somebody has got to explain to me what the hell you see in them, now that you know what the result of their policies are. I just don't understand why you would inflict them onto the country.

[sandnsea]

19. I do

I give her the IWR. And Iran. And NCLB. And the Patriot Act.

I give her her business associates and fundraisers.

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=chatwal+hillary&btnG=Search+Images&gbv=2

http://images.google.com/images?gbv=2&hl=en&q=hsu+hillary&btnG=Search+Images

:shrug:

[cboy4]

20. Wouldn't you be curious knowing how many people

who were on the proverbial fence ended up voting for Hillary because so many of your fellow Obama supporters are arrogant a-holes?

I'm sure curious.

[tabasco]

26. You've met a lot of Obama supporters in real life?

or are you voting for someone based on your experience at an internet message board?

If the latter, that is just plain pathetic.

[cboy4]

29. I'm simply asking the question. None of it affects me since

I crossed Obama off of my list when he decided to pander to a homophobe who could be responsible for the suicides of multiple gay teenagers.

[quakerboy]

41. I would be far more curious

were we really able to fully and honestly analyze voters motivations, to find out how many votes Clinton got purely based on name recognition versus how many Barak got based purely on having a slightly more flowing name.

[For PaisAn]

201. Count me in

Edwards is my guy and I had intended to vote for him even though he dropped out. After getting a load of the vitriol coming from Obama supporters I reconsidered. The man bloviates and most of his supporters seem like a bunch of groupies so in awe of him. They're mesmerized and that's not a good thing. So I voted for Hillary last night, substance over style. (Also where I live there were no Edwards delegates on the ballot.)

[krkaufman]

25. Another hater and misogynist heard from. Nothing to see here; move along.

</sarcasm>

I'm equally puzzled. (But am hopeful given tonight's results. Obama did what he needed to do. The race is now even.)

[Luminous Animal]

28. I'm 50, too

And I am been fighting since the age of 12 for social and economic justice. Neither candidate is going to do shit for the vast majority of us. Obama's shown no more inclination to be a energetic leader (ala FDR) than Clinton. I predict that were either one to win, they'd be little more than placeholders reigning over an increasing failing economy and mired in our wars of aggression. And both of them are too conventional too react to a rising discontent with little more than platitudes, corporate sanctioned measures, and penalization.

We, the people, are screwed.

[Skittles]

32. correct

it is sickening, watching DUers bickering over HRC and Obama - neither one of them deserves the adulation they are receving.

[emmadoggy]

97. Absolutely.

:hurts:

[StatGirl]

99. Bingo -- our real choices have already been taken away from us

The candidates who really get it -- Gore, Kucinich, Edwards -- are out. We're facing a choice between two very unliberal, corporate-owned candidates.

I have no confidence that either one can deal with the very real problems facing us, particularly the economic turmoil that will arise out of Peak Oil. We need a new FDR, and I have little hope that either one has the character and conviction to take on that role.

Soaring rhetoric doesn't thrill me any more. I'm old enough to know how that story ends.

[Zorra]

123. Yep: "Corporate Presidential Campaign Giving Surges"

Mon Feb 4, 2008 6:11am EST

Facing a government crackdown over predatory lending and a troubled housing finance system, Wall Street and the real estate industry were among the top political givers in 2007, a campaign finance watchdog group said on Sunday.

Leading all corporate donors in campaign donations as of the end of last year was investment banking giant Goldman Sachs, based on an analysis of Federal Election Commission records, the Center for Responsive Politics said.

The next four largest corporate donors were Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Lehman Brothers and Merrill Lynch, according to the center's fourth-quarter preliminary analysis, which is subject to revision.

Investment banks, commercial banks and real estate companies altogether have pumped almost $34 million into the presidential race, with Democratic leaders Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama getting the most money, the center said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN0451979920080204

[hay rick]

191. Peak Oil

When do you think peak oil will occur? I think there's a fair chance that significant economic turmoil will PRECEDE the arrival of peak oil. I'm thinking about the confluence of factors such as a weak dollar, our increasing reliance on imported oil (we hit peak ca. 1970) and the pincer of expanding boomer entitlements meeting depleted trust funds. Of course, hitting peak and starting down the other side of the bell curve will just add to the fun.

Are Hil and/or Obama ready for this kind of trauma? Of course not. Nobody is. FDR's stabs at getting us out of the depression were well-intentioned but largely ineffective until WW2 came along. I'm hoping that if (when) really hard times arrive, the times will make the (wo)man.

I voted for Edwards and I'm not thrilled with either Hillary or Barack- but either one is an easy choice over McCain or anyone who would consent to be the Republican Party candidate.

Obligatory age disclosure: 62. Of course, this is the internet, so I could actually be 14...

[StatGirl]

199. I think we're there

Or that it's creeping up in the next few years. There will be some mitigation as we switch to some alternative fuels (we already have a Prius, solar panels on the roof, and my commute vehicle is a bicycle). But demand for oil is awfully inelastic in this country.

What FDR did helped dampen the economic swings. (Note: I *am* a Keynesian, and I always thought supply-side economics was BS). But I agree that we weren't close to getting out of the Depression until WWII ramped up the demand. The President and Congress who have to deal with the coming economic bad times will have to restructure the economy.

If I were Queen of the Universe, I'd start with universal health care unlinked from employment status, a better minimum wage, and time-and-a-half overtime starting at 30 or 35 hours per week (this encourages companies to hire more workers so that we can avoid massive unemployment).

Oh, and lots of infrastructure projects. Here, not in Iraq.

[hay rick]

241. Agree it's close

I think higher oil prices will make some previously unexploited reserves economically viable. The higher exploitation rate, rather than newly discovered reserves will help to extend near-peak production for a brief time. Little comfort here as this process presupposes high prices followed by higher prices.

Disappointed to hear you don't get voodoo economics.

I hope the Queen of the Universe would also consider making her health care plan single-payer. I think that's the most important of many needed reforms in our health care system.

I agree with you on minimum wage. I disagree on lowering the time-and-a-half threshold as it would lead to reduced income in primary jobs when too many families already rely on 2nd, 3rd, and 4th jobs.

Enthusiastically agree with infrastructure investment. I think gov't should be employer of last resort. Which brings us back to FDR and the CCC, WPA, etc.

One more piece for our Lego structure: sharply higher progressive taxation! Death tax on steroids! Soak the rich! You get the idea...

[Individualist]

116. This 64 year old agrees with you,

butI also believe neither candidate can win the GE. Once again the party will have snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.

[lisainmilo]

233. that is what my husband thinks, he is 60. n/t

[FunkyLeprechaun]

30. I agree

I'm nearly 27 and all I've known is Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton and I'd like to see a different person in the Oval Office than another Clinton.

Clinton may have won California and New York, but will she win the southern states in the GE? Wyoming? Montana? It really depends if the Nominee is McCain.

Clinton appeals to Democrats while Obama appeals to Democrats, Republicans, and Independents. If McCain gets the Nomination and Obama gets the Nomination, he'll take McCain's base support away from him. Clinton vs McCain will be such a close contest while Obama vs. McCain might result in Obama winning the presidency.

That's how I see it.

[kid a]

149. kick

[Laurab]

197. There are also an awful lot of Democrats Clinton

DOESN'T appeal to - seemingly, a lot more than Obama. That, combined with her high negatives w/independents and Repugs, would make it a very, very difficult GE for her to win. She would need every single Dem vote, and then some, and I don't think that's going to happen. I think she would GOTV for the repugs in a huge way, whereas if Obama was the nominee, they might just stay home. Not only that, some like him enough to vote for him, and they don't like McCain all that much.

I don't know why we would want to risk that. It's only my opinion, but it's a somewhat educated one, that Obama could win the general, because his appeal isn't confined to a percentage of the Democratic party. McCain won't excite people to vote UNLESS HRC is the nominee. I feel it would be an easy victory for Obama, a difficult, if it happens at all, victory for Hillary.

[Skittles]

31. she sucks

but I fail to see how Obama is a big improvement

[sandnsea]

33. Well then

You clearly don't see the specific reasons that she sucks. You clearly ignore things like voter suppression and disenfranchisement, numerous corruption scandals, voting to expand war, and the rest of her rovian tactics and policies in order to retain your special brand of anti-establishment politics. If you actually did see her clearly, you'd know there is no way in the world she's like all the other Democrats because she's truly in a league of her own and not in a good way.

[Skittles]

35. LOL

keep spinning

[sandnsea]

39. If Obama and Hillary are the same

then so is every other candidate and Hillary, even Kucinich, because he took money from PACs and voted against mandatory background checks at gun shows so he's clearly in the pockets of the gun lobby. So is Paul Wellstone because he took PAC money too.

[Recursion]

71. There's a good thread in the "Guns" forum about the "gun show" bit...

Not to hijack this but it's a real pet peeve of mine; "gun show loophole" is an incredibly dishonest name (one I blame on Bill Clinton, incidentally), and voting against it was a good idea.

[Usrename]

37. He sucks in a completely different mode.

There is at a chance, a hope that he could become a statesman if elected. There is no chance, no hope with Hillary.

She would NOT lead us on a path toward anything even remotely resembling justice. She is on a completely different trajectory.

Nothing will ever change unless people are willing to strive for justice, and we know she won't. Obama might. There's a hope.

[JVS]

167. I'm reminded of Nader's "dime's worth of difference" here.

About the same + isn't hawkish. I'd say it's worth going for him over going for her.

[joshcryer]

34. So you're pro tarrifs?

I like Hillary because she has the courage to want mandated health care, unlike Obama. Her health care plan is significantly better than Obama's on that fact alone.

[joshcryer]

47. Well? Are you? I find tariffs to be bad.

I think taking away tariffs, while it hurt the local job economy, has helped India and China move into the new world. That's a good thing.

[Recursion]

72. Every single candidate is pro tariff (except maybe Ron Paul)

We still have tariffs, and unless we go fully libertarian we will always have tariffs. The NAFTA/CAFTA style tariff regime that Bill Clinton pushed so hard and that Hillary by all indications seem ready to push are simply tariffs that large corporations like.

[joshcryer]

106. NAFTA released the vast majority of tariffs, allowing global capitalism to prosper.

India and China would not be at the level they are if NAFTA wasn't passed, and the rest of the world would fester for it.

[Recursion]

132. Umm.. how does NAFTA apply to China?

NAFTA allowed American manufacturers to move to Mexico and American agriculture industries to sell to Mexico.

And, at any rate, while you seem to still like neoliberal economics I think most of our party has soured on them. I certainly have, and would be happy to go into why on a separate thread.

[joshcryer]

152. NAFTA led directly to the creation of the WTO.

Gapminder shows that at this period in time China, India and many other countries had a significantly better economic situation at this point.

I actually am an anti-capitalist, but I hate tariffs, because they're an act of economic aggression, much like sanctions.

[Recursion]

212. Yes, I recall getting tear gassed and clubbed in front of the WTO

Because apparently the belief that there's a better idea out there than Friedmanian "shock doctrine" capitalism is worthy of a truncheon and tear gas...

[woolldog]

38. Well said.

And I agree with you completely. I cannot support HRC for president either in the primary or GE.

Sorry about your health, btw.

[sandnsea]

40. I'm not dying

But once you hit 50, most people know their days are numbered, if they're being any kind of honest with themselves anyway. But thanks for your concern. It really does annoy me that lots of people could spend their last days with the kind of optimistic future Obama can bring, but aren't going to be able to because there is no way Hillary can do that as she's shown by the way she chooses to campaign.

[woolldog]

42. Oh good.

But to answer your question. Probably has to do with her "35 years of experience." :eyes:

[emilyg]

118. I'll be 70 this year and

and don't feel my days are numbered. Hope your outlook improves.

[HughBeaumont]

43. Same Page. Same Page.

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/HughBeaumont/32

Like I said before, I'm not hearing ONE compelling reason whatsoever to vote for Hillary Clinton. Not one. All I'm hearing are reasons NOT to vote Republican.

We can do so much better, and we're not going to.

She has far too many less-than-democratic positions on important issues like free trade, Bewsh oil follies, Health Care, national security, outsourcing, the 2001 Bankruptcy bill, cluster bomb vote, the Peru trade agreement, etc. I cannot vote for someone who supports lousy trade agreements and thinks doing business with Indian outsourcing companies is good business. I cannot vote for someone who believed the worst president this country's ever been disgraced with. Twice.

Hillary doesn't even inspire people in her OWN party. The whole "I'll support the Dem nominee even if I have to hold my nose" . . . that's DU. That's not America. America isn't New York.

I'm sorry. I cannot do it. I want to be proud of who I vote for.

I'm not getting behind HRC. The truth is, I don't feel any enthusiasm for Hillary as a candidate. I don't find her to be honest. I think she's completely clueless to the needs of the middle class and the poor and I don't think she's the best person for that aspect of governing. I'm from Ohio, and it's arguable that tons of workers lost jobs here (related to some of them) as a result of her husband's (and his friend 41's) NAFTA, which she supports. I think she would divide the left and center and wouldn't inspire many people to get behind her. I don't think she would turn one 2004 red state. I think she would mobilize Republican voter rolls. I think it would be a repeat of 2004. I think nominating her would be a poor choice. There it is.

This isn't "My Party, Right or Wrong". It'd be just like lying.

[Radical Activist]

46. Yes, she tells us what to vote against but gives nothing to vote FOR.

Being not as bad as the Republicans is all the Clintons have given us. You don't get to elect a Democratic President very often and I want the next one to do something besides not be a Republican.

[Michigan-Arizona]

219. Well Put n/t

[ginnyinWI]

227. you are so right!

Agree with you. Earlier today I said in a reply that I'd support Hillary if she got the nom. But this thread has reminded me of all the stuff that went down during the Clinton years, and particulary all of the failed actions she was the instigator of. And her style of politics is just like Rove.

It would be lying to vote for that again.

I got really excited in 2004 because I saw in John Kerry an honest public servant, and I still see him that way. I volunteered and donated like crazy.

Obama seems to be cut from the same, honest cloth. I don't want to compromise again. I want to believe in my candidate. I won't vote for Hillary. I'll stay home first.

[HughBeaumont]

239. With Gore and Kerry, I never saw "lesser of two evils".

I thought they were very strong candidates with great ideas going against a rather lame failure in W. Thusly, I voted for both.

Unfortunately, each man had a few things going against them.

1) Rather than campaign on the few positive aspects of the Clinton administration, Gore picked one of the WORST VP selections possible in an attempt to distance himself from every aspect of it, good and bad, completely. If anyone gets a chance, they should listen to Jello Biafra's "If you like Tipper, you'll LOVE . . . ". It's a spoken word about just HOW bad Holy Joe Lieberman was as a person and a Democrat. It pretty much explains to the uninudated why the Greens and Indies "saw no difference between the two parties", and it wasn't because of Al Gore.

2) This is the one thing you gotta feel sorry for Al Gore on - the guy just has the worst luck with associations. Lieberman. Tipper's PMRC thing in the 80s (another thing that kind of dogged him among the left). Bob Shrum. The DLC. The Media. Monicagate. Really, I believe the whole Monicagate thing screwed Al Gore. I believe a great deal of Der Failure Fuhrer's weren't votes for George Bewsh, but votes against Bill Clinton and Monica.

3) A Complicit Media and bottomless Republican-supporter pockets. On paper, Gore vs Bewsh and Kerry vs Bewsh seemed like a basketball game between Memphis vs Lakeland Community College. Unfortunately for Gore/Kerry/Edwards, they weren't just competing with George Bewsh. Despite the Failure Fuhrer not running on one positive or successful accomplishment in either term, the complicit media portrayed him as heroic and steadfast . .. the Everyman's candidate. Someone who "yu'd have a beer 'n a steak with!" At the same time, they painted Kerry as a wine and limo, "flip-flopper lib" and Gore a tremendous bore.

4) Bewsh was a continuation of the Reaganite Big Business friendly policies of Trickle-on. 'Nother words, what Big Business wants, Big Business will get, no matter WHAT the cost or how underhanded the actions were to get there. They're hard-right Republicans and they're entrenched in everything. Industry. Corporations. Wall Street. Religion. Media. Voting Machine companies. Because power, money and the raising of the income gap are commodities too precious to be decided by silly old Democracy.

After all, back in the 30s, Big Business, led by old money families, plotted to overthrow FDR and create a fascist government to do Wall Street's bidding. The only reason it's exposure by Smedley Butler (who couldn't be bought) wasn't a cause celebre is because the media owners were part of that plot.

So when you think about it, neither candidate was competing merely against George W Bewsh. They were competing against corporations, the wealthy and all that they owned and held dear: their cash and power. They never had a chance.

[ginnyinWI]

242. Kerry was really given a raw deal by the media

It was so frustrating; if you weren't watching him on C-span, you had no idea who he was or what his message was. CNN would show about 30 seconds of a speech, and then mute it and talk over him about something completely unimportant while showing the video feed of him still speaking! (I've seen the same thing being done to Obama.)It wasn't until the Gen. Election Debates that people really got to see Kerry and hear his ideas--and by then the Swifties and others had had plenty of time to define him.

But I think Obama has taken lessons and improved over the Kerry campaign in that he keeps his message extremely simple: Change. He speaks very simply (but inspirationally) so that he's accessible to more people. He's got some of Kerry's good advisers on board who have doubtless learned some hard lessons. And now the Clinton camp and even some of the Repubs are stealing his effective slogan.

He's also very good at deflecting mud. Rather than just answer charges and creating a tit-for-tat fight in the media, he focuses on exposing the tactics. "They are just doing this to make you think..." which educates the audience about what's really going on. I think Kerry thought the best way to deal with mud was to rise above it and ignore it, but so much of it stuck, as they defined him, and, as you said, the media was not with him.

So I have high hopes that Obama will be able to continue to do well. He doesn't need to resort to dirty tricks and tactics, he only needs to expertly defend himself and deflect distortions and smears while at the same time defining himself and his message simply and honestly.

[nolabels]

44. Because the information they get that is filtered through MSM makes........

them feel comfortable with HRC. They believe the best alternative to what they have now is what they had before. The dichotomy of correct or incorrect are the choices they know. Remember its only a small percentage that would turn the whole thing on its head. Please don't get discouraged because there is still a long way to go. If you persevere you will see your some of your hopes materialize eventually. Anything can happen and probably will, it's just how change works.


Btw, i am 49 but only kind of learned a few years ago that it doesn't matter too much what others think or how they think about something but more about what happens next :shrug:

[sandnsea]

45. You're right

No matter what, it is about what each of us individually does next. Thanks!

:hi:

[Radical Activist]

48. I don't get it either.

I got tired of being lied to by the Clintons a long time ago.

I got tired of hearing someone empathize, talk about a problem, tell me how much worse the Republicans are, and then do NOTHING. Don't people see through that game by now?

[bklyncowgirl]

49. I'm a 53 year old woman and I voted for Obama for the same reasons

Don't get me wrong, if Clinton's the nominee I'll support her, but I feel that her nomination will mean a major blow for those of us who've hoped to change the Democratic party--and through it the country--from within.

This country's a mess. This world's a mess. As you've pointed out, many of our problems stem from policies promoted during the Clinton years. NAFTA comes to mind. A Republican could never get that through Congress. Bill Clinton could and did. As a result America has hemmorraged manufacturing jobs and Mexican farmers have been devestated and swarmed across the border to find work. Does anyone think that the move of manufacturing from the U.S. to countries where environmental protections are non-existant is good for the planet? Hillary's original health care plan was a disaster. She says she's learned from that mistake--let's hope so. Our lack of a health care system is killing us--both literally and figuratively. When Toyota decides that it's better to put its new plants in Canada because of high health care costs in the US it is time to make some big changes.

As a candidate--I don't know. She'll fight like hell, there's no doubt about that--but how is a candidate who has a less than stellar record on campaign finance reform win voters who want clean elections against one half of McCain Feingold? How does a candidate who's position on the Iraq war was essentially indistinguishable from that of John McCain until she announced her run for president and suddenly discovered the wisdome of staged troop withdrawals make the argument that this war is a disaster that never should have happened?

I would love to see what Bruce Springsteen called "The country that lives in our hearts" when he was campaigning for John Kerry become reality in my senior years. Sadly, I don't see that happening under Hillary and Bill Clinton. Maybe I'm wrong, I hope I'm wrong.

[ursi]

50. I'm with you, I don't want another Clinton for President with Bill clinton in the White House

been there, done that. And I can't forget how Bill has been galavanting around the world, raking in the cash just like the Bush family ...sucking Poppy Bush's butt crack.

[Meshuga]

51. Relax!

Delegate count is at about 823-732 after Super Tuesday. We still have a long road ahead of us. :-)

[dailykoff]

54. The same crowd that aggressively argues that LHO killed JFK.

Now do you get it?

[derby378]

205. Oswald DID kill JFK, silly...

Oswald was the triggerman. What I want to know, however, is who paid for Oswald's bullets?!?

I suspect it could have been Bush 41, since he claimed he didn't remember where he was when JFK was shot.

And no, I'm not supportng Hillary, either.

[workinclasszero]

55. I don't get it either

Who really wants another 8 years of the Bush/Clinton dynasties? A Clinton presidency will raise the reich wing Rethug party from its deathbed to inflict God knows how much more harm and wasted time and energy onto the nation.

Obama is a clean break with the past and can set this country on a path to a progressive future where America will once again be an example of greatness to all the world.

Or we could have eight more years of Bill Clinton's big mouth, scandal after scandal, and wingnut attack dogs gone wild.

sigh...

[TexasObserver]

56. Why, indeed?!

You wrote this and it deserves repeating:

"WHY??? Why are you supporting this woman? It makes NO SENSE. She is everything DU has been against since the day I got here."
++++++++

It's difficult to see how a progressive can look at her record the past 7 years and say "that's who I want running the country!" There is a reason Hillary loses every poll at DU and has consistently run worse than Obama, Edwards, and Kucinch the past year. She's not a progressive and she has a record of caving on important issues over and over. War? Patriot Act? FISA? She might as well be Bush's legislative whip.

[beachmom]

58. The only thing that explains it: Fear

Look, 2000 and 2004 were very painful. We not only "lost", it was so close, we really didn't lose when you figure in the GOP cheating, yet Bush has occupied the WH for the last 7 years.

The Clintons understand this anxiety and fear in the Dem base, and are exploiting it. That is why Hillary's slogan was "I'm in, and I'm in to win". Plus Bush has been so bad, people look longingly at the scandal-plagued yet "peace and prosperity" '90s, and want to go back. Before 9/11. Before the Iraq War. Before Bush's son.

I don't know what is going to happen with this nominating process. But if Hillary is the nominee, she will have won it out of fear of the unknown, fear of change, fear of rocking the boat. It is in fact, a conservative vote to vote for Hillary. "We know what to expect" is the answer given for the inexplicable votes for her. Well, expect piece meal incremental steps when the country needs bold steps. That will be a Clinton Term 3 Administration.

[dsc]

59. Several Reasons

First, in a relatively short career we aready know that Obama has his own felon (Rezko) and won one race by keeping his strongest opponent off the ballot (his state senate seat).

Second, Obama is wrong on health care while Hillary is right. Obama repeatedly has hung with homophobes while avoiding a true hero to gays. Obama learned the wrong lessons from the 1990's as apparently you did. We could nominate Jesus and Ghandi and the press would tell us we nominated two crack addicts who hate America.

[OzarkDem]

60. I don't want Newt Gingrich deciding health care reform

Obama's health care policy was developed by the good folks at the American Enterprise Institute, whose key policy advisor on health care is Newt Gingrich - the same guy who brought us the horrendously expensive Medicare Prescription Drug Plan - donut hole and all.

Any Dem candidate who lets Republicans shape his policies isn't very good.

[beachmom]

63. Care to back up that assertion?

[demokatgurrl]

69. Please, tell us more about this!! This needs to get out.

[Skwmom]

61. This is what they need to drive home in Ohio.

If they do, she will lose.

[Popol Vuh]

62. sandnsea

I am a bit younger than you - 41yrs old. But I cannot agree with you more on your assessment of the last 16yrs or say it better than you did. It too has boggled my mind what the hell are people thinking. I am so with you. It makes absolutely no sense at all.


K&R

[kid a]

147. yep!

[Strelnikov_]

66. Beyond me

And to top it off, Clinton has no chance in the general election against McCain considering the electoral college map.

I could see support for a DLC type if they were the only good shot at winning, however . .

[ramapo]

74. Sadly, you're 100% correct.

I'm 52. I was more in the Edwards camp until he dropped out. The anyone-but-Hillary vote was always the majority vote in early primaries.

I'm excited about Obama but much more importantly, I know Republicans, independants, young and old enthusiastic about him.

I cannot stand the thought of another Clinton in the White House. What next then, Jeb Bush to follow Hillary?

The country needs a dramatic change. There's only one man who can deliver that.

I don't understand it either. I'm already sick just thinking about her as the nominee.

[demo dutch]

77. Obama or Clinton? Exit Polls say winning issues Economy #1, & Out of Iraq within 1 yr & healthcare

It's going to about the excitement of the Dem side (I really don't think massive amounts of people will tune out, then there are the ones that want out of Iraq, need healthcare and improve the econom. Add the the devision on the Repub side.

We'll beat McCain on every issue, so I see a dem in the WH, whether we fight about it right now or not!!!!

P.S. I'm hoping for a joint ticket!

[krabigirl]

78. Like Obama's any different? Open your eyes! It's a crock!

[clarence swinney]

80. I am 83

PRAISE CLINTON AND GORE WITH PLEASURE
GDP--rose from 6,300 to 11,600
NATIONAL INCOME-5,000 to 8,000 Billion--
JOBS CREATED—237,000 per month to replace Jimmy Carter record of 218,000.
AVERAGE WEEKLY EARNINGS--$360 to $478
AVERAGE WEEKLY HOURS WORKED--never hit 35.0--hit that mark 4 times in 80's
UNEMPLOYMENT--from 7.2% down down down to as low as 3.9%
MINIMUM WAGE--$4.25 to $5.15
MINORITIES--did exceedingly well
HOME OWNERSHIP--hit all time high (no big deal most can say this-except Reagan)
DEFICIT--290 Billion to whoopee a SURPLUS
DEBT----+28%---300% increase over prior 12 years by Conservatives.
FEDERAL SPENDING--+28%---+80% under Reagan- who is da true conservative?
DOW JONES AVERAGE—3,500 to 11,720 top in 2000. All it's history to get to 3500 and Clinton zooms it
NASDAQ--700 to 5,000 top in 2000.---All of it's history to get to 700 and Clinton zooms it
VALUES INDEXES-- almost all bad went down--good went up in zoom zoom zoom
FOREIGN AFFAIRS--Peace on Earth good will toward each other---Mark of a true Christian--what has Bush done to Peace on Earth?
POPULARITY---highest poll ratings in history during peacetime in AFRICA, ASIA AND EUROPE . Even 98.5% in Moscow--left office with Highest Gallup rating since it was started in 1920's.
STAND UP FOR JUSTICE--evil conservatives spent $110,000,000 on hearings and investigations and caught one very evil man who took a few plane rides to events.
BOW YOUR HEADS—“Thank you God for sending us a man of Bill Clinton's character, intelligence, knowledge of governance, ability to face up to crises without whimpering and a great leader of the world. Amen”.
THANK YOU GOD FOR THE GOOD TIMES THE CLINTON YEARS.
clarence swinney-political historian-Lifeaholics of America- burlington nc
[e-mail]

[K Gardner]

81. Ditto, ditto and BRAVO! It is beyond my comprehension, too. Well-said !

[clarence swinney]

82. I am 83

Comparing Democrat’s hero-CLINTON—versus Republican’s hero--REAGAN
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1.JOBS—grew by 43% more under Clinton.
2.GDP---grew by 57% more under Clinton.
3.DOW—grew by 700% more under Clinton..
4.NASDAQ-grew by 18 times as much under Clinton.
4.SPENDING--grew by 28% under Clinton---80% under Reagan.
5.DEBT—grew by 43% under Clinton—187% under Reagan.
6. DEFICITS—Clinton got a large surplus--grew by 112% under Reagan.
7.NATIONAL INCOME—grew by100% more under Clinton.
8.PERSONAL INCOME—Grew by 110% more under Clinton.
SOURCES—Bureau of Labor Statistics (www.BLS.Gov)--Economic Policy Institute (EPI.org)—Global & World Almanacs from 1980 to 2003 (annual issues)
www.the-hamster.com (chart taken from NY Times)
National Archives History on Presidents. www.nara.gov
LA Times 10-11-00 on Market--www.Find articles.com

A vote for a Republican is a vote for Less Success.
A vote to reduce the Standard of Living for all Americans.

Clarence Swinney-Political Research Historian-Lifeaholics of America-President
Please submit comments to [e-mail] or P.O. Box 3411-Burlington NC-27216

[mzmolly]

94. Nice post Clarence.

:hi:

[clarence swinney]

83. I am 83

A Vision for the 21st Century - Foreign Policy Accomplishments
Foreign Policy: World’s Strongest Force for Peace, Freedom and Prosperity
Promoting Peace and Strengthening Democracy
· Advancing peace in the Middle East by brokering peace agreements between Israel and its neighbors, including the Palestinians and Jordan; negotiating the Wye River Accords; supporting the launch of final settlement negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians; and revitalizing peace talks between the Syrians and Israelis.
· Ended a decade of repression and reversed ethnic cleansing in Kosovo by leading NATO alliance to victory in 79-day air war against Serb forces, forcing their withdrawal, ushering in international peacekeepers, and launching the Stability Pact to strengthen democracy, prosperity and integration throughout the Balkans.
· Helped broker the Good Friday Peace Accord in Northern Ireland, ending decades of bloodshed and empowering the people of Northern Ireland to determine their future.
· Led diplomatic efforts to end the civil war and foster multi-ethnic democracy in Bosnia.
· Restored democracy in Haiti, ending military dictatorship and stopping refugee flows.
· Supporting transitions to democracy in South Africa, Nigeria and Indonesia, and mediating peace efforts in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Central African Republic, Sierra Leone, and Ethiopia-Eritrea.
· Helped end violence and protected democracy in East Timor by leading diplomatic efforts and supporting international peacekeeping mission.
· Helped settle the Peru-Ecuador border dispute and end civil war in Guatemala.
· Pressing for human rights and religious freedom worldwide, including in China, Burma and Sudan.
Combating Threats
· Protecting Americans from weapons of mass destruction by working to reduce Russian nuclear arsenals through START, eliminating nuclear weapons from Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan, easing nuclear tensions between India and Pakistan, signing the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, and achieving the indefinite extension of the Non-Proliferation Treaty and ratification of the Chemical Weapons Convention.
· Enhancing military stability in Europe by successfully concluding the adapted Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty.
· Combating terrorism by developing a national counter-terrorism strategy, appointing a national coordinator and striking terrorist targets in Afghanistan and Sudan.
· Waging war on drugs by intensifying interdiction efforts, strengthening cooperation with allies, cracking down on drug lords and seeking $1.3 billion in assistance for Colombia.
· Reducing North Korean threat through deterrence, including the forward deployment of 37,000 U.S. troops; diplomacy, including bilateral talks leading to a moratorium on long-range missile testing; and non-proliferation, including the eventual dismantling of North Korea’s dangerous nuclear facilities.
· Containing Iraq through deterrence, economic sanctions, over $20 billion in humanitarian assistance for the Iraqi people from the oil-for-food program, and support for popular opposition to Saddam Hussein’s regime.
· Addressing new threats by protecting America’s critical infrastructure from cyber-terrorism and biological and chemical weapons.
· Development of a limited national missile defense to protect against attacks from states that threaten international peace and security while preserving strategic stability with Russia.
· Strengthening military readiness and modernizing our armed forces.
Strengthening Alliances and Building Partnerships
· Fulfilling vision of an undivided, democratic and peaceful Europe by enlarging NATO, integrating Southeast Europe, and strengthening our partnership with Russia.
· Building a more constructive relationship with China through engagement and frank dialogue, leading to cooperation on non-proliferation and regional security, environmental protection.
· Deepening security alliance with Japan through adoption of Defense Guidelines and Joint Security Declaration.
· Strengthening cooperation with South Korea through jointly offered Four Party Peace Talks with North Korea and the establishment of Trilateral Consultation and Oversight Group to coordinate North Korea policy.
· Secured landmark agreements to develop oil and gas pipelines from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean Sea, strengthening ties in the region and ensuring Americans have continued access to vital natural resources.
· Expanding trade and strengthening democracy in Asia and Latin America through the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation forum and the Summit of the Americas.
· Strengthening ties with Africa by launching the new Partnership for Economic Growth and Opportunity, achieving passage of the African Growth and Opportunity Act, and supporting the Africa Crisis Response Initiative and other regional peacekeeping efforts.
· Preserved U.S. leadership role at the United Nations by reaching agreement with Congress that would enable us to pay $1 billion in back dues.
Expanding Prosperity
· Opening markets for U.S. exports abroad and creating American jobs through NAFTA, GATT and nearly 300 other free and fair trade agreements.
· Integrating China into the world economy through landmark agreement for China’s entry into the World Trade Organization that opens markets to U.S. exports, slashes Chinese tariffs, and protects American workers from dumping.
· Established World Trade Organization to reduce tariffs, settle trade disputes, and enforce rules.
· Reduced the possibility that a future Asian financial crisis would undermine America’s prosperity by promoting structural reform -- including sound monetary policies, urging banking reforms and fighting corruption abroad.
· Stimulating worldwide growth through support for the IMF and G-8 global economic strategy.
· Assisted Mexico’s economic recovery with $20 billion in emergency support loans.
· Forgave $500 million in African debt, announced initiative to link debt relief to health and education investments, and forged agreement among G-8 industrialized countries to provide additional debt relief.

[JuniperLea]

178. Hooray for Clarence!

Way to post facts instead of knee-jerk emotions! Thanks!

I like the next one too:) And the one before!

[clarence swinney]

84. I am 83

Economy Accomplishments
Economy: the Strongest Economy in a Generation
Longest Economic Expansion in U.S. History. In February 2000, the United States entered the 107th consecutive month of economic expansion -- the longest economic expansion in history.
Moving From Record Deficits to Record Surplus. In 1992, the Federal budget deficit was $290 billion – the largest dollar deficit in American history. In January 1993, the Congressional Budget Office projected that the deficit would grow to $455 billion by 2000. The Office of Management and Budget is now projecting a $211 billion surplus for 2000 – the third consecutive surplus and the largest surplus ever, even after adjusting for inflation. Compared with original projections, that is $666 billion less in government drain on the economy and $666 billion more potentially available for private investment in this one year alone. The 2000 surplus is projected to be 2.2 percent of GDP -- the largest surplus as a share of GDP since 1948. This is the first time we have had three surpluses in a row in more than a half century.
Paying Off the National Debt. In 1998 and 1999, the debt held by the public was reduced by $140 billion, and the government is projected to pay down an additional $184 billion in public debt this fiscal year alone. That will bring total debt pay down to $324 billion -- the largest three-year debt pay-down in American history. Public debt is on track to be $2.4 trillion lower in 2000 than was projected in 1993. Debt reduction brings real benefits for the American people -- a family with a home mortgage of $100,000 might expect to save roughly $2,000 per year in mortgage payments. Reduced debt also means lower interest rates and reduced payments on car loans and student loans. With the President's plan, we are now on track to eliminate the nation's publicly held debt by 2012.
More Than 22 Million New Jobs. 22.2 million new jobs have been created since 1993, the most jobs ever created under a single Administration -- and more new jobs than Presidents Reagan and Bush created during their three terms. 91 percent (19.9 million) of the new jobs have been created in the private sector, the highest percentage in 50 years. Under President Clinton and Vice President Gore, the economy has added an average of 255,000 jobs per month, the highest under any President. This compares to 52,000 per month under President Bush and 167,000 per month under President Reagan.
Fastest and Longest Real Wage Growth in Over Three Decades. In the last 12 months, average hourly earnings have increased 3.8 percent -- faster than the rate of inflation. The United States has had five consecutive years of real wage growth -- the longest consecutive increase since the 1960s. Since 1993, real wages are up 6.5 percent, after declining 4.3 percent during the Reagan and Bush years.
Unemployment is the Lowest in Over Three Decades. Unemployment is down from 7.5 percent in 1992 to 4.0 percent in June 2000, and in April the unemployment rate was the lowest in over 30 years. The unemployment rate has fallen for seven years in a row, and has remained below 5 percent for 34 months in a row. African-American unemployment has fallen from 14.2 percent in 1992 to 7.2 percent in April 2000 -- the lowest rate on record. The unemployment rate for Hispanics has fallen from 11.6 percent in 1992 to 5.4 percent in April 2000 -- and also the lowest rate on record. For women the unemployment rate was 4.0 percent in April -- the lowest since 1953.
Highest Homeownership Rate in History. In 1999, the homeownership rate was 66.8 percent -- the highest ever recorded. Minority homeownership rates were also the highest ever recorded.
Lowest Poverty Rate in Two Decades. The poverty rate has fallen from 15.1 percent in 1993 to 12.7 percent in 1998. That's the lowest poverty rate since 1979 and the largest five-year drop in poverty in nearly 30 years (1965-1970). The African-American poverty rate has dropped from 33.1 percent in 1993 to 26.1 percent in 1998 -- the lowest level ever recorded and the largest five-year drop in African-American poverty in more than a quarter century (1967-1972). The poverty rate for Hispanics is at the lowest level since 1979, and dropped to 25.6 percent in 1998.
Largest Five-Year Drop in Child Poverty Rate Since the ‘60s. Under President Clinton and Vice President Gore, child poverty has declined from 22.7 percent in 1993 to 18.9 percent in 1998 -- the biggest five-year drop in nearly 30 years. The poverty rate for African-American children has fallen from 46.1 percent in 1993 to 36.7 percent in 1998 -- a level that is still too high, but is the lowest level in 20 years and the biggest five-year drop on record. The rate also fell for Hispanic children, from 36.8 percent to 34.4 percent – and is now 6.5 percentage points lower than it was in 1993.

[Political Heretic]

220. This cut and paste originally from the BILL CLINTON WHITEHOUSE.GOV site. WOW I'M SO SHOCKED.

Imagine my TOTAL SUPRISE AT THE AMAZING ROSY PICTURE OF HALF-TRUTHS AND CRITICAL OMISSIONS TO BE MINDLESSLY CUT-N-PASTED BY ROBOTS WHO DONT EVEN ATTEMPT TO USE A SINGLE BRAIN CELL OF CRITICAL THINKING.

GOOD JOB! Congratulations - you the reason you have the country you deserve. :eyes:

[mtnsnake]

87. Now I know I'm doing the right thing in supporting Hillary, who isn't anything like your BS portrays

her to be. What a friggin pantload, but I guess I just have to consider the source.

[Armstead]

89. It's the question I keep asking too Why do people want more of the same failures?

[marlakay]

91. I am 51 and feel the same way, want the new

to come in...

[bdamomma]

103. me too, I am tired of the dynasties, we need some new ideas

and to clean up that ole boys club in the Congress.

[proud2BlibKansan]

92. I am 54 and I couldn't agree more

:yourock:

[Auggie]

95. I am 50 and I agree

[Laura PourMeADrink]

102. Thanks Sandnsea! Poll after poll here at DU (I know, because

I posted many of them) showed miniscule support for her - and consistent criticism of the same things she is being defended for. Just like 31,000 unknown, unpolled votes of people who would have had to also lie to exit pollers miraculously showed up in a do-or-die state; NH, Hillary supporters showed up in droves on DU.

My biggest problem - I just don't respect her (for many of the reasons you enumerated). We have lived with so much shit - I want someone to look up to and admire. That I would walk 20 miles in the snow to go vote for. Someone you just instantly know in your gut is on the up-and-up.

But, as long as I live, I will never, ever understand why anyone would even consider nominating someone with so much baggage and such high negatives right from the starting gate. It seems totally idiotic to me.

People get offended when anything negative is spoken about her - but if she is nominated, just wait for the same tenfold.

And, if by some chance, Bill has pursued his philandering career - put your seatbelt on - there WILL be pictures! And, we can kiss the WH goodbye.

[mzmolly]

104. I am 42. I like both Clinton and Obama. Obama slightly more so.

Let's be realistic. The sex scandals of Bill Clinton would befall many in office if we spent millions trying to pry into the pants of politicians. And, with Obama we'll have drug scandals as opposed to sex scandals. I don't like the idea of rehashing Monica Lewinsky, but I am certain that Obama's admitted drug use is not going to be a pleasant ride, either. By the time the RW is done with Obama he'll be a terrorist/drug addict. Thankfully, he has the money, personality to overcome these attacks.

Also, the loss of manufacturing jobs has much to do with policy enacted during the Reagan years.

The Reagan years between 1980 and 1988 to be sure had created over 19 million new (low paying)jobs, exploding technology, unprecedented prosperity and had rekindled national pride. It also led to firing of 10 million high paying manufacturing jobs as corporations received tax incentives to move their operations overseas. http://www.emayzine.com/lectures/1980s.htm

To indicate that "free trade" with China and others started with Clinton is absurd.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1079/is_n2138_v88/ai_6810376

Reagan's heart and head were clearly on the side of free trade. While president, he declared in 1986: "Our trade policy rests firmly on the foundation of free and open markets. I recognize ... the inescapable conclusion that all of history has taught: The freer the flow of world trade, the stronger the tides of human progress and peace among nations."

It was the Reagan administration that launched the Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations in 1986 that lowered global tariffs and created the World Trade Organization. It was his administration that won approval of the U.S.-Canada Free Trade Agreement in 1988. That agreement soon expanded to include Mexico in what became the North American Free Trade Agreement, realizing a vision that Reagan first articulated in the 1980 campaign. It was Reagan who vetoed protectionist textile quota bills in 1985 and 1988. http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=2705

Reagan visit to China, accords support expansion of U.S. exports; trade recovers from slump, could reach new high Business America, August 20, 1984 by Chen Nai-Ruenn, Jeffrey L. Lee

U.S.-China trade is recovering from the slump of the past two years. In the first half of this year, U.S. exports to China ($1.1 billion) showed a modest increase (12.4 percent) over the same period in 1983, while U.S. imports from China ($1.5 billion) increased by 40 percent. At current growth rates, two-way trade for 1984 could equal or exceed the record level of $5.5 billion achieved in 1981. In the long run, U.S. exports to China are expected to grow substantially. U.S. trade with China will benefit from the success of China's economic adjustment, its industrial modernization plan and open-door policies, and a number of new bilateral agreements.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1052/is_v7/ai_3395321

Clinton created jobs as he had a balanced approach. I don't agree with everything he did, but give Obama eight years in office and see if we all agree with his every move.

Obama wants to reach out to Republicans. That's what Clinton did in the 1990's and it's what he's being critiqued for in your post.

As for the war, I can't believe that is an issue for those who supported Kerry vs. Dean in 04? Hillary Clinton voted as she did partly for political reasons. I don't like it, but it wont hurt her in the GE.

I am not a Hillary Clinton supporter, but I think your characterization regarding the Clinton years is jaded and inaccurate.

Also, do you think that Republicans are going to stop "bickering" if Obama is elected?

In 04 you critiqued those of us who questioned Kerry because he might be our front runner. You indicated that we could harm our eventual "nominee". Pardon me for taking your previous position on this but I think we have two good candidates, and I hope you're prepared to support our nominee.

Peace Sandnsea

[lisainmilo]

105. An Edwardian who has gone Obama, for our country.

John Edwards voted along the same lines as Clinton, the difference he apologized. Clinton has not, but has actually defended her stance. I agree with the Edwards people, the M$M has given us our 2 candidates, and I had to vote for 1 of them. I could have voted for Edwards, but I did not want to split the vote and as we can see the importance of that, as I live in Missouri. I voted Obama for the exact reasons in the OP. Something terribly suspicious has happened in our country. Our democracy has been hijacked. Bill Clinton was a good president. In spite of the RW attacks he did accomplish alot. Times have changed and so have the Clintons and not for the better.
Along with Sen. Clintons voting record, Bill Clinton has befriended his supposed enemies. I see very little difference between the Clintons and the Bushs' now.

Who committed 9/11? Not the Iraqis as we all know. Most of those who committed this atrocity on America were from Saudi Arabia. Right? Why would you accept monies from them? Would you? Both Bush and Clinton have. The Clintons received 10 million dollars from them. That in itself is damning! Now look at her voting record. Look how many times she has defended Bush, now all of a sudden she is against him. She has changed her stance on pulling the troops out, how many times? Come on. I agree with the OP, I don't get it either. Again a picture is worth a thousand words. So here are a few thousand words.

















In October of last year a senior republican speaks about Hillary Clinton, claiming she is on the same highway as them.

NURSING a beer in a bar not far from the White House, a senior Bush administration official was handicapping the presidential race and it was the usual tale of woe regarding the Republican field, with him lamenting that there was no standout candidate uniting the party.

But then he leant forward -- and this is a lifetime Republican -- and said: "You know, this is going to sound weird coming from me, but I trust Hillary. She might bein the left lane, but at least she's on the same highway."

(emphasized)

The Australian:http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22575682-5013451,00.html

[Sequoia]

110. Yes, for 20 years Bush and Clinton

Please think of the children who are now young adults who've known only them in the White House. Scary thoughts; please, no more!

[valerief]

112. I yam what I yam. nt

[JeanGrey]

113. I'm with you.

[mod mom]

115. Exactly and look at who she chose to represent her campaign: Unionbuster Mark Penn

I can't think of a more repugnant frontman who espouses the powerful over the people:

Isn't it Time for Mark Penn to Leave Burson-Marsteller?
Posted November 12, 2007 | 11:18 AM (EST)


My colleague at The Nation, Ari Berman, has done more than any journalist to shine some light on how pollster-strategist Mark Penn, head honcho at PR giant Burson-Marsteller, and perhaps the most important figure in Hillary Clinton's campaign, poses a real dilemma for the candidate. Penn heads a firm that has represented everyone from union busters to big tobacco, and more recently Blackwater. (According to a Marsteller spokesperson, it was a subsidiary, BKSH & Associates, run by GOP operative Charlie Black, which helped Erik Prince prepare for congressional hearings after his employees killed civilians in Iraq).It would seem difficult to find a more controversial client than Blackwater but Penn's firm has just been retained by Spin Master.

Who is Spin Master? It turns out that Spin Master distributes Aqua Dots, a toy that was recalled last week because it contains a glue ingredient that when ingested is broken down by the body to make GHB, the "date rape" drug, which can cause unconsciousness and even death. (The Consumer Product Safety Commission says the number of children sickened by Aqua Dots has risen from two to nine in the past week.)

Penn has repeatedly stated that he has no direct contact with controversial clients like Blackwater or unionbusters. But what about the good old-fashioned American principles of responsibility and accountability -- principles which his candidate likes to invoke on the campaign trail? As Ari Berman has pointed out, the dilemma for Clinton is that Penn's firm represents many of the interests whose influence she has vowed to curtail. But as kids get sick from poisonous toys, how can Clinton keep in her corner, as her chief strategist, a man who has even limited involvement with a firm like Burson-Marsteller? Isn't it time that Clinton ask Penn to choose: my campaign to make this a safer country or a PR firm which has too many clients undermining that agenda?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/katrina-vanden-heuvel/isnt-it-time-for-mark-pe_b_72206.html


"In '06, with Penn at the helm, the company gave 57% of Campaign Contrib to GOP"



Polling Czar



After the 1994 election, Democrats had just lost both houses of Congress, and President Clinton was floundering in the polls. At the urging of his wife, he turned to Dick Morris, a friend from their time in Arkansas. Morris brought in two pollsters from New York, Doug Schoen and his partner, Mark Penn, a portly, combative workaholic. Morris decided what to poll and Penn polled it. They immediately pushed Clinton to the right, enacting the now-infamous strategy of "triangulation," which co-opted Republican policies like welfare reform and tax cuts and emphasized small-bore issues that supposedly cut across the ideological divide. "They were the ones who said, 'Make the '96 election about nothing except V-chips and school uniforms,'" says a former adviser to Bill. When Morris got caught with a call girl, Penn became the most important adviser in Clinton's second term. "In a White House where polling is virtually a religion," the Washington Post reported in 1996, "Penn is the high priest."

Penn, who had previously worked in the business world for companies like Texaco and Eli Lilly, brought his corporate ideology to the White House. After moving to Washington he aggressively expanded his polling firm, Penn, Schoen & Berland (PSB). It was said that Penn was the only person who could get Bill Clinton and Bill Gates on the same line. Penn's largest client was Microsoft, and he saw no contradiction between working for both the plaintiff and the defense in what was at the time the country's largest antitrust case. A variety of controversial clients enlisted PSB. The firm defended Procter & Gamble's Olestra from charges that the food additive caused anal leakage, blamed Texaco's bankruptcy on greedy jurors and market-tested genetically modified foods for Monsanto. PSB introduced to consulting the concept of "inoculation": shielding corporations from scandal through clever advertising and marketing.

In 2000 Penn became the chief architect of Hillary's Senate victory in New York, persuading her, in a rerun of '96, to eschew big themes and relentlessly focus on poll-tested pothole politics, such as suburban transit lines and dairy farming upstate. Following that election, Penn became a very rich man--and an even more valued commodity in the business world (Hillary paid him $1 million for her re-election campaign in '06 and $277,000 in the first quarter of this year). The massive PR empire WPP Group acquired Penn's polling firm for an undisclosed sum in 2001 and four years later named him worldwide CEO of one of its most prized properties, the PR firm Burson-Marsteller (B-M). A key player in the decision to hire Penn was Howard Paster, President Clinton's chief lobbyist to Capitol Hill and an influential presence inside WPP. "Clients of stature come to Mark constantly for counsel," says Paster, who informally advises Hillary, explaining the hire. The press release announcing Penn's promotion noted his work "developing and implementing deregulation informational programs for the electric utilities industry and in the financial services sector." The release blithely ignored how utility deregulation contributed to the California electricity crisis manipulated by Enron and the blackout of 2003, which darkened much of the Northeast and upper Midwest.

Burson-Marsteller is hardly a natural fit for a prominent Democrat. The firm has represented everyone from the Argentine military junta to Union Carbide after the 1984 Bhopal disaster in India, in which thousands were killed when toxic fumes were released by one of its plants, to Royal Dutch Shell, which has been accused of colluding with the Nigerian government in committing major human rights violations. B-M pioneered the use of pseudo-grassroots front groups, known as "astroturfing," to wage stealth corporate attacks against environmental and consumer groups. It set up the National Smokers Alliance on behalf of Philip Morris to fight tobacco regulation in the early 1990s. Its current clients include major players in the finance, pharmaceutical and energy industries. In 2006, with Penn at the helm, the company gave 57 percent of its campaign contributions to Republican candidates.

-snip
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070604/berman

[pauldp]

121. I am 44. Stop the Bush/Clinton Dynasty! nt

[Cha]

124. With the clintons ..it's all about them.

Senator hilary has shown nothing but political cowardice and no leadership since Oct 2002. It's been about getting back to the whitehouse..the most political expedient road, no matter that it included so many dead and maimed Soldiers and dead Iraqis.

Howard Dean has tried to build up the Democratic infrastructure and the clintons want to tear it apart because it's all about them and their corporate donors. And bil just keeps on lyin'...

[mondo joe]

126. I can only answer for myself:

I'm going to vote Dem.

The only viable Dem candidates are Clinton and Obama.

I don't think they're very different on policy, so no clear choice there for my vote.

I think they each have potential to win and potential to lose in the GE, so no clear choice there for my vote.

I dislike some of Obama's overtures to what I consider religious bigots. And since I consider religious the greatest threat to my rights and the well being of my family, I have a hard time accepting that.

Clinton, on the other hand, has reached out to gays in ways I determine to be sincere and respectful.

So that's how we get to my vote.

[mike_c]

127. I don't get it either-- and I do NOT support HRC....

I will do anything I can to defeat her if she is the democratic nominee. I will never vote for her.

[OwnedByFerrets]

128. K & R and in indentical shoes....nt

[Diane R]

130. I'm a 50+ year old woman, and I'm with you all the way. NO MORE CLINTONS!!

[Critters2]

138. This is why I voted for Edwards.

At least I'll have the pleasure of saying "I told you so".

[lisainmilo]

228. u actually give clinton the vote

my heart is with Edwards too, but voting for him only allows the Clinton dynasty to continue. JRE is not viable anymore. You can have you vote, you can say I stood for what I think is right...but you are giving Clinton the vote. I realize the M$M has narrowed the choices we have, but really no difference in voting for Edwards to make a point and giving him the 2% or voting for Clinton and giving her the 60%. Missouri was close (where I live), and as much as I wanted to vote for Edwards, it really made no sense to me if I really want change. Obama is change. He is standing for a transparent government. He wants people involved in processes, which means our voices will finally be heard. He stands for campaign finance laws to be changed. He is pro-public financing. I desperately want these kind of changes in Washington. If you are an Edwardian Dem I know you do to. Just food for thought. :)

[DutchLiberal]

139. She's a woman. That's why. People want to be 'part of history'.

Just like they vote for Obama "because he's black".

Kucinich, Edwards, Biden had much better ideas and platforms, but hey! they're just a bunch of white guys...

[magatte]

140. There is a reason why Obama is winning in the Democrats with more than high-school education

But this is democracy. And it is our duty to work as hard as we possibly can to keep pounding that message out there, and get people aligned with their own interests.
The media won't do it. They are jsut entertainers, looking for controversy and horse races.

We are the ones we've been waiting for!

[kid a]

142. Damn!!! Well Said!!! i'm going to have to go open all my sock puppets to rec this to the roof!!!!!

=)
i actuall don't have any other accounts, but if i did i would log in and rec some more!!

[The Backlash Cometh]

144. Dang. You're channeling my thoughts.

[candice]

145. Whoever gets in the White House after Bu$h has to be better...

...even McCain. Had McCain not been subject to Rove's push poll in S.C., he might have been president. With Gore or McCain, we wouldn't have had the optional war in Iraq.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

146. damn. well said. beatutifully said. GREAT POST!

but only because I am 50, too. I can easily relate.

[PaDem]

153. What I don't get is why we are fighting ourselves............

the only ones who can defeat the Democrats in the Fall are the Democrats. I will never, ever for the life of me understand why so many Democrats, and ESPECIALLY so many Democrats on this forum (a place where people tend to be better informed than the casual observer)are so committed to our defeat in the Fall. I mean it's remarkable. The Republicans just keep nominating their best GE candidates while we nominate polarizing establishment candidates who can't win. We did it in 2004, we're doing it again now. It's laughable, and it really, really bothers me. There, I feel better.

[ShortnFiery]

154. In a few months I too will be 50 y.o. ... Go OBAMA!

I promised myself after Bill Clinton's smarmy "Lee Atwater impersonation" during the run-up to the South Carolina Primary that, "I will NOT EVER vote for either Bill or Hillary Clinton again." This foregoing promise ===> I fully intend to keep! ;) :hi:

[candice]

156. Hillary will be a better pres than Bill & she was re-elected handily...

...by her constituents. Even with the Republican big money against her. Her constituents liked what she did for them, or she'd be voted out.

[BeatleBoot]

158. Et tu, Brute ?

[beezlebum]

159. I'm 28

and i am with you. i don't get it either. :shrug:

[Mountainman]

161. No one knows what these people will do in office. That is really a leap to think you know what the

future is going to be.

[beezlebum]

163. we already know

what bill clinton did in office, and we know what hillary clinton has done both as a first lady and as a senator, as well as what she has campaigned on, both aloud and behind our backs, especially as far as foreign policy (IWR, iraq 'stay the course,' iran, etc.), not to mention her association with DLC- these things are at the very least a hint if not a promise as to what our future might bring with another clinton- and said hint alone is frightening, i'd hate to see it come into fruition.

[Mountainman]

244. Sorry, I don't buy it.

[beezlebum]

245. what is there not to buy??

when george bush started lying about iraq, a lot of people didn't buy that he was actually going to do it, nor that democrats would enable him, time and time again. but he did, and they did.

and now he has started lying about iran. so, what conclusion might one draw? that an invasion may be in the works? and based on his history, we don't know that he will, he may or may not invade iran, but one can only draw such a conclusion- i mean, we don't have the proof that he's gonna, i mean, just because he did it before doesn't mean he's gonna do it again, but....i sure as hell want him the fuck out of office, as well as the dems who've repeatedly enabled his endeavors!

i mean, george bush could change, george bush might stop committing atrocities and raping the earth and scapegoating immigrants and screwing the poor and middle class. does that mean i will ever trust him? the answer is a resounding NO. trust is based on a person's history, and i can't trust hillary based on her history.

why take chances when we can do better?

[Samantha]

162. There is no logical answer to your question

Hillary Clinton is a woman who was a partner in a law firm for 15 years. She served as First Lady for 8 years. She's running on a platform of 35 years of experience, when the simple fact is she is a second term Senator from New York, whose first term was her very first elective office. Floating a vastly inflated resume, she constantly opines the lack of experience of her opponent Barack Obama, who at least had years of experience at the State level in representative government. In short, she has about two years of Senatorial experience on Obama, and prior to that no elective office experience. BUT NO ONE CALLS HER ON THIS INFLATED RESUME.

Her conduct during this Senatorial experience has been to enable Bush* to pursue his abdominal policies. We at DU were outraged about this for a number of years, but apparently a number of people here are suffering from political attention deficit disorder.

Her support of the preemptive attack on Iraq alone should disqualify any legitimate Democrat from supporting her. I have given up on trying to understand the logic of the why Dems are supporting her; I simply have drawn my line in the sand and refuse to vote for her in any capacity at any time. I will abstain from voting for POTUS during the GE if she is the candidate, but will vote the rest of my ballot as a straight Democratic ticket -- as is my CIVIC RIGHT. What others choose to do is between them and their conscience and they will have to live with the consequences of their vote.

Thank you for this thread and having the guts to post your candid opinion.

Sam

[beezlebum]

166. PADD

nice, and so true.

[bowens43]

169. I'm with you also but

I'm a lot younger, I'm 49 ;-).

The last thing I want to see is another 8 years of the partisan bullshit, bickering and sniping that we had over the last 16. Hillary is more of the same. She is damaged goods. She is so divisive that A Hilliary presidency virtually guarantees a dead lock in congress on every issue, even if we still control both houses. A Hillary presidency will be as bad for America as another bush presidency would be. I think that most of her supporters must support her because they want to tweak conservative noses. THey know that they hate her. They can't possibly believe that she will move our country forward in any positive way.

She's old school....it's a new age. She needs to step out of the way or be moved out of the way.

[usrbs]

170. Because I don't see evidence that Obama is the greatest thing since sliced bread

Have you seen the clip where Hannity asks a bunch of supporters to name some of Obama's accomplishments and they could only quote his speeches?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PzFOOcEQtP0

Because I remember exactly how much leadership Obama (and Clinton) showed since 2004.

Because I heard the clip of Obama praising Reagan and I can't buy the way it was spin.

Because I don't believe in extending a hand to the Repugs.

Because Obama's policies are pretty similar to Hillary's, and if anything are to the right.

Because in the debates and town halls Hillary is articulate and intelligent and usually bests Obama.

Because Hillary has been a pretty good senator in working for her district.

Because I'm from Massachusetts and I see how Deval Patrick (whose slogan was also "Yes We can") struggled his whole first year, and can't accomplish much of what he wants with all the resistance he's encountering. Charisma and unity can get you only so far.

But the main reason - I think she'll be a better president.

[Major Hogwash]

172. It makes no sense to anyone in Idaho. Obama beat Hillary 4 to 1 here.

It was awesome. I have never seen so many people from all age groups so committed to one cause - ending the war. The young people were great and we had a guy who was 90 at the caucus.

We are Democrats - and WE are the change that we have been waiting for!!

[JuniperLea]

177. Age doesn't automatically guarantee wisdom

No one can know for sure how ANYONE will do as POTUS, unless that anyone is an incumbent running for a second term. The candidates themselves don't know. No one knows the pressure. No one knows the crushing responsibility. No one knows the secrets known only to presidents.

You don't know what kind of president Hillary would make. You don't know what kind of president Obama would make either.

All the pontification around here is getting a little too thick and smelly.

[porkrind]

180. Great post, Sandnsea

I fully agree.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

181. You speak as if everything were H. Clinton's fault. I'm an Edwards supporter, so don't come after

me as if I were a H. Clinton supporter. I wasn't, tho I plan to vote in the GE for whoever wins.

However, everything you mentioned didn't BEGIN with Hillary Clinton running for nominee, and it didn't BEGIN with President Clinton.

Unless you're some college kid, you know full well it began with the Neo-Cons and that they didn't do this overnight. It took them decades to take over the entire country "back" from the Democrats. They worked tirelessly and from the bottom up, placing in each tiny, local seat of government (no matter how small), some dedicated Neo-con, or evangelical fascist, while we Democrats did...... NOTHING.

And it created a wave of right wingerism throughout the nation. They made it seem "cool" somehow to be a son-of-a-bitch who called the unfortunate on welfare, "welfare queens", and they made it seem "cool" to take womanhood back to the Inquisition by trying to prohibit abortion, and they deregulated corporations so they could rob us blind, poison us, treat us like serfs, and ultimately impoverish us. They screwed us good but not without the help of ALL OF US. Before long, they had even changed the language. "Liberals" had to hide their true beliefs lest they be accused of being Communists, no one dared speak up for abortion, no one dared speak up against war, no one dared speak anything but Neo-Con talk.

In elections, the Neo-cons did very well indeed. We were left behind over and over and at the speed of light they passed shocking laws that removed our rights and benefited the rich. I was shocked (as were the Neo-Cons) that President Clinton had been elected at all. Sure, he was moderate rather than liberal, but I was still amazed. After all, Neo-Cons will give corporations EVERYTHING they want, and corporations certainly filled the Neo-Cons' pockets with big money for campaigns, but still Clinton won. The Neo-Cons were PISSED. SO pissed, in fact, that they didn't rest until they had impeached our president, after having dragged H. Clinton through the coals. And what did Dems do while this was going on? Some did nothing. Others complained. Most were immobilized. We didn't come to the defense of our Dems or our president.

But you place the entire blame for everything that happened in this country from the 80s on, on H. Clinton and President Clinton. You're also under the impression that, like magic, all the sh*t done by the Neo-Cons to this country will be erased magically.... by somebody of your choosing. Well I hate to break this news to you, but it's not going to happen overnight. It took the Neo-Cons longer than overnight to f*** this country, and it will take a while to fix it.

And by the way, what you were doing from the 80s on, while the Neo-Cons were slowly spreading themselves through this country like a metastasizing cancer? I'm not trying to be combative, but I always ask what Democrats were doing while the Neo-Cons were killing our country bit by bit.

[FirstLight]

190. Well said Sarah!

I am and Edwardian as well... and though I will stand WITH my party in November, I still cant bring myself to "like" BO.
He feels like a Rethug in sheeps clothing to me. All flash and no substance. Yes it IS just a feeling, but I have to go with my gut, so do we all to some extent.

While I understand the "questionable" actions of the Clintons and, let's face it, Most politicians. I do believe that it was a groundwork laid years before I was old enough to vote...and that Kenneth Starr and that whole debaucle was the beginning of the shaming of our country in the eyes of the world. the words "puritanical hypocrites" come to mind...I met Bill before the whole thing came tumbling down, and I was really bummed as it unfolded, because I don;t think now (nor did I at the time ) that any of the BS had AYTHING to do with him being an excellent pres - and Hillary was admirable to work through it with him.
For those with political history, is it okay to just chalk it up to experience, and listen to where the person is NOW?
I believe staying present is a good way to really hear what someone is offering and really SAYING from the podium.

There have been some great points on this thread, on both sides. However, the facts of our last Dem in the WH are enough to stand alone...AWESOME POSITIVE CHANGE...... and IF we can bring that ability to get things done back, we will ALL be in a better place.

Like I said, I will vote Dem no matter what in November, though I think Hillary has a better idea of how to get the job done than Obama.
AND there are different rules of conduct in Washington, behind the scenes, etc. (which we have to admit they suck, but they exist)..I would rather have someone who knows how to wrastle the alligators in the Oval office than someone who idealistically offers their hand, only to have it bitten off, at the shoulder!

[Sarah Ibarruri]

194. Thanks! Let's vote Dem and start on the long road to make this a good country again nt

[Raine]

182. I wonder too. I'm in my mid-50s

I remember it very well and I don't want to go thru that again. I want someone new and different, a fresh start.

[Faygo Kid]

189. 56, and I'm with you - No bridge back to the 20th century

Geez, I was 29 when Bush 1 became Veep. Now I'm 56, and it's been Bush or Clinton on the ticket every year. I don't want to go into my 70s with this continuing, and it will, because you know damned well Jeb is going to get the GOP nod next chance he gets.

[1776Forever]

183. Since Hillary has said she has 35 years of accomplishments .......

and ties this to Bill's tail - let's take a look at what they have accomplished:

NAFTA, CAFTA, Communications Bill of 1996 Act, and outsourcing money to India -

Voting for the Iraq War to invade - not to help protect the troops after they are all ready there -

And not least: Her vote of the so-called "Lieberman-Kyl" resolution on Iran.

You will NOT seeing me in the voting booth if she is "ordained".

:rant:

[Myrina]

186. Sandnsea, may I just say ...

I LOVE YOU! :applause: :applause: :applause:

[calteacherguy]

187. You had me at your first sentence. K&R.

[paparush]

188. Going back to Reagan in 1980, we've had a Bush or a Clinton in the WH for 28 years.

Change? Hell yeah!

[kid a]

195. what...second page??? no way!!!

[BlueJac]

198. Nicely said....

The Clintons never did anything for the average American, they just held off the job of destroying America, the job that GW Bush is doing now, with the help of Congress. We do not need more of the failing past, but to look forward to a brighter future. George W Bush and Dick Cheney are un convicted criminals!!

[JKaiser]

200. why is obama the better choice?? Who knows what skeletons are in Obama's closet?

HIllary is awesome! GO Hillary!!:)

[greyghost]

217. Coming soon to a news net near you!

[mdmc]

204. As a former HRC fan, I can explain it

She is gonna win - the corporations want her to win - the neo-cons want her to win - feminist (some real hard core ones, ones that make me look like a DLC tool) want her to win.

And she is a democrat.

Keep your head held high. The right will hate the HRC years 10x as much as we will:toast:

[greyghost]

216. Exactly, she's it. PERIOD

[dugggy]

206. Many women support Hillary simply because Hillary

has a vagina! These women are not politically knowledgeable.
They are strictly voting based on gender. Unfortunately
90% of voters could not tell you 3 policy items in the
candidate's agenda for whom they are pulling the lever.

[For PaisAn]

208. Please

"Why do you want the sex scandals?"

You do know that moveon.org was created in response to the Republican witchhunts of the Clintons. It's hard to understand how a fellow democrat could, after all that's happened, continue to perpetuate this crap. The scandal was what the repulsive repugs did. The scandal was not Clinton's private, none of our business, sex life. You totally lost me after that statement

[truedelphi]

209. Maybe a lot of people are tired of pointing out everything you just

Laid out so well.

Oh yeah, I'll give the Hillary suporters that she is a wonk.

But when the going got tough, she had no strategy to get her programs passed.

If the Repugs ran ads against her programs, why weren't any Dems assigned to run ads backing the programs?

When the going on Campaign Finance got tough, the Clintons simply assigned the Campaign finance Reform staffers to the issue they knew would go through, NAFTA.

[Blue_In_AK]

210. I'm 61, and I'm not thrilled with either of them.

I would have been happy with Edwards, Dodd, Biden, or Richardson (and I love the ideas of Kucinich and Gravel), but instead I'll be forced to vote for whichever of the other two is left standing, despite the fact that I don't trust either of them in the least. Nevertheless, I'm a Democrat and I will vote for our nominee and not whine about it.

Everybody needs to suck it up and get behind whoever is eventually nominated.

[TwilightGardener]

213. Proud to be your 117'th rec, Sandnsea.

[BeHereNow]

215. And I am ecstatic to be #118. SANDNSEA....

Thank you.
BHN

[Tatiana]

214. This is a very good thread. n/t

[speedoo]

218. I've got 15 years on you, and I don't get it either.

Rec #123 by the way. Thanks for posting, it's a great post.

The 15 years difference in our ages means I was an adult when:

JFK was assassinated.

Vietnam.

1968, when the country nearly fell apart, as RFK and MLK were assassinated, and young people were murdered by the national Guard at Kent State.

The country endured Nixon and eventually Congress did its job and forced him out of office.

Those years were enormously difficult and costly. But the country survived. In part, it survived because of courageous people. Like Senator Sam Ervin, for example.

But we don't seem to remember that, because people like Hillary in important position make decisions based on calculations of power potentially gained, and other "values" that have no place in their proper decision making role.

Obama's not my first choice, but I will never again vote for, or support in any way, Hillary Clinton.

[Guaranteed]

221. I know exactly what you're saying. It's beyond idiocy.

We've spent the past five years railing against the RIDICULOUSLY COWARDLY leadership the Clintons have supplied for us, but then she shows up asking for the nomination and all kinds of people are like, "Oh, well sure!"

WTF???

It's just stupid. Really, really short memories.

[lutefisk]

223. It just doesn't make sense. (Your post sure does, though.)...n/t

[EdwardWilbur]

224. I respectfully agree. I do not understand why anybody could approve of the war in Iraq

[sick_of_it_all]

226. This will be my first and only post

sandnsea-

I've been a lurker on DU for a while, along with other political sites that span the left-right spectrum.

In truth, I'm more conservative than proabably 99% of DU, and usually vote Republican. Yesterday I voted in the Republican primary.

So why am I here?

Because last night while watching the returns I had a revelation, the kind of thing that feels like a huge weight lifted off your shoulders and makes you wonder why it took so long to see clearly, and wish you had the wasted time back that you didn't.

Both John McCain and Hillary Clinton are part of the problem. The PROBLEM. They will not change, and nothing will change if either of them become President. For all the promises and slogans, just look at what either of them have ever really done to make this Country a better place to live - Hillary from 1992 on as a "co-President" and a carpetbagger Senator, McCain as a 5 term defender of the rotten status quo, and a corporate servant first and foremost.

The media and corporations WANT and NEED this race to be Clinton/McCain, because EITHER WAY they win! What in the name of God does anyone REALLY think will change with Hillary as President? Or McCain? Do you think that the banks, corporations, military/industrial complex, or ANYONE who currently has power or control will lose any of that power and control? Absolutely not.

So the reason for this first (and probably only) post, is that I want to offer a window into the mind of a voter like myself, and just let you all know what I can and cannot do this November.

I absolutely cannot vote for Hillary Clinton under any circumstance.

I WILL vote for John McCain if Hillary is the Democratic nominee, because despite my utter disgust with him (and I live in Arizona BTW), he is NOT Hillary Clinton.

If Obama is the nominee against John McCain, it will be soul-searching time for me, I can tell you that. Particularily if Obama chooses a VP with the same energy and optimism - that is NOT an entrenched Democratic politician i.e. Biden or Edwards. An Obama/Clinton ticket would be absolute poison, but an Obama/Brian Schweitzer-type ticket could be a godsend. (Schweitzer is the moderate/conservative Democratic governor of Montana - look him up).

So at this point I have to say that despite 6 presidential elections voting for the Republican (except for Perot in '92), I could and very likely WOULD vote for Obama against McCain. And I can tell you that the conversations I've had with my fellow right-leaning coworkers indicate a similar willingness, because we absolutely hate Clinton and we absolutely hate McCain.

Look, the Republican nominee WILL BE McCain, which means that the conservative base is ANGRY. ONLY THE DEMOCRATS CAN NOW DETERMINE THE FUTURE OF THIS COUNTRY! If you insist on running Hillary, it will be a bloody battle where the conservatives will focus their anger about McCain ON HILLARY and either she or McCain will win, and the divisions between left and right will only grow deeper and angrier. If you run Obama, you could be looking at a 45 state landslide because conservatives WILL NOT fight for McCain, especially if they see Obama truly try to unify with a moderate/conservative Democrat VP.

Thanks for reading. Good luck with your choice.

[ginnyinWI]

231. thanks for posting!

It's true--both Republicans and Democrats are hungry for change. And another Clinton isn't it, not matter how loudly she yells that she is. She is a political animal who happens to be better at politics than at policy, kind of like the present occupant of the White House.

I think Obama knows better than to put her on his ticket. He's got real clarity of vision, from what I've seen.

[sandnsea]

237. Thank you for the post

I so completely hear you. I lived in Montana for a long time, left when they started going wacko and put Racicot in office, lol. But I like Schweitzer a lot and really really like Jon Tester and encourage you to look him up. However, I think a better choice would be Jim Webb of Virginia because he has vast military experience and worked as US Navy Secretary under Reagan. It was for a short while because he disagreed on some foreign policy issues, but I think it still gives him the experience people are looking for. I know how people feel about Hillary in the west though, I think people in some parts of the country just don't get it.

Most importantly though, I wish there was some way the voice of the people would come through because we're all so thoroughly disgusted with the lot of it.

[Guava Jelly]

240. The reasons you specify were one of my deciding factors in choosing Obama

Except I like Hillary as a person and I like McCain.
I really am not in love with either.
But I will vote Clinton and campaign hard for her if she is my party's nominee.
I know several people exactly like you.I live on the border of Kansas and Missouri and I see this pattern emerging.
People want change.
I would hope that you would consider voting for Mrs Clinton even if you have to close your eyes or plug your nose.
If she screws up we will give her hell trust me..You think she wants to piss off her base.

And btw..thanks for sharing your perspective.

[hay rick]

247. hating Hillary

The fact that you hate Hillary is to her credit. If you voted R in the last 6 elections, you voted for GWB twice. If you want to know what's wrong with this country, look in the mirror.

[Tatiana]

248. Awesome, articulate, and reasoned post. n/t

[dailykoff]

230. You left out the torture

and the renditions and the occupations and the false flag operations.

[lisainmilo]

235. kick!

nice post!

[xxqqqzme]

238. I share the same page w/ you.

I cannot believepeople, who complain about corporate control, support her.

Among my fellow local dems, more than a couple, who have marched in protest of the war and * policies, are supporting her. One woman, who has had anti-war signs made and installed in the yard of her corner lot house (which is also a signal intersection), is a strong HRC supporter......I simply Do NOT get it.