And The Train Wreck Continues

The big money Clinton backers, pissy that their candidate is doing poorly and stands no chance at winning unless the super-delegates overrule the voters, are putting the screws to Pelosi:

Twenty top Hillary fundraisers and donors have sent a scathing private letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, chastising her for publicly saying that the super-delegates should support the winner of the pledged delegate count and demanding that she say that they should make an “independent” choice.

Greg Sargent has the whole letter.

As someone new to the party, I have to say the awesomeness of the Democratic circular firing squad really can not be explained to outsiders. You can try to explain it, but it just doesn’t sink in until you are actually a part of it. The Bush administration and Republican rule has been an unmitigated disaster for this country, and the Clinton camp seems dead set on making sure we get four more years of it. Bush’s poll number are worse than syphillis, and yet the Clinton campaign and their supporters keep making me yearn for the decency and the integrity of the say-anything Romney crowd.

This primary has truly been full of win for me, and a real eye-opener. While the GOP is turning lemons into lemonade with McCain, the Democrats are showing the world they know how to turn filet mignon into a shit sandwich. Impressive work.

I think I am going to start drinking again.

293 replies
  1. 1
    NR says:

    All I can say is, don’t confuse the Clinton machine with the Democratic party. Hopefully after Hillary loses the nomination, we can begin the process of purging the party of their toxic influence once and for all.

  2. 2
    over_educated says:

    Looks like we picked a lousy day to stop sniffing glue.

  3. 3
    Andrew says:

    I think I am going to start drinking again.

    Why on earth would you stop?

  4. 4
    Sage says:

    It’s not the “Democrats”, John, it’s the Clinton machine that is doing this. Once we finally kick Hillary off the stage, all this circular firing squad crap will come to an end. Obama isn’t going to be smearing other Dems or hurting the party, and the Clintons will be in for major humiliation if they try to drag this out past June 3rd. The press will make them look like sore losers, which they already are.

    McCain should be quite worried. Obama has had his worst month ever, he’s taken on Wright and the Kitchen Sink and the Clinton Wing, and he is still basically tied with McCain. Just wait until Obama gets to direct his full attention on the old man and his Bushian plans for the future.

  5. 5
    Nash says:

    Why on earth would you stop?

    Usually waking up to find your liver on the other side of the bed crying is a good reason . . .

  6. 6
    Conservatively Liberal says:

    I told you that you should have registered as an independent John. Noooooo, instead, you had to go from the frying pan straight into the fire. ;)

    Independent is the place to be. You can bitch about both parties, and you are under no obligation to vote for either side.

    Bill Clinton is one of the reasons I am no longer a Democrat. Hillary just confirms my decision. I still vote mostly Democrat, but they can not automatically count on me as they did in the past.

  7. 7
    cleek says:

    anyone heard if Reid is getting a similar letter ? if not, can we assume that whatever his big plan was to bring this to a close it didn’t involve telling Clinton to bow out ?

  8. 8

    I think I am going to start drinking again.

    It’s primary season and you’re not drinking heavily?

    I see you still have a lot to learn about being a Democrat.

  9. 9
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    I guess that all that’s left is for one of Clinton’s supporters to take Howard Dean hostage and present a list of demands.

  10. 10
    Rick Taylor says:

    As someone new to the party, I have to say the awesomeness of the Democratic circular firing squad really can not be explained to outsiders. You can try to explain it, but it just doesn’t sink in until you are actually a part of it.

    *weeps and nods* Though I don’t actually remember it ever being this bad before.

  11. 11
    horatius says:

    Well. Congratulations John. Now you belong to no organized party. Screwing up the Presidency since FSM only knows when.

  12. 12
    Cain says:

    Since they are hillary’s biggest donors does that mean they are the democratic party’s biggest donaters? If not, screw em. If you want grass-roots support you need eschew these big donors anyways. (unless of course George Soros tells us not to..)

    This looks like a fight between grassroots nutroots vs the establishment. I say fight the power man! Da Man needs to go down!

    Now quick, we need to hug myiq4xus in order to seem balanced.

    cain

    cain

  13. 13
    Zifnab says:

    It helps if you keep in mind that the DLC and Blue Dog Democrats have about as much populist appeal as Donald Trump at a country music festival.

    The two parties used to be national manifestations of the Good’ole’boys club. The Clintons and their supporters are just throwing a hissy fit because – unlike their Republican counterparts – they can’t write themselves blank checks into the highest reaches of power anymore.

    Don’t think of it as the Democrats shooting themselves in the foot come November. Think of it as the wingnut elements of the Democratic Party (the same Liebercrats that voted for War with Iraq and handed blank checks to Heir President over the last six years) getting the same treatment that the wingnuts in the Republican Party are feeling.

    It’s just six of one and half a dozen of another. America likes to think an (R) or a (D) will identify your political affiliation, but now we’re going to find out how many liberals are really living here. If McCain takes the Presidency in ’08, its because this country is too conservative for its own good, and it’ll get to learn another 4 years of life lessons about the virtues of those dirty hippies the heaped scorn on 40 years ago.

  14. 14
    LiberalTarian says:

    So, where do you think the money that used to go to the GOP has gone instead?

    Like Roger Waters said (on Amused to Death, 1992, one of the BEST antiwar albums ever),

    Each man has his price Bob, and yours was pretty low.

    The beauty part of being a Democrat is not that you have infallible candidates, it is that you get together with a bunch of your peeps and you make them change their behavior. When Blue America runs robo calls in your district, you vote for middle-class child healthcare. It’ll never be a perfect system, since it is run by imperfect people (and the more people you get in a room the more imperfect the system becomes).

    But, you have a voice in this party, even if you are relatively broke. It is *still* a participatory democracy. I believe Democrats adhere to this value more (much much much more) than Republicans, which is why I am a Democrat.

    Obama and Edwards were right on this point–the problem is letting corporate America steal our public interest. I think Clinton and her buddy Scaife are not getting together as harbingers of efforts for the public interest, and she’s willing to vote Kyle-Lieberman knowing the message it sends to members of her party.

    Obama is not perfect either, but like I said before, I think he is stoic. I think he will be responsive, and I think he is going to bring Democrats in on his coattails in every election in the country. We do, still, have to actively participate.

  15. 15
    Incertus says:

    Pelosi is the Speaker of the goddamn House of Representatives, and will expand her majority this year with or without the help of those donors. They ought to be on their knees slobbering away to her instead of issuing demands.

  16. 16
    demimondian says:

    The letter is an interesting gambit — and I’m not at all sure it’s a wise one.

    At the end of the day, these twenty people are putting themselves up against BlueMajority and the like. Now, maybe their contributions to the party coffers really do outweigh the small-donor contributions to, say, Obama. This year, though, it honestly doesn’t seem that way — this year, in fact, the small donors have swamped the big donors. This year, and in 2006. And I would say that the effect of the Kerry NYT ads back in 2004 kind of pointed in this direction, too.

    If so, then I hope the netroots to stand up and ask these donors “how much are you worth to the party, folks” and try to match that sum, in order to call their bluff. It just might work.

  17. 17
    The Moar You Know says:

    I have to say the awesomeness of the Democratic circular firing squad really can not be explained to outsiders.

    We’re the very best at what we do. We only wish the Republicans were as good at it as we are.

  18. 18
    The Moar You Know says:

    Once we finally kick Hillary off the stage, all this circular firing squad crap will come to an end.

    If only, Sage, if only. We’ve been doing it with great success since the 1960s – how else do you think a guy like Nixon could win two terms?

  19. 19
    Ninerdave says:

    Welcome to the Democratic Party John. Enjoy the cluster fuck it has always been.

  20. 20
    Shygetz says:

    Think of it as the wingnut elements of the Democratic Party (the same Liebercrats that voted for War with Iraq and handed blank checks to Heir President over the last six years) getting the same treatment that the wingnuts in the Republican Party are feeling.

    The thing is, I don’t think most of HRC’s policies are crazy; it’s just the way she’s going about trying to win the nomination (or whatever it is she’s trying to do now). Her campaign has managed to move me from a tepid he’s-my-third-choice-but-I’d-be-okay-with-Hillary-too Obama supporter to a solid Obama partisan. If Hillary puts self before party, I have a hard time believing she wouldn’t put self before country.

  21. 21
    Incertus says:

    If so, then I hope the netroots to stand up and ask these donors “how much are you worth to the party, folks” and try to match that sum, in order to call their bluff. It just might work.

    Anyone got Kos’s private number?

  22. 22
    Sasha says:

    As someone new to the party, I have to say the awesomeness of the Democratic circular firing squad really can not be explained to outsiders. You can try to explain it, but it just doesn’t sink in until you are actually a part of it.

    Yeah. It’s like being a Cubs fan except the glorious flameout happens only once every four years.

    But when we finally get our shit together and win one . . . there is no drug whose high can compare.

  23. 23
    F says:

    What a slanted and misleading lead John.

    If your yes men would have read the letter for themselves instead of trying to be first to agree with you they would seen that the “pissy big money donors” asked Pelosi to stay out of it.

    .
    They informed her that her statement that the super-delegates were obligated to support the candidte of the pledged delegates was wrong and was not the intent of the Democratic Party when they established them in 1984.

    During your appearance, you suggested super-delegates have an obligation to support the candidate who leads in the pledged delegate count as of June 3rd , whether that lead be by 500 delegates or 2. This is an untenable position that runs counter to the party’s intent in establishing super-delegates in 1984

    .
    They reminded her of her own comments from 10 days earlier when she said the super-delegates had to make their own decision.

    as well as your own comments recorded in The Hill ten days earlier: “I believe super-delegates have to use their own judgment and there will be many equities that they have to weigh when they make the decision. Their own belief and who they think will be the best president, who they think can win, how their own region voted, and their own responsibility.’”

    .
    They concluded by reafirming there support and asking her to clarify her position on the super-delegates using their own judgment and making independent decisions.

    We have been strong supporters of the DCCC. We therefore urge you to clarify your position on super-delegates and reflect in your comments a more open view to the optional independent actions of each of the delegates at the National Convention in August.

    .
    Its ironic to see you jump in and put this slant on the whole conversation, aren’t you the one who always attacks the Clintons for not, “following the rules”. In reading the letter it seem thats all that the “pissy big money donors” were asking for, that Pelosi “follow the rules”.

  24. 24
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    F Says:

    I’m not really sure why I like pies so much. The roundness? The delicious crust? I dunno, man, I dunno.

  25. 25
    Jake says:

    Rich shits throwing tantrums to get their way? [Yawn] How Republican.

    Sorry we’re not all sunshine and kittens over here on Teh Left. May I suggest the Green Party?

    [Runs]

  26. 26
    ed says:

    A threat by big donors is no threat at all. These people buy influence from whatever fountain they think will produce water for them. These folks may pretend it’s Hillary or die, but they will be in line to support Obama (or John McCain) as soon as he is the link to influencing whatever they want influenced.

    Undying loyalty to a particular politican is not how influence purchasers actually operate. They will protect their investment in a particular politican until the investment goes south, then that commodity will be dropped faster than Enron stock.

    Ms. Pelosi, tell them to go fuck themselves and their threatening letter. Their golden egg is laid by the institutions of the Presidency and the Congress, not particular individuals.

  27. 27
    Incertus says:

    Hey F,
    You didn’t tell the whole story either.

    We therefore urge you to clarify your position on super-delegates and reflect in your comments a more open view to the optional independent actions of each of the delegates at the National Convention in August.

    They’re not just talking about superdelegates here. They’re actively asking Pelosi to encourage pledged delegates to rethink their pledges. They’re encouraging delegates to overturn the will of the people who voted for them.

  28. 28
    horatius says:

    Mccain : Chelsea Clinton is ugly, because she takes after her father, Janet Reno

    Clinton : Mccain has crossed the C-in-C threshold. The junior senator from Illinois has not

    Richard Mellon Scaife : Hillary, why did you murder Vince Foster?

    Clinton : Thank you for inviting me. To answer your question, I would have left the church if Wright was my pastor.

    Bonus Billary

    Richard Mellon Scaife : How did you put up with your wife when your adultery trial was going on? My bitch of a wife is giving me nightmares.

    Bill Clinton : I feel your pain.

    Richard Mellon Scaife to the press : Bill is much nicer and a lot more charismatic in person.

  29. 29
    myiq2xu says:

    Four Hillary-bashing threads in one day? Is that a new record?

    What will y’all have to talk whine about when the big scary Clagina is gone?

  30. 30

    […] Posted in Democrats, Election at 3:55 pm by LeisureGuy John Cole: The big money Clinton backers, pissy that their candidate is doing poorly and stands no chance at winning unless the super-delegates overrule the voters, are putting the screws to Pelosi: Twenty top Hillary fundraisers and donors have sent a scathing private letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, chastising her for publicly saying that the super-delegates should support the winner of the pledged delegate count and demanding that she say that they should make an “independent” choice. […]

  31. 31
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    What will y’all have to talk whine about when the big scary Clagina is gone?

    We’ll be too busy rejoicing to post.

  32. 32
    Zifnab says:

    Four Hillary-bashing threads in one day? Is that a new record?

    What will y’all have to talk whine about when the big scary Clagina is gone?

    We’ll most likely go back to bashing Republicans. As God intended.

  33. 33
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    Or we’ll be speculating how Obama will do against the McCain/Clinton ticket.

  34. 34
    myiq2xu says:

    Hillary sends y’all a message:

    You better kiss me
    ‘Cause your gonna miss me when I’m gone

    Make your donations to the CDS Society

  35. 35
    Cain says:

    Frankly, I can’t wait to get back to bashing Republicans. This inner-democrat fight sucks. I mean, we’ve completely chased out 28%er or whatever his name is. I haven’t seen any redstate types here in forever? They’re busy laughing at us and our 28%. Funny how the nutty part of any population always end to be 28%.

    cain

  36. 36
    F says:

    Incertus,

    According to the rules the delegates and super-delegates have the option to disregard the voters and pledge their support to whomever they think would be the best candidate for president.

    I, like you and most voters think this would be a very bad idea, however that option is available to them and pointing that out to Pelosi particularly after her “super-delegates should support the winner of the pledged delegate count” comment is not a problem in my eyes.

    Politics is a rough game people and if you’re going to choose sides, expect the other side to try and take you out. Pelosi seems to have chosen her side.

  37. 37
    Studly Pantload says:

    Effers —

    Of course there is no *explicit* threat in the missive in question. The threat is created through implication. “Nice, fat wad of donors ya got, there. Be a shame if something was to happen to ’em.”

    Meaning: Only an idiot wouldn’t read between the lines.

  38. 38
    Martin says:

    This looks like a fight between grassroots nutroots vs the establishment. I say fight the power man! Da Man needs to go down!

    That’s basically it. This is DNC vs DLC. It’s why Clinton can’t back out – not only does she lose the nomination, but it validates Dean’s 50 state strategy and that the party should be run from the bottom up.

    Personally, I’m all for it. The DLC is too much like the GOP for my tastes. We already have a big money and cronyism party, and my god if Obama and Dean haven’t gotten voters energized. How can we not want to reward that?

    But the GOP is having the same fight, just more quietly. The religious right are being shut out of this election and the consequences of that to them are not yet known. Personally, I think Obama will pick up a lot more of this vote than people want to recognize. The bulk of the religious right has moved quite a lot and Obama is an attractive candidate.

  39. 39
    Laertes says:

    Apparently there’s a bunch of rich assholes who haven’t caught on to the new reality in the Democratic party: The grassroots are the “top fundraiser” now. Have these guys not even LOOKED at the numbers Obama is putting up?

    Who cares if some real estate mogul can bundle 200k from people who want overnights in the Lincoln Bedroom when Obama can write a letter and harvest a million bucks in $20 donations?

  40. 40
    ThatLeftTurnInABQ says:

    I have to say the awesomeness of the Democratic circular firing squad really can not be explained to outsiders.

    The Democratic party is not for pussies, but you can’t understand that from the outside looking in. The phrase “if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen” was coined by Harry Truman. GOPers have it easy by comparison.

  41. 41
    J.A.F. Rusty Shackleford says:

    Clinton Down, Obama Not So Much

    New Lows for Clinton.

  42. 42
    Pooh says:

    hey Myx,

    Tell us why substantively, we’re wrong for bashing HRC. Make the affirmative case. “CIC Threshold” does not pass go, nor does Courage Under Fire. I’m genuinely interested in why you think she’s a better candidate in terms that aren’t solely designed to mock/bash so-called “MUPpets”

  43. 43
    Pooh says:

    According to the rules the delegates and super-delegates have the option to disregard the voters and pledge their support to whomever they think would be the best candidate for president.

    I, like you and most voters think this would be a very bad idea

    This is me doubting you.

  44. 44
    rob! says:

    The Bushes and the Clintons–a pox on both your houses!

  45. 45
    empty says:

    Though I don’t actually remember it ever being this bad before.

    You must have been too young for the Ted Kennedy hissy fit that helped give us St. Reagan.

  46. 46
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    Tell us why substantively, we’re wrong for bashing HRC.

    Because shut up is why.

  47. 47
    BCT says:

    Wow, I just read your post and then read the letter. Are we on the same planet? That letter seemed pretty tame to me.

  48. 48
    myiq2xu says:

    The Democratic party is not for pussies

    FDR had to fight it out for the nomination in 1932. 1968, 1972, 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 2000, and 2004 were all contested Democratic nomination fights. This one is just closer than usual.

    The only real primary battles in the GOP that I remember were in 1976 and 1980, with an early knock-out match in 2000.

  49. 49
    Martin says:

    Funny how the nutty part of any population always end to be 28%.

    Actually, it’s 27%

  50. 50
    empty says:

    Four Hillary-bashing threads in one day? Is that a new record?

    That’s because John is “tired of talking about the primary.”

  51. 51
    myiq2xu says:

    Tell us why substantively, we’re wrong for bashing HRC.

    Bring it on, but don’t whine when we hit back.

  52. 52
    zzyzx says:

    Yeah that poll is insane. A 11 point deficit in Fav/Unfav and she’s making electability claims?

    This link is promising though SDs might be having enough.

  53. 53
    Scrutinizer says:

    Maybe F is right. I mean, pledged delegates should be able to change their minds, right?

    Maybe Clinton’s pledged delegates should consider this:

    As expected, one of the two major Democratic candidates saw a downturn in the latest NBC/WSJ poll, but it’s not the candidate that you think. Hillary Clinton is sporting the lowest personal ratings of the campaign. Moreover, her 37% positive rating is the lowest the NBC/WSJ poll has recorded since March 2001, two months after she was elected to the U.S. Senate from New York.

    As for the damage [the Wright] controversy did or didn’t do to Obama, it’s a mixed bag. Yes, Obama saw some of his numbers go down slightly among certain voting groups, most notably Republicans. But he’s still much more competitive with independent voters when matched up against John McCain than Hillary Clinton. And he still sports a net-positive personal rating of 49-32, which is down only slightly from two weeks ago when it was 51-28. Again, the biggest shift in those negative numbers were among Republicans.

    On one of the most critical questions we’ve been tracking for a few months, Obama showed resilience. When asked if the three presidential candidates could be successful in uniting the country if they were elected president, 60% of all voters believed Obama could be successful at doing this, 58% of all voters said McCain could unite the country while only 46% of voters said the same about Clinton…

    …among Obama voters, Clinton has a net-negative personal rating (35-43) while Clinton voters have a net-positive view of Obama (50-29). Taken together, this appears to be evidence that Obama, intially, should have the easier time uniting the party than Clinton.

    37% positive rating. Is she trying to shoot for W territory?

  54. 54
    myiq2xu says:

    That letter seemed pretty tame to me.

    ZOMG! You didn’t see the McCarthy-like attacks on Pelosi’s patriotism? What about the Rovian slurs about her character and looks?

    It was right there between the lines in invisible ink!

  55. 55
    Pooh says:

    Dennis – SGMM Says:

    Tell us why substantively, we’re wrong for bashing HRC.

    Because shut up is why.

    myiq2xu Says:

    Tell us why substantively, we’re wrong for bashing HRC.

    Bring it on, but don’t whine when we hit back.

    Figured as much.

  56. 56
    Conservatively Liberal says:

    We’ll most likely go back to continue bashing Republicans. As God intended.

    Fixed.

    This letter to Pelosi is pretty funny to read.

    Shorter Rich Guys: Dammit, we bought and paid for our candidate, and you are screwing it up!

    Gee, a few guys with a few votes and lots of $$$ to maybe buy lots of votes, or the netroots, which has lots of voters and lots of $$$? Tough call. Not.

    I guess we will see if Nancy has guts or not real soon.

    I think the Democratic party is going through a period of attempted change. Big money has been ruling the party, and the pols have catered to them. When communication was like it was before the internet, it was easy for pols to pay lip service to the public, cater to the rich and hide from the trouble.

    Not any more. The netroots may allow the people to wrest control of the party from big money, something that the Republicans would never even consider. Progressives are activists of one sort or another, they want to be involved. The internet caters to this by allowing progressives to network, and in doing so they have built themselves into a force that will have to be reckoned with.

    I think that is why the internet is so popular among progressives, and talk radio is the domain of the right. The right likes to be fed info, and not argue with the content (as long as it is the ‘right’ content!). Talk radio does this with the mostly one-way communication. Progressives want to be involved, and the internet is making this happen in ways that were unimaginable 25 years ago.

    This fight between Hillary and Obama is a battle between old party ‘boss’ rule and new party ‘people’ rule. That is why the fight is this nasty, that and the old party rulers have all of their chips on Hillary. If they lose, they are on their way out.

    This is not just Hillary fighting for her political life. That is why she is not going to give up any time soon.

  57. 57
    Martin says:

    Politics is a rough game people and if you’re going to choose sides, expect the other side to try and take you out. Pelosi seems to have chosen her side.

    Just figured that out, eh? She’s been in Obama’s camp since she took issue to Clinton pimping McCain over Obama.

    But the donors aren’t refusing to fund Pelosi, they are refusing to fund all Democrats running for the House. They’re picking a fight with all Dems. That’s the problem.

  58. 58
    F says:

    Pooh,

    Thank you.

    You are first person I’ve seen today and in many a day, who has asked, why are we Hillary Clinton supporters? The vast majority of the post from most everyone else has been an attack on Hillary and unfortunately most of those have been of the personal nature.

    .
    My support for Hillary comes down to 2 main points:

    1. I know her, I know what her policies are going to be, I know what she is going to attempt to do for this country and you know what I agree with 90% of it.

    2. I don’t know Obama, I think I know what his policies are going to be, I think I know what he is going to attempt to do for this country and you know what I think I will agree with 90% of it, however I’m not sure.

    For me there is a big difference in knowing someone and thinking that you know someone (example: John Cole’s reaction to the presidency of George Bush the lesser)

    .
    1 additional point:

    I refuse to let the Republicans win, they are not going to define my Party or its Leaders for me, I will choose who I will support based upon my criteria not who the Republicans make out to be the boogie of the month.

  59. 59
    Scrutinizer says:

    Pooh Says:

    hey Myx,

    Tell us why substantively, we’re wrong for bashing HRC

    I hope you’re not planning on waiting for an answer to that question that has substance to it. Mikey doesn’t do substance when it comes to Clinton, he just does his little tapdance and makes his silly-ass remarks.

  60. 60
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    But the donors aren’t refusing to fund Pelosi, they are refusing to fund all Democrats running for the House. They’re picking a fight with all Dems. That’s the problem.

    Yes, but they were gracious enough to leave out the photos of Pelosi’s grandkids on their way to school.

  61. 61
    Tsulagi says:

    A sternly worded letter? So what’s your problem with that? That’s bedrock SOP and weapon of choice when it comes to Democratic action to effect hope and change stuff. See post 06 mid-terms.

    While the GOP is turning lemons into lemonade with McCain, the Democrats are showing the world they know how to turn filet mignon into a shit sandwich.

    They do have a special way about them, don’t they? Maybe just trying to show their bipartisan spirit. You know, don’t want GW to get out of town next year without first proving they too have all the potential for his epic anti-Midas touch. Kerry just wasn’t enough proof.

  62. 62
    p.a. says:

    Zifnab Says:

    It helps if you keep in mind that the DLC and Blue Dog Democrats have about as much populist appeal as Donald Trump at a country music festival.

    The two parties used to be national manifestations of the Good’ole’boys club. The Clintons and their supporters are just throwing a hissy fit because – unlike their Republican counterparts – they can’t write themselves blank checks into the highest reaches of power anymore.

    …Think of it as the wingnut elements of the Democratic Party (the same Liebercrats that voted for War with Iraq and handed blank checks to Heir President over the last six years) getting the same treatment that the wingnuts in the Republican Party are feeling.

    …now we’re going to find out how many liberals are really living here. If McCain takes the Presidency in ‘08, its because this country is too conservative for its own good, and it’ll get to learn another 4 years of life lessons about the virtues of those dirty hippies the heaped scorn on 40 years ago.

    Just so. Hillary’s insurrection will show the depth of DLC penetration in the national Democratic party. I’m not talking actual members, but- ahem- fellow travelers in Congress. Please please do not underestimate a politician’s survival instinct. When it becomes clear to Congressional Dems that Hillary’s candidacy will lose the Presidency for them, the pressure on her to drop will be tremendous. The question is, will the national Dems attempt to pull the plug in time? Then we will see how delusional she and her inner circle truly are, especially when all these pathetic attempts to skim off Obama delegates fail.

    Now for the pessimistic view. If the Congressional Democrats don’t exhibit the sense of self-preservation I give politicians credit for (and one of the very few examples of this is current: the Republican Party’s insane embrace of George W. Bush after 7 years of malign buffonery), they will not only lose, they may decimate the ground-up model that Dean and Obama are in the process of miraculously reviving. Long term this may be more damaging to the DemParty than losing in 2008.

    ‘Who will free me of this meddlesome [woman]!’

  63. 63
    Pooh says:

    My support for Hillary comes down to 2 main points:

    1. I know her, I know what her policies are going to be, I know what she is going to attempt to do for this country and you know what I agree with 90% of it.

    Fair enough. Though I tend to agree with this, I have a few keypoints:

    A) Coattails, ability to move an agenda forward. We’ve been over this a million times, but Obama as the nominee = a bluer congress, plus, just possibly, a window to actually get some real progressive shit done.

    B) the 10% where I’m pretty sure I’ll disagree with HRC is probably the most important 10% – willingness to blow shit up just because, featuring prominently. Does anyone really doubt that HRC will, for whatever reason, be more hawkish than BHO? Given that our foreign policy Establishment of Very Serious people is so structurally hawkish, I really would welcome erring in the other direction. But I’m silly that way.

    C) HRC is more likely to lose to McCain.

    D) MUP!!!!!!!

  64. 64
    myiq2xu says:

    I hope you’re not planning on waiting for an answer to that question that has substance to it. Mikey doesn’t do substance when it comes to Clinton, he just does his little tapdance and makes his silly-ass remarks.

    Kool-aid really kills brains cells doesn’t it?

    Y’all want to bash Hillary, go ahead. I’m not saying that bashing per se is wrong. Politics ain’t beanbag.

    But when you do, don’t whine and cry about “kneecapping” because your pony can’t take a punch.

    As my grandma would say “Don’t dish it out if you can’t take it.”

  65. 65
    Dug Jay says:

    These folks that signed the letter have given literally millions to Democratic Senate, and particularly House, candidates in recent election cycles. The implied “threat” is a shutoff of future such funding. It will be interesting to see what, if anything, Pelosi does.

  66. 66
    jack fate says:

    As someone new to the party, I have to say the awesomeness of the Democratic circular firing squad really can not be explained to outsiders. You can try to explain it, but it just doesn’t sink in until you are actually a part of it.

    It’s the subtle difference between dominance and governance. If your taste is dominance? The modern Republican party is for you. Reagan’s 11th Commandment is bullshit. In a democratic society it is impossible to be uncritical of ones opponents and allies, alike. I think many are taken aback by the Democrat’s sniping because we are all used to two decades of the ruling party, which, for all intents and purposes has been Republican, swallowing strong held beliefs in exchange for dominance and lock-step unity. Remember fiscal conservatives? The real “get government off your back” Republicans? Principles that went out the window when Reagan showed you could say those things and do exactly the opposite; as long as it worked to your advantage.

    I don’t know one truly libertarian-leaning conservative person who gives a shit a about abortion or homosexuals or who worships what god. I know a lot of people who call themselves that even though their “libertarian” leanings end abruptly at abortion, gays and Christianity. But, it has kept the movement together for decades and even though it’s been torn asunder the giant turd that is the Bush administration and the 2006 congressional blowout, it is re-solidifying behind John McCain. Why? Because he’s their only, and quite sad, ticket to power. Name one prominent Republican leader in the party that wouldn’t make the Richard Weavers of the old school Conservativism roll in their graves? William Buckley even called it surreal.

    Governance, on the other hand is a totally different matter. Their are Democrats, more than I care to think about, that rely on or want for the “dominant” style of leadership (Clinton, Ford, Emanuel, Lieberman et al.) Like the upper-echelon of the Republican party, they need to be leaders and everyone must follow. But a bigger portion of the Democratic party, in my opinion, is more interested in governance and has little patience for the demagoguery of the likes of Clinton and her surrogates. Thus you start to see more “governance” minded Democrats pushing back against them, much like they’ve unsuccessfully tried to do with the Republicans.

    It’s a much more complicated topic, imo, and I think I’ve only scratched the surface. But, I think we are seeing the more democratically (small “d”) minded people start to revolt against the “powers that be” that have sought to dominate the party much like the Republican leaders have done. It ain’t going to pretty and I have one prediction: Should Clinton “win,” there will be an all out civil war in the party (I think it’s a long time coming, personally.) However, should Obama capture the nomination, I expect a lot, though not all, of the Clinton supporters to get behind Obama once they have to pick a leader to support. (They may be similar to Republicans, but they’re Democrats for other reasons.) The ones that don’t? Fuck ’em. They can go register with the Republicans for all I care. Since, as Bob Altmeyer’s work in social sciences has demonstrated, the modern Republican philosophy is more suited to the authoritarian mind-set anyhow.

  67. 67
    ACK says:

    This primary has truly been full of win for me, and a real eye-opener. While the GOP is turning lemons into lemonade with McCain, the Democrats are showing the world they know how to turn filet mignon into a shit sandwich. Impressive work.

    I have voted for Democrats for a long, long time and I don’t ever remember it being as bad as this. Ever.

  68. 68
    myiq2xu says:

    Coattails,

    He’s not likely to have any in two big states.

    ability to move an agenda forward

    Based on what? His final year in Illinois where he was gifted sponsorship of several bills by Emil Jones? (In return for $3 million in earmarks)

  69. 69
    Zifnab says:

    The Democratic party is not for pussies, but you can’t understand that from the outside looking in. The phrase “if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen” was coined by Harry Truman. GOPers have it easy by comparison.

    PotD

  70. 70
    ThymeZone says:

    I have to say the awesomeness of the Democratic circular firing squad really can not be explained to outsiders

    John, I’ve been a registered Democrat around 40 years longer than you have. This is not about Democrats, it’s about the Clintons. It’s all about them.

  71. 71
    ThymeZone says:

    GOPers have it easy by comparison

    This is quite true. It’s easy to belong to a party that has no interest in facts, science, or the Constitution. It’s a party of people who feel deeply and welcome anyone who feels deeply. Whether they actually know anything or have any factual basis for it, nobody cares. Whether it’s war, or medicine, or the fate of the earth … all idiots are welcome.

  72. 72
    Rarely Posts says:

    Groan.

    What part is actually untrue? As much as everyone hates Hillary’s tactics, she’s correct and so are these people in being outraged at an attempt to circumvent democracy.

    I like Nancy Pelosi but she shouldn’t try to influence the election amongst her own party.

  73. 73
    myiq2xu says:

    The modern Republican party is for you.

    John McCain is a “maverick” and is hated by the neanderthal wing of the GOP because he occasionally doesn’t march in lock-step. 98% compliance isn’t good enough.

    His biggest sin? He actually challenged G-Dub for the nomination when “they who lead” had decreed the winner.

    The Democratic party is made up of very diverse elements. How can they not disagree?

  74. 74
    empty says:

    Does anyone really doubt that HRC will, for whatever reason, be more hawkish than BHO? Given that our foreign policy Establishment of Very Serious people is so structurally hawkish, I really would welcome erring in the other direction.

    First, thanks for posting something other than schoolyard taunts. To your point that is exactly the point where Obama scares me more than Hillary. I think his foreign policy team has a large number of true believers in the idea of liberal or humanitarian interventionism. The three top ones that come to mind are Samantha Powers (I know she is out for now but I presume she will be back if Obama is in the WH), Susan Rice and Anthony Lake. I don’t doubt the sincerity of any of these folks – but then many of the neocons were quite sincere too. Among Clinton’s advisers Holbrooke is also of the interventionist variety but most are not. I saw Brzezinski as a major plus among Obama’s advisers. I think he is an asshole but he is the kind of asshole we need right now. But he got dumped after complaints from the AIPAC crowd (as did Malley).

    Bottom line I think Obama has an idealistic group of people around him who feel that America’s military might should be used for setting right the wrongs of the world and that scares me. I know – I am a fraidy cat.

  75. 75
    ThymeZone says:

    My support for Hillary comes down to 2 main points:

    1. I know her, I know what her policies are going to be, I know what she is going to attempt to do for this country and you know what I agree with 90% of it.

    2. I don’t know Obama, I think I know what his policies are going to be, I think I know what he is going to attempt to do for this country and you know what I think I will agree with 90% of it, however I’m not sure.

    Thus assuring that nothing you ever say here will be taken seriously from this point forward.

    We know nothing of the three candidates in terms of what they will be as presidents. We only know what they say and do now. In that regard, considering the ubiquitous nature of information access today, we can know about the same amount of information about all three candidates.

    If you don’t “know” any of these three people at this juncture, then you aren’t paying attention.

  76. 76
    ThymeZone says:

    His biggest sin?

    He doesn’t support the rightwing party line.

    As anyone who actually follows politics these days can tell you. But, feel free to just do what you always do, and pull crap out of your ass.

    Based on what?

    You were asked for a month to describe the actual qualifications that HRC brings to this candidacy. I don’t recall a single word from you that could be taken to be a description of actual qualifications. Why don’t you shut the fuck up, or answer that question?

  77. 77
    Xenos says:

    Apparently there’s a bunch of rich assholes who haven’t caught on to the new reality in the Democratic party: The grassroots are the “top fundraiser” now. Have these guys not even LOOKED at the numbers Obama is putting up?

    While the masses have an advantage in presidential candidates, those donors are able to send $2,300 to each Democratic Representative. If you get 100 donors together with the money to do that, you can drop $230,000 in all their respective pockets on the same day. You can get some serious attention from the collected congress-critters with that sort of stunt.

  78. 78
    ThymeZone says:

    I like Nancy Pelosi but she shouldn’t try to influence the election

    That’s right, Rarely Makesense, the role of powerful politicians is to sit quietly by and never try to influence the outcome of any elections.

    Brilliant, really. Did you put a lot work into thinking that one up, or ….?

    Take a lot of time and blogspace and describe the process you followed to come up with that whopper.

  79. 79
    Zifnab says:

    What part is actually untrue? As much as everyone hates Hillary’s tactics, she’s correct and so are these people in being outraged at an attempt to circumvent democracy.

    Qua? Pardone? Baking Powder?
    How is Nancy Pelosi circumventing Democracy again? Did she attempt some voter caging we haven’t heard of? Has she invalidated any elections recently? Was she seen stuffing ballots with Barack’s name on them?

    It’s a very damning allegation, but you could at least do something to support the claim. All I saw was an assertion by a woman who was – herself – a Superdelegate. She did not even go so far as to assert that Barack should be the nominee. She merely voiced her opinion on how Superdelegates should direct their votes.

  80. 80
    myiq2xu says:

    You were asked for a month to describe the actual qualifications that HRC brings to this candidacy. I don’t recall a single word from you that could be taken to be a description of actual qualifications. Why don’t you shut the fuck up, or answer that question?

    “Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.” – Lazarus Long

  81. 81
    slippy hussein toad says:

    What will y’all have to talk whine about when the big scary Clagina is gone?

    Defeating McCain, bonehead.

  82. 82
    ThymeZone says:

    don’t whine when we hit back.

    With what, wisecracks and snark?

    What else you got?

  83. 83
    Zifnab says:

    So, myiq2xu has finally lost it.

    Maybe she’s being serious about that “not posting anything for a week” bet seriously, because I haven’t seen a word of substance all day.

  84. 84
    Scrutinizer says:

    I refuse to let the Republicans win, they are not going to define my Party or its Leaders for me, I will choose who I will support based upon my criteria not who the Republicans make out to be the boogie of the month.

    I’ve been a Democrat for almost 40 years now. I was originally an Edwards supporter, and when he dropped out I didn’t have a strong preference for either Obama or Clinton. Neither of their policy positions were progressive enough for my taste, but where there were differences, I leaned toward Obama. I leaned more towards Obama when I saw the difference between the way he ran his campaign compared with the trainwreck of Clinton’s campaign, especially when she obviously had no plan after Super Tuesday except to “build firewalls”. If I have to judge who’s the better executive, I have to say Obama, based on the way the two campaigns have been run.

    I’ve never believed that Clinton has any particular “experience” that makes her a better choice than Obama, in fact, her time in elected office is less than his. She has consistently overhyped her experience, she has invented the super-secret commander-in-chief threshold, and her latest delusion about Bosnia was the neatest piece of improvisational theatre I’ve witnessed.

    I began to loathe Clinton when she began to promote the Republican candidate as more experienced and better qualified than Obama. Her position is easily seen as “vote for me, or vote for McCain”, which is one of the most cynical positions I’ve ever seen in a primary. Sure, hyping herself over Obama is fair game in a primary, but to push the Republican when its clear that a Democratic victory is the ultimate goal is taking triangulation to a new place.

    Clinton’s campaign is weaving more and more desperate ploys to change the metric of the campaign from pledged delegate votes to “important states”, then to popular votes, then to electoral votes, to urging pledged delegates to vote for her when they are pledged to Obama. It’s just like FL-MI: Clinton doesn’t like the outcome, so she wants to change the game to suit her. Kind of like an eight-year old who isn’t getting her way. I don’t mind that she reaches out to superdelegates, by the way. Both candidates are doing that; it’s in the party rules that superdelegates vote their conscience, not the popular vote, and that’s fine. Even there, Obama has been outperforming her recently.

    You say you know what you’re getting with Clinton. So do I, and I don’t want it. It has nothing to do with Republicans past or present trying to define the party or set up boogie men. It’s all about Clinton: she’s divisive, an ineffective manager, and she’s far too willing to triangulate and sit at the table of the worst sort of Republicans if it will advance her interest. Fine, if she wants it—personally I prefer people with more integrity tha we’ve had for the last 7 years.

    K?

  85. 85
    ThymeZone says:

    “Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.”

    As I thought, you still have nothing. Zilch.

    Just wisecracks and armpit farts.

    What a fucking wanker.

  86. 86
    Rarely Posts says:

    That’s right, Rarely Makesense, the role of powerful politicians is to sit quietly by and never try to influence the outcome of any elections.

    Brilliant, really. Did you put a lot work into thinking that one up, or ….?

    Take a lot of time and blogspace and describe the process you followed to come up with that whopper.

    She shouldn’t encourage an outcome that prevents people from voting. Why exactly would she or any Democrat wish to do that? The superdelegates are not meant to vote as a reflection of the delegates, otherwise their votes are meaningless. The superdelegates vote to make sure the best candidate is the one that goes up against the Republican nominee. Disagree with their votes but don’t try to strong arm them.

  87. 87
    Martin says:

    2. I don’t know Obama, I think I know what his policies are going to be, I think I know what he is going to attempt to do for this country and you know what I think I will agree with 90% of it, however I’m not sure.

    It’s pretty easy to find out about Obama. Aside from the 64 page layout of the issues, there are some other analyses to read. Here’s two to start:

    TNR offers “Barack Obama is offering the most sweeping liberal foreign-policy critique we’ve heard from a serious presidential contender in decades. But will voters buy it?”

    TNR offers another on reform of the intelligence community.

    In my experience, many people have rejected Obama because they don’t understand what he offers of substance. There’s a LOT there, but many people won’t take the time to digest it, think it out, and see what it means. They are conditioned to think in terms of prepackaged policy options and Obama offers none of that. Every time you follow one of his policies out and think you have it down as pro/anti trade, he throws a half dozen twists at you that you’ve never heard out of a candidate before. I’ve always hated the black/white policy options because I (like most people) are smart enough to know that black/white NEVER works. Grey works, and I need to hear about the grey. Politicians are always afraid of the grey stuff because it tends to get used as a blunt object against them.

    But I don’t see much of anything out of Clinton that really lays new ground. That’s troubling to me because I can’t tell if it’s something she is serious about or something she just pulled out of the Democratic Party Policy Manual. Every time Obama cuts across the traditional policy views, I’m comforted that it’s something he is serious about because the upside of going in a new direction isn’t big enough to justify the risk of losing voters who won’t pay attention to the details. Each risk he takes is a plus. Clinton doesn’t take much in the way of policy risks or even moral stands before a hostile audience that I can see. Those are the credibility moment.

  88. 88
    ThymeZone says:

    Bottom line I think Obama has an idealistic group of people around him

    Versus a group of people who think that a woman is entitled to be president because she was married to one.

    Pardon me, but I can’t abide by that kind of bullshit. Give me the idealism. At least I understand idealism.

  89. 89
    Scrutinizer says:

    myiq2xu Says:

    I hope you’re not planning on waiting for an answer to that question that has substance to it. Mikey doesn’t do substance when it comes to Clinton, he just does his little tapdance and makes his silly-ass remarks.

    Kool-aid really kills brains cells doesn’t it?

    Y’all want to bash Hillary, go ahead. I’m not saying that bashing per se is wrong. Politics ain’t beanbag.

    But when you do, don’t whine and cry about “kneecapping” because your pony can’t take a punch.

    As my grandma would say “Don’t dish it out if you can’t take it.”

    Thus proving my point. Again.

  90. 90
    demimondian says:

    These folks that signed the letter have given literally millions to Democratic Senate, and particularly House, candidates in recent election cycles. The implied “threat” is a shutoff of future such funding. It will be interesting to see what, if anything, Pelosi does.

    So they have. And the folks from Blue Majority have given literally millions to Democratic and particularly House candidates in the last few weeks.

    Guess which one weighs more heavily, Dug Jay?

  91. 91
    myiq2xu says:

    fucking wanker

    Isn’t that an oxymoron?

    As I thought, you still have nothing. Zilch.

    You’re the expert.

  92. 92
    ThymeZone says:

    OMFG, are you seeing these positive-negative poll numbers on Clinton and Obama from NBC-WSJ? (Olbermann, live).

    Clinton has fucking TANKED in positives in the last two weeks, while Obama has apparently soared.

    While this is not exactly hard to understand, it still surprises me.

  93. 93
    Scrutinizer says:

    The three top ones that come to mind are Samantha Powers

    Geez, at least get her name right.

  94. 94
    F says:

    Pooh,

    Coattails
    I think both Hillary and Obama can easily win the General Election with sufficient coattails to ensure a bluer Congress. I think Obama may have a more higher coattail count, but then again I don’t know that.

    10% Disagreement
    Hillary is not going to “blow shit up”, she is a Foreign Policy realist. She understands our current force structure, she understands the political bind that the Republicans have placed us into with their adventures over the past 8 years. She will not allow herself to be maneuvered into blowing shit up.

    Lose to McCain
    This country is just tired of the Republicans, we’re running a Black man with a Muslim middle name against a woman named Clinton and they’re both polling higher than McCain right now. No way, no how do we lose this election.

    MUP
    Other than Jesus Christ, I’m not a big follower of charismatic leaders. With charismatic leaders, I think people tend to put all their hopes and wishes into them, they become superman in their eyes, so when the inevitable failure occurs they then become fervent in the opposite direction (whats that saying; theres a thin line between love and hate).

    I want my leaders to be men with faults, so I know there no better or worse of a person than I am, which means I’ll then judge and hold them to the same standards as I do myself; A man with faults.

  95. 95
    myiq2xu says:

    Versus a group of people who think that a woman is entitled to be president because she was married to one.

    Now you’re speaking Rove’s words:

    This is not a coronation. Democrats do not like her sense of entitlement. She is not owed the nomination. It does not belong to her simply because her name is Clinton.

    Turdblossom must be proud of you.

  96. 96
    ThymeZone says:

    Turdblossom must be proud of you.

    You might just be the biggest ass I have ever seen post here. Bar none. And that puts you above some people who are first class horse’s asses.

  97. 97
    Rarely Posts says:

    Now you’re speaking Rove’s words:

    Saddest part of this entire nomination is watching the Obama supporters embrace Rovian tactics and talking points.

  98. 98
    ThymeZone says:

    You’re the expert.

    Brilliant material. Really. What are you, a fucking high school kid?

    Are you actually capable of saying something intelligent? Why don’t you surprise everybody here and actually do it?

  99. 99

    […] This cracked me up. I too marvel at the suicidal impulses.   […]

  100. 100
    F says:

    For all you people pointing out Obama’s policy letter on this or that, please see my comment above, which I’ll repeat here.

    For me there is a big difference in knowing someone and thinking that you know someone (example: John Cole’s reaction to the presidency of George Bush the lesser)

    .
    Also, either Hillary is an old Washington DC insider who has group of DLC hands all ready to drive this Party and country into the ditch or she is vastly inexperienced and has no idea of what she is doing.

    It can’t be both, so please choose one and stay consistent.

  101. 101
    ThymeZone says:

    your pony can’t take a punch.

    In the last two weeks, positives-negatives:

    Clinton, minus about ten.

    NBC_WSJ today (see Countdown for details).

    As expected, one of the two major Democratic candidates saw a downturn in the latest NBC/WSJ poll, but it’s not the candidate that you think. Hillary Clinton is sporting the lowest personal ratings of the campaign. Moreover, her 37 percent positive rating is the lowest the NBC/WSJ poll has recorded since March 2001

    Your harpy appears to be going into the toilet. You need a new punchline.

  102. 102

    Welcome to the Party, John! Some of us have been living with this our entire political lives.

  103. 103
    libarbarian says:

    Also, either Hillary is an old Washington DC insider who has group of DLC hands all ready to drive this Party and country into the ditch or she is vastly inexperienced and has no idea of what she is doing.

    It can’t be both, so please choose one and stay consistent.

    Come off of it.

    Its really not hard to understand.

    * She is an old-time Washington insider who has vast experience with domestic party politics and fundraising for the Democratic party machine.

    * She is an inexperienced newbie in the area of foreign policy and war.

    Clintons claim to have “earned” the nomination is code speak for saying that she has really done a lot for the Democratic party machine and feels that the party owes her the nomination in return for her previous hard work – the like the PTA mom who feels she is owed the chair because she’s held the most bake-sales.

  104. 104
    libarbarian says:

    your pony can’t take a punch.

    Hardly. Hes gonna beat your she-donkey, but he might not have the strength afterwards to beat the Elephant.

  105. 105
    Cain says:

    It can’t be both, so please choose one and stay consistent.

    Er why not? Maybe it’s a judgement issue? Maybe she isn’t showing good judgement by being the washington DC insider and belonging to the DLCer when it’s obvious that the people voting are looking for a bluer candidate not one someone from the establishment? I don’t see that it has to be one or the other.

    cain

  106. 106
    Martin says:

    Coattails
    I think both Hillary and Obama can easily win the General Election with sufficient coattails to ensure a bluer Congress. I think Obama may have a more higher coattail count, but then again I don’t know that.

    Obama has a much higher coattail count. Hillary will bring some along, no question, but Obama has huge ground games in every state. You can’t carry a Dem senator in Montana if you never go to Montana, and that ground game of Obama’s puts virtually every house race in play to some degree. Lots of Dems just won’t be able to overcome an incumbent but it’ll force the GOP to spend money there, and that alone helps. Hillary’s team denies that Montana is in play, or any red state for that matter, but the fight for the 2008 Senate is in red states. We can either step up to that fight or stick to the usual 51% solution.

    MUP
    Other than Jesus Christ, I’m not a big follower of charismatic leaders. With charismatic leaders, I think people tend to put all their hopes and wishes into them, they become superman in their eyes, so when the inevitable failure occurs they then become fervent in the opposite direction (whats that saying; theres a thin line between love and hate).

    So if he has better policies and character we should reject him because people like him? I don’t get this argument. This is the usual ‘afraid to win’ shit again. Did the public turn on FDR or JFK? No, competent, charismatic presidents hold the public. Stop giving up before we’ve even started.

  107. 107
    Ninerdave says:

    I’m actually interested to see what positive case myiq can make for Clinton.

  108. 108
    myiq2xu says:

    Hardly. Hes gonna beat your she-donkey, but he might not have the strength afterwards to beat the Elephant.

    Then urge the unpledged delegates to vote for HRC – she will beat McCain. She’s a winner, not a whiner.

  109. 109
    ThymeZone says:

    She’s a winner, not a whiner

    Uh – chuckle – huh. Yeah, I think we can be the judge of that. Thanks anyway.

  110. 110
    Pooh says:

    10% Disagreement
    Hillary is not going to “blow shit up”, she is a Foreign Policy realist. She understands our current force structure, she understands the political bind that the Republicans have placed us into with their adventures over the past 8 years. She will not allow herself to be maneuvered into blowing shit up.

    Such a realist she still thinks she was right to be wrong about Iraq. Since she has repeatedly said that SHE would not have invaded Iraq were she in charge at the time, she didn’t vote to authorize the war (and spare me your parsing about the meaning of isAUMF is) because she thought it was the right thing to do, but as a political calculation. Ready to blow shit up to score political points from Day One.

    Remember that BHO is the one who has been explicit in his criticism of the ‘mindset’ which got us into Iraq, whereas HRC is only too happy to fall back on the wonderfully non-falsifiable “incompetence dodge”.

    Coattails
    I think both Hillary and Obama can easily win the General Election with sufficient coattails to ensure a bluer Congress. I think Obama may have a more higher coattail count, but then again I don’t know that.

    Well considering that he has specifically run an inclusive campaign and she is all about 50+1, and that purple state types with elections coming up seem to be firmly in his camp, I’m going to go with his coattails being significantly longer.

  111. 111
    Notorious P.A.T. says:

    But when you do, don’t whine and cry about “kneecapping” because your pony can’t take a punch.

    “Waah! Waah! Why do I always get asked the first question and not Barack? Waah!”

  112. 112
    Adam says:

    Kool-aid really kills brains cells doesn’t it?

    Y’all want to bash Hillary, go ahead. I’m not saying that bashing per se is wrong. Politics ain’t beanbag.

    But when you do, don’t whine and cry about “kneecapping” because your pony can’t take a punch.

    As my grandma would say “Don’t dish it out if you can’t take it.”

    What the fuck do you call coming in a thread whining about the four anti-Clinton posts today? Cry more.

  113. 113
    Martin says:

    Saddest part of this entire nomination is watching the Obama supporters embrace Rovian tactics and talking points.

    I call shenanigans on anyone using Rove to tar the other side. We need a new Godwin’s law just for Rove.

    It would appear that any time anyone says anything remotely critical of a candidate, they are ‘Rovian’. It’s lost all meaning.

    And calling out ‘supporters’ is a total cop-out. Supporters don’t mean shit. We can pull up hillaryis44 or taylormarsh and double down on anything you can come up with. You want to guess how many ‘nigger’ comments about Obama I can find in the next hour? I’m pretty sure I can cover 100 with no problem – hell, I bet I can find 100 from 100 different domains in an hour. Let’s keep it to the candidates and the people that are officially attached to the campaigns.

  114. 114
    myiq2xu says:

    I’m actually interested to see what positive case myiq can make for Clinton.

    No you’re not.

    I’m guessing that you’re a Niner fan. Call it a hunch.

    I’m not surprised that you’re a MUPpet too.

    I’m a Raiders fan. For years, win or lose, they have had the reputation of being the dirtiest team in football and are usually the most penalized. Kinda like the Clintons.

    The Niners’ rep during their glory years was that they were a “finesse” team. Very few penalties, lots of points. Kinda like you-know-who.

    But back during those Niner glory years they polled the NFL players to find out which team they thought was the dirtiest.

    The Niners were picked in a landmudslide.

    I quit trying to be substantive months ago. All I got is Turdblossom’s favorite memes in return. Very disturbing coming from alleged liberals and progressives.

    I knew I recognized the stench of right-wing meme, I just didn’t realize it was coming direct from Karl’s face sphincter.

  115. 115
    Notorious P.A.T. says:

    Saddest part of this entire nomination is watching the Obama supporters embrace Rovian tactics and talking points.

    L
    O
    L

    By “rovian tactics” do you mean a fear-mongering red phone TV ad? Gosh, you’re right, why did Obama run that ad?

  116. 116
    Adam says:

    She’s a winner, not a whiner.Then urge the unpledged delegates to vote for HRC – she will beat McCain. She’s a winner, not a whiner.

    Being a winner would be winning more delegates than your opponent. Asking for delegates because you’re losing is… whining.

  117. 117
    Notorious P.A.T. says:

    Hillary is a Foreign Policy realist.

    “Hmm, should I give our brain-damaged dry-drunk borderline-sociopath former-oilman president (who stole the election but now claims to care about freedom and democracy) the power to invade an oil-rich country? Yes, great idea!”

  118. 118
    slippy hussein toad says:

    ThymeZone Says:

    “Never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.”

    As I thought, you still have nothing. Zilch.

    Just wisecracks and armpit farts.

    What a fucking wanker.

    This is about what I expect from someone whose userid proclaims that they’re smarter than everyone else.

    A massive superiority complex usually gets put into place to mask . . . insecurity.

  119. 119
    myiq2xu says:

    And calling out ‘supporters’ is a total cop-out. Supporters don’t mean shit. We can pull up hillaryis44 or taylormarsh and double down on anything you can come up with. You want to guess how many ‘nigger’ comments about Obama I can find in the next hour?

    Find some Hillary supporters saying that here, then we’ll talk.

    I could nutpick at one of the kool-aid sites if I wanted to, but I don’t.

  120. 120
    Ninerdave says:

    No you’re not.

    Yeah actually I am.

    — irrelevant sports crap snipped out —

  121. 121
    Notorious P.A.T. says:

    So if he has better policies and character we should reject him because people like him?

    No kidding. It’s about time for Clinton’s camp to update their talking points. Most of the people slamming her here are, like me, latecomers to Obama’s side and are angry with Clinton for trying to sink the party if she doesn’t get her way. Talking about “Obama kool aid” is a lack of acknowledging reality.

  122. 122
    myiq2xu says:

    This is about what I expect from someone whose userid proclaims that they’re smarter than everyone else.

    Your userid proclaims you to be . . . what exactly?

  123. 123
    Adam says:

    F,

    As an aside: people are ripping on you; don’t let it get to you. I imagine that they’re mostly annoyed that myiq has finally gone over the edge into complete trollism — I disagree with your position on Clinton v. Obama, but I don’t think it’s disingenuous. :)

  124. 124
    Adam says:

    F,

    That said, your “letter” to John on the other thread is kinda silly. John was mocking Obama with the best of ’em until it just got too absurd. The comparison to Sully doesn’t wash — let up on the throttle a bit.

  125. 125
    tBone says:

    The vast majority of the post from most everyone else has been an attack on Hillary and unfortunately most of those have been of the personal nature.

    Sorry, but this is bullshit. Yes, Hillary gets her fair share of personal attacks here, but the vast majority of the criticism she receives is because of her campaign tactics. I’ve seen dozens of posts that began with some variation of “I would have happily voted for either Obama or Hillary, but then the primaries began . . .” Her campaign has earned most (not all) of the barbs flying their way.

    She will not allow herself to be maneuvered into blowing shit up.

    I’m curious – how do you square this statement with her votes on AUMF and Kyl-Lieberman?

    Rarely Posts says:
    Saddest part of this entire nomination is watching the Obama supporters embrace Rovian tactics and talking points.

    This is quite possibly the dumbest fucking thing I’ve seen posted here for at least two weeks. Congratulations.

  126. 126
    BH Buck says:

    Let’s get this straight…

    Certain people come here, a site they clearly know leans towards Obama, posts more comments than your average Balloon-Juice visitor, COMPLAINS ABOUT THE FRIGGIN’ INJUSTICE OF IT ALL, and has the nerve to call others “whiners”.

    Yep. Real smart.

  127. 127
    Liberal Masochist says:

    myfootballiqiszero just admitted to being a Raiders fan. That pretty much says it all. They are just about the worst run franchise in the NFL and she loves the Clinton campaign! We get it now. Usually sports analogies are idiotic, but your crappy attempt at one reveals much about you.

  128. 128
    tBone says:

    I could nutpick at one of the kool-aid sites if I wanted to, but I don’t.

    O rlly? As I recall, you tried that a few weeks ago and the best you could come up with was some random usenet post.

  129. 129
    myiq2xu says:

    Liberal Masochist Says:

    I am a fair-weather fan. I only support teams that are currently winning. Loyalty is stupid.

    You reveal yourself, and it isn’t pretty.

  130. 130
    Ninerdave says:

    Well myiq? Waiting. F laid out why he supports Hillary in positive terms. I’m interested to see why you do too.

  131. 131
    Will says:

    I just got here. Is this the Name Calling blog? Must be. Or is it the Ignore the Media Smear Campaign Against the Clintons blog? Maybe it’s the Let’s Be Hypnotized by Obama’s Deep Voice and Sing Song Rhetoric and Forget About Trying to Understand the Issues blog. No. It’s the Throw Disgusting Insults at the Democratic Party’s Greatest Policy Experts blog.
    Excuse me. I was looking for educated discourse.

  132. 132
    Liberal Masochist says:

    Ninerdave – it will never happen. You’ve lost her.

    Gotta hop everyone, got some Chelsea highlights to watch after I catch up on the latest Yankees spring training developments, but not before I read up on the latest news regarding UNC’s march to the NCAA championship…

  133. 133
    Liberal Masochist says:

    Wait – I mean Red Sox!

  134. 134
    Nash says:

    John, how many times do you have to be proven wrong to get the point that you overreact to, well, everything?

    So, things are so screwed up Democratic Party-wise that they have zero chance of taking the White House, right? How about putting your money where your mouth is, or are you just being a drama queen again?

    Said with respect. But your schtick does get tiresome, no matter which dog you claim you’ve got in the fight.

  135. 135
    John Cole says:

    John, how many times do you have to be proven wrong to get the point that you overreact to, well, everything?

    So, things are so screwed up Democratic Party-wise that they have zero chance of taking the White House, right? How about putting your money where your mouth is, or are you just being a drama queen again?

    Said with respect. But your schtick does get tiresome, no matter which dog you claim you’ve got in the fight.

    Why are your comments going into moderation? Did you get a new computer or something?

    I don’t think I am over-reacting. This is a train wreck and going to get worse.

  136. 136
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    Excuse me. I was looking for educated discourse.

    Then why didn’t you provide some?

  137. 137
    tBone says:

    Excuse me. I was looking for educated discourse.

    Hillaryis44.org is that way >>

    Don’t let us keep you.

  138. 138
    demimondian says:

    Excuse me. I was looking for educated discourse.

    Will, welcome. This is the Balloon Juice comments section, the Rumpus Room of the internet, where the jet set of the internet set get set to bet on net net debt we’ll regret when the sun’s set.

  139. 139
    demimondian says:

    Top that, Steak.

  140. 140
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    “Hmm, should I give our brain-damaged dry-drunk borderline-sociopath former-oilman president (who stole the election but now claims to care about freedom and democracy) the power to invade an oil-rich country? Yes, great idea!”

    Here, here! Paraphrasing my comment on an earlier thread: it was like being sold an ’82 Yugo by a mollusk.

  141. 141
    The Other Steve says:

    Latest polls show Hillary took the hit for Wrightgate.

    Her approval rating is now only 37%. This is an overall electorate approval.

    Amongst Obama supporters, Clinton’s approval is 35%, with 43% having a negative view.

    While amongst Clinton supporters, Obama approval is 50%, with only 29% having a negative view.

    I’d say this train wreck is over. The DNC will probably give Hillary until Pennsylvania, and if she doesn’t win by more than 20 points the super delegates are going to unite behind Obama and end this thing.

    There’s been some other articles about super delegates noting Clinton’s attacks on Obama… The new connection between Clinton’s and American Spectator/Richard Mellon-Scaife was the end of this campaign.

    This is done.

  142. 142
    AkaDad says:

    I just got here. Is this the Name Calling blog? Must be. Or is it the Ignore the Media Smear Campaign Against the Clintons blog? Maybe it’s the Let’s Be Hypnotized by Obama’s Deep Voice and Sing Song Rhetoric and Forget About Trying to Understand the Issues blog. No. It’s the Throw Disgusting Insults at the Democratic Party’s Greatest Policy Experts blog.
    Excuse me. I was looking for educated discourse.

    Actually, this is the We Mock People Like You blog.

  143. 143
    Xenos says:

    I quit trying to be substantive months ago. All I got is Turdblossom’s favorite memes in return. Very disturbing coming from alleged liberals and progressives.

    Bull.

    Months? Since when is six weeks ‘months’? The tipping point was not until after super Tuesday… I think the key point when I felt free to ridicule Clinton was when she backtracked about Texas once she realized she could not win the delegates there. That is the point people here felt free to ridicule the “This is excellent news!! For Hillary!!” crowd, including you, Myiq@#$@$.

    Now it is just so much sour pissing from the Hillbots. At least Rove does not whine about things, just tries to change reality. The fact that Rove gets away with it is the crime.

  144. 144
    demimondian says:

    it was like being sold an ‘82 Yugo by a mollusk.

    Um…is that supposed to be a bad thing?

    You see…well…last week? This clam…well…yeah…and he was so…cute…and so…desperate…and…I just didn’t have the heart to say no…and it was such a good deal…

  145. 145
    Krista says:

    I’m embarassed for you, demi. But I still like you.

  146. 146
    Xenos says:

    Wait. Stop. Reverse that.

  147. 147
    Krista says:

    That last comment was in regards to the rhyming bit, not the clam bit. Now if you could get a rhyming clam bit going, I might be impressed.

  148. 148
    Notorious P.A.T. says:

    Maybe it’s the Let’s Be Hypnotized by Obama’s Deep Voice and Sing Song Rhetoric and Forget About Trying to Understand the Issues blog.

    Duh, you got me there! I is only likes Obama becuz he talk good! Me not know ’bout dem issues! Was vote to invade Irak good idea? Me dont no.

  149. 149
    demimondian says:

    I’m embarassed for you, demi.

    Why? Because I bought a vintage yard ornament for $100, or because MyIq1/2amoeba wanted me to judge a web beauty contest?

  150. 150
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    That last comment was in regards to the rhyming bit, not the clam bit. Now if you could get a rhyming clam bit going, I might be impressed.

    I hold you personally responsible for whatever follows on this.

  151. 151
    empty says:

    Pardon me, but I can’t abide by that kind of bullshit. Give me the idealism. At least I understand idealism.

    TZ I know the demands of your persona are paramount but really, you don’t always have to be a complete tool. When you quote someone quote the whole damn sentence.

  152. 152
    Splitting Image says:

    myiq2xu: “Now you’re speaking Rove’s words:”

    Rarely Posts: “Saddest part of this entire nomination is watching the Obama supporters embrace Rovian tactics and talking points.”

    If I needed another reason to prefer Obama to Clinton, this would be it. Do either of you mind telling me exactly what you would classify as “Rovian”?

    Are you referring to some of the Republican strategies for winning elections that you disapprove of? Or just the dittoheads’ tendency to froth at the mouth at the name “Clinton”?

    The Republicans have had both good and bad elements to their electoral strategy over the years. For one thing, they consistently took a much larger number of small donations from a much larger base of people than the Democrats did, countering the idea that the Democrats were there for the “little people”. Obama has neatly pinched that idea from them, but I’d hardly call that “Rovian”. He has also carefully referred to the Democratic coalition as the “new majority”, which is necessary to ensure that the party’s policies, and not the Republicans’ are seen to be from “grassroots America”. Both candidates ought to be doing that.

    Was it reaching out to Republicans? At the start of the campaign the assumption was that a large number of Republicans were disenchanted with the way their party was going and the biggest issue was which Democrat could bring the most of them into the fold. Obama has consistently stressed that Republicans who have turned to him have done so because they have rejected the Bush/Cheney model of government.

    This changed when Clinton ran her “3 AM” ad which more or less said that the Bush/Cheney model of government is the only correct one. McCain gets it, she gets it, and Obama doesn’t get it. Since then, the assumption that the vast majority of people want a change from Bush/Cheney has been called into question and the Clinton campaign is arguing that Republicans are more likely to vote for a candidate who mirrors McCain, rather than one who contrasts with him.

    Again, how is the Obama campaign “Rovian”? Clinton has changed the narrative to read that the majority of the country would naturally line up behind McCain if the Democrats failed to nominate a supernaturally strong candidate to defeat him. Just a few weeks previously, the Republican field was considered so weak that people openly talked about the Republicans throwing the election.

    Since running that ad, Clinton has started receiving more and more venomous criticism from Obama supporters and the same disgruntled Republicans who were considering crossing the floor for him. Rovian? Clinton went directly for Obama’s main strength – his crossover appeal – and made it a negative, in spite of the fact that it is an undeniable positive for the party to do what he has been doing.

    The Democrats can coast to an easy win in November if they keep their eye on one thing: the Iraq war. The war was wrong on every level. The Republican candidate supports it and the Democratic candidate doesn’t have to. How hard is this for the party to understand?

    Instead of pushing the narrative that will win the election for the party, Clinton resorted to a 9/11 ad exactly like one the Republicans would have run, and pushed herself as the Democratic Rudy Giuliani. And make no mistake about it: that’s what the 3 AM phone call business was about. The fact that it got examined for racial subtext and other trivia simply shows how far that the “9/11” story has faded from the political scene.

    So that is where we are now. According to the Republicans, we can vote for McCain or we’ll all die. According to Clinton, McCain is a fine person and normally if you voted for a Democrat, we’d all die, but she is no ordinary Democrat. And according to Obama, we should be giving all this a rest, and Clinton shouldn’t be obfuscating the Democrats’ winning advantage.

    Unless I’m missing something, the only part that’s Rovian is the part that comes after the last comma in that paragraph, and then only because his last opponent happens to be named Clinton.

    So, please, tell me what I’m missing.

  153. 153
    F says:

    Adam,

    Thank you for the kind words.

    However, No,one here will ever get to me. I come here because I enjoy politics and I enjoy arguing about politics, even with those who can’t keep to a professional level.

    My “Open Letter” to fellow Democrats was a plea for civility and a toning down of the rhetoric aimed at one of our presidential candidates and you can see how well that was received.

    I’ll write another time of why I linked John To Sullivan and you’ll better understand my reasoning.

  154. 154
    Llelldorin says:

    In defense of Democratic infighting, it does generally lead to decent governance. Having a thousand factions constantly battling can help avoid the sort of group-think that’s gotten the Bush administration into so much trouble.

    Frankly, this year’s infighting isn’t even all that serious, by our standards. Remember four years ago, when Gephardt took out Dean by morphing him into Osama bin Laden in an ad? (Even that looked tame compared to Kennedy in ’80, as empty said above.) The only thing that’s really different this year is that–as in 1980–our factions have dug in firmly and are nearly equal in size, so nobody will be in a position to declare the infighting moot until the convention starts. Obama’s certainly the more likely candidate, but unless something changes he won’t have enough delegates to simply declare himself the presumptive nominee until Denver.

  155. 155
    ThymeZone says:

    even with those who can’t keep to a professional level.

    Say what? This is a food fight blog. Professional level?

    Fuck you.

    On another note, Bill Clinton is announcing that he is qualified to be First Lady, by virtue of having been married to one for eight years. He is ready to make the beds on Day One.

  156. 156
    The Other Steve says:

    My “Open Letter” to fellow Democrats was a plea for civility and a toning down of the rhetoric aimed at one of our presidential candidates and you can see how well that was received.

    I guess I didn’t see this letter. I’m assuming you were addressing the letter to Clinton supporters telling them to tone down the rhetoric attacking Obama?

  157. 157
    ThymeZone says:

    When you quote someone quote the whole damn sentence

    If you want me to do better with your straight lines, then give me better straight lines.

    Otherwise kiss my ass.

  158. 158
    ThymeZone says:

    Now if you could get a rhyming clam bit going

    This can’t end well.

  159. 159
    myiq2xu says:

    So, please, tell me what I’m missing.

    Facts, logic, and any chance of being taken seriously.

  160. 160
    ThymeZone says:

    you’ll better understand my reasoning.

    Okay, so “F” really does stand for Fathead?

  161. 161
    F says:

    TOS,

    No, it was a letter asking everyone to

    please limit your attacks on the Clintons to their policies or politics and not their personalities (we’ll leave that to the Republicans).

    .
    and it also asked them to

    .

    And just as importantly, when they are slandered or attacked unfairly, I want you to defend them as ardently and as passionately as the person, who is attacking them. The Clintons are part of our party leadership and defending them is what makes us a strong Democratic Party.

    .
    Of course, the same sentiments apply to Obama. You can read the entire letter here.

  162. 162
    ThymeZone says:

    Facts, logic

    I’m sorry …. what?

    Facts, logic?

    I thought these were as Kryptonite to you. Don’t go near them man, your dick will fall off.

  163. 163
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    I guess I didn’t see this letter.

    You missed little. It was the equivalent of the “Leave Britney Alone” youtube video.

    It landed F in the pie factory.

  164. 164
    John S. says:

    Facts, logic, and any chance of being taken seriously.

    Man, you have the projection schtick down pat.

    That has to be my favorite troll technique – by far. Make a solid reputation for behaving a certain way and then accuse everyone else of doing it.

    That’s what made Darrell a classic. And you’re well on your way, too.

  165. 165
    demimondian says:

    This can’t end well.

    Well, I’ve been leaving the rest of you an opportunity to taking a rhyming clam slam, Sam. C’mon, this is BJuice, where every internet clam and his dam has some damn scam to cram — wham! — into spam, to slam, a cam, along the macadam.

  166. 166
    empty says:

    Otherwise kiss my ass.

    Kinda difficult with tBone stuck to it.

  167. 167
    ThymeZone says:

    please limit your attacks on the Clintons to their policies or politics and not their personalities

    You mean, their lying-ass sociopathic scorched earth win at all costs fuck the party and everybody who doesn’t agree with them personality?

    After seven years of Bush, you don’t think those things are relevant? I do.

    Anybody with a PC and Google can write a policy statement. Anybody can claim they are going to give me healthcare … even somebody who fucked it up so bad last time that I’ve had no chance of seeing reform for 15 frigging years now thanks to them ….. I think personality is quite relevant, thanks. And most voters are quite capable of deciding what’s relevant to them and what isn’t. They don’t need spoofass bloggers to tell them what’s relevant, do they?

  168. 168
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    Well, I’ve been leaving the rest of you an opportunity to taking a rhyming clam slam, Sam. C’mon, this is BJuice, where every internet clam and his dam has some damn scam to cram—wham!—into spam, to slam, a cam, along the macadam.

    Oh, the humanity!

  169. 169
    ThymeZone says:

    Kinda difficult with tBone stuck to it.

    Take a number.

  170. 170
    demimondian says:

    Oh, the humanity!

    Blame Krista. Failing that, blame the meds.

    Just don’t blame me. It’s not my fault, honest.

  171. 171
    myiq2xu says:

    I thought these were as Kryptonite to you. Don’t go near them man

    I should be safe here

  172. 172
    AkaDad says:

    Have the Republicans purchased bosniansnipersfortruth.com yet?

  173. 173
    myiq2xu says:

    Kinda difficult with tBone stuck to it.

    I believe that should be “in,” not “on.”

  174. 174
    demimondian says:

    Have the Republicans purchased bosniansnipersfortruth.com yet?

    No, but the WHOIS record for bosniansnipehuntersfortruth.com lists MYIQISAMOEBAS as its POC

  175. 175
    ThymeZone says:

    I should be safe here

    Badabing!

    The Henny Youngman of politics, ladies and gentlemen.

  176. 176
    Zuzu says:

    A tidbit may be a harbinger of good things to come:

    A commenter at another site, whose posts I’ve been reading since the Florida recount days, a die-hard Republican who was willing to perform all the mental gymnastics necessary to defend GWB all these years, push the Slow Boat agenda for all it was worth, rant about liberal judges, etc. etc. ….

    has nothing but good to say about Obama, thinks the Wright flap is partisan nonsense, and plans to cast his first-ever vote for a Democrat in November.

  177. 177
    F says:

    ThymeZone Says:

    you’ll better understand my reasoning.

    Okay, so “F” really does stand for Fathead?

    .
    ThymeZone,

    Thank you, you’ve just given me the incentive me to do something I’ve been thinking of doing for awhile. (no, I’m not coming out the closet)

    Everyone my screen name has now changed, I will no longer go by “F”, my new screen name is now “Loviatar”.

    So, I don’t get accused of sock puppetry I will remind everyone of this for the next few months.

  178. 178
    myiq2xu says:

    Oh, the humanity

    Would you like green legs and clam? Would You like them, Spam I am?

  179. 179
    myiq2xu says:

    So, I don’t get accused of sock puppetry I will remind everyone of this for the next few months.

    We won’t let the truth stop us from accusing you of stuff.

  180. 180
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    One of the most disillusioning things about this campaign was finding out that Al Gore got a free ride while Hillary helped Bill run the country.

  181. 181
    Zuzu says:

    A tidbit that may be a harbinger of good things to come.

  182. 182
    ThymeZone says:

    Thank you, you’ve just given me the incentive me to do something I’ve been thinking of doing for awhile.

    Having an original thought? Okay, good luck, we are pulling for you!

    So to speak.

    Really, the one-letter handle is an outstanding idea. Did you consider just using one punctuation mark?

    It’s like picking out your Monopoly piece, isn’t it?

    I always liked the race car. Or the hat. And the thimble.

  183. 183
    myiq2xu says:

    A commenter at another site, whose posts I’ve been reading since the Florida recount days, a die-hard Republican who was willing to perform all the mental gymnastics necessary to defend GWB all these years, push the Slow Boat agenda for all it was worth, rant about liberal judges, etc. etc. ….

    has nothing but good to say about Obama, thinks the Wright flap is partisan nonsense, and plans to cast his first-ever vote for a Democrat in November.

    Richard Mellon Scaife?

  184. 184
    scrutinizer says:

    Anybody with a PC and Google can write a policy statement. Anybody can claim they are going to give me healthcare … even somebody who fucked it up so bad last time that I’ve had no chance of seeing reform for 15 frigging years now thanks to them ….. I think personality is quite relevant, thanks. And most voters are quite capable of deciding what’s relevant to them and what isn’t. They don’t need spoofass bloggers to tell them what’s relevant, do they?

    Misogynist.

  185. 185
    Sasha says:

    Bottom line I think Obama has an idealistic group of people around him who feel that America’s military might should be used for setting right the wrongs of the world and that scares me. I know – I am a fraidy cat.

    The “right the wrongs of the world” idea is part of the neocon/Bush reasoning for invading Iraq. MUP has always struck me as the anti-Bush that way. His comment of “not opposed to wars but to dumb wars” shows much more consideration and restraint than Clinton’s out-hawk-the-hawks positions she frequently takes to prove she’s not weak on defense.

  186. 186
    myiq2xu says:

    One of the most disillusioning things about this campaign was finding out that Al Gore got a free ride while Hillary helped Bill run the country.

    That’s nothing. G-Dub has gotten a free ride while Karl Rove helped Cheney run the country.

  187. 187
    Zuzu says:

    Richard Mellon Scaife?

    Well, haven’t heard him pushing Obama lately, but ….

    interesting Clinton connection, isn’t it? I read that Bill started making nice to him for his Africa AIDS initiative, and , well, I dunno.

  188. 188
    ThymeZone says:

    I will remind everyone of this for the next few months.

    Oh lord. The fun never stops.

  189. 189
    ~ says:

    Did you consider just using one punctuation mark?

    You got a problem with me?

  190. 190
    ThymeZone says:

    G-Dub has gotten a free ride while Karl Rove

    Yeah but at least Rove has the good grace not to claim that he is qualified to be president by virtue of kissing a president’s ass and holding his chair for eight years.

  191. 191
    ThymeZone says:

    Aw hell, I’m sorry myiq, I probably burst your bubble .. you thought Rove was qualified, didn’t you?

    My bad.

  192. 192
    Asti says:

    interesting Clinton connection, isn’t it? I read that Bill started making nice to him for his Africa AIDS initiative, and , well, I dunno.

    I think Bill’s friend GHWB (41) introduced them. Bill likes those rightwingers these days… probably always did, perhaps that’s why he fell in love with a Goldwater Girl?

  193. 193
    empty says:

    MUP has always struck me as the anti-Bush that way.

    You might wish to read some of the writings of Power, Lake, and Rice. Again, they are decent people. They want to do things like stopping the misery of the people in Darfur. Very commendable. But they want to use America’s military might to do it, with or without UN approval. I always thought there was a significant portion of the neocons that were sincere. They just had an inflated view of themselves and an unfortunate willingness to use military force.

  194. 194
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    I think Bill’s friend GHWB (41) introduced them.

    Actually, Bush 41 told the lovable scamp that one of Scaife’s young interns wore dentures.

  195. 195
    Asti says:

    Rarely Posts says:
    Saddest part of this entire nomination is watching the Obama supporters embrace Rovian tactics and talking points.

    “Rarely Posts” posts so unrarely that I’ve taken to interpreting everything he says in that light.

  196. 196
    Asti says:

    Actually, Bush 41 told the lovable scamp that one of Scaife’s young interns wore dentures.

    What’s wrong with dentures? You never had a gummy hummer before?

  197. 197
    Asti says:

    I would like to offer Hillary Clinton an apology. I realize now that her sniper attack in Bosnia was correct. It seems that the sniper was in Washington D.C. though, offering cigars to her hubby, at the time Hilly was ducking for cover (I know this because I found it on FR) ;)

  198. 198
    ThymeZone says:

    “Rarely Posts” posts so unrarely that I’ve taken to interpreting everything he says in that light.

    Funny. Smart. In other words, he won’t get it :)

  199. 199
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    I quit trying to be substantive months ago.

    Bullshit. You were pretending to be an Edwards supporter while you launched scuds at Obama.

    You’ve NEVER operated in good faith in these threads and I defy you to prove otherwise.

  200. 200
    ThymeZone says:

    You got a problem with me?

    !

  201. 201
    tBone says:

    Kinda difficult with tBone stuck to it.

    What the fuck? I haven’t posted anything in this thread related to either of you, so how did I get in the middle of this slapfight?

    I believe that should be “in,” not “on.”

    See, you’re the reason what’s-his-name upthread was unimpressed by the level of discourse here. Oh, and fuck off.

    Well, I’ve been leaving the rest of you an opportunity to taking a rhyming clam slam, Sam. C’mon, this is BJuice, where every internet clam and his dam has some damn scam to cram—wham!—into spam, to slam, a cam, along the macadam.

    I hope all of you assholes are happy. Look at what your constant fighting has done to Demi. Just look!

  202. 202
    Ninerdave says:

    Bottom line I think Obama has an idealistic group of people around him who feel that America’s military might should be used for setting right the wrongs of the world and that scares me. I know – I am a fraidy cat.

    Wow. I’d like to see what left you with that impression.

  203. 203
    ThymeZone says:

    ~

    Tilde end of time?

  204. 204
    Ninerdave says:

    Still waiting for you Myiq.

  205. 205
    ThymeZone says:

    I would like to offer Hillary Clinton an apology.

    According to NPR today, she states that she utters “a million words a day” and can’t help making some mistakes.

    A wag at NPR pointed out that if she talked as fast as the fastest auctioneers in the world, it would take her 42 hours to utter a million words.

    So, I dunno what to believe at this point.

  206. 206
    Asti says:

    Tilde end of time?

    Yes!

  207. 207
    Ninerdave says:

    According to NPR today, she states that she utters “a million words a day” and can’t help making some mistakes.

    So when she lied misspoke was the her monkeys, typewriters and shakespeare moment?

  208. 208
    Asti says:

    According to NPR today, she states that she utters “a million words a day” and can’t help making some mistakes.

    A wag at NPR pointed out that if she talked as fast as the fastest auctioneers in the world, it would take her 42 hours to utter a million words.

    So, I dunno what to believe at this point.

    Hey, I’m not offering her carte blanche to lie her fool head off, I’m just saying, I really do realize now that she really WAS under attack (by Monica Lewinski).

  209. 209
    ThymeZone says:

    Yes!

    Ty 426 times.

    Now, that fellow has certainly, um, made his mark here.

  210. 210
    ThymeZone says:

    Hey, I’m not offering her carte blanche to lie her fool head off, I’m just saying, I really do realize now that she really WAS under attack (by Monica Lewinski).

    That Tuzla thing was while Monica was in the White House?

  211. 211
    Ninerdave says:

    Now, that fellow has certainly, um, made his mark here.

    Me thinks you need to join the “Demi Balloon Juice Poetry Slam”™

  212. 212
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    According to NPR today, she states that she utters “a million words a day” and can’t help making some mistakes.

    Thank goodness we can rest assured that she’ll never make any on that 3AM phone call.

    “I would like to extend my deepest apologies to the remaining people of Ireland. The name of your country is so much like ‘Iran.’ Besides, I utter a million words a day and sometimes I make mistakes.”

  213. 213
    freddy says:

    I’m thinking Hillary gets her sun-shiny day in PA, and she starts to feeling like Wile E. Coyote does when he’s just about to catch up with Roadrunner…

    And then Barry drops the 2 ton Acme Gore/Edwards endorsement on her going into NC.

    Game Over.

  214. 214
    ThymeZone says:

    Me thinks you need to join the “Demi Balloon Juice Poetry Slam”™

    Demi hasn’t liked me for a long time. Despite the overtures I have made to his Milky-Way sized ego.

  215. 215
    Calouste says:

    But the GOP is having the same fight, just more quietly. The religious right are being shut out of this election and the consequences of that to them are not yet known. Personally, I think Obama will pick up a lot more of this vote than people want to recognize. The bulk of the religious right has moved quite a lot and Obama is an attractive candidate.

    And Huckabee came out with a fairly measured response to the Wright controversy, basically along the lines of “I don’t agree with him [Wright], but with the way blacks were treated when he was young, I can see where he is coming from”. That must have had some impact on Huckabee’s southern following. Has the Huckster officially endorsed McCain yet?

  216. 216
    Asti says:

    Apparently, if you believe FR ;)

  217. 217
    ThymeZone says:

    Bill likes those rightwingers these days… probably always did, perhaps that’s why he fell in love with a Goldwater Girl?

    I think Bill likes anybody he thinks he needs at the moment. I wonder if he just likes the food at the White House?

  218. 218
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    I wonder if he just likes the food at the White House?

    We know that he likes the cigars.

  219. 219
    Asti says:

    I’m thinking Hillary gets her sun-shiny day in PA, and she starts to feeling like Wile E. Coyote does when he’s just about to catch up with Roadrunner…

    And then Barry drops the 2 ton Acme Gore/Edwards endorsement on her going into NC.

    I hear Wile E. Coyote likes explosives too!

  220. 220
    ThymeZone says:

    I was looking at FR, Asti, but I can never find anything over there. Who does their presentation …. Michael Brown?

  221. 221
    Asti says:

    I wonder if he just likes the food at the White House?

    You really do think of food 24/7, don’t you? It’s a good thing you can’t get fat.

  222. 222
    Asti says:

    I don’t think I should share the link here, but it was a thread they had up yesterday.

  223. 223
    empty says:

    Wow. I’d like to see what left you with that impression.

    Power, I have followed since her book on genocide (A Problem from Hell) in which she clearly expresses her deeply felt outrage over international indifference to suffering around the world and often proposes a muscular intervention. Unfortunately, I don’t have the book with me so I searched for interviews she gave during her book tour and I think I can give you a taste. Here, she talks about the Israeli- Palestinian problem:

    … it would probably take, also, to support what will have to be a mammoth protection force, not of the old Rwanda kind, but a meaningful military presence. Because it seems to me at this stage (and this is true of actual genocides as well, and not just major human rights abuses, which were seen there), you have to go in as if you’re serious, you have to put something on the line.

    Unfortunately, imposition of a solution on unwilling parties is dreadful. It’s a terrible thing to do, it’s fundamentally undemocratic. But, sadly, we don’t just have a democracy here either, we have a liberal democracy. There are certain sets of principles that guide our policy, or that are meant to, anyway. It’s essential that some set of principles becomes the benchmark, rather than a deference to [leaders] who are fundamentally politically destined to destroy the lives of their own people. And by that I mean what Tom Freidman has called “Sharafat.” I do think in that sense, both political leaders have been dreadfully irresponsible. And, unfortunately, it does require external intervention, which, very much like the Rwanda scenario, that thought experiment, if we had intervened early…. Any intervention is going to come under fierce criticism. But we have to think about lesser evils, especially when the human stakes are becoming ever more pronounced.

    I don’t think she is a bad person. When I was younger she would have been someone I would look to as a role model. But I am older now and I have seen war and it scares me.

    It is easier to point you to writings of Rice and Lake. They co-wrote an editorial in the Post about a here ago. Here is the link. You can see what I mean both about their sincerity and their willingness to use military force to solve humanitarian problems.

  224. 224
    ThymeZone says:

    You really do think of food 24/7, don’t you?

    I think of other things 426 times a day, but I do slip a food thought in there every three hours or so.

  225. 225
    ThymeZone says:

    The Clinton administration has failed to take appropriate action in several key situations, including: the militarization of the Rwandan refugee camps in eastern Zaire (now Congo) beginning in late 1994; the defiant
    military regime in Nigeria, symbolized by its execution of Ken Saro-Wiwa and the other Ogoni activists in November 1995 and the sham transition to democracy; and Congo, where the new government of Laurent Kabila cracked down on civil society and undermined the U.N. investigation into massacres of Rwandan refugees. Although none of these situations lent themselves to easy solutions, the administration missed important opportunities to integrate the protection of human rights and the rule of law into its policy, and thus lost credibility.

    U.S. policy toward Nigeria is a case in point. The administration failed to adequately press the Abacha regime to respect the rights of its citizens. Once the administration was unable to stimulate multilateral sanctions on Nigeria, it retreated into a wait-and-see holding pattern. A drawn-out policy review has apparently been underway for many months, but no conclusion has been announced. There are indications that the administration may be softening its policy toward Nigeria, perhaps in the hopes of gaining better cooperation in the areas of drug enforcement and aviation safety. The paralysis of U.S. policy toward Nigeria is due in part to the administration’s tendency to bow to the interests of U.S. oil companies.

    The administration has taken a selective approach to human rights, turning a blind eye to abuses in countries considered to be strategically or economically important. Ethiopia, the second largest recipient of U.S. aid in sub-Saharan Africa, continued to be largely immune from U.S. criticism, despite its routine denials of freedom of expression and association. Kabila’s’s Congo provides another example of the administration’s reticence to clearly and publicly articulate its human rights concerns for fear of antagonizing the government.

    I love it when the Clintons talk all self-justifyingly about “their” presidency. As if we lived in a bubble.

  226. 226
    ThymeZone says:

    So … what did we say to scare off mylowiq?

    Was it the Kryptonite thing?

  227. 227
    ThatLeftTurnInABQ says:

    F says,

    Also, either Hillary is an old Washington DC insider who has group of DLC hands all ready to drive this Party and country into the ditch or she is vastly inexperienced and has no idea of what she is doing.

    It can’t be both, so please choose one and stay consistent.

    F,

    The logical fallacy in your argument is easy to spot. You assume that old DLC hands have actual experience at doing something, anything, other than driving this Party and country into the ditch.

    The evidence to support this assumption is what again, exactly?

    DOMA?

    Losing ground to the GOP at every level during Bill Clinton’s 2 terms?

    Egging Allan Greenspan on and repealing the last shreds of Glass-Steagall?

    Caving in to Bush on AUMF?

    Doing it again on Kyl-Lieberman?

    Caving in on torture?

    Caving in on FISA?

    Caving in on Mukasey?

    The DLC is so f**king good at caving we should rename them the Democratic Spelunking Council.

    So yes, it is in fact possible to be an experienced DLC insider and also to simultaneously have no idea what one is doing, to be vastly inexperienced at doing anything that is of any benefit to the nation or the party, and be basically of no f**king use to anyone, except of course the GOP and George W. Bush, for whom the DLC is the gift that keeps on giving.

    A fair number of people here might even agree with me in asserting that these qualities tend to be strongly correlated with one another with a large positive coefficient.

    That really is the whole point of this particular election actually, but it seems to have passed you by.

  228. 228
    Asti says:

    I think of other things 426 times a day, but I do slip a food thought in there every three hours or so.

    The average man supposedly thinks of sex every fifteen minutes, does this mean you think of that more often too? Just curious. ;)

  229. 229
    ThymeZone says:

    The average man supposedly thinks of sex every fifteen minutes, does this mean you think of that more often too? Just curious.

    Are we sure it isn’t “for fourteen minutes at a time, every fifteen minutes?”

  230. 230
    Asti says:

    Are we sure it isn’t “for fourteen minutes at a time, every fifteen minutes?”

    You never did get your gruel, did you?

  231. 231
    Jimmm says:

    myiq1/2xu:

    1968, 1972, 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988, 1992, 2000, and 2004 were all contested Democratic nomination fights. This one is just closer than usual.

    And the Democratic party won, wait, let me get my calculator … exactly ONE of those general elections. Not that there’s a pattern here.

  232. 232
    Asti says:

    The DLC is so f**king good at caving we should rename them the Democratic Spelunking Council.

    That’s a good line, may I please steal it? ;)

  233. 233
    ThymeZone says:

    You never did get your gruel, did you?

    I just realized, thinking about that, that I have no idea what gruel actually is.

    So I am looking it up.

    Gruel is a type of preparation consisting of some type of cereal boiled in water or milk

    Okay, it’s oatmeal or grits.

  234. 234
    Jimmm says:

    Wait, make that two: 1976.

  235. 235
    Jimmm says:

    Wait, make that two: 1976 and 1992.

  236. 236
    ThymeZone says:

    Correlation is not causation.

    I just thought that up.

  237. 237
    Killjoy says:

    I knew I recognized the stench of right-wing meme, I just didn’t realize it was coming direct from Karl’s face sphincter.

    Hilarious. Bill goes on Rush Limbaugh’s show, and Hillary hobnobs with Rupert Murdoch, schmoozes with Richard Mellon Scaife, and passes around trash from the American Spectator, and you’re going on about imagined right-wing “memes” from the Obama camp?

  238. 238
    Asti says:

    It has come to my attention, with some help from TZ, that, Hillary really doesn’t belong in the White House. She remembers being under attack in Bosnia, because at the same time she was in Bosnia, Monica Lewinsky was doing the nasty with her hubby. Friends, we have to put a stop this this, Hillary needs intervention. If she returns to the White House, she’s going to need serious therapy to face those walls again. We cannot allow a scorned woman to run the country from the same office where that event occured. That’s just wrong in so many ways.

  239. 239
    MNPundit says:

    Look at it this way, in any other year with anyone else, Clinton would have crushed them in January and be the nominee “wright” now. This is the first time an insurgent candidate is actually winning…

    …now are you surprised that there was/is so much anger on the lefty blog side? We have to deal with the GOP and we have to do it while keeping our own idiots in line.

  240. 240
    TenguPhule says:

    Are we sure it isn’t “for fourteen minutes at a time, every fifteen minutes?”

    That is correct. And the fifteenth minute is when they’re in the middle of sex, which is when they think about baseball.

  241. 241
    Just Some Fuckhead says:

    War Journals made it to the front page on Dkos, Tbone. Hooboy. JC, you shoulda already had it on the front page. Tsk tsk.

  242. 242
    Asti says:

    Hilarious. Bill goes on Rush Limbaugh’s show, and Hillary hobnobs with Rupert Murdoch, schmoozes with Richard Mellon Scaife, and passes around trash from the American Spectator, and you’re going on about imagined right-wing “memes” from the Obama camp?

    Excuse me, but if you look behind you, you’ll see you knocked over that sign, it says “Please don’t feed the trolls”.

  243. 243
    ThymeZone says:

    We cannot allow a scorned woman to run the country from the same office where that event occured. That’s just wrong in so many ways.

    Seriously, that is a little disturbing. Why, when you get right down to it, do they want to go back there?

    Are they acting out some kind of cathartic thing at our expense? I mean, it’s their business … until they use our presidency to act it out.

  244. 244
    Asti says:

    Seriously, that is a little disturbing. Why, when you get right down to it, do they want to go back there?

    Are they acting out some kind of cathartic thing at our expense? I mean, it’s their business … until they use our presidency to act it out.

    Perhaps that’s why Bill is doing so much to sabotage her chances? He had to have thought about that “it’s my office now, Buster” moment! ;)

  245. 245
    John Cole says:

    War Journals made it to the front page on Dkos, Tbone. Hooboy. JC, you shoulda already had it on the front page. Tsk tsk.

    I sent him the link.

  246. 246
    ThymeZone says:

    That could be, although every time I see him talking now I can’t help the feeling that he thinks he is running for reelection.

  247. 247
    Asti says:

    That could be, although every time I see him talking now I can’t help the feeling that he thinks he is running for reelection.

    Well, his message was much better when I voted for him. Yeah, I can see that HE thinks he’s running, but with the trash coming out of his mouth these days, I don’t think he stands a chance.

    And, if he DOES get back in the White House, and he starts offering Hillary advice, does that somehow violate the two-term limitation?

  248. 248
    ThymeZone says:

    And, if he DOES get back in the White House, and he starts offering Hillary advice, does that somehow violate the two-term limitation?

    The idea gives me the Slick Willies.

  249. 249
    Martin says:

    You might wish to read some of the writings of Power, Lake, and Rice. Again, they are decent people. They want to do things like stopping the misery of the people in Darfur. Very commendable. But they want to use America’s military might to do it, with or without UN approval. I always thought there was a significant portion of the neocons that were sincere. They just had an inflated view of themselves and an unfortunate willingness to use military force.

    I think this is a fair enough criticism. Rice and Lake carried some of the responsibility for rearranging the deck chairs during Rwanda and have walked away from it regretful that they didn’t do more.

    But I think you should keep reading on this trio as they aren’t so easy to nail down. Yes, they would do something in Darfur, but Power has argued that military intervention wouldn’t work and would be the wrong move. So I don’t think you should assume that they’ll chuck platoons at every problem that shows up. I wouldn’t call them idealists, though. Power a bit, but not Lake or Rice.

    Its a topic I’d like to hear more about from Obama, but it’s a group that will definitely not dismiss some problem around the world as not being worthy of our attention, even if there is no place for our action.

  250. 250
    Asti says:

    It seemed so strange to me that a father and son were both president of the United States in the personages of John Adams and John Q. Then, a hundred and seventy years go by without a repeat, and then within a twenty year period we have a father and son, and a husband and wife all either serving or trying their damnedest to get into that position (Hillary is the only one who hasn’t of course) with nary a single candidate in between.

    At the rate we’re going in this nepotism thing, I wouldn’t be surprised if Bob and Libby Dole don’t have some “Run for the presidency: Bob runs first, Libby runs after” magic plan to do a repeat.

    Is this really what the presidency was supposed to be about? This is looking like a cheap imitation of monarchy.

  251. 251
    Martin says:

    Just want to make sure tbone is tripletee and that someone didn’t rip you off over at DKos.

  252. 252
    Cain says:

    John Cole Says:

    War Journals made it to the front page on Dkos, Tbone. Hooboy. JC, you shoulda already had it on the front page. Tsk tsk.

    I sent him the link.

    haha.. somebody created a movie poster for it!

    cain

  253. 253
    Ninerdave says:

    You can see what I mean both about their sincerity and their willingness to use military force to solve humanitarian problems.

    Point taken, but isn’t that what Bill did in Bosnia?

  254. 254
    Cain says:

    Point taken, but isn’t that what Bill did in Bosnia?

    He drove a hummer or maybe he got a hummer? I’m really confused now..

    cain

  255. 255
    Ninerdave says:

    So … what did we say to scare off mylowiq?

    Was it the Kryptonite thing?

    No Pooh asked a legitimate question and I pressed it. I’m thinking she needs time to ponder

  256. 256
    Ninerdave says:

    Correlation is not causation.

    I just thought that up.

    and THAT is why I read this blog. It’s this sort of stuff that helps me in my bar arguments.

  257. 257
    Ninerdave says:

    War Journals made it to the front page on Dkos, Tbone.

    Congrats tbone!

  258. 258
    Conservatively Liberal says:

    Made the front page of Kos, eh tbone? Kudos! That is a killer story…lol

  259. 259
    Cain says:

    I saw this in a quote by Alexander Hamilton which sort of summarizes Hillary against Obama:

    No character, however upright, is a match for constantly reiterated attacks,
    however false.
    — Alexander Hamilton

    cain

  260. 260

    […] Our Founding Fathers were pretty smart. As commenter Cain at Balloon Juice shows: Cain Says: I saw this in a quote by Alexander Hamilton which sort of summarizes Hillary against Obama: No character, however upright, is a match for constantly reiterated attacks, however false. —Alexander Hamilton […]

  261. 261
    Martin says:

    Looks like it just isn’t us:

    McKinnon re-re-reaffirmed his now famous commitment to step away from the McCain campaign if Obama is the nominee, though he’ll continue to be a cheerleader, support him, attend the debate prep sessions in an unofficial capacity wearing his lucky hat, etc. When asked why, he said he liked Obama, respected him and what he was capable of doing for the country while at the same time fundamentally disagreeing with him on major issues, and therefore didn’t want to be responsible for creating ads tearing him down. When I asked him if he’d be comfortable creating ads tearing down Hillary, he said, without pausing, “Absolutely. I’d do it in a minute. I’d burn my house down to do it.”

  262. 262
    slippy hussein toad says:

    When asked why, he said he liked Obama, respected him and what he was capable of doing for the country while at the same time fundamentally disagreeing with him on major issues, and therefore didn’t want to be responsible for creating ads tearing him down. When I asked him if he’d be comfortable creating ads tearing down Hillary, he said, without pausing, “Absolutely. I’d do it in a minute. I’d burn my house down to do it.”

    What this sounds like is the old political landscape, pre-Reagan, pre-Abolition of Fairness Doctrine, when political opponents could disagree without believing it necessary to completely destroy each other. Hillary is as much a product of the destructiveness of that era as Rush Limbaugh is — unable to view political contention as anything but a deathmatch.

    And I think Obama has the potential to end that. His campaign has class that Hillary can’t even see, let alone emulate.

  263. 263
    myiq2xu says:

    There has to be better than Ezra:

    Since all political commentary is powered by sports analogies, let’s take football here. The Clinton team is playing as if this will be decided on points. But in fact, it will be decided by judges, some of them empires, some of them representatives of the crowd, some of them big donors to the stadium. And those judges are terrified of pissing off their loyal fan base. The strategy here should be making the loyal fan base like you, not trying to pummel the other team.

    Uh, dude? Football games are decided on points.

    Best comment from the thread:

    Next time stick to “manly” analogies you’re more familiar with like engine repair and hunting:

    “… just like when the piston ring rubs against the muffler bearing too hard, allowing excess carbon dioxide to escape through the headlight gasket.”

    “… much as I would go out with my trusty 12-gauge double-barrel, crawl around on my stomach. I track and move and decoy and play games and try to outsmart them. You know, you kind of play the wind. That’s hunting.”

  264. 264
    myiq2xu says:

    What this sounds like is the old political landscape, pre-Reagan, pre-Abolition of Fairness Doctrine, when political opponents could disagree without believing it necessary to completely destroy each other. Hillary is as much a product of the destructiveness of that era as Rush Limbaugh is—unable to view political contention as anything but a deathmatch.

    WTF?

    Really, WTF?

    Did you just pull some pithy sounding shit from a Maureen Down column to come up with that?

    Did you name yourself after a toad that excretes hallucinigens?

  265. 265
    Krista says:

    Well, I’ve been leaving the rest of you an opportunity to taking a rhyming clam slam, Sam. C’mon, this is BJuice, where every internet clam and his dam has some damn scam to cram—wham!—into spam, to slam, a cam, along the macadam.

    I hope all of you assholes are happy. Look at what your constant fighting has done to Demi. Just look!

    Well, I don’t know about you, but I’m happy as a….well…you know.

  266. 266
    Xenos says:

    Ezra did reach a bit too far. The better comparison would be to the business of football. African Americans are a minority, but are among the most avid football fans. Thus, no second chances for Rush Limbaugh.

    Here, the Clinton machine is trying to cut off the most loyal section of the base in order to make up for their weakness with middle-class swing voters. As opposed to Obama, who has managed to win over both African Americans and swing voters. And now she is losing the swing voters to McCain due to her Bosnia fabulisms.

    Pelosi needs to put the Hillbots out of our misery. She is letting them hurt the brand. Obama, however, needs to step up and run a national movement. He can replace and out-fund the fatcats in supporting the DCCC – so he should get out and do that.

  267. 267

    The Republikan Party is run a though only one heir to the Peacock Throne were available, and all available resources must be marshaled to his (yes, HIS) potential Rule.

    The Democratic Party, on the other hand, behaves as a dandelion behaves: chaotic, self-conflicted, no rhyme or reason, but it succeeds from sheer strength of (ofttimes stupid) numbers.

    If you had been raised with a bias towards “elegance” (in the engineering sense of least means for greatest effect) then it is bewildering to suddenly immerse yourself in the chaos of Democratic politics.

    That’s what took me awhile to get usded to when I switched over in 1988 (having — as it now turns out, ACCURATELY — seen the handwriting on the wall)

    But remember this: no lawnmower ever engineered, no defoliant ever formulated, no organization of human industry and coordinated action has EVER yet defeated the humble dandelion.

    They’re good in salads, too.

    (I talked about the circular firing squad on my blog today, too. But in a more horrific sense).

  268. 268
    Xenos says:

    If you want to eat dandelions you have to pick the leaves before they flower. Otherwise they are too bitter. I am not sure where to go with that as a metaphor, but there you have it.

  269. 269
    myiq2xu says:

    What Lambert said:

    And all these Republicans, and their allies in our famously free press, and their right wing funders organized a discourse whose salient feature of discourse was the Mighty Member of Bill Clinton:

    The shape of that member, its size when erect and when not, its “distinctive markings,” and, in general, where it had been, and what it had done (as ribo has it, “what he did with it.”) There seemed hardly a Conservative pundit who, no matter where he began, could not finish but by dilating on Bill Clinton’s penis. There seemed hardly a shouting head on the teebee who did not resort the riposte “Yeah, but what about Bill Clinton’s penis?” There seemed hardly a dull-witted freeper who didn’t have the weapon of Bill Clinton’s penis in his pitifully small and Cheetohs-stained arsenal.

    The discourse of the time was voyeuristic, sanctimonious, snickering, prurient, and filled with hate—and all orchestrated by the Republican’s “Mighty Wurlitzer.” (Atrios’s original tagline, “Middle C on the Mighty Casio,” was a play on this.) Hatred for Bill Clinton. Hatred for Hillary. Hatred of Hillary for staying with Bill. Hate, hate, hate, hate.

    And it went on for years. It just never failed. For any Conservative, Bill Clinton’s penis was always the trump card, the discussion ender, the snicker-inducing punchline. This primary is child’s play by comparison. The “partisan attacks”? Love taps.

    Kids, this is nothing. Anyone who lived through the time when the Republicans impeached Clinton knows. We know raw hate when we see it. And we know raw hate for The Clintons when we see it. We know the tropes, we know the talking points, we know the moves, we’ve seen them all. Because we lived them.

    We just never expected to have to live them again, and from fellow Democrats, too. (emphasis added)

    The root of all ClintonHate: Clenis envy.

  270. 270
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    What Lambert said:

    OTOH, Bill’s lying about it, his clumsy attempts to thwart the subsequent investigation by invoking executive privilege in the questioning of his his aides, and the infamous statements; “I did not have sex with that woman,” and “It depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is,” gave the Republicans the cause celebre that they’d been vainly seeking throughout his administration. Just like Elliot Spitzer, Bill Clinton handed his enemies the club with which to beat him. To extend the justifiable sympathy for the Clinton’s hounding beforehand to the results of Monicagate is to excuse conduct that, although not criminal, was criminally stupid.

  271. 271
    myiq2xu says:

    To extend the justifiable sympathy for the Clinton’s hounding beforehand to the results of Monicagate is to excuse conduct that, although not criminal, was criminally stupid.

    After years of fighting (without the support of the party that you are now blamed for not helping) against people who were trying to undo two elections, would you have helped them by telling the embarrassing truth in answer to irrelevant questions?

    John Cole and I agree – I’m sick of this shit too. But he blames the victims, while I blame the perpetrators.

  272. 272
    Liberal Masochist says:

    Shorter myiq: Al Davis for President!

  273. 273
    myiq2xu says:

    To extend the justifiable sympathy for the Clinton’s hounding beforehand to the results of Monicagate is to excuse conduct that, although not criminal, was criminally stupid.

    Dennis, I know you’re not a troll, so let be be straight: I hated the santimonious bullshit from the right-wing when they hypocritcally tried to impeach our President for shit they were doing too, and I hate the Obots who are lip-synching the same right-wing bullshit today.

    I am am starting to hate the man who could put a stop to it but who instead pretends to have “transcended” politics.

  274. 274
    myiq2xu says:

    Liberal Masochist Says:

    Baa baa baa baaaaa baa baa baaa baaaa!

  275. 275
    Xenos says:

    John Cole and I agree – I’m sick of this shit too. But he blames the victims, while I blame the perpetrators.

    But it is surely a smear to accuse Obama and the Obamaniacs of anti-Clintonism when they criticize the Clintons. There is a certain amount of ‘OMG, the Republicans were right about the Clintons all along’, which is distasteful and unfair, but one can be against the Clintons without being Scaifelike.

    Obamaniacs do not show the Anti-Clinton pathologies (paranoia, mendacity, corruption and nepotism), they have only been against Clinton since the last few weeks of unpleasantness, and their complaints are based not on fantasies but specific actions and statements by the Clintons that the Obamaniacs find offensive.

  276. 276
    myiq2xu says:

    But it is surely a smear to accuse Obama and the Obamaniacs of anti-Clintonism when they criticize the Clintons.

    I didn’t do that. You want to criticize her, go ahead. But when you lip-synch Karl Rove don’t expect your credibility to survive.

  277. 277
    myiq2xu says:

    Obamaniacs do not show the Anti-Clinton pathologies (paranoia, mendacity, corruption and nepotism), they have only been against Clinton since the last few weeks of unpleasantness, and their complaints are based not on fantasies but specific actions and statements by the Clintons that the Obamaniacs find offensive.

    I’ve been watching CDS brand ClintonHate for 16 years and I know it when I see it.

    Walks like a pig – oinks like a pig, lipstick or no lipstick, it’s a pig.

  278. 278
    Anticorium says:

    chastising her for publicly saying that the super-delegates should support the winner of the pledged delegate count

    I miss having a positive opinion of the Clintons. I miss the days when I could look at this and not instantly realize this is code for demanding that Clinton win by superdelegates if she loses the pledged count, or that Clinton win by superdelegates if she wins the pledged count. I miss feeling like it would be awesome if it was true that getting Hillary means we get Bill back into power too. I miss feeling like it would be awesome that even if Bill stayed away from the levers of power Hillary was still obviously a smart and competent leader. I miss the comfortable knowledge that phrases like “Obama has a Jewish problem” show up on intellectual sewers like Stormfront but at least they would never be uttered by a mainstream political campaign. I miss knowing that, yes, Comedian X is smarter than Politician Y, but it’s not like Comedian X is Sinbad or anything. I miss the Clintons who would fight hard against the people who called their daughter a whore and accused them of murder, but would reach out to the people who shared their political affiliation and their hopes for America.

    I miss feeling like Hillary Clinton is better than all that.

    And I miss Pearl Jam not sucking, but that’s neither here nor there.

  279. 279
    Xenos says:

    But what counts as a Rovian criticism? This is being thrown around in a very loose way that clouds up the discourse.

    Rove has a specific outlook and specific methods – namely, utter dishonesty promulgated through controlled media personalities that are disciplined through controlled access and corporate interference with journalism, and the specific tactic of accusing his opponents of whatever his client is weakest about. There is a distinctive two-pronged attack that is unmistakable.

    Based on my best definition of ‘Rovian’, I can’t say Obama has been doing that. Maybe you have a different definition that would fit better, and for which the Obama attacks fit. But expect to have to defend this sort of claim.

  280. 280
    Anticorium says:

    The preceding, of course, is a perfect example of Clinton Derangement Syndrome. Do you find yourself having a lower opinion of Hillary Clinton in 2008, based on her campaign’s activities during the Democratic primary, than you did in 1999 based on the aftermath of years of right-wing attacks on her husband? If so, ask your doctor about CDS and its treatments.

  281. 281
    Xenos says:

    I’ve been watching CDS brand ClintonHate for 16 years and I know it when I see it.

    Walks like a pig – oinks like a pig, lipstick or no lipstick, it’s a pig.

    This is the argument of an apologist, and not a very good one. This is like saying all criticism of Israel is anti-semitism, or all protestants are anti-Catholics. Anti-Clintonism is pathological mindset, just like antisemitism or anti-Catholicism. When you define it so broadly and loosely you rob the designation of any useful power.

    This leaves aside the issue of the Clintons making peace with the Murdochs and the Scaifes of the world. It fits a pattern I am now seeing where pathological anti-Clintonism is now being deployed by the Clintons into a anti-Obama-ism movement. If true, that is utterly unforgivable.

  282. 282
    Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop says:

    I miss feeling like it would be awesome if it was true that getting Hillary means we get Bill back into power too. I miss feeling like it would be awesome that even if Bill stayed away from the levers of power Hillary was still obviously a smart and competent leader.

    Was anyone ever really this naive when it came to the Clintons? Were you in that much denial? We were telling you all along what they were really like. Why could you not see it until they attacked one of your own? It’s almost like you didn’t care about their reprehensible character qualities as long as they only lied about Republicans! Yeah, almost.

  283. 283
    myiq2xu says:

    Ellison, Ellensburg, Ellers, and Lambchop Says:

    Oink oink oink oink squeal squeal oink oink

  284. 284
    Anticorium says:

    *sniff*

    I just got a real BJ troll to reply to me.

    Screw this myiq crap. Lambchop’s old-school, like Strom Thurmond and polio. I’ve posted a little bit here, but I’ve never felt like I belong. Until now.

    I’d like to thank my agent, and the Academy, and….

    However, it must be said:

    Why could you not see it until they attacked one of your own?

    Wait, the Clintons went after Lorne Nystrom and Jack Layton? When was this?

  285. 285
    Xenos says:

    EEEL, the criticisms of the Clintons had a really crazy character to them that made them not credible. Of course, even liberals, who empowered the Clintons while the Clintons dragged the party to the right on most issues, were going to defend them against the nut-cases who dominated the Republican attacks.

    Sleazy? Sure. But what was the real sin in Whitewater that was worth derailing the government? Do you expect any Democrat to say “Hey – Bill Clinton must be trafficking in cocaine and assasinating people on an ongoing basis – Scaife told me so!”?

    Sorry, you guys were not credible. It is like my saying ‘you should have known W. would screw up – here are five times Ted Kennedy told about this.’ I can hardly expect you to believe anything from a source I know you consider to be discredited.

  286. 286
    John D. says:

    I didn’t do that. You want to criticize her, go ahead. But when you lip-synch Karl Rove don’t expect your credibility to survive.

    Get off it, myiq.

    You’ve spent WEEKS parroting the Clinton camp line. I’ve explained to you, in detail, what problems I have with the Clinton campaign. I’ve explained to you my order of preference for the cadidates. And I’ve explained to you, again in detail, what the Clinton campaign is doing to drive me away from voting for her.

    She is pissing me off, directly, through her and her surrogates’ actions. She did not “misspeak” about sniper fire, she lied. Carville’s comment about Richardson was heinous. Ferraro’s comments were racist. Penn’s constant dismissal of voters as unimportant is horrifying.

    Clinton is campaigning in a vacuum, it seems, as if what was said 5 minutes ago NEVER HAPPENED. The 3 AM ad asks who will be ready, then she suddenly excuses a lie by claiming tiredness? She uses ignorant arguments, props up her Republican opponent to attack her Democratic one, and hires the worst advisors group I’ve ever seen, meets with some of the most repugnant Republican backers in history, and I’m supposed to trust her?

    No. Just, no.

    You can invoke the spectre of Rove all you want, but he has nothing to do with me and my thoughts. I’m using critical thinking, my own senses, and the brain I have to form my own opinions. That opinion is that she is the worse candidate on the Dem side, and should therefore lose the nomination fight. And I’m now acting in accordance with that opinion, actively donating and working for Obama.

    Congratulations, myiq, you and your chosen one have finally gotten me off of my ass to campaign. For Obama.

  287. 287
    Dennis - SGMM says:

    Dennis, I know you’re not a troll, so let be be straight: I hated the santimonious bullshit from the right-wing when they hypocritcally tried to impeach our President for shit they were doing too, and I hate the Obots who are lip-synching the same right-wing bullshit today.

    I hated that part of it too, especially when Henry Hyde stated that his adultery (At age 40) was “A youthful indiscretion.”

    That said, once the sorry situation was out in the open, Bill Clinton could have done any one of three things:

    1)He could have admitted what he’d done, apologized publicly to Monica Lewinsky and the American people, stated that this didn’t affect his ability to govern, and ended by saying that the rest was a private matter between him and his wife.
    2)Done the above and resigned. That would have left Al Gore as President at the election.
    3)Lied about it, thus touching off the investigation and making sure that the stayed alive for months, continued lying until his defenders felt like fools and the Republicans had the grounds, no matter how tenuous, to bring articles of impeachment.

    You would have thought that Watergate – it’s not the crime, it’s the cover up – would have informed Clinton’s actions. You would also have thought that he’d know that the first rule when besieged is “Don’t lower the drawbridge.”

  288. 288
    Scrutinizer says:

    I hated the santimonious bullshit from the right-wing when they hypocritcally tried to impeach our President for shit they were doing too, and I hate the Obots who are lip-synching the same right-wing bullshit today.

    myiq, I agree wholeheartedly with the first part of your statement. The so-called Politics of Personal Destruction that the Republicans launched during the Paula Jones/Kathleen Willey/Monica Lewinsky phase of the Whitewater witch hunt brought the government to a halt, and did as much (or more) political damage to the Republicans (or at least, to certain Republicans) as it did to the Democrats. But as Dennis said, Clinton provided the wedge when he dropped his, er, drawbridge. I agree with the list of possible alternatives that Clinton had, and I too think that Clinton chose the worst of all possible alternatives when he tried to cover up the whole incident.

    I also agree with your second point, to the extent that some Obama supporters are dredging up Monica and that whole mess. At the same time, Monica is part of the negative baggage that the Clinton name carries with it. It’s inevitable that if Clinton wins the nomination, we’ll have the whole mess dredged up over and over. After all, what was the first thing the media reported on when Clinton released her WH records? That Hillary was in the White House when Bill was getting his knob polished.

    But very few (if any) Obama supporters bring up the Clenis here. Most of the criticism of Clinton here has nothing to do with right-wing talking points, and you’re being disingenuous to suggest that that’s the case. John D’s post lays it out pretty well:

    I’ve explained to you my order of preference for the cadidates. And I’ve explained to you, again in detail, what the Clinton campaign is doing to drive me away from voting for her.

    She is pissing me off, directly, through her and her surrogates’ actions. She did not “misspeak” about sniper fire, she lied. Carville’s comment about Richardson was heinous. Ferraro’s comments were racist. Penn’s constant dismissal of voters as unimportant is horrifying.

    Clinton is campaigning in a vacuum, it seems, as if what was said 5 minutes ago NEVER HAPPENED. The 3 AM ad asks who will be ready, then she suddenly excuses a lie by claiming tiredness? She uses ignorant arguments, props up her Republican opponent to attack her Democratic one, and hires the worst advisors group I’ve ever seen, meets with some of the most repugnant Republican backers in history, and I’m supposed to trust her?

    That’s pretty much it, myiq. You seem to ignore remarks that give specific reasons for opposing Clinton, and you seem to content yourself with parroting mindless screeds about “Rovian politics” and “kool-aid drinking Obamabots”, or limiting your responses to high-school level insults and witticisms instead of responses with substance.

    I’ll repeat a question I asked weeks ago: What specific experience does Hillary have that makes her a better choice for President than Obama? Or, if you don’t want to answer that one, what, specifically, would make Hillary a better Commander-in-Chief than Obama? Or, if you don;t want that one, how about why is Hillary justified in reversing her original position on the MI-FL primaries, given that the voter turnout in both those states were tainted by potential voters in those states being told that their votes wouldn’t count, a statement that Hillary herself made?

  289. 289
    Nash says:

    Why are your comments going into moderation? Did you get a new computer or something?

    Not a new computer, but updated operating system…would that do it?

    I don’t think I am over-reacting. This is a train wreck and going to get worse.

    I agree, and yet, it will all mean nothing in the end. It’s still one-on-one in the fall, and unless things change in a way that doesn’t seem possible, all the McCain holding this lead, that lead stories of today will be so much dust in the wind come November.

  290. 290
    Nash says:

    This one is not me, the long-term, often silent (not silent enough, yes, I know), Nash.

    Nash Says:

    Why on earth would you stop?

    Usually waking up to find your liver on the other side of the bed crying is a good reason . . .

    March 26th, 2008 at 5:04 pm

  291. 291
    OniHanzo says:

    I’ll repeat a question I asked weeks ago: What specific experience does Hillary have that makes her a better choice for President than Obama? Or, if you don’t want to answer that one, what, specifically, would make Hillary a better Commander-in-Chief than Obama? Or, if you don;t want that one, how about why is Hillary justified in reversing her original position on the MI-FL primaries, given that the voter turnout in both those states were tainted by potential voters in those states being told that their votes wouldn’t count, a statement that Hillary herself made?

    It’s pretty telling the lack of replies on something as substantial as these questions. Instead of dialogue with those who are genuinely interested in it, myiq is going for the soft targets with a Nerf bat. Weak by any standard.

    Which is a tragedy…as I’d like to see a genuine response from a Clinton supporter. If myiq’s support for Clinton is, in fact, sincere.

    F’s posts, at least, have had meat to them.

  292. 292
    Xenos says:

    Myiq dropped off the face of the earth just as EEEL made a parting shot. Maybe we’ve been spoofed.

  293. 293

    […] I am currently reading Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail, Hunter S. Thompson’s great work about the 1972 campaign. He talks about the Democratic Party’s awful primaries then. I also read Balloon Juice, a fantastic blog written by a cranky ex-Republican named John Cole. This is what he said: As someone new to the party, I have to say the awesomeness of the Democratic circular firing squad really can not be explained to outsiders. You can try to explain it, but it just doesn’t sink in until you are actually a part of it. ..This primary has truly been full of win for me, and a real eye-opener. While the GOP is turning lemons into lemonade with McCain, the Democrats are showing the world they know how to turn filet mignon into a shit sandwich. Impressive work. […]

Trackbacks & Pingbacks

  1. […] I am currently reading Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail, Hunter S. Thompson’s great work about the 1972 campaign. He talks about the Democratic Party’s awful primaries then. I also read Balloon Juice, a fantastic blog written by a cranky ex-Republican named John Cole. This is what he said: As someone new to the party, I have to say the awesomeness of the Democratic circular firing squad really can not be explained to outsiders. You can try to explain it, but it just doesn’t sink in until you are actually a part of it. ..This primary has truly been full of win for me, and a real eye-opener. While the GOP is turning lemons into lemonade with McCain, the Democrats are showing the world they know how to turn filet mignon into a shit sandwich. Impressive work. […]

  2. […] Our Founding Fathers were pretty smart. As commenter Cain at Balloon Juice shows: Cain Says: I saw this in a quote by Alexander Hamilton which sort of summarizes Hillary against Obama: No character, however upright, is a match for constantly reiterated attacks, however false. —Alexander Hamilton […]

  3. […] This cracked me up. I too marvel at the suicidal impulses.   […]

  4. […] Posted in Democrats, Election at 3:55 pm by LeisureGuy John Cole: The big money Clinton backers, pissy that their candidate is doing poorly and stands no chance at winning unless the super-delegates overrule the voters, are putting the screws to Pelosi: Twenty top Hillary fundraisers and donors have sent a scathing private letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, chastising her for publicly saying that the super-delegates should support the winner of the pledged delegate count and demanding that she say that they should make an “independent” choice. […]

Comments are closed.