Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Sheesh, I don't even know why I bother. But anyway...
Obama has reneged on every promise he has made during his campaign but it's Hillary's fault.
Reneged on every promise? Nice right-wing/GOP/PUMA talking point there. Of course it has no basis in fact. He hasn't even taken office yet. Yes, you can point to FISA/telecom immunity, and that pissed me off. But not public financing of his campaign (he only pledged to consider it with McCain, not to accept it.) Of course had HRC been the nominee and the eventual winner of the election, she'd have had cases of flip-flopping and backpedaling too. They're all politicians and that's how politicians function.
Oh, and who in the hell said that Obama's change in position on any issue was HRC's fault? Your anti-Obama hatred is leading you to read way too much into others' arguments. I think you need some reading comprehension lessons.
Bill Clinton, the only Democratic president to actually stand up to the Republicans and face them down over the federal budget is the one who started the Democrats decline?
Bill Clinton "standing up to the GOP over the federal budget" was mostly show over a few minor issues. On most major things, Clinton caved in to the Right, or even advocated conservative positions himself that were at best slightly watered-down Republican policies. He was the DLC's golden boy and the Democrats became the DLC, centrist, GOP-lite party that abandoned its progressive wing under his watch.
Kudos to him for "trashing welfare" (now the Democrats are pushing corporate welfare instead) and giving us the lowest crime rate in 50 years.
Welfare reform (as it was done by Clinton and the GOP Congress in the 1990s) was not a good thing. It was anti-progressive. And Clinton was hardly responsible for lower crime rates. They were due to many things, but not Clinton's lurch to the right on criminal justice issues. His Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, with its huge expansion of the death penalty, erosion of civil liberties, and extensive surveillance provisions, has for years now been considered the blueprint and foundation of the Patriot Act. This you consider progressive? Apparently we have different definitions of that word. But then since you're really a right-wing troll and provocateur posing as an embittered Clinton supporter, I guess that makes sense.
It's quite simple......Obama believes in winning at all costs but many of us don't believe in the "ends justifies the means" philosophy or his religious dogma.
Nah, I think he believes in winning with some integrity. Winning at all costs, however, has been an established description of the Clintons for some time, and not just among Republicans (not that I necessarily agree with that assessment). I've never heard anyone with any claim to credibility describe Obama's mentality as "the ends justify the means", and frankly I have no idea what you mean by his "religious dogma", nor do I care to know.
"I do not support gay marriage. Marriage has religious and social connotations, and I consider marriage to be between a man and a woman." (From the Human Rights Campaign's 2008 Presidential questionnaire) - Barack Hussein Obama
Yep, and you can find statements from HRC or virtually all the other Democratic candidates (except for fringe lefties like Kucinich) that are almost word-for-word copies of this, because they ALL opposed gay marriage. So what? He opposes gay marriage but supports civil unions with the same rights and benefits, as well as just about everything else on the "gay agenda" (such as repealing DOMA and "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", immigration reform, passing ENDA, etc.) You're arguing with him over a matter of semantics. Grow the fuck up.
Wouldn't it be nice to have a president who put civil law above religious law?
Yeah, it would, but none of the major Democratic candidates, HRC included, would have given you this either, so what's your beef with Obama?
You can have your own opinions of blackness. Unlike you, I do not think that we all have to think the same way. Go ahead, though, buy into the stereotype white people have of us that we all think the same.
As for Diallo, Louima, Dorismond, et. al., I have heard of their names. I was almost trampled near Battery Park by a mounted police officer and a few hours before hand, I was part of the mob that bypassed police barricades on 42nd and 5th by climbing over the stone fence on the north west side of the New York Public Library. So yeah, I am from "Gotham," as you put it.
You want to call me a hater? Fine. I'll call you a Stan, as we black people like to say.
Just because I do not want to kiss Obama's ass or buy into the myth that he is the best choice to fix the problems our country is having, does not make me a hater. But, he was elected, so he is the only choice.
I respect and admire Senator Clinton, and would prefer that she not take part in the Obama administration, that's all. She should lay low in the Senate if she wants to be governor or she can continue to represent people like me, one of her constituents, and not be a rubber stamp for Obama. Let his other groupies in the Senate do that. She should show she has an ounce of self-respect and leave her mark.
You Obama stans get so agitated if someone doesn't want to kiss his feet. Calm down. There is room for all of us at the table. Isn't that what your Saint Obama might say...in public, at least?
I'm "the enemy" ... ie an Obama supporter from the start ... but I agree with your assessment of the landscape. This is a Godfather move, no question.
However, I disagree when you say that the SoS position takes her out of the mainstream, or that working for Obama makes her irrelevant. I don't see foreign policy becoming irrelevant anytime soon, and anyone who thinks so doesn't remember, oh, six months ago.
Hillary Clinton lost the primary because she refused to use the fifty-state strategy. She could have ... she was advised to ... but she didn't take any of her opposition seriously enough to go that way. It was a simple miscalculation, and thems the breaks.
She's a brilliant and talented lady. Whether or not she stays relevant depends on her ... either as a senator, or as Secretary of State, or as future Governor of New York or in some other capacity entirely.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
