Letters to the Editor
-
ljwalker53
"What is just astonishing to me about Obama's followers is that they cannot and will not accept that there is HARD evidence about Obama using "race-baiting" as a tactic, when he did not win in New Hampshire; and it has been used repeatedly by his campaign to smear Bill and Hillary Clinton."
What is the hard evidence? I must have missed it. Could you produce it for our edificiation?
If someone has already posted it, just point me in the right direction. I don't have time to go back and read every post on the subject.
-
Obama Supporters
Why do so many pro-Clinton arguments start with "Obama supporters raised the spectre of.."
Does anyone else smell bullshit? I'm a Obama supporter, guess what I called Clinton last night over dinner with friends? I'll leave it to your imagination.
Except, here's the thing, try to follow along, I don't work for Obama. I'm not an Obama surrogate.
And I'm not Mark Penn, Terry Mcauliff, James Carville, Geraldine Ferarro or Bill Clinton himself. Worse, some of the more damaging stuff comes straight from the horses mouth.
These people, on the payroll of HRC for President, simply cannot control themselves. They are pathologically cutthroat. They are get lathered up in gleefull shadenfreude at the slightest evidence of the Obama campaign wearing down so much that they do not even hear it when they mouth a breathless endorsement for the F*CKING REPUBLICAN NOMINEE.
To quote Elliott Smith, "deaf and dumb and done."
Please just stop it already. The jig is up. Go home, because if you win the primary with these dirty tricks, I might as well vote Nader or Ron Paul or write in "hope deferred". Because I will be a stolen primary.
-
@ fooled
Wow, I hadn't even read your bit about the passport thing. Seriously, paranoid much? Was Obama on the grassy knoll?
-
@ David Blixt: The Obama Mirage
Imagine, for a moment, that the positions were reversed. Senator Obama would be out of the race already. Whereas Senator Clinton has managed to spin herself as having a chance (a notion that Salon aids in their small way, cherry-picking the title for this piece out of a much darker and more realistic NYT story). Her constant rebranding, her flights of revisionism, her fabled "35 years" of experience when she holds a total of 7 in an actual elected office. To say that she is not a slick campaigner is to assert that the sun rises in the West.
This is just funny. But, still, I couldn't resist responding.
1] Obama has been running for president since he entered the U.S. Senate in 2004.
2] His colleagues in the Senate think of him as a dilettante and state senators in Illinois certainly don't think of him as a "change-maker" by any stretch -- commenting on the fact that his "present" votes were frequently a way to "take a powder" on controversial issues.
3] He takes credit for developing legislation that he didn't participate in -- and does it in a press conference for all to see.
4] He's so "electable" that he had to engage his election machine in Chicago to find ways to oust his opponents in the state senate primary, including Alice Palmer -- a former "friend", and he did the same thing in his U.S. Senate campaign.
5] Obama's campaign manager, David Axelrod, has geared Obama's campaign around his race/African-American heritage, whatever you want to call it, and has been spinning it furiously ever since he lost in New Hampshire and every time he faces competition among African Americans
6] He avoids having his photos taken with San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsome, for appearance' sake (so that he won't be perceived as "too lgbt friendly".
7] Andrea Mitchell reported this morning that ONE of the reasons Obama does not support a "redo" in Michigan is because he would have to campaign side-by-side with Kwame Kilpatrick (the mayor now indicted for lying under oath about his sexual relationship with an aide). Again, it might make Obama look too human.
8] Obama "borrows" (oh, heck, let's just say "steals") Clinton's economic package WHOLE CLOTH, but repackages it as his own and then has the gall to accuse Clinton of stealing it from him!
9] Clinton's campaign NEVER contacted Canadian authorities. They have come out publicly and stated that.
10] Obama followers, supporters, acolytes, whatever, spin the Clintons -- and especially Hillary Clinton -- using right-wing tactics and talking points to smear, demean, diminish, dismiss and deny everything about her. Wow! This is hopeful? Unifying?
The man is a politician. No more. No less. Hillary Clinton is a politician (although with a whole lot more standing in the U.S. Senate than is Obama), but a politician, nonetheless.
Perhaps the most accurate indication to date, of Obama's electability problems, is Rev. Jeremiah Wright, however it gets spun. Because average voters remember that kind of "hate speech" and will be reminded of it every day, once he is the nominee, until the GE.
I'll take Clinton with 5% or 10% -- which is still a better perecentage than none. So, enough with the "She should just drop out."
-
Here's another one...
Mar. 25
Electoral Votes: Obama 218 McCain 296
Electoral Votes: Clinton 273 McCain 221
Go to www.electoral-vote.com to see the latest polls on the General Election. Hillary beats McCain but Obama does not. Clinton wins Florida, NJ and Penn -- but Obama loses those to McCain. Check it out. Interesting to say the least.
-
@EMStoveken
Sorry for the delay in my response, yeah...i've been perusing "On The Campaign Trail '72" of late as well...and yeah, the similarities really are striking!
Now I think I should re-read Better than Sex...lord knows he had some...curious...impressions of the Clintons and their staff :)
-
Don't even bother.
Don't feed the deadenders, y'all. It does no good. Most of the hardcore Clinton folk around here left the reality-based community sometime after Wisconsin.
The good news is the press is finally starting to catch up. It took 3-4 weeks, but, hey, math is hard!
-
@Fooled Since you won't let this slide
Back then, raising questions about Hillary Clinton's commitment to civil rights was his only path to the nomination.
Obama's surrogates became apoplectic about Hillary Clinton's reference to LBJ as an effective president.
The history of the run up to South Carolina is irrefutable.
I find myself in strong disagreement to your recent words. Obama's pathway to the nomination then, as now, is to run on a change mandate, a "throw the bums out, post decisive politics" message, campaign in all 50 states, harness the youth vote and build 21st a century ground game.
Saying that Obama is only winning because of the "race card" and therefore Hillary is only losing because it, is trying to paper over the numerous tactical and strategic mistakes made by the Hillary campaign.
I won't confuse your storytelling with irrefutable history. I don't think what Hillary said regarding MLK and LBJ was racist. It was stupid and a politically costly blunder. Back then, pre SC, Hillary was trying to sell this false dichotomy of "dreamers" vs "doers". Back when speeches didn't matter, when they "were just words". She put Obama and MLK into the dreamer camp and LBJ and herself into the doer camp. Not that she's done much to compare with LBJ, but that's another story.
Try telling a group of people whose Hero was assassinated for his speaking out that words don't matter, that he was just a dreamer. The AA community didn't need Obama's camp to tell them think what to think of that. They're not a bunch of lemmings ready to boil off the cliff when somebody yells "racist!".
As I've mentioned here elsewhere, you critque or diminish a mythical hero at your own risk.