home

Unhelpful Remarks From Obama Supporter

This is bad:

In an interview with CNN's Jessica Yellin, Dick Harpootlian, a former chairman of the South Carolina Democratic Party and a supporter of Barack Obama, said some of Bill Clinton's recent remarks on the campaign trail were appeals based on race and gender. He said the comments were meant to "suppresses the vote, demoralize voters, and distort the record," and said they were "reminiscent of Lee Atwater."

Outrageous and false. And, from Obama's perspective, not helpful to his campaign. Consider this, the LAST thing Obama wants is for his big win next Saturday to be viewed as a race issue. Harpootlian feeds that narrative with his outrageous smear.

Obama himself strenuously denied that the Clinton campaign was playing race or gender games last week. Harpootlian does no one any favors with this outrageous smear. The Obama campaign should disavow them.

< GOP Ideas Revisited: Context | Obama: I Pushed The Wrong Button On Votes >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • If he didn't disavow JJ Jr., why would (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by Teresa on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:38:51 PM EST
    he this? Remember the nice debate a few weeks ago. He said he'd take responsibility going forward. We'll see.

    Surrogates (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by BDB on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:50:28 PM EST
    I swear for most of this campaign that Obama's surrogates are really working for Clinton and vice versa.  I don't think I've ever seen two candidates with surrogates who say more stupid, unhelpful stuff.

    yep the polls are fascinating (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:44:52 PM EST
    and the Obama supporters dont seem to think about the fact that us "old farts" lived thru all that history (including thru Clinton administration) and still support him....Why? Because while he made mistakes, he still tried his best to represent us and with a republican majority in the congress....No easy feat....We are loyal to him because he did a good job and left office with a good job approval from 65% of Americans...again no small feat....So think about why we support him when we know him the best.... and think about why on earth we would support anyone that would support the GOP...We wouldn't....and personally I would hate to be the GOP if Hillary gets in there with a democratic majority....Go Hillary!!!!

    Well said, athyrio (5.00 / 1) (#162)
    by felizarte on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:55:09 PM EST
    my sentiments precisely.  I just want to add, that Clinton's was a personal mistake.  Ken Starr could not find any instance, not even a little one, to show that Bill Clinton ever used his office to help Lewinsky.  There was no wrongdoing found either in the useless Whitewater investigation.  I am convinced that all that Special prosecutor investigation was to try and slow down Bill Clinton who was making great progress in repairing the ill-effects of the 12 years of Reagan-Bush  in the Whitehouse.  

    The trouble I think of those who do not have experience is to argue hard that experience does not matter all that much.  Only with experience can you say, they are sooooo wrong.

    I believe Hillary Clinton, with Bill on tap, will be a great president. Obama should use this as a learning experience.  Perhaps later, when he has the experience comparable to Hillary's he would come to appreciate people who have come before him.  Pride goes before downfall.  

    Parent

    Athyrio (none / 0) (#118)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:53:28 PM EST
    I always liked Bill Clinton more than I liked Newt Gingrich or any of the Bushes, but you have to remember that the 65% was because a lot of us didn't think he should have been impeached because of a BJ, even if he was stupid enough to lie about it. My rating for his behavior regarding trade agreements, the destruction of welfare and the consolidation of the media is a lot lower than 65%. It's all context.

    And I'm an old fart too. I remember JFK, LBJ, Nixon and everything from then to now. And I'm not such an old fart that I've forgotten all that much. Hillary Clinton is the most divisive Democratic candidate for President in my life. I expect her to win the nomination, but she is so repugnant to so many Americans that she may be able to do what I have believed to be impossible: give the Republicans the White House.

    Parent

    but (none / 0) (#135)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:10:41 PM EST
    when you ask why repugnant, those same people cannot really give you an answer....which is why she is leading in the polls with the democrats...People like her...They really do...or else she wouldnt be winning...

    Parent
    athyrio (none / 0) (#184)
    by Kathy on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 08:17:25 AM EST
    thank you for saying that.  I like her.  I always have.  I will vote for her because I think she understands core democrat values and I know that she will get things done.  She has a record of working well with republicans when she has to, and she learned the hard way how NOT to get things done way back during healthcare, which she has admitted.  It's not because she's a woman or because she's white or because of Bill (though I loves me some Bill) it's because I feel she is the best candidate.  But, because I'm a woman, they assume I'm some ignorant "vagina voter" and that I am only voting for her because I am a woman.  

    I am sick and tired of the men in this race getting to say they made a mistake (boneheaded or otherwise) and that's it, people absolve them.  She has a long record because she has served for a long time.  Everyone makes mistakes.  She admits that she screwed up healthcare and wants a second chance.  It's very telling that the president's wife could not get a bill through with her own party in charge.  Obama sounds just like she did at the time, and assumes that the party will be lockstep with him.  I think we all prove that's easier said than done.

    And another thing!  Those who say, "My liberal girlfriend's independent brother-in-law says he'll never vote for Hillary.  She is the most reviled creature on earth," I have this as a response: we tend to hang around people who share our ideals.  This sort of impromptu "polling" sounds very New Hampshire to me.

    Parent

    Are NAFTA DOMA and the Bankruptcy reform (none / 0) (#186)
    by Rojas on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 08:34:40 AM EST
    bill she voted for "Core Democratic Values"?
    WHat about media consolidation? Is there room in the umbrella for that?

    Parent
    Hillary didn't vote for or against (none / 0) (#189)
    by ding7777 on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 09:22:14 AM EST
    NAFTA or DOMA.  And she said she was wrong about the Bankruptcy bill.

    Parent
    Speaking of unhelpful... (5.00 / 2) (#34)
    by Teresa on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:07:22 PM EST
    Ed Schultz was the pro-Obama talking head on Hardball tonight. He played the Monica card in calling Bill Clinton a liar. Oh well, I'm sure that pleased Tweety.

    For the first time in my adult life, I am totally getting turned off on politics and I'm pretty hardcore.

    Obama statement (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:19:32 PM EST
    Obama: I think there is no doubt that she has higher negatives than any of the remaining democratic candidates. That's just a fact and there are some who will not vote for her. If you look at the results in Nevada, for example, she eked out the popular vote victory over me, but I ended up winning more delegates because she got almost all of her votes from Clark County, Las Vegas and some of the traditional democratic areas. We got votes there, but we also got votes in northern Nevada and rural conservative regions of the state that traditionally don't vote Democratic, but were excited about my campaign.

    I have no doubt that once the nomination contest is over, I will get the people who voted for her. Now the question is can she get the people who voted for me? And I think that describes sort of one of the choices that people have, just a practical choice, as they move forward."

    http://www.cbn.com/cbnnews/308216.aspx

    Losing my mind, was this discussed here today?  Does this sound like a threat to the party?  Ok, he now for me is not just arrogant, he is a punk.  

    read this (none / 0) (#170)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:29:09 PM EST
    article it is interesting perspective about Obama.....

    Parent
    his supporters (none / 0) (#174)
    by Jgarza on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:55:57 PM EST
    so far have been about 50/50 dem/ind.  Her supporters are almost all Dem.  I tihnk it is pretty safe to say if he is the Dem nominee all her Dem supporters will vote for him in a general.  you really can't make that argument for indies.  SO i think it is a fair point to make.

    My guess is if you already don't like Obama you will view it as a threat.  If you are a Democrat concerned with winning in November, it would be smart to take this information into account.

    Parent

    Well she'll (none / 0) (#181)
    by ding7777 on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 06:41:26 AM EST
    get Obama's Democratic votes and probably Edwards', too

    Parent
    Obama can do no wrong (3.66 / 3) (#5)
    by GOPmurderedconscience on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:42:17 PM EST
    Besides you, nobody will report on this outrage.

    The Obama campaign has been playing this game for a very long time but the big media don't call them on it.

    • Just remember Jesse Jackson Jr saying Hillary Clinton tears have to be "analyzed" because she didn't shed tears for New Orleans?

    • They sent a 4 page memo to the media asking them to chastise the Clinton Campaign for using subtle tone of racism and for diminishing the legacy of MLK?

    • They purposefully distorted Bill "fairy tale" quote in the most racist way

    • On MLK day, HRC paid tribute to MLK by saying the fact that a young AA man, a son of the south born in poverty, and a woman are in a the position of winning the WH, and she got blamed for using "coded" language by mentioning "young AA men"?

    I could go on and on.

    This has become so toxic that in our community, there is a bitter divide between those who support Obama and those who don't. I don't know why these guys play these games and the media just fuel the fire instead of stopping it.

    So Bill Clinton (1.00 / 1) (#2)
    by commissar on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:30:29 PM EST
    freaks out again.  48 hours ahead of schedule.

    Eight more years of this? Again?

    Great, just peachy.

    I'm disappointed in your reaction (none / 0) (#3)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:34:44 PM EST
    Harpootlian's comment deserved outrage because they were outrageous.

    Parent
    really (none / 0) (#27)
    by Jgarza on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:22:35 PM EST
    in your last post someone said Obama was having a meltdown and you have no issue.  Now outrage?  

    These people are supposed to be political professionals and as soon as they start whining about dirty tricks, you want to applaud them.  

    This is a an ex-president being attack dog in a primary campaign, he doesn't get to cry foul, if he doesn't like it stop being attack dog.

    Parent

    Really? (none / 0) (#67)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:11:12 PM EST
    You think that the remarks being reacted to are at all comparable?

    And frankly, gien your behavior today on the site, you need to chill out period.

    Parent

    Only a couple of weeks into the primaries (none / 0) (#30)
    by DA in LA on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:48:54 PM EST
    And we have a predictable 48 hour "drama window."

    Ridiculous and transparent.

    Parent

    I agree (none / 0) (#1)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:28:37 PM EST
    and more and more Obama's campaign is being painted as being racist....the polls are showing it too....not good for him....whoever that man is, that made that statement is very foolish....

    Have they never heard of (3.66 / 3) (#12)
    by felizarte on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:47:48 PM EST
    "if you find yourself in a hole, stop digging."? Sen. Obama and several of his supporters appear to have glass chins.  This is where Sen. Obama's lack of experience shows.  They are being petulant, almost like spoiled brats.  Reminds me of children weaned on praise, in order to develop confidence and self esteem, but not grown up enough not to get deflated when they do not receive the customary praise.

    Go back to fighting a battle of ideas to benefit the American people; the catch being, you have to convince the American voters, not just one ethnic group or another.  

    This reminds me of a movie back in the sixties with Robert Redford as the leading man in the role of THE CANDIDATE.  His character was that of an activist lawyer working with the farm workers who were being intimidated just as they were trying to form a union (loosely based on the UFW of today)

    Anyway, he ran for the Senate, his initial intention was just to be heard.  He started having a following; then advisers, and later evolved into the candidate who now wants to win and therefore began compromising his stand on issues. . . .

    Obama can win this thing if he could stick to what he is preaching. Of course he has to have a team in place, but do not  let yourself become a captive of your supporters.

    Parent

    We disagree (none / 0) (#6)
    by commissar on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:43:37 PM EST
    A couple weeks ago, I compared the Clintons to Rove, and you .. ummm... reacted.

    Part of Lefty DNA seems to be "WE'RE better than them. (and therefore,  by definition, the Clintons are honest)."  Bull. They are the most low-down, conniving, dishonest politicians in a long time.

    The Clintons made this about race. They were running against multi-racial Jesus Christ. They needed to run against a "black candidate." So they provoked, backed off, stirred it up, apologized, etc. Until, here were .. lo and behold .. now they're running against Jesse Jackson. Good job.

    It works, and I hope you folks are proud of them.

    Typical Atwater tactics. Harpootlian is spot on.

    Even if you believe that (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:47:06 PM EST
    And I am strongly of the view that you are full of crap, Harpootlian then does Clinton's work for them.

    How in blazes can you be happy about that?

    Parent

    I am not happy about any of this (none / 0) (#24)
    by commissar on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:03:53 PM EST
    Least of all at the prospect of having to vote for these scum in November.

    Within very very very broad limits, I don't care how  vilely the Clintons practice their politics. For some major, real-world issues, the GOP needs a time-out. Talk about your 'lesser of two evils.'

    But they are pushing even those limits.

    FWIW, I voted for Hillary Clinton for US Sen in 2006, with few, if any reservations, so I'm not some   15-year Clinton-hater.

    Parent

    I voted for her for her first term (none / 0) (#25)
    by DA in LA on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:15:10 PM EST
    But won't be voting for her again.

    Parent
    Why? (none / 0) (#173)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:48:28 PM EST
    I do not care (none / 0) (#79)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:22:12 PM EST
    what you were.

    Your comment is unacceptable.

    You go wirte crap like that at daily kos.

    It is not welcome here.

    Parent

    I don't know how (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by RalphB on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:55:05 PM EST
    you could be more wrong.  To compare Bill Clinton to Lee Atwater requires a completely ignorant jackass.
     

    Parent
    Voter Suppression (none / 0) (#20)
    by commissar on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:00:06 PM EST
    classic Atwater.

    Or are we here believe the 'fairy tale' that the Clinton had nothing to do with the lawsuit against the at-large districts?

    Parent

    You must be kidding (none / 0) (#22)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:01:59 PM EST
    But rant on.

    Obama is the one hurt by this.

    Not the Clintons.

    Parent

    Please blog. . . (none / 0) (#35)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:07:25 PM EST
    on the voter suppression "issue".

    Parent
    With or without Diebold conspiracy issue? (none / 0) (#64)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:08:08 PM EST
    Not in a million freaking years (none / 0) (#78)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:21:16 PM EST
    Daily Kos drivel will not be the topic of discussion here.

    Parent
    I was hoping for a fair-minded. . . (none / 0) (#84)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:27:59 PM EST
    examination of the issue.  Obviously (at least, to me) the charges about Iowa are absurd.  But the lawsuit in Nevada seems to me to be a pretty clear attempt to lower the turnout in a particular demographic for partisan reasons.

    Parent
    Nope (none / 0) (#94)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:31:53 PM EST
    Unless the demo was CWU members.

    Parent
    Yes, that was exactly . . . (none / 0) (#99)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:34:03 PM EST
    the group that it appears they were trying to disenfranchise.  If there were any genuine problems with the additional polling places (and I can see that there might have been -- allowing some people to vote at work and not others hardly seems fair) I would have thought the suit would have been brought -- or at least objections raised -- weeks or months before the caucuses.

    Parent
    A compelely cynical maneuver (none / 0) (#102)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:36:32 PM EST
    Yes, but. . . (none / 0) (#140)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:16:40 PM EST
    clear cut voter suppression?  A lot of ridiculous dirt has been thrown against the Clintons recently, but this one really does bug me.  Which is why I'd be interested in an actual analysis of the situation.

    Parent
    Obama took voter suppression to the (none / 0) (#32)
    by ding7777 on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:54:05 PM EST
    extreme by challenging primary petition ballots to knock 3 competitors out of the race.

    Obama Knows His Way Around a Ballot


    Parent

    Obama doing same in Vegas (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by Kathy on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:03:41 PM EST
    Now, he's contesting the Vegas election for voter suppression.

    "Hello, Pot?  This is kettle.  I gotta question."

    Parent

    We are to believe (none / 0) (#39)
    by standingup on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:16:36 PM EST
    that allegations have been made but do not assume anyone's guilt based on allegations alone.  

    Parent
    I don't agree with the Atwater comparison (none / 0) (#88)
    by NaNaBear on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:29:46 PM EST
    But with every thing else you said. I still don't understand why AA have to , or explain why they are voting for Obama , Clinton, or Edwards .  
    This has caused alot of AA to be angry, and rightful so(imo)   Why aren't other groups being scrutinized the same way?  

    Most believe this is part of the Clinton's game plan. They are accomblishing what they set out to do. Divide and conquer.  The problem is,  its hurting the Dem. Party, not just Obama.

     He doesn't have to wait for the Rep. attacks, fellow Dems are doing a great job of preparing him. Just like Clinton can handle it, so will he.  

    I have read comments complaining about what bloggers say against Clinton on other boards. You are doing the same thing you are accusing them of.  All of us are entitled to our opinions of all the candidates.

    Some have resulted to calling people demeaning  names because they don't agree with them. Shame on all who are doing this.

    Parent

    Did he give any examples? (none / 0) (#7)
    by DA in LA on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:43:45 PM EST
    Or just make this broad, unsubstantiated claim?

    i'm glad bill clinton got angry (none / 0) (#8)
    by sammiemorris on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:46:04 PM EST
    First of all, the most blatantly racist event of the campaign was the Senator Clinton D - Punjab memo. Could you imagine the outrage that would have occurred if someone said Joe Lieberman D/I - Tel Aviv, or Barack Obama D- Kenya? Although there is a strong Indian community in this country, it lacks numbers and doesn't necessarily believe in the politics of victimization, so it didn't turn out to be a big deal. But let me tell you something, that memo was worse than George Allen's Macaca Moment.

    Second of all, the most explicit playing of the race card occurred the day after the New Hampshire Primary when Jesse Jackson, Jr., Barack's campaign co-chair, declared that although "Hillarys tears melted the granite state, as we move to South Carolina, where 45% of the electorate is Black, we have to wonder where those tears were during Katrina."

    If that isn't the race card then what is.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNrlSn7ndAA

    I just cannot (none / 0) (#14)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:50:00 PM EST
    argue continually about Clintons being so evil...It is silly and belies the soaring polls in alot of states right now by the democrats..It is silly to ignore it and pretend that they are evil....Bush is evil....enough said....

    Parent
    JacktheBoo (none / 0) (#13)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:49:17 PM EST
    Do not post that garbage here. You will be banned if you persist.

    This is not daily kos.

    and backed up with no facts whatsoever (none / 0) (#17)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:52:54 PM EST
    just putting it in caps doesn't make it true...

    It seems that reason and facts (none / 0) (#19)
    by felizarte on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 05:56:32 PM EST
    are not acquainted with you.

    Sit Room CNN (none / 0) (#21)
    by PlayInPeoria on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:01:32 PM EST
    Just played Obama's reponse to Pres Clinton. One commentator noted the change in language that Obama used.

    I watched the clip they had on (can't find it on the net yet).

    Obama used language like "ya'll".

    Not what I usually hear from him. It looks like race is comming up again.

    just watched the video (none / 0) (#26)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:19:29 PM EST
    he is an amazing man, with a head full of facts...I love Bill Clinton....OK...all you rabid Obama folks can go after me now lol.......

    This campaign was not about race (none / 0) (#28)
    by commissar on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:36:04 PM EST
    before late December. Obama was seen as a guy who transcended race (rightly or wrongly).  

    Somehow or other, in ways obscure, and never quite "nail-able," the campaign became about race.

    Now look at the polls. The white candidate and the black candidate are each taking 2-1 or 3-1 or their race.

    Advantage Dynastic Duo.

    Enough (none / 0) (#50)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:34:02 PM EST
    You have repeated the same comment about 10 times.

    Chatterer. Look it up in the FAQs.

    Parent

    It really should NOT be (none / 0) (#31)
    by PlayInPeoria on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 06:51:19 PM EST
    about race. But the subject keeps coming up.

    I just watched a video clip on CNN showing Obama, a midwesterner, go into 4-5 sentences of southern draw in his response to Pres Clinton's comments while surrounded by AA. Racial tones.

    Even two comentators noted this. Of course, I can not find a re-run on the net. This will lost in the back-and-forth.

    Hillary did the same thing (none / 0) (#36)
    by Kathy on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:07:31 PM EST
    and the press crucified her for it.  At the time, I thought it was a natural thing to adopt, what with living with Bill and living in Arkansas for so long.  My reaction when she had the drawl was the same as I have to Obama doing it.  When you hang out in the South (where I was born and raised and continue to love livin') or you are surrounded by Southerners, you pick up the cadence.  Maybe it's in the grits?

    Folks just wanna sound cool.  Y'all dig?

    Parent

    Seems to me Edwards's Southern drawl (none / 0) (#56)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:03:48 PM EST
    is quite a bit more audible than during the Steak Fry event in Indianola, IA.

    Parent
    You should hear my Southern accent (none / 0) (#66)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:09:12 PM EST
    When I visit my brother in Atlanta.

    It's contagious.

    Parent

    I was born in Texas (none / 0) (#85)
    by RalphB on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:28:16 PM EST
    lived elsewhere for most of 20 years.  Moved back and my accent says I never left.  Contagious is a mild word for it   :-)

    Parent
    Heck, even the walk is apparently distinctive. (none / 0) (#141)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:23:55 PM EST
    One of the ubiquitous carpet sellers in Turkey (they always call out their guess as to pedestrians' country of origin) took one look at my friend (who was not speaking)and sd. "Texas"?  Stunning.  She hasn't lived in Texas for quite a few years.  

    Parent
    What it is I don't know but (none / 0) (#156)
    by RalphB on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:47:05 PM EST
    I walked into a bar in Sydney a couple of years ago and the bartender nailed me.  Said "What's your pleasure, Tex" before I opened my mouth.

    Downright weird.


    Parent

    lol (5.00 / 1) (#178)
    by ding7777 on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 05:44:16 AM EST
    If the bartender says that to all Americans he's bound to right sometime

    Parent
    hmmm (5.00 / 1) (#187)
    by Kathy on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 08:41:37 AM EST
    Texas is Texas.  It's not the south.  It is a nation unto itself.


    Parent
    well... (none / 0) (#127)
    by Kathy on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:03:05 PM EST
    Atlanta accents are much more sophisticated (says the native).  My drawl is much more pronounced when I am at home (though I admit I talk it up in NY city just to counter that yankee twang!)

    Seriously, I don't see Obama sounding "southern" as an issue and it's certainly not about race, because "ya'll" and "fixin to" etc, are staples of the southern dialect.  It knows no gender, creed or origin.  It's the south, honey.  

    Parent

    Clinton didn't (none / 0) (#37)
    by standingup on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:08:33 PM EST
    fall into the trap either.  He handled the press very well.  Ambinder's transcript left off the last question and answer where Clinton refused to let the press have their way.  

    From the New York Observer's transcript:

    Q_Are you saying the Obama camp is bringing up these racial issues?

    A-"You just want one more story -- shame on you! Shame on your, you just want one more story! Print the facts. Nobody ever prints any
    facts."



    thanks for posting that (none / 0) (#45)
    by Klio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:09:06 PM EST
    I didn't realize Ambinder's rather lengthy transcript was incomplete.  Tricky of him

    Parent
    On balance. . . (none / 0) (#38)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:10:02 PM EST
    in the scoring of the game of "supporters making unhelpful statements" I think the Clintons are somewhat in the lead.  I'm talking about real (public figure) supporters -- when it comes to blogosphere snipers, the clear advantage is with the Obama campaign.

    Harpootlian is a (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by RalphB on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:45:45 PM EST
    former chairman of the SC Democratic party.  That makes him something of a public figure.

    If case you might not remember, he's the guy who said "I don't want to buy the black vote, I just want to rent it for a day" some years ago when he was chairman.  Great legacy for him, huh?


    Parent

    Hmmm. Good tie in with that rogue flyer (none / 0) (#59)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:05:25 PM EST
    passed out by the Obama precinct captain in NV.

    Parent
    Larry knows that (none / 0) (#65)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:08:20 PM EST
    He is just remarking on the buffonery at daily kos.

    Parent
    He's really subtle. I still haven't decoded (none / 0) (#69)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:11:40 PM EST
    that Staten Island exchange.  Not complaining, as he is an excellent addition here.

    Parent
    Latest from Pit Bill (none / 0) (#40)
    by commissar on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:18:37 PM EST
    "If [Barack Obama] wins this nomination, I'm going to do what I can to help him become president."
     "After all the mean things they said about me, I can't believe I'm saying this," Clinton said.


    Hey all you Obama supporters (none / 0) (#41)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:20:55 PM EST
    Here's a song for ya....from us old fogies in the olden days.....:-)

    Parent
    You made my day (none / 0) (#182)
    by LadyDiofCT on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 08:00:22 AM EST
    That was so great.  A blast from the past.  Go Hillary!

    Parent
    i don't think you need to worry (none / 0) (#42)
    by hellothere on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 07:22:03 PM EST
    too much about obama being the candidate in november. the poll numbers for super tuesday don't support that at all.

    frankly, i wish the primaries were over, but then the haters will still be around with all their hate come november. geez

    Parent

    OBAMA SMEARS (none / 0) (#44)
    by northcoaster on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:02:01 PM EST
    I read this site daily along with several other political blogs with various Democratic leanings, and it is fairly obvious that Obama is not the favorite son at this site. I personally liked Edwards positions but he looks like he won't be nominated anytime soon, and I find Clinton's campaign to be mean spirited (almost Rovian) in its playbook. So, when you diss on Obama for something someone else said it only feeds the look of your inherent bias.

    Hiliary and Obama are probably both too DLC oriented - thanks for Nafta - but they both would be better than any Repug running.

    Hiliary benefits everytime the race issue comes up in terms of  Obama's candidacy because Obama's appeal is based on not being perceived like past angry black politicians - he needs to project being above racial divide - so tell me again who benefits when the press and the CLintons bring up race?????

    Sheesh (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:32:55 PM EST
    I give up with Obama supporters.

    Mindless.

    Parent

    Tell us why you think he is more electable (none / 0) (#51)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:38:14 PM EST
    than HRC, per your comment on mydd.  

    Parent
    Watching the gators (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:40:37 PM EST
    But MEdia Darling sums it up pretty much.

    Parent
    Gators WIN!! (5.00 / 1) (#63)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:07:15 PM EST
    Sharapova is SMACKING the ball.

    Parent
    But is she electable? (none / 0) (#70)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:12:22 PM EST
    Oh yes (none / 0) (#74)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:17:13 PM EST
    Electable? (none / 0) (#104)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:38:02 PM EST
    Or delectable?

    Parent
    Dont' answer that, BTD. (none / 0) (#115)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:49:43 PM EST
    You missed the point... (none / 0) (#46)
    by Teresa on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:18:19 PM EST
    this was an Obama supporter who brought up race. As they continue to bring this up, it just backs Obama into a corner he doesn't want to be in.

    Parent
    If Hillary Benefits Every Time Race (none / 0) (#47)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:23:18 PM EST
    comes up, they why did Dick Harpootlian, a former chairman of the South Carolina Democratic Party and a supporter of Barack Obama, bring it up on CNN.

    The fact that it is not helpful to Obama was the point that BTD was making in this post.

    It would be beneficial if both campaigns could find a way to dampen down this type of rhetoric.

    Parent

    Dick Harpootlian (none / 0) (#48)
    by chrisvee on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:29:47 PM EST
    As I understand it, Dick Harpootlian is a member of Obama's announced 'South Carolina truth squad' -- or did I misunderstand that announcement earlier this week?  So I hardly think it's biased for TL to discuss the nature and impact of these remarks on Obama's campaign.  YMMV, but I think it's a pretty inflammatory allegation to describe President Clinton's remarks as reminiscent of Lee Atwater given the things Lee Atwater did in his heyday.  It just ramps up the race issue again. I think Obama needs to disavow these remarks quickly.  They aren't helpful to his campaign and they aren't particularly accurate, either.

    Parent
    Obama will disavow (none / 0) (#58)
    by Kathy on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:05:18 PM EST
    the remarks in a few days.  He always lets it play out before he says, "oh, that's terrible.  Y'all stop."

    Parent
    maybe i missed it but (none / 0) (#150)
    by hellothere on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:36:29 PM EST
    when did obama disavow jackson jr or the religeous singer on tour accused of being homophobic? it seems obama doesn't disavow much his supporters say.

    Parent
    Somebody shut Bill up (none / 0) (#54)
    by sef on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:57:38 PM EST


    give Harpootlian a MEGAPHONE!! (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:05:51 PM EST
    Honest to Gawd, go do this crap at daily kos.

    NOT HERE!

    Parent

    which is why (none / 0) (#130)
    by sef on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:06:05 PM EST
    I love TL, but not when its talking about politics.  Seriously, I have seen exactly one post on the politics of crime relating to the dem primaries.  Maybe I should just go get my crimlaw news from Doug B.

    Parent
    I have the opposite reaction; venturing (none / 0) (#136)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:11:54 PM EST
    into the posts and comments about criminal justice sometimes makes me wonder why I read Talk Left.  Then I realize those portions are for people who practice criminal defense law.  

    Parent
    Why? (none / 0) (#57)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:04:27 PM EST
    why I enjoy listening to Bill...He makes alot of sense.....

    Parent
    Michelle Obama (none / 0) (#55)
    by PlayInPeoria on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 08:59:43 PM EST
    on race issue...an interview with News 14 South Carolina

    "It's inevitable that people will bring up race and talk about race in this campaign. What, if any, role do you think it should play in this campaign?" Boyum asked Obama during a brief interview following a campaign stop at the University of South Carolina in Columbia.

    "You know race is still an important issue in this country," Obama said. "You know there are still so many things that are impacted by race -- whether it's health. We know that there's still health disparities that exist. There are women that are African American that are dying of higher rates of breast cancer. So the issue is real."

    "Our belief is that the decision of who will be the next president will not be based solely on race or gender. You know, my deep hope is that people will base their decision on who they think they can trust. Who's got a vision for the country? Who's bringing a different, you know, tone to politics and who's going to really take this country in a different direction? And quite frankly, I think the only person that comes close to that is Barack. And he happens to be a black man," she said.




    Fine answer (none / 0) (#62)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:06:31 PM EST
    He is right about (none / 0) (#68)
    by Kathy on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:11:13 PM EST
    black women being more likely to die of breast cancer, but they are genetically predisposed to a particularly nasty type.  Screening, of course, is massively important, and that is where the health care "system" fails not just black women, but poor women in general.  Many insurance companies make it all but impossible for women to get basic screening.  They also don't help much with contraceptives.  Adding to the problem, most women will put their spouse or their children above their own needs.  If a woman who makes a meager living has to decide between her children getting healthcare, or even her children having basic school supplies or going on a field trip or, god forbid, having a nice pair of sneakers, then she will forgo insurance for herself.  This is why we need universal healthcare that mandates ALL women, men and children are covered.

    Parent
    I've read black women diagnosed with (none / 0) (#72)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:15:21 PM EST
    breast cancer are not given the array of choices and information provided to similarly situated Cauc. women.  I've also read that Michelle Obama's job includes steering uninsured patients away from the medical center (her employer) emergency room to community clinics.  

    Parent
    absolutely right and it is also (none / 0) (#152)
    by hellothere on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:38:50 PM EST
    failing the american people in general. it is a natiional disgrace.

    Parent
    Will there be a white backlash? (none / 0) (#61)
    by diplomatic on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:06:09 PM EST
    At what point do people start to harbor some resentment toward Obama for continuing down this path for no reason?  His campaign could argue that some of the previous comments directed at him were dog whistles but this is now absurd.  I wish he would get back to the unity/hope/inspiration message that at one point had me believing in him.  I was ready to support him and drop Clinton.  Some of my comments about 1-2 weeks ago on Dkos prove it.  I was ecstatic after he won Iowa.  On the bandwagon!  But then he reminded me of how unready he is to handle a campaign at this level.  Wait, I blame Axelrod.  He is the thorn.

    Now this Obama (5.00 / 1) (#71)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:14:38 PM EST
    remark isnt too smart of him....I  cannot imagine saying the Hillary voters will of course vote for me but I dont know if my supporters will vote for her....bit of an ego.....

    Parent
    Cathy thinks he is controlling and (none / 0) (#75)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:18:43 PM EST
    (not to put words in her mouth), perhaps misogynistic.  Maybe he cannot envision a woman winning the GE.

    Parent
    Excuse me (none / 0) (#77)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:19:39 PM EST
    NONE OF THAT!

    This site will not become daily kos.

    No more comments like that.

    Parent

    That was a "some people say" comment. (none / 0) (#80)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:23:01 PM EST
    Not me, honest.  

    Parent
    No (none / 0) (#81)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:25:26 PM EST
    some people say comments.

    Look, I know you but I'll be damned if I let this site become a mini daily kos.

    It will NOT happen.

    Parent

    I totally agree. Despite the presence (none / 0) (#82)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:26:55 PM EST
    today of Peter Daou AND John Kerry, not a pretty picture.    

    Parent
    So, why do you think Obama sd. that (none / 0) (#86)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:28:20 PM EST
    i.e., her voters will vote for me but mine may not vote for her?

    Parent
    He is bitter right now (5.00 / 2) (#89)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:30:04 PM EST
    and making a ton of mistakes.

    Honestly, I think he is pi**ing away any chance he has.

    Parent

    I'm wondering if Obama and his campaign (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:31:03 PM EST
    wouldn't be better off just ignoring what Bill Clinton says.  

    Parent
    oh heck yeah (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:34:01 PM EST
    he never should have gotten in the dirt....he cant stay above the frey and maintain his "above it all" thing this way...he is off message....

    Parent
    I think (none / 0) (#91)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:30:50 PM EST
    he is trying to point to her electability...but it came out wrong and egotistic in m y opinion

    Parent
    sorry! (none / 0) (#117)
    by Kathy on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:53:01 PM EST
    that was me-Kathy with a K.  I said that it troubled me very much that Michelle Obama would not accept a job offer until Barrack had met her future employer and approved of her working there.  I found that troubling and misogynistic.  If making a personal conclusion like that crosses a line, then I am very sorry.   (I think it's in the "testy" post, and refers to his website)  I left the sites you mention because they were nasty!

    Parent
    I think its more calculating, than anything else (5.00 / 1) (#179)
    by ding7777 on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 06:01:25 AM EST
    Just the fact that Michelle, 3 years out of law school, would leave a law firm for a staff position within Chicago strongest political machine - why??


    Parent
    I think it would be calculating (none / 0) (#188)
    by Kathy on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 08:58:30 AM EST
    if she took the job, worked her way in, then introduced her fiance-a man who only wanted to get into politics but held no office-then I would not have a problem with it.   She actually told them that she could not take the job until Obama approved of them.  This sends a strong message that Michelle, an ivy league educated woman who was asked to interview on her merits, is less important than Obama.  Did she only take the job to get him ahead?  Is that all she is worth?  She wasn't even married to him at the time!

    I dunno, maybe I have too much estrogen this week.  This infuriates me.  So, so controlling.

    Parent

    Hm (none / 0) (#93)
    by chrisvee on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:31:18 PM EST
    Intellectually, I understand his point (or what I think is his point): Clinton appeals strongly to the core Democratic base while Obama perhaps attracts more indies, Republican crossovers (Obamacans), and new (youth?) voters. If he's the nominee, her supporters will surely support him rather than sitting out the election or turning to a Republican candidate.  However, his supporters may either stay home, wander back to the Republican party, or perhaps support an independent candidate if one presents.  I guess this is the general thinking underlying the comment.

    Maybe.  I would hope the situation with the economy as well as the need to pull out from Iraq and the need to get our government working competently again would make a compelling case to vote Democratic for most voters even if they aren't generally interested in a progressive or Democratic agenda.

    I understand that he's trying to make the 'electability' case.  But I must say that I find the way he's making the point to be rather off-putting because my feeling is that we've all got to band together to get the Democratic nominee elected and ensure that we do well on the down ticket.  Frankly, I would expect Obama to work as hard for Nominee Clinton as he would for himself, if it comes to that -- and I expect the same of both Clintons.  This election is just too important.

    Parent

    Bill says he's on board. (none / 0) (#101)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:35:13 PM EST
    I thought Nevada exit polls proved Obama didn't really pull in many Republicans (Obamicans-that's really good), independents, and/or youth.  

    Parent
    Demographics (none / 0) (#133)
    by chrisvee on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:09:56 PM EST
    I can't recall the NV numbers off the top of my head, but I thought I had read that Clinton had begun to chip away at his perceived advantage in some of those demographics after Iowa.  But I think that the 'story' is almost more important than the reality here -- it's part of Obama's strategy to paint his appeal as being very broad and uniting.

    Obama used the term Obamacans to refer to Obama Republicans (like Reagan Democrats) during a rally earlier this week in SC.

    Parent

    that comment from him (none / 0) (#114)
    by diplomatic on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:49:20 PM EST
    Divisive stuff.  Ugly tone.  He really seems to dislike the Clintons.  He talks about them worse than he has almost any Republican.  Troubling.

    Parent
    I believe the (none / 0) (#122)
    by standingup on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:57:38 PM EST
    key portion of that comment is:

    I think there is no doubt that she has higher negatives than any of the remaining democratic candidates. That's just a fact and there are some who will not vote for her. If you look at the results in Nevada, for example, she eked out the popular vote victory over me, but I ended up winning more delegates because she got almost all of her votes from Clark County, Las Vegas and some of the traditional democratic areas. We got votes there, but we also got votes in northern Nevada and rural conservative regions of the state that traditionally don't vote Democratic, but were excited about my campaign.

    I have no doubt that once the nomination contest is over, I will get the people who voted for her. Now the question is can she get the people who voted for me? And I think that describes sort of one of the choices that people have, just a practical choice, as they move forward."

    My thoughts are this is another example of Obama awkwardly making a point that is true yet easily mistaken.  I would have to check to be certain but believe he is referring to Independents or Republican voters in "northern Nevada and rural conservative regions."  He is probably correct and needs to work on his delivery more than anything.    

    Parent

    but (none / 0) (#125)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:01:48 PM EST
    did the cross over votes just go to him for the primary in the "be a democrat for a day" thing or would he get them in a general election...I submit they were for the day and he wouldnt get them in the general election....big difference as Hillary will always get those democratic voters in the GE.....

    Parent
    Good (none / 0) (#145)
    by standingup on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:29:54 PM EST
    question and I don't have a good answer.  I think there are a couple of factors that will weigh heavily on the crossover in the general election, the Republican nominee and the economic situation at that time.  

    I did find the CNN breakdown of the entrance polls from Nevada.  Independents made up 15% of the voters and Obama took 47% to Clinton's 33% share.  They broke the state into three regions.  Washoe County (Reno and more conservative) had 18% and oddly enough, again  Obama had 47% to Clinton's 33%.  Clark County (Las Vegas) accounted for 66% with Obama taking 39% and Clinton 53%.  Rural Nevada, which I assume is more conservative, made up the other 16% with Obama and Hillary breaking almost even at 41% and 42% respectively.      

     

    Parent

    i also recall during that now (none / 0) (#158)
    by hellothere on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:49:51 PM EST
    famous interview where the reagan bruhaha began that obama also made comments regarding the last election where the candidates all called on him to come campaign for him and not anyone else. just me he kept saying. i have to say that put me off.

    Parent
    I think (none / 0) (#160)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:53:19 PM EST
    Obama's very huge ego will be his downfall....

    Parent
    Yes (none / 0) (#171)
    by standingup on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:39:05 PM EST
    he did make that point.

    There is a reason why in 2006 I made the most appearances for members of Congress. I was the most requested surrogate to come in and campaign for people in districts that were swing districts, Republican districts where they wouldn't have any other Democrat. And that was based on their read that of the fact that you know what this is somebody that can reach out to independents and republicans in a way that doesn't offend people.

    While I agree with him to an extent, I can think of additional reasons they sought him as a surrogate.  He is moderate and he does not carry the baggage that Republicans will use to rally their base.  I also think Obama was using 2006 as a launching pad for 2008 in terms of establishing his fundraising abilities and name recognition.  

    Parent

    Hope That Remark Doesn't Get Much Traction (none / 0) (#168)
    by MO Blue on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:12:19 PM EST
    Lot of older Dem voters are not real pleased with Obama right now and I don't see this type of remark helping him in a Dem primary. Also, it encourages his supporters to continue this meme. One which I have seen too often on the blogs.

    Coming after WJC's remark that he will help Obama become president if he is the nominee, this comment does not show Obama in a good light.

    O/T read some of the comments on that post. Talk about getting petty and nasty. {shudder}

    Parent

    Don't you think Obama is playing things (none / 0) (#73)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:16:57 PM EST
    differently in South Carolina, where more than 50% of registered voters are black?  Let's see if his campaign backs off for Super Tues.  

    Parent
    He will have no choice (none / 0) (#110)
    by diplomatic on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:45:07 PM EST
    Sure he will change his tune after South Carolina.  But will it be too late?

    Parent
    Here's my latest brainstorm: (none / 0) (#112)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:47:26 PM EST
    he's signaling the Armenian/American voters in CA.  

    Parent
    heh (none / 0) (#116)
    by diplomatic on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:50:05 PM EST
    Hurricane season is over.

    Parent
    The problem here (none / 0) (#139)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:14:07 PM EST
    is that most people perceive Clinton and her husband to have begun and continue to sling the mud.


    Parent
    got any evidence to back this up? (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by diplomatic on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:28:19 PM EST
    care to let us know how you came to that conclusion?  What the media tries to push is not the same as what the people believe.

    Parent
    if you (none / 0) (#146)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:32:59 PM EST
    go by the polls, most democrats support Clinton at this point....some states in a rather large margin...

    Parent
    no, not axelrod. the buck stops (none / 0) (#155)
    by hellothere on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:42:57 PM EST
    with obama. it is his campaign and he is the one who needs to make the necessary changes.

    kerry had bad advisors as i recall.

    Parent

    For the record (none / 0) (#76)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:18:45 PM EST
    Issues are issues.

    Statements are statements.

    Criticize them all you want.

    But NO CHARACTER ATTACKS ON ANY OF THE DEM CANDIDATES!

    This site will NOT become daily kos.

    Period.

    I agree with you BTD (none / 0) (#83)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:27:34 PM EST
    and if I have stepped over the line, please rein me back in because the last thing on earth I wish to do is hurt the democratic party....

    Parent
    He's talking to me, not you. (none / 0) (#87)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:29:05 PM EST
    I'm talking to everybody (none / 0) (#90)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:30:37 PM EST
    BTD manifesto. Time for a meta post, or (none / 0) (#96)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:32:35 PM EST
    just imitate Digby and shut down the comments entirely!

    Parent
    We do not do metaposts here (5.00 / 1) (#100)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:34:36 PM EST
    This is an authoritarian blog.

    Parent
    Turst me on this: that was a lol. (none / 0) (#103)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:36:39 PM EST
    I think I might have started all this (none / 0) (#121)
    by Kathy on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:55:56 PM EST
    Sorry!

    Parent
    Not really. I was paraphrasing your (none / 0) (#126)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:03:01 PM EST
    view of Michelle Obama's job interview anecdote and putting my own spin on it.  Sensitive issue.  (But apparently Mr. Obama doesn't pick up his dirty socks either!)

    Parent
    doesn't pick up his socks? (5.00 / 1) (#131)
    by Kathy on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:06:54 PM EST
    That is it.  He is dead to me.

    Parent
    My thoughts exactly. Change, hope, blah. (none / 0) (#138)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:13:57 PM EST
    yep (none / 0) (#185)
    by commissar on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 08:34:08 AM EST
    Fair and balanced (none / 0) (#95)
    by Rojas on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:31:54 PM EST
    You should probably leave now (none / 0) (#97)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:33:58 PM EST
    Daily Kos is much more your speed.

    I realize this edict pretty much eliminates your ability to contirbute.

    Parent

    The democratic party (none / 0) (#108)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:41:03 PM EST
    is the one thing we all belong to or wish to support I would hope.....That being said, I agree that we have to pull our slams of a personal nature because these two people (Obama and Hillary)  might be on the same ticket....who knows.....but whether they are or not, we all wish to see the GOP lose in the fall...and the only way they lose is if we all get behind our nominee....no matter which one it is ......very very important!!!!!

    Parent
    This is a candidate statement (none / 0) (#105)
    by RalphB on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:38:51 PM EST
    Hillary voters will of course vote for me but I don't know if my supporters will vote for her.

    How can you address that in a reasonable way and not speculate that it's perhaps sexist?  It's undeniably dumb and says a lot about his ego.

    What's out of place?  Do you consider that a personal attack?

    Parent

    I believe it is unfounded (none / 0) (#106)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:40:34 PM EST
    He was remarking on her high negatives.

    Not her gender.

    Parent

    But don't her "high negatives" (none / 0) (#109)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:42:27 PM EST
    stem from her gender.  Look at the comments earlier today about her "shrill" voice when she "shouts."

    Parent
    So anyone who doesn't like Clinton (none / 0) (#147)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:33:06 PM EST
    is sexist?

    You mean I voted for Barbara Boxer for the last twenty years because I mistook her for a man? Or maybe I voted for her because I thought she was a conservative? Or maybe I voted for Boxer all this time because of her deep voice. Not!

    There are people who may not vote for Clinton because she is a woman, just as there are people who may not vote for Obama because he is black. But somehow Clinton supporters are blind to the fact that there are a lot of people who do not like Clinton's politics, or her campaign.

    I would like to see an acknowledgement by some Clinton supporter here that there may be some dislike and mistrust of her beyond her gender.

    In fact, why should anyone vote for Clinton? How about someone here say something positive about Clinton's positions instead of continually bashing the other candidates?

    Parent

    So don't vote for her (none / 0) (#165)
    by Klio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:57:14 PM EST
    Despite what you've written, people in fact aren't blind to the dislike some have for Clinton's politics -- not deaf either. Give it a rest already.

    You find her repugnant.  I understand.  Here's my advice:  don't vote for her!  

    I wonder, though - have you considered that some people don't dislike her or her politics?  May even <<gasp!>> approve?  It's a big world out here, you know, with room for every taste.

    Parent

    Lets see: although unsuccessful, she (none / 0) (#166)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:00:14 PM EST
    put a lot of thought and effort into drafting and trying to shepherd through Congress a health care reform package.  She is generally well-respected by her constituents in NY for her work as a U.S. Senator on their behalf. Her remarks at the Petraeus  hearing were right on the mark and she had the guts to make them.  As far as I can tell, she is respected by many people and leaders of other countries.  She will do a fine job against the Republican nominee in the forthcoming GE debates.  She has worked well with others in the Senate to get legislation drafted and passed.    

    Parent
    what about this (none / 0) (#167)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:07:52 PM EST
    link and unfavorables...what does it say about the unfavorable rating of Obama and Hillary...I read it but my eyes are crossing after all this and need your opinions....

    Parent
    Apparently it is an attack on O's character (none / 0) (#107)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:40:59 PM EST
    to suggest such a thing.  But then, as you know, I'm not an O supporter, tepid or otherwise.  

    Parent
    actually (none / 0) (#111)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:46:19 PM EST
    I think that the more Hillary is attacked, the more support she gains....It is rather amazing....like in New Hampshire....

    Parent
    So true. (none / 0) (#113)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:48:50 PM EST
    I must say (none / 0) (#119)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:54:04 PM EST
    that I am like that lady in New Hampshire that asked her once how on earth she does this...It is really amazing that she keeps up that spirit day after day after all the mean and vile things are said about her....Obama on the other hand really shows his emotions on his sleeve when he is criticied, he gets really mad and says dumb stuff...not good

    Parent
    And look at poor Bill, caught taking a (none / 0) (#123)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 09:59:01 PM EST
    cat nap (or just resting his eyes, who knows) on video at MLK Jr.'s church in Atlanta.  

    Parent
    Gotta sleep sometime (none / 0) (#161)
    by RalphB on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:54:53 PM EST
    and I imagine those speeches can get old after the 100th time you heard them. They're not exactly the heart of originality.


    Parent
    How do you see. . . (none / 0) (#132)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:07:21 PM EST
    sexism in that comment?  Because he used her first name?

    To me it sounds like a bungled attempt to point out that some of Obama's support comes from independents and cross-over Republicans who are considerably less likely to vote for Clinton.  Inelegantly expressed, perhaps, but sexist?  I don't see it.

    Parent

    I agree that it doesn't seem sexist (none / 0) (#144)
    by Kathy on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:28:52 PM EST
    But it does seem really arrogant, which can often be confused with sexist.  It reminds me of the folks who have been calling Edwards a "kingmaker," as if he can magically confer his delegates.  I think we have all proven that we each have our own opinions.

    (And about Bill falling asleep: anyone who has been to a black church knows that those sermons can go on for hours. Days, even.  The first time I went to a white church was a revelation!  Absolution in under an hour!  It was then that I knew I would never be a black person.)

    Parent

    Another feature distinctly different from (none / 0) (#151)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:37:41 PM EST
    non-black churches I've attended:  if the collection plate contents aren't up to snuff, have another offering.  Good idea.  

    Parent
    Kathy, (none / 0) (#154)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:41:44 PM EST
    that happens in all sorts of churches, even churches with mixed race congregations. Not that I've been to any churches lately, but then I'm not a public figure with cameras aimed at me.

    As far as people voting for Edwards, I suspect that most of them are like me. We like his positions on the issues. We feel he's the most progressive of the three, is more likely to revive a social safety net and work for social justice. I think that most of them are voting for Edwards because neither of the two leading candidates have shown themselves to be very progressive. Others wonder about Obama's heart, and the rest just don't trust Clinton to be anything more than Republican Lite.

    Parent

    This is what I would like to see (none / 0) (#183)
    by Kathy on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 08:10:56 AM EST
    from John Edwards post-election: I want him to become a lobbyist for the poor and uninsured.  Think about it: 47 million folks, each give him a dollar.  He goes to Washington and works the rooms, and when the politicians don't do what they are supposed to, he becomes a thorn in their sides.  He could never have this much power as a politician.  

    (and then, in two or three generations, it'll be as corrupt as the Teamsters, but I'll be dead by then so I won't care)

    Parent

    No. Because he started off his (none / 0) (#148)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:34:30 PM EST
    response with this:

    Obama: I think there is no doubt that she has higher negatives than any of the remaining democratic candidates. That's just a fact and there are some who will not vote for her.

    I take that to mean her "higher negatives" are based on her gender.  Perhaps that isn't waht he meant.  Kind of like the Reagan kerfuffle.

    Parent

    No. (none / 0) (#157)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:48:12 PM EST
    It's not her gender. People don't like Clinton. I've got a woman in her early twenties in my household, a feminist, who found Clinton's anti-videogame grandstanding pure bull. Don't worry. She's registered as a Green so she won't be voting in the primary. But who knows who she'll vote for in November.

    Parent
    How does your female household (none / 0) (#159)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:51:01 PM EST
    member in her early twenties feel about Obama's "present" votes on abortion issues while in the IL Senate?

    Parent
    I don't see sexism (none / 0) (#163)
    by RalphB on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:56:38 PM EST
    either, I just saw some exaggerated ego. I was just trying to get a better idea of the rules of the game here.


    Parent
    Well, do we know what was discussed (none / 0) (#124)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:00:03 PM EST
    at the meeting he had just left?

    touche! (none / 0) (#128)
    by Judith on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:04:26 PM EST
    Ah, a uniter, not a divider. (none / 0) (#129)
    by Bob In Pacifica on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:05:06 PM EST
    I really wonder why anyone with a liberal bone in his or her body would support Clinton. It's certainly not her personality, not her position on anything, nor the way Clinton gave the oligarchy everything they wanted. Maybe it's because they see her as the designated candidate of the DLC and they worship the power of the status quo?

    I guess the reason why the Clinton supporters like her is because they want to be alley-fighting bullies too.

    And I don't understand (none / 0) (#149)
    by RalphB on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:35:56 PM EST
    the animus toward her.  Really looks irrational most of the time.


    Parent
    I agree with you RalphB totally!!!! (none / 0) (#153)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:41:18 PM EST
    Bob (none / 0) (#180)
    by ding7777 on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 06:39:10 AM EST
    There is not much difference between Hillary or  Obama or Edwards on the issues.

    So it comes down to presentation and believability.

    I liked Edwards in 2004, but no as much this time around - his repetitive apology for the Iraq War vote really bothers me - especially when he wasn't apologizing for it in 2004.

    I like Obama but question his commitment to core Democratic values  - especially when he uses Republican-lite rhetoric to inspire the Independents.

    I like Hillary. She is tireless, experienced,  has a "can do" attitude and knows Roe vs Wade is not a battle to dismiss because it was fought 60's and 70's.

    but I'll vote for any of them in the GE.

    Parent

    again bob (none / 0) (#137)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:13:00 PM EST
    you keep repeating that statement...no matter how many times you repeat it, doesnt make it true and it isnt true....

    As I recall, it was in a link provided (none / 0) (#142)
    by oculus on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:25:53 PM EST
    here by stellaaa.  Shall I search?  

    I believe her negatives (none / 0) (#164)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 10:56:46 PM EST
    now are about even with his.....I read that somewhere recently and for the life of me I cant remember where..some google person needs to find that fact....

    recent polls (none / 0) (#172)
    by athyrio on Wed Jan 23, 2008 at 11:39:51 PM EST
    Here are the latest polls I could find, including, where available, the Real Clear Politics averages:

    Alabama: Clinton 31, Obama 28, Edwards 8

    Arizona: Clinton 45, Obama 24, Edwards 9

    Arkansas: Clinton 57, Obama 17, Edwards 14

    California: Clinton 43.5, Obama 31.5, Edwards 10.5

    Connecticut: Clinton 41, Obama 27, Edwards 9

    Georgia: Obama 36, Clinton 33, Edwards 14

    Illinois: Nothing recent, but the last polls had Obama in a blowout. There's no reason to think that's changed.

    Massachusetts: Clinton 56, Obama 23, Edwards 14

    New Jersey: Clinton 46, Obama 28, Edwards 10.3

    New York: Clinton 48, Obama 32, Edwards 9

    Oklahoma: Clinton 45, Edwards 25, Obama 19

    Got these numbers from a post on The Left Coaster and they are really interesing and apparently recently done....

    This contest will be (none / 0) (#175)
    by talkingpoint on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 01:12:18 AM EST
    over on 02-05, because Obama race base campaign will not give him a victory in 90% of the states.

    Wow (5.00 / 1) (#177)
    by Jgarza on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 02:23:21 AM EST
    Obama race base campaign

    I love it, if you dare suggest race is involved in anything the Clinton's do you get a lecture, yet there isn't a post on this site that has something about Obama that doesn't have some mention of his campaign playing a "race card" or being racist.

    What is funny is you all insist he is going to loose because of it.  So of course it makes sense them that he is bringing them up?

    Ohh and my new fav since he some of his supporters might not vote for her he is being sexist.

    Actually from this post's comments alone i have gotten

    Obama is a racist
    misogynist
    arrogant
    loosing it
    melt down

    Are you even Democrats, because you all sound like Pat Robertson.  
    I'd love to respond to all the crap claims too, but I can't, I will get deleted.

    So I give up, I'm done commenting here, have fun Obama bashing.  I'll stick to the law posts..

    Parent

    whatever happens (none / 0) (#176)
    by athyrio on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 01:17:14 AM EST
    I sure hope it is soon because we need the unity of our party to win this election....it is vital...

    Parent
    Comments closing on this thread (none / 0) (#190)
    by Jeralyn on Thu Jan 24, 2008 at 09:42:45 AM EST
    We're almost at 200 and it's time to move on. Thanks for all your thoughts, if the thread needs to be cleaned, I'll do it later.