home

Wolcott . . . Heh

By Big Tent Democrat

Wolcott. This is an Open Thread.

Note - Comments are now closed. A note of thanks to Flyerhawk for being a very good sport while we picked on him. Note to all of us, we should not have done that.

< Is It Sexist To Point Out . . . | Revisiting the Four State Pledge on MI/FL Promises >
  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Michael Berube (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 05:54:15 PM EST
    sums up my angst over Hillary's recent tactics perfectly well...

    've been using the Google all week to try to find out if a Democratic candidate for the presidency has ever praised his (or her!) Republican opponent on national security at the expense of his (or her!) opponent in a heated Democratic primary. Specifically, I've been trying to find out if there was any point in 1984 when Walter Mondale said, "I think it's imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander-in-chief threshold. I believe that I've done that. Certainly, President Reagan has done that. And you'll have to ask Senator Hart with respect to his candidacy," or any moment in 1968 when Hubert Humphrey said, "I think it's imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander-in-chief threshold. I believe that I've done that. Certainly, Richard Nixon has done that. And you'll have to ask Senators McCarthy and Kennedy with respect to their candidacies."

    Granted, it's not a fair comparison, since Vice-Presidents Mondale and Humphrey had significantly higher security clearances in the Carter and Johnson administrations than Hillary Clinton had from 1993-2001. But I'm just trying to locate any speeches or press releases in which Mondale gave the nod on national security to Reagan or Humphrey gave the thumbs-up to Nixon.

    So far, all I've come up with is a really obscure moment preserved in Ye Olde Google Cache, from a press conference in late May of 1860 when Stephen Douglas said, "I think that I have a lifetime of experience that I will bring to the White House. Senator John Breckinridge has a lifetime of experience that he will bring to the White House. And former Illinois state legislator Lincoln has a speech he gave in 1858." But this doesn't seem terribly relevant. So it could be possible that we're seeing something truly unprecedented in American history. And that's really exciting!



    Um (5.00 / 12) (#2)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 05:55:58 PM EST
    How about John Kerry attacking Howard Dean in 2004? You folks need to stop acting so shocked. Let's deplore it but stop acting like it has never happened before.

    Wolcott is laughing at you.

    [ Parent ]

    Here Is Something Else From 2004 (5.00 / 4) (#48)
    by MO Blue on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:23:08 PM EST
    From Doctor Dean:

    Dean: Chris, four years ago, my opponents got together and had a political action committee, all four of which, uh, contributors contributed to the thing, which morphed me into Osama bin Laden, so this is patty cake. This is a tough campaign between two well- well-spoken, smart people, either of whom are capable of being president of the United States. But this is not, by and large, out of bounds. Raw Story


    [ Parent ]
    My favorite line: (5.00 / 7) (#53)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:26:44 PM EST
    "Lawd, you'd think it was Judgment at Nuremberg, with all this lofty, Oscar-caliber emoting."

    Seriously!  Is this the Democratic Party or the Actor's Studio?

    [ Parent ]

    It's from (5.00 / 3) (#58)
    by litigatormom on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:28:11 PM EST
    the 5th floor of the Happy Valley Clinic.

    [ Parent ]
    Absolutely hilarious (5.00 / 1) (#143)
    by Cream City on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:27:14 PM EST
    and I want to know how Wolcott hacked into my family's heated emails lately.

    Last night, a sib actually sent an F. Scott Fitzgerald quote that said sib felt was oh-so-apt about Bill and Hill; excuse me, "Tom and Daisy."  And it was accompanied by an illustration.  I refrained from responding that said sib was being oh-so-stereotypically "creative class" about it all.

    And said sibs were absolutely Bill fanatics for eons.  Had baby pictures taken with him.  What is it with the turn-on-a-dime syndrome?  I don't get it.

    But Wolcott has got it down like nothing I've seen before.  A hoot.

    [ Parent ]

    What Dean forgot to mention... (5.00 / 1) (#199)
    by Dawn Davenport on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:30:01 PM EST
    ...was that the guy who created those Osama-turned-Dean commercials was none other than Robert Gibbs, who's now serving as Obama's communications director.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm fairly certain (none / 0) (#5)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:00:33 PM EST
    that John Kerry never praised George Bush in an attempt to disparage Howard Dean.

    [ Parent ]
    No (5.00 / 5) (#7)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:01:47 PM EST
    All he said was the George Bush would kill him on the Commander in Chief issue.

    I wonder what he meant by that? Sheesh.

    You ARE intent in having Wolcott laugh at you I see.

    [ Parent ]

    And yet alarmingly (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by Steve M on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:06:46 PM EST
    Bush did not prance around in the GE saying "look, even John Kerry admits I'm qualified to be CiC."

    Gosh, why not?  Because the whole point is that 2004 Bush, or McCain, doesn't have to resort to rhetorical cleverness to prove their CiC credentials.  Like it or not, it is self-evident to most of the electorate.

    Hillary still shouldn't have said it, but the hand-wringing is truly absurd.  Between this and the "as far as I know he's not a Muslim" flap, I'm truly starting to worry about people.

    [ Parent ]

    She should not have said it (5.00 / 6) (#15)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:09:27 PM EST
    And neither shouldhave Kerry. But this is exactly what Wolcott is talking about - this new fouind belief that she is breaking new ground here is so patently absurd, that one wonders if these people have a clue of what is actually going on.

    This goes from Josh Marshall to Matt Yglesias to well everyone on down to Flyerhawk here.

    These are not stupid people. What is wrong with them?

    [ Parent ]

    CDS (5.00 / 5) (#21)
    by Steve M on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:12:42 PM EST
    That's the only thing I can think of.

    Otherwise reasonable people would not be this disposed to think of Hillary Clinton as uniquely evil if the GOP had not spent a decade baking it into everyone's skulls.

    It's like everyone in the blogosphere gets to have their little "Rush was right" moment along the way in this campaign, when they finally realized the "truth" about Hillary.

    [ Parent ]

    And Wolcott rightly ridicules them (5.00 / 2) (#31)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:15:49 PM EST
    here, with Ken as the doppelganger for the lot of them.

    A bit cowardly of Wolcott truth be told. But a bit cowardly of me to not writer that in a post. But he raked me over the coals one time and I am not anxious to get in his crosshairs again.

    [ Parent ]

    Daily Frat (5.00 / 3) (#167)
    by Athena on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:46:18 PM EST
    That self-same diarist had recently deposited a nasty ad hominem comment to one of my posts recently.  An endless supply of sanctimony is apparent.

    [ Parent ]
    Moral Decision (5.00 / 3) (#117)
    by waldenpond on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:57:51 PM EST
    If you watch closely enough, it is the same people who have come to the decision that it is a violation of themselves to vote for Clinton.  I have advised them to change their names.  The repeated indignation is annoying when it isn't laughable.

    [ Parent ]
    The problem is (none / 0) (#27)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:14:52 PM EST
    she KEEPS SAYING IT.  This isn't one isolated speech.  It is a campaign strategy.  And it will burn her or Obama.

    You have a quote where Kerry said that George Bush is competent?  

    Words matter.  General themes don't.

    [ Parent ]

    Ahhh (5.00 / 4) (#33)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:16:43 PM EST
    So if she had just said it once that would have been ok? How many times did Kerry say it? Do you know? Psst, it was more than once.

    [ Parent ]
    I'll ask again (none / 0) (#62)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:29:43 PM EST
    How many times did Kerry say that Bush was competent?  

    [ Parent ]
    Your energy level is truly impressive. (none / 0) (#72)
    by oculus on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:37:20 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I'm sorry (none / 0) (#77)
    by Steve M on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:40:02 PM EST
    how many times did Hillary say McCain is competent?  Every day y'all plumb that quote for more sinister implications.

    [ Parent ]
    Yeah (5.00 / 1) (#150)
    by sander60tx on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:35:32 PM EST
    I wonder how many times she actually said it.  I think that it just keeps being replayed.  Each replay I've seen, she's wearing the same outfit, so I presume if she said it more than once, it was on the same day.  But, I really don't know what else she's said since then.  

    [ Parent ]
    No, no, you're just making excuses (5.00 / 1) (#173)
    by Cream City on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:51:34 PM EST
    as everyone knows that part of her evil strategy is to have exact replicas of every outfit, down to the accessories -- didn't you see Amy Poehler on SNL? -- so that you would think just this.

    Can you PROVE that cable tv ever reruns the same clip again?  Where is your link for that?

    No, clearly, you have been taken in by The Evil One and Her Campaign's Fashion Clone Strategy.

    As we say in Project Runway, she made it work! :-)

    [ Parent ]

    Please keep up (none / 0) (#86)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:43:39 PM EST
    BTD referenced a quote by Kerry which said that Dean was not fit to be President, as an example of comparable situation as what Hillary is doing.

    It would only be comparable if Kerry also said that Bush was a competent, or fit if you prefer, President.

    [ Parent ]

    George Bush was already president... (none / 0) (#172)
    by kredwyn on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:50:29 PM EST
    not qualified or not, he was already in the seat that Kerry was trying to win.

    And btw...given that "Hope" is an overarching and general message, you might want to be careful with statements like "Words matter.  General themes don't."

    [ Parent ]

    why should we have all the fun? (5.00 / 1) (#89)
    by Kathy on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:44:30 PM EST
    You ARE intent in having Wolcott laugh at you I see.


    [ Parent ]
    It's so easy (none / 0) (#98)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:46:36 PM EST
    to take cheaps at the person that disagrees with the crowd, isn't it?

    The problem with the blogosphere is that it resembles a schoolyard playground far too much.

    [ Parent ]

    You know what's sad flyerhawk? (5.00 / 4) (#124)
    by Maria Garcia on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:05:43 PM EST
    Obama has so many legitimate positive attributes that make him a great candidate. I never asked any of the candidates to be perfect. I think he made a HUGE mistake going with the trash the Clinton strategy. Al Gore made the same mistake...running away from our strengths. In that sense he let the Republicans call the shots. What I want to hear from his campaign is why he will be the better president. Rightly or wrongly, I already formed my opinion that Hillary Clinton has what it takes to be president long before I even heard of Barack Obama. He had to overcome her name recognition and her excellent track record in my mind. While I admire her, I didn't necessarily start out this primary season convinced that she was the best candidate.

    BTW, I thought that Dean and Wesley Clark were better candidates than Kerry in 2004 and I still supported Kerry.  

    [ Parent ]

    Trashing Clinton (none / 0) (#127)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:08:03 PM EST
    is a purely subjective argument.  The notion that either candidate was particularly kind to the other is pretty ridiculous.

    [ Parent ]
    Well you won't give an inch, will you? (none / 0) (#132)
    by Maria Garcia on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:12:42 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    he gives lots of inches (none / 0) (#158)
    by tree on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:41:37 PM EST
    You just haven't noticed yet that he's carrying the goalposts when he moves

    [ Parent ]
    heh (none / 0) (#163)
    by RalphB on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:43:32 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Give an inch? (none / 0) (#162)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:42:58 PM EST
    You're trying to argue that Obama started it thus Hillary's attacks are ok.

    I'm saying they are both willing to attack each other yet I am the one who needs to give an inch?

    [ Parent ]

    Seriously, I'm just trying to get you to... (none / 0) (#170)
    by Maria Garcia on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:48:54 PM EST
    ...lighten up.

    [ Parent ]
    Show me where I said that .... (none / 0) (#176)
    by Maria Garcia on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:53:35 PM EST
    ..Hillary's attacks are okay because Obama started it. If I did say that, it was unintentional. And if all you are saying is that they are both willing to attack each other, then I quite agree with you.

    [ Parent ]
    I don't have a problem (none / 0) (#14)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:09:17 PM EST
    with Hillary criticizing Obama as being inexperienced.  I DO have a problem with her PRAISING McCain.  Why is this so hard to understand?

    [ Parent ]
    What is so hard to understand? (5.00 / 7) (#19)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:11:57 PM EST
    that you actually NOW argue, through some double flips of parsing, that what Clinton said was worse than what Kerry said.

    Kerry said DEAN was UNFIT to be Commander in Chief!!

    Clinton did not say Obama was unfit, she said she and McCain were more fit. Very bad indeed.

    But in the scheme of things, what Kerry said was so much worse it seems hard to me to believe I have to argue this point with you.

    But you and Berube are INTENT on having the vapors so you will have them.

    This is why Wolcott is laughing at all of you.

    [ Parent ]

    I had a problem with Obama praising Reagan. (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by Maria Garcia on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:12:50 PM EST
    But I got over it.

    [ Parent ]
    I haven't gotten over it. (5.00 / 3) (#121)
    by Boston Boomer on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:04:04 PM EST
    Obama's admiration of Reagan is evident in his book in multiple references.  I don't think I can get over the McClurkin business either.


    [ Parent ]
    The McClurkin business was worse. (4.75 / 4) (#135)
    by Maria Garcia on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:18:17 PM EST
    I actually haven't gotten over that yet.

    [ Parent ]
    Yeah (none / 0) (#42)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:21:02 PM EST
    It took you and others 2 months to get over it.  And his praise was tepid and referenced a dead Republican not the current Republican nominee for President.


    [ Parent ]
    She didn't praise him.. (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by lectric lady on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:39:39 PM EST
    ...she merely stated a fact. It IS a FACT.

    There are a zillion reasons to trash McCain, but he HAS passed the threshold to be CinC.

    [ Parent ]

    The thing about (none / 0) (#91)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:44:54 PM EST
    facts is that the are incontrovertible.  2+2=4 is a fact.  The Sun rises in the East is a fact.

    McCain passing some nebulous threshold of Presidential ability is an opinion.  Nothing more.

    [ Parent ]

    It was not a compliment. (none / 0) (#138)
    by 0 politico on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:21:45 PM EST
    A considered opinion, perhaps,  not one I would have offered in public.  But, it is an opinion some may share.

    This is not something that we need to blow gaskets over, IMHO.

    [ Parent ]

    BTW (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:02:44 PM EST
    John Kerry on the capture of Saddam Hussein and what Dean said about it. Look it up and stop acting like a fan.

    [ Parent ]
    Here you go (5.00 / 5) (#11)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:07:22 PM EST
    BOn December 16, at Drake University in Iowa, Kerry asserted that "those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein, and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture, don't have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president."

    Are you shocked yet? Do you have the vapors again? Should Obama denounce and reject John Kerry?

    Please. you and Berube need to grow up.

    [ Parent ]

    I'm beginning to suspect Obama's (none / 0) (#16)
    by oculus on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:10:05 PM EST
    having Kerry speak for the campaign is like the NAFT/Canada communication.  I'm against the Iraq war in this campaign, but don't worry.  I'll stay the course if elected.  

    [ Parent ]
    You miss my point (5.00 / 4) (#23)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:13:57 PM EST
    Kerry was saying DEAN was unfit, UNFIT, to be C-i-C. VERBATIM. In express words with no wiggle room.

    But Flyerhawk, with an assist from Berube, has decided to have the vapors now and act as if he NEVER EVER saw anything like it.

    Which is why Wolcott is laughing at the lot of them.

    [ Parent ]

    One more time (none / 0) (#34)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:17:12 PM EST
    and the last time because now it's just a gang up argument.

    I DON'T CARE if she says that Obama is not fit to be President.  That is politics.

    I have a problem with her praising McCain.  Why is this so hard to understand?

    [ Parent ]

    Because praising someone may be (5.00 / 3) (#43)
    by Florida Resident on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:21:28 PM EST
    bad politics but it is not wrong if you really believe that the person has the qualities you are praising.  Sort of when Obama called the Republicans the Party of Ideas or something to that effect.  Not good politics but if he felt that in certain areas they had the ideas who am I to argue with his beliefs.

    [ Parent ]
    Why? Obama has praised plenty of Repubs. (5.00 / 5) (#44)
    by Maria Garcia on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:21:36 PM EST
    He's said that McCain is an honorable man. Why is the CiC thing so sacrosanct? I don't like her praising McCain either, but sheesh, why is this the dealbreaker when Obama has done it too?

    [ Parent ]
    No. (5.00 / 5) (#46)
    by Mary Mary on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:22:04 PM EST
    You have a problem with Hillary. Full stop.

    Please. Do you really think that no one in this country would have thought that John McCain is qualified to be Commander in Chief if Hillary Clinton had not said it?

    [ Parent ]

    On e more time (5.00 / 4) (#47)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:22:33 PM EST
    Folks like you are being satired by Wolcott for a reason.

    [ Parent ]
    Do you really think (none / 0) (#55)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:27:44 PM EST
    that I care what Walcott says?  

    What's funny is that I have a very specific criticism of Hillary.  I have stated countless times that I would vote for her in November, unlike MANY here who state they WON'T vote Obama in November.  

    And yet I am the one that is being satirized.  Yeah, ok.  Here's a tip for all of you.  When you start our a response "Yeah what she did was wrong but....." you're probably not making your point very strongly.  

    I am the one defending Obama on a heavily pro-Hillary web site.  I am not sitting comfortably in friendly waters getting outraged by every new faux outrage against my candidate.  

    [ Parent ]

    I'll take a vote cause I don't know... (5.00 / 3) (#66)
    by Maria Garcia on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:31:50 PM EST
    Who here won't vote for Obama if he's the nominee? I'll vote for him, I've said so a million times.

    [ Parent ]
    I can name (none / 0) (#69)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:34:16 PM EST
    10 regular posters here who have said they won't vote for him or that he has to achieve some as of yet unknown goal to convince them to for him.

    [ Parent ]
    I have heard that many times from both (5.00 / 3) (#76)
    by Florida Resident on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:39:52 PM EST
    sides on different blogs.  But the majority of Clinton followers are life long Democrats not new comers or independents so they will vote for whoever the Democrats Nominate.  Can the same be said of the crossovers or independents Obama's campaign brags so much of attracting.

    [ Parent ]
    I speak (none / 0) (#81)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:41:41 PM EST
    soley of this blog since BTD chose to call me out as an example of Walcott's criticism.

    [ Parent ]
    Mind you that I believe BTD is pro-Obama (none / 0) (#85)
    by Florida Resident on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:43:08 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    x (none / 0) (#94)
    by Mary Mary on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:45:33 PM EST
    I think you should've avoided the word "angst." And not quoted Berube. JMO.

    [ Parent ]
    x (5.00 / 2) (#79)
    by Mary Mary on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:40:40 PM EST
    I'll vote for him, but only after I travel to the polls on my knees, scourging myself with thorns,to show the proper penitence for committing such treason against my very soul.

    [ Parent ]
    Me too. And if he betrays me on (none / 0) (#96)
    by oculus on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:45:58 PM EST
    SCOTUS nominees, I'll be the one marching on Washington.  

    [ Parent ]
    I told my dad about this cartoon (none / 0) (#115)
    by zyx on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:57:13 PM EST
    and he thought it was great--so I printed it (he doesn't use the 'net much any more) and mailed it to him.

    He voted for Obama in Wisconsin but said he'd be happy with Clinton.  He was a (Rockefeller) republican when I was a kid--and a career AF pilot.  His loathing of Bush and McCain actually kind of surprise me.

    http://i255.photobucket.com/albums/hh157/blogtopus/poli8.jpg

    [ Parent ]

    There's a petition online (5.00 / 2) (#207)
    by anniethena on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:38:54 PM EST
    link

    Obama Supporters Who Will Not Vote For Clinton in November

    Saw it on Huffpo this afternoon - it was a bit below 1600 signatures when I first checked and it's now over 1700. No idea when it started of course.

    You should check out some of the comments from the signers. This one's a beauty:

    Stop 'Wars for PROFIT'. Stop treating our Troops like second class citizens! Help them when they come home. Stop Profiteering by GOP'. World Domination is NOT the answer. REAL CHANGE means stopping the GOP.

    Amidst all the comments of "I'll stay home or vote for McCain"....

    [ Parent ]

    I take it you do not (none / 0) (#59)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:28:49 PM EST
    But I found his post spot on, funny and devastating to people like you.

    [ Parent ]
    For the most part (none / 0) (#65)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:31:36 PM EST
    I don't care much for blogosphere self-flagellation.  

    It doesn't bother me but it doesn't interest me either.

    [ Parent ]

    Then why are you (none / 0) (#179)
    by Cream City on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:58:22 PM EST
    putting yourself through this misery in front of this audience?  

    <curtain slowly closes on scene of our hero setting down whip after flagellating self while giving stirring soliloqy against self-flagellation. . . .>

    [ Parent ]

    hey Cream are you a Drama Teacher? (none / 0) (#180)
    by Florida Resident on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:00:56 PM EST
    Reminded me of my Drama Class just now.

    [ Parent ]
    I'm dying here... (none / 0) (#125)
    by waldenpond on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:06:59 PM EST
    I am laughing so hard right now I can't type!!!  This is so @##% funny!

    [ Parent ]
    Once again... (none / 0) (#93)
    by lectric lady on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:45:16 PM EST
    ... she didn't PRAISE McCain, she stated a FACT.

    Turn back the clock. Say McCain had been CinC on 9/11. Do you think he and his administration would have done what the Bushies did? I don't think so.

    I still detest McCain. I wouldn't vote for him in a million years because of 99.99999% of his beliefs. But the Fact is, he passes the CinC test, and Hillary, unlike you, understands that.

    [ Parent ]

    Once again (none / 0) (#101)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:49:36 PM EST
    she did NOT state a fact.  I have no idea what McCain would or would not have done.  

    BTW, do you have a copy of this CinC test?  I wouldn't taking it.  Is it like the SATs focusing mostly on fundamental secondary school knowledge or is more like the military ASVAAB, focusing on common skills? I'm not the greatest test taker but I would like to find out if I can pass the test to be CinC.

    [ Parent ]

    It is obvious (none / 0) (#174)
    by sander60tx on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:52:33 PM EST
    that if one bases fitness to be CIC on experience, that John McCain has much more of that, partly due to the fact that he is older.  People would have thought of on their own.  I don't necessarily think it's bad that she pointed that out, though I didn't really like tone of her comment.  I think she was trying to get people to think about how Obama would stack up to McCain in a CIC-creditials comparison.  Often when the question comes up, Obama brings up his good judgement (based on the speech he made in 2002).  She is trying to get people to think about how that comparison will look in a McCain-Obama race (experience vs. the judgement i.e., the speech) vs. how that will look if it is a McCain-Clinton race (more experience vs. being married to someone who was the CIC).  I don't think she should necessarily remind people about Bill (they haven't appeared together since Super Tues.) but it is relevant that she is married to someone who was CIC and that she would have the advangtage of his advice were she the CIC.  Whoever becomes president will have "on the job training."  She happens to be married to someone who, for better or worse, can personally provide it.

    [ Parent ]
    I got your point. Just venturing an off topic (none / 0) (#147)
    by oculus on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:32:23 PM EST
    comment.

    [ Parent ]
    A quote like that is worth a 1000 words (none / 0) (#18)
    by lilburro on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:11:36 PM EST
    at least as far as Kerry goes.

    [ Parent ]
    Please indeed (none / 0) (#20)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:12:28 PM EST
    You need to spend more than 2 seconds understanding what the criticism is.  

    I think her tactic of praising McCain is not only bad for Obama, it is bad for Hillary Clinton and it is terrible for the Democratic Party.  

    This is a really difficult topic for Democrats to gain credibility on.  When Hillary cedes that the Republican is, in fact, experienced and competent on foreign policy issues you are ceding a huge point that won't be easy to walk back from.  

    It is really really really bad tactic.  

    [ Parent ]

    Strangely ... (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:14:14 PM EST
    the only people it seems to upset are Obama supporters.

    I wonder why?

    [ Parent ]

    I find it very strange (5.00 / 5) (#118)
    by Kathy on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:59:19 PM EST
    that no one is really looking at what Clinton said:

    "...I think it's imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander-in-chief threshold.  I believe that I've done that. Certainly, Sen. McCain has done that and you'll have to ask Sen. Obama with respect to his candidacy."

    So, what's Obama's answer?  "Here are my credentials!"?  No, his answer is, "that's not fair!  You said McCain was more qualified than me!  WAH!!!  I'm tellin' uncle Teddy!"

    [ Parent ]

    Because (none / 0) (#35)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:17:42 PM EST
    most Hillary supporters are content with attacking Obama and don't care about the repercussions down the road.

    [ Parent ]
    as McCain.  Let the voters decide who has a better grasp of Foreign affairs and the like and whose experience is more valuable when you debate and run against each other in the GE campaign.

    [ Parent ]
    Ironic comment of the day (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:28:00 PM EST
    Too funny.

    [ Parent ]
    I agree (5.00 / 5) (#36)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:19:10 PM EST
    but who gets apoplectic over a bad POLITICAL TACTIC and say someone is evil and they will never vote for them and that she is evil and oh, that she is evil.

    You are being quite the slippery eel in this thread.

    I hate the tactic and have said so.

    But the reaction from the rest of the blogs has been simply ridiculous. That is Wolcott's point.

    Did you read his piece?

    [ Parent ]

    Please (5.00 / 4) (#38)
    by Steve M on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:19:57 PM EST
    While she shouldn't have said it, it is hardly ceding a "huge point" with respect to John McCain.

    We are very, very unlikely to win the threshold argument of whether McCain is experienced enough to be President.  We can poke holes around the edges but that's about it.

    On the other hand, the argument as to whether Obama is experienced enough is far more up in the air, and we could well prevail on that point.  But a lot of people need to get over the idea that we were somehow going to persuade everyone that John McCain was a clueless newbie, before Hillary gave away the game.

    [ Parent ]

    Indeed (5.00 / 10) (#54)
    by litigatormom on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:26:55 PM EST
    No one can credibly claim McCain lacks experience on military matters. The question is whether he's learned the right lessons, and drawn the right conclusions, from that experience.

    I would say no.  Despite all the "experience,"  what McCain doesn't have, IMO, is the judgment and temperament to be CiC. And lots of senior military officials agree.  

    Obama, of course, is making a similar judgment, based on one vote, about Clinton: that she lacks the judgment to be CiC because of a single act: her Iraq resolution vote.  Well, many of Obama's most prominent supporters, including John Kerry and Tom Daschle, made the same judgment. Is it hypocritical of Obama to accept their endorsements, and send them out on the road as surrogates?  

    [ Parent ]

    Of course not (none / 0) (#49)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:23:34 PM EST
    We aren't going to convince people that McCain is a newbie.  But we can convince people that he has terrible judgment that his past experience is irrelevant UNLESS we cede the points up front.

    [ Parent ]
    Hawk, do I understand that (5.00 / 2) (#183)
    by Cream City on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:07:25 PM EST
    (oh, this sequenced comment thread, ouch) to LitMom's query:

    "Many of Obama's most prominent supporters, including John Kerry and Tom Daschle, made the same judgment. Is it hypocritical of Obama to accept their endorsements, and send them out on the road as surrogates?"  

    The sum total of your reply, Hawk, was "Of course not"?  Could you, uh, explicate?  Why is it not hypocritical of Obama to so criticize Clinton's judgment for the same vote cast by those whose judgment of him we are to accept and even embrace?

    [ Parent ]

    Kerry even went so far recently as to say (none / 0) (#185)
    by oculus on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:10:15 PM EST
    he doesn't fault HRC for not redaing the NIE before she voted for the AUMF.  

    [ Parent ]
    Well (none / 0) (#61)
    by Steve M on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:29:31 PM EST
    I do not believe Hillary ceded that point in any way.

    Do you really think that when Obama says "McCain voted for the war, you can't trust his judgment," he will come back with "aha! but Hillary Clinton said I had passed the commander-in-chief threshold!"  The very notion is absurd.

    [ Parent ]

    experience is not the (none / 0) (#177)
    by tree on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:54:20 PM EST
    same as judgment. Two different issues. Ceding the point that McCain has experience doesn't mean that you can't make an argument that judgment or temperament disqualify McCain. A smart politician will cede the points that can't be won, so as to focus on the one's that can. And only you are confounding experience and judgment. You are the only one ceding the point. No one else has, including Clinton.

    [ Parent ]
    Please. . . (5.00 / 4) (#178)
    by LarryInNYC on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:58:06 PM EST
    I think her tactic of praising McCain is not only bad for Obama, it is bad for Hillary Clinton and it is terrible for the Democratic Party.

    There are certainly people who believe it's a mistake ever to say anything non-disparaging about the Republicans or individual Republicans.

    But very, very few of them are supporting Barack Obama's post-partisan, no-one-party-has-all-the-good-ideas campaign.

    We've been through six months or so of "don't vote for Hillary, she's too divisive, the Republicans hate here, Obama can swing Republicans and independents".

    Now, because Clinton acknowledged something that pretty much everyone recognizes -- that McCain's been around government for a long time -- that narrative is completely out the window?  Because Clinton said "McCain has the experience to be C in C" suddenly she's not divisive enough?????  And Barack Obama, the post-partisan candidate, is the one who's credited with never having a kind word to say about Republicans?

    Could we at least have some consistency?  If divisiveness isn't good politics, why is non-divisiveness also not good politics?  Tomorrow, when Clinton attacks McCain's policies is it going to be back to last months argument -- that we need to attract Republicans to win?

    [ Parent ]

    Wasn't HRC's comment that both (none / 0) (#25)
    by oculus on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:14:16 PM EST
    she and McCain were qualified to be Commander in Chief and Obama should speak for himself.  CinC is different than foreign policy, although they are, of course, intertwined.

    [ Parent ]
    What she said was that both (5.00 / 5) (#39)
    by litigatormom on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:20:41 PM EST
    she and McCain brought a "lifetime of experience" to the job of CiC, but Obama brought a speech he gave in 2002.  

    I wasn't happy with her putting the issue that way, but BTD is right -- it's not like she's breaking new ground here.

    And if I'm not mistaken, Obama has called her credibiity and integrity into question while giving McCain a free pass on that issue.

    It is, sadly, what politicians do.  Even when its not smart politics.

    [ Parent ]

    OMG (5.00 / 2) (#212)
    by Warren Terrer on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:52:36 PM EST
    That tears it. Better that McCain be elected than a Democrat who said something nice about him. Let's all cut off our noses to spite our faces.

    [ Parent ]
    Right, and when Obama is Prez (none / 0) (#26)
    by lilburro on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:14:28 PM EST
    Chuck Hagel will handle foreign policy.

    [ Parent ]
    Don't Forget Lugar At State (5.00 / 1) (#108)
    by MO Blue on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:52:30 PM EST
    and Arnold somewhere or other. Makes you wonder if he plans to include any Dems in his cabinet.

    [ Parent ]
    Is Obama promising to take Arnold (none / 0) (#113)
    by oculus on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:55:52 PM EST
    off our hands in CA?  

    [ Parent ]
    hummmm (none / 0) (#99)
    by lectric lady on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:47:19 PM EST
    She didn't PRAISE McCain

    [ Parent ]
    Also the famous ... (5.00 / 5) (#17)
    by Robot Porter on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:10:45 PM EST
    Howard Dean "Osama" ad was created by Robert Gibbs a former press secretary for John Kerry.

    Robert Gibbs now communications director for Barack Obama.

    There are no clean hands at this level.

    [ Parent ]

    I know (5.00 / 4) (#37)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:19:53 PM EST
    It is just juvenile and puerile and well ridiculous.

    [ Parent ]
    George Bush was the incumbent President (none / 0) (#70)
    by ineedalife on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:36:22 PM EST
    So the whole thing doesn't apply in 2004.

    This only works when the opposing candidate is not an incumbent President or VP. That drastically limits your options since almost always the other candidate is an incumbent or VP.

    [ Parent ]

    How (5.00 / 2) (#100)
    by tek on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:49:11 PM EST
    about Barack Obama accusing Bill Clinton of racist remarks that the President never uttered?  Or Obama accusing Hillary Clinton of diminishing MLK when, in fact, that never occurred?  Or how about Ted Kennedy announcing that he endorsed Obama because Hillary overlooked JFK's role in civil rights legislation and then a review of Hillary's remarks proves that she, in fact, stated quite plainly that JFK crafted the legislation and LBJ pushed it through?

    Never seen a Democrat slam another Democrat to gain political advantage?  You must not read the news.

    [ Parent ]

    You have a (none / 0) (#103)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:50:34 PM EST
    quote of Obama accusing Clinton of racist remarks?  That would be neat to have.

    [ Parent ]
    No he uses his surrogate like JJ jr for that. (none / 0) (#110)
    by Florida Resident on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:53:11 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I have a copy of a four-page memo (none / 0) (#112)
    by Kathy on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 06:55:45 PM EST
    quote of Obama accusing Clinton of racist remarks?  That would be neat to have.

    LINK

    [ Parent ]

    Looks like you take it up (none / 0) (#120)
    by flyerhawk on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:01:58 PM EST
    was Candace Tolliver.

    [ Parent ]
    Has Tolliver been fired for (5.00 / 1) (#186)
    by Cream City on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:10:56 PM EST
    misrepresenting her client's thoughts about Clinton?  In Tolliver's field, you don't even finish out the day if you do so.

    Has she been fired?  Or "resigned"?

    [ Parent ]

    Obama and Clinton (none / 0) (#123)
    by 1jane on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:05:37 PM EST
    Both candidates have surrogates they can't always control. As to the racist thing it was the media that jumped all over Bill Clinton's comment comparing Barack Obama's win in the South to a Jesse Jackson win. Mr. Clinton more than strongly infered that Barack Obama was just an African American flash in the pan. Mr. Clinton continues this line with heavy hints that Barack Obama would make a great VP for Hillary, again marginializing Barack Obama into junior status, not because he's an African American this time, instead he infers Obama is ready to be the next president.

    [ Parent ]
    Only in the eyes of those that see (5.00 / 1) (#130)
    by Florida Resident on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:12:03 PM EST
    Obama as the AA's candidate does Bill Clinton remarks
    more than strongly infered that Barack Obama was just an African American flash in the pan
    in my eyes all he was saying was that even though Jesse Jackson won SC and other Primaries he still did not win the nomination.  Now if you and others always want to see evil conniving motives behind every Clinton remark or statement your welcome to your opinion that does not mean I have to respect it.

    [ Parent ]
    Check out Blackprof.com (5.00 / 2) (#122)
    by esmense on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:04:35 PM EST
    He has some choice quotes from Gary Hart campaigning against Walter Mondale in 1984:

    "Senator Gary Hart said today that Walter F. Mondale, as Vice President, was part of an Administration that was "weak," "inept," "uncertain" and marked by "days of shame" in Iran...

    "Walter Mondale now promises an America that can and will stand up for its vital interests," the Colorado Senator told an ebullient crowd of hundreds of students at Texas A&M University here. "But Carter-Mondale actually gave us an America held hostage to the ayatollahs of the world."

    "In national security as in domestic policy," he said, "we must not leave the American people with a bleak choice in 1984 between two failed pasts - that of Ronald Reagan and that of the Carter-Mondale Administration."

    `Reagan's Favorite Opponent'

    "After reviewing the record of the Carter-Mondale Administration, I can understand why Walter Mondale is Ronald Reagan's favorite opponent," Mr. Hart added."

    [ Parent ]

    Well, Gary Hart (5.00 / 1) (#184)
    by Practically Lactating on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:10:09 PM EST
    can add his name to list of people in the blogosphere with short and/or selective memories.

    Hart had this to say in his recent column:

    It will come as a surprise to many people that there are rules in politics. Most of those rules are unwritten and are based on common understandings, acceptable practices, and the best interest of the political party a candidate seeks to lead. One of those rules is this: Do not provide ammunition to the opposition party that can be used to destroy your party's nominee. This is a hyper-truth where the presidential contest is concerned.

    Link

    [ Parent ]

    I guess it has to be said, so . . . (5.00 / 3) (#155)
    by Cream City on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:40:12 PM EST
    might it just possibly be that

    (a) as has been said before, Obama is pursuing a primary strategy but Clinton already has moved on (and probably began with) a GE strategy; and

    (b) if she is the Dem nominee, she knows (and has known and probably focus-grouped this for years) that there will be particular issues that will be most difficult for many voters to overcome; and

    (c) those issues may go against such ingrained attitudes in our country that they might not be overcome if she waits until the end of the convention -- Labor Day -- to start; and

    (d) one of those attitudes that could be particularly crucial in a time when we are in two wars is whether we will be safe with a woman CiC.

    Given that, she has to get started taking on McCain on this issue, saying that she can be the CiC as much as the GOP nominee.  And I do believe that on this very blog, there have been many calls for our candidates to start running against McCain.  And, frankly, Obama ought to be doing more of that, too -- but in this area, he has the weaker hand.  So of course, she is not supposed to note that and just let Dems lose the White House?

    We were not supposed to notice that this is one of Obama's weak areas?  If he doesn't deal with it soon, and if he is the nominee, we are doomed.  He ought to stop avoiding it and start talking about why he is ready (which is far different from saying "I'm ready" to the cheers of "Yes, you are!")

    [ Parent ]

    Isn't it interesting that neither HRC nor (none / 0) (#161)
    by oculus on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:42:50 PM EST
    Obama has to explain why they failed to serve on active duty?  But then the Republicans run a Vietnam vet.  

    [ Parent ]
    Not really an issue for Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#193)
    by ineedalife on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:24:51 PM EST
    given the roles for women in the military in her time. Obama, of course, will have to deal with it.

    I am sure by November we will all be convinced that not pursuing a Wall Street job is a much bigger sacrifice for your country than going to Vietnam. In fact we will be asking why McCain shirked his duty to his country by vacationing in Southeast Asia while all noble young men were running petition drives in the inner city. /snark

    [ Parent ]

    Now, that is just (5.00 / 1) (#210)
    by Cream City on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:46:49 PM EST
    too circular a spin.  And thus, I suspect we will see it on MSNBC within a week.  Chortles!

    [ Parent ]
    Not an issue for Obama either due to his (none / 0) (#213)
    by oculus on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 08:54:01 PM EST
    age and the cessation of the draft.  

    [ Parent ]
    Oh, one of my favorite opening lines (5.00 / 3) (#165)
    by Cream City on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 07:45:47 PM EST
    from students.  "I've been using the Google all week to try to find out" just begs for the standard reply:  Go. To. The. Library.

    Shocking, but true: Most historical materials, primary and secondary, are not yet online.

    It is -- as my students say -- a bummer, Berube.  But nobody said it was gonna be easy.

    [ Parent ]

    Wollcott! Kudos! (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by magnetics on Sun Mar 09, 2008 at 05:57:50 PM EST
    And kudos again! for the excellent purge and corrective.