home

Saturday Night Open Thread

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Blog Related
Posted on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:23:02 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

A few points. The most important, we all are relieved that Ted Kennedy appears to be fine.

Next, Big Brown is a Super horse.

Third, when I criticize the delegate selection rules and the outcome of the pledged delegate process and the MI/FL fiasco I am in no way criticizing Barack Obama as he has done exactly what he was supposed to do. I tip my hat to him. He has behaved honorably throughout the process in that he is trying to win the nomination. My critique is of the process and the organization that organized the nomination process and made the disastrous and rule breaking decisions regarding FL/MI.

Finally, this is an Open Thread. Oh some foul mood music on the flip.

Comments now closed, there's a new open thread up.

< The Lack Of Integrity Of The Pledged Delegate System | Late Night Open Thread >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Saturday Night Open Thread | 273 comments (273 topical)
    I thought you said he is mistaken not to (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Teresa on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:25:24 PM EST
    support re-votes (when they were still possible)?

    I agree on Big Brown. I think we're looking at a Triple Crown winner. He got stronger the longer the race went. It will be fun to watch.

    Big Brown (5.00 / 8) (#3)
    by AmyinSC on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:28:49 PM EST
    Is Phenomenal.  He didn't even have to kick into top gear!  What an amazing horse...

    I do not sure abt BTD's assertion that Obama has acted honorably in this nominating process.  FL and MI? He has stonewalled at EVERY turn on that.  How his people railroaded caucuses??  That came from somewhere, especially like TC, in which people were showing up with packets that weren't even supposed to be AVAILABLE...SO, honorable?  I cannot agree with that assertion.  In addition to THOSE concerns, his sexist behavior has certainly been less than honorable, IMHO...

    [ Parent ]

    dirt off his shoulders (5.00 / 21) (#26)
    by Kathy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:47:43 PM EST
    snubbing her on the senate floor.  Not practicing what he preaches by taking a stand against sexism.  Not denouncing surrogates who trash her like she's something nasty the dem party stepped in.  Trashing WJC's legacy-or at least trying to.  

    Not honorable.

    [ Parent ]

    I wouldn't say honorable but... (5.00 / 0) (#78)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:16:10 PM EST
    ...I suppose he took advantage of the situation. I guess it wouldn't bother me as much if people didn't put him on some kind of pedestal.

    [ Parent ]
    It wouldn't bother me as much (5.00 / 20) (#97)
    by Kathy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:24:46 PM EST
    if he wasn't running as the champion of the exact opposite of everything he says he is.  Time after time after time, he's said he's running a clean campaign, a different sort of campaign, when anyone who has half a brain would see that he's running the usual, Chicago-style dirty campaign.  During the debates, when he talked about taking the high road, I just kept thinking, "Harry and Louise mailer, 'she's desperate to win'; 'she'll say and do anything to win'; etc."

    It's the same hypocritical attitude he takes about his vaunted three years of community service and time in the state senate, living in the shadows of Rezko's slums.  It's the fact that every time he gets called out on something inconsistent, he blames a staff member, or he pushed the wrong button, or he voted "present" as a strategy even though he was not told to.  It's voting for a bad bill, then going on the record saying he didn't mean to vote for it, knowing his vote still stands.  It's lying about passing a bill he did not pass.  It's lying outright about the whole NAFTA meetings thing while bashing Clinton for doing something he did (that she did not do).  It's trashing Bill Clinton's legacy. It's praising Reagan and Bush.  It's accusing the Clintons of racism.

    I dunno, I don't find it honorable to be where you are only because you are standing on the bodies of all those folks you climbed over to get there.

    [ Parent ]

    Then the moment when (5.00 / 8) (#109)
    by JavaCityPal on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:32:52 PM EST
    her poll numbers for untrustworthy became 36% to his 51% in the first state where he didn't show up to stump speech how she was running a negative campaign to his worthy, policy-focused one.

    That confirmed for me that all her negative numbers (accepting 35% would be the best number any politician could get) were undoubtedly the result of the horrible image he was painting of her with the tone and intent of his campaigning.

    MSM is bad, but the greatest % of the blasting they have been doing against Hillary was given to them by the Obama campaign.


    [ Parent ]

    Honorable my ass. (5.00 / 17) (#114)
    by sickofhypocrisy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:36:41 PM EST
    He has virtually secured the nomination by labeling anyone who doesn't worship him a racist.  His campaign tactics have been appallingly Rovian.  He is shameful.

    PS - his entire campaign is about campaigning.  He deflects criticism by blathering on ad nauseum about using others using 'negative campaign tactics' that his campaign won't use because that's not how they campaign because they're running a clean campaign unlike the other campaigns that are dirty campaigns because that's how campaigns have always been run but not anymore since he's decided to change the way campaigns are run. campaigncampaigncampaign.  gag.  

    [ Parent ]

    Wow! Kathy, you're right on target. Thanks!! (5.00 / 1) (#163)
    by DeborahNC on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:08:04 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    And How About... (5.00 / 1) (#181)
    by AmyinSC on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:22:33 PM EST
    His "community organizing" really being voter registration?  And his campaign's meme that Michelle grew up poor in South Chicago, as opposed to BOTH of her parents working for the city??  Don't even get me STARTED on all of the stuff abt his dad, most recently though was his father's flag-draped coffin...Wow.  If the media bothered doing its job at ALL, they would be talking abt this...

    [ Parent ]
    more importantly (5.00 / 1) (#244)
    by CanadianDem on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:03:59 PM EST
    what are their counter-tops made of dammit!!!!?!?!?

    BTD you reap what you sow, although I admire your firefighting skills now.

    [ Parent ]

    One of the best (none / 0) (#185)
    by facta non verba on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:23:58 PM EST
    comments ever! So spot on. Duplicitous is his middle name.

    [ Parent ]
    I Do Not See obama As Anything Honorable.... (5.00 / 5) (#165)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:09:33 PM EST
    sorry.  

    [ Parent ]
    Obama's campaign was definitely not (5.00 / 7) (#192)
    by Serene1 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:30:32 PM EST
    an honourable one. Gaming the system can never be called honourable especially if your campaign theme is the opposite. There are a lot of delegate fraud stories floating arround for the same not to be taken seriously.
    Secondly the way they baited Hillary and her supporters was appaling. Right from the start they had a gameplan of attacking Hillary, unfortunately the gameplan was right out of a republican hand book of Character assasination. They built up the 'Hillary is bad tempo' to such a level that almost all pro Obama blogs in the netroots overnight became an 'anti Hillary willing to sprout any conspiracy theory about Hillary' blog.
    They liberally used racisim charge against Hillary and her team for any perceived insult. It reached to such a crescendo that any ad or utterance by Hillary was perceived to be a coded racist message or term. Mind you Obama kept quite throughout when his surrogates drummed up the racisim charge. Team Obama is single handedly responsible for the kind of animosity that exists between Democrats today.

    This is not the behaviour or outcome of an honourable campaign.

    [ Parent ]

    Exactly! (5.00 / 3) (#180)
    by AX10 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:20:55 PM EST
    Obama and his surrogates have NOT been "honorable".
    He is a politician like the others.  For him to act as he is "above it all" is nonsense.

    [ Parent ]
    Exactly Right, Kathy. (none / 0) (#63)
    by AmyinSC on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:09:16 PM EST
    And I meant TEXAS...Sheesh.  

    [ Parent ]
    Don't Forget obama Playing (5.00 / 7) (#183)
    by talex on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:23:33 PM EST
    the race card.

    Remember the whole thing started out with an anonymous source in a British newspaper and Obama jumped on it FAST to turn black voters against Clinton.

    The old saying goes: Follow the Money.

    In this case follow who an anonymous source article benefited the most. Right out of the Karl Rove play book that one was.

    Then their was the publicly available picture of Obama in African garb that he took advantage of with once again an anonymous source saying it was released by the Clinton campaign.

    Again - follow who benefited from that.

    I am throughly convinced Obama played dirty in branding Clinton a racist by pushing the race theme on her.

    [ Parent ]

    I personally feel that Obama deserves some (5.00 / 7) (#2)
    by andgarden on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:25:58 PM EST
    criticism for the way he has acted wrt the delegate selection process. In particular, his blocking of the Michigan revote. Hillary, of course, should probably have accepted the compromise offered last week, so long as Obama also agreed to seat all Florida delegates.

    agreed (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by bjorn on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:42:27 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    If Clinton (5.00 / 7) (#24)
    by Emma on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:46:55 PM EST
    can't be the nominee, why should she accept anything?  Why shouldn't she stick to principle and insist that every vote be counted as it was cast?  Which means:  not giving Obama delegates he didn't earn.  If she can't be the nominee, what's the benefit of accepting anything less?

    [ Parent ]
    Yep. (none / 0) (#152)
    by DeborahNC on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:03:14 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Had she buckled to that unfair (5.00 / 7) (#113)
    by JavaCityPal on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:35:47 PM EST
    distribution, she would have been confirming the unfair tactics that the Obama campaign has been using were okay. It wouldn't be in concert with her "fighter" image.

    She is right to fight the injustice.


    [ Parent ]

    I will criticize Obama (5.00 / 16) (#4)
    by Stellaaa on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:28:53 PM EST
    not because I an inclination to do so, but he and his campaign did not make a genuine effort to resolve the issue.  Instead they have used the ineptness of the DNC to their advantage.  I don't respect that kind of leadership, particularly when it has labeled itself as the new  politics.  

    Yep I agree. (5.00 / 5) (#8)
    by lilburro on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:38:17 PM EST
    Honorable is not the word I would use to describe him.  His supporters are far worse though.  Reports of their caucus behavior are beyond the pale.  Caucuses need to go.

    [ Parent ]
    I agree but I doubt Obama will do anything (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by bjorn on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:39:31 PM EST
    to reform the system if he wins.  We will see.

    [ Parent ]
    It's the DNC's responsibility (5.00 / 1) (#116)
    by JavaCityPal on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:37:32 PM EST
    and they have a leader who needs to start doing his job.

    [ Parent ]
    Obama is doing what has always done (5.00 / 5) (#104)
    by FlaDemFem on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:27:52 PM EST
    gaming the system. That's all he knows how to do, as far as I can tell. And you can't do that sort of thing in the GE, it won't fly. What's he going to do if he gets to the White House and finds out he is the system? How is he going to game that?

    And Big Brown was great. So was Kent Desormeaux, whom I knew back when he was just a Cajun kid looking for rides. He was good even then, and soon became the leading apprentice in MD, and the leading rider for a few years. He gave that horse a perfect ride.

    The thing about the 7 spot and a horse as big as Big Brown (and he is long and lanky for a race horse well muscled and all but big and long striding) is that if he didn't break well he could get boxed in. Kent got him out of the gate and perfectly placed. The other thing about Pimlico vs. Churchill is that Churchill has that 1/4 mile stretch. At Pimlico, the quarter pole is in the turn, not at the top of the stretch. So, if he is going to make his move at the quarter pole, which he pretty much did in both races, he is accelerating on the turn rather than on the straightaway at the head of the stretch. That can make a big difference for a long striding horse like Big Brown. But Kent had him on the outside, which flattens the turn somewhat, and on they came. That was just about a perfect race from the point of view of a rider.

    And my friend at Pimlico said that Big Brown was "tearing down" the spit box(where they get the urine and blood for the tests) like he hadn't even run a race. So, look out NY, here comes a really good horse. This might be the year for a Triple Crown winner. I remember Secretariat's Triple Crown..man, that was a horse and a half. Big Brown is not in his class, look at the times, but he is the best shot we have had at a  TC winner in a long time. Keep your fingers crossed!!!

    [ Parent ]

    Mark Salter really said it best (5.00 / 9) (#119)
    by JavaCityPal on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:40:34 PM EST
    Senior Adviser to McCain last week said about Obama's campaigning:

    "We have all become familiar with Senator Obama's new brand of politics. First, you demand civility from your opponent, then you attack him, distort his record and send out surrogates to question his integrity. It is called hypocrisy, and it is the oldest kind of politics there is."

    [ Parent ]

    Here Is The Supposed Honor From the obama (5.00 / 1) (#169)
    by PssttCmere08 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:12:10 PM EST
    camp and followers I am guessing...

    On Carole Midgen Leading's poll to see who superdelegates should endorse, Hillary was leading by a wide margin yesterday. This morning it has flipped to Obama...and the strange thing is, if you hit reload on the page, Hillary keeps going down a percentage point a minute. I think someone is running a bot to change the vote, because apparently you can vote more than once. (An Obamabot...running a bot!)

    Maybe it's a good idea to vote (again) and to post some comments on her board to counter this obvious manipulation of the voting tally:

    http://www.carolemigdenleading.com/forum.asp

    Went back to Migden's page and they closed the poll.


    [ Parent ]

    It is open (none / 0) (#258)
    by Mrwirez on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:17:10 PM EST
    I just posted there. It is about how to pick a president. Leave comment.

    [ Parent ]
    Stellaaa, that is not even (none / 0) (#122)
    by zfran on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:44:13 PM EST
    leadership. He seems to be a follower, not a leader. When you are a chief, your feather sticks out, his does not, at least for me.

    [ Parent ]
    Gaming Florida Twice (none / 0) (#215)
    by Athena on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:45:11 PM EST
    Florida has been gamed twice in 8 years to give us totally unqualified Presidential candidates - Bush and Obama - who will have gone farther than they should have because of the failures in that one state.


    [ Parent ]
    FYI (5.00 / 1) (#5)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:31:00 PM EST
    I have suspended myself for the rest of the night and tomorrow for violating the site commenting rules in the previous thread.

    I will not be posting again until Monday.

    Ya know (5.00 / 7) (#10)
    by Lahdee on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:39:07 PM EST
    One of the things we admire about you is your passion.
    Have a good weekend. See you Monday.

    [ Parent ]
    Unlike a lot of us BTD you are one of the few (5.00 / 6) (#20)
    by bjorn on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:44:12 PM EST
    people who has always treated both candidates with respect. I think we all know that you are on the side of the voters and making a better system.

    [ Parent ]
    I respect self suspension (5.00 / 3) (#25)
    by Stellaaa on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:47:01 PM EST
    I wish I had the character.  I will try it for tomorrow.

    [ Parent ]
    Dang BTD, that punishes all of us. (5.00 / 3) (#29)
    by Teresa on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:48:04 PM EST
    I will miss your take on the Sunday shows.

    [ Parent ]
    Be that as it may, BTD (5.00 / 5) (#68)
    by frankly0 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:11:56 PM EST
    you absolutely owned KidOakland in that thread.

    Quoting him back his own words about "vote suppression" -- which once upon a time was the moral high ground claimed by everybody on the Obama side when it came to the Nevada caucuses -- exposed his, and Josh Marshall's, hypocrisy beyond dispute.

    I have to say I sympathize with your disgust on this point, which has always been a trigger issue for me as well. The hypocrisy is too palpable, the bias too arrogant and smug, the deceit too blatant, to react to it with anything like equanimity.

    [ Parent ]

    Whoa, what did I miss? (5.00 / 1) (#87)
    by Maria Garcia on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:20:06 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    BTD, you are a grown up (5.00 / 2) (#144)
    by zfran on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:58:52 PM EST
    who has learned how to take responsibility for your actions. I wish others were like you!!!

    [ Parent ]
    Drawing Distinctions (none / 0) (#50)
    by Spike on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:00:17 PM EST
    I appreciate your willingness, BTD, to draw a distinction between your problems with the DNC and the actions of the Obama campaign. They have run a highly effective campaign driven by a strategy to secure every possible pledged delegate. While legitimate complaints can be raised about the nominating process, Obama should be held responsible for its shortcomings.

    [ Parent ]
    HEH... (none / 0) (#73)
    by mrjerbub on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:14:51 PM EST
    You must be here with me in (Tacoma) Seattle. Can you believe this weather? Clear skies. 85 degrees.

    [ Parent ]
    I deleted Kid Oakland's remark (none / 0) (#243)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:03:55 PM EST
    as there is no need to continue the ugliness and hypocrisy.

    It is all stated in the other thread.

    Kid Oakland, do not bring it uop again in this thread. I did not.

    Now be civil and respectful please.

    [ Parent ]

    Yeah, open thread (5.00 / 10) (#9)
    by angie on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:38:21 PM EST
    I recall during the 57 state thread that one commenter wrote that she didn't think this one gaffe was enough to put him on the level of W. Ok, now we have this one re: why Hillary will do better then he will in KY:
    "What it says is that I'm not very well known in that part of the country," Obama said. "Sen. Clinton, I think, is much better known, coming from a nearby state of Arkansas. So it's not surprising that she would have an advantage in some of those states in the middle."
    Besides the fact that "the states in the middle" comment comes off as totally elitist, IL actually borders KY and, thus, is much closer than AK. I move that this latest gaffe, together with his others such as bitter/cling gate, needing Arabic speakers in Afghanistan, etc, puts him on par with W. Is there a second?

    second (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by bjorn on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:40:42 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    SECOND!! (5.00 / 3) (#16)
    by AmyinSC on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:40:57 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Second (5.00 / 4) (#19)
    by Raven15 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:43:53 PM EST
    ...and I also join the chorus of those who don't think "honorable" is the right word to describe Obama's comportment.

    Have a great day off, BTD! (I've needed many of my own over the course of this epic)

    [ Parent ]

    I second that emotion! (5.00 / 2) (#27)
    by Stellaaa on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:47:52 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    word! nt (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by isaac on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:05:30 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    Second (5.00 / 2) (#81)
    by Andy08 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:18:06 PM EST
    indeed.

    [ Parent ]
    He screws up geography now (5.00 / 14) (#89)
    by Cream City on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:20:45 PM EST
    as well as history, in so many of his statements?

    As an academic, I now know to entirely question the vaunted reputation of Columbia University.

    He was said to be a liberal arts grad there.  I have business majors, nursing majors, architecture majors, and many others in professions, not liberal arts -- and at a commuter campus -- who do better than this.

    How can a Senator of a state not know which states border his?  How can a Senator of the state of Illinois, one who poses and launches his campaign at Springfield, not know that Lincoln came to the state  from next door?  Are we now going to find out that Obama has not been to as many counties in Illinois, the ones far from Chicago, as there are countries he has not been to but claimed?

    A day does not go by without me shaking my head at the stunning prospect of this being our presidential candidate.  And in this year, possibly our president.  This is our answer to Dumbya?!

    [ Parent ]

    Yea, I've begun to wonder about Columbia too. (5.00 / 0) (#136)
    by DeborahNC on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:54:05 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    maybe we need a man from the (5.00 / 1) (#214)
    by hellothere on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:44:31 PM EST
    working class who went to school at night. they can't do any worse and just might have a little respect for the working class.

    [ Parent ]
    geography and history! (5.00 / 5) (#238)
    by noholib on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:58:35 PM EST
    I still think his flippant reference to the Bataan death march--comparing the long primary campaign (when was this?  in March or April ?!!) was awful and that it shows an  appalling lack of sensitivity and judgment when it comes to history.  The Bataan death march was a wartime atrocity after all.
    Please, don't tell me about his vaunted superior judgment.  No one will accuse him of excessive gravitas.  It just doesn't go with coolness, does it?

    [ Parent ]
    notice how we aren't hearing about his (5.00 / 5) (#242)
    by angie on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:02:35 PM EST
    "superior judgment" much anymore? Now it is all about "unity" and "change" but after the whole Wright fiasco, they pretty much dropped the "judgment" thing as a talking point.

    [ Parent ]
    judgment? (5.00 / 1) (#257)
    by noholib on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:15:46 PM EST
    Angie, isn't "superior judgment" still implied by his standing on his speech against the Iraq war? As if no other question about his knowledge and approach to foreign affairs need ever be asked?

    [ Parent ]
    Perhaps you are right (5.00 / 1) (#270)
    by angie on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:24:20 PM EST
    that it is "implied" -- I meant how we don't actually here him (or the SDs who have been coming out to endorse him) actually using the words "judgment" anymore -- the words now are all about how he is the one who can "unite the country" and "be an agent of change." I think it is deliberately done so that we all will not be reminded about his "judgment" in sitting in that church for 20 years.

    [ Parent ]
    Love it (5.00 / 3) (#110)
    by ruffian on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:33:37 PM EST
    but then Southern Illinois is like whole other state if you live in Chicago. It's almost Appalachian.

    [ Parent ]
    Once again, he purposely refused to (5.00 / 3) (#127)
    by JavaCityPal on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:47:25 PM EST
    acknowledge she is better known because she spent 8 years living in the Whitehouse as the First Lady.

    He knows the love the people have for the Clinton's, so, the same way he is now campaigning as though there is nothing more for him to do in the primary, and his only opponent is McCain, he is dissing and dismissing the best reason there is to get the democrats back in charge.

    He is the democratic counterpart to dubya, and the democrats need to prove they are smart enough to see that before they mess up another GE.

    [ Parent ]

    Hold up... (3.00 / 0) (#142)
    by Alec82 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:58:07 PM EST
    ...because your comment is kind of nonsensical.

    He is the democratic counterpart to dubya, and the democrats need to prove they are smart enough to see that before they mess up another GE.

     If he is the Democratic equivalent of President Bush, you're essentially saying we get eight years of a Democratic presidency...but then you say "mess up another GE." So you don't mean that...

     I just don't buy it.  He's not remotely like Bush, or even a Democratic version of Bush.  He is a gamble, as is Senator Clinton.  But I don't buy this nonsense that he is equivalent to one of the most disastrous presidents in U.S. history.

    [ Parent ]

    Every candidate is a "gamble" (5.00 / 3) (#149)
    by angie on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:00:19 PM EST
    however, I place my money on one who knows how many states are in this Union and knows which states border his own.

    [ Parent ]
    Ok, I have driven to Arkansas (5.00 / 3) (#170)
    by FlaDemFem on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:12:48 PM EST
    from VA, and I went through KY on the way..they aren't anywhere near each other. And when I was working on the track, I drove from AR, where I was at Oaklawn Park, to KY where we went to Keeneland and Churchill, and then to IL when we went from Churchill to Hawthorne. It took days to get from AR to KY. KY to IL was an easy day's drive. My US geography isn't very good..my world geography is great. Being educated mostly overseas does that. But even I knew that IL is close to KY and Arkansas isn't. Before I did all that driving, I knew it. Why doesn't Mr. Ivy League-educated Senator know it?? Doesn't he ever look at a map?? I am getting so TIRED of this man!! He should go back to the Senate, learn his craft and oh yeah, chat up the other Senators about where their states are.

    [ Parent ]
    Hey! Give the guy a break! He grew up in HA, (none / 0) (#251)
    by jawbone on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:08:42 PM EST
    and it's understandable that the mainland states' boundaries are a little fuzzy to him.

    Teehee.

    [ Parent ]

    Third (5.00 / 1) (#264)
    by Mrwirez on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:21:31 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    It's interesting (5.00 / 8) (#31)
    by The Poster Formerly Known as cookiebear on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:49:19 PM EST
    But reading over here has spurred the memory that originally, it was Clinton supporters who were annoying me.

    But the suspects in question had always been annoying, imo, finding every opportunity possible to flame people, holding bizarre and memory-flawed grudges, etc. Besides, they got banned pretty quickly.

    Then, the Obama supporters went bonkers, and I suddenly saw clear as day the critiques of dKossians as groupthink and bullies.

    I was honestly crazy about Obama from day one. But I lost it because I was so horrified by all the crap surrounding him.

    What I regret now is that I didn't vote in the primary for Edwards. I really, really came to like him and even today, think he would have been the best of the lot.

    To be honest, I voted for Clinton in the primary here, just to piss off the Obamaists. :D

    Well, I never claimed to be particularly mature!

    Good grief. I better sign off before I reveal any more deep dark secrets.

    Is it April fools again? (5.00 / 8) (#70)
    by Andy08 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:13:38 PM EST

    I am in no way criticizing Barack Obama as he has done exactly what he was supposed to do. I tip my hat to him. He has behaved honorably throughout the process in that he is trying to win the nomination.

    Say what? Hat tiping? Honorably? I am dumbfounded by your comment....

    He honorably turned down and blocked every
    proposal for a revote in FL & MI and continues to do everything in his power to disenfranchise the 2.5 Mil voters that took the time to go vote in Jan. all in the name of wining the nomination; and he still dismisses the seating of their delegations.

    Very `honorable' indeed.  Uh?

    Ted Kennedy's doctors said he is resting (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by felizarte on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:14:52 PM EST
    and not in any immediate danger.  (Per CNN) he will undergo further tests to determine the cause of the seizure.  Report says he did not have a stroke.  

    thanks for the update (none / 0) (#103)
    by ruffian on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:27:05 PM EST
    I've been irritated with Teddy recently, but only because I love him!

    [ Parent ]
    What is with the feminist bashing? (5.00 / 8) (#75)
    by dianem on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:15:02 PM EST
    I was bored (okay, trying to avoide some homework) and I wandered into the big orange. The top rec diary was a screed by a purported feminist decrying how "older feminists" were insulting the young ones by insisting that they vote for Clinton just because she is a woman. First, who said this? She didn't provide any evidence that the women who supported Clinton did so simply because she was a woman, although both she and the commentors seemed to assume that this was true. Second, how can she call herself a feminist and not be able to see the sexism that has occurred in this campaign? I got the impression that she was my age, which means that she has been in the workforce long enough to see that women are not equal. Is this simply a case of Obamamania dominating over common sense? Or is there a streak of anti-feminism in America that even permeates women who call themselves feminists?

    Your last line, door #2 (5.00 / 7) (#82)
    by Kathy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:18:20 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    In my experience (5.00 / 8) (#93)
    by angie on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:22:39 PM EST
    The Gen Y females run away from the word "feminist" like it is radioactive. I could go into my entire "how role models like Britney Spears and Paris Hilton have set women back 50 years," but suffice it to say: they don't know what it even means to be a feminist -- they think it is being some fire-breathing man hating non-sexual prude. Their opinion on feminists means next to nothing imo.

    [ Parent ]
    Gen Y females are part of the reason (5.00 / 7) (#123)
    by sickofhypocrisy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:45:31 PM EST
    I hope McCain wins (assuming BO is the candidate, of course) and Roe v Wade is overturned.  

    I marched on Washington for reproductive rights several times.  For what?  These spoiled brats glibly walk through the doors that so many brave women opened for them with absolutely no appreciation for the sacrifices that were made on their behalf.  Eff them.  Let them fight for some of their rights for once.  Maybe then they'll begin to understand the sexism that STILL runs rampant in this country.  

    [ Parent ]

    Thank you for saying that (5.00 / 1) (#138)
    by dianem on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:55:07 PM EST
    I want roe v. wade overturned, too, although I don't think the right will allow it. It's too useful. It keeps the populace pacified while they strip away our rights one by one. I am part of the post Roe generation, but I know how fragile our right to control our bodies is. We need people to fight to get the rights back that have been taken away from us, and until Roe is gone, they won't even admit that we've lost. I can't tell you how many women have told me that Roe is a valuable asset. It was, at one time, but they've found so many loopholes that it is now a tattered remnant of what it was.

    [ Parent ]
    This one calls herself a "feminist" (5.00 / 7) (#124)
    by dianem on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:45:46 PM EST
    Then she proceeds to claim that women are completely equal in today's society and the old school feminists are simply in denial. She really seems to believe that women have all the same opporunities as men and the only women who don't believe this are bitter women who have failed in their personal goals and need an excuse.

    I'm trying to imagine if the same attitude were taken toward blacks. Only a fool would deny that racism exists - no progressive would dare. Black people have largely achieved equality, just like women, but there are pockets and ceilings that hold all of us back.

    [ Parent ]

    I have concluded fminism was just a blip. (5.00 / 2) (#135)
    by masslib on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:52:54 PM EST


    [ Parent ]
    I can't believe that. Or I won't. (5.00 / 2) (#143)
    by dianem on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:58:51 PM EST
    We're not going back. There has been a lot of progress. Men are taking more responsibility for childcare, and women have risen slowly through the ranks to lead. In other nations, feminism has become the norm. Many nations have had female leaders, and women have become activists for many causes that have nothing to do with women's rights. Women in some places have actually achieved real equality. As much as I hate the stupid cigarette ad, "We've come a long way, Baby". There have been setbacks, and I'm feeling more and more that my world is getting smaller, rather than larger, but I don't think we're close to "An Handmaid's Tale".

    [ Parent ]
    As a movement, a blip. (5.00 / 5) (#156)
    by masslib on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:05:13 PM EST
    I totally believe that.  When women flaunt their feminist credentials as in "1000 feminists for Barack Obama" in an effort to help a less qualified, less experienced male opponent of the first viable female Democratic candidate to run for President, who also happens to have spent her entire dult career championing feminist issues, I sense the movement has failed.

    [ Parent ]
    That doesn't mean that the movement is dead (5.00 / 4) (#166)
    by dianem on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:09:41 PM EST
    It just means that we need to redefine it, move it from the fringe back into the mainstream. These women are going to learn that there are a lot of doors closed to them, and we need to be there to help them learn to open them.

    [ Parent ]
    I actually know one of them (5.00 / 8) (#222)
    by Cream City on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:48:18 PM EST
    who wrote that pro-Obama feminists' screed.

    I can tell you that she has made a career of being a feminist but stabs women coworkers in the back and won't stand up for others when not feminism but just a conscience calls for it.  Seeing her on the list made all of them suspect for me.

    This campaign has been a series of revelations about many people I know well or thought I knew about as much as it has been a revelation about the media, DNC, etc.

    No, we have not come a long way, baby -- or sweetie or cutie (as Obama called Barbara Boxer).

    [ Parent ]

    I agree... (5.00 / 2) (#176)
    by Alec82 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:14:41 PM EST
    ...and I do think that Senator Clinton would have been a great message to send to the Islamic world and, to a lesser extent, East Asia, regions suffering from a deficit in this arena.  Unlike many Obama supporters, I don't dislike Senator Clinton (her husband is a different matter, and, in fact, I was waffling between her and Edwards before South Carolina...the Iraq vote and a mentor's persistent campaigning pushed me over the edge for Obama), but I refuse to accept the idea that Senator Obama is the anti-Christ of Democratic politics, which unfortunately is much of the message that I receive on this site.  

     BTW, I loved Atwood's book.  My mother is a huge fan and I managed to get her an autographed copy of Oryx and Crake for, get this, ten bucks (I was working at a bookstore at the time, got it at cost because it hand't sold out, and only discovered it was autographed after I purchased it).  

     While I don't think feminism is dead, I do worry about the message younger women are receiving.  My sister is 12 and eats up that MTV garbage like everyone else her age.    

    [ Parent ]

    FTR, I don't think Obama is (5.00 / 2) (#269)
    by sickofhypocrisy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:23:24 PM EST
    the anti-christ of Democratic politics.  I think David Axelrove is.  

    [ Parent ]
    Dead Wrong (5.00 / 5) (#286)
    by felizarte on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:37:50 PM EST
    your quote:
    but I refuse to accept the idea that Senator Obama is the anti-Christ of Democratic politics, which unfortunately is much of the message that I receive on this site.

    Please identify any post in this site that ever referred to Obama as 'anti-Christ'!  Please don't try to sneak in statements like this over here and take advantage of the overall civility in this site.

    And what is there to dislike about Sen. Clinton other than she refuses to be beaten by Sen. Obama's campaign?  It's Hillary or McCain for me because I think that a president Obama will be worse.  McCain has demonstrated his sense of honor many times, unlike Sen. Obama.    


    [ Parent ]

    those who don't know and study history (5.00 / 4) (#219)
    by hellothere on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:46:52 PM EST
    are doomed to repeat it.

    [ Parent ]
    I remember the good old days when the (5.00 / 6) (#131)
    by Joan in VA on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:49:06 PM EST
    Sisterhood was powerful. Today, one considers themself as feminist by virtue of being a woman. There is no consideration of helping other women in any way including putting them in positions of power where they can help all women.

    [ Parent ]
    I know... it was poorly written dribble (5.00 / 2) (#199)
    by Exeter on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:36:30 PM EST
    If African Americans voted for Barack by the same percentage that women voted for Hillary, Hillary would be winning by a large margin and have the nomination rapped up after Super Tuesday. I don't condemn Africans Americans for doing this -- its forgivable racism, just as women voting for women because they are a woman is forgivable sexism.

    [ Parent ]
    I totally get why AA's are voting (5.00 / 1) (#265)
    by sickofhypocrisy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:21:49 PM EST
    for BO in such large numbers.  I wish women were doing the same for Hillary.  That said, isn't it a little bit ironic that - at least in the black community - he is not being judged on the content of his character?  I wonder what MLK would think.  I'm not being snarky.  What do you guys think?

    [ Parent ]
    I don't think we can presume to know (5.00 / 1) (#274)
    by bjorn on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:27:23 PM EST
    what MLK would think.

    [ Parent ]
    Different Strokes (1.00 / 4) (#147)
    by Spike on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:59:27 PM EST
    I know many women who consider themselves feminists -- including my wife and daughter -- who are avid Obama supporters. Many of the them supported Hillary Clinton until South Carolina when they were turned off by Bill Clinton's race-tinged campaign tactics.

    [ Parent ]
    This has nothing to do with Obama (5.00 / 7) (#162)
    by dianem on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:07:56 PM EST
    Feminists can be Obama supporter's without betraying anything. But too many of them seem to believe that older feminist women are voting for Clinton only because she is a woman, and looking down on them for doing otherwise. Some of these same people attack Clinton in sexist ways and dismiss older feminists, which is ungrateful and insulting.

    If there is one thing I will never forgive Obama for it is convincing people that the Clinton's were using racism to get votes. In doing so, he was using racism to his favor, and it worked. He distorted things that Clinton and her supporter's said, turning honest racism-hating people into Clinton hater's. It turned the tide of the election, and divided the nation, tearing open wounds that were slowly healing.

    [ Parent ]

    Obama Didn't Do It... (none / 0) (#189)
    by Spike on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:29:38 PM EST
    My wife -- an "older feminist" -- made up her own mind to switch to Obama because of Bill Clinton's Jessie Jackson comment after South Carolina. To imply that she was unable to independently reach that conclusion without being convinced by Obama smacks of sexism to me. Am I wrong about that?

    [ Parent ]
    Yes, you are wrong (5.00 / 2) (#218)
    by dianem on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:46:46 PM EST
    I never suggested that gender had anything to do with your wife's decision. You may believe that I am wrong, but sexism has nothing to do with it.

    [ Parent ]
    But they weren't offended (5.00 / 10) (#168)
    by sickofhypocrisy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:10:25 PM EST
    by the Obama surrogates attacking Hillary for "using tears" to sway votes in NH?  They weren't the least bit offended that BO has yet to make a peep in terms of discouraging his supporters for their vicious personal attacks on HRC?  They didn't care that he essentially gave her the finger during a stump speech?  They weren't bothered that he portrayed her as a crazy out-of-control woman when he said she was throwing the china at him?  None of that offended them as much as Bill Clinton saying that Jesse Jackson had won SC?  Huh.  

    Your wife and daughter may consider themselves feminists, but no self-respecting feminist would be anything less than appalled by the way this man, his campaign and his supporters have carried themselves in terms of their treatment of Hillary as a woman during this campaign.  Sorry.  

    [ Parent ]

    Your comments... (1.00 / 1) (#179)
    by Alec82 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:19:50 PM EST
    ...are vicious and way too personal.  Any legitimate points you have (and there are a few) are lost in the personal attacks.  I won't dignify them with a substantive respnse.  Back off.

     

    [ Parent ]

    umm... (5.00 / 2) (#196)
    by sickofhypocrisy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:33:55 PM EST
    so sorry you're offended, but 'vicious and way too personal'?  which part of my comment was vicious or even personal?  

    [ Parent ]
    This... (1.00 / 1) (#201)
    by Alec82 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:37:13 PM EST
    ...part:

    Your wife and daughter may consider themselves feminists, but no self-respecting feminist...

     Knock it off.

    [ Parent ]

    Are you a woman? (5.00 / 1) (#206)
    by angie on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:39:19 PM EST
    That's right, you are not. So you knock it off -- you know nothing about it.

    [ Parent ]
    Feminism... (1.00 / 1) (#212)
    by Alec82 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:42:14 PM EST
    ...ain't limited to women...or is it?

       Are you black? Then you have no insight into racism, huh?

     Stupid. Those were personal attacks and you know it.

    [ Parent ]

    Don't tell me what I know you arrogant (5.00 / 1) (#232)
    by angie on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:53:45 PM EST
    [redacted per site rules]. And you certainly aren't going to give me a lecture on feminism. That's right, I have the ovaries, you lose this argument, big boy.

    [ Parent ]
    Feminism (5.00 / 5) (#253)
    by sickofhypocrisy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:13:43 PM EST
    isn't limited to women, but you should probably understand what it means before you claim to embrace it.

    and, yes, non-blacks can have an insight into racism because blacks are not the only race that suffers discrimination.  all races do on some level.  that said, i am white, so i cannot assume to fully understand the black experience.  just like you cannot assume to fully understand the female experience.  if you were a woman, you would understand how disturbing it is when women are more offended by alleged racism than they are by sexism (when they are equally offensive).  any woman who can overlook or excuse sexism on any level is not a true feminist.  

    ps - don't even get me started on how the clintons were systematically trashed as racists by the obama campaign.  it's a disgrace.

    [ Parent ]

    Seriously, dude, (5.00 / 3) (#220)
    by sickofhypocrisy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:47:02 PM EST
    vicious was a serious overstatement.  

    [ Parent ]
    No... (1.00 / 1) (#224)
    by Alec82 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:49:59 PM EST
    "no self-respecting feminist" was the overstatement.  As I said, you had good points.  They get lost in that.  

    [ Parent ]
    I call BS (5.00 / 1) (#204)
    by angie on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:38:02 PM EST
    First, look of the word "vicious" Second, Spike brought up his alleged feminist wife & daughter for the sole purpose of repeated the lie about Clinton's "racist remarks" re: SC. We all know about the Obama memo to "inject racism" by misrepresenting the Clinton camp, even though the msm has conveniently forgotten it, yet the lies about Clinton still get repeated.

    [ Parent ]
    I Should Just Let This Pass (none / 0) (#241)
    by Spike on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:59:51 PM EST
    But I admit I find it troubling. My wife and daughter consider themselves feminists, whether you feel compelled to judge them "alleged" feminists or not. When you say that I was repeating a "lie" about Clinton's "racist remarks," you refuse to acknowledge that it's possible that my wife could be offended by what she determined to be racially-tinged remarks. If my wife personally concluded the remarks were racist, on what authority do you judge that my wife's heartfelt conclusion was a "lie?"

    [ Parent ]
    You're right, you should have let it pass (5.00 / 1) (#249)
    by angie on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:07:52 PM EST
    I didn't say your wife lied you [redacted per site rules] and the fact that you think I did shows you lack fundamental reading comprehension. Furthermore, I was talking about YOU when I used the word "alleged" NOT your wife, because based on what you write here on a daily basis, I don't believe a word that comes out of YOUR mouth. Moron.

    [ Parent ]
    On What Grounds... (none / 0) (#268)
    by Spike on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:22:46 PM EST
    ...do you question the veracity of what I "write here on a daily basis?" Can you point to specific posts that are factually incorrect? And how is the conversation advanced by labeling me a "moron?" It seems to me that little is gained by engaging in that kind of undue incivility.

    [ Parent ]
    Excuse me? (5.00 / 1) (#275)
    by angie on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:27:35 PM EST
    I am quite capable of drawing my own conclusions about you, and I do not owe you any explanations. But I will say this to you: you can't even read and interpret correctly what I wrote, and instead accuses me of saying your "wife's heartfelt decision was based on a lie." Anyone who wants to play dirty with me by twisting my words has no credit with me.

    [ Parent ]
    Thanks (1.00 / 1) (#284)
    by Spike on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:36:13 PM EST
    Your response explains a lot.

    [ Parent ]
    Why? Because he congratulated Obama on (5.00 / 4) (#175)
    by derridog on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:14:40 PM EST
    winning SC and said that Jesse Jackson had also won it  in 1988? As I recall, Clinton was excoriated for that comment because he was (supposedly purposefully) reminding everyone that Obama was the "black candidate". Well, as far as I can see, Obama  has been reminding everyone of that himself ever since as he sees racist attacks behind every tree, precisely so he can own the black vote and discredit every criticism made of him,  no matter how valid.

    [ Parent ]
    And, Jesse Jackson had won (5.00 / 1) (#191)
    by zfran on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:29:55 PM EST
    it, so was Bill Clinton telling lies or being racist? Who was really being disengenuous??

    [ Parent ]
    Then they fell for the media spin (5.00 / 4) (#225)
    by Cream City on Sat May 17, 2008 at 09:50:59 PM EST
    on that rather than research it for themselves.

    Feminists can make mistakes.  But there is time.  If they are feminists who read, they can find research on this done by others; google historian Sean Willentz' fine and detailed analysis of that event.  

    That, or they can wait for the book to come out on this campaign and feel like foolish feminists then.

    [ Parent ]

    Condescending (none / 0) (#250)
    by Spike on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:07:54 PM EST
    This is one of the most sexist posts I've seen in a long time. To conclude that any feminist who concludes that the Clinton's have engaged in race-tinged tactics has fallen for media spin or hasn't done their homework is condescending as hell.

    [ Parent ]
    No, what is condescending (5.00 / 5) (#259)
    by angie on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:17:41 PM EST
    is a man telling women about "why their feminist wife supports Obama" as some kind of counter-argument to their own views about the sexism that has been displayed in this campaign by Obama and the msm.

    [ Parent ]