home

"I'm Hillary Clinton And I Do Not Approve That Message"

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Elections 2008
Posted on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:37:41 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

Here's the video:

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< Sen. Kennedy To Appear Tonight At Convention | Obama's Worst Enemies >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    "I'm Hillary Clinton And I Do Not Approve That Message" | 96 comments (96 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    I See Hillary (5.00 / 6) (#1)
    by BDB on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:43:04 PM EST
    continues her quest to destroy the Democratic Party.

    Do you not... (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by DET103 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:49:20 PM EST
    ....see the obvious racial undertones in that message?

    Parent
    John Edwards just editted it (none / 0) (#16)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:55:55 PM EST
    So it plays like this: "I do not approve .... " cut to "..... of Barack Obama."

    Parent
    LMAO! (5.00 / 2) (#55)
    by Jane in CA on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:23:06 PM EST
    That deserved a "ten" rating :)

    Parent
    Oh My Lordy (5.00 / 2) (#61)
    by Desired User Name on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:28:56 PM EST
    Am I high or is this really THAT funny? I'm still laughing at your jest ;)

    HUMOR NEEDED to get me through these Denver Days.


    Parent

    Tell it (5.00 / 1) (#74)
    by sas on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:46:01 PM EST
    like it is Hillary.  You go girl.

    Parent
    She's gonna get blamed for it anyway (5.00 / 1) (#2)
    by myiq2xu on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:43:52 PM EST
    "It's all Hillary's fault" is the new mantra of the Democratic party

    Her eighteen million voters (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by chel2551 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:47:34 PM EST
    will always have her back whether they decide to vote for Obama or not.

    That's not true in Obama's case, as primary voters are having second thoughts.

    In the end, Obama has to win people over and get those who once supported him back on his side.

    Reading comments today, I still say some of his supporters need to stifle themselves.  

    Parent

    I have been saying since early (5.00 / 4) (#8)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:49:41 PM EST
    in the primary that I would take no great joy in seeing Obama lose.  I would however take GREAT joy in seeing some of his supporters lose.

    Parent
    I echo that sentiment on supporters (none / 0) (#27)
    by Valhalla on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:04:34 PM EST
    even though I'm sure it's just another cobblestone laid on the path to h*ll for me...

    Parent
    Funny... (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by DET103 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:06:55 PM EST
    ...you say that as my neighbor across the street who was quite surprised to discover that I wasn't all that excited about Obama (to which I explained the primary fiasco and my DNC anomosity and nothing really about him in the conversation) told me as a result of it that I was going to hell and hasn't spoke to me since.

    Parent
    I am less concerned about (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:15:04 PM EST
    our path to hell and more concerned about our path to Oceania

    Parent
    Good point. My cobblestones can be (none / 0) (#51)
    by Valhalla on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:20:47 PM EST
    adjusted either way, I think.

    Parent
    what's so wrong about that? (none / 0) (#64)
    by ccpup on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:32:50 PM EST
    most of my friends will probably be in Hell anyway and I suspect the parties will be a lot more fun there than that other place where all you seem to do is float around and play a harp.

    I mean, c'mon!  A harp?

    Sheesh.

    Parent

    Hell has a kicka$$ kazoo band, I've heard (5.00 / 1) (#69)
    by sleepwalker on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:38:16 PM EST


    Parent
    kazoos? (none / 0) (#77)
    by ccpup on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:48:12 PM EST
    ugh, like I want to go to Hell and take kazoo lessons.

    Can't I just be the insane cheerleader who stumbles alongside the kazoo marching band, kicking my legs at inopportune moments and colliding with the crowd like a drunken bull on acid?

    Sounds like more fun.

    :-)

    Parent

    This (none / 0) (#20)
    by Jgarza on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:59:03 PM EST
    is the most ridiculous not based in reality thing I have ever read.

    That's not true in Obama's case, as primary voters are having second thoughts.

    And thats based on?  ohh nothing?

    Parent

    I think there's a few (5.00 / 3) (#25)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:02:03 PM EST
    DFAs who've decided they've been betrayed by the FISA "capitulation" and by Obama picking someone who voted "for the war."  and wants "more wars."

    They are being scurried away from the Obama blogs fast and furiously.

    I think it's funny.


    Parent

    On ye olde (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by chel2551 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:05:36 PM EST
    personal testimonials.

    If you don't think his FISA vote lost him support, you haven't strayed from that comfortable bubble you're in.

    That was huge.

    Parent

    He's losing support in the polls (none / 0) (#32)
    by Valhalla on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:06:21 PM EST
    many, many discussions re: same over the last few days on TL.  Key states' polls are tightening or starting to lean to McCain.

    Parent
    strategy (none / 0) (#93)
    by weltec2 on Tue Aug 26, 2008 at 02:50:12 AM EST
    I think he's going to have to figure out an entirely different strategy if he is going to keep the college kid vote. He had them by the droves in the primaries. There may be pockets where he will be able to keep them, but... I think he's losing them now.

    Parent
    Hillary is (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by JThomas on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:01:44 PM EST
    doing a great job to unite the party. As a democrat that desperately wants the Bush/Cheney/McCain regime to end ,I cannot thank her enough. Way to go ,Hillary.

    Parent
    and sadly (none / 0) (#6)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:48:12 PM EST
    it is only going to get worse.

    Parent
    If he drops in the polls (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by chel2551 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:53:47 PM EST
    and ends up losing, it's because he wasn't ready for primetime and his campaign team sucked by pitting dem against dem Ias well as the newly-converted repubs).

    Think about that.  How on earth did they think that could be a winning strategy?

    Parent

    I dont disagree (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:55:23 PM EST
    but it is clear who they plan to blame if he loses.
    and the MSM will help them.
    not saying I care all that much, just observing.

    Parent
    If you need proof, see today's (none / 0) (#14)
    by dk on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:55:48 PM EST
    post by David Sirota over at HuffPo (linked to here by vastleft at Corrente).

    Parent
    David Sirota (5.00 / 2) (#19)
    by chel2551 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:58:53 PM EST
    needs a thorough flushing of his system.  

    Parent
    I thinking (5.00 / 3) (#23)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:00:35 PM EST
    high colonic

    Parent
    well, let me know (5.00 / 1) (#65)
    by ccpup on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:35:01 PM EST
    when that happens.  I want to put at least an ocean between me and the unhappy locale that unfortunately gruesome event takes place in 'cause it ain't gonna be pretty.

    Seriously.

    :-)

    Parent

    Everyone knows (none / 0) (#22)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:59:54 PM EST
    How much some of us speak out against the personal attacks others make on Democratic Party politicians.


    Parent
    Clearly she's bitter (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by americanincanada on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:46:43 PM EST
    and has no sense of unity.

    I heard she knits, too. n/t (none / 0) (#34)
    by Valhalla on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:07:10 PM EST


    Parent
    I'll bet she had her people (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by chel2551 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:49:53 PM EST
    add "not" to the video.  Just like she had that picture of Obama doctored.

    I love it! (5.00 / 1) (#18)
    by bjorn on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:57:02 PM EST
    Switched on the TV to see if the convention had started and there was Chris M.  ranting about the bitter PUMAs.   How sorry is this guy that he has to talk about the PUMA folks as his mortal enemy because of course this convention is all about Chris Matthews.  I switched it off but got a really good laugh that the PUMAs got under his skin!

    We PUMAs have to thank Tweety (5.00 / 5) (#30)
    by janarchy on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:05:27 PM EST
    Without him, we'd be nowhere. He's like the founding father of the movement along with KO and the rest of the MSNBObamaC boyz (including Rachel Maddow).

    He should be proud of himself!

    Parent

    considering Matthews is partly responsible for (5.00 / 4) (#36)
    by kempis on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:08:42 PM EST
    PUMA, there's definitely some justice in that.

    I was wondering why I didn't have the convention on. Now I remember that I can't stand any of the cable "news" network personnel.

    I suppose I could watch it on CSPAN....But I honestly do not care about it. For the first time in my life, I'm pretty much indifferent toward the Democratic convention.

    Parent

    Funny, because he folded like an accordian (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by Valhalla on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:10:08 PM EST
    when talking to Diane Mantouvalos of JSND the other day about PUMAs.  I guess when he has to actually talk face to face, it's a different story.

    Parent
    Diane is an attractive woman. (none / 0) (#48)
    by sleepwalker on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:16:42 PM EST
    Maybe she sent a tingle down his leg.

    Parent
    I do rather think that's it. (5.00 / 2) (#54)
    by Valhalla on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:22:32 PM EST
    He all but apologized when Diane called him out particularly as being part of what gave rise to JSND-PUMA.

    Parent
    "all but" doesn't count. (5.00 / 1) (#57)
    by Fabian on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:26:30 PM EST
    I don't think we've heard a sincere apology from any of the perps.

    Parent
    No, but still a bitter joy to watch him (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by Valhalla on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 06:43:21 PM EST
    stutter and squirm and change the subject, even if it was just because Diane is a babe who caused him advanced tongue-tiedness.

    Parent
    Good thing Obama avoided any Clinton (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:59:24 PM EST
    controversy by not picking her as VP.  (snark)

    If she is going to be the center of media attention anyway, and she will, why not capitalize on it? I'll never understand it. Biden won't be able to find a TV camera this week.

    WTF? (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by AlSmith on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:04:57 PM EST
    "Democratic officials involved in the negotiations said Monday the idea is that at the start of the state-by-state vote for the presidential nomination Wednesday night, delegates would cast their votes for Clinton or Obama.

    But the voting would be cut off after a couple of states, the officials said, perhaps ending with New York, when Clinton herself would call for unanimous backing for Obama from the convention floor. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity while the deal was being finalized."
     clinton-obama-working-out-deal-for-roll-call-vote

    The deal usually is you can vote whoever you want on the first ballot and then are released.

    Why change up things this year to make her support look more tepid than it really is.

    Unbelievable (5.00 / 4) (#38)
    by janarchy on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:09:11 PM EST
    The Republicans ought to have a field day with that. "Obama was so afraid his own party wouldn't nominate him that he had to stop Clinton in her tracks and screw over her delegates once again."

    How pathetic. I honestly hope her delegates walk out rather than be treated like non-entities. No other candidate in the history of the DNC has been treated like this.

    Parent

    Wanna bet the RNC (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by Fabian on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:21:59 PM EST
    makes a huge show of tallying every vote in their convention?

    Sometimes I swear the Obama campaign has a special division just for gift wrapping PR opportunities for the McCain campaign.

    "Let's not make a public show of NOT considering Hillary for VP."   "Great!  Let's wrap that up and hand deliver to the GOP."

    Is the Obama campaign is wall to wall yes-men and yes-women?

    Parent

    they won't (none / 0) (#85)
    by VelvetElvis on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 06:21:29 PM EST
    They don't want to risk giving the Ron Paul freaks more airtime than they will get already.


    Parent
    Rumors about how they're going to run the (5.00 / 1) (#50)
    by Valhalla on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:19:50 PM EST
    roll call vote are flying.  First it was Clinton to release delegates and there'd be no roll call at all, then the 'official' vote would be only among the delegates in their hotels tonight (or maybe tom. night, varies), then it was on the floor but arranged so Illinois put Obama over the top, and now this truncated throw it to Obama before the whole vote is taken thing.

    It seems as if a series of possibilities is being floated and then adjusted as each meets with some skepticism and possible negative press.

    I think probably only folks who pay lots of attention to these things are catching all this, but it does make the Democrats look rather disorganized and amateurish.  

    Parent

    Dems in disarray (none / 0) (#59)
    by ruffian on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:26:42 PM EST
    I see they are wasting no time in reinforcing that stereotype.

    Parent
    Another support for the meme Obama (none / 0) (#60)
    by oculus on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:27:51 PM EST
     state announce the votes from the floor.  Or maybe that's just old politics.  

    Parent
    Hillary is doing more than her fair share (5.00 / 2) (#41)
    by Desired User Name on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:11:44 PM EST
    for the Obama camp. And looking good while doing it.

    I always break into a smile when HRC gets a joke in. I always thought she did best when injecting humor although doing so was difficult during the long brutal primary (of course). I think she's handling herself amazingly well considering the absurd & often abstract demands placed on her by so many absurd and often abstract (or abstruse) people. She has such grace to her, such style...OH THE HUMANITY. I miss her.

    I'm not a "PUMA" ...I'm AMUP

    1.annoyed 2.mauled 3.unhappy 4.pissed
    urgs...but it's good to be here. I read this
    BLOG all the time...so much, maybe too much,
    a lot! Thanks for the vid post.
    -------OH:
    [[by BDB]]
    "continues her quest to destroy the Democratic Party. "
    --------Made me do an "LOL". good one.

    The paranoid nuts claiming she aims to destroy (5.00 / 3) (#42)
    by esmense on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:12:25 PM EST
    Obama so she can run in 2012 are, in my view, undermining the chance of a Democratic victory in 2008. (You'll find tons of them commenting on TNR and TPM.)

    Blaming Clinton for Obama's problems, and letting him off the hook on the need to aggressively court the Clintons' constituencies, doesn't do one thing to earn one vote for the Democratic ticket.

    So why are so many self-proclaimed Obama "supporters" indulging in this?

    why are so many . . . (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by Capt Howdy on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:16:26 PM EST
    its all they have got.

    Parent
    Live by CDS, die by CDS. (none / 0) (#56)
    by Fabian on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:24:25 PM EST
    That's my theory.

    Parent
    Carville (none / 0) (#70)
    by americanincanada on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:39:02 PM EST
    just took some CDS deranged people to school. He was in contortions as Gloria Borger was speaking and finally just let it rip. Gloria ended up agreeing with him and then they both rolled their eyes as CAfferty got going.

    Jack Cafferty must be working for John McCain...

    Parent

    Hillary's integrity.... (5.00 / 3) (#63)
    by p lukasiak on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:29:26 PM EST
    Hillary has a problem.  She grew as a person during the primaries -- and now refuses pretend that the truth isn't the truth.  

    Unfortunately, that means she can't say that the McCain ad is inaccurate, or that she no longer believes what she said is true.  She has to remain true to the truth.

    All that she can do is say that there are truths that are of more signficance than the truths she'd previously told, and that means that voters should support Obama.

    Bill and Hillary should leave Denver... (5.00 / 1) (#83)
    by p lukasiak on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 06:09:40 PM EST
    right now, and go on vacation, leaving behind the statement:

    Both of us are unequivocal in our support of Barack Obama, and the crucial importance of an end to the destructive Bush/McCain policies.  We are leaving because the media prefers to make up stories about conflicts between us and Senator Obama -- conflicts that do not exist.  By leaving we hope that the media will concentrate on doing what it should be doing -- informing the American people about Senator Obama and the Democrats vision for Americas future.  

    She's (none / 0) (#3)
    by talesoftwokitties on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:45:47 PM EST
    not doing enough to unify the party.

    What more do you expect from Hillary? (none / 0) (#88)
    by ding7777 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 07:43:58 PM EST
    The job for uniting the Party belongs to Mr. Reach-across-the-aisle Obama, not Hillary?

    Parent
    How dare she! (none / 0) (#9)
    by janarchy on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:49:51 PM EST
    You'd think she and her husband had some kind of leverage with the voters or something...

    I don't think she was speaking for (none / 0) (#11)
    by inclusiveheart on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:53:14 PM EST
    you only ;)

    Two years ago I was still so angry with her for her AUMF vote that I really couldn't take her seriously at all.

    Over the past six months, I have really come to respect her more than I would ever have imagined I could.

    Of course, party loyalty goes a long way with me.

    Sorry (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:55:53 PM EST
    It's a habit now.

    As everyone knows, I support Barack Obama for President but I will keep writing precisely what I think about this campaign.

    I will vote and support Obama but I am not a campaign staffer.


    Parent

    I was just kidding. (none / 0) (#37)
    by inclusiveheart on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:09:07 PM EST
    Ha :)  Levity :)  heh?

    Parent
    Seriously? (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by chel2551 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 04:56:06 PM EST
    Two years ago I was still so angry with her for her AUMF vote that I really couldn't take her seriously at all.

    I will never understand this.  Nor the pass that people gave Kerry, Edwards, Obama (who would have voted for it if he'd been in the Senate), and now Biden.

    Nope.  Never.


    Parent

    Did I say I made peace with the (none / 0) (#43)
    by inclusiveheart on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:13:00 PM EST
    vote?  Nope.

    I said that I could not take her seriously.

    Different.

    I am still more than unhappy about that vote.

    I won't get into the specifics of why she in particular really winded me at the time, but let's just say she did.

    But her ability to be a team player now does off-set the most cynical interpretation I had of her decision then - and as I said I have grown to respect her in ways that I never knew I could.

    Parent

    Maybe it was just a Clinton thing (none / 0) (#52)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:21:24 PM EST
    A lot of people have wierd things about Clintons that seem to not make much sense.


    Parent
    No it was pretty simple really. (none / 0) (#67)
    by inclusiveheart on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:35:36 PM EST
    She and her husband had eight years of high-level intelligence on Iraq.  They should have known that there was something very wrong about the claim that all of a sudden Saddam Hussein had nuclear and biological weapons that all reports while they were around suggested that they did not.  The timeline was wrong.  Neither of those types of weapons get produced in a year's time.

    I won't go on, but I felt that Hillary Clinton was in a very special position at the time to challenge the Bush Administration's wild-eyed claims.  I was blown away when she did not.

    Parent

    Assumptions there (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:44:59 PM EST
    Maybe the information they had was unverified and it was, in her view, right to give the president war power authority to pursue verification.  I mean Colin Powell never admitted he lied.  Or did he???  He just said he went too far with unverified data out of loyalty to his Commander in Chief.  And he regretted that.

    I still think it's odd that Clinton is held to a different standard than other politicians.


    Parent

    That's an interesting point (none / 0) (#71)
    by Democratic Cat on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:39:59 PM EST
    I get what you are saying, but do you think that Hillary actually had access to that kind of information when she was First Lady? I am ignorant of what her security clearance would have been during Bill's administration, but do you think it would really have enabled her to receive this kind of intelligence information?

    Parent
    Would anyone you know who is (none / 0) (#80)
    by inclusiveheart on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:54:57 PM EST
    smart not have consulted their husband and all of the people around them.

    I think she believed the president for two reasons:

    1. What nutcase would ever lie about a threat like that?
    2. She and Bill always supported "regime change" in Iraq.

    We all now have the answer to question #1 and I think like many people in Washington at the time were she was more susceptible to this sort of irrational lie.  We were reeling from 9/11, anthrax attacks and the sniper - who I later found out was in a parking lot at a shopping mall I used to frequent.  It was a scary time and those people on the Hill were scared to death.

    Parent
    From what I understand, (none / 0) (#76)
    by Emma on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:47:57 PM EST
    Hussein did have nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons programs.  After all, he used chemical weapons on the Kurds and there was great fear of chemical and biological weapons during the Gulf war.  The issue was whether or not he had dismantled those programs, kept them going, or expanded them.

    I believe the UN supported the AUMF because THEY wanted to use the threat of U.S. force to get U.N. weapons inspectors into Iraq.  And it worked, the inspectors got into Iraq.  And found, from what I could tell, no evidence that the programs were active.  But Bush invaded Iraq before the weasons inspectors were done.  I seem to recall some concern that U.S. troops would invade while the inspectors were still on the ground in Iraq.

    Also, I don't understand the assumption that Hillary had the same access to high-level intelligence that Bill did.  Wouldn't she need security clearance?  Did she have security clearance?

    Parent

    You're talking to someone (none / 0) (#79)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:53:34 PM EST
    Who takes people who think Clinton voted for CAFTA and the bankruptcy bill seriously, but won't take Clinton seriously cause she trusted a president who 70% of the country believed they could trust.  

    At the time, of course.


    Parent

    The simple question that I would (none / 0) (#81)
    by inclusiveheart on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:58:39 PM EST
    have asked Bill is this:

    Is this possible based on your extensive knowledge of the history here?

    Maybe she asked and he said yes, but given the fact that all of the people who tried to warn us at the time that the intelligence was deeply flawed I would have been surprised if he would have given that answer.

    Parent

    Sorry, but your contortions (none / 0) (#90)
    by chel2551 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 08:03:58 PM EST
    are just that.

    You don't acknowledge that she represented New York State.  You don't acknowledge that she was going to run for president.  Heck, Obama is already getting grief becaude of his national  security creds, which explains his pitiful vote for FISA.  "They" love to portray the dems as weak there.

    Just stop it.

    It's just an excuse on your part to cheerlead for Obama.  

    Parent

    I hope she didn't take us into (none / 0) (#94)
    by inclusiveheart on Tue Aug 26, 2008 at 07:31:13 AM EST
    that war because she was planning on running for President.  A lot of people are dead - maybe as many as a million people are dead and I would never want it to be said that one of the reasons all those people died was because she wanted to be president one day.  Your defensive reaction hurts her image - not my honest comments about how and why she disappointed me at that time.

    I am not an Obama supporter except in as much as he will be the Democrat on the ticket this fall.  I have made my comments not to score points against her - I started giving her a real and heartfelt compliment - I was asked a question about the war vote and answered honestly.  I'll thank you for not attacking me so viciously again in the future - I clearly have a different point of view but that doesn't make me an enemy to Senator Clinton or to you.  If you want to debate the issue fine - but attacking me is a waste of your and my time.

    Parent

    Lots of people (none / 0) (#96)
    by Emma on Tue Aug 26, 2008 at 08:02:03 AM EST
    seemed to think it was possible that Hussein had NOT suspended his NBC weapons programs after the Gulf war.  And that, in fact, he was still doing research and development of NBC weapons.  It was why the UN wanted to get in and search, after all.  

    So maybe she did ask him what he thought.  And maybe he said, "Yeah, it's possible he's still got these weapons.  It would be great if the UN could get in there to look."  And she voted for AUMF because that was the purpose of it:  to get UN inspectors into Iraq to look for weapons programs.  And it worked, it got UN weapons inspectors into Iraq.

    Parent

    And are you ok with Biden's vote (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by dk on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:05:00 PM EST
    to ban "partial birth abortions"?

    Parent
    And what does that have to do (none / 0) (#58)
    by inclusiveheart on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:26:30 PM EST
    with my admiration for how Senator Clinton has handled herself in the past six months?

    Is she supposed to reject the Democratic ticket in your mind?

    It is too late for her to go all "third party" here.

    And for the record, no I am not "okay" with Biden's vote on that bill nor am I okay with the mis-leading terminology you used to describe the procedure.

    I am way more liberal than most people - probably more liberal than you are - but I try to work with what I have once my options have been eliminated - seems to me to be more practical than taking my red wagon and sucking my thumb in some corner.

    I try to encourage the positives in politicians and hope that they'll be so busy being positive that they don't have time to go with their destructive tendencies.  It is by no means a perfect system, but it is better than atrophing in hopes that we might find absolute perfection from all of these people.

    The upside of electing Biden - he won't be able to vote on issues of choice anymore.  Now our job is finding someone trustworthy to replace him to do so.

    Parent

    Oh, so asking for a Democrat (none / 0) (#68)
    by dk on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:35:57 PM EST
    to support women's reproductive freedom is now tantamount to demanding absolute perfection?  I suppose you defend Obama's gay-baiting too.  

    Women's rights over their own bodies...gay people's dignity....I suppose I should just "get over" those things.

    But I'm just a gay guy busy sucking my thumb.  Why do you care.  You keep rationalizing.

    Parent

    Absolutely not - please don't (none / 0) (#78)
    by inclusiveheart on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:50:06 PM EST
    even suggest that.

    Let me ask you - what do you and I have now?

    Seriously.  Give me a good option and I am all ears.

    The only path I can see right now is figuring out how to get these people who have been anointed to pay attention and care about the things we care about.

    How to do that exactly is somewhat confounding, but what I know is that giving up will definitely NOT yield any results that I care about.  This politics stuff just isn't easy - and Democratic politics is worse.  But as long as there is a democratic process in this country - no matter how anemic - I won't be able to stop trying to win some ground for liberal causes.

    Parent

    Well, one way is to tell the (5.00 / 1) (#82)
    by dk on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 06:08:51 PM EST
    Democratic party that this time, they have crossed the line, and they will not get the support they took for granted from people like me.  Am I risking four years of divided government?  Yes.  You may not agree with this, but please do not accuse me of thumb sucking and doing anything with a wagon.  And please don't whitewash the unpardonable positions that Obama and Biden take, even if you do decide to vote for them.  It's all the more reason why you should highlight them even more.

    Parent
    I did not accuse you of (none / 0) (#84)
    by inclusiveheart on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 06:16:25 PM EST
    thumb sucking and red wagon taking - I said that I could not do it - as much as I think about it myself at times - it was a characterization of how I would view myself.

    And I whitewash nothing.  I do however try to say something positive when I see something that I feel is positive.  I think that Senator Clinton is doing everything she can to protect me and you from John McCain - to her own personal detriment - that counts for something for me.  I appreciate her service and instincts at the moment because I know far too much about John McCain not to worry a lot about how I will manage to leave the country if he is elected - and support my retired parents - and care for them - and a lot of other stuff that scares the living daylights out of me.

    Parent

    Frankly, my dear, (none / 0) (#91)
    by chel2551 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 08:06:34 PM EST
    I have no idea why you're backing Obama, because he's provided no clue as to how he'll handle any of your concerns.

    But he'll be the nominee.

    Maybe he'll decide to take a risk and be more forthcoming.


    Parent

    You have no idea why (none / 0) (#95)
    by inclusiveheart on Tue Aug 26, 2008 at 07:56:45 AM EST
    because he's not my guy - he's the guy that my party picked and I am a Democrat - I also happen to have a keen understanding of exactly who John McCain is and just how dangerous and devastating his administration would be.  I'm voting with Senator Clinton in November - she's got her priorities straight.

    Parent
    I take it you've made peace with (none / 0) (#26)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:03:22 PM EST
    Biden's AUMF vote too.


    Parent
    Nope. n/t (none / 0) (#44)
    by inclusiveheart on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:13:56 PM EST


    Parent
    Oh. Ok (none / 0) (#49)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:19:43 PM EST
    I have.  

    I always took him seriously and listened to what he had to say.


    Parent

    I take him seriously because he (none / 0) (#62)
    by inclusiveheart on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:29:26 PM EST
    has been the only person in either party who has clearly stated that Iran is 5-10 years away from a nuclear program that might be a worry to us and has worked pretty hard in the Senate to put out "war with Iran fires" over the past two years.  That is good imo.

    Parent
    Are these the kinds of statements (none / 0) (#66)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:35:35 PM EST
    you're talking about:

    "To have a despotic theocracy in possession of a nuclear weapon, creates a much bigger danger than having a democratically elected government in control of a nuclear weapon. ... They're much more likely to use it or threaten to use it or attempt to use it for blackmail."

    Wallace asks: "You're saying at this point a nuclear Iran is unacceptable?"

    "Correct," Biden replies.
     

    Hey.  I agree with him.  Do you?  

    I'm sensing a little meme creation here.  Soon, everyone will know that no one has done more to stop war in iran than Senator Joe Biden.

    Parent

    Nope - I agree with him on that - but (none / 0) (#72)
    by inclusiveheart on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:41:09 PM EST
    what impresses me is that he is not afraid to say that Iran is not an imminent problem as the Bush Administration tried to claim and as many Democrats in their knee-jerk fashion simply went along with when the Republicans tried to stir that pot.  Biden even sponsored a piece of legislation that never went to the floor that had the sole purpose of barring the Bush Administration from attacking Iran when they came back from the 2006 election - and continued to insist on a calm and rational approach to that situation instead of allowing the neocons the opportunity to instill enough fear in people to launch another un-provoked attack.

    Parent
    So you would take seriously (none / 0) (#75)
    by Edgar08 on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:46:30 PM EST
    Anyone who supported that kind of legislation.

    So would i.


    Parent

    It's an interesting dilemna (none / 0) (#35)
    by thinkingfella on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:08:23 PM EST
    On the one hand there's the prospect of voting for a Democratic candidate that wasn't the first, second, third or even last choice.

    On the other hand, there's the prospect of being a pawn (unwitting or otherwise) of McCain's strategy.

    Decisions, decisions....

    Doesn't she realize (none / 0) (#40)
    by Chisoxy on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:10:10 PM EST
    how little leverage she has? Where's Judy Woodruff to invite her to sit down.

    Hah! (none / 0) (#46)
    by americanincanada on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 05:15:49 PM EST
    The best one yet!

    Parent
    How can you be speaking on for you (none / 0) (#87)
    by LatinoVoter on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 07:10:36 PM EST
    when you didn't say anything in the post? ;0)

    You should have ended it "Hillary Clinton, speaking only for her."

    If you want to see a longer clip (none / 0) (#89)
    by facta non verba on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 07:53:14 PM EST
    of Senator Clinton's speech to the NY state delegation, here it is:

    Senator Clinton's Call for Unity

    Has anyone found a transcript of the entire speech (none / 0) (#92)
    by jawbone on Mon Aug 25, 2008 at 08:33:25 PM EST
    Hillary gave to her supporters this morning?

    I checked and found nothing.

    Any complete video?

    She said some good stuff and I live commented on it; posted it and it did stick because I went back to it later to provide a link; later, tried to pull up the comment and it was gonzo.

    Any idea what happened? My memory isn't good enough to recall her exact words, but what I wrote was pretty close!

    "I'm Hillary Clinton And I Do Not Approve That Message" | 96 comments (96 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment