The worst time for Dems to praise McCain
One of the benefits of having a prolonged Democratic primary race, after Republicans have already winnowed their field to John McCain, is that it’s a two-against-one dynamic — the GOP can’t direct all of its ire at one Dem, and there are two Dems to go after McCain at the same time.
Of course, that only works when Dems realize this isn’t a time to praise McCain.
At a press conference on Monday in Ohio, Clinton was defending her “3 a.m.” ad, and told reporters, “I have a lifetime of experience I will bring to the White House. I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he made in 2002.”
The pro-McCain comments were quickly and widely panned — so Clinton repeated them. James Fallows reported on Wednesday, “In a live CNN interview just now, Sen. Clinton repeated, twice, the ‘Sen. McCain has a lifetime of experience, I have a lifetime of experience, Sen. Obama has one speech in 2002′ line. By what logic, exactly, does a member of the Democratic party include the ‘Sen. McCain has a lifetime of experience’ part of that sentence?”
That, too, was widely panned. So why would Clinton ratchet up the pro-McCain rhetoric even more?
I wish Hillary luck in her attempt to become McCain's VP.
Sickening.
Because she's a monster, that's why. She doesn't care if she takes the whole party down, as long as she gets the nomination.
After all of this crap, if Clinton were somehow to miraculously win, I would find it hard to put any effort into voting for her. I may put just as much effort into voting for her as she put into voting on FISA.
Doesn't everyone bring a "lifetime of experience" to the table?
"That, too, was widely panned. So why would Clinton ratchet up the pro-McCain rhetoric even more?"
Easy. The more experienced McCain is perceived to be, the more a Dem voter might want a candidate who could theoretically match his experience.
If you think about it, we all have a lifetime of experience, don't we? Next.
Sounds like the "fixers" are trying fix the elections in the favor of war and economic polarization and exploitation.
Hello Hilliary? Are you Joe Lieberman reincarnated?
"Easy. The more experienced McCain is perceived to be, the more a Dem voter might want a candidate who could theoretically match his experience."
Except if she were to win the Dem. nomination based on this argument, she would lose this argument to McCain. If Obama wins the nomination, McCain can use Hillary's quote against Obama.
Completely selfish and destructive comment by this woman.
Is Hillary going to start an "America for Hillary" party if she loses the Dem nomination?
Clintons done as a democrat. She might as well start looking at jomentum credentials. I wouldn't vote for her if she was running against Nixon.
I think the comment is over the line and shows that she is a little tone-deaf in a way that hubby wasnt (back in the day anyway). But Clinton is a fighter and she's fighting for the nomination so I can't fault her too much. God knows the obama camp has thrown a few punches her way.
I do not grasp her strategy here. Clinton has to know how her comments will be taken by the public. So what is her objective? Yes, she paints Obama as a political novice but at the same time she is further strengthening McCain's position now when she may have to take him down later if/when she becomes the Democratic Presidential nominee. If she gets the nominiation then every time she tries to place herself above McCain in experience these comments will be thown right back in her face.
moondancer @ 11:
Hyperbole much?
Apples @ 1:
Hillary wants in any way she can get in. As she has made clear, nothing else matters.
Sounds like Clinton is joining a growing line of DLC Democratic spoilers:
Zell Miller-Joe Leiberman-Hillary Clinton
Ed-hussein-win @ 7:
That's total bullshit.
I have a lifetime of experience, would you want me removing the brain tumor in your child? Or defending your brother in his murder case? Or ... you get the idea.
Effective governance requires specialized knowledge, just like anything else. It's not all that's important, but dismissing it so casually is just plain stupid.
Too subtle? She knows that she can beat McCain.
Hillary '12 that's why. McCain '08 enables Hillary '12.
I recall C&L and other liberal blogs gushing about their private conference with Bill a couple years back. I shook my head in disbelief. The king of triangulation working his magic on the supposedly enlightened bloggers.
HA
The same Bill that Molly Ivins panned for rushing back, mid-campaign, to execute a brain damaged black man, proving his bona fides to the conservatives on crime.
The same Clinton that gave us NAFTA. The Bill that Jerry Brown called "the Wall Street candidate."
Some of us were awake back then.
That good ol DNC democrat, Clinton.
To paraphrase Chris Rock, I'm tired, tired, tired of the Clintons.
We got the real deal here in WI, the Feingold half of McCain/Feingold.
Russ is fer real.
She completely alienated me with that comment. What next? Praise of Bush?
And what exactly is her foreign policy experience anyways? The Armed Services Committee? Voting to go to war?
"I think Ronald Reagan changed the trajectory of America in a way that Richard Nixon did not and in a way that Bill Clinton did not. He put us on a fundamentally different path because the country was ready for it.
I think they felt like with all the excesses of the 1960s and 1970s and government had grown and grown but there wasn’t much sense of accountability in terms of how it was operating. I think people, he just tapped into what people were already feeling, which was we want clarity we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and entrepreneurship that had been missing."
I forgot. Barack can do no wrong in the "progressive" blogosphere. My bad.
bubba @ 12:
Fine, but she doesn't have to sabotage any other Democrat's chance of beating McCain. She should at least show some loyalty to the party and the Democrats that vote for Obama. Not throw the whole game to the Republicans if she doesn't win the nomination.
So, I would suppose she would vote for Mr. McCain rather than Mr. Obama
Maybe it is only me who is at a loss, but I don't see where this "experience" has benefited McCain or Clinton, since they didn't correctly see that Iraq wasn't a security threat, and instead voted for the war, a $500B fiasco so far, with "tail" costs bringing the costs to at least a trillion. We should note that at the time of authorization, the war was predicted to cost $20B and last 6 months. Clinton should have recognized that the Iraq war was the exact same war proposed to her husband by the exact same PNAC people.
And in the case of Clinton, unless Bill is going to answer the phone for the 3am call, I don't see where the experience is. McCain was a pilot, but I don't recall command experience. And he doesn't have a plan to get out of Iraq, and is willing to stay for 100 years. Haven't heard his plan to pay for it. His representations on the surge is misleading-fighting is down in Bagdad because Shiites have fled Sunni neighborhoods and Sunnis have fled Shiites neighborhoods. Al-Quaeda is diminishing not because of the surge, but because we armed the Sunnis to drive them out. It was the Sunnis who was keeping out Al-Quaeda until we went in and disarmed the Sunnis.
Meanwhile, if Obama had been listened to, we wouldn't be in the Iraq quagmire. His speech, which Clinton dismisses was brilliant, and showed great comprehension of the war proposal. McCain and Clinton, despite their "experience", blew it. Clinton wishes she knew then what she knows now - actually, all she needed to do then was listen to Obama's speech.
hoss @ 5:
Ha! Yes - God I love the liberal blogosphere - so much more intelligence in one thread than you'd find in the whole field with the wingnuts.
CalGeorge @ 20:
And what is Obama's? Voting to fund it?
Joe O. @ 13:
Her strategy is simple...extortion. She is establishing a scenario in which she endorses McCain at the expense of Obama. If you don't elect her, then McCain, not Obama will be POTUS, so you'd better elect her.
Joe O. @ 13:
Her strategy is to win the Democratic nomination at the expense of the Democratic party. She cares more about her personal political ambition than she does about her party or the country. She'd rather win the nomination in August and lose in November, then concede defeat right now, unite the party behind Obama, and give the Dems a fighting chance in November.
Why this isn't a BIGGER story than the Pennsylvania contest is a mystery to me. It doesn't matter if Hillary wins PA by 20 points, Obama will wipe out any delegates she win by winning in North Carolina big the following week. The same thing happened today! By winning Wyoming by 20 points, Hillary has netted ZERO or less delegates on Tuesday since she lost Texas in delegates. Obama also picked up two more superdelegates since Tuesday.
This is all a exercise in futility.....
.
I wonder what McTORTURE has to say about:
.
I'll be bringing this up when people mention that if Obama wins, he should offer HRC the VP slot.
Tom (Not Tom) @ 3:
I second that!
HC makes these comments as part of anything goes to win the nomination. I'm a loyal Dem and party activist, but with these comments she has lost my support, even if she gets the party nod.
I bet Hillary kills her teammates in Counterstrike, too.
OK, she doesn't get to be on the ticket now, top OR bottom. Experience praising the opponent. Don't need it.
Marco @ 26:
What you mean is not committing political suicide by falling on his sword and cutting funds for the troops. Only an idiot isn't aware that's exactly how the Corporate Media would play it and the majority of the American voters would eat it up whole cloth.
truly, i never thought i would be so pissed off at that woman as i am...
just astounding...
and then THIS:
Lieberman calls for Bush to release library donors.
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/03/08/lieberman-calls-for-bush-to-release-library-donors/
whooo! i am getting mighty dizzy!
and y'just know sumpins up!
Mister Anderson @ 28:
So why would Clinton ratchet up the pro-McCain rhetoric even more?
There's no mystery, and we should just come out and call it what it is: coercion.
This tactic is clearly directed at the Democratic Party and the superdelegates, and the message is this:
It is coercion because it contains the very real threat of destroying the Party's chances in the general election, and most of the superdelegates' chances for re-election. Having her say things like this is just Mark Penn sending us the party's ear.
Because they know this guy does not have what it takes to lead this very large and complicated country in a very large and complicated world.......
Monster comes closer to the truth. She is all about herself and refuses to run against Bush's record. Somebody better tell her that half the Democratic party is nauseated by this. But she does love her lobbyists just like McSame.
What the hell is a Commander-in-Chief threshold? This is complete bullshit and she knows it.
Give me a frigging break.
MarkC @ 38:
ROFLMAO!!!
I bet this you and your cat: http://newssohot.com/bed_bugs/pics/tinhat.jpg
McClinton speaks.
chris @ 39:
chris the hit and run troll doesn't have what it takes to reason his way out of a paper sack. All he can do is mouth Republican talking points as if there was anything factual about them.
enough @ 40:
LOL!
In case you didn't know it, Bush isn't running in '08...
Hillary is a monster.
It's a stupidly scorched-earth comment. It does very little to benefit her, as both her and McCain's foreign policy judgement has been terrible.
All it succeeds in doing is creating more bitterness in the Democratic party.
Very very stupid, very very selfish, very very shortsighted.
That was the last straw (for me) from the McClinton camp.
McClinton = McSame.
If Obama were to select Hillary as his VP, he'd not last 10 days before getting Vince Foster'ed
Hillary and McCain, they are the McSame.
Their experiences have been mostly bad for the American people. McCain had three bombers shot out from under him in Vietnam and was captured the third time around, and gave what he claims is a false confession under torture, but now he approves of torturing people to get information from them? Hillary Clinton had the opportunity to vote against going to war with Iraq. She didn't take it. But instead compounded her error by voting to give George Bush the aurhority to invade Iran whenever he chooses!!!
I guess old war horses have to stick together. As Hillary points out, there is no difference between her and John McCain for the American people.
I think I will get a bumper sticker with Hillary and McCain, it's all the same.
[39 chris Says]: Because they know this guy does not have what it takes to lead this very large and complicated country in a very large and complicated world…….
--->>I see, and Bush did???????????? Look around you. Obama will be just fine.
Snowball @ 44:
WOW, I saw alot of reason in your threat, no matter, I'm right and deep down inside you know I'm right......
foolme1ns @ 50:
It's always nice to see people complain about something and then do exactly what they complained about...
tz @ 23:
Sounds like it to me.
Ed-hussein-win @ 51:
I am looking around and I see a time in the world were we cannot afford ANOTHER guy on training wheels......
Two wrong don't make a right.....
This is where Hillary has lost my vote UNLESS she apologizes to the Democratic party for her basic endorsement of McCranky.
See, this is about Hillary and her thirst for power. I never thought I would believe it but its true. She cares more about her being President than the Democratic Party.
Watch out for her because she is so vindictive that if she is not nominated she will see to it that Obama will lose to McCain.!!
Swashbuckler @ 45:
Yes, but McCain is joined at the hip with Bush's record. So much for his "life experience."
Hillary's problem is she doesn't have enough to distinguish herself from that record either so she's ill-equipped to run against McCain when the American public is looking for a change from Bush regime policies.
On the other hand, you're not a Democrat or supporter of either Democratic candidate, so what's your point?
Indeed, that would make a good bumper sticker:
She's had a lifetime of experience trying to control Bill too. How'd that work out?
Question: Should a mean bastard be replaced with a mean bitch?
Discuss, please.
Since when does a Democrat throw a Member of their own party (the One who she said"It is an Honor to be on the stage with Barock Obama") under the bus, and praise a republican? I have never in my life see this before. It is Unbelievable!
She has lost her frikin' mind! Man this is psycho queen on parade time. The High Up Democratic Officials should take her butt to the woodshed big time. The Only reason she won in Ohio and Texas was because all the Republicans voted for Her! That is now a matter of public record!
But you know what both clinton and mccain have in common? aipac.
motorfingaz @ 56:
You gonna vote for Nader?
topper @ 47:
Shocking!! Selfish? Short-sighted? Who knew?
;-)
OBAMA wins in Wyoming by over TWENTY points!!! Go Bama.
republicanSScareme @ 60:
LMAO!
Snowball @ 35:
Oh, so he makes politically motivated choices? Kinda like how he now says he would never have voted for the war although his statements of a few years ago say otherwise?
Only an idiot wouldn't admit that. But Hillary = evil for making hers.
55 chris Says: Ed-hussein-win @ 51:
[39 chris Says]: Because they know this guy does not have what it takes to lead this very large and complicated country in a very large and complicated world…….
—>>I see, and Bush did???????????? Look around you. Obama will be just fine.
I am looking around and I see a time in the world were we cannot afford ANOTHER guy on training wheels……
Two wrong don’t make a right…..
---->> Pithy stuff, Chris.
Megan Sheehan @ 31:
EXACTLY!!
republicanSScareme @ 60:
Wow, it's like I am at FreeRepublic.
Hillary Lieberman has all the "experience" of Barbara and Laura Bush and Nancy Reagan. She's no Maggie Thatcher, Golda Meir, Indira Ghandi, or even Benazir Bhutto. She has the fictional mastery of J. K. Rowling.
Marco @ 66:
Such a vote might be a principled stand, but never had a chance of passing. So what's the point? Empty symbolism?
GWB has almost 8 years experience as Commander-in-Chief and he isn't the least bit qualified to be President. Clinton is making it reeeeally hard for me to vote for her if by some slim chance she is nominated. Don't get me wrong...I'd do it, I just woudn't like it.
Marco @ 69:
The Obama fan club doesn't like criticism of the chosen one...
What the hell was Hillary thinking? I was wavering between her and Barack, but this cinched it. I believe McCain has every intention of going after Iran. I shudder to think what happens if he wins.
Swashbuckler @ 62:
I am. It's OK. Before you lose your kit and your head explodes, I could vote for Nader a million times in my state, and the Dem would still get all the electoral votes. And those are the ONLY votes that count.
If it were close, of course I would hold my nose and vote for the stinker the Dems thrust upon us...
Jess @ 72:
Which goes to show that experience isn't everything. That doesn't mean it isn't meaningless either.
bubba @ 12:
What punches are you talking about? He said she voted for the war which is true. He mentioned that she refuses to release her tax returns and that is also true. No innuendo and no spin. Do you know something I don't? Please elaborate.
Swashbuckler @ 73:
Isn't that just a predictable wing nut troll. Show up at a Liberal blog to talk trash and then whine about being argued with.
.
REMEMBER:
Conservatives call (s)Hillary a Liberal.
Right of center IS NOT the Liberal starting point.
.
Gee . another hit piece on a Democrat and you criticise her for doing what you just did?
Snowball @ 71:
Yes, he's gotten pretty far on empty symbolism.
Snowball @ 78:
Isn't that just like a predictable fan club member, no actual KNOWLEDGE - just a feeling...
73 Swashbuckler Says: Marco @ 69:
republicanSScareme @ 60:
Question: Should a mean bastard be replaced with a mean [Deleted. Site Monitor]?
Discuss, please.
Wow, it’s like I am at FreeRepublic.
The Obama fan club doesn’t like criticism of the chosen one…
----------> NO. Hillary is supposed to be a Dem., did you forget that? McClinton is hearting McCain, the enemy. That makes her a GOP collaborator. I have trouble respecting that. Next she'll be invoking the spirit of Ray-gun. Is she thinking Lieberman or McSame for VP?
Marco @ 81:
He has. And if Obama wins the nomination (which he likely will) and the election (which he likely will) then the rubber will meet the road the Obama will have to deliver on that promise. I suspect that the Obama fan club will be as disappointed in what he delivers as we have been with the recent Democratic Congress.
Swashbuckler @ 73:
I guess I am a wingnut now for agreeing with you. Never voted Republican ever, but don't support Obama for President in 2008 (although I voted for him in 2004 for the senate) so I guess it's my fate.
Swashbuckler @ 62:
Yes, because the Clintons behaviour over the past couple of weeks have pushed me to it!
Ed-hussein-win @ 83:
Collaborator?!
You people are really amazing, and NOT in a good way...
Yeah let's just hate each other. Lets hate Obama, let's hate McCain, let's hate Hillary, let's hate the neighbor, let's just hate everyone.
P.D. @ 71:
I was fully behind Clinton until she showed that she will throw a fellow Democrat under the bus for a republican candidate.
She is sickening!
Monster. Extortionist. Selfish. Destructive. Spoiler. Disloyal. Coercer.
These are the terms used in this thread to describe Senator Clinton by those who support Senator Obama. Everyone of his supporters in this thread have decried her statements this week in acknowledging Senator McCain's experience as being "over the line", yet they have no problem labeling Senator Clinton as they have.
Has civility gone out the window? Has everyone forgotten Senator Obama's praise of former President Reagan as pointed out by Marco in 21 right before the Nevada caucuses? I don't remember terms such as "monster", "extortionist", "selfish", "destructive", "spoiler", "disloyal" and "coercer" being used to describe Senator Obama.
Grow up people. Use some freaking common sense. Senator Clinton made her statements as an astute political move to partially insulate herself from experience attacks by Senator McCain should she win the Democratic nomination. It does not cripple Senator Obama for her to make this move, because no matter what, no matter who wins the Democratic nomination, they will be attacked by the Republicans as being inexperienced.
Raise the level of discourse. Show proper respect, as I have and maybe, just maybe, I will start listening to the real reasons you support Senator Obama.
motorfingaz @ 81:
So, you'll vote for Nader despite all that he has done?
That sounds like a double standard if I've ever heard one!
Does everyone need a fucking DRAWING?!?!
Clinton IS the establishment. Her, McCain, Bush....NO DIFFERENCE.
GO AHEAD. Give the corporatists the White House again...AND the Congress.
Eat fucking snow, drive cars that get 20 miles per gallon and pay fucking $10 for gas.
MORONS!!!
Phoenix Justice @ 84:
Sadly, your reasonable plea will fall on deaf ears...
Marty @ 19:
Feingold is the most honorable member of the Congress....I wish he had run.
I am glad he's supporting Obama....
What's the caption for that picture?
Each of them saying..."Thanks for the rimjob last nite".
Maybe Osama Bin Laden was right. When asked if 911 was enough of a blow. Quote: "Don't worry the United States will Implode from Within"
It certainly looks like were on the way.
Whatever. This is irrelevant
Swashbuckler @ 79:
I actually don't think he'll win but he gets my vote anyway, despite the Hate Hillary First crowd and their inspiring words of "hope" and "change."
Yikes.
Swashbuckler @ 82:
Actually, I've read your comments for a couple of years here. We've even debated a few times. I pretty familiar with your tactics and political persuasion.
That aside, what makes you think I'm some fanatical Obama cultist (as if there is such a thing, only a Corporate Media manufactured caricature)? You're only here name calling so you can play a little divide and conquer game with Democrats.
I'll vote for either Democratic candidate if they get the nomination. I'll do anything to keep the Presidency out of the hands of you Republicans and your criminal party.
That doesn't mean that I have to like Clinton's scorched earth campaign strategies. You and I both know it's not good for the Democratic party and that's why you're here trying to justify it. It isn't because you're a Clinton supporter.
ohio progressive @ 93:
Feingold would have been an excellent choice...
Swashbuckler @ 91:
QUESTION:
If Obama wins the nomination, will Clinton be compelled to support the more qualified candidate or the speech maker?
Her statement, not mine.
She shoots her own foot, we only point and laugh.
.
[deleted - way over the top. can we rise above ignorance like this, please? Sitemonitor]
Snowball @ 99:
You're a fool - you're a fool because you think you things you don't, just like herr Bush.
I'm a registered Dem, have been all of my adult life and I voted for Hillary in the primary.
You fanboys are AMAZING!
bubba @ 12:
Ya just last week Obama compared her to Huckabee, but said that Huckster brings more religious credibility. Hahahahaah........man.....eyesight and still blind
It's GLARINGLY OBVIOUS what she's doing.
1. She does not have to win over Obama supporters. If she's nominated, they will vote for her anyway.
2. She DOES have to win Republicans.
Hillary can say Obama supporters are women-hating communists all she wants. THEY WILL STILL VOTE FOR HER if it's between her and McCain. She's making nice wioth McCain to prove to right-wing voters she's not that bad.
This is GLARINGLY OBVIOUS.
Swashbuckler @ 91:
Look, I was for Hillary 100% until she showed her phoney ass tirade against Obama a couple of weeks ago. Then she basically endorses a republican John McCain over a possible Democratic nominee Obama?
Sorry but that stinks to high heaven!
Bill Maher researched her book trying to find out what exactly her experience is and what qualifies her for whatever crisis that is making the phone ring at 3am. What he found was her telling about the worst "crisis" in her life. It was when she found out Bill was cheating. Her reaction? She couldn't breathe, she was in shock and then just started crying and yelling at him. Maher played the audio last night. You might think, oh thats personal, but whatever crisis that is coming could be personal to you. Is the reaction you expect?
Phoenix Justice @ 90:
Thank you for that, but I also fear it will fall on deaf ears.
Max-Hussein-1 @ 101:
She'll endorse Obama and use the same argument to do so that Obama has been using against Clinton. That judgement matters and Obama's judgement is superior to McCain's...
Swashbuckler @ 103:
"You're a fool - you're a fool because you think you things you don't, just like herr Bush."
Incoherent much? Kinda like Bush. :D
I hope we aren't all wagging our tongues for nothing. Will the corporate machine even ALLOW a democratic president? They own the media, they own the voting machines...
I don't hold out much hope for us regular people. Life is good for the rich people they aren't going to want to change that. Just think, while Bush has been in office the cost of gas has nearly quadrupled! His pals are making big bucks!
Weltallica @ 105:
Some will, but I think a lot will not. Many are simply fans of Obama and will sit out the election if he isn't running.
SCOTUS, SCOTUS, SCOTUS, SCOTUS. Snowball got the ball rolling.
Phoenix Justice @ 86:
Put this praise in perspective....
she made fantastical accusations of plagiarism....big fat lie
she made intentionally misleading characterizations of Obamas health care plan.....dishonest
she exploited a bogus story about Nafta and canada, even after it was debunked, post election day, by the press....big fat lie...
then, after all that, she says only she and mccain are qualified to be president. that's different than the praise obama has given to mccain and reagan.
she's like a a boxer throwing lowblows to the groin, and you keep asking us to admire how great a fighter she is.....it's called cheating. There's nothing admirable about it, and there's nothing uncivil about calling a lowblow a lowblow; there's nothing petulant or vitriolic about suggesting that even if she scores a knockout throwing lowblows, she still shouldn't win the fight (get my vote)...
NoBuddy @ 24:
Also, all she had to do was listen to other countries.. Everyone except Briton didn't want this war. I think she would have access to more information than your average citizen! Just about all countries said no to war... The US went in almost unilaterally. That phrase" I wish I knew then what I knew now" is a cop out. To weak of an argument when your dealing with millions of lives here.
Snowball @ 110:
Forgive me my typos as I forgive those who typo against me...
Does spending five years in a cage really qualify as foreign policy experience?
If so, let me know. I'm thinking of running my parrot for president.
-_-
Carl from L.A. @ 117:
It's an excellent point, but one that is hard to make in an acceptable way to the general public.
Marco @ 21:
From an academic standpoint (which is NOT necessarily a wise place to be in a political season) Obama is exactly right here.
Reagan (I stood 10 feet from the scoundrel at the Detroit convention in 1980, I was a service worker, read paid poobah) did change the country. He ruined it. He said that Government didn't work, he got himself elected and proved it.
He was an actor and he delivered a good speech. A lot of working people in Michigan were succored in by his hooey.
Lyndon Johnson famously said 'you can't shine a cow patty'.
That was before Reagan, who perfected the practice.
I don't know what Obama thought he had to gain by talking about Reagan. But a polite person will not say bad things about the dead.
So maybe I am not so polite. Reagan was a disaster.
Working people today are still succored in by the right wing baloney.
I know even less precisely what McClinton thinks she has to gain by mentioning McBush at all.
What I do know is that Reagan is dead and he was admired a whole lot of people who should have known better. He is not running for office although the neocons wish he were.
McBush IS running and the only thing that a prudent Democrat should say about that is, if you liked Bush's first two terms, you will love the third, because that is what John McBush is going to be.
Hillary wandered off the reservation for me, I won't vote for her. PERIOD. End of story.
Phoenix Justice @ 90:
Oh she is trying to insulate herself SHOULD SHE WIN. No matter who wins the republics will attack, this is true, but she just gave them ammo to use on Obama SHOULD HE WIN. How does that help the party? It doesn't it only helps her (she thinks) because it is all about her. Listen to her speeches. I I I me me me.
Weltallica @ 105:
BINGO! She's ran a scorched earth Republican candidacy, and STILL Dems supporters will vote for her. Her or McCain, who would the Dems support? HOWEVER, what if just enough Dems don't support her now? Hello Prez John McRightF'ingNuts.
Hillary is dependable for a stab in the back to the Democratic Party, and little else.
Carl from L.A. @ 117:
It does when you're McTORTURE and your president enshrines USTorture Inc. as the norm.
.
Carl from L.A. @ 117:
I think that's exactly what Cheney/Rove/Bush is doing with McCain.
Alice Hussein @ 120:
Reservation? Huh?
you want the clinton strategy???
here is is
scorched earth policy
if she cant have the nom and the presidency, then make sure mccain (who is sure to be a one term pres) gets it
then in 2012 she will still be young enuf to run
eff her....eff her husband...and if you still support this power grabbing bitch (ya, i went there) eff you too
L.A. Confidential @ 126:
Hey, it's just an expression. She didn't mean to be racially insensitive, honest!
106 motorfingaz Says: Swashbuckler @ 91:
motorfingaz @ 81:
Swashbuckler @ 62:
[motorfingaz @ 56]:
((note: altered script in double parentheses-- I wasn't against Hillary)) .......until she showed her phoney ass tirade against Obama a couple of weeks ago. Then she basically endorses a republican John McCain over a possible Democratic nominee Obama?
Sorry but that stinks to high heaven!
I second that. Exxactly my sentiments. I no longer respect her or her tactics.
NoBuddy @ 24:
McCain did command a training squadron down in Florida for two years 70s, but thats about it, he then got parachuted into a grooming job for political officie.
This is a person whose father and grandfather were both admirals and its to be expected that the scion would get high rank too if he kept his nose clean, he retired after 30 years in the Navy at the rank of Captain which says a lot.
McCain is hot headed, impulsive and a loose cannon, and with his advancing years and probably latent PTSD not a good choice for supreme button pusher and potential unleasher of Armageddon.
If by some
Dieboldweird thing McCain got into the WH even the Repugs would regret it sooner than later.uncle joe mccarthy @ 127:
Wow. Thats astounding. Einsteinonian!
uncle joe mccarthy @ 127:
Hill could still win, then Jeb could win, then Chelsea could win, and by that time the Bush twins could offer double the presidency once again like the Hill and Bill show....then of course, the grandchildren should be old enough to be eligible......quite the pattern of possibilities.
Ed-hussein-win @ 129:
To be blunt, I don't think she cares if you respect her, she simply cares if you vote for her...
Swashbuckler @ 45:
Yes he is. He's called McCain. And Hillary is like a sickening little sharpei humping his fucking leg and it's disgusting.
If Clinton gets the nomination, I'll vote for her. For me, at that point it's about who gets to make the next several Supreme Court nominations. I don't like her foreign policy positions or her triangulating Third Way DLC corporatism, but if McCain gets to stack the courts with fanatical right wing ideologues from the criminal Federalist Society everything that Liberals and Progressives care about for the rest of our lives will be moot.
Swashbuckler @ 128:
Yeah. Alice must watch a lot of survivor?
L.A. Confidential @ 126:
McCain, the Coal Miners and the Native Americans evicted from their lands to make way for the strip mines.
L.A. Confidential @ 88:
Swashbuckler @ 133:
Well, I WON'T. I'm staying home in November if it's Hillary Vs. McCain. I won't make a choice like that again.
Snowball @ 135:
Why would you think she would appoint any different than McCain if she believes in alot of the same things he does?
L.A. Confidential @ 96:
Consider what Chomsky (my hero) has to say about 911.
slippy hussein toad @ 134:
No, he isn't. Someone with the same policies as Bush has is running. But it's a different person who is perceived differently by the public.
Obama beats McCain by a few percentage points in a polls. Obama would trounce Bush...
L.A. Confidential @ 118:
I couldn't agree more.
States won with 60% or more of the vote:
Barack Obama: 14 States + DC + VI * Virgin Islands (89.9%) * Idaho (79%) * Hawaii (76%) * Alaska (75%) * District of Columbia (75%) * Kansas (74%) * Washington (68%) * Nebraska (68%) * Minnesota (67%) * Colorado (67%) * Georgia (67%) * Illinois (65%) * Virginia (64%) * Maryland (62%) * North Dakota (61%) * Wyoming (61%)
Hillary Clinton: 1 State * Arkansas (70%)
Snowball @ 135:
Very true, she might be a beetch but shes our beetch :O Go Obama Go get those nominations please.
ohio progressive Says:
When did Feingold endorse Obama?? I haven't heard that.
Just a note on Russ,
I ran a blog for him for Prez. He dropped out because the insiders turned their back on him -remember he had them ready to support him against the Patriot Act before the Xmas holiday, but Reid and Schumer (as reported in The Hill later) used their DSCC purse power and forced them to vote against Feingold. And they did. When Russ heard they switched their votes (the all-powerful 'new' Joe Lieberman had a lot to do with that too) he came to the Senate floor -and called them all cowards. And dropped out a short time later.
If you don't have the DSCC money and campaign help -as Ned Lamont found out - you're toast.
Oh, and Russ had also endorsed Ned over Joe. So that was a double foul against him. Schumer and Reid brought Lieberman back, and Russ Feingold was punished and forced out.
All those same pro-Lieberman people are now with Hillary, completely..
And they're all still together, baseball bats at the ready -to keep Barack Obama out, too
This is no time to praise Barack Obama. Some people are telling me this weekend that they won't vote for Hillary is she is the nominee - but alas they'll vote for Obama over McCain. I said keep that up and you're going to get McCain because if you continue to say that to the right people like me. I'm going to tell you right back at ya babe - I'm not going to vote for Obama. I think that is where many of us Hillary voters are at right now and really I don't think Obama or his supporters can change our minds. I'm speaking for about eight people I know personally. So good luck to your candidate you did a really good job helping him win to just lose. I'm sick and tired of it all. Good Night and good luck. Hillary is going to be one hell of a awesome President. Obama can't win he's being bought and that'll never work in the general. To much tug of war will tear him apart.
Ron @ 113:
Some of you fighting amongst us are not looking at the big picture.
Phoenix Justice @ 90:
nice of you to bring up more of clinton bs talking points
did obama praise reagans policies???
is the dem candidate gonna be running against reagan??
never in the history of the presidential primaries, or even any political primary has a candidate praised the opposition candidate in an attempt to destroy the candidate from the same party
but we should not use perjoratives to describe hillary....no
we let lieberman off the hook, and look what he is doing now
so take your high and mightiness and step off
she is a monster
she doesnt give a shit about the dem party
she could care less about the country
she cares for only one thing...the clinton legacy
If you read the normal blogs I do, you'll see a pattern people.
"I won't vote for her"
"I won't vote for him"
Umm........let's say it's 50/50 for argument sake.....can whoever wins the Dem candidacy, win the federal election with just 50% of own party support?
Comments are closed on this entry