While addressing Obama's recent horrible poll numbers from Newsweek on the TODAY Show Monday morning, Harold Ford was asked if Obama's flip flopping on some issues had impacted those numbers and Ford--without provocation--attacked MoveOn and the entire liberal blogosphere for not being happy with his FISA vote. There was no need to criticize us, because we weren't part of the question she asked. So I can only conclude that Ford was referring to FISA and he took an opportunity to throw us all under the bus. I think there were a few other issues that we didn't even complain about. Why would Ford pull those attacks out of thin air? It's all to please the Villagers. That's why you're a loser, Harold.
Q: There's also a lot of accusations now about both campaigns about flip flopping, specifically against Obama about flip flopping? Do you think there's something going on, does Barack Obama have to worry now?
Ford: No....this race is fluid, this race is finally forming. Two things. Barack Obama is running for the President of the US, not the President of MoveOn.org, the President of any liberal group. He's running to lead, be a decision maker and a visionary for the country on the economy, national security and the immediate issue of Iraq.
I'd say McCain has flip flopped on many more positions than Obama has so the question is way off, which how a good Democrat should have responded, but beside that, what is Ford talking about? The country wants to move left. Check out all the numbers. Almost eight years of Bush have decimated the conservative movement and the economy, so people want a real change. Running as a liberal should be a goal to run towards, not a problem to move away from even if the media wants this race to be about personalities and not policies.
Here's a message to Ford: I want Obama to win the presidency very badly for all the obvious reasons, but I will not sit by idly while he allowed retroactive immunity to be passed. There was no need for that issue to even have been brought to the floor of Congress or for him to vote for it. He wasn't the only one to vote for it either, by the way. You can donate here to our Blue America page to help the cause. Is Jonathan Turley a dirty f*&king hippie too?
I'm sure you got the appropriate props from your media and DLC buddies for slipping that one in. Harold.
Email him here and ask why he went out of his way to attack us, but be gentle. You know how fragile he is .... harold@fordfortennessee.com
Do you REALLY think the powers that be respect the Constitution and the will of the people.
Oh...and FRIST.
Hey Harry, I got news for ya. Obama votes like a republican, war mongers like a republican, then he must BE a republican. I ain't alone on that either.
So, let me get this straight...Obama should take campaign advice from a womanizing jackass like Harold Ford who thought pissing off progressives in his own state to the point they refused to vote in the hopes of pleasing right wing bigots who never would vote for him anyway?
Harold Ford needs to take a long walk off a short pier! What a douschebag!
July 15, 2008
Quinnipiac: Obama Opens Lead Nationally
"With commanding leads among women and young voters and near unanimous support from black voters," Sen. Barack Obama has a 50% to 41% lead over Sen. John McCain, according to a new Quinnipiac poll of likely voters released today.
Independent voters split 44% to 44%. McCain has a slight 47% to 44% edge among men voters and a larger 49% to 42% lead among white voters. But black voters back Obama 94% to 1%, while women support him 55% to 36%.
Interesting: Obama gets 44% to McCain's 47% in red states, which went Republican by more than 5 percent in 2004, and leads 50% to 39% in purple or swing states.
Latest Quinnipiac Poll Gives Obama Solid Lead
The latest Quinnipiac University Poll gives Barack Obama a national 50%-41% lead over rival John McCain, bolstered by strong support among blacks, women, and young voters. McCain has a slight lead among men as well as white voters. The candidates split the spoils among independents and seniors.
Exactly!
Oh yeah? Well Fuck Harry Ford! People who don't believe in the Constitution should not be allowed anywhere near it...
The DLC et al better wise up and realize that a big part of the massive democratic primary turn out were not just first time voters, but people getting off the fense wanting to make sure a "progressive" agenda that is implied in the words "change" and "hope" was to be implimented. IOW, it was a bunch of independents. And, based on the break out of the recent polls, it is these independents who are stepping back in their support. If they say sitting, then this race comes back to the republican kind of game; a race of the bases. Who can get more of their base out?
Now how do you suppose one should go about getting the base of the democratic party out to vote? Would it be the same show as the one that got the independents jumping off the fense to the Obama side?
MSNBC has a slew of these so-called analysts that like to tell Americans how to think or to provide "insight.". I am glad that this site watches them and catches their inane and ridiculous horseshit so I don't have to. Apparently this is where failed politicians go to die; cable news networks. This statement appears to be stating the obvious, and he gets paid for it?
The DLC and Hillary supporters are one in the same. They want to derail the Democratic Party and would love to see Obama fail.
One of the Bush Administration's many intolerable traits is that it insists on unilateral, unreasonable decisions, claiming that any feedback from the President's employers (the US public) is just focus group noise. Whether reasonably or not, I worry that Mr. Obama's approach to FISA represents a similar attitude. I want a responsive President, not an imperial executive.
The reich-wing MSM continues to carry McGrampa's water by accusing Obama of being a flop-flopper, but of course the reich-wing MSM continues to ignore the laundry list of flip-flops of McGramps:
* McCain supported the drilling moratorium; now he’s against it.
* McCain strongly opposes a windfall-tax on oil company profits. Three weeks earlier, he was perfectly comfortable with the idea.
* McCain thought Bush’s warrantless-wiretap program circumvented the law; now he believes the opposite.
* McCain defended “privatizing” Social Security. Now he says he’s against privatization (though he actually still supports it.)
Wait, I’m not done with the last two weeks yet….
* McCain wanted to change the Republican Party platform to protect abortion rights in cases of rape and incest. Now he doesn’t.
* McCain thought the estate tax was perfectly fair. Now he believes the opposite.
* He opposed indefinite detention of terrorist suspects. When the Supreme Court reached the same conclusion, he called it “one of the worst decisions in the history of this country.”
* McCain said he would “not impose a litmus test on any nominee.” He used to promise the opposite.
And these come after these other reversals from April and May:
* McCain believes the telecoms should be forced to explain their role in the administration’s warrantless surveillance program as a condition for retroactive immunity. He used to believe the opposite.
* McCain supported storing spent nuclear fuel at Yucca Mountain in Nevada. Now he believes the opposite.
* McCain supported moving “towards normalization of relations” with Cuba. Now he believes the opposite.
* McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Hamas. Now he believes the opposite.
* McCain believed the U.S. should engage in diplomacy with Syria. Now he believes the opposite.
* He argued the NRA should not have a role in the Republican Party’s policy making. Now he believes the opposite.
* McCain supported his own lobbying-reform legislation from 1997. Now he doesn’t.
* He wanted political support from radical televangelists like John Hagee and Rod Parsley. Now he doesn’t.
* McCain supported the Lieberman/Warner legislation to combat global warming. Now he doesn’t.
And these are the flip-flops I’ve noticed earlier:
* McCain pledged in February 2008 that he would not, under any circumstances, raise taxes. Specifically, McCain was asked if he is a “‘read my lips’ candidate, no new taxes, no matter what?” referring to George H.W. Bush’s 1988 pledge. “No new taxes,” McCain responded. Two weeks later, McCain said, “I’m not making a ‘read my lips’ statement, in that I will not raise taxes.”
* McCain is both for and against a “rogue state rollback” as a focus of his foreign policy vision.
* McCain says he considered and did not consider joining John Kerry’s Democratic ticket in 2004.
* In 1998, he championed raising cigarette taxes to fund programs to cut underage smoking, insisting that it would prevent illnesses and provide resources for public health programs. Now, McCain opposes a $0.61-per-pack tax increase, won’t commit to supporting a regulation bill he’s co-sponsoring, and has hired Philip Morris’ former lobbyist as his senior campaign adviser.
* McCain has changed his economic worldview on multiple occasions.
* McCain has changed his mind about a long-term U.S. military presence in Iraq on multiple occasions.
* McCain is both for and against attacking Barack Obama over his former pastor at his former church.
* McCain believes Americans are both better and worse off than they were before Bush took office.
* McCain is both for and against earmarks for Arizona.
* McCain believes his endorsement from radical televangelist John Hagee was both a good and bad idea.
* McCain’s first mortgage plan was premised on the notion that homeowners facing foreclosure shouldn’t be “rewarded” for acting “irresponsibly.” His second mortgage plan took largely the opposite position.
* McCain vowed, if elected, to balance the federal budget by the end of his first term. Soon after, he decided he would no longer even try to reach that goal.
* In February 2008, McCain reversed course on prohibiting waterboarding.
* McCain used to champion the Law of the Sea convention, even volunteering to testify on the treaty’s behalf before a Senate committee. Now he opposes it.
* McCain was a co-sponsor of the DREAM Act, which would grant legal status to illegal immigrants’ kids who graduate from high school. Now he’s against it.
* On immigration policy in general, McCain announced in February 2008 that he would vote against his own legislation.
* In 2006, McCain sponsored legislation to require grassroots lobbying coalitions to reveal their financial donors. In 2007, after receiving “feedback” on the proposal, McCain told far-right activist groups that he opposes his own measure.
* McCain said before the war in Iraq, “We will win this conflict. We will win it easily.” Four years later, McCain said he knew all along that the war in Iraq war was “probably going to be long and hard and tough.”
* McCain said he was the “greatest critic” of Rumsfeld’s failed Iraq policy. In December 2003, McCain praised the same strategy as “a mission accomplished.” In March 2004, he said, “I’m confident we’re on the right course.” In December 2005, he said, “Overall, I think a year from now, we will have made a fair amount of progress if we stay the course.”
* McCain went from saying he would not support repeal of Roe v. Wade to saying the exact opposite.
* McCain went from saying gay marriage should be allowed, to saying gay marriage shouldn’t be allowed.
* McCain criticized TV preacher Jerry Falwell as “an agent of intolerance” in 2002, but then decided to cozy up to the man who said Americans “deserved” the 9/11 attacks.
* McCain used to oppose Bush’s tax cuts for the very wealthy, but he reversed course in February.
* On a related note, he said 2005 that he opposed the tax cuts because they were “too tilted to the wealthy.” By 2007, he denied ever having said this, and insisted he opposed the cuts because of increased government spending.
* In 2000, McCain accused Texas businessmen Sam and Charles Wyly of being corrupt, spending “dirty money” to help finance Bush’s presidential campaign. McCain not only filed a complaint against the Wylys for allegedly violating campaign finance law, he also lashed out at them publicly. In April, McCain reached out to the Wylys for support.
* McCain supported a major campaign-finance reform measure that bore his name. In June 2007, he abandoned his own legislation.
* McCain opposed a holiday to honor Martin Luther King, Jr., before he supported it.
* McCain was against presidential candidates campaigning at Bob Jones University before he was for it.
* McCain was anti-ethanol. Now he’s pro-ethanol.
* McCain was both for and against state promotion of the Confederate flag.
* McCain decided in 2000 that he didn’t want anything to do with former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, believing he “would taint the image of the ‘Straight Talk Express.’” Kissinger is now the Honorary Co-Chair for his presidential campaign in New York.
When Ford ran to the "center" he lost.
When Gore ran to the "center" and away from Clinton he lost.
When Obama ran to the "center" his lead over McSame evaporated.
Those who do not learn from history are destined to repeat it.
Harold Ford, like so many Beltway pinheads, doesn't "get" that the Democratic Party's "momentum" would have never gained any seats in 2004, 2006 or 2008, without the grassroots energy derived from the very organizations he discounts. Left to party leadership, Harold Ford would have spent his last dime going nowhere, while partying with his thumb up his ass. Ford should incur the wrath of real Democrats . . . that of a quick replacement next time around. Ungrateful tool !
yeah, and george bush was the pres. of the u.s. bullshit. bush was the pres. of right wing chicken hawk lunatics and greedy rich people like the msm.
When any candidate bashes MoveOn.org, all MoveOn supporters who have donated to that candidate should immediately write to that candidate and request the money back. Tell the candidate, "I am MoveOn.org." Copy the letter to your local media.
Sorry, but you bloggers are the problem right now. You whine and scream when you disagree with someone who isn't even in office yet, and has a long road to hoe. With friends like you, we'll end up with McCain for sure...a wonderful repeat of the 2000 election, where lefties held hands, sung kumbaya, and voted for Nader. Good God, can't you all just shut up until December? Then you can whine all you want.
Harold Ford, another failed DLC quasipulican.
sorry...quasipublican
St. Paul Scout @ 2:
Sure, you're not alone...I'm certain that most of the voices in your head agree that the guy your Repub friends call "the most liberal member of the Senate" is a Republican. You people are so drunk with lies that you actually believe the bullshit that you spout.
How's this? Gentle enough?
I toned it down as much as I could.
Ford. Just another LIEberman.
I'm thinking it's dangerous when these politicians forget where their base support comes from... I'm just sayin'...
Don't forget where your support comes from, Mr. Obama. It got you where you are today.
Harold Ford, Clinton hatchetman.
If Obama alienates his supporters and alienates the moderates who are left of "center" he's toast and he'll have no one to blame but himself but we'll get stuck with 4 more years of Bush. Anybody seen John Edwards?
KW @ 17:
Is your lunch break over yet?
Umm ... he didn't attack anyone, he merely pointed out a fact - Obama is trying to be President of the U.S.A., not MoveOn.org or any other liberal group. While he may agree with those groups more times than not he has not adopted their platform, and they have not adopted his.
Wow Bitter Bud, you sound really bitter.
Isn't it rude for the interviewers to not refer to Harold Ford Jr. as "Senator Ford"? I mean, they call Barack Obama, "Senator Obama", and John McCain, "Senator McCain". What gives?
Each election cycle is new and this one has unusually scary big picture elements like a pending depression. The arguments about moving to center based on what happened in the near past when we were fatter and happier are all wet. One could just as easily argue that McGovern got clobbered in the 70's by embracing the fringe and how, pray tell, did Clinton get elected?
Oh and Newsweak polls are crap.
Call it projection. Barack Obama has always been a pragmatic centrist politician who is very smart and likeable and is intent on bringing everyone to the table. The Taliban Liberals don't 'get' this. They made a straw hero out of the guy by misunderstanding his intent while being over excited by his charisma. It is like some high school kid in the throes of infatuation with a love object to a degree where the love object is imbued with qualities that never existed and then the infatuator is bummed.
By way of illustration, allow me to share this amazing comment from some My DD diary by the funny and brilliant, 'Bishop Rook'.
================================
They're starting to act like my father.
Truth is, they don't want to win, because they have absolutely no idea how to handle winning. It's such an alien concept to them that it's frightening. Being out of the mainstream, one of the "cool kids" who is smarter than everyone else, is a much more comfortable position for them to be in.
For this reason, they've already subconsciously devoted to hating Obama, because he's now too mainstream and too likely to win. They'd feel like a lemming if they supported him; much better to be in the small group of "in the know" folks who have "seen the light" and no longer support him. And for this reason they need to cling tightly to the first excuse they can find to hate him.
They throw flimsy excuses and slogans like "Obama killed the 4th Amendment!" without even understanding what the new FISA legislation does. They seek the latest talking point like a teenager chasing trends.
It's like the mass exodus of devoted fans that happens any time a popular indie rock band's first hit single gets on the charts--even if the music is just as good as it's always been. "Man, they used to be cool, but now they're just total sellouts..."
Why do I understand all this? I used to be one.
Hi, my name is BishopRook, and I'm a recovering Kucinich supporter. I've been sane and pragmatic for four and a half years.
Proud member of the Wikipedia Generation of American politics .
Ruthless "The Whiner" People @ 13:
The problem with obama is that he ran pell-mell to the center and past it in just the last few weeks; and this he did before the convention. As a Hillary supporter, I do not want to see him fail as some fools have suggested --- but getting to know him is a roller-coaster experience. So who is he? It is a matter of faith and belief now --- and if that ain't scary, I don't what is. And as democrats we should and must always question our party and our candidates --- what he would do in office is anyone's quess.
Harold Ford is a weak, watered down, black politician conditioned to be afraid to say how he really feels about important issues. Trust me, you don't know him and he won't let you. Just like Condi, Colon and Clarence, Harold is placating white folks to feel "comfortable" with him solely to advance his career. Ford is a liar and a phony. I'm a professional black man who runs into Harold Fords all the time. Wearing masks and saying exactly opposite of how they feel on subjects, particularly concerning race so not to rock their personal boat. Like me or not, I'm always myself. Ford is the kind of guy white folks love until he slashes two white people in a gangway.
As much as I want Obama to win, he still gets on my last nerves when he becomes the political weathervane, spun completely off his hinges with ever GOP wind broken. C'mon! Obama callowly caved on the FISA Bill, just to save Dems who took cash from Big Telecom, which was outrageous. He should have stuck to his promise to fillibuster that bill, because there is not likely to be the proverbial 'next time' to counter the damage done already.
Everytime Obama senses one drop of blood about to hit the waters, he seizes up and either pitches a valuable surrogate under the big wheels of Grampers' Straightjacket Regress, or he callowly backpedals to the political center on issues behind which he needs to be firmly standing liberally and progressively. Even though Barak is running against a befuddled old coot who graduated fifth from the bottom of his Academy class, he still can't afford to take too many more devastating hits to his steadily DIMINISHING reputation. As it is, too many middle-of-the-roaders supporting Obama are actually only voting against McCain. So, Obama can't afford to squander or relinquish a single inch of ground in this fight.
Harold Ford is mindless pinhead, an idiot home from the Hill for more reasons than swiftboat ads suggesting he was actually campaigning to give some nasty to white Tennessee tarts. It's doubtful that Harold Ford has ever had an original or independent thought that was useful or productive in any way. This dude is one dim bulb. MoveOn.org was not the only progressive or liberal organization who expressed disappointment that Obama did not go through with his promise to fillibuster the FISA Bill. More than MoveOn.org are stunned at how flagrantly Obama is pandering to the center when his appeal and his lead in the polls have come from independents, progressives, liberals, and the revolutionary left. Obama is seriously jeopardizing support in hand for votes from the center and right that he not only is not likely to get, but really doesn't need to seek, just to vanquish Gramps. Obama supporters don't want more of the same, which is what they all see coming from the Democratic center that didn't help Obama win the nomination. Thus, any Obama surrogate claiming to have the Senator's Presidential interests at heart, who can't see or understand that fairly fundamental and obvious political reality needs to be axed from the team. With Harold Ford's less than stellar campaign resume, the ObamaNation probably shouldn't include this dunce on the team, good friend or not!
Chris Rich @ 30:
Amen. You said it better and more coherently than I, my friend.
Not just Obama's stance on FISA- but has everyone ignored his stance on afghanistan?? He wants more troops in afghanstan and wishes to prolong that war. Reducing troop levels in one area(Iraq) for another(afghanistan) doesn't strike me as a peace candidate. Unless Obama seriously changes his decisions on personal liberty, Afghanistan, and his stance on Iran- he is ANOTHER WAR CANDIDATE like Bush, McCain, and the rest. He just sounds nicer when he talks.
Wow, these posts are sizzling! So much anger for Ford. But you are pretty much correct. But I would prefer a weak pinhead compared to a Red-neck Repug any day of the week.
I don't care if Obama blows Ralph Reed on the 700 Club. If that's what it takes to get a Dem in the White House, I'm for it.
Hello President John McCain.
I'm still waiting for the first news report of the Newsweek poll to mention their change in methodology from June to July.
From Digital Journal:
That's just Newsweek making the numbers fit their agenda, in both polls. No credibility whatsoever.
KW @ 17:
this post is an example of just how and why we are in trouble as americans.
it is shortsighted, insulting, idiotic and simply wrong.
gahd... fools, damn fools
you might be a sheep, led around by your nose, but don't expect others to join you in the pasture.
Dr. Hussein Matt @ 5:
All I can say is if this country is stupid enough to put McCain in then we deserve what we will get and it won't be pretty.
I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Obama's starting to look too much like this guy.
Moving to the DLC, Ford-approved center is EXACTLY why his poll numbers are dropping.
How do I know? Because if I were to get called about Obama, even though I'll probably vote for him, if they asked me whether I think he'll be a good commander in chief, I'd probably say no. That doesn't mean that I want McSame more. But it sure does skew the poll, doesn't it?
What can be counted on from Harold Ford is he will spew the old guard Democratic party talking points BS. This is why he continues to be on national TV. How much do you see Ned Lamont on national TV? I think he's a Hillary puppet propped up to drive the wedge.
Oh yes-- advice on winning elections from Harold Ford.
I'll just file that with Jessica Simpson's tips on cramming for an Advanced Physics final.
Sue @ 41:
Amen, and exactly right.
What is Harld Ford. jr. talking about? Barack Obama despises the DLC. He's turned down their invitation to speak before the organization at least three times .
I'm a progressive and I agree with Harold Ford. You all don't want anybody straying far from your idealistic view of the world. I don't either. I'm angry about the FISA bill too. Obama is running in a general election and is trying to win a sweeping majority of the vote so that it can't be taken away from him. He is going to try to walk that tightrope and you are making it harder for him to do so. The moderate conservatives and independents he is talking to to don't want to vote for a radical lefty. Sorry but they won't vote for him. The flip flopping issue is a problem because the media is making it sound like he is flipping more than McCain. In fact, with the exception of the liberal blogs, most of the media has pretty much stopped talking about McCain's flopping. That's what we should be paying attention to. The telecoms can still be brought up on criminal charges. The FISA legislation only prevents civil suits not criminal charges.
Theguy @ 35:
No, Obama doesn't want to "prolong the war" in Afghanstan. He wants to find the people behind the 9/11 attacks and bring them to justice(your hero Dubya could have save everyone time, lives, money and our rep had he done that). Also, Obama doesn't want "more troops" he wants to remove most of the troops from that moral, military, and financial cesspool in Iraq and concentrate our efforts in the true "Central front in the war on terror". Time for the Iraqis to wipe their own asses(isn't the surge working?). Obama's right.
Heraldblog @ 37:
well it would be a change from his blowing bush! and raguns corpse!
I don't understand why we've got Harold Ford--president of the Democratic Leadership Council (*cough*Republican Wing of the Democratic Party*cough) and Hillary Clinton shill--appearing all over television as a commentator on Barack Obama. Oh... wait... I do understand: Harold's there to marginalize the progressive elements of the party and worm his way onto the Obama gravy train.
The arc of history has passed the DLC by. The American People are hurting and the last thing we need right now is to accommodate the neocon rats who brought us to this pass. We need progressive solutions to our problems. the omnipresence of Harold Ford is the mainstream media's attempt to frame the debate.
Well, Harold may think he can afford to spit at the netroots from the great height at which he sits but the whole structure that supports him is tottering. He will find that out only when it's too late.
I'm struggling to figure out how this was really an attack against the liberal blogs. Sounds like C&L is being fragile here. Can't I say... "I want cheesecake; not apple pie, not ice cream, and not chocolate cake -- cheesecake!" and not necessarily be saying that I don't like apple pie or ice cream. I'm just clarifying what I want. Ford is saying that if Obama had to adopt every bubbling opinion of every liberal blog, his campaign would get scattered and sheepish.
Chris Rich @ 30:
Hi, my name is BishipRook and I'm the good German. Come time to vote, I will put aside all of my moral principles and vote for the person with a "D" beside their name with no more thought than cheering for my favorite team at a football game. Party before country!
Lie to people about the FISA vote by telling them that they just don't understand it? War with Iran when the Secretary General of IAEA has recently stated that there is no evidence of a nuclear weapons program? Continue the slaughter and theft of oil in Iraq? Increase the slaugher in Afghanistan? More troops and more war for the military-industrial complex? Invade Pakistan? Continue flushing the international reputation of the U.S. down the toilet? Destroy the value of the dollar? Bail out Wall Street? It's all good. Those that disagree are just a bunch of dirty hippies that are not being pragmatic. The Party knows best and what's good for the party is all that really matters to me.
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
Pandering to the center during a campaign does not mean he can't do Liberal things after being elected
Play to win, after you win then do whatever your heart tells you
Ford is right
Have you seen Obama's remarks on Afghanistan?
Out of Iraq and into Afghanistan, and maybe even Pakistan, is his plan, where we will stay the course until the job is done.
We cannot afford to lose there, he said.
So I guess we're in for a hundred years.
This is SOOOOOO much better than McSame.
I am SOOOOO glad the Democrats put up a peace candidate.
Aren't you?
it is so laughable that this fraud and pathetic ex-rep is actually brought on to give his political opinions.
consider this:
Merrill Lynch & Co., Inc. (NYSE: MER) today (feb 14, 07) announced that Harold E. Ford, Jr., former congressman, Ninth District of Tennessee, will join the company as vice chairman and senior policy advisor, effective March 5. Mr. Ford will advise senior management on domestic policy issues, serve as a member of the firm's public policy and social responsibility management committee, and support a variety of business development initiatives in the institutional and retail markets
so, when this neoliberal stoolie gives "his" advice, "his" views, and "his" opinions, are we supposed to assume that they are somehow kept separate from the interests of merril lynch?
ford, like the majority of the msm camera-whores, is compromised and part of the effort to support the policies that have damaged america.
chele @ 16:
I quit MoveOn after they endorsed Obama. I guess I made the right choice. I don't like Obama at all but please people, keep on him to move back to the left!
I sort of agree with Ray, a lot of the time we tend to have skins that are far to thin. Having said that, it sounds like Harold Ford is a bit of a Jerkwad.
Yeah, the DLC... the geniuses who thought it would be a great idea to alienate the liberal base of the Dem party in order to try to appeal to the GOP-lite voting public which would never vote democratic even if their life depended on it.
And btw, both Clinton and Gore are founding members of the DLC. And I am fucking tired of them, they costed so many elections it ain't even funny: The only reason why they feel somehow qualified to direct the dem party is because they won 2 elections. In '92 it is debatable Clinton would have won without Perot's spoiler, and in '96 the GOP ran a lame duck like Dole. Meanwhile the DLC shenanigans cost both of the houses for over a decade (the DLC conveniently forgets all about the fun and games that was the "Contract on America"), and the 2000 election was lost to a fucking retard like Bush. Because it made perfect sense for Gore to be a bore, and ran a son of a bitch like Lieberman in the ticket.
You know what I would like to see? I would like to see the DLC spend as much time bitching about the GOP and the conservative movement as they do bitching about the liberal grass roots movements that are helping the Dems. And I would like to see the DNC grow the same spine to attack the current administration as they grew trying to blame the 2000 and 2004 debacles on people like Nader. But I will not hold my breath.
The Dem powers that be seem to be showing some sort of weird "abused partner" pathology, almost like some fucked up Stockholm syndrome. Where they piss on their supporters (the liberals) trying to gain the validation of their abusers (the conservatives)
Since all I keep on getting from the Dem is a nice middle finger toward my liberal ass: Running 2 conservative candidates down my throat (Obama and Hillary), kissing the ass of the current admin while demonizing those requesting accountability, Hillary acting as if the word liberal was something to be ashamed off, Obama voting yea for the FISA bill, etc, etc, etc. Well, I am about fucking sit this election out. Unlike them, I am not ashamed of being a liberal, and I have no weird psychological issues that makes me want to cuddle to my abusers.
If they are ashamed of the liberals, fine. But they should stop assuming we will vote for them simply because they assume the GOP alternative is so fucking bad that they don't have to earn my vote by having to compromise to the powers that feed their accounts.
It is time for the DLC to be asked to pick a fucking side: if they want to talk like a GOPer, walk like a GOPer, and look like a GOPer. Maybe they should stop undermining the liberal interests in the Dem party and join the GOP. Oh, wait...
So many of thes polls are on ridiculous questions. I'm going to ignore the polls untill after the debates. I find myself thinking about the Kennedy Nixon debate alot lately. Unless Barak has a complete meltdown, starts babbling or faints, he should do quite well. Even if he doesn't continually call the audiance "MY FRIENDS" McFudd is a dweeb.
Gaius Sempronius Gracchus @ 54:
Move to Afghanistan? Troll we are already in Afghanistan. I get it....instead of talking up McGeezer(you don't have a pot to piss in) you dog Obama's every move(even the ones that make sense). Great strategy.
Harold Ford wants to be Lieberman when he grows up, but not as smart.
i've never liked Ford. is that wrong? he comes off as a total phony to me. and an arrogant one. all schtick.
I can't believe a voted for this asshole in 2006!!
Bud @ 56:
I'd say we already are by threatening to withhold support. The people that Obama's lost in the poll may not have been contacted, because his support is primarily among the young who don't necessarily have the land-lines pollsters depend on, but instead have cell-phones that pollsters haven't figured out yet how to contact with phone lists. However, others probably never went to mccain, but have been rendered apathetic, whilst others may be considering write-in candidates.
Then we can make the final call right before going to the voting booth.
Gaius Sempronius Gracchus @ 54:
The only peace candidate was Kucinich, but he did not have a chance in hell...
At least I am glad I contributed to his campaign, did you?
This is the same dickweed that called Krustys famous green screen speech "awesome, the best I've seen McCain".
Bud @ 56:
After your all negative bullshit tirade why would anyone give a shit about your request?
Gaius Sempronius Gracchus @ 54:
who said one hundred years in afganastan.......the occupation in iraq is causing more problems than it's solving at this time.....maliki wants a timetable within the last few days 9 u.s. troops were killed in Afganastan.
mccain said 100yrs...not us the guy doesn't know shia from sunni........so now were down to talking about czechoslavakia.....bottom line iraq wants us out they are a sovereign country
St. Paul Scout @ 2:
Say WHAT???????????????
Dr Acula @ 69:
My cat has four legs my dog has four legs therefore my cat is a dog logic?
centrism is the same crap that lost democrats the power in the 90s until 2006. there is no shame in being libral
Alice Cooper once sang a line in one of his songs (not sure where he got it from it sounds familiar.)
You got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything.
Of course Alice lives in a rich suburb of Arizona with three kids and a python and is probably a John McCain man (?)
I think this is the right cut:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fESZLa6MGjE
Can anyone even envision an scenario where a Republican talking head would go on television and attack his or her base?
Very unlikely.
Once again, the Democratic leadership is more concerned with appeasing the media and the right than their own base.
They fear the opposition and take their own supporters for granted. The Republicans take the opposite approach and have for the last 30 years.
Which side has been more successful?
Here we are, in the worst political environment for the Republicans since the Great Depression and perhaps the worst overall situation for either party since 1980 and we are still watching the Democratic "leaders" kiss the "Center's" ring and giving the people who actually do the work, send the checks, organize the communities and pull the lever for them the finger.
Politics is not rocket science. Do what works. What the GOP has done for the last 30 years, works. They get in trouble when they go to the extremes. We never even try to do what we know to be not just good policy, but good politics.
We're going to win a lot of victories this year but I fear that, once again, we will learn the wrong lessons and assume that it was our genius strategy and not a collapsing economy and a disastrous war that got us where we are.
George Bush is why we are back, not anything we are doing. After he's gone, we'll struggle again because, unlike the Republicans, we seem to choose not to associate their whole party with an astoundingly unpopular figure head. Republicans take what people don't like about Democrats and turn whomever they are running against into that Democrat, regardless of the record. Democrats run against an individual Republican and attack his or her record.
It's why we lose.
I have no problem with what Ford said.
Good thing Obama is reaching out to religious groups with his faith based initiative, because support from the bloggers dosn't appear to be very reliable judging by...
...most every single post here!
Is Ford an Edsel?
Jonathan Turley and John Dean- two hippie liberals according to Harold Ford's definition. I really cannot stand that man. He is the epitomy of a Blue Dog Democrat and a corporate flunky.
Obama will keep the war machine chugging along at full-throttle while he diverts the media with his colorful bloviating and his rock star persona. No thanks.
Question: Why has the phrase "flip flop" been universally embracedas a disrespectful way of saying that a person changed his or her mind? I'm almost sure that this phrase was a Rove plant that has now developed deep roots. While there are plenty of politicians who change positions on issues out of political expedience, there are also plenty more who change their minds after considering new information and weighing different points of view. We've all changed our minds at one time or another; there is no shame in that. Rove must be delighted every time someone uses this phrase. It's related to "the blame game"--remember Rove's catchphrase to avoid accountability during the Katrina disaster? "Flip flop" and "the blame game" only serve to deepen the divide. Why do we BUY INTO these phrases? Why don't we step back and listen to what we're saying?
Don @ 74:
for the most part neither do i......i have been saying this for months this is a strategy......obama is a shrewd politician.....the country may want to move left but it certainly is somewhat conservative in order for him to win there must be a center...transitional point
the military industrial complex is making billions of dollars...they're not going to give that up easily...then you have the fear factor of iran/israel these two factors result in a tough guy mentality...conservative.
a big problem for our party is that we have not been able to undue the negative linguistic framing associated with the word "liberal"...now is not the time to do it.trust i totally understand...i am proud to be a liberal but its not in fashion yet....buts going to make a comeback....i believe some of us are falling for the right propaganda we must hold strong.
obama is not an idealogue...he is a realistic person so therefore he must make compromises
Ruthless "The Whiner" People @ 13:
When Webb ran to the center he won.
When Casey ran to the center he won.
When LieBerman ran to the center he won.
When Sheldon Whitehouse ran to the center he won.
Left&Left @ 60:
Of course the U.S. military is already in Afghanistan. You can tell because every single day we get to read about more civilians being murdered there by the military. With Obama the chickenhawk, it's clear that we can expect an escalation of the violence, chasing some imaginary bogeyman that was on kidney dialysis years ago, and who is supposedly not in Afghanistan but Pakistan. Are we going to invade Pakistan as well, as Obama has hinted at? In case you haven't been following the news, the people of Pakistan, who had nothing to do with 9/11, are furious at the prospect of U.S. troops in their country. Like Iran, Pakistan is much larger than Iraq, and the U.S. doesn't have the troops. Although it doesn't get much media attention, Afghanistan is every bit the disaster that Iraq is. The warlords who we have been paying off, who also had nothing to do with 9/11, have now turned against us. Throwing more cannon fodder at the problem won't accomplish anything. They don't refer to Afghanistan as the graveyard of empires for nothing.
Left&Left @ 67:
?
CatAtomic @ 44:
I fixed it for ya.
I'm a MOveOn.org member and I take no offense. Obama stated time and time again to be a different politician and govern for the best of the country and not special interests - MoveOn.org is a special interests. For years we see pandering to the special interests, and if we don’t want pandering, then we need to accept the fact that means US and You as well - You cant make everyone happy, all of the time, and that means us lefties.
.
Q U E S T I O N:
What kind of person will promise to work undo his vote once he is out of the position to change that vote?
How should I trust a man who promises to undo his vote even before he cast it?
Why should I trust a man who says one thing and then proceeds to undermine his own promises?
As an American, I deserve to be lead by competent people who actually support and defend the Constitution of the U.S.A., who do faithfully and without any mental reservations or a purpose of evasion. To date, NObama fits that bill of what I, as an American, do not deserve. NObama has NOT supported my Rights, Freedoms and Liberties when he voted to render, unto ANY Administration, even his own, the ability to usurp my Freedoms, Rights, and Liberties. His lack of support and defense of Americans Rights, Freedoms and Liberties and his unwillingness to faithfully accept his current charge demonstrably shows NObama incapable of being trusted. And, characteristically, in his waiving courage to be against and then for the right to usurp Americans Freedoms, Rights and Liberties, NObama has demonstrated his indifference too and contempt for the Constitution, to which he swore to defend and support.
VOTE NObama!
.
jax @ 81:
Maybe if we could find the mythical elephant's graveyard we'd finally be rid of the republicans.
Actually, I've paid member of Move On too. I was gone for a few days and didn't get a chance to vote on who to support, but even if I did it wouldn't make any apparent difference (I wanted a no preference stance, and that mayn't be an option.)
You snooze you lose.
I get what he is saying, it is reality and I also think we (those aligned with moveon) shouldn't get so up in arms about the truth. Like it or not, the "idealists" (I guess, me) are going to be left behind. It's just mathemetics.
On the other hand, Obama was very willing to take moveon/netroots/etc's support until he actually had to follow through with anything, but yea, we're the bad guys.
thing is, it's TRUE... and i said as much this morning at TP...
Barack Obama is running for the Office of the President of the United States…
not the Democratic party…
In a country where Republican candidate Barry Goldwater would be considered a liberal, I think that Harold Ford is way off base --- DLC be damned.
Embittered & Anti-Republicrat - Max-Hussein-1 @ 84:
if GOD is on the ballot you'll be voting i take it.....if not you can stay home i guess and you'll still lose. obama never said he is a idealistic politician but i see rather as a realistic politician so therefore compromises need to be made.....be part of the process......your smart why is he doing what he is doing...think about it.
constituent @ 90:
i dont think obamas smart enough to even know hiself what hes doing!
Left&Left @ 48:
The people behind the 9/11 attacks are all dead and none of them were from afghanistan. There is no such thing as a true "central front in the war on terror"- if you think we need to wage a war on terror you need to understand that our entire foreign policy is the real problem. When you provide financial aid to corrupt kings and dictators in the arab and muslim world- why would you expect people not to fight against you?
Its time people understood that the war in Afghanistan is just as immoral as the war in Iraq- why do Afghan houses need to be bombed and civilians die?
Obama DOES want more troops- look at his website he wants to increase the size of the US military- and he does want to move more troops to Afghanistan.
Time for the "Iraqi's to wipe their own asses?" Excuse me but the ones that routed "Al-Qaeda" and other criminals from Iraq WERE Iraqi's in the first place. The US military loves to take credit when it doesn't do shit.
MSNBC and Flox use Ford because he'll say or do anything.
And Ford is desperate to include Barack - or anyone else for that matter besides Bayh and Lieberman -as one of his DLC hacks, not to mention he's personally pissed because no shows up at his parties. HA!
But Ford forgets - Obama dismissed Ford and his DLC platform, long ago:
"..Illinois State Senator Barack Obama rejects any “suggestion” that “inclusion of my name” on a Democratic Leadership Council/New Democrats membership list amounts to “an endorsement on my part of the DLC platform.”
And what is the DLC platform - so eagerly adopted by the Right and the 'centrists' clogging the arteries of the Senate??
Left&Left @ 60:
So someone's a troll because they think Obama is just as bad as McCain? The world isn't "democrat" or "republican" you know. How old are you?
scott @ 83:
Just a hint, when you consider "requesting that politicians defend the constitution, the 4th amendment in this case with FISA" as "pandering" somewhere, sometime ago, you took the wrong turn...
I am just saying...
ysbaddaden @ 85:
As if getting rid of the republicans is going to magically solve all of our nations problems? The democrats in congress and Obama are for the same basic foreign policy we've had for DECADES. This is a serious problem that goes beyond democrat and republican- and shows us that the two are one and the same.
If the Senate were voting today on a bill to provide blanket immunity for every criminal activity Bush, Cheney, Rove and the rest have engaged in for the last eight years, how much confidence would you have that Barack "The Fraud" Obama would vote against it?
Honestly, would it be higher than zero? And if so, what would that delusion be based on?
.
.
.
This is what the Democratic party has degenerated to. I've got no interest. Thanks anyway . . .
Theguy @ 96:
you said it pal, vote mccain more war vote obama more war two pigs in a poke!
I had a robo poll just recently, the question was: If the election were held today would you vote for, 1) John McGoo 2) BO or 3) undecided.
If the election were held today, which was what the question was, I would vote for Nader. Since he wasn't included I didn't press a key on the telephone keypad.
Again the voice repeated the question. Again, no Nader, no response.
Again the voice repeated the question. One more time and I hung.
This system is rigged by the two parties, pure and simple.
If Obama hadn't said and done one thing on FISA, but THEN at the end of the day did the opposite, I would have a different opinion.
Trashing the Constitution is not part of any platform I will support.
jax @ 81:
I agree. But it is our Homicidal Maniac in Chief who created and left this shit for the next Prez to clean up. Staying in Iraq simply makes a bad situation worse. If Obama leaves Afghanistan without at least trying to find the Murderous Mr. bad kidneys the Repubs will slam him without mercy. Dubya's shit storm might well be an impossible mess to correct.
Newsweek polls are CRAP!!!
Harold Ford knows how to lose elections (and he likes the white women - at least, that's what the New Yorker says.)
Theguy @ 96:
i agree with that
we have used the power and clout (see, military) to enforce neoliberal policies both abroad and at home.
reagan, bush, clinton, bush all accepted the (il)logic if projecting our strength to force economic neocolonialism.
and it failed.
swampfox @ 91:
i dont think obamas smart enough to even know hiself what hes doing!
I don't think it takes a genius to understand that pissing off your base in order to appease a voting block which would rather stick a white-hot up their rectums than vote for you, somehow is not a good approach.
Theguy @ 94:
Someone's an idiot if they can sit through the last eight years and say that McCain is just as bad as Obama.
The courts, the DOJ, the military, the environment... you'd have to be an idiot.
kali yuga @ 97:
so we give up i don't think so .........hey most of us are frustrated..i'm trying to understand why compromises are being made..this is much more complicated then we understand....bush has been ruling with a strong arm and has been three steps ahead of everyone.....if obama was on the left he wouldn't have a chance at least not at this point in time....this is the necessary evil
How did so many of us get so thin skinned and self-righteous? Barack never said he wanted to become the darling of the "progressive", "liberal", or any other "movement." He said, as is frequently stated on this blog, he wanted to be President of ALL Americans - as Ford stated. I, as a progressive independent, became excited as I became convinced that Obama actually meant what he said and that the notion of "we" was serious. If we take umbrage as bloggers simply because he is not declaring that he marches strictly to our tune on every issue, every time, then we are actually clamoring for "politics as usual" - just our brand. Trying to pull this whole country together is going to be a difficult task - partly because we seem to like the battles that the deep divisions bring. Compromise, cooperation, consensus, etc. require intelligence and a dedication to solutions instead of to a "party", "group", or "element". Bush et al showed us what you get if everything is about "loyalty".
wow, looks like this room is full of the bitter Hillary crowd.
Is it possible that Obama really hasn't changed his positions that much?
With the exception of FISA - that he vowed to filibuster - what has he changed on?
And on FISA, a lot of Dems changed positions. Is it possible that the IG report is actually worth something?
Are there any self-proclaimed geniuses on this board who can acknowledge that true wisdom is knowing that you know nothing?
I'm not saying that I now think that the FISA reforms are great. I'm just saying that I'm not going to call Obama an idiot because I disagree with him.
Overall, he's clearly the better candidate compared to McCain, and he's our best chance for the next four years.
Harold Ford: Barack Obama is running for the President of the US, not the President of MoveOn.org, the President of any liberal group.
One problem is that the statement is it implies Move-On and liberal groups are somehow not American (US).
Another problem is that the public agrees with liberalism principles but loathe the word.
swampfox @ 98:
I heard this same ridiculous debate in 2000 regarding Gore v Bush. Both candidates are the same? BULLSHIT! You people never learn. Will Obama and McStupid put the same people on the Supreme Court? After all, they are the same, right?
One problem with that statement...
swampfox @ 91:
constituent,
I should stay home on voting day...? REALLY? And what kind of Democracy is this you propose?
Reality... NObama was against immunization for lawlessness before he supported it, all the while claiming he's capable of undermining not only yours, mine and our Rights, but also his own vote. That I find him incapable of being committed for supporting and defending American Rights, Freedoms and Liberties is not my fault that I should stay home for. Indeed, FOOL! Everyone should be up in arms... if they weren't coward by an illegitimate CONgress and illegal Administration.
STAND UP TO TYRANNY or die by it's rule.
GIVE ME LIBERTY or give me death.
WHY CHOOSE THE LATTER BECAUSE IT REQUIRES NO WILL, STRENGTH, CONVICTION and COURAGE?
LOL
PA-THETIC!
.
sgtmajor @ 106:
obama sucks on any groups tool for thier votes then trows them in the dumpster , hes a lieing fraud and no more trustworty then bush or mccain, politicians are scum by trade , thier is no worthwhile choice this year , you settle for the sellout im not going to, kucinich 08 ,
JimboSlice @ 80:
Would one of you define exactly what "running to the 'center'" means? Folks keep using this as some kind of definitive campaign strategy and I am not sure they mean. Is there a "left/center/right" gauge somewhere?
Old Billy Hussein @ 104:
That argument is flawed.
Sure, dog vomit (Obama) is not as bad as dog shit (McCain).
However, my expectations are not so low that I would be willing to sit through a meal made of several courses of dog vomit just because the restaurant next door just offers dog shit in the menu.
At some point we need to ask to stop with the dog by products... enough is enough. And I don't care that McCain is awful, I still have enough self respect that I don't give two shits that another 4 years of McCain would be a disaster. We need better than just "not as fucking awful" Or else we will never get out of this whole brought upon us by our continual compromising of our standards.
Mediocrity is not acceptable period, unless you want to live in a mediocre country, with a mediocre present, and live through a mediocre future.
"I want Obama to win the presidency very badly".....
Why? When the primary fight started, I waited to make a decision, expecting HRC and Obama to present reasons why each of them should be our nominee. I'm still waiting for Obama's reasons. Now you're starting to understand, to finally get it, that Obama's kool aid has more influence on you than any solid reasons to vote for him. I've read that to effectively debate a position, one needs to fully underestand both sides of the debate. I suggest you visit HRC's positions, relate them to today's world, and reconsider the decisions you have made. This world is much too dangerous for you to be pushing a wrong position.
swampfox @ 113:
Great analysis, thanks!! You're kidding, right?
sgtmajor @ 114:
The center in this country could be considered "moderate conservative" i.e. right wing, in most other industrialized countries.
As a liberal, I certainly don't care about this mythical ill-defined "center" that they keep on ramming down my throat.
sgtmajor @ 117:
i never kid !
ominous @ 107:
LOL, we would be the crowd that believes in the 4th Fourth Amendment.
jimbo @ 116:
Just because HRC has "positions" it doesn't mean those are the correct "positions" or "positions" I would agree with. Not by a long shot...
Are some people really that dense?
Using Harold Ford's angle, one could say that Obama shouldn't have voted with the Republicans on FISA, since Obama isn't running to be chairman of the Republican Party.
Eric Jaffa @ 122:
Ding, ding we have a winner.... here is a virtual beer for you. Chapeau... chapeau!!!
Liberal Stu @ 120:
i would like to know how hillary would have voted on FISA
if she was the presumptive nominee
Old Billy Hussein @ 104:
Seeing as in the past 2 years the democratic congress has given Bush everything he wanted- yeah its pretty damn easy to say they're both just as bad. In what way is Obama better on the military side than Mccain? Because he rather have more US troops die in Afghanistan over Iraq? What's Obama's stance on monetary policy? I don't even think he has one- just like McCain doesn't have one. These are important issues that are being ignored
Apparently Harold has joined the LIEberman wing of the DNC. Add another ass to be kicked to the curb list for next year.
"wow, looks like this room is full of the bitter Hillary crowd"
bush popularity figures released today show bush sinking, leaving only the most partisan repugs still liking him. Don't look now, but Obama is on a similar trend. I suggest we will soon find out who is the "bitter" crowd. Obama's action on FISA demands answers why he sold out the American people. I stated previously that I'm still waiting to be convinced that Obama is someone for whom I will vote. His FISA action has done just the opposite. Question is, when it becomes apparent Obama is not the nominee Democrats want, will you become just like the bush 25%? Or will you be honest enough to admit your mistake and do what is necessary to correct it?
constituent @ 124:
Good point...but you're wasting your time with logic here. These still mourning Hillary disciples are so angry they can't think straight.
Left&Left @ 110:
They are essentially the same- Gore was in an administration that had heavy sanctions on the Iraqi people which lead to many deaths- as well as military intervention overseas. Just because Bush was even WORSE doesn't mean the former was any good.
The basic ideas in regards to foreign and monetary policy are the same when it comes to Obama and Mccain. They both think the US has the right to do whatever it wants in the world(Obama's militarism is just focused on another country)- and they both don't care or don't understand the impact of a central bank in the economy.
Dude@121:
"Just because HRC has “positions” it doesn’t mean those are the correct “positions” or “positions” I would agree with. Not by a long shot…"
Do you mean like FISA? Obama sold out Amercans with his position, HRC voted for America. So you don't agree that FISA is bad for America, not by a long shot? Perhaps a little remedial reading will help.
Left&Left @ 128:
I was an Obama supporter from the beginning until he trashed the 4th Fourth Amendment. Fuck Obama
Maybe you'd take it from Naomi Klein?
Theguy @ 129:
And Gore would have appointed Roberts and Alito? Also, why didn't the Supreme Court just flip a coin when deciding Gore v Bush since there wasn't any difference?
Arguing hypothethcally on politicians not the subject of the thread is speculation and non sequitur thinking, not logic.
Moveon.org, making even people who agree with them cringe for five years now.
They aren't helping.
Harold Ford is not only a smarmy jerk, he is jealous of Obama for all the obvious reasons.
ysbaddaden @ 134:
I hope you are referring to both sides using hypotheticals this debate(maybe with full disclosure that you are a Hillary supporter)
99 @ 132:
Great interview. Something for the Obama folks to think about.
All of you need to chill out. I may not agree with everything that Obama says or does, but he is exactly the person I thought he was when I voted for him. A liberal who is willing to listen to points of view on all sides of an issue and make decisions that he thinks are best for the country as a whole, not just what we progressives want to hear. I have had enough of politicians who support legislation that may play well to an overly vocal minority, but fucks over the rest of us.
On FISA... of course I would have preferred that Obama vote against the bill, but his vote (either way he went) would not have made a difference in the outcome. By voting for the bill, he's taken away a talking point from the Republicans. They cannot use his vote to smear him as soft on terrorism. It isn't the ideological vote that we all wanted to see, but it is the pragmatic vote that was needed. If his had been the deciding vote, then I could understand the vitriol coming from the left.
Come on people, stop all of this bullshit. It's time to stop bitching and figure out where we go next.
137 Left&Left Only after Gore and Clark didn't announce, and Biden, Dodd and they one I was backing, Edwards were pushed out.
Additionally, I was not saying she was the only nominee worth considering but resisting those who were calling for her to leave early. Additionally too many Obama supporters were likening her to boosh and are now arguing how dare anyone compare Obama to McCain. Obama didn't win by primary voters alone, but by a lot of super-delegates finally announcing late and moving in his direction, finally pushing him over the 2025 delegate count (although at one point they increased the delegate count to if I remember correctly 2145 when they split the delegates in Florida and Michigan.)
This is why Republicans win and Democrats don't: b/c Republicans bond behind their candidate even if he sucks (like Bush or McCain), whereas Democrats rip their own candidates apart whoever they are.
Whatever you think of Obama he is clearly better than Bush was or McCain is, but that won't stop half of the democrats from ripping on him as if he is the next anti-christ. And Dems will lose the election as a result.
Enjoy the mud slinging if you must but don't whine when the Republicans win.
141 Avenger
Almost, but not quite. We can hope Bob Barr will peel of some as the libertarian candidate, although I'm not certain they're done with their nomination.
Slacker @ 139:
a "free" market liberal? now that is an interesting concept...
and i suppose one person's "talking points" is another person's 4th amendment.
i guess some thought that, since obama said he would filibuster (assuming that he was, at one point in time, passionate about the 4th amendment), he would lead the democrats to shoot the telecon appeasement bill down. guess not.
and people expressing dismay ('bitching', as you say) at the erosion of civil liberties is not only commendable, it is necessary.
ysbaddaden @ 140:
We didn't link Hillary to McStupid(not Bush) she did! This the problem...You Hillary people still think and want the primary to go on and you're taking it out on Obama, attacking anything he says or does because you think you're still fighting for Hillary....just like the conservatives. I'm out....I respect Democracy, and I don't beat dead horses.
Liberal Stu @ 120:
Uh, do ya think that maybe...JUST MAYBE...Clinton voting nay on the FISA bill allowed Obama to vote Yay...so that their votes offset, and Obama could then dodge the "weak on terrorism" attack by the right.
Avenger @ 141:
this is why?
is it?
lord holy mother mary jesus...
Obamabot @ 000:
Liberal AND Proud @ 145:
Wow, talk abut twisted logic there...
Comments are closed on this entry