Jane!

Hey now!

John McCain supports torture by the United States of America.

One acronym, Jane! IOKIYAR! *g*

When did that david Brooks column first appear? It just got into the local this mrning. I thiought I was gonna vomit on the bus. Te one that said everybody was being unfair to McCain because he’s really a maverick, ya know.

Hey Jane, thanks for posting about Wm Buckley yesterday. Took guts esp. in this day of scorched earth “debate”. I think that’s why I appreciated him. He’d at least listen to what you had to say and be okay with the fact you still had citizenship if you disagreed with him.

the passion that fueled the virulent hatred against Hillary Clinton in comments across the blogosphere just does not transfer to John McCain.

there’s nothing that compares to the feeling of betrayal.

McCain is a manufactured candidate. The problem is, no one will touch him and hold his crap accountable. It’s really scary, because they will do anything to put him in power. The country is in just as much trouble today as pre-2000.

What to do?

Back on topic: I’ve seen tons of McCain bashing. Perhaps the outrage was aimed at Fox as much as at Hillary? That association is not good for a democratic campaign…really.

The McCain story already been bashed universally.

So perhaps the stats are slanted due to the timing? Just guessing here.

I’m going to say 100 years of death and destruction in Iraq gives it a good run for its money.

funny, innit?

but not in a ha-ha way…

That should have read “anything”

Oh man. The range of opinion was pretty amazing. From I disagree with him but respected him.’ to “I remember him on Sunday morning before the Bowery Boys” to “Scumbag. Glad he’s dead.”

We have a bunch of really evil people in charge of the country and they want McCain. Until the real ways in which they took this power is openly addressed…everything else is “pretend everything is alright” I like this candidate, I like that one. It’s not alright at all — the country is still in enormous danger from these people. Here’s some important stuff that needs to be looked at:

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/....._0228.html

When you wake up and the 10 top rated Kos diaries are all filled with anti John McCain vitriol, you let me know.

I have a very different view of our large orange neighbor now. I was shocked by the response there to anyone saying a positive word about Clinton. I just call it Orange State now.

Ahhh…okay. I’m not a kos reader…

may I try again? Um, maybe parents are harder on the good kids and have given up on the black sheep?

Yeah. That war hero thing makes it harder. But the elctorate has alot of younger (than me) people who don’t remember Vietnam and don’t really care all that much. I say: Pound the bastard so he don’t know what hit him. That’s what I say.

Google Ted Sampley

The hallmark of the Bush Presidency is very sadly, death.

We like Supreme Court Justices Hillary Rodham Clinton and Senator Christopher Dodd, AG Edwards, and President Obama.

What’s interesting/disturbing is that the irrational virulence against Sen. Clinton seemed to come from all over the spectrum. You couldn’t blame it on the right wing. As Pogo once said, “We have met the enemy . . .”

well, if clinton hadn’t supported the invasion and ongoing occupation of iraq - i’d concede the point.

… but what i was referring to was the primary emotional response… not the thoughtful one that comes a split second later.

The impression in this home is that the msm likes McCain.

Well damn, it’s not like she hasn’t earned at least a good bit of rational vitriol.

Or maybe we information junkie political types are far more affected by 15 years of establishment media narratives than we like to admit to themselves? Or maybe there’s more to the ways we all unconsciously code for gender than even the most enlightened of us comprehend?

We need to push for a McCrazy/Huckabee debate. What a hoot that one would be…

ah, i thought you were referring to the response here.

I’m talking about the “liberal” blogosphere. There are McCain haters, but they’re all on the right.

John McCain is a fraud, a self-styled “maverick” who claims to support “ethics” and “reform,” while voting for the Bush agenda and wallowing in the mud with dozens of lobbyists who run and finance his campaign.

Get this. The objective is to defeat McCain.

You have to pound him with simple, direct charges. Hypocrite, 10,000 years of war, corrupt, old, out of touch, unhealthy, terrible temper, unstable, mean….things like that. Paint the picture with big strokes.

I think it would help if we were to refer to McCain by his full name: John Sidney McCain III.

You know, the guy who got into politics because his Naval career was stalled out and he was never going to make admiral like his daddy and granddaddy? And who ditched his first wife for an heiress whose money financed his first congressional campaign?

Well gee might be a little to late now. Nd by the way why isn’t there outrage at the insinuation…..no the whole hearted belief that Hillary won New Hampshire becuse the voters in New Hampshire must be racist. In Iowa they voted for Obama….Hence they are truly enlightened oopps vote against Obama…AHHHHH RACIST RACISTS THEY HATE BLACK PEOPLE IN NEW HAMPSHIRE!

We are going to rue the day that this guy got the nomination for I truly fear that we are underestimating McCain and we could have another four years of no progress and a dead locked government which the Conservtives just love because nothing gets done.

Oh, and did I forget to mention that John McCain claims to care about the Geneva Conventions while supporting torture by the United States of America?

What sucks (among other things) is how this bullshit about Obama is being perpetuated in msm - the Kenyan garb, the hand not over the heart, the missing lapel pin, the schooling, the Muslim bullshit. The way they do it is so bogus. “Oh we know it’s all bullshit, but the important thing is whether it resonantes with Joe Sixpack.” so they talking about this shit. hey, if it’s bullshit 9and it is) drop it.

Hi Jane. One possibility is that the left feels it much more personally when something controversial happens from within their side than outside it. It may be that folks on the left expect Republicans to do unsavory things and therefore don’t react as strongly. This isn’t exactly a controlled experiment but about 6 months ago I posted diaries at Kos on cosecutive weeks about conservative betrayal and liberal betrayal. The former got 4 comments, the latter 25.

The idea is to evict the GOP from the White House and put more Dems into Congress. I am open to debate on this issue.

The impression here is “More of the Same” McCain sucks msm cock.

Thought better of it.

McBush works for me.

i think the issue may be that despising mcbushain is sort of a given, where as clinton is supposed to be one of our own? Of course, mccain is a cretin. check. not a lot of surprise there.

support for the iraq war killed any chance of my being enthusiastic about clinton — she wrote herself out of my world at that point. unforgivable. sure, I’ll vote for in the fall if that’s the choice, but i’ll be disappointed. and that’s completely independent of who else was running for dem nominee.

kiddo, I don’t see any room for debate there.

I may be slow on the uptake, but after reading comments and JH’s responses to comments, I am not sure I understand this post fully.

I don’t neither any three of them, HRC, Obama or McCain.

I don’t even hate McCain’s stated policies, I just think they would be disastrous, and want all voters to understand exactly why they would be so bad, with minimum words and maximum impact.

If could also explain clearly and concisely why several of them don’t make a lick of sense, and are incompatable with each other would be nice too.

Note well, that we now need to make is very well known that it is important to distinguish between McCain’s *stated* vs *real* policies in several areas (and the maverick reformer department comes to mind first.)

And who decides who liberals and leftists are? The Republicans?

“John Sidney McCain III”

Wow. Sounds very “born with a silver spoon in his mouth”, doesn’t it? Let’s run with it!

We like Supreme Court Justices Hillary Rodham Clinton and Senator Christopher Dodd, AG Edwards, and President Obama.

Actually, I wouldn’t mind seeing either Clinton or Dodd as AG; Clinton would, I think, be particularly poetic justice. Someone mentioned Edwards for Secretary of Labor and I thought that was a good fit.

or, i’d say the msm likes the comfortable funding they see lining up behind mccain …

In my personal case, I probably posted a few strongly-worded messages about Hillary’s acceptance of a Fox News debate. But it wasn’t because I hate Hillary. I don’t. I respect her dedication and intelligence, but I don’t want her as president, because of her hawkish tendencies. To me, ending the war and restructuring the role the US plays in the world is the #1 issue, and Obama is clearly the better choice to do that.

Rather, it is because I hate Fox News with a passion, and it really pisses me off when any Democrats treat them like a respectable news organization.

As for McCain’s adventures with campaign finance, I read about that stuff in other sites (particularly TPM) long before I read about it on Firedoglake, so I think it was old news by the time you posted it.

ding.

republicans behaving badly. no shocker.

I think people feel a need to call out a dino, perhaps.

I’m throwing out as many theories as I can till one sticks!

OH and one other thing the enitre backround noise of the Obama campign is based on the hatred generated by close to 20 years of smearing lying insinuation everything from drug running to murder and the left have gloomed on to that agenda. What the Republican smear campaign against the Clintons couldn’t do in twenty years, the Democratic smear campaign did in six months. Dick Morris is in awe of your accomplishment. For me I am done with politics.

Someone on a previous thread here referred to McCain as “McCan’t”. Love it! When up against Obama the “Yes We Can” guy, ole McCrazy would look so, well, you know, a lot like George Bush…

I agree. Watching the e-mail exchanges was dismaying.

Easy peasy answer, Jane.

The left expects rationality. the right operates viscerally. They can and will turn on a dime.

Or maybe information junkie political types are far more affected by 15 years of establishment media narratives than they like to admit to themselves? Or maybe there’s more to the ways we all unconsciously code for gender than even the most enlightened of us comprehend?

i’m quite convinced that’s true of all of us, myself included. (i don’t have a link handy, and i’m not going to look for it…but i’m sure you can remember a certain post and the ensuing firestorm?)

but are you suggesting that accounts for it? i have a very negative view of senator clinton - but it is most definitely surpassed by my negative view of former president clinton. is it not possible that there are those of us who feel betrayed by the last clinton presidency - and the support/blinders people who call themselves democrats and progressives have for them?

Yeah a lot of people say that and cite her AUMF vote as evidence of her “bad judgment.” Which might be a little more convincing if they hadn’t supported Edwards, too.

sorry about my own incoherent and mutually incompatable typing. Right in the middle of my daily great later afternoon slump.

Need to make a glossary of McCain terms monickers and slogans, which will focus on important points.

‘less jobs more war’ McCain
‘No you can’t’ McCain
McCain’s Gravy Train, er Bus, whatever, stuff like that.

Here is some news for you…The United States Military will still have a presence in Iraq at the end of the next Presidents term whoever that is. Count on it.

KO just compared Bush to Beavis & Butthead. It’s gonna be a good show tonight I can tell. ;-)

Lizard-brain McCain - When Junya Isn’t Enough

Hillary “we have to win in Afghanistan”.

Unless you are a big Hillary fan.

Pretty easy, Jane. We expect a hell of a lot more out of one of our own.

Um, it’s utterly new news, escalating every day. Sorry, no sale.

well, i thought it was evidence of a bit more than “bad judgement” … seemed pretty darn clear that she knew what she was doing and why … and yes, same applied to edwards. for me at least, the war was and is a defining issue. a lotta other important issues too and i don’t want to de-emphasize them. but the killing has got to stop.

…or maybe it’s just because people on Dem-leaning blogs such as this one and kos and HP don’t expect anything less from McCain, and expect more from Clinton. Just a thought.

OMG, John Barrow endorsed Obama. Anyone have a link to Hillary’s website so I can join up?

What’s interesting/disturbing is that the irrational virulence against Sen. Clinton seemed to come from all over the spectrum. You couldn’t blame it on the right wing. As Pogo once said, “We have met the enemy

I am waiting for mental health professionals to explain HDS. The hate and misogyny directed at Hillary on lefty blogs is amazing. The surprise to me is that it has demonstrated that “lizard brains” are not a wingnut exclusive. Also there seem to be a fair number of very screwed up males on the left. I guess the other possibility is that they are wingnut trolls posing as lefties.

I keep indicating that the time is fast approaching to unite behind a candidate.

the left feels it much more personally when something controversial happens from within their side than outside it. It may be that folks on the left expect Republicans to do unsavory things and therefore don’t react as strongly.

exactly.

this is probably a stupid example, but it’s the only one i can think of at the moment.

who would feel more anger towards: your spouse who you caught kissing a co-worker, or your neighbor you saw in the act with a stranger while his/her spouse was out of town?

it’s not about the seriousness of the deed - much of the emotional response comes from the sense of betrayal.

… but if you don’t feel a deep sense of having been betrayed by the clintons, i don’t think it’s going to make sense.

the right operates viscerally. They can and will turn on a dime.

Unfortunately, not as fast or as many as the Dems do…! The Rightards certainly act/vote in lock step… 8-(

No chance someone has watched her for years and just doesn’t like her because of what they have seen?

I’m talking about the “liberal” blogosphere. There are McCain haters, but they’re all on the right.

You know something is wrong when Digby is attacked and has to close down her comment section. That was really sickening.

Oh these misogynists on KO are at it again.

I suspect that the Pukes might eat McCain alive in order to make room for Romney.

yup, bingo.

(i do hear a little voice in the back of my mind warning me that the same feeling of betrayal may be lying in wait for Pres Obama’s legacy. which is why the issues do continue to matter, as well as the identity obama promotes — to referencce the previous topic)

KO; “Hill is not ruling out the Veep slot…!” Hmmm…

i think the best support for your thesis is if the people you are referring to are willing to forgive bill clinton but not hillary clinton.

is that your sense of the state of opinion?

We must have a Democratic victory. We must. No matter what it takes. Losing is not an option. Period. If the Pukes win, it is because of a fix, and all hell will break loose in this country.

Or maybe we information junkie political types are far more affected by 15 years of establishment media narratives than we like to admit to themselves? Or maybe there’s more to the ways we all unconsciously code for gender than even the most enlightened of us comprehend?

You took the words - well, the sense - out of my mouth, Pach.

The MSM have been parroting the VRWC’s accusations for years, making it clear that they viscerally dislike her, starting back in 1992, at least.

Meantime, they’ve been repeating the McCain hero/maverick meme for at least as long. It affects us all, I fear. Which is why I think nominating her would lead to (yet another) REpub victory in November.
I say that with sadness, but I think it’s true.

The guy who is destroying my country and says torture is okay.

No chance someone has watched her for years and just doesn’t like her because of what they have seen?

No problem with that..and that is mostly what I was seeing when it was Edwards v Clinton….now the amount of pure hate is amazing..again it may be trolls injecting really vicious misogyny into the lefty blogs.

I do find the grappling of the concept of infinity somewhat interesting. And the Ontological Argument also. ;0)

I’m already pre-enraged about McCain, so I’m less likely to comment. And I’ve been following the McCain public financing story closely, so there was nothing new for me there.

I guess that’s why we have to register?

Math teachers. . .

Yes. It is of the utmost importance that the 9/11 investigation be reopened and everything re-examined. There has been no proper investigation into not only 9/11 but the effect it had on this country leading to the invasion of Iraq.

Then the criminals must be brought to justice. All of them.

Selise, time to take to the ramparts… 8-(

House Could Take Up Surveillance Legislation Next Week

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmsp.....0002678676

I’ve suspected poseurs trolls as well…I also wonder if the african dress photo was circulated by rovians to stir it up and hilary’s camp flunked the response to that test.

A strong visceral approach by the Demo candidate would help change the viewpoint. Let’s face it. These elections are not about the candidate, or what the left believes. It’s about gut.

I’m sorry, I just don’t buy into Hillary-As-Victim mythology. I know there have been some misogynistic and sexist stuff said about her, but she’s screwed up badly enough on her own.

Good luck on that.

oh, and by the way, in case it’s not obvious, mccain sucks. I hate him and have hated him for years. Zero-integrity guy, obviously willing to do anything for political power. his willingness to support torture is just mind-boggling. and he certainly fails the war test.

Framing McCain’s “identity”…KISS (keep it simple stupid) is the only way to go. We can’t prosecute him, but we can show what a jerk he really is, but it has to be in simple “terms”….that stick.

We need to push for a McCrazy/Huckabee debate

I’m looking forward to Obama/McCain.

But my lady tells me I am a very emotional math type though. Lahoma likes you. And so do I. We read your stuff. And talk about it. ;0)

Edwards, at least, admitted that his vote for AUMF was a mistake and he accepted responsibility for that mistake. Hillary, through her careful triangulation (to attempt to please all the people all the time) and perhaps to appear tough at any cost, has not really accepted personal responsiblity for the mistake that was her vote. Dubya fooled her. Dubya did not fool me. Why did he fool her?

The guy who is destroying my country and says torture is okay.

right.

and let’s be clear about who started (as far as we know) the extraordinary rendition program that included kidnapping people and taking them to egypt to be tortured and/or killed.

because that would the administration of bill clinton.

and i am pretty sure that one of the reasons the MCA was supported by so many dems is that amnesty went back to 1997.

i can not tell you what this knowledge has done to my views of the democratic party in general and the clinton in particular.

I’m not, Raven. Are you?

Jane, I think it’s about the battles that folks on the left believe they can win.

They know that there will eventually be a solution to the question Obama or Clinton, and issues that weigh one way or the other will be fought over.

But for more than 8 years — decades, really, since the Reagan years and the rise of movement conservatism — the left has been marginalized by the right. At first it was taking advantage of liberalism’s generous nature, but over time it became outright theft.

McCain’s campaign as it operates right now, in defiance of law, with 59 effing lobbyist/corporate whores aboard ship, is just one more massive theft on top of a mound of systematic thefts.

Look at Marcy’s own cynicism about Pelosi’s letter to Mukasey; it mirrors our widespread belief that the Republican Party is a RICO outfit, and that they will not stop until we have taken the White House AND Congress back from them. (We know that won’t stop them, either, but it may check them for a day or two.)

That’s why we shrug collectively; McCain’s a Republican incumbent and candidate, or in other words, a thief. We’ve known it; the only thing that will change any part of those facts is removing the goal he and his RICO peeps seek. Hence the passion about all things Democratic primary.

Dean and the DNC did the right thing, filing a complaint with the FEC. This is yet another reason for the shrug; a competent person is doing the rational thing about McCain’s bullsh*t. But what do you think the FEC will do about it? Anything at all?

[sigh] And so onward to battles we know we can win.

What do you dislike about McCain? You have a great way of coming right to the point.

thank you for the heads up.

I would like Hillary so much more if she had dumped Bill years ago and not have listened to Billy Graham when she wanted to leave him. She should have gone with her intuition. Never trust the advice of a man telling a woman to stay with an adulterer. It is a projection on his part. Connected with Bill is my objection. He has been a heavy lug to carry around.

Having said that, the hatred of Hillary is not about Bill but that a woman dares to be the top dog. Obama can not imagine how high a bar has to be for a woman to be accepted. Top dog is a man’s job.

As for McCain he gets a free pass on everything because he was a war hero. PPS is going to do a program on McCain’s bravery and military service. It’s in progress.

That’s a stinger, but really, why would anyone write you in an attempt to sway you away from John McCain?

In this instance, I reject your analysis, though I don’t denounce it.

Nope but if push comes to shove I’ll pull the lever.

You’re most welcome, Ma Cheri! *g*

Yeah, that really pissed me off.

I’m talking about the “liberal” blogosphere. There are McCain haters, but they’re all on the right.

You don’t really mean to say this, do you Jane?

Just look at todays threads. McCain haters everywhere.

Hey! Here’s one one right here.

I’m sorry, I just don’t buy into Hillary-As-Victim mythology. I know there have been some misogynistic and sexist stuff said about her, but she’s screwed up badly enough on her own.

I doubt that Hillary sees herself as a victim…What disturbs me is that I get the impression that when a female blogger calls bullshit on misogyny; they get a lot of mail that has the “b” word “c” word and more. I have no evidence of that but if Digby had to close comments, it must have been pretty bad.

Do you seriously believe that Hillary Clinton would be worse on torture and perpetuating the war than John McCain?

I think best thing for country would be for next president (and the Supremes) or two or three to undergo a very thorogh and merciless buttkicking by a sufficiently progressive congress. So if my dreams come true for that, I cannot hate any poor sap very much who tries out for the job.

we’re gonna need something like the south african national reconciliation process once day comes again. it’s going to be a very hard road to deal with the reality of war criminals having run the country and living among us. i personally have no idea what the best way forward given that reality is. war crimes trials certainly feels emotionally satisfying. my friend who lived in so africa during the reconciliation describes it as a transformative process for the country, one that took him completely by surprise in its power.

Lahoma advises me that she thinks the time has perhaps come for an ideology of rationalism tempered with empiricism and this is possibly what’s needed now. Good God. Another possible Lahoma truism, which may prove to be valid within certain contexts. The problem is the proof. Lord I love this woman.

I hate the Neocons.

OT:

look at this:

The figures are staggering: Gazprom has a market value of $245 billion. It employs nearly half a million people and is buying up state energy companies across Europe.

It provides 100% of the gas needs of neighbouring countries like Latvia, and it provides almost half of Europe’s gas needs, which will rise from 200 billion cubic metres today, to around 600 billion cubic metres by 2020.

Europe is currently desperately dependent on Russian gas.

Looks like the EU is going to be sucking up to Russia.
Just a few decades since the USSR dissolved and Russia was in tatters. The bear is waking up again.

I’ve said all along that I think she’ll attack the first “target of opportunity” that come along to prove she’s tough, she’ll have to. No on the torture question.

I like the Buchanan line about McCain making Cheney look like Ghandi.

national reconciliation OK, as long as it includes accountability. No accountability, then a formal or informal reconciliation process would be a bad thing. Just set bad precedent for next gang of thugs who would think they could get away with even more outrageous and worser outrages.

The thing that really frosts me is that the narrative is being set up, here and on other blogs, that if Hillary loses, it will be because she’s a woman and those mean men wouldn’t give her a chance, which is complete bullshit. People need to accept the fact that she ran a shitty campaign and work from there.

Jane, I love you, I really do. I hope not in a creepy way, but facts are facts.

You’ll see no coverage of McCain’s campaign finance problems (I haven’t) in the MSM, because it isn’t entertaining. Or simple.

Part of the plan. Putin is a Neocon.

or this:

WASHINGTON (UPI) — The good news for Russia is that energy prices are at a world record, and that Russia is now tied neck and neck with Saudi Arabia as the world’s leading oil producer, producing around 9 million barrels per day to a world consuming about 84 million bpd. Russia is the largest non-OPEC oil producer and now generates 12 percent of global production.

My expectations of Hillary are stratospheric compared to those anent McBane (I was attacked by a Siamese bat). She should know better, far and away more than McBane could ever even begin to perceive.

Having said that, the hatred of Hillary is not about Bill but that a woman dares to be the top dog. Obama can not imagine how high a bar has to be for a woman to be accepted. Top dog is a man’s job.

I do believe that is at the root of everything, starting with her healthcare planning - well, really, the MSM wasn’t very nice to her during the campaign, either. Lots of photos of her changing hairstyles, glasses to no-glasses, plain to polished…the usual aimed at a woman who does anything but stand and gaze worshipfully at her candidate husband.

It makes me very, very sad that I cannot vote for her. At this point, I’m tending to believe that the first woman pres will not come from my-and-Hillary’s generation.
We’ve had to work at convincing ourselves that it’s okay for us to do what were, in our formative years, men’s jobs. Younger women tend to take for granted what their elders are still fighting against. That confidence tells.

A possible cheater…now that makes the news. KISS

Sorry Raven. I call bullshit.

Just for the record, I’ll vote for either Hillary or Barack with much pride, on several levels.

They’re just both in a world of hurt when it comes to the coverage they’re going to get, relative to St. McCain of Media Mountain.

Putin is a dictator. He is also a cult leader like Hitler. He is another fascist power hungry thug. Oy

You know it isn’t axiomatically an either/or proposition. It is quite possible to have both things be true at the same time.

If HRC is the presidential nominee, we in this home will vote for her in a heartbeat over any Republican. Bar none. I want to be very clear on this.

Russia has lots of gas. The EU needs the gas. Canada has lots of gas. The US buys Canada’s gas. Some Canadians I know are pissed off about their gas going to the US.

Hillary has no record of accomplishments.

Name one.

How can you call bullshit, neither one of us knows. It’s my opinion based on years of study. . .

Or do you mean she WILL permit torture?

and:

One factor driving up the cost of food is the rocketing price of oil, which raises agricultural costs of everything from fertilizer to transport and shipping. Like the oil price, the cost of food is responding, in part, to the burgeoning demand in China and India, where rising incomes allow people to eat bigger meals, and to buy meat far more frequently. That, in turn, has helped to squeeze the world’s supply of grain, since it takes about six pounds of animal feed to produce a pound of meat.

Then there is climate change: Harvests have been seriously disrupted by freak weather, including prolonged droughts in Australia and southern Africa, floods in West Africa, and deep frost in China and Europe. And the push to produce biofuels to replace hydrocarbons is also adding to the pressure on food supplies — generous U.S. subsidies for ethanol has gobbled up needed food acreage, as farmers switch from producing food. “The area used for biofuels is increasing each year,” says Nik Bienkowski, head of research at ETF Securities, a commodities trading firm in London.

I think McCain-campaign finance story is simple -he formally signed onto public financing when he needed it to save his campaign, and now is breaking law by breaking the agreement when he no longer needs it.

Simple.

Legal technicalities and complexities don’t wash since McCain is a 1) straight talking 2) maverick, 3) reformer.

Too bad the big time reformer groups are turning out to be just as corrupt as McCain.

and ethanol the savior:

NEW YORK (Fortune) — Cargill announces it’s scrapping plans for a $200 million ethanol plant near Topeka, Kan. A judge approves the bankruptcy sale of an unfinished ethanol plant in Canton, Ill.. And that was just Tuesday.

Indeed, plans for as many as 50 new ethanol plants have been shelved in recent months, as Wall Street pulls back from the sector, says Paul Ho, a Credit Suisse investment banker specializing in alternative energy. Financing for new ethanol plants, Ho says, “has been shut down.”

How can the ethanol industry be slumping only two months after Congress passed an energy bill most experts consider a biofuels boon? The answer is runaway corn prices.

I’d vote for Senator Clinton, but I would see it as a victory for the DLC, which I loathe.

Since 1980, Americans have had:

1980-1988 George Bush Sr. for VP

1988-1992 George Bush Sr. for President

1992-2000 Bill Clinton for President

2000-2008 George W. Bush for President

2008-2012………Hillary Clinton for President? (NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO! I’m so tired of these two freaking families I could scream!)

Of course it is, but the overall tone I’ve seen here definitely trends away from laying any blame at Hillary’s feet.

Well, I’m personally embarassed by the level of vitriol against Clinton on the “progressive” blogs. A real eye opener for me. At least I got to cut my recommended blog list by 2/3rds.

Yup.

I can’t believe I didn’t realize the Clinton’s are total frauds earlier.

I mean the strike.

Biofuels

AS THE United States searches for alternative ways to feed its addiction to petroleum, ethanol and other biofuels derived from organic material have been considered a miracle motor vehicle elixir. The energy bill signed by President Bush in December mandates that at least 36 billion gallons of biofuels a year be used by 2020. Yet separate studies released this month by Princeton University and the Nature Conservancy reveal that biofuels are not a silver bullet in the battle against global warming. In fact, they could make things worse.

Can I quote you on that :)

Oh, c’mon, SanderO.

How about fucking surviving the abject bullshit she’s had to survive in her entire political career? For simply being Bill Clinton’s husband, staying married, moving from IL to NY, and being a highly respected Senator, even by the words of her fellow Senator St. McCain? No one, and I mean NO ONE, questions her knowledge and attention to detail. Not even Rush.

She would be fine, and light-years better than McCain.

Whew!

I have a sly plan on how a woman can beat the male-favored system for choosing a president. She has to be the VP running mate. He drops dead once in office and she ascends to the grand position. Not much different from Queen Elizabeth I.

The list is lengthy. But if If I had to distill it down I would say this: He is an opportunist-sycophant, who will be even worse than GWB. Hope you are having a good night.

Do you seriously believe that Hillary Clinton would be worse on torture and perpetuating the war than John McCain?

no. i don’t.

but your question is asking about the seriousness of the deed and not the sense of betrayal - which was what i was trying to get at.

the clintons betrayed me on the issues of war and torture because i trusted them.
and mccain did not because i never trusted him anyway.

a sense of betrayal will affect the emotional response - that is my thesis.

OT
but for those interested, The New York Philharmonic concert from North Korea is on PBS’s Great Performances tonight. And you can watch it online.

her entire political career

Would you outline that for me?

As long as you use these: ” “

There are a number of factors at play here. First, while it would be an oversimplification to say the animus with Clinton is simply because she’s a woman, there is no doubt that it is because she’s a woman who can outsmart men who like to pose as smart, because she’s bitchy at times (though that bitchiness in a man–say John Mc Cain–would be forgiven as simply a man being a man), because her own husband has disrespected her in ways that always render women vulnerable to abuse (the extreme being in places where women are punished because they have been raped). Secondly, I think in general, ad hominem reaction is more prevalant among conservatives; that is, conservatives hate the Clintons less for their politics than their personal foibles and tics, while those on the left may have been suspicious of Bush from the first, or given him after 9/11 the benefit of the doubt, what we despise him for is his political actions. Finally, as this is a lefty blog and people who follow Jane Hamsher are lefties, there is some resentment that Clinton might go over to the darkside at Fox, while we view the finances of politics (whether it be Clinton’s or Obama’s somewhat slimy backers, or Mc Cain’s two faced manipulations) as par for the whole political class course, so we shrug and say “so what else is new?”

thanks. Make music, not war.

You’re my horse if you never win a race!

Thanks.

McLobby:

opportunist-sycophant
Worse than George W. Bush

Hope you two are having a good night too!

wesgpc at 134:

We’re junkies. It IS simple to us.

To Average Joe/Josie, the whole “money in politics” thing was checked out on long, long ago.

It’s hard to live outside your own paradigm, I admit. But one should try, because except for our own perspectives, and rightly so, the world does not revolve around us.

kiddo @ 148, selise @ 149. thank you both.

Do you see Hillary as a progressive? I don’t. She voted in favor of invading Iraq and even trusted George Bush to use invasion as a last resort. As a rational American yourself, didn’t you question the intentions of Georgie & Dickie? I did and I know you did too. Why couldn’t she see through the bullshit like we did? And how can one be an attorney and not question things like the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, or even the idea of giving the telecom companies immunity from prosecution because they broke the law on behalf of George Bush?

I know Obama’s voting record isn’t perfect either, but at least he called BULLSHIT when he saw what George Bush & Dick Cheney were about to do back in 2002/2003.

you’re not serious?

Ding, nobody really gives a flying fuck.

Everything you just said in this comment is absolutely right on.

The part I hated most about the sixties and seventies was the sexist attitude towards women by liberals. It was really bad. Women got no place until they took matters in their own hands in spite of the liberal men.

thanks. Make music, not war.

Yes!
that was the message last night from Pete Seeger, too.
gee that portrait was just delightful.

McBush wants to spy, torture, and go to war for 10,000 years…just like W, only worse, and he’s backed by the Neocons. America hates him.

Huh? What’s that mean?

I keep thinking McCrazy will pick Sen. Suzie-Q Collins of Maine to be his VP. Good gawd! I hope not!

It means I like you.

I think she could do the job. She’s not my first choice. And she had years to do things, give someone else a chance.

I heard Kay Bailey was being considered. Ugh!

Even worse! Yuck!

Yea I am.

I hate her.

Liberals, you should have been around radicals!

The Repug women mentions here are all “I know my place” women. They obey the lord and master. And, the male continues to rule.

Jane -

Your case-in-point is a perfect example of what I’m talking about. Hillary proposing a debate on Fox got a vitriolic reaction not because of who or what she is, it got that reaction because we just got finished patting ourselves on the back for getting ALL the candidates to back out of Fox debates in NV and SC. It was a breathtakingly stupid move on Hillary’s part to even THINK about doing that.

We expect better of our candidates, and to get all wound up and assign motive to the fact that we don’t get as excited about a Republican slimeball being a Republican slimeball is a fairly specious argument.

Raven at 161.

Precisely.

Well, no, sorry. Not “nobody.”

Just not enough of us.

Absolutely.

Well, Just after posting some 70+ comments ago, I got a call from Oregon Democrats, a grass roots organizing effort. The caller said a recent poll here has McCain ahead of both Hillary and Obama, where McCain has only beaten Hillary in the past.

It’s visceral.

I think we have a question for Russert to ask at a future debate:

—————

McCain Embraces Hagee; Won’t Reject or Denounce
John Hagee is eagerly awaiting a world war that will usher in the second coming, calls the Catholic Church the “anti-christ” and “great whore,” and says Jews are responsible for their persecution. John McCain made a special trip to San Antonio to pick up his endorsement.

Farrakhan’s Support For Obama? Hugely Controversial. Hagee’s Backing Of McCain? No Problem.

http://tpmelectioncentral.talk.....e_post.php
By Eric Kleefeld - February 28, 2008, 5:11PM

Or Geena Davis.

well jane, you asked a serious question, and i’m just trying to think it through and give you a serious answer.

i’m not discounting that unaknowledged sexism is playing a role. but since i’m unaware of it, i have no way to give you an estimate of how large a role it is with me.. i have to leave that to others who know me very well.

all i can do is try to think about where my personal hostility comes from - but i’m not going to be able to see the stuff you are probably the most interested in.

I was estimating, Kiddo, can I get some help here?

I think congress is where action should be for next several presidential terms, so cannot bet too worked up about relative mertis of HRC or Obama (or Edwards or Dodd or several others).

And the Conservatives were taking their wives to wife-swopping parties. Women served one place, prone.

the clintons betrayed me on the issues of war and torture because i trusted them.
and mccain did not because i never trusted him anyway.

I concur! What was truly shocking to me was McCan’ts flip-flop… How can one, being a recipient, can in all conscience allow it to continue…! 8-(

SanderO, 145, agreed.

That’s mainly why I lean towards Obama. But the intramural fratricide is both boring and stupid.

The proverbial “ball” is keeping the GOP out of the WH. I think we should keep our eye on it. I won’t rip Hillary a new one, because, you know, I may have to vote for her.

Amen.

All day today, I’ve been hearing….people trust the Republicans to protect them from terror…????? WTF

9/11 happened on Bush’s Republican Watch.
More terrorists in the world than ever, on Bush’s Republican Watch.

Liars.

It wasn’t Drudge that dropped the dime on Prince Harry but the Brits are pissed at him! KO says there is some good news!

Eeeeeeeeeeeeeew. I don’t like that idea of women being in the kitchen again. Yuck.

My long time friend Kathy has been married since high school (22 years ago) and FINALLY divorced her abusive alcoholic dumbass husband. She’s lost 75 pounds (she was a chunker! LOL) and now wants to go skydiving! Like I’ve always said to her over the years, “You don’t need no stinking man to make you happy”. She’s living her life for the first time in a long time. I am sooooooooo happy for her. She will never allow herself to be in the kitchen only. Phew. Finally.

Also QuakerGirl, I remember all the show’s in the 70’s where the women were blond, stupid, and sexy. It bothered me and one day I said that to my mother and father. I remember them chuckling and then giving me a hug, because they too didn’t like the way the shows were portraying women.

Did someone say Clinton pile-on?

I think that would be supine!

my son, who is for McCain (i know - i have already bemoaned the fact to my shrink; “where did i go wrong”) recommends this site to me:
http://www.abovethelaw.com/200.....bama_1.php
What are your impressions of this site?

It is the Clinton economic model that is the real problem, NAFTA has
gutted the economy to the extent that Wall Street is now seen as the
economy, rather than speculation upon it. HRC is paying for Bill’s
overselling, against significant opposition within the party, the
” new ” economy, he just believed that Junior Civitans crap about the
” free enterprise system ” that made him a Fullbright scholar. It has
been the liquidation sale of the century and it is over, as is the politics that made it happen. Sean Wilentz is a fine historian, Princeton
guy, big on the Clintons as the Van Buren wing of the party, but the
democracy seems to have come to life for Obama… who knew this would
happen 6 months ago. May you live in interesting times.

OK, if Geena Davis ran, I could get worked up over her. Unless she is a wingnut.

Furthermore, I think both Obama and HRC did break a barrier with their campaigns. I don’t understand the idea that if either one is not nominated there it will decades before next black or woman candidate runs. Why not?

Obama and HRC have serious cred who ran serious campaigns and got serious support from wide sections of country. I think next credible woman or black candidate will be quite soon.

I cook every meal in this house.

The part I hated most about the sixties and seventies was the sexist attitude towards women by liberals. It was really bad. Women got no place until they took matters in their own hands in spite of the liberal men.

Right on, QG, and more than that, it was women’s treatment by the men in the left and far-left groups that triggered the ’70’s wave of the women’s movement. I remember it well—women in such organizations as SDS, the Mobe, SNCC, etc., found themselves being relegated to making coffee and running the mimeo machine. They looked around and said, WTF?

I haven’t forgotten Stokely Carmichael, when he was still head of SNCC (oh, wait, was it him or H.Rap Brown?), declaring emphatically that “the only position for women is SNCC is prone.” (Actually he meant supine, I think…well, maybe not. but the gist was very, very clear.)

Aww, Raven, I knew that. I was just teasing you. :-)

If you hang out here, you can’t be all bad.

Bush proved the current electorate is much more about the media’s vote and “personality.” I don’t like it, but I have to fight it, and to some extent live with it.

Being from Chicago, I trust Obama’s ability to fight. He’s smooth and tough.

Incidentally, I was on a ballot as an Edwards delegate. Just before he dropped out. My main worry is my uncanny ability to back a loser. :-)

LOL I could handle Geena Davis as VP or even president. ;-)

I wonder if the Pukes have something BIG on McBush to keep him in line for now…W said he was not certain McCain would be the Puke nominee…how would he know???? Perhaps the Cindy thing was a little preview…they’ll let him go along until late in the year and then nail him and install Romney. Just a thought.

Here’s the thing: I care when Hillary screws up, because she’s almost great. I care because she’s a Democrat and I want her to do the right thing.

McCain is a Republican. I don’t care. After the Plame leaks, the mines, the email scandals,the sex scandals, the lobbyist scandals, the scandals involving old coins, the corruption at every level of government — nothing Republicans do to bend or ignore the rules is at all surprising. So ho hum, another Republican breaking another law for which this administration won’t manage to fine, prosecute or otherwise rebuke …

You don’t need any help from me. You’re doing the job.

Heh, Billo wins silver and gold on WPITW!

I’m from Villa Park, left in 66 for the green machine.

“The only position for women in SNCC is prone.”
Remember that one?

And we love that about you. Men are great cooks as far as I’m concerned. :-)

My friend Jan sent an email out asking us to send in our favorite recipes for a fundraiser…and sadly…I had none. LOL Well, none that I had written down. Darn it.

Just tryin to keep it loose up in here.

Eeeeeeeeeeeeeew. I don’t like that idea of women being in the kitchen again. Yuck

I don’t either..I just encourage the GF to go out to dinner with a friend so I could have the kitchen to bake a cake.

JANE……….BRILLIANT POST

I was a fan of McCain in early 2000. I still say the country would have been better off had he, not W, been “elected” that year. However, after Bush did what he did to McCain in SC, and McCain not only took it but he embraced Bush, I lost all respect for McCain. Not really much of a “maverick” after all. To be plain McCain has showed himself to be W’s bitch.

I think the Dems should go after MCain on his ethics and should not concede that he has such great foreignpolicy credentials. I am cautiously optomistic that Obama will turn what some think is a McCain strenght–foreign policy–against him.

Obama is the man for the times, I think, my friend.

We have been South Beachin it for a couple of years, a real challenge.

Gottcha. ;0)

i like being in the kitchen. sitting here now, home after work, hanging at the lake while I wait for my sweetie to get home, and i’ll be serving dinner ;)

that said, the 60s/70s political scene does seem like it was very fucked up, esp’ly in gender and power relations.

You’re a true liberal man, Steve! ;-)

My kids prefer my cooking over Mom’s, while Mom can cook some good grub…! *g*

We were how we were raised.

My wife has a “home ec” degree but she’s fine with me handling it.

Come next November it will either Hillary or Barack we have to vote for to kick probably McCain’s cheatin’ butt. That is when the rubber hits the road and we take back our country. Keep your eyes on the prize.

I’m not against women being in the kitchen just as long as they’re not the only one in the kitchen. See? I do cook…just not very well. Edible…but not award winning. LOL

I’m with you, kiddo. I just don’t like the treatment Hillary gets in the media, and on just a whole bunch of blogs.

A few days ago, I commented thusly.

I remember all the show’s in the 70’s where the women were blond, stupid, and sexy. It bothered me and one day I said that to my mother and father. I remember them chuckling and then giving me a hug, because they too didn’t like the way the shows were portraying women.

The women in my family during the 70s were great fans of Maude.

Except, that is, for my grandmother who to this day thinks Nixon was framed. Oddly, of all the women in my family, she’s the most like Maude herself.

It is kinda irritating, when it’s Mom’s turn… ;-)

the kitchen is always the fullest room in the house, around here. no one’s being left alone here … things might change, just slower than we want …

1,772 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

Citizen Hamsher and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:

Thank you sister Hamsher for this post that challenges a lotta stuff I take for granted as a male in this society. I been tryin ta figure out jest what it is I’m uncomfortable about here and I’m still not sure but I think, short of buyin’ into yer thesis, I ken figure out what it is NOT.

I think that, just as many of us boomers who grew up in the “Exodus” generation expected more of Israel and Israelis than anyone else on the planet, many of us “progressive” males with strong, successful independent mothers demanded more from Mrs. Clinton than was humanly possible for anyone to provide…certainly more than Mrs. Clinton has to offer. Maybe it is the feelin’ of betrayal that some, including myself, feel when the first female candidate for president appears to be a NARLesque, corporate shill who is usin’ her gender to advance not only her personal prospects but the politics of those who would keep all of us, including women, in chains.

Maybe, maybe, maybe…. but at this point I must rely on what my brilliant and successful wife and my two extraordinary daughters (who are all also disappointed in Mrs. Clinton) say: “she just isn’t believable”. And Jane, that’s the crux of the anger a lotta us progressive males feel, she’s conned us about who she is and what and who she represents and ,dear sister Hamsher, there’s nuthin’ worse for the male ego than bein’ conned by a clever female.

KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION…WE’LL FIND OUT WHAT SHE’S REALLY MADE OF IN THE NEXT TWO WEEKS!!

I always loved my Dad’s cooking too and I think it was because he took his time and did quirky things that my mother didn’t. Like one night he put one of our play balls in the middle of the table as a centerpiece just to get us kids to laugh and wonder. *shaking head* He was (and is) always like that.

Lahoma has suggested I might have perhaps been contemplating watching a double header of two of our favorite movies. Upstairs. Tonight. “Enemy Mine” and “Harvey”.

Goodnight.

Lahoma and okk

I still do not understand this whole thing about Hillary. I disagree with her on many things but I don’t “hate” her. Why should I hate her? She’s the very picture of the woman who got out of the kitchen, ran for President and we have destroyed her. Not the Repugs - Us. How can we do that? Disagree with her.
But hate? Not in my vocabulary. I think it is disgusting.

“The only position for women in SNCC is prone.”
Remember that one?

Not only do I remember, I still hear the chuckle of other men. So funny! There was also lots of violence towards women. If a woman complained she was brutally raped the judge accused her of encouraging it. No wonder many women are still angry and will not allow those days to return.

‘nite kiddo … best to Lahoma. have fun!

Joan Severance?

Well, dam — it’s not like any candidate running for office doesn’t merit exposure and criticism for his past political (opps, and personal) actions. Let him who is without error throw the first stone — translation — Obama with his halo around his head and his voice as his weapon — no one will seriously criticize him (not to mention that the press has to stand on their tippy toes for the color of his skin in black)– But if all America jumps on his bandwagon, they can’t all be wrong — Or can they?

U r funny, Norske.

I loved Maude too. She was real. My Aunt Dot was just like her…she had that same voice, same silver grey hair, and big pointed boobs.

Remember how brunettes were considered “dirty looking” compared to the blonds back in the 70’s? That always bothered me. Luckily the times have changed.

I think obama has a pretty good record as a progressive . He was involved in pushing through anti-profiling laws as an Illinois State Senator right after 9/11, worked on Carol Mosley-Browns’ Senate Campaign, and has pushed everything from low-income housing, replacement housing for the poor integrated into gentrified sections of Chicago, environmental laws that relate to cleanups in urban areas, voter registration and counting accountability laws, etc.

The safe thing would have bneen for him to support the war during his 2002 Senate Campaign. Bush and the Republicans were on their bully pulpits and Congress was cowering in fear of being tainted as “terrorist sympathisers”. But Obama took a principled stand against the war. Not too many did, and some felt the consequencies of doing so. If Obama had been merely running for Congress his stand might have been a “politically safe” thing to do…given his District. But the Senate was a different kettle of fish in Illinois.

Tardy to the party ain’t you?

Most folks heads have gotten soft after all the years of Clinton bashing from the left and the right. Clinton was opposed by the Republicans from day one…(”No honeymoon”..Bob Dole).

Early March 1993 - Sen. Robert C. Byrd, chairman of the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee, and a recognized guardian of Senate procedure, blocks the Clinton reconciliation bill strategy. He is convinced the strategy amounts to a “prostitution of the process” by pushing through “a very complex, very expensive, very little understood piece of legislation.”

April 30, 1993 - Hillary Clinton meets behind closed doors with Republican and Democratic senators. She implores them to tell her what she is doing wrong and tells them she is having trouble meeting with Republicans. It is common knowledge among many of those present that the staff of Senate Minority Leader Bob Dole has told Republicans they are not to meet with the First Lady.

September 19, 1993 - Pat Moynihan, speaking on Meet the Press, dismisses the economic calculations in the Clinton plan — which has not even been formally launched — as “fantasy numbers.” He also joins with Republican critics and strikes at the very heart of reform by saying there is “no health care crisis.”

July 23, 1994 - Following several days of anti-Hillary rhetoric on local talk shows, Hillary Clinton — at a bus rally in Seattle — is confronted by hundreds of angry men shouting that the Clintons are going to destroy their way of life, ban guns, extend abortion rights, protect gays, and socialize medicine. When she finishes speaking and tries to leave the rally, her Iimousine is surrounded by protesters. Each of the four caravan routes becomes an expedition into enemy territory — with better-armed, better-prepared, better-mobilized anti-Clinton protesters at each stop along the way. Local reform groups and caravan organizers are forced to cancel scheduled stops because of implicit threats of violence.

…..and that is about where we are today. No wonder people love to hate the evil Clintons……..

You don’t see the McCain hatred as much because for one, we’re still feeling him out. And two, it’s like preaching to the choir here. We all understand that we dislike him. We’re not speaking directly to any McCain supporters here (there may be a few at MyDD) so it’s more strategy discussion on how to take him down rather then throwing ad hominems and whatever else around.

But I’m sure it will come in due time. He hasn’t really gone after Barack yet. When it starts, watch out.

that’s a very interesting link … thank you. date of 2003 also stands out.

It seems we have been monopolized by the Bushes. Clinton had just one term (election and reelection). Why do you’ll have to lump Clinton into that argument. I don’t have a problem with Hillary Clinton serving as President of the United States. She is brilliant and would do a dam good job.

Jane, do you remember when Bill Clinton started lecturing liberals in the audience back along (maybe in 2004? It was awhile ago) and basically said we had to be nice and cordial? And then he acted like he was disgusted with us? I can’t forgive him for that and I can’t forgive the fact that he and Bush Sr. banned together either. Hillary was around this whole time too and it makes me wonder if she too was feeling like that. This could explain why most of her support is coming from the 50 and older crowd. She isn’t progressive if you ask me.

A few weeks ago on C-SPAN there was a live interview with Barbara Bush. She said that they had hoped the relationship between Bush Sr. & Bill Clinton would have brought the parties together. Is she insane????!!!!???? I think so! Anyone who cozies up to the Bushes is not a friend to me or my liberal way of thinking.

Honestly, if it was another woman running today, I would feel differently (well, I would scrutinize anyone…male, female, black, white).

Hey, if you’re okay with two families running our nation, that’s fine. Personally, I am sick of both of them! I want change and part of that change means having someone other than a Clinton or Bush in the White House. But hey, if you want Hillary to be president in 2008 to 2016 and then have Jeb Bush come in in 2016 and then Roger Clinton after that, by all means…vote your conscience. LOL

Me?

I’m tired of them all.

Regarding Hillary, I’ve pointed out many positive stands she has taken and positions where she has fallen short. For the former I’ve faced some grief of this and other sites. I tend not to visit sites with “her people” though. I was a Kucinich supporter and had to wade through a lot of information before settling on Obama as the best of the remaining candidates by the time of Super Tuesday. I’m actually glad I didn’t vote by absentee ballot for once. A week or two before it may have gone to someone else (maybe Richardson). I liked Dodd a lot as well, but he dropped out just beforehand.

I guess well know for certain in a few days in Clinton can keep on “carryin’ on”. But if she isn’t in a reasonable position to win a majority of the non-FLA/MIChigan elected delegates, I hope she does the right thing and withdraws. Otherwise her actions could rend the party apart. If she does that her name and her husbands will go down in history as self-interested, power-hungry egomaniacs who were not at all interested in the people she claimed to represent.

But I trust she will do the proper thing and request that delegates committed to her vote for the general nominee…and that the Florida and Michigan delegations be seated only upon that basis (perhaps after a first ballot without them). She should also inform Superdelegate supporters to support Obama.

Same here. Time to move on… don’t worry about the big fish surviving
a loss, some corporate parachute awaits the loser.

LOL, Jane at 232.

I’m a brunette guy, which ought to tell you how much you impress me.

I don’t know anything about Joan, actually, except that she was my favorite character in an otherwise boring/amusing “Bird On a Wire.” Since then, I’ve been a big fan. *blush* If she had a British accent, God knows what she could make me do. :-)

*shrug* I guess I’m guilty of lookism, at least from afar.

hey (your favorite word) I think you are getting a little carried away. Thanks for your Opinion. I am just saying I look who I think is the most qualified, who has the most experience and would meet all the obligations to carry out the responsibilities to serve all the peoples of the United States — that is who I would vote for and if the name happens to be Brown, Green, Black or whatever, that is how I place my vote. Just because it is Clinton, I don’t disqualify her.

Thank you, Jane, for writing the original post–it confirms my own sense of concern. As a former Edwards supporter, I weighed who to transfer support to. I settled on Hillary, finally, and not without ambivalence. But I have been appalled about the animus toward her from folks for whom she’s not the first choice–but ought not to be too far down the list. (From a long-time reader but first-time poster who among other things is male and Anglo. . . .)

Jeez, Jane, it just occured to me that you might know Joan!

Being a movie mogul and all.

Back on topic, I just wish the Democrats and independents would give ol’ Hillary a break. Yeah, she’s got some baggage, and a whole bunch of it isn’t even her fault, but she’s so much more sane and smart than St. McCain of Media Mountain it’s boring to discuss.

Honestly, since I don’t see much difference between the parties at a very, very macro level, I usually vote third party. I did so in the IL Gov. race in ‘06. I do so at lower levels all the time. But this time, since I love my country very much, there will be nothing but Dem votes on my ballot. I don’t like the two-party system, but I’m not an idiot.

Jane,
My sweetie’s answer is widespread misogyny. I hate to admit it, but maybe she’s right. Of course, I can recite what I like to think are rational reasons why I prefer Obama to Hillary as Prez, but I would not hesitate to vote for her over any Republican that might be offered up.

But maybe my carefully crafted reasons are just– rationalizations for misogyny?

HuffPo is all agog about Hillary’s performance at the last debate (sorry, no link). But what it points to is this: At this point of the campaign, voters want a candidate to *sound* presidential. And I’m afraid that there’s a misogynistic stereotype of what “Presidential” sounds like. And high, shrill voices are not yet included within that orb.

Bob in HI

…there’s nuthin’ worse for the male ego than bein’ conned by a clever female.

Damn, that’s deep, man. You might be onto sumthin’.

Although, I dislike Bill much more and always have based on his policies and actions. Many of problems with Hillary stem from guilt by association to Bill.

Thanks for the food for thought. It’s tasty!

I do. LOL I see more of the same with her, but if you don’t, then that’s your opinion and you’re free to have it of course. ;-)

FWIW, misogyny is my first answer.

I’ve seem some crtiques of HRC based solely upon her record in public office/Health Care effort - these seem to based on HRC’s political career, not her gender.

But most of what I see screams misogyny.

[this from someone who is decidedly not a Hillary fan]

Exactly. The Bushes and the Clintons will be fine even if they don’t win the White House for the rest of eternity.

You’re in good company. Dwight Yoakam thinks she’s da bomb too.

She was horrible in the last debate, it’s not misogynistic to say so.

My problem with Sen. Clinton has nothing to do with her sex and everything to do with her war vote.

Other than that, I’m a fan. I prefer Obama, but I’m a fan of hers.

Hillary has been “treated to” a lot of misogyny. And, I think that the expectations that have been placed on her are much more acute than same for the male candidates.

Neither H. Clinton nor B. Obama were my first choices. I will happily vote for either of them in Nov.

I am not a Hillary hater, but there are many reasons I’ve said in the past “I will never vote for her”- well, I will, if she is the nominee. (And, I also have reservations about Obama)

But, part of my negative view of Clinton has to do with this issue of leadership. I heard her say so many times “When I am President I will do.. (such and such). And meanwhile, she was not showing real leadership in the Senate on key issues that are important to me. If she had stood up to battle on those issues, I would have been a convert.

As a female who has survived (kinda sorta in the male world of science) I am hardly a misogynist. I have looked at the candidates as individuals, apart from their gender. There are women who like to trash other women, so that they can maintain their “Queen Bee” status. I’m not one of those. But, on the other hand, I don’t feel that I need to support any woman, just because of her gender.

Late, comment I know… arrived late, and just finished reading the comments…

added via edit p.s.- my statement/ decision “I will never vote for her” came initially bec. of her vote on the AUMF, and then bec. of her inability to back off from that. To my mind, the invasion of Iraq, which I knew would be a disaster from the get-go, is the worst failing of the US on a global scale in my lifetime.

hey VG. was wondering what you would think…. glad you made it, better late than never.

Late, and without reading comments, but I think there’s a much simpler explanation. We expect this kind of crap from Republicans. It’s what they do, it’s what they are. We hate it when a Dem is not significantly better.

(Also it’s human nature to despise your cousin who agrees with you on 4 out of 5 issues much more than a stranger who disagrees with you everywhere.)

I think both Obama and HRC did break a barrier with their campaigns. I don’t understand the idea that if either one is not nominated there it will decades before next black or woman candidate runs. Why not?

I almost forgot to say Amen.

(I’m an Obama guy, but) if HRC loses the nomination, McCain would be a genius to pick a woman for his running mate. Fortunately, I don’t think he’s that smart.

Hi Selise, well, I tried to give my viewpoint as honestly and as succinctly as I could.

Hi Gordon- yes, “we expect this kind of crap from Republicans” goes a long way by means of explanation.

I have to say, though, that Jane’s post and comments really got me thinking about the “what if”- I perhaps have taken it for granted, for many reasons, that we will have a Dem president Jan. 2009. But, that might be just a little too optimistic!

i don’t think we can count on a dem president next year. i’m really really worried.

I HATE John McCain. I detest him. I LOATHE him, and when he dies in office, I’ll make a point of traveling to his grave, after the hubbub has died down, and PISSING on it.

That good enough for you?

Uh, fund raising? Voter turnout? This will be a rout.

Could the double standard be a consequence of misogyny?

Selise- prior to this post from Jane, and all of the comments, I had taken a Dem president for granted. However, the post gave me a swift reality check. Apart from the issue of misogyny, which we all could probably debate forever, the question “why aren’t we going after McCain” did really get to me, and I am starting to share your worry. After all, the Repugs have stolen elections before.

Mein führer, I can valk!

Gordon- that was my thinking before. But, as I just said to Selise, it’s not as if Repugs haven’t stolen elections before.

If anyone thinks the questioning of McCain’s ethics is just so much partisan character assasination, they should read George Will’s latest column: http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/will022708.php3. Will connects the dots in a compelling way and succeeds, at the very least, at exposing the seedy self-aggrandizement McCain is guilty of.

Jane Hamsher seems to be one of the few shining a spotlight on McCain’s dancing around (or is it trampling all over?) his own campaign finance laws.

http://newsprism.wordpress.com

And they tried in 2006, but with only minor success.

It is no longer “tin foil hat” territory. They really can’t jimmy an election past 10 points or so.

We have at least 29 R ‘retirements’ from congress (and it will go up). They know they’re toast. They’re good R’s, so they still follow orders, but the orders are just to keep W in office and out of jail for another (almost) 11 months.

Take telcomm immunity. W is going to the mat because they have his balls in a vice - they know what he’s been doing - the rest of us don’t. He has to protect them, or he’s in jail.

He’ll threaten war in the ME, but he won’t actually get it done, because the military almost certainly won’t go there. But at this point the threat is just to distract from his real problems - the legal advice he’s gotten from Yoo, Addington et al has turned out to be crap.

Nothing like throwing a grenade into the picture, but Barak and Michelle Obama remind me a lot of Bill and Hillary Clinton. I really anticipate Michelle Obama getting the Hillary treatment.

Jane, I don’t understand Hillary hate either. It gets very personal - her voice, mannerisms, etc. Surely a lot of it is misogyny, but whether there is something more there I don’t know. As an older person, what I’m steeling myself against is ageist attacks on McCain (which will express contempt for all old people, not just him, whether or not the speaker is aware of it or intends it that way). It’s already begun, of course. Hillary has been on the receiving end of some ageist prejudice, but it has been over-shadowed by the misogyny. With McCain it may become flagrant. There are legitimate objections to him, having nothing to do with his age. But, as with race and gender, one of the easiest ways for people to attack him is with ageism. I expect a litany of old, old, old, senile, doddering, over the hill, can’t get it up, Alzheimer’s, Jurassic, the past is bad, old is inferior, etc., etc. I suppose it will show up in blog comments, jokes, and informal conversation first and then probably work it’s way into MSM. Do I need to say that because I reject ageism, that does not mean I support McCain? There is no reason to hold back on blasting his policies, his contradictions, his own prejudices, his record, etc., war hero or not. His age is a legitimate issue if anyone thinks it is really an impediment to doing the job of President, but they need to make that argument seriously, not through ageist jibes. Attacking him using negative stereotypes of old people is unacceptable, not because he needs to be protected from it but because it affects an entire class of people. That said, I can’t imagine it reaching the depths of Hillary hate that we have seen.
There is a natural generational conflict, but I think we can avoid prejudicial, senseless, ageist attacks, whether they are directed at the young or the old. Obama’s supporters have been attacked on the basis of age prejudice too. We say America glorifies youth, but I think young Obama supporters have been pretty viciously trashed just for being young.
Today it occurred to me that old people and young people are the same people at different times. Sorry this is so wordy.

“I genuinely thought that the impulse to vilify Clinton and defend Obama was just because people really, really liked him. I have to say, now I’m not so certain.”

You thought the right had a lock on womanhating?

I think a lot of it is that there isn’t a substantial case against her for centre-leftists (most of the liberal blogosphere including commenters), and she’s not all that clearly differentiated from their guy. So they reach into the rightwing memebag for stuff to throw at her. Just today I read a “liberal” on a “liberal” blog agreeing with another “liberal” about how cold and calculating Hillary is. I mean, WTF? These were both women too, but I don’t think women are immune to misogyny either.

I agree. where is the McCain hate. Here is a man that has broken the law he helped write on campaign financing. He also stands on a stage with a wingut Minister who is ready to kick start the Rapture NOW and you hear nothing. I was one who was not in favor of going on Fox. Still see no advantage in giving Fox any credibility. Finally I was able to post a comment. A long time visitor and reader but have been unable to post.

To me, McCain’s trickery about trying to get in and then out of public financing is trivial compared to his promise to stay in Iraq for 100 years and his Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran. It just doesn’t register with me, and I can’t get that excited about it because the FEC has no quorum. So I’m afraid that by the time McCain has to pay massive fines the election will be long over.

This observation is patently ridiculous. You have been defending Hillary in so many of your comments. You play the victim card for her. You seem to amazed that so many have such long memories as it concerns Hillary’s ability to join hands with those who led us into this morass that is the Iraq War. The so-called Hillary Haters didn’t defeat Senator Clinton - Hillary defeated Hillary.

We Democrats are in the midst of a very interesting and passionate debate as to who will represent this party come November and replace the most onerous administration any of us has experienced in our lifetime…and many of us want nothing to do with those WHO ENABLED them and those who continue to believe in them.

I look forward to posters everywhere with the image of McCain hugging the chimp. Those of us who want do not want to see Hillary as the nominee want zero to do with the Bush loving McCain. And by the way, we don’t have to HATE anybody because we disagree and disapprove of the way they compromise themselves and their country. We just don’t want to vote for, nor support them. We do what we can to stop them from getting their hands on the reins.

I’m amazed that you are making this observation in the heat of this primary season when both Hillary’s and Obama’s camps are still working hard to win the nomination. In fact, it has been more Obama who has spoken out and hit back at McCain recently while Hillary desperately attacks Obama from within.

Also, as much as I respect this site, I don’t see enough attention to dismantling the McCain hypocrisy. I haven’t seen enough McCain outrage from Jane Hamsher. There’s been a lot of debate re: Hillary and Obama, but if you would like to lead us into battle with McCain, we are here to follow that charge.

Turning up the volume on stopping the STRAIGHT TO HELL EXPRESS starts at home Firedoglake!

Obama 08!!

Concerning my own paragraph two, line two, please correct “onerous” with “odious.”

Good (very late) Night FDL

j.

in support of my thesis (betrayal matters)…

look at the nader thread and other times nader’s name has come up. is the nader hate any less than the hillary clinton hate? i’m not sure, but there’s certainly more hatred of nader expressed here than of mccain.

i’m not saying that misogyny isn’t playing a big role with clinton, but there is other stuff going on too. people are angry and looking for a socially acceptable scapegoat. when that scapegoat is a woman, then the sexist language comes out (even from people who i don’t think are sexist).

I think the emotion McCain arouses in the liberal blogosphere is not hatred but contempt. If bmaz is anything to go on, liberal bloggers think that if we can puncture the myth of McCain and show that he is a hypocrite, that will be the end of him. Some of us don’t even think he is going to make it to the convention. If McCain is simply a hypocrite he cannot be as actively malevolent as Cheney or Rove who tell you exactly what they are going to do. There is only so much hate to go around.

So many of us got into this because we were disgusted with the establishment Dems and their fear of being demonized. Because Hillary Clinton is Hillary Clinton, because she has already been demonized as far as possible, she could never stick her neck out to be a leader for the things the netroots care for when she was in the Senate. Also Hillary Clinton is relying on those same establishment Dems as well as women to put her over the top. The same netroots who got behind Donna Edwards and Darcy Burner and treated Pelosi as a conquering hero at first don’t hate the idea of female leaders. MSOC’s hatred of a thousand burning suns for Hillary Clinton isn’t woman hating. I think the idea is that any power Hillary Clinton may amass isn’t hers as much as it is that of the Democratic system we all wanted to change. She is the last thing from an insurgent or crashing the gate.

GOOD MORNING FDL,

Have you seen Hillary’s new ad?!!!

while your children were sleeping last night Hillary got a phone call.

Hillary is truly the new Joe Lieberman.

OBAMA 08! …now more than ever!

Jane Hamsher:

This is the analogous to the Republican argument that people on the left complain about the Iraq war or the Israeli occupation but never find time to complain about Saddam Hussein or other dictators.

It’s completely dishonest. Oh, that poor put-upon woman, Hillary Clinton. Complaining about misogyny towards her is frivolous — the perception that she was getting unfairly attacked has worked to her advantage as often as not, and its absolutely trivial compared to what Obama is already getting.

Oh, and then there’s the war she voted for.

Please stop these aggrieved, emotional attacks on your readers for imaginary slights.

Jane, I appreciate your multi-tasking. But first the nomination without the Clintons and then on to McCain.

Jane Hamsher:

“I genuinely thought that the impulse to vilify Clinton and defend Obama was just because people really, really liked him. I have to say, now I’m not so certain.”

This bullshit is particularly patronizing; it’s downright Dowdesque. It’s also — and I hesitate to use this loaded word because of its etymology — hysterical. Millions of people of both sexes and all ages, races and classes support his candidacy. It’s not some teen fan club.

The thing that really frosts me is that the narrative is being set up, here and on other blogs, that if Hillary loses, it will be because she’s a woman and those mean men wouldn’t give her a chance, which is complete bullshit. People need to accept the fact that she ran a shitty campaign and work from there.

One can accept the fact that she ran a shitty campaign and still see the obvious and vile misogyny to which Hillary was subjected. Just to get this implication out of the way, I’m not suggesting Obama engaged in or directed it, but he certainly benefitted from it. Hillary had to overcome unique obstacles that were placed in her way simply because she was a woman. She was judged for things that all basically came down to “she’s a woman” (’Shrillery’, anyone?). A properly run campaign could have overcome much of this, but the fact that her campaign was inept at handling this sort of thing doesn’t negate the fact that it was there.

I have a sly plan on how a woman can beat the male-favored system for choosing a president. She has to be the VP running mate. He drops dead once in office and she ascends to the grand position. Not much different from Queen Elizabeth I.

To be a pedantic here…

Queen Elizabeth I followed her sister, Mary, onto the throne. A better example would be someone like Katherine Graham who took over the Washington Post after her husband died and ran it until her own death many years later.

What, specifically, were the obstacles?

To this Obama voter, there was one obstacle to me voting for her: her war vote.

Will the pity party mercifully end after she gives her concession speech?

I wonder how much of the “pass” McCain gets is simply the low expectations of the electorate with regard to Republican candidates? Certainly racism in Obama’s case and sexism in Clinton’s case play a role in the virulent hatred olympics. A large role. American’s however, have been slowly boiling in a pot of Republican nastiness for the last eight years. Hangin’ with the white supremicists and lbbyists just feels like “more of the same”. The expectations of Obama and Clinton are higher, in part because they are both running on change, in one form or another, and in part because they are running as “representatives of their cohort”, rather than as rich white guys. Something to ponder.