I despise Hill!

Hillary for 2012!

I think Bill and Hill have Campaign Addiction…

Intervention, stat!

Thanks Jane.

rut-roh

she has jumped the shark…..a few times
lookeeeeeee here

http://images.huffingtonpost.c…..-large.jpg

It is almost as if she has a script listing actions which I consider unacceptable. She has certainly been managing to push all of my buttons lately.

She demands your vote!! it is her due!!

all snark aside, I just wonder if she’s so far around the bend that she doesn’t even realize how many people she is alienating with all this nonsense.

Doesn’t make sense to me. A democratic candidate should support grass/net/root people.

I have mixed feelings about MoveOn but do support them when we can work together for a common goal.

Wow. This is sad.

Ahhhh. She’s looking for her Sistah MoveOn moment.

I wonder if it had anything to do with sleep deprivation.

Looks like she’s trying to rally the Vichies (DLC).

Hillary says: “We have been less successful in caucuses because it brings out the activist base of the Democratic Party.”

Damn those party activists!

I guess we need fewer activists?

Amen Jane! I too am a MoveOn member and they’ve done a helluva lot more for progressive causes than Hillary Clinton ever pretended to do. How far can we afford to let her embrace of the Rovian style go? I’ve stayed out of this primary mess for months, vowing to support whoever wins the nomination as they go toe to toe against McCain. No more. Obama will get my vote, whether he is the Democratic candidate or whether I have to write him in. Clinton has gone way too far to the dark side for me to ever vote for her now, which saddens me, because I once would’ve gladly voted for her.

Well said, Jane. I just don’t get it and it makes me sad….

I know you can chalk it up to deseration — but it is the classless, intoxicated addict form of desperation (where you are willing to become what you hate to get what you need).

Well said Jane…it means much since FDL has been so balanced

move on dot org is an ectremist group saddled with big bucks to remake the US into a better “Soviet Union” than the one that existed for less than a century in Eastern Europe/Asia.

Surely there’s more to life than being a “moveon” lemming!

Hillary is a deceitful person, always has been- took you dems a long time to realize this.

You Barak supporters have almost no clue as to what he really believes, yet you fawn all over him. Pathetic.

“deseration” of course = desperation, but of a particular political type.

MoveOn may not have opposed military action in Afghanistan (according to Eli Pariser in the Washington Post) but I did, because I was quite certain George Bush would bungle it and we’d just wind up spending billions on a bunch of junk that would make his buddies rich and a lot of poor people in the poorest country in the world would die senselessly. Sadly that turned out to be right, and disparaging anyone for challenging this country’s unrelenting bellicosity during the Bush administration is wrong.

just a small correction.

i opposed the war against afghanistan too – but because i thought it was the wrong thing to do. i always wanted us to go after the guilty – but we were too consumed by bloodlust and redirected aggression to do that.

… i have lots of complaints wrt to moveon – there’s lots of room for people of intelligence and good will to disagree about what we should do. but let’s at least get our history right

i hope this is misreporting and that clinton never did any such thing. if there’s a tape, i look forward to getting to seeing it for myself.

the whole article is up at huffpo and i assume also at Kos

Bad move on Clinton’s part, that’s for sure.

Did Moveon.Org endorse Obama?

I dunno, I sort of liked deseration. Sounds desolate.

Yes. They first polled their memebership as to when they should endorse and follwed it up with a vote on who to endorse.

There is no video, but there is an audio tape. Been site-hopping a lot, so not sure if it was huff post that has the audio. or another site.

Ok, I’m confused, Jane.

Is the prime objection that she’s saying Afghanistan was right and opposing it was wrong? Kudos to you for opposing it…but something on the order of 80% of *Democrats* supported *that* invasion so it’s hardly news that those of us who didn’t are not exactly mainstream , is it?

Or is it that she’s undermining MoveOn? Seems to me they asked for that by making an endorsement very early in very close primary. They essentially told HER to go to hell…how on earth can we fault her for returning fire? (Assuming she did, of course)

MoveOn endorsing Obama was wrong (and I’m no Hillary suppporter). When they took sides they put themselves right dead in the middle of the piefight. I don’t see how we can complain now if they get a little pie in their face…..

Audio here

Hillary Clinton is bitter.

She made these statements after Super Tuesday, which was the original planned end-date of her campaign for the Democratic nomination. Things did not work out as she and her krewe planned; things still continue to go awry for her.

Which means all of her laudatory remarks since then about the wonderful high levels of participation among the Democratic activist base have been lies. She doesn’t want people participating, especially those of us who want to change the criminal foreign policy of BushCheneyCo.

Using Rove talking points is, unfortunately, not new for Hillary Clinton.

I hope Democratic activists in Pennsylvania will take heed and end her futile campaign for the Presidency on Tuesday. It’s over.

Let’s move on.

At the risk of being flamed, can we place her comments in context? Right after Super Tuesday (at which point she had assumed originally she’d have things wrapped up) and right after MoveOn had endorsed Senator Obama. I know for myself, I was a bit disappointed at MoveOn for endorsing so early in the game so I can also imagine how she felt about it.

Note: I am not a fan of HRC or BHO but will vote for the nominee leading the ballot in November 2008.

i don’t think pie fighting is Jane’s issue rather the repug talking points she used (the same as Karl Rove) that were wrong.

This is a cold, calculated, Clinton triangulation move. Lacking sicerity, it’s only for political gain. The moral compass that guides the Clintons has only one point: do anything that is for the benefit of the CLintons..

To me, it just seems like typical Clintonian triangulation. Diss a (supposed) leftist org. like MoveOn thereby polishing your centrist credentials.

Sistah Souljiah.

*sigh*

agreed

Maybe David Brooks is right, and the Dems are going to hand this election to McCain.

My friend today told me that we’ve had a war on terror, a war on drugs, and a war on poverty, when what we needed was a war on stupid.

i don’t think pie fighting is Jane’s issue rather the repug talking points she used (the same as Karl Rove) that were wrong.

That’s how I read it, too, and I agree. I don’t know what the point is of running as a Democrat if you’re dead set on acting just like Karl Rove.

Chabord, she didn’t just slam MoveOn…unless MoveOn is “the activist base of the Democratic party”. Also, she lied about MoveOn using a Karl Rove talking point.

Jane,
A year ago I was firmly supporting Hillary. For me Obama was an empty suit. And that argument on many levels is still true. What changed me was the talking points.

Thank you, Jane!

I’m a MoveOn member, too (although have had to be less active than I want to be).

Even though she may have been upset with their endorsement of Obama, her whining about MoveOn as if they are the reason for her defeat is truly pathetic. As if every stupid decision she made in her campaign’s moves (or early on, their LACK of movement — expecting “inevitability” to carry her) had nothing whatsoever to do with it.

Please.

How desperate.

She despises “activists”? Well, this shows what her presidency would be like, doesn’t it? Blaming others for her own mistakes, and the shooting down the most enegized folks looking for progressive changes…

Enough of defending Hillary for using Rovian tactics for me. If you are a Hillary supporter that is great and good for you but I have spent the last 8 years fighting like hell against the Bush administration and the filth that is Karl Rove. The destruction they have wrought on this country, our Constitution, our civil rights and our international reputation is staggering. I cannot and will not support any candidate who feels it is justifiable to mimic and utilize those self-same tactics for whatever reason.

I will never accept the ends justifying the means. When one of the contenders for the Democratic nomination openly, candidly, and clearly regurgitates Republican talking points against her opponent and members of her own party knowing that the Republican party will use that against whoever wins the nomination, she has gone too far in my book. That is my feeling and it isn’t going to change. I needed to say that and I have. I wish those of you who support Hillary despite this well. I can’t anymore.

My friend today told me that we’ve had a war on terror, a war on drugs, and a war on poverty, when what we needed was a war on stupid.

What we need is to stop using war as a fucking metaphor for anything and everything.

any chance this was deliberate?

remembering the reaction to moveons’ Betrayus ads,
and now Hillary’s outrageous claim moveon was against going after Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, hmm is this too convenient?

Well said.

oh boy, this is really going to hit a raw nerve with some people

Did Moveon support military action in Afghanistan?

What the Taliban did to the women of Afghanistan was despicable, and so I supported that invasion. What chimpy did afterwards–invading Iraq–was equally despicable (not to mention stupid) and I opposed it.

That said, you have been very balanced (unlike the Orange Obama) and Hillary shouldn’t be attacking her own side.

The “Real” Mrs. John McCain.

oh boy, this is really going to hit a raw nerve with some many people

As opposed to you, who can read his mmmiiinnnndddd!

What we need is to stop using war as a fucking metaphor for anything and everything.

So you’re advocating a war on War?

“Soviet Union”, that’s just a Limbaugh talking point! I think I’ll mosey over and drop a C note on Move on in honor of ol’ Hazmat and the DLC…

Uh, MoveOn polled their MEMBERS and endorsed the (strong) winner of that poll.

Are you suggesting MoveOn should have said to its 3.2 million members, “Hey, this is a close primary. Don’t express a preference.”?

thanks for the audio link. i’m having trouble making out all the words, does anyone have a link to a transcript? or should i try to make one?

per the article on Huffpo:
MoveOn never opposed the war in Afghanistan

Good on you, Priscilla!

Clinton looks at Obama, and the only playbook she has to use is the one created by the Republicans and adopted by the media. Personal attacks over trivia, innuendos, smears, etc. She’s become well steeped in the Beltway mindset, with its contempt of outsiders who actually think their views matter. Truly sad- but then she’s surrounded herself with people who all feel that way.

After umpteen years in the governor’s mansion in Arkansas, then the White House, the corporate boards, the Senate, it’s no wonder she’s lost touch with reality. Having ‘experience’ of all this, to the point that it becomes one’s normal environment, is why we have a ruling class that is so detached from ordinary people and things that matter.

So you’re advocating a war on War?

No.

Submitted for your consideration
How do the various candidates react under pressure?
(Albeit purely political pressure up to this point)

You’re welcome, I don’t know of a transcript right now though.

I’ve been looking and haven’t located on yet

I love this part:

“. . . So they flood into these caucuses and dominate them and really intimidate people who actually show up to support me.”

So THAT’s why she can’t win in caucuses. Now I get it.

Don’t feed the troll.

So THAT’s why she can’t win in caucuses. Now I get it.

Sounds like she only likes democracy when it’s her people flooding in.

No.

so you want a piece of War?

Hillary wants your vote Jane, just not your opinion.

There’s a partial transcript in the Huffpo article that seemed accurate as I was listening. There are a couple of sentences on the audio before it then meshes with the transcript.

Exactly! No more f#*king wars!

Oh No! Hillary (aka Mark Penn) is flaming the angry fem hippie bloggers of the toobz. Poor Hill does not know of our mighty wrath. But we must show sympathy, since she had a 20 to 30 point polling lead. Only the worst campaign ever, could have thrown that away. I think supporters of Hillary should give Mark Penn and Howie Wolfson the credit they deserve. You have already given them over $10 million for their great job. That does not count the money they got from the government of Colombia

She is blaming MoveOn? Try blaming herself and Mark Penn first.

i’d like to know exactly when this took place and also, who what at this “private fundraiser” – seems like a very warmongering audience.

I just hate seeing dems attacking other dems.

Hillary’s trying a new tactic: Move to the center BEFORE the party convention! The heck with appealing to the Party’s base before the convention.

Of course, she wants to re-define the party’s base, and the definition apparently does not include DFH or progressives.

Bob in HI

LMAO!

I have had it up to HERE with her!

She’s really letting out her inner Joe Lieberman.

Without the Netroots and the blogosphere, the right wing narrative would still dominate, and we’d still me a minority. I’m convinced of that.

Mrs. Clinton just laments the days when insiders had all the power and could pose as populists while selling out the middle class – all without ever being called on it in any organized fashion.

After Tuesday (when she picks up 12-20 delegates at most, coming no closer to winning the nom), I really hope all of us on this side, who have been so patient with the process, begin to shut it down.

Time for her to GO.

This campaign really showed something. It shows how well Obama learned his lesson in community organizing. While Obama isn’t perfect(not even Feingold is), I am glad I canvassed for him last weekend and will do it again.

What does that do? (not being a smartass, I’m curious)

HuffPo had approx. 900 comments when only the headline was up …

and I repeat *sigh*

Exactly!!!

And blaming Mark Penn would come down to blaming herself, too, since she chose first to hire him, and then to keep Penn around.

Another example of what her presidency would be like.

Sorry Jane but Hillary wants nothing to do with you or your vote. You’re not her kind of American. You think for yourself instead of just follow blindly.

Ding! Perfectly said as usual Bob.

From HuffPo:

Howard Wolfson, communications director for the Clinton campaign, verified the authenticity of the audio. When asked if Clinton’s statement suggested dismay over high Democratic turnout and elevated activist energy, Wolfson replied: “I’ll let the statement stand as is.”

I’m guessing this is not a good day to be Howard Wolfson. In fact, he’s probably not going to have a very good weekend, either.

No, I’m not suggesting that MoveOn should’ve told its members not to express a preference – that’s just silly. But MoveOn itself had no business endorsing in a primary between two people of pretty much identical progressive credentials. Doing was was necessarily and inherently an act that could only be divisive.

Now, if they had polled their members in *December* and endorsed *Edwards*……. ( grin )

Oh, you mean as in being a majority? Tough.

Hoo boy, I just remembered that MoveOn was originally founded in the wake of the Lewinsky scandal, to get folks to “move on” from that type of gotcha crap.

Look at the gratitude they get!

You’re giving her too much credit. She’s ALWAYS been a “closet” conservative–from the link KaylnMaine gave the other day to mother jones mag:

[Reinhold] Niebuhr and [Paul] Tillich’s combination of aggressiveness in foreign affairs and limited domestic ambition naturally led Clinton toward the gop. She was a Goldwater Girl who, under the tutelage of her high school history teacher Paul Carlson (whom Jones describes as “to the right of the John Birchers”), attended biweekly anticommunist meetings and later served as president of Wellesley’s Young Republicans chapter. Out of step with the era’s radicalism, Clinton wrote Jones from college, lamenting that her fellow students didn’t believe that one could be “a mind conservative and a heart liberal.” To Jones, this question indicated that Clinton shared Niebuhr’s notion of Christians needing to have “a dark enough view of life that they can be realistic about what’s possible.”

Two decades later, while Bill was campaigning for president, Clinton picked up that theme once more, displaying a theological depth that conservative believers could appreciate. In an interview with the United Methodist Reporter, she expressed regret that her church had focused too much on social gospel concerns in the ’60s, ’70s, and ’80s, “to the exclusion of personal faith and growth.” The spirit, believe theological conservatives, matters more than the flesh. Clinton added that she was happy to see her liberal denomination becoming more salvation centered in the ’90s.
(snip)

Clinton’s prayer group was part of the Fellowship (or “the Family”), a network of sex-segregated cells of political, business, and military leaders dedicated to “spiritual war” on behalf of Christ, many of them recruited at the Fellowship’s only public event, the annual National Prayer Breakfast. (Aside from the breakfast, the group has “made a fetish of being invisible,” former Republican Senator William Armstrong has said.)

The Fellowship believes that the elite win power by the will of God, who uses them for his purposes. Its mission is to help the powerful understand their role in God’s plan.

(snip)

When Time put together a list of the nation’s 25 most powerful evangelicals in 2005, the heading for Coe’s entry was “The Stealth Persuader.” “You know what I think of when I think of Doug Coe?” the Reverend Schenck (a Coe admirer) asked us. “I think literally of the guy in the smoky back room that you can’t even see his face. He sits in the corner, and you see the cigar, and you see the flame, and you hear his voice—but you never see his face. He’s that shadowy figure.”

Coe’s friends include former Attorney General John Ashcroft, Reaganite Edwin Meese III, and ultraconservative Rep. Joe Pitts (R-Pa.). Under Coe’s guidance, Meese has hosted weekly prayer breakfasts for politicians, businesspeople, and diplomats, and Pitts rose from obscurity to head the House Values Action Team, an off-the-record network of religious right groups and members of Congress created by Tom DeLay. The corresponding Senate Values Action Team is guided by another Coe protégé, Brownback, who also claims to have recruited King Abdullah of Jordan into a regular study of Jesus’ teachings.

Unlikely partnerships have become a Clinton trademark. Some are symbolic, such as her support for a ban on flag burning with Senator Bob Bennett (R-Utah) and funding for research on the dangers of video games with Brownback and Santorum. But Clinton has also joined the gop on legislation that redefines social justice issues in terms of conservative morality, such as an anti-human-trafficking law that withheld funding from groups working on the sex trade if they didn’t condemn prostitution in the proper terms. With Santorum, Clinton co-sponsored the Workplace Religious Freedom Act; she didn’t back off even after Republican senators such as Pennsylvania’s Arlen Specter pulled their names from the bill citing concerns that the measure would protect those refusing to perform key aspects of their jobs—say, pharmacists who won’t fill birth control prescriptions, or police officers who won’t guard abortion clinics.

Clinton has championed federal funding of faith-based social services, which she embraced years before George W. Bush did; Marci Hamilton, author of God vs. the Gavel, says that the Clintons’ approach to faith-based initiatives “set the stage for Bush.” Clinton has also long supported the Defense of Marriage Act, a measure that has become a purity test for any candidate wishing to avoid war with the Christian right.

More here:

http://www.motherjones.com/new…..rayer.html

1,816 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

Citizen Hamsher and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:

Do I detect a note of disappointment or, dare I say, betrayal, Sister Jane? I am not gloating here but are you surprised? Mrs. McClinton has made so many promises over the years and has been in bed with SOOOO many corporations for the last 10 years that she can hardly do other than she has done now that the only service she can provide her corporate pimps is to try and catapult fascist propaganda into the Democratic primary.

I hope we have now heard the last of the accusations of misogyny and sexism against those of us on the left who have been actively opposing her efforts to flush a “new” Democratic Party into the old Republican sewer.

KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION…IT’S OK TA BE MAD AS HELL!!

Wasn’t MoveOn created during the Lewinsky stuff to get us all to like…move on? She owed them big. And she let them down equally big. Who knew that would happen?

Tell the media they suck
-slag

good grief – she’s a fundie !

Funny…today she is trying to say that “Obama can’t take the heat” and is a “complainer”. “He should quit…I never complain”.

Well, this tape shows she does a lot of “mighty whinging”. And I recall earlier her complaining about the Media being sexist, complaining that she always got the first question at debates, that delegates that she expected to show loyalty to her (and her husband) were being “disloyal”, the comaplaint that Obama was getting a “free ride”, the skit on SNL- which was essentially a whine about Obama’s “regal” treatment by the media. We knew that she was whining about things in Texas by Obama supporters being far more prepared and organized…only her legal teams were “organized”.

But now it seems that she was whining about how “activists” were making this a real Primary Campaign as far back as Super Tuesday.

But she’s trying to assert today that Obama is the whiner? This from Madame “Cookies and Right Wing Conspiracies”?

Karl Rove talking points? Hillary? Shocking..GOP lite.

Fast typer, you are!

Does this mean that what Hillary becomes queen, er I mean president, this site will be shut down?

This sounds a bit familiar . . . Oh yes, it’s what Jane said last September to Elizabeth Edwards (with emphasis added):

So here’s the rule. You never repeat right wing talking points to attack your own, ever. You never enter that echo chamber as a participant. Ever. You never give them a hammer to beat the left with. Just. Don’t. Do. It.

Jane, your clarity in standing up for progressive values is stellar. Because you stayed out of the pie fights, it left you clear to criticize all participants in the Democratic primary process.

Thank you.

Actually the thing that irritated most recently about Clinton is a report I heard on the NewsHour where she used wrt Obama’s remarkd about the unfairness of the ABC debate the Harry Truman quote, “If you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.” It ignores the fact that Stephanopoulos was a top level staffer in Bill’s Administration. Yet despite this conflict of interest, he was one of the two moderators. Beyond that both Stephanopoulos and Gibson seemed to compete with each other in who could repeat the most Republican talking points and who could avoid the longest asking a substantive question. Clinton should have been as critical of the moderator bias in that debate as anyone. Instead she used it to take a cheap shot at Obama. What we are seeing with Clinton is someone who is committed to a scorched earth policy with regard to the nomination. If she can’t have it, she wants to do as much as possible to see whoever does, in this case Obama, doesn’t win in November.

Great minds run in the same channels.

;-)

I had the strangest idea yesterday, and want someone to seriously disabuse me of the notion of a McCainClinton ticket

here’s my incomplete transcript, based on (and with corrections to) the quotes from huffpo.

hoping others will give the audio a very close listen and correct/complete this. thanks.

……..

[Mod: see update in comment below at 5:18.]

i think there are two bits that may or may not be separated in time:

…what happened is, um, that all during january he had a huge advantage on the internet. and a couple of good ….???…. that …???.. by the Moveon dot org endorsing him — which is like a gusher of money that never seems to slow down…

…We have been less successful in caucuses because it brings out the activist base of the Democratic Party. MoveOn dot org didn’t even want us to go into Afghanistan. I mean, that’s what we’re dealing with. And you know they turn out in great numbers. And, you know, they are very driven by their view of our positions, and it’s primarily national security and foreign policy that drives them. I don’t agree with them. They know I don’t agree with them. So they flood into these caucuses and dominate them and really intimidate people who actually show up to support me…

Jane,
I signed up here to say to you that I’m sorry that I posted your story at DU before knowing it was going to be taken down. As a fellow “true” democrat who meant no harm but saw the significance in your thread. I think Hillary Clinton has now just lost the election. I believe this is an historic moment we are witnessing tonight.
SFJ

i want to know who are the warmongers in the dem party she was pandering to.

As someone who has supported every liberal agenda for over forty years, Clinton’s remarks were like slap in the face. Things said in closed door meetings and fund raisers, remarks about ignorant Southerner’s who didn’t support Bill in ‘94, give me the creeps. This is a Democrat saying this?

A massive retaliation against Iran if they struck Israel is something that I don’t think even the dumbass that’s occupies the White house would utter.

She would now be contending for the Presidency if Obama hadn’t entered the race and our choices would be limited to an eternal presence in Iraq or a candidate who promises massive retaliations to secure the pro-Israel vote.

“Moveon.org endorsed [Sen. Barack Obama] — which is like a gusher of money that never seems to slow down,” Clinton said to a meeting of donors. “We have been less successful in caucuses because it brings out the activist base of the Democratic Party. MoveOn didn’t even want us to go into Afghanistan. I mean, that’s what we’re dealing with. And you know they turn out in great numbers. And they are very driven by their view of our positions, and it’s primarily national security and foreign policy that drives them. I don’t agree with them. They know I don’t agree with them. So they flood into these caucuses and dominate them and really intimidate people who actually show up to support me.”

Somebody is whining and bitter. I did not know MoveOn was a gusher.

As some commentator said yesterday….there are hundreds of hidden mines regarding HC…most held by the GOP from the 90’s. So be it. However, this crap coming after super tuesday…she does not whine? she does not take repug talking points as her own? she does not lie? I’m over her and Bill and Chelsea….buhbye….

Obama has, barring some disastrous error, already won the nomination. Senator Clinton is becoming increasingly destructive, trying to provoke him into a disastrous error. It’s time for the superdelegates to end this thing before she flames out.

In regards to question, What does Obama do?
He makes you believe that you can make a difference. He talks and you listen and your heart begins to feel lighter and bigger in your chest. It really feels like some kind of spiritual experience. He doesn’t say “I”, he says “We” when he talks about working hard. He doesn’t say easy, he says difficult, but somehow you want to work hard and even make sacrifices–but the sacrifices aren’t for him. They’re for the better things that both you and he are working for. I know he’s famous and hopefully about to be president, but it feels like a real and equal partnership. He tells you that he wants you to believe not just in the change he can effect, but in the change we all can effect if we stand together. He made us believe in ourselves and it felt good. So many of us have felt helpless about government for so long and now he’s shown us how to do something about it and we’ve gone after it big time. We feel empowered and strong. He says we’re the people we’ve been waiting for and we seem to be proving that’s true. We like him a lot, but we love ourselves when we act on the things he showed us about grass roots organization. Come join us. It is an amazing experience in patriotism. You seemed to ask an honest question and I took the time to answer from my heart and from my experience. I hope it answered your question. Blessings.

I believe this is an historic moment we are witnessing tonight.

i agree.

that’s one reason for trying to get it as correct as possible.

1,816 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

Citizen Mrs.K8 and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:

Oh how great to hear your measured voice of reason, Sister K8 but remember that Mrs. McClinton couldn’t have fired Mark Penn if she wanned to, ‘cuz he is the campaign monitor for the corporate fascists who have subsidized her political career.

KEEP THE FAITH AND EVERYTHING WILL BE REVEALED…EVEN IF IT’S AS UGLY AS HELL!!

Well done. There’s nothing like speaking from the heart.

It really feels like some kind of spiritual experience

this is where you really loose me.

thanks for the transcript

yeah, it would be nice to know just who she was talking to. Must not have been grassroots folks. This was a fundraiser though, right? Was this when she had to assuage her backers’ worry that she was down for the count?

… What we are seeing with Clinton is someone who is committed to a scorched earth policy with regard to the nomination. If she can’t have it, she wants to do as much as possible to see whoever does, in this case Obama, doesn’t win in November. …

I was thinking along the same lines awhile ago

Ronald Reagan also spoke very well. He had a lot of pretty ways of saying things…

gah, i feel hungry every time i hear that name.

1,816 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

Citizen karela:

Oh my that was the most beautiful description of Obama’s campaign that I have ever heard…I’m printin it off and I’m gunna show it to my kids, who are all Obama folks but are worried about the corporate power he is facin’ and the armies of hate they have mobilized.

Gosh I wish I could write like that…now pray for him (if you believe in that stuff) ‘cuz it’s gunna get real dangerous for ‘im in the next couple a months.

KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION…NOW WE THAT GOT A LEADER WE GOTTA GET HIS BACK!!

Back in December 1998, the call went out on the Internet to gather around the Veteran’s Building on Wilshire Blvd for a demonstration against the House Impeachment Vote. I was there, carried a sign, got sunburned, along with thousands of other people.

I have no idea the name of the organization that did that, but I have a suspicion it was MoveOn or its precursor.

A lot of us stood up for the Clintons. MoveOn stood up for the clintons. That’s how it got its name. AND WE ALL GOT FUCKIN’ SISTA-SOLJAed TODAY.

THANKS A FUCKIN’ LOT FOR NOTHING, HILL AND BILL. Next time, clean up your own spooge.

it is actions that speak the loudest to my ear.

Yes, sadly, I think you are right about that, Norske, dear heart.

And you are quite right in it being ugly as hell.

(hope you and your family are well — I can’t stay online long right now, but it was so very good to see you again! Thank you so much for your freedom-fightin’ ways!)

‘cuz it’s gunna get real dangerous for ‘im in the next couple a months.

if it looks like he may beat mcsame, i think you are right.

Exactly. Pretty words do not equal pretty actions…

my question was actually directed at Selise wanting to know who/ the context of her words and I was asking why, to which I was answered in #101.

I’m not at all worried about Obama in fact this isn’t about Obama for me, this is about the party. I hate to see dems tearing at each other, this is what the repugs do.

But your words are true and thanks for sharing them (BTW, I’m already a supporter…third time is the charm)

wow.

well, i’ve been fence sitting… not being very excited by either candidate. but i do think i was just pushed off the fence.

The very idea makes my heart hurt. Please don’t let our country be as crazy as it sometimes seems.

I got it exactly right

I’m not crazy about Hillary’s statments, either, but this “she’ll say anything” crap is a right wing talking point in itself. Look in the mirror, those of you who are upset about how she is using GOP tactics against Obama. This is all just such garbage. Why on earth should Clinton defend MoveOn (of which, btw, I am a member)? They choose NOW, after Obama gets some nasty (trashy, inappropriate, etc.) questions, to act indignant over the decline of journalistic standards in the debates?! NOW?!?! Where the hell were they when it was “gang up on Hillary” time? (Crickets) They have endorsed her opponent and taken occasional pot-shots at her. They complain about the media NOW, finally, and she’s supposed to be all warm and gooey toward them? I am amazed at the GOP-style hypocrisy that so many in Left Blogistan are evincing here. It just makes me so sad. We have two great candidates, and yet half the party is condemned by loudmouths on the internet. Nice.

1968 did happen. i don’t think we’re all that different now.

if obama challenges the status quo… but we shall see, that may not happen, although i think it is more likely to happen now.

doesn’t feel good to get pushed, does it?

Do I detect a note of disappointment or, dare I say, betrayal, Sister Jane? I am not gloating here but are you surprised?

I hope we have now heard the last of the accusations of misogyny and sexism against those of us on the left who have been actively opposing her efforts to flush a “new” Democratic Party into the old Republican sewer.

I’m surprised Jane held out this long. I thought the “Me & McCain are ready to be POTUS, and he’s not” crap would’ve done it for her.

i have my own problems with moveon. but they and your complaints were not what clinton was complaining about moveon.

think about the content of her complaints and what that means.

no, you’re right. pulled is better.

but that, i don’t think, is on offer.

In case y’all haven’t seen this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yel8IjOAdSc

It’s the Obama-Jay Z thing.

I’m not young anymore, but this stuff keeps me optimistic.

This isn’t about Obama, this is about a democrat using false repug talking points to go after (discredit) another group of deomocrats in the eyes of yet another group of dems. that is not okay, never has been, never will. Repugs do that and we expect it from them, but we don’t expect to get shot at in our own camp.

No, I like to find my own way. Moreover, of all the things to get worked up over, this would be pretty far down my list.

You’re off base in many ways.

We have defended Hillary Clinton whenever bias reared its ugly head, and have tried to make the campaign about issues.

Only after her campaign imploded, and she became desperate and scorched earth did she start to get push back.

If the roles were reversed we’d be calling out Obama.

Defend her if you must, but she has been despicable time and again over the past 6 weeks.

What is your take?

In some ways we are worse than 1968. We have regressed to the howling mob on the right constantly yelling against just plain people. I wonder where next?

No, it isn’t

Like I’ve said before, there is NO difference between Clinton and McCain/Bush when it comes to foreign policy or wars.

NONE.

…what happened is, um, that all during january he had a huge advantage on the internet. and a couple of good breaks by the Moveon dot org, ya know, endorsing him — which is like a gusher of money that never seems to slow down…

this is one of our candidates trashing her own party’s base.

I’m not worked up at all, just disappointed.

Moveon is not the party’s base. It is a part of the party, but mot the base.

god I wish he’d find a way to win in PA next week. Then it would have to be over.

i know and it grieves me that this is what has happened to our party. if someone wants to come along and explain that there is not a fracture in the party, I’d be more than happy to entertain your argument

complaints re moveon: top-down anti-democratic, too tied to the party, and especially this (read my comments in that thread, sorry – there’s a lot of them)

Oh Lookee…John McCain is SOOOO! Middle Class

McCain’s campaign also released his 2006 individual tax returns. For 2006, he reported paying $72,771 on taxable income of $215,304. He also reported charitable gifts of $64,695.

Remember that George Megalopagus and Charles d’Gibson were working so hard to make those single-filers that made “under $250,000″ as the struggling Middle Class.

Looks like McCain really is just an average Joe…with a wife that has $100 million dollars. Of course, he refused to reveal HER tax returns.

He had to “protect the children”….Hmmm!

From what? The “inheritance tax”?

When did it become a bad thing to be a party activist?

excellent! thank you!

any more corrections? additions?

newt – will you post the whole thing again, but with your corrections? … as a reference / resource for folks?

I am amazed at the GOP-style hypocrisy that so many in Left Blogistan are evincing here. It just makes me so sad. We have two great candidates, and yet half the party is condemned by loudmouths on the internet.

I am sorry. I am a loudmouth. I did flood into our caucus, and dominated and intimidated the Hillary people. My only excuse is I worry she will start a preemptive war with Iran. (Or Lebanon, Syria, Venezuela, Somalia, Oh wait Somalia may not have Oil.)

part of the base, imo.

When did it become a bad thing to be a party activist?

only when the activist attempts to hold the leadership accountable.

Move-On is certainly a large part of the base. They put up a petition to condemn ABC for the debate asking for 100,000 signatures and got over 200,000 in 24 hours. That’s power and I like it.

The misogyny and sexism of many of Hillary Clinton’s critics continues unabated — in fact it has escalated, and it still has no place on this blog.

And I still endorse no one.

That is my opinion too. Part of tbe base, but not ‘the’ base. Of course, unlike most here, I believe the DLC is part of ‘the’ base.

agreed. I’m trying my hardest to wrap my head around what would drive her to say this to a bunch of dems…

That is an easy question to answer. They are supporting her opponent and opposing her.

Some of us aren’t engaging, jane. Trying to understand or something to that effect.

sorry,his wife is SOLE HEIR to a company that makes 300 million per year,shes worth AT LEAST a billion if not 2

Agreed. Just a much smaller part of the base than in the Clinton era.

*sigh* no, why did she use a repug talking point (an untrue one at that)

Interesting point about Stephanopolis…especially given what Carville said about expecting loyalty from those who benefitted from serving for Bill Clinton.

“I believe that loyalty is a cardinal virtue. Nowhere in the world is loyalty so little revered and tittle-tattle so greatly venerated as in Washington. I was a little-known political consultant until Bill Clinton made me. When he came upon hard times, I felt it my duty — whatever my personal misgivings — to stick by him. At the very least, I would have stayed silent. And maybe that’s my problem with what Bill Richardson did. Silence on his part would have spoken loudly enough.”

So perhaps Stephanopolis also has a sense of loyalty towards Hillary Clinton (he was deceived by Bill, not Hillary, over the Lewinsky scandal). I haven’t heard a peep from Carville decrying GS’s misbehavior or comments or disloyalty. I wonder why?

1,816 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

Citizen Oldgold:

Sorry old buddy, but MoveOn IS the Democratic base and, in fact, this is the first time that the base of the Democratic Party has had the resources, thanks be to the internet, to challenge the choice of the corporate establishment of the party.

Get over it Oldgold…have a smoke, tip back a glass, put yer feet up and dream about the bad old days.

KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION WE JEST WENT TO THE NEXT LEVEL!!

KO is talking about it

Some Dems always seem hopeful that they will get at least a few Repub votes if they pander enough. Won’t happen now or ever. Hillary won’t get their votes and now she has removed a lot of Dems who might have voted for her. It might as well be called knee-capping yourself.

You are assuming that ‘talking point’ is false. I am not so sure about that. My research, admittedly quick and shallow, has so far yielded an ambiguous amswer as to Moveon’s position on the Afghanistan war.

Jane – do you think that some/many anti-Hillary comments here have been sexist? I’ve seen a lot of vehement opposition to her tactics and triangulation, but I haven’t seen anything (from regulars) that would approach misogyny. (Not saying that there hasn’t been from other quarters, btw)

Sure.
Selise’ updated transcript:

…what happened is, um, that all during january he had a huge advantage on the internet. and a couple of good breaks by the Moveon dot org, ya know, endorsing him — which is like a gusher of money that never seems to slow down…

…We have been less successful in caucuses because it brings out the activist base of the Democratic Party. MoveOn dot org didn’t even want us to go into Afghanistan. I mean, that’s what we’re dealing with. And you know they turn out in great numbers. And, you know, they are very driven by their view of our positions, and it’s primarily national security and foreign policy that drives them. I don’t agree with them. They know I don’t agree with them. So they flood into these caucuses and dominate them and really intimidate people who actually show up to support me…

No, the question is, do you want to vote for Clinton?

You know, it’s really easy to call this nomination a pie fight when you sit up in your tower of non-partisan objectivity. The endless equivocation makes me sick. When one Democrat is being called unelectable, you sorta have to pick sides. When one candidate is hellbent on tearing the other down, you have to make a choice. Given your silence thus far, this sudden fake outrage of yours is not convincing at all.

The misogyny and sexism of many of Hillary Clinton’s critics continues unabated — in fact it has escalated

jane, i really wish you could be specific when you make this criticism. i’m not arguing that you are wrong, but as one of senator clinton’s long time critics, i can’t help but wonder each time the criticism is directed at no one and everyone, if it’s directed at me too. i suspect i’m not the only one who feels the sting.

and it would help to know what kinds of things you see as sexist. for one thing, i could avoid them. and two, i could learn from your perspective.

i can’t claim to have never uttered a sexist remark, and if i do, i want to be called on it. but it really sucks to have to take every general statement wrt the sexism of senator clinton’s critics as cause for another heart-to-heart with myself.

Well, if you are right and Moveon is ‘the’ base, we are in deep electoral trouble.
I think the base is much more diverse than you apparently do and that the center of the base is to the right of Moveon.

thank you newt! i suspect that passions will run high on this one, so we might as well do everything we can to make sure we have the details as right as we can get them.

very much appreciate your careful attention to detail.

1,816 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

Citizen Oldgold:

“…unlike most here, I believe the DLC is part of ‘the base’…”

Oh my…come on inta the 21st century Oldgold, where have ya been fer the last 12 years. Jest compare the membership of MoveOn to the membership of the DLC and then tell me about which comprises “the base”. The Democratic Party can win in November WITHOUT the DLC but the Democrats lose without MoveOn. Game …set…MATCH!!!

KEEP THA FAITH AND GOOD RIDDENCE TO ‘EM!!

i suspect the center of the country is to the left of moveon.

but i’ve been full of shit before.

I agree that misogyny and sexism have been directed, nay heaped, on Senator Clinton. But that doesn’t make her a better candidate.

actually it was debunked years ago when Rove tried to claim the same thing

No, to win we need every damn Democrat we can round-up.
But, I enjoy your flaming, so let her rip with all the ammo you have!

thanks for the youtube. that was very well done.

No problem!
Headphones and .aif files help.
And I skipped a few “ah’s” and “um’s”, but the above is as close as I can make it.

Surely, Mrs. Clinton, with all the large bull’s eyes painted on GOP crime and corruption scandals, you could find a more worthy target for your wit and ire.

No, it really wasn’t. The hard thing to sort out, is Moveon’s position as opposed to Moveon’s leadership’s position. Like I said earlier, I need to spend more time to get this straight.

Citizen Oldgold:

MoveOn represents the millions of regular folks who have been triangulated, marginalized, intimidated and jest plain ignored by the Democratic Party establishment for over 30 years…why the fuck do ya think that voting participation has been goin down for 50 years while Democrats have been losin elections to an organized MINORITY party??!! Wake up and smell the coffee old man…there’s a new posse in town!

KEEP THE FAITH AND REMEMBER WE KEN WIN WITHOUT ‘EM!!

you rock!

as per usual!

And I still endorse no one.

You will, my friend.

You will.

And we’ll welcome you with open arms!

I am wide awake. I disagree with most of your comments, but I enjoy reading your opinion. You never fail to entertain. So, keep on flaming and pass the lutefisk and lefsa.

they have opposed the iraq war and not the afghan war but feel free to research

they have opposed the iraq war

but they were late to do so, and never would hold the D congress accountable for funding it.

Hillary has forgotten something rather important.

In 2004, Eli Pariser rightly said, “We bought it, we own it, and we’re taking it back.”

We, THE PEOPLE, have taken back our party, and Hillary has forgotten that we hold the pink slip on it, not the Clinton dynasty, not the DLC, not the machine-politics-as-usual.

We, THE PEOPLE, are MoveOn and Democracy For America, and ActBlue, and many more progressive organizations, who are the real heart and soul and now the real pocketbook/wallet of the party, the same ones who sat Howard Dean and his 50-State Strategy and not the Clinton’s useless gopher, Terry MacAuliffe.

And we, THE PEOPLE, haven’t forgotten who voted for the Iraq War authorization, where Bin Laden wasn’t. Redirection may work with infants and toddlers, but trying it on voters is a sign of utter disrespect; pointing at Afghanistan, where Bin Laden actually was, is only another failed effort to disrespectfully redirect our attention from her vote on Iraq and her persistent inability to own up to that failure.

Nor have we, THE PEOPLE, forgotten the very little to nothing that the Clintons did while in office and afterwards to build the grassroots of the party. They didn’t walk the walk with us; they didn’t believe they needed to. They honestly thought they had it in the bag, and their actions prove it more than words ever could — although these last words from Hillary only confirm this.

She never wanted my vote; she was more worried about the donors with big money because she figured she could buy the votes she needed, and she figures that bad-mouthing my kind will increase their donations.

In spite of the uselessness and futility of the gesture of voting tomorrow in a district convention in Michigan for delegates to represent us, I will cheerfully vote to send known Obama supporters as “Uncommitted” delegates. Because it’s still my party and I’ve worked for it and I own it, too.

okay
well I’m anti any war but oldgold doesn’t necessaroly believe that the repug talking point was false

That does it. If HRC manages to swing a back-room deal and is the nominee, I’m not voting this year. Fuck her and the horse she rode in on. She’s a fucking republican anyway, I don’t care what letter a bunch of morons put5 next to her name on a newspaper page or a TV graphic. She should be McCain’s running mate.

We are really getting some outstanding comments and some beautiful prose. Thanks to all who have commented so eloquently – it’s a treat.

Apply the same standards to Hillary’s comments about activist support of Obama as you do to Obama’s remarks about the lack of support of people from small towns in Pennsylvania.

Candidates misspeak on the campaign trail. And they say not nice things about people or groups that don’t support them. Is there anything new here?

What I don’t get is why Moveon would support someone who thinks G.H.W. Bush’s foreign policy was a wise one.

((( Rayne )))

At first, I thought this story was fake, until I saw a link to Jane’s post.

Fact! Thank you, Rayne.

they can both be true – not nearly antiwar enough for me, and way too antiwar for the Rs.

I’ve seen a lot of vehement opposition to her tactics and triangulation, but I haven’t seen anything (from regulars) that would approach misogyny.

My point as well.

It’s not about Obama, really. it’s the use of a false talking point to alienate a section of the party. If he said it, it would be equally disturbing.

Ditto, Petrocelli! Nice to see you!

Twain – thanks. I’ve put in one helluva lot of hours, shoe leather, sweat and tears into taking back this country, into rebuilding the Democratic Party in my own corner of the world.

And getting this slap in the face from the woman who would be my nominee?

Call me a crappy Christian, it won’t be the first time — but I don’t turn the other cheek. Watch out for my right upper cut.

((( Wobbly )))

FDL 101, Rule 7 … ;-)

We are anonymous

All your base r belong to us

jane, i really wish you could be specific when you make this criticism. i’m not arguing that you are wrong, but as one of senator clinton’s long time critics, i can’t help but wonder each time the criticism is directed at no one and everyone, if it’s directed at me too. i suspect i’m not the only one who feels the sting.

Selise, as Michael Jackson sings, “You are not alone…I am here with you…”

You have my respect and support, though I’m north of the border … this is about empowering the people as the surest way of realizing our greatest potential as people in a Global Village.

I still think it’s a battle between machine Dems and grassroots Dems. Move On being more of the grassroots persuasion, but still inclusive. This is so disappointing.

Yep. She’s been vetted and she can take a punch AND I believe her baggage is more like a clown car.

Actually, she simply thought she wouldn’t get caught.

Since Move On was born out of a desire to defend her husband from impeachment fever, what she did is just make the Clinton Scandal Era relevant to the political conversation.

I don’t have all the specifics but there have been many folks who have repeated many of the smears of the ’90s used against her.

About how she’s so intent on power she’ll say or do anything up to murder.
About how she’s so cold and heartless and nothing she ever says can be taken at face value.

Basically any slur that can be (and was) made up against HRC in the ’90s HAS been repeated by folks seriously here over the last six months. By people who would not usually be thought of as doing such a thing.

But it has been accepted because it was HRC they were talking about and folks do seem to accept that the worst of the worst statements about her are the truth.

Yes, it is just such a battle. And it is for the soul of the Democratic Party, and for a democracy that’s based on participation and equality, not on money and access.

I fear what could happen if the populist grassroots do not win.

We really need to find out what group she was speaking to.

There are a lot of folks in between Moveon and the DLC types.

She never wanted my vote; she was more worried about the donors with big money

Which makes her campaign’s whining about being outspent laughable.

1,816 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…

Citizen selise:

Thank you for your, measured and well reasoned response to Jane’s concern over all the McClinton misogyny. I have been tryin’ ta get a response to from ‘er about this for a long time. There is no question that there is (and has been for a long time) a lot of crazy sexism motivating many in opposition to McClinton but most a that comes from folks who would NEVER vote Democratic anywayz and represent the very folks from whom she seems ta be competing for votes!

I feel the same way you do, dear, and I know I am sexist jest as I am racist by virtue of my gender, race and middleclass socialization. Sexism like racism has to be fought every day but I make that effort and will not have my politics or opinions marginalized and “caged” by the accusation of either.

Thanx, Citizen selise, you said it beautifully!

KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION BUT AIM CAREFULLY, WE CAN’T AFFORD ANY FRIENDLY CASUALTIES!!

About how she’s so intent on power she’ll say or do anything up to murder.

any congress critter who voted for the war out of political calculation is guilty of this, imo. including my senator kerry who visited the lake today.

MSNBC Abrams is covering Gusher-gate.

Wake up, Jane. This isn’t about you or me or anyone else. It’s all about Hillary, and she’ll do anything to get it.

Remember, she sat down with Richard Mellon Scaife, who led the impeachment cheerleaders, and now she’s trashed MoveOn, and organization which was started to defend her husband. If that doesn’t show how craven she is, nothing will.

man i’m late to this post!! i’m a moveon member and we were polled as to our choice to support for the nom…. obama came out ahead according to poll results – as i said i’m late here maybe its been mentioned…… and didnt moveon begin as a semi-supporter of bill clinton? thats right dlc dems – keep throwing ammo to the repugs…………. we are kicking our own collective ass….. imo

I know I am sexist jest as I am racist by virtue of my …. socialization. Sexism like racism has to be fought every day

amen citizen norske, and the way we do that, imo, is to try to take all accusations seriously and without defensiveness. but it can get exhausting when the accusations are frequent.

Oh, and another thing Jane – of all people, I would think you would be able to spot a Liebercrat in the making.

I agree. Once in a while MoveOn has been too quick to “jump on” to an issue that I thought we should let pass. But how do you pick and choose your “issues” these days?! I am a member, and for the most part I think that they are doing a great job. Don’t diss your base, babe! . . . Oh, shoot, she just thinks that on the extremely slim chance that she gets the nomination this will help her in the general.

I’m tired of this old-style manipulative politics. I don’t know how many times in the last few years I’ve asked myself, “Who is that man behind the curtain?”

I’m not naive; I know she’s been unfairly attacked, and that’s wrong.

But since Jane and others laid down the law about that weeks ago (and deservedly so) most of the heat she’s taken around here has been in response to statements and decisions made in her campaign, which are fair game.

Any comments I offer about Sen. Clinton has to do with the issues.

Not her hairstyle. Not her clothes.

The issues. And I get tired of getting lumped in with idiots with a different agenda every time I criticize something she does.

hmmm I forgot?

In a word, you’re indulgining in revisionist history.

Move On was started to critique and pushback on media coverage and the impeachment debacle.

They’ve been criticizing unfair media for a long time. Hillary has benefited from their (our) doing so. Then when she needed a scapegoat, they were conveniently at hand.

Two words (for me): “Sniper Fire”

My tipping point.

moveon did motivate a lot of things, in the beginning, but i don’t like some of their recent language in my emails and i don’t like some of their tactics.

so, they may have started out as something good but they seem to have gravitated to the fad of wanting to incite and provoke, be on the cutting edge just to say they are, and to me that isn’t a base for anything lasting.

so, they don’t get money from me until they go back to being constructive instead of destructive.

there’s a saying-’riding on a memory’ i think that is what they are doing.

hit submit too soon—

to my 222-

just as ed schultz has turned into rush with red hair…

our potential leaders have turned into charlatans…….

past heroics don’t erase current flaws.

I have now turned from a Hill supporter to a non supporter and have informed her of the same. I am beyond disgusted

Yeah.

My wife and I both worked for Kerry via MoveOn PAC, but we recently also had to request they remove us from their mailing list.

Honestly, I don’t believe it matters.

There are going to be people who disagree within the party. They’re not the issue.

Hillary’s failure in terms of leadership-in her campaign and her personal conduct under (you’ll pardon the metaphor) fire is the issue.

I don’t care who she was talking to.

I’m willing to cut both of them some slack when they say nasty and even untrue things about people who aren’t supporting them. They are after all both human. It does seem much easier for the crowd to get on their high horses about what she says and to forgive, or reinterpret in a kinder light, what he says.

And other than some perceptions about who represents the “establishment”, I don’t see much difference between the two.

the issue for me isn’t as much as she was lying about moveon, it was what she was using to dis them – trying to prove that she is a warmonger? that is what pushes me off the fence.

don’t know if obama will be any better – and could be worse. but at some point we need to have some accountability for all the death and destruction.

I keep getting the impression that someone convinced Clinton that all she had to do was become a candidate and she was sure to win.
Now she has real opposition, and she’s complaining loudly about all of us not rushing to make her President the way she believes she should be. (It sounds a lot like ‘if you don’t play by my rules, I’ll take my toys and go home’. Small children do this, and so does Bush. She should be past it.)

Someone needs to explain to her that she isn’t the one who decides the winner, it’s all of us, including the people she’s just insulted, and that there’s no guarantee that the early leader will win.

Snark: If being first lady counted as experience, Eleanor Roosevelt would have been president instead of Truman. After all, she was first lady for three terms.

Of course, unlike most here, I believe the DLC is part of ‘the’ base.

Holy hell. What a ridiculous statement. The DLC doesn’t have a freakin’ constituency. There are no Democrats marching in the streets demanding closer lobbying ties to big business.

The things people say….

Isn’t it also fair to say that certain people, who keep showing up with nonsensical, irrational objections to Obama are perhaps hiding a hatred of African Americans?

Was out and about (suburbs of Pittsburgh) about an hour or so ago.

Came up behind a big red Chevy pick-up which had lettered across the tailgate: “I’m not bitter I’m better.”

‘Hmm’,I thought to myself, ‘I wonder who that person supports?’

My first thought was, ‘McCain?’

‘Those’ people really believe they are ‘better’, right?

Imagine my surprise …

Well, I was in a Hillary ‘neighborhood’ …

But what does it mean?

Maybe they are feeling ‘better’ than they were? (everybody, with certain exceptions, !@#$%^&*, deserves to feel ‘better’, although we’re probably all going to be feeling un-’better’ soon …)

If anyone has a clue,

please come to my rescue …

I would like to see certain HRC supporters um … behave a little better.
(So … I hope that is what it means, ‘better behaved’ base. Maybe Obama and Clinton supporters could vie to see who might behave the ‘best’?)

Or maybe they are above bitterness (I certainly hope so)

WTF? What progressive group will Clinton’s campaign attack next? Clinton’s campaign is doing exactly what her husband did in his last 3 years in office – destroying and weakening the Democratic Party.

I guess Napoleon’s motto is theirs too: “apres moi le deluge”, which loosely translates to after I gone who cares if things fall apart.

McCain to Lieberman to fat chance. First of all, why does she even think MoveOn is even a blip in the general zeitgeist?

Feminism is to Hillary what “the troops” are to Bush.

There are many people around the world who really do hate US soldiers and who want to see the USA fail. And there are many people who really do hate women and want to see any woman politician fail.

Jane, please. You’ve got to learn your place. You’re an ”activist,” which is below a ”concerned citizen who writes pesky letters” and quite a bit below a clueless voter who can be swayed by smear ads.

Don’t get above yourself, dear.

jane, do you not know that moveon endorsed obama back in feb?

maybe somebody has already told you but i’m here late and don’t have time to read through it all.

i quit them the same day, disappointed they chose sides. why should she uphold them when they work against her?
duh.

Coming in very late but gotta say … I am disappointed in the diss of MoveOn but even more concerned by the language of Senator Clinton criticizing citizens for showing up and voting! and her clear statement there that she does not agree with MoveOn’s approach to foreign policy. Since MoveOn is in the moderate range on foreign policy, this is quite something.

*dingdingding* winner!

Hillary’s been playing the feminists for suckers, IMO.

I left MoveOn when they chose sides.

Hillary has been under attack from every direction from the start. Punch drunk Democrats with Kool-aid moustaches have wailed viperous nonsense incessantly. Obama surrogates and supporters bite at her ankles and the second she kicks one away she suddenly morphs into Roves evil twin sister.

People have once again managed to make exactly the wrong choice. Obama will get zero done even if given the chance. There is no there, there. He’ll take notes and bad advice for two years as his administration grinds to halt because he hasn’t a clue where all the battlegrounds are. Then he’ll run for re-election for two years. Not a single worthwhile policy goal will be met. No chance. Plain as day.

That’s what hope will get ya. A big, fat, nothin’. Idiots elected GWB and fools will elect our next President. Hillary was never inevitable, or entitled. Thats what others made her out to be. She was and still is simply the best choice we have in front of us, regardless of hurt little feelings.

Hillary has been under attack from every direction from the start. Punch drunk Democrats with Kool-aid moustaches have wailed viperous nonsense incessantly.

AUMF – yes (please see the discussion with Code Pink to understand)
Brought Dick Morris into the White House
Flag Amendment – yes
Leadership of the DLC – always
Decided putting Mark Penn on TV was a good idea

Judgement, integrity, political astuteness. The whole package.

The invective flung, hurled, shoveled and heaved at the candidates is, truly, unfortunate.

It can be argued as to whom has gotten the ‘worst’.

Those responsible should be ashamed … they won’t be, but they should be…

However, the invective traded between us, here, is a jack-ass of a different color.

By what possible reasoning, through what myopic lens, is it considered ‘reasonable’ or justified to belittle or insult ANYONE else, simply because they have the temerity to see things differently?

By what reasonable facility may we presume to call others ’stupid’ or ‘foolish’ or ‘cultish’ or ‘delusional’?

We may lament that we consider others to have failed to see the ‘light’, we might even consider others to be obtuse. Of course the stakes are ‘high’, they have never been ‘higher’ …

So it makes perfect sense, then, as our nation bombs another people into hell, to seriously engage in insulting, assaulting, and casting aspersion upon each other.

I know, I just don’t get ‘it’.

Frankly, I think selise and Norske have just about summed up the position a thoughtful, honest, and compassionate person ought to take.

Such people realize that they are not above error, and if err they must, let it be on the side of caution regarding the humanity of others and and on the side of understanding, regarding most everything else …

I’m sorry, you and a whole lotta others think that all of it adds up to something significant. I don’t share that view. Sure, its something to discuss and titter about over coffee and the morinin rag.

But the simple fact is it all has very little if anything to do with making Barack Obama the wiser choice. The job is front of us, not behind us. It ain’t 2000 or even 2004 anymore. 2009 and beyond will quickly dispatch any turgid importance bemoaned so loudly today.

I don’t like everything about Hillary either. And I don’t especially dislike Obama. Hell, we’re so far in the bag it might not matter one whit who the next President is when it comes down to it. The only one left with any chance at all is Hillary, like it or not.

Well, anyhow, we’ll see, won’t we?

Hillary was never inevitable, or entitled.

I believe her quote was “The race will be over by Feb. 5th.”

Now she was right, for all intents and purposes it was over.

Both candidates are pandering to the militarists. What was Obama talking about when he praised the foreign policy of GHWBush?

He was contrasting the multi-lateral and cautious approach to Junior’s adventurism, obviously. Hate to break it to you, but there were only two candidates who dissented seriously from US supremacy as a foreign policy: one was kucinich who got about 20 votes, and the other was running in the republican primary and is a wacko bircher.

it’s been a mystifying constant through this race that people like you have clung to the delusion that Obama’s support is made up of naive lightweights. As if people like you are not just right, but far smarter and more politically astute than Jesse Jackson Jr., Barbara Lee, Cornell West, and Pat Murphy, far more serious than the SEIU and the Teamsters, and vastly superior analysts of rhetoric than Lakoff and Barabara Ehrenreich. It’s not that you disagree with us all, but that you disagree in such a manner that makes your entire approach suspect.

Hillary for 2012!

Spot on… doubt there will be much of a country left to lead after four years of McCain, but that doesn’t seem to concern her much.

MoveOn is fauxgressive.

I know a lot of what he believes. He’s written a lot. Given speeches and most importantly he has a record that, though not lengthy, shows what his priorities were in the State Senate : ethics reform, death penalty reform including videtaping of confessions, bulk purchasing of drugs to make them cheaper for citizens and some environmental concerns plus pro-choice and in the US Senate: ethics reform, securing nukes/weapons in former Soviet republics, environmental work on mercury levels, address avian flu; very deep understand of the constitution and our country’s history, I could go on. I’d be surprised hazmat if you really care for an answer to your allegation.

Some thoughts.

Notwithstanding the Bush Administration’s intrinsic incompetence, I believe attacking Afghanistan was the right decision. First, international law allows you to initiate an act of war where either: 1) the U.N. has authorized such measure; or 2) you’ve been attacked or an attack is “immanent.” In the case of Iraq, neither was true. EVEN IF Saddam had had WMD’s, there was no indication that an attack on America is immanent (nor would there be any if Iran simply acquired nuclear weapons, although my mind rebels at the thought), and, of course, Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. In the case of Afghanistan, however, both measures hold true. We had wide international support–evidenced by continued NATO participation–and it was Osama Bin Ladin’s home base at the time. These arguments go to the legality and not the wisdom of the Afghan war, but I think we can confidently acknowledge that the Taliban would not have routed out Bin Ladin absent the war.

As for Hillary, she has been taken to task relentlessly for her decision to give the President authorization to attack Iraq. This supposedly goes to her “judgment.” (In my view, she was simply maximizing the POTUS’s bargaining position at the time. Imagine if he’d tried to elicit concessions from Saddam if Saddam had known that force couldn’t be used. And the Senate had been given assurances that an attack would be forthcoming only as last resort. Her lack of judgment was in trusting Fearless Leader to keep his word.) I believe, in light of this, that MoveOn’s “judgment” can be called into question on their decision to oppose an attack in Afghanistan. (Ms. Hamsher’s stated position was slightly different, as she opposed the invasion of Afghanistan because she believed Bush is an incompetent boob.) All this is political, of course, because MoveOn has endorsed Obama, and, like much of the progressive internet community, has taken to attacking Clinton (often times unfairly, I might add.)

As for liberals attacking each other: WE MUST WALK A NARROW ROAD. One way to fall off the path is to engage in ad hominem attacks. Personal acrimony MUST be avoided at all costs. Some of the above comments, in effect, state that those not towing the ideological line should be ‘thrown out’–i.e. alienated to the point of non-participation–of the Democratic party, that victory in Novemeber will be achieved without them. Look at the polling data: at this point in time at least, the argument is just plain WRONG. The other way to fall off the path is to stifle all criticism, of our positions and our candidates–which would in my view, completely inconsistent with being a Democrat in the first place. As an attorney, I often have to take a view hostile to my client. When, for instance, I prep someone to testify, I subject him or her to harsh cross-examination questions in addition to my own, to prepare them to hold up under pressure. The metaphor I use to explain my behavior–and this is copyrighted folks–is that of a test pilot. A test pilot in flight subjects the plane to extremes of pressure, speed, and gravity. At the same time, the test pilot’s desire is never to break the aircraft apart: he needs it to hold together. Criticism, analysis, and disagreement are part and parcel to democratic values, not the antithesis of them.

boy Jane, talk about a can of worms!
In light of the magnitude of the problems that we’re faced with in trying to undo all the damage that’s been done to the US,the Iracis,and everybody else on this planet by this maladministration,we better stop all this petty bickering over issues that we can’t do anything about and try to bring things back into focus.
It seems to me that everything has been wrong from the gate.From the appointment of Bush on.It’s all been so well timed.Manufactured if you will.The nearly complete disintigration of this country.It was not by chance.
It’s going to take alot to put it back together again,if ever. I believe we can ,but somebodys got alot of explaining to do to do

Jane, I think that you were being overly dramatic with your closing line. Hillary has every right to state what she did after Move On picked sides early in the nominating process and actively worked against her. I see nothing wrong in what she had stated. Move On, which ironically was birthed during the Clinton impeachment travesty, lost sight and got carried away in their hubris, just like Markos Moulitsas and DKos have, in thinking that THEY are the democratic party. They are but one constituent, arguably an upper class, elitist and organizationally wealthy one, but they certainly don’t represent the majority of the party. And by their ham fisted actions, in a way similar to that of Code Pink, they are alienating other important groups that make up the party and potentially fracturing the alliance that will be needed to defeat the republicans in Fall. Emily’s List supports Hillary, but they have certainly not actively undermined Obama or the democratic party in the manner that Move On or DKos are doing.

Just to grab a couple of parts of your comment, wrt MoveOn (you know, the “elite”)…

They are but one constituent, arguably an upper class, elitist and organizationally wealthy one, but they certainly don’t represent the majority of the party.

The preposterousness of this statement is breathtaking. I can’t believe it didn’t come right off of a FAX from Gahd-knows-where.

Who do you think made MoveOn “rich,” as you call it? A large and vocal segment of the party (you know, the segment that Steny and Rahm and Nancy and Hillary and Bubba and the rest of the blatantly Republican-Lite DLC have no defense against).

Are you really so determined to deflect criticism of Senator Clinton that you are willing to give the Democratic Leadership Council a pass? Really?

The segment of our party that sees the Constitution shredded and sits on its hands, that sees the most heinous 1st Amendment rights violations in the history of the Republic, that sees the Nation dragged into war by blatant lies and fear mongering, that sees the Department of Justice converted into another arm of the “Unitary Executive” and replies, “Well, we’ll make it better in 2009?”

Who handed down the edict that any group, in any party, on behalf of any segment of that party, is obliged to make nice with the likes of people who defend the record that Senator Clinton is currently fronting to gain the White House?

To name a very few – AUMF, NAFTA, flag-burning, Iran, cozying up with Gingrich on health care and defense, being hosted by Rupert Murdoch in a fund raiser, and the sneering and condescending tactics employed to make the race between she and Senator Obama into a “If I can’t have it, neither can you…” brawl – are you kidding?

And just for the record – Neither Senator Obama or Senator Clinton are anywhere near the top of my list. I am equally suspicious of both.

The Senator needs to come correct. She wants the Left without having to BE Left, and and she wants to do it at a whisper. Now that she is denied that, she takes us over her knee. Despicable. Yep – Favorite tactic of the DLC (to borrow the phrase) – you never have to appear to move to the Right if you can smack the folks on the Left.

And by their ham fisted actions, in a way similar to that of Code Pink, they are alienating other important groups that make up the party and potentially fracturing the alliance that will be needed to defeat the republicans in Fall.

So, run to the middling middle, or you’ll wish you had? We’ve heard that before from the Republicans (and way too many Democrats) in the United States Senate.

No dice. Senator Clinton pays a price for this.

For those defending HRC, it wasn’t just MoveOn she was trashing, it was Dem activists in general.

If Obama had done this, would you be so forgiving?

Hillary wasn’t dissing MoveOn but rather Obama activists! who have used bullying and aggression in caucuses.
It’s a sad day that FDL has become like DKos – twisting all Clinton remarks to fit an agenda.
Very sad.

Absolutely SueN! And yet again – much drama over a Clinton remark – drama designed to rachet up the Hillary-hate begun by the Republicans.

And for what purpose? Surely it’s not to attract Hillary supporters to Obama’s campaign.
Heck! even Obama appears to want the primary to continue per his demeaning remarks about Hillary and “brushing her off.”

On Feb. 20 Obama began calling for Hillary to GET OUT.
And then came Wright, Ayers, Rezko, etc.
I understand Obama’s concern while more facts keep emerging.

In the meantime we’ve learned the Truth about Obama’s tale about the Kennedys bringing his father to America. It was a big fat LIE!
But – whatever it takes to get the Kennedy endorsement!
http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/3/30/13655/6958

But Obama’s lies on video never air on TV.
Hillary embellished her Bosnia trip but there was some truth to it since AP reports indicate snipers had been reported earlier.
But Obama’s tale about his father and the Kennedys – NO TRUTH at all!!

Is this thread about Obama, or about HRC? It was HRC who badmouthed one of the key activist organizations, the one that actually defended her own spouse and has stood behind Dems who are living up to their Democratic values. It’s not the first time her campaign has been disrespectful of the Democratic (big D) and democratic (little d) values we share; her lack of a ground game until well after February made it clear she thought this was going to be a cakewalk, roses and candy thrown at her feet.

And then badmouthing people who are generally the most active in the party?

Give me a break.

You want to make it about Obama? Show where he’s badmouthed us in this thread. And leave the Kennedys out of this — they have been at this and paid a high enough price for serving the public, they know what they’re doing.

Folks there’s getting to be as much Hillary-hatred on this site as on Kos for GOdsakes. And now I’m getting regular emails from Jane, who I love, aligning herself with Markos.

I wrote back that while I love FDL and the Pups and come here often, the minute we join forces with Kos, we lose credibility with any blog-reader who happens not to hate Hillary. I actually come here perhaps weekly now instead of daily because I’m so tired of it.

Yes MoveOn has circulated petitions in the early going against aggression post-9-11.
“Against Tide, They Clamor For Peace,” The Philadelphia Inquirer, 9/21/01

Yes they have opposed funding (87 billiion bill) to be used for Iraq and Afghanistan.
Will Lester, “Political Notebook,” The Associated Press, 10/15/03

Yes they are party activists, and activism getting people to caucuses is especialy powerful since they measure such a tiny % of the voters you really get bang for your buck, and kudos to BO for figuring this out and organizing so well in this way. As we all know, the general isn’t about caucuses however.

If we want to start flinging poo around about who’s dissing who, Obama offers plenty of gaffes for ammunition too, as we saw in the ABC joke-of-a-debate this week. (Though the outrage we heard from the Boyz et al was conspicuously missing when HRC was the target of the exact same sh-t when she was the front-runner).

For every HRC gaffe, I can give you another reason why Obama might lose my vote too. BO-supporters better hope this one doesn’t get much play on the toobs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zhkq11UExcw

Anyway. What’s it gonna be? ARe we going to get behind the candidate best able to win the WH or are we going to continue the circular firing squad and prove once again how Democrats can lose unloseable elections?

As for “best able” …anybody got any recent electoral map polls vs McCain? The last one I saw scared the crap out of me, because it shows BO getting his clock cleaned in FL and also losing OH and PA and ties in states he desperately needs like NJ.

Any recent nbrs?

Dear Jane, if you haven’t noticed, Huffington Post hates the Clintons. I was banned from there a long time ago when I expressed my support for her. The move-on piece has been edited by them to make her look bad. Please refrain from their tricks.

Word. And please Jane, separate yourself from Markos, now. Hillary supporters are banned from there too. It won’t be long before TGKJM will ban them from TPM…or maybe he already has since Greg Sargent’s hiatus seems to be indefinite now.

Electoral map anyone?

Ok, I am calling smott99 out. Every one of his Moveon.org points was taken from gop.com and in the same damn order. Smott, this is exactly why folks liek me have the3 willies about Hillary and her campaign – becuse they aand you use GOP tactices, attack points AND literal text.

First, Show me the actual text of the 10/15/03 Will Lester piece, and not just a mention of it, not just a line about it from a GOP website. I’ll be waiting.

Second, you can oppose a bill in hopes of getting a better one. If it was a joint bill, maybe they just opposed the Iraq part. But again, you dug no deeper, and contented yourself with a simple Repub talking point. Kneejerk support for a candidate I think.

Lastly, Hillary’s point was that they opposed going into Afghanistan – she’s wrong – and look, here is an actual quote (if you are unacquainted with one):

In a statement to The Huffington Post, MoveOn’s Executive Director Eli Pariser reacted strongly to Clinton’s remarks: “Senator Clinton has her facts wrong again. MoveOn never opposed the war in Afghanistan, and we set the record straight years ago when Karl Rove made the same claim. Senator Clinton’s attack on our members is divisive at a time when Democrats will soon need to unify to beat Senator McCain. MoveOn is 3.2 million reliable voters and volunteers who are an important part of any winning Democratic coalition in November. They deserve better than to be dismissed using Republican talking points.”

And lastly, why is it a bad thing for an organization or urge moderation and peace in a time of confusion and pain? Maybe if we would have thought out Afghanistan better, we would not have gone into Iraq, or made Guantanamo a black mark on the history of our country.

Your post actually does more harm to your cause than it helps, nub.

And please Smott, drop the lame rhetorical question – if you are so hungry for a electoral map, find one. Or make one up. Whichever is easiest for you.

Oh – and I forgot to mention – remember the Senate vote to repudiate the MoveOn Petraeus ad in 2007? It passed 75-25. Clinton voted against it.

One guess who managed to miss the vote.

Smott, dude, just post a link to gop.com. You’re using all their content already.

…GOP attacks?

As opposed to GOP policies, such as privatizing SS. Or opposing govt mandates like health care.

Please guys. I’ve been here 5 minutes and already you’re proving my point. I’ve never been to GOP.com but thanks for the insulting assumption, and yes also thanks ThucydidesJr, for the extra insult about manking up electoral maps – that’s some nice snark. Ever wonder why people think BO-ites are condescending? Jesus.

As for Against the Tide you cannot get the link from Philly Inquirer it’s from 2001.

As for MoveOn and the opposition to the 87 billion bill here’s an article about it that quotes Zack Exley.
http://www.pww.org/article/view/4280/1/186/

And as for the electoral map, that I was asking for in all seriousness, to see if we can estimate who’s going to do better against McCain, this is the latest I could find, from myDD, that hot-bed of GOP Rovian tactics.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/4/17/222510/938

But For God’s sake 5 minutes after I mention circular firing squad, look what happens.

Thuc, Dude, lay off. We can talk all day about whose policies are closer to the GOP. I don’t think it’s HRC’s.

Whatever Clinton thinks about the activist base, it pales in comparison to the vile attacks launched daily at her and her supporters by MoveOn, Kos, and the netroots.

Remember, it was Clinton who had the spine to send Wolfson on O’Reilly to defend Kos. Remember, too, that it was who Clinton voted against censuring MoveOn, while Obama skipped out of the Senate just minutes before the vote was held.

Yet, despite these efforts, Clinton has received nothing but scorn from these thugs.

Further, Clinton supporters are quite familiar with the nastiness and small-mindedness of the netroot’s thought-police.

We have been threatened, attacked, and banned across the internet from the beginning of this campaign. The bullying of Clinton supporting caucus-goers is well-documented. They believe that they alone can judge who is and isn’t a “real Democrat”, and woe to those who dare to advocate against or exercise their right to vote contrary to their draconian precepts.

I cannot speak for how Clinton really feels about the activist base. As for this life-long Democrat, they’ve done little to earn my respect, and much to earn my disdain.

Thanks JoeChi.

I just wrote Jane asking that she/we use this forum to try to find common ground and come together. The blue blogosphere is splitting the Democratice Party and Markos and TGKJM are 2 of the leading examples. We can do he-said-she-said all day long. They’re both making gaffes.

Why don’t we compare them on issues that matter, the way we would have liked the debates to have done (at least the first hour!)? We all have our favorites, but isn’t electability the whole ever-lovin’ point?

one of the reasons people might think you are parroting GOP spin points is that you repeat attacks on Obama that are purely manufactured. For example,

As opposed to GOP policies, such as privatizing SS. Or opposing govt mandates like health care.

The difference between Obama and Clinton on SS is that Obama favors removing the regressive tax cap. In the last 3 person debate, Edwards took Clinton to task for opposing his and Obama’s plan to make SS funding fairer. Currently, as is widely known, FICA tax is used to fund general obligations – but it is capped at around $95K. When you say that Obama proposes privatizing SS, you are repeating a lie. Similarly, neither Clinton nor Obama proposes universal “health care”. What Clinton proposes is mandatory purchase of health insurance. As Michael Moore pointed out, Clinton’s plan is mostly a subsidy of the insurance companies. Having insurance, does not mean you have actual health care access. Both candidates offer weak claims of supporting universal health care, but neither has a plan to institute universal health care. So, again, you write something that has no factual basis. Why should anyone take you seriously?

All I did was look up your points, it was clear you lifted them verbatim from gop.com. So no, dude, I will not lay off. If you want to play closet Republican, I am happy to call you on it.

And as for snark, if you repeatedly ask a silly question re: electoral maps, then don’t cry when someone, again, calls you on it. Thank you for the link, though the comments point to other predictions very different than the one you and the author imply. So it is still too early to say it is more than a toss up, and your argument shows its weakness.

And again, no link to the Will Lester piece.

As for the pww, here is an interesting blurb:

Zack Exley, MoveOn.org organizing director, commented that “the Bush administration is trying to give blank checks out to Pentagon contractors,” while some wounded soldiers returning from Iraq are waiting a month or more for appointments with a military doctor, “It’s disgusting,” Exley said.

So here is a very valid why they opposed the bill. You clearly made their opposition to the bill sound like a bad thing. It doesn’t sound bad at all to me. Care to clarify why you brought it up?

And, you know, you don’t get to attack a candidate or a progressive Dem organization, then complain about a circular firing squad. That smacks of hypocrisy, and you are clearly smart enough to know that. Hillary made a mistake attacking a progressive organization that defended her husband. Say it, and move on (pun intended).

And I am not talking about whose policies are closer to the GOPs. I am talking about the Hillary camp using GOP tactics and talking points and GOP websites.

and if JoeChi thinks Moveon.org are thugs, then… wow. Don’t ever leave your gated community.

I have stated publicly in diaries that I will vote for whoever is the Dem candidate. But that in no way gives ANY Dem candidate or campaign a free pass on being called out for using GOP tactics and stupidly dissing of parts of the party that have supported them in the past, and even did so recently.

And JoeChi, in an alternate universe where Moveon supports Clinton, your alternate self is praising them to the high heavens.

I have not found a single Clinton supporter who is willing to argue the superiority of Clinton’s health plan on the merits. Not one.

So?

So-so …

Ah, so.

Iam not!

What?

You heard me …

I don’t know what you are upset about.

That’s just what I thought!

What?

You know what I mean!

???!

You are a cultist …and delusional.

Excuse me?

Whatever happened to rational discourse?

Are you talking to me?

Who else?

I don’t understand.

Well, that’s obvious.

I’m becoming confused …

You should be used to that by now.

What?

Don’t keep ‘what’ing me, aren’t you paying any attention at all?

I think I’ve had quite enough of this.

See, you don’t want to have a rational discussion, you just want to rant …

Excuse me?

There is no excuse for your behavior, none at all.

(At this point the internal dialogue becomes serious, proving that one should never be of ‘two minds’ when it comes to polly-ticks. Arguing with oneself is almost as futile as arguing with friends, especially when whatever mind they have is already made up. When one ‘makes up’ one’s mind, is it akin to putting on lipstick? Or is it like writing fiction?)

Sorry to repeat myself; must be old age.

HRC’s health proposals include mandates. BO’s does not. He would allow people to opt out of contributing, neatly placing extra burden on those who need coverage such as cancer survivors like myself.

Moreover, for a smart guy he misses the whole effing point which is that universal care is a matter of the common good, public health, it’s in the public interest. We should all be in this togther, we should all contribute. Every other industrialized nation seems to get that.

We in this society should be committed to taking care of each other, all in the same boat. HRC frames it in moral terms. BO frames it in govt mandate terms.

I believe her plan is better.

HRC’s health plan mandates that people purchase insurance. That is not universal care. As most of us know, having an insurance policy, particularly the low end policies that people will be forced into, is no assurance of coverage. So I’m happy to argue the relative merits of the health plans, but don’t begin by representing Hillary’s plan as something that it is not.

In my opinion, Obama’s plan is politically far sounder and Hillary’s plan illustrates her “tin ear”. Her proposal will be easily attacked as a burdensome mandate – which it will be for some people. She will then have to sweeten the package with more and more inducements for the insurance industry – just as she did before. The result will be complex and highly expensive to administer. Obama’s plan is simply to extend availability of the federal plan. It’s a very smart step towards universal care.

HRC also has taken $$ from the Insurance Industry. They’re not about to back someone who is going to cut into their profits. I smell a rat.

Early in this nominating process, I admired and supported FDL’s efforts to remain above the pie fights. In fact, although I am an Obama supporter I emulated FDL’s principled stand to avoid undermining other Democrats who might eventually be our standard bearer. As of the last few weeks, I feel that a vow of neutrality and taking a position to not take a position amounts to opting out of one of the most important political decisions of our times. I read FDL several times each day and have been disappointed that if I didn’t know there was a struggle going on inside the Democratic Party, I would certainly not be informed about it on this site. Attacks on MoveOn are attacks on liberal Democrats and demonstrate that this contest is among other things, a fight for the heart and soul of the Party. I’m hoping to see some leadership from FDL as the Democratic Party decides whether to wallow in the politics of distraction, division and distortion or whether Democrats choose to engage in the politics of expansion and inclusion – all in the cause of implementing a bold, progressive agenda.

For every HRC gaffe, I can give you another reason why Obama might lose my vote too. BO-supporters better hope this one doesn’t get much play on the toobs:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zhkq11UExcw

The supposed “flipping of the bird”? Come on, now.. Anyway, I admire the honesty it took for FDL to meet this head on. I can understand why some of the liberal blogs want to stay above the Clinton/Obama fray, but what was said in that recording is not really about Obama, and it’s not only about MoveOn. MoveOn is not the totality of the activist base of the Democratic party.

the bottom line is, who will you vote for in November?

i’m voting for the nominee of the Democratic Party.

if you’re doing anything else you’re a traitor to this country, or a Republican.
we know that if we get McCain we get at least four more years of what we’re still going through. any honest sentient being knows that this cannot be good.
politics is often rancid sausage but it doesn’t have to contain botulism.
whoever gets the nomination, i will vote against the Republican nominee.

Look, BOTH sides need to understand that their candidate CANNOT win in November WITHOUT supporters of the other candidate. And, frankly, if your candidate becomes the nominee, he or she will be forced to throw some pretty big bones to the other side to elicit their cooperation, the more muck you throw now, the bigger the concessions will need to be.

Be a little more tactful and tactical in your presentation of your opinions. You’re not going to change anyone’s mind with venomous attacks anyway.

So no actual argument on the merits of health plans?

and no argument on the merits of SS reform as actually proposed by the candidates?

RedHen, please comment here more often.

The larger ‘picture’ is really what ‘this’ should be about.

Thank you.

Bravo!!!