Hurray for Clark- He is truly a man with a deep and genuine love of country!

Recent developments in Florida, however, have to worry the Clinton campaign. Florida Dems are now ready to back down and make the primary meaningless, reducing the already dwingling possibility of a successfull Florida firewall strategy. Now, Clinton is at the mercy of bad showings in the early states, and things like the SEIU moving forward with an Endwards endorsement are not a good start for that.

Oh, nothing like garnering the support of General Wes Clark to start up the Hillogynists on this board to start whining all the Fox news points.

Let's start with "she's the most beatable of the Dems." Unlike all the other Dem nominees, Hillary has been fully "vetted" by the Republican slime machine over the last 15 years. Despite this, she leads the Republican possible contenders in all the reliable polls. Despite her so-called negative in this area, these numbers will only go up as she gets more exposure as the Dem nominee. charms the "mushy middle," and women (the largest single voting bloc by far) get more excited about electing the first woman president in our glorious history.

If Hillary can build and hold double-digit leads against the excellent Dem nominees like Obama and Edwards et al, how do you think she'll do, really, in head-to-head with any of the Republican lightweights in the current political climate?

Finally, I've asked this before. What states that Kerry-Edwards took in 2004 will Hillary not pick up as well or better? Add Ohio (and certainly Arkansas if Clark's on the ticket) as well as some other purple states in 2004, and you've got a Democratic landslide.

Take heart, ye Hillogynists!

not wanting Hillary Clinton to be the nominee does not make someone a misogynist. stop implying that it does, colonpowwow. there are perfectly legitimate arguments to make against her as a candidate.

colonpowwow, can you explain to me why you use such a term as 'hillogynists' or a phrase such as ' whining Fox news points'? It seems to me that you are intentionally insulting folks who aren't primary supporters of Hillary Clinton. What do your insults accomplish except to increase the alienation and concerns a lot of democrats have about a Hillary candidancy?

This is not some collegiate football game, is it? This is not just about a 'win' in the general election, and then 'all is fine and dandy'. This election is about the next four years of an America facing crises domestically and internationally. This important election deserves our deep attention as voters, which I believe involves more than cutesy sloganeering, counter-productive insults, and band-wagoning based upon vague assertions not supported by facts......

.....unsupported 'facts' such as "Hillary has been fully vetted by the republican slime machine over the last 15 years." I am not a Hillary supporter precisely because I have been studying her actual Senate record which is quite empty of substance, but does contain some worrisome instances of Hillary working against 'Made in USA' products. If I can do that 'vetting', surely the republican opposition can do the same in a general election. So, thorough 'vetting' of Hillary is [intentionally, as in 'keep the powder dry'] not complete at this point, and by the time of the general, that more thorough vetting might surprise and distress a lot of democrats.

The statements purportedly released by Clark and Stabenow illustrate my number-one problem with Hillary. If I didn't know who was purportedly saying it, it would be impossible for me to distinguish between statements that supposedly come from her, statements that purportedly come from her campaign spokespersons and, now, even statements that come from her endorsors.

"Strength," "experience," "Day One," "leader," blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. All of them sound like over focus-grouped buzz-word laden pap written by a (large) committee of mediocre Inside-the-Beltway Dem consultants. Even what she supposedly "spontaenously" says in the debates sounds like this.

This is what people mean when they rap her about "inauthenticity." Where is the real person behind all the layers of packaging and what, if anything, does she actually still believe in at this point? Is she really just afraid that if she lets people know who she really is and what she really thinks, they won't elect her? Is it just a case of a smart person who's worked in this mileau for so long that she's internalized this way of communicating to the point that she does not even understand how it sounds to people outside of DC? Have the successive beatings we've took between 94 and 06 just caused her go all Willie Stark?

I don't know. I do not know who she is. Try as I might, I still have no idea why she wants to be president. Most impoortant of all, I do not know if she knows why she wants to be president anymore.

To cap it all off, from a tactical standpoint, the kind of "selling a product" crap that she does is the Repulicans' forte, not ours. They are so good at it that they can actually fake authenticity. (DC-Insiderer lobbyist career politician and sometimes actor Thompson is the down-home commonsense outsider, barely closeted facist Giuliani is a "liberal" Republican.) We have never beaten them at that game and I'm not seeing any sign she can do it this time. Maybe she can win, but if she does, it won't be because of her "perfect" campaign.

Having said all that, Clark would be a great choice for VP for her. He'd bring more to her ticket than any of the other candidates for President. I'm sure Clark thinks so too.

I still cannot support someone who will not admit that she had made serious errors in judgement when she voted to support the war (she still won't even admit that) without even bothering to read the facts. Committing others to their deaths is serious business. I'll bet she never missed any dinners or fundraisers at the time.

Why in the world would "We the People", who are so angry at Bush for lying (I mean misstating) to us about reasons to attack Iraq... and to this day refusing to admit a multitude of mistakes... why would we then want to elect his clone, who has been involved in numerous lapses of judgements and, like Bush, will not even admit their faults.

I for one do not want another Bush in office... even if it is a Democrat and a woman...

My impression is that Hillary has offered Clark the vice-presidency or some great plum. As evidenced from her campaign's recent accusations of anti-semitism against Brzeninski -- obviously with the sole intention of smearing Obama -- Hillary is signalling loud and clear that she will not have Obama on the ticket.

First John Edwards and now Hillary have shown they are more than willing to exploit racial and ethnic fears and distrust to gain power. Is this what we need in a country and world that desparately needs healing? As a jewish woman, it doesn't give me any comfort to have noticed this terrible flaw in Hillary. No matter what other policies she presents that I agree with, I am truly disappointed at her lack of recognition of what her role as president will require. We need a healer now -- it is a matter of survival. The more I see of Hillary's divisive posturing (and Edwards' also) the more I realize that the only viable democratic candidate capable of getting this country and world on a peaceful track is Barack Obama.

Pretty clearly, the best reason to support Sen. Clinton is that she most upsets the worst people in the country--maybe to the point that some of them would just up and leave.

But spite voting really should be left to the Republicans, who are so fully motivated by their hatreds and fears. Particularly since, in this instance, their loathing of her completely ignores the fact that of the serious Democratic candidates, she's by far the least progressive and the most likely to perpetuate, if not the Bush/Cheney policies, the premises on which those policies are based:

1) There are virtually no restraints on the power of the executive branch

2) By virtue of our unmatched power, America has the right to intervene in the world however, whenever and wherever we see fit

3) The current economic order in the United States is perfectly moral and does not require any serious revision--nor does the theory and practice of politics in America, so fully informed by that economic order

4) History is always someone else's fault

Will she be better than Bush/Cheney? Of course. She's vastly smarter, works much harder and will surround herself with people of much greater talent and integrity. But the changes will be at the margins; what really will happen is that the country will slow the pace at which it's going tohell.

Hillary Clinton is, above all, a fearful politician. She's afraid of the big bad press, the people who (moronically) would have castigated for a want of toughness if she hadn't voted for the AUMF, the ones who still jump at every opportunity to write about her cleavage, or Bill's horndoggery, or Whitewater (you know that one's coming back in some way), or "Travelgate."

She's put this fear at the center of her political being and let it guide her public persona. So she speaks in generalities and focuses, it would seem obsessively, on the blocking and tackling of politics: campaign logistics, message discipline.

(Here's a fun game: just try and find a Clinton campaign statement that doesn't include the phrase "strength and experience.")

The question NCSteve asked is the key: why does she want to be president? I don't have the first clue. I just know it won't be good for the country--it will mean only the perpetuation of the disgusting politics of these last 15 years, while the serious problems of our time continue to go unaddressed--if she succeeds.

I long for the good ole' days back in August---when Obama could actually get his name mentioned in a story on tpm that was not, essentially, about Hillary Clinton.

Who got to you asswipes---and what did it take?

colonpowwow,

For the record,my candiate preferences, which I never keep secret, are, in order:

1. Obama
2. Edwards
3. Hillary
4. Dodd

The idea that no one had been insulted here more than Hillary is, in my view, a case of selective perception. There are numerous posters on this board who invariably respond to any mention of Obama's name with everything from juvenile insults (*cough*pacc*cough) to out and out vitriolic slander.

And, with respect, I think your mission to engage in "pushback" would be more effective if you would actually explain why you think the arguments made are wrong rather than resorting to strawman arguments, ad hominum attacks on the motives those who criticize her or dismissivly characterising a valid pointof view as an "insult" or a "Republican talking point."

I, for one, was expressing a genuine concern I have had about her since her vote for AUMF, and one that only seems to be getting worse as the campaign progresses. Accusing me of carrying water for another candidate is confusing cause and effect. The fact that I am a supporter of Obama does not, for example, cause me to go off on Edwards, notwithstanding the fact that Obama would likely pick the vast majority of his supporters if Edwards withdrew.

Either respond to the arguments actually made or tell us why why you like her and why we should. Lashing out doesn't get it done.

NCSteve

First of all, can I join with any others in rueing the day that some people discovered the phrase "ad homininum attacks?" I do not engage in them, I don't insult anyone personally. My posts are merely my OPINION (does this really need to be stated?) that people attack Hillary in a particularly irrational way. Where are all the "anybody but Obama" or "anybody but Edwards" posters. As I said before, cyberspace is littered with the "anybody but Hillary" posters.

I support Hillary because most of those liberal progressives who I hang with and admire (aka Democrats) do (see all recent polling data).

I also support Hillary because (despite her votes for the Iraq War authorization and Patriot Act which I despise), she is a solid lifelong liberal progressive Democrat with the best chance of winning (again, IMHO) the election, withstanding and pushing back the rightwingers with the alliances and power she's forged in her political career, and she'll make an outstanding president, just like Bill did. BTW, I didn't like Bill when he won the nomination, but I happily voted for him and he won me over quickly. I hope you experience a similar journey with our first woman president.

Sorry, I don't like anonymous posts. That last post was mine, and the no-name was an accident.
Sorry!

Jan,

Did you know that Hillary is leading the entire lefty blogosphere on a "blackout" of Barack Obama?

No? Well ask elrapierwit. I'm dropping a note to Matt Drudge.

Hi anonymous donna,

Upon rereading your original post, I see you did not actually call Hilary anti-Semitic.

Rather than turn this into a Monty Python episode of why someone accusing a non-anti-Semite of accusing another anti-Semite of being an anti-Semite is actually accusing the accuser of being an anti-Semite . . .

Let me offer my most hysterical apology for misreading this part of your anti-Hillary post.

colonpowwow,

Thanks for your refreshing clarity in response to some of the post we find on this site.

donna,

Despite the irrational Hillary-hate, you seem like a nice enough person who is generally concerned about issues facing the Jewish communitiy.

That said, respectfully, I don't have the faintest idea what you're talking about.

Sorry.

Thanks for coming on at the end of a thread about Hillary getting endorsements from key Democrats and taking the time to indulge in a little bedtime Hillogyny.

Good luck with that Hillary collapse thing. For my part, if she starts to fall in the polls (to only a 10-20 point lead over the next two closest candidates, it will only motivate me to work harder to ensure the election of the first woman president of the United States. About time, don't you think?

HOT RASMUSSEN POLL:

No bounce for Hillary in SC: Obama still leads 42%-30%

Mcain overtakes Huckabee to lead 27%-24% in South Carolina. Romney trails far behind with 16% and Thompson with 12%.

Again, if the Clintons decide to swift-boat Obama as they were beginning to do in NH (but didn't) they will be dead to me.

I don't think Kennedy (or anyone else concerned about their political career) really wants to get associated with the Clintons' dirty campaign.

And what frequent comparisons to JFK? He mentioned JFK having a dream of Americans landing on the moon, but there isn't much else there. He also hasn't compared himself with MLK Jr really either. Hillary compared him to MLK Jr, in that both are apparently all talk and can't get anything done without whitey, but aside from that..

>>>Your "greatest talent" may be someone else's greatest phony. Keep it to yourself!

Yes, let's all just shut up. Everyone knows this country is too complex for anyone to rule it other than a Bush or a Clinton. Only they have the machines that make the yum-yum.

>>>It's all false hopes! It's all fairy tales!

LOL. This is what Clinton is reduced to I guess. It must be a pretty freaky situation for the man from Hope, if he could step back and see it. But he wants back in the White House, and he'll say anything at this point.

No matter who you support, Bill Clinton is tarnishing his name to many people by supporting his wife as much as he is. People that don't like her will be really turned off by what he does to get his wife elected. That's even if you are like me and liked Bill until now.

She is less likable than Bill, and Bill is bringing his likability down to that of Hillary.

You don't have to be a Republican to be anti-Hillary.

Thank you, AS, above, for an interesting point. From a perspective I hadn't considered till now.

Just suppose Obama wins. How will it be that a former prez trashed someone before they became president? I didn't like bill's behavior in any case, but yes, it looks unseemly.

At this point we have a former president, who traveled around with the current, failed president's father. On top of that he's wading into the current race and trashing a candidate who's a black man. I wonder if that will ultimately take black voters away from hillary.

Hillary should stay in the Senate and bill should stay out of the "race."

"We've got to call up not just Republicans," said the Illinois Democrat, "but we got to call up Ted Kennedy and say, Ted, you're getting a little old now, and you've been a fighter for us before I don't know what's happening now, Ted get some spine and stand up to the Republicans."

Ted Kennedy is serving as a lightning rod there and it's pretty obvious. Obama is attacking the rhetorical Teddy Kennedy, the long-serving senior Democratic statesman, not the man himself. He's saying the Democratic Party needs to fight back. I think Ted Kennedy is smart enough to realize this and not allow it to impact his selection.

So aimey,

Other than survive as Bill's First Lady, what has Hillary actually done? Vote for the Iraq war while under the delusion that Bush would negotiate (incredible naivete) - Yes. Vote to push the argument for a new Iran war - Yes. What else has she done during her 7 years in elective office? She's not a doer, she's the true talker - all attack, all the time.

grover_rover-

The distinction between MLK/LBJ was between activism and legislation. W/O the legislation (legal protection) the activism may die-they need each other. Of course the activism started in the Black community. Although, by no means did Northern liberals ignore segregation. Also, think back to the abolishionists.
Do you think the students in Little Rock in '57 would have been able to attend LRHS had Ike not provided protection? What about Brown v. Board? When "whitey" controls every legal institution, where are you going to get protection?

Back to Kennedys--

RFK Jr., as many of you probably know, endored Obama-at least a year ago when I heard him speak. Carries some weight with me because RFK Jr. tells it like it is.

Bupalos wrote on January 10, 2008 11:00 AM:
"Fired up! Ready to Go!"

Don't be childish and follow the fashion. Obama is a phenom, like American idol. You cry for an idol, like the fellow cried for people to leave Britney alone. When you mature, you will realize how silly you are!

southpaw wrote on January 10, 2008 11:05 AM:
grover_rover-

Wow, you are so wrong! RFK Jr. compaigned for Hillary in Iowa. What have you been drinking, magic posion from Obama?

So let me get this straight. In order for Bill to stay in your good graces his has to roll over and not do the same for his WIFE that she did for him all because you are tick off that he has the guts to point out that everyone needs to a closer look beyound the hoopla surrounding Obamba Before we hand nomination. That just maybe we might want to lake a long hard look at his ACTUAL record outside of his ripped off speeches. Obama supporters take the cake. Several years ago All of Clinton supporter were caught up in this same movement you guys are all caught up in. Then Reality checked in. Now that the CLintons have born the struggles challenged the systems and gained the clout to get it done you want to throw them out and start all over from scratch. Thats what Bill is trying to tell you. Grow up and listen. He is not putting Obama down but trying to give you a reality check that comes from dare i say it EXPERIENCE

"When you mature, you will realize how silly you are!"

Right, when I turn 52 next month I'll give up my false hopes that we can have change in this country. I'll realize that only president's son's and president's wives and president's brothers can be presidents...that only Clintons and Bush's are genius enough to lead us in this terribly complicated a nasty world. That we shouldn't believe in the fairy tale of a candidate that actually excercises judgement instead of tacking whatever way the political winds blow.

Ah, but it's still a month to my birthday, so until then, indulge me, oh mature one!

grover

Didn't know that-I stand corrected. I also said it was a year ago when I heard his comments. Easy there, hoss.

I wonder why he went w/ Clinton 'cause he sounded pretty firm in Obama's camp back then...

I'm so glad that the woman who asked Clinton the question openly stated she voted for Obama. Can you imagine the constant harping about the planting of the woman for the question if she had voted for Hillary? This woman singlehandedly eliminated a meme before it started!

I don't hold Hillary responsible, but I'm shocked at how many of my non-political acquaintances think Obama is a Muslim.

Watch your inboxes, folks. The scurrilous anti-Obama smear emails are gonna come fast and furious.

I don't hold Hillary's camp responsible, but I've been amazed at how many of my non-political acquaintances have already mentioned the "fact" that Obama is a Muslim. It makes me wonder how many others just haven't bothered to mention it!

Watch your inboxes. The flood of scurrilous anti-Obama smear emails and rumors is just beginning.

I'm beginning to believe that the role of the rank and file is to insure that There is, in whatever order, an Obama-Clinton ticket. I have been an Edwards supporter on the issues, but increasingly think he doesn't have the voter support, for whatever reason. And the more I think about November, the more I'm coming to believe that, for reasons both shallow and substantive, an O-C ticket will be very powerful. What do you think? As voters and caucusers, how about we lay off the other candidates and work to see there is an even result in every state from here on. Then the question is who heads the ticke4t, but both are there.

Uggh..
My last comment was meant for anonymous-sorry, grover...need more coffee...

Bill Clinton would give a crack whore a rim job. There is no depth to which he will not sink.

Obama seems more of an RFK than a JFK to me. JFK was a young, charismatic, talented guy who ran pretty much against the Republicans (Nixon/Eisenhower).

RFK ran against the Democratic establishment (LBJ), clearly an anti-war, "youth candidate," as is Obama.

"Clinton’s Strategy Echoes Bush in 2000"
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/09/clintons-strategy-echoes-bush-in-2000/

All of you referring to African-American Gov. Deval Patrick in Massachusetts and then saying that Obama will be the same as him are making a disgusting argument.

aimey mays, I'm talking to you.

Would you say that b/c some female politician who supports Hillary is not doing a good job then Hillary won't do a good job b/c they are both women?

No? Well, there's absolutely no difference. Stop it. Now. You are not helping Hillary.

To be honest, if you look deep enough into who put the most work into most Dem/progressive legislation, you usually find Kennedy's staff.

"Well, he didn't heed the call then. He wouldn't stand up against Republicans. But maybe he will stand up against the DLC, which is Republican-lite."

Clearly written by someone who has paid no attention to Kennedy's career during the Bush administration. Except for on NCLB, he's been one of the most strident, eloquent, and consistent opponents of the Bush administration.

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0930-05.htm
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/09/19/politics/main574154.shtml

Kennedy deserves enormous credit for COLA extensions, S-Chip, and almost all of the progress made on health care over the last two decades. He voted against virtually all of the Bush policies we love to hate.

Although I haven't made up my mind, and would be happy with Obama, Clinton, or Edwards, I have to say that many of Obama's supporters on the web seem so taken with the "change" versus "status quo" rhetoric that they're willing to attack anyone else, no matter how liberal, no matter if they hold views similar to Obama's, and no matter how long they've been champions for progressive causes. Obama had no idea what he was talking about in 2003. I expect he knows better now. The question is, do his most rabid partisans?

To Greg DeLassus:
At the bus stop...

Why are you so surprised, half the Anerican voters (give or take a few)thought Bush would make a great president and voted for him (twice!). To this day nearly a third of the American people support him despite all the stuff that has come to light about him. A good portion of our fellow Americans are not very bright and many of those ride busses. Get yourself a mountain bike and avoid that segment of the population.

I am very hopeful Kennedy will back Hillary. Most of his family is supporting Hillary, including RFK Jr., former MD lt. Governor. His son was supporting Dodd but should be in Hillary's camp soon.

We want Kennedy to tell Obama: Senator, I know President Kennedy. He's my brother. You are no President Kennedy. He had 14 years of experience as a Senator and a House memeber. He was a Navy pilot fighting in WWII. If he would be running now, you would call him have too much experience and say he is the problem not the solution.

LOL!!!

Get yourself a mountain bike and avoid that segment of the population.

I bike to work in the summer, but this time of year it is just not practical. Meanwhile, for the one Obama-is-a-wahabi nut I met at the bus stop, I have met many others who were really interested to hear what I had to say in favor of Sen Obama, so as a campaign strategy I dare say that bus-riding has been a net-plus.

:-)

"Finally, to those scoffing at the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, I have to defend HRC..."

The problem is when you grow so paranoid of it that you see it as everywhere and everything, you aren't an effective fighter. You become a clown. I think Hillary either formulated the phrase or at least used in in reaction to the rumors that Bill was tagging Monica. That just made the entire left look like a bunch of paranoid laughingstocks that couldn't understand real life because of their paranoid filters. As a result, Clinton wasn't the only one who got Bush.

I don't want to go back to that kind of mentality. The real irony is that Hillary can't really be blamed for her paranoia, because they did come so hard after Clinton for whatever reason. And I'm sure they would again.

I'd wager Kennedy goes for Obama.

Up front, I do not like Barak Obama. That said, the last thing he needs is every member of the democratic establishment endorsing him. What is going to happen if he wins the general? Will we have another “democratic elitist” on our hands? We all know how that turned out.

On another note I find it laughable that people believe Obama can unite the country by having independents and some republicans vote for him. No! I am not suggesting that Hillary can, no democrat can or will. Also, stop being fooled by the republican candidates and pundits announcing their desire to run against Hillary, they are terrified of her. They know she can win. Why else were they beaming when Obama won in Iowa? They want to run against him! Stop being gullible, this is right out of the Karl Rove play book. Just watch Sean Hannity talk about him, it is so transparent.

The fact remains that President Clinton is dammed if he does; and dammed if he dose'nt. So many people are so quick to judge President Clinton on anything he says. All I know is that under his watch he balanced the budgit and left a surplus when he left office. Under his watch my 401k plan did the best ever. Schools improved so much. This president was and is welcomed with open arms anywhere on earth. Every world leader respects him, even Mr Putin. The dollar is down, foreign investments are moving away from America and we are in a recession. If America chooses Hillary, the Clinton team will be productive from day one. There will NOT be a 2 to 4 year learning curve. Foreign investment will start pouring back in to our country
our dollar will start getting stronger and America will be out of a recession.
President Clinton has earned the right to speak his mind. Will any American Husband let anybody belittle his wife????
Come on people, what you are seeing is one of the most brilliant Presidents of this centuary, taking up for his wife in a mild manner, controlling himself in everything he says. Did anybody else raise a Billion for the Tusnami??? A poor kid from Arkansas worked his way up, became a Rhodes scholar, governed a state many times and did what he said he will do, when he came to the White House.
America did prosper under his watch!!!!
Hillary forgave him when he stumbled. So who the hell are we to hold anything against him. All I can say is the Whole world thanks God for Bill Clinton. By the way, I'm not a Democrat. I take a person for what they have done for others.