Hillary should tell B. Hussein Obama, it's over a-hole. You didn't pick me, you're going to LOSE. Back to your Senate Subcommittee that you never show up for. Clinton 2012!

McCain/Bimbo 2008! No Barry!!!!

I think this would be a big mistake for Hillary on Obama's behalf. She's the most obvious choice to tear in to Palin's horrible record and point out how she's anti-feminist.

Not sure why anyone thought that Clinton would stick her neck out for Obama. It's a shame, though. She seems to be the only Democrat who has a killer instinct.

Every day we are focused on Palin is a day we are not amplifying the Obama campaign's message that Senator McCain simply represents four more years of President Bush

This is exactly right.

Scare the crap out of voters with images of what another four more years of Bush will be like.

Get Biden out there talking about Palin's "fiscal conservatism" that brought Wasilla unreal debt levels, and get him asking Palin is the state of Alaska is willing to forgo all pork largesse.

Well, unless she's telling repeated lies, HRC supports Obama and wants him to win. (Is she telling lies, Clinton supporters?)

And if she supports Obama, then she should spend some time telling her former and current supporters, who may have moved to McCain with the Palin pick, why Palin is not a good candidate.

I thought women who supported Clinton were educated, intelligent people who understood what four more years of Republicans in the White House would mean to women, all Americans, and the world, rather than just members of a personality cult.

Was I wrong? Sure seems like it from reading these comments.

ps. Al Giordano points out that registration deadlines in most states are Oct. 5-6.

Spread the word!!!

http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield

Spread the word to your progressive friends:

********************************************
Get out the vote!: Voter registration deadlines starting Oct. 4-6
http://www.rockthevote.com/voting-is-easy/important-dates/
********************************************

Sen Clinton has it exactly right. Clinton beating up on Palin 1) distracts from the real opponent (McCain) and 2) feeds the sympathy vote for Palin. The best thing we can do is to beat up on McCain and leave Palin enough rope to hang herself (or fade into oblivion for lack of press exposure).

Number one: If Hillary or Palin were a man -- each would take the other on -- just so they could WIN the election.

Number two: - It IS is Hillary's best interest to take Palin on NOW or risk facing her in 2012 if Obama loses.

Hillary needs to take Palin on. She needs to know that the next right wing takeover of the government will be permanent and there will be no more electoral chances for her if McCain-Palin wins. I hope the Clintons are big enough and generous enough to see this.

From:

Head of State

http://tinyurl.com/55atsk

Monday, September 08, 2008

Fear and the Result of Our Decisions: Media, Palin and Iraq

I recall keenly the days of the run-up to the Iraq war. How many journalists--including those I knew and admired--drew back from criticism of obvious gaps and flaws in the logic leading to the conflict; who, despite stories of critical importance for the future of the nation hanging before them, left them hanging in the group-reinforced fear that they would be accused of a lack of patriotism if they were to report them.

And so they were left to be reported long after--in books looking back at the clear issues, landmark errors, and trail of missed opportunities that has led to the fatal outcomes we now see before us.

The issues were there at the time. To be reported.

They were not.

Today, they are again being cowed, by an equally powerful fear of unnecessary intimidation and restraint, the consequences of which stretch far beyond those that we have seen in Iraq.

At a time when we are at war, the economy in shambles, when today Fannie and Freddie Mac are, for the first time in their history, in effect being nationalized, we are being swept by emotion and fear--career fear--into ignoring a situation that would likely send us tumbling into the unknown.

For the short-term fear that each journalist feels, in being perceived as "unpatriotic" to vague, manifest threats regarding gender--they fail to report issues that have nothing to do with gender: the preparedness of a candidate for Vice President of the United States, running alongside an elderly and chronically ill Presidential candidate.

Instead--just as in the run-up to Iraq--each is making the easier choice--to join the risk-averse chorus of personality pieces, each, in the same diffusion of responsibility that had such a major role in leading us into the war in Iraq, taking the route that leads away from fact, regardless of gender.

As in Iraq, reporting fact--regardless of pressure for a mindless conformity and silence--represented actual patriotism, providing the nation with the information it needed to make a reliable and authentic decision, so reporting the facts here--regardless of pressure for an unthinking conformity represents a true balance, a true equality, a true lack of bias.

This is a time of difficult decisions. However, those decisions--your decisions--matter. We have seen this.

Report it. Don't be cowed.

Cite:

Head of State

http://tinyurl.com/55atsk

I see the Kerry strategy is alive and well.

I agree that Obama should stay on message, but attacking the opposition is what surrogates are for. To not use them is naive. That "catfight" puts Palin on the defensive and forces her to spend part of her public spotlight currency elsewhere instead of spreading lies about Obama.

I am not suggesting Hillary spread lies about Palin. Just hit her on one or more of her many controversies the the media is avoiding. This woman could be a heartbeat away from the presidency in 60 days and the public knows nothing about her. Someone needs to step up to the plate and correct this situation.

I would pay money to hear Hillary say "va-jay-jay."

great e-mail response to the attacks on Palin:

I received your email with the attachment about Sarah Palin. While this report might be scary and threatening to some, to me it sounds like the same the kind of trash written about Hillary Clinton, Bill Clinton and even Barack Obama. However, since the Clintons are no longer in the race we can leave them out. But what I wonder is why it’s okay to say that Palin is a fundamentalist Christian but not okay to ask why Obama spent twenty years in the pews of Jeremiah Wright’s intolerant church? And why is it okay to allege that Palin wants to destroy Alaska’s wildlife but not okay to ask if Obama plans to support Hamas instead of Israel? And people can can accuse Palin of racism based on rumor and hearsay but not hold Obama accountable for playing the race card, quoting Malcolm X and accusing good people, particularly the Clintons, of racism. While I may not agree with Palin’s politics, I am unmoved by the smear campaign launched against her. Please do not send me any more political emails. While this e-mail goes to great lengths to appear to be politically correct and to be doing me a favor, it’s actually savaging someone’s reputation based on shoddy evidence or outright lies. After forty years of voting for the Democratic candidate for president, I want you to know that these sexist and hateful lies against Sarah Palin you forwarded go against the reason I am a Democrat. Therefore, under no circumstance will I be voting for Obama.

Best Regards

Please help me Momma Clinton.....yeah right.

Please help me Momma Clinton.....yeah right.

For those of you that miss it:

http://img73.imageshack.us/my.php?image=hillaryfublueck0.jpg