Tuesday, April 22, 2008

This is how pathetic the Obama/Hillary fights have gotten

A long time ago, there used to reasoned, lively discussions about which Democratic candidate should be: the former First Lady-turned Junior Senator from New York, Hillary Clinton, or the charismatic Junior Senator from Illinois, Barack Obama. Those who supported Hillary made the argument that she was the most experienced because of her 8 years at President Bill Clinton's side. Those who supported Obama made the argument that it was long past due to change the status quo in Washington, D.C., and the country needed to come together after 8 years of division from the current Administration. Both sides could agree, at one time though, that whoever won the party's nomination, would be a much better alternative than the same policies that have sent America into the rut it is currently in, thanks in large part to the George Bush Jr. and the Republican Party. There even used to be talk of brining the best of both worlds together to form an incredible dream team not seen since O.J.'s murder trial in the 90's: an Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama ticket.

That was two, maybe three months ago when all this good feeling was taking place.

Now-a-days, Obama supporters and Hillary backers can't stand the sight of the other person's candidate. And the list of big-named celebrities donating and supporting either candidate is more evidence of how out-of-hand this in-fighting has become.

Not that it matters much, but Clinton's got better celebrities.
gayleg | Posted 05:13 PM on 04/21/2008

You really think so? Clinton supporters are misinformed or willfully evil, in any case.
qwr | Posted 05:35 PM on 04/21/2008

Aww its okay, maybe Elton John can put on another benefit show for you and your broken dreams.
barrista | Posted 03:50 PM on 04/21/2008

Eva Longoria Parker,Ellen DeGeneres,Barbra Streisand,Magic Johnson,Ugly Betty, Mario Lavandeira,Nata Portman,Jack Nicholson,Ted Danson,Elton John,Rob Reiner ! ! !
and EDUCATE yourself leave a comment ( I DARE YOU ! ) wake up and do what is good for
the country.
dvdpt | Posted 01:25 AM on 04/22/2008

Is there any truth to the rumor that America Ferrera has gotten Chelsea Clinton an acting gig? Apparently, the show will be called, "Ugly Chelsea."
qwr | Posted 05:20 PM on 04/21/2008

All Right!!! Natalie Portman supports Hillary Clinton. Natalie is a very smart young woman compared to Scarlett Johansson

Ani ohev otach Natalie Portman. Ja ne.
paciere | Posted 06:21 PM on 04/20/2008

Both sides are now fighting over celebrity endorsements. Un-fucking-believable.

A question for these guys: what the hell is wrong with you people??? Seriously??? I'm a proud Obama supporter and Democrat, but even I think that these bitch-fights in internet chatrooms have become pathetic and shameful! NewsFlash, Democrats: this isn't 2004 when we were stuck with a limp dick in John Kerry. We have two accomplished and exciting candidates who will make history as either the first African-American or woman candidate nominated by a major political party to run for the highest office in the land, and either Obama and Clinton will be a better choice than the piss-poor, corrupt, and do-nothing Republican administration Americans have been subjected to for eight longs years! Who gives a damn who Padme (Portman) or Danny Ocean (Clooney) supports for the Democratic ticket? Be and act like fucking adults, for Christ sakes!


et said...

I get what you are saying, Jonathan. I am in Obama's corner despite good blogfriends, whose opinions I respect, who are staunch Hillary supporters. But here's why. Forgive me the lengthy post, please.

- - - -

This is my attempt to define why I am supporting Barack Obama. In the process I hope I will be able to better define my own thinking and identify the things that are making Obama the most appealing candidate to me.

Grassroots Coalition-Building

In comparing the two candidates, I see the Obama campaign as inspiring more grassroots activism, more engagement in the process by young voters, and thus a stronger effort to bring new blood, new ideas, and especially a populist vs. corporatist point of view into the Party. Some sources in the blogosphere cast this as Dean’s 50-state strategy vs. a committee-driven “a-few-important-states” strategy. I’m not persuaded one way or another how valid that is, but the Clinton campaign rhetoric about their having won “the (important) states” would tend to give it some weight. I prefer a campaign, a platform, and a Party in which (every) state is important. Obama seems to deliver on that.

Staying Above the Fray

I’ll be honest – I expect 300% better performance from any (D) candidate versus any (R) candidate, in part because I expect the lowest and most vile tactics from the camp that has fueled GWB’s obscene two terms. But between the two (D) candidates, I think Obama has done a better job in rising above Politics As Usual. I was honestly horrified to hear Clinton say that she has a plan, McCain has a plan, and Obama has a speech. It’s Party divisiveness at its most blatant, and it puts self above Party in a way that I feel is destructive in a campaign in which it’s not just about the Presidency, but it’s about regaining decisive, filibuster-proof control of both House and Senate…and in a year when it is so eminently achievable, especially given multiple GOP blunders and retirements and so on. With so much at stake on multiple levels, not just on the top tier, you don’t gain the edge by impugning your Party rival in comparison to the opposition…that negativity trickles down to local races, which is harmful on a broader level.

Which of us would say “I have a viewpoint, Johnny Dollar has a viewpoint, Xxxxxx has a post”?? That’s the equivalency I see here.

Viewpoint and Hope

It seems to me that putting yourself forward for high office is all about inspiring the electorate. Yes, experience is important, but unless you’re an incumbent running for a second term, there is no WAY you can say that you’ve truly “been there” and “done that,” because the truth is that there is no comparable experience that can prepare you fully, completely and adequately to lead the arguably most powerful nation on Earth.

I remember arguing with my grad school roommate about Reagan back in ‘84. She said she liked him, would vote for him, thought he was a “nice man.” My response was, yeah, but what about the circle of people who’ll gravitate to him?

Sadly, I was right.

Both Clinton and McCain are running on their leadership, their focus, their vision and absolute commitment to do A, B and C. How many of those who will vote for them think they are “nice” candidates, disregarding what interests and factions will potentially coalesce around them?

What I hear in contrast, from Obama, is that he will draw together experts in their respective fields to hear the best and most knowledgeable advice that he can, and act accordingly. He admits he doesn’t personally have all the answers. He states that he will rely on knowledgeable opinions.

I like the sound of that more than I like the sound of any candidate who says, “This is what I say in April 2008, and this is what I will do in February 2009 no matter what may change between now and then.”

I want somebody in the Oval Office who won’t march in lockstep to some ideological tune. I want somebody NUANCED for a change. Sensibly flexible. Someone who will listen to advice, adapt to changing conditions in a positive way, and LISTEN before he/she ACTS.

Nothing I have heard from the Clinton campaign suggests this kind of consensus-building strategy. It’s all about her being “ready” to lead on “day one.”

I don’t see that as reasonable. Nobody is “ready” to lead on “day one.” I think that Obama’s casting of the issue in terms of “judgment” is far more prudent and reasonable.

I had rather that 3:00 AM phone call be answered by someone willing to listen to good advice rather than someone committed without nuance or discretion to a campaign promise made months past.

The Fear Card

OK, so, now that I’ve introduced it…I really became disillusioned with the Clinton campaign with the roll-out of the 3:00 AM ad. It borrowed a gambit from the Rove fear-fear-fear playbook big time, and it sat poorly in my stomach.

Do you really want me to lie awake at night, wondering if my sleeping child will be nuked, Hillary, if I fail to cast my primary vote for you?

This is the kind of ploy I would expect from any (R) candidate, but not from one of our own.

It’s NOT about fear of terrorists coming to Nebraska to annihilate middle-schoolers in their beds!

It’s NOT about making ordinary Americans worried that some suicide bomber is going to infiltrate their 4th grader’s soccer game.

Global terrorism isn’t focused on that scale. Yet that’s the scale, and the visceral reaction, to which this ad pandered.

It was inappropriate, misguided and WRONG.

It was beneath Clinton and beneath her campaign.

And don’t even get me started on her recent suggestions that a nuclear attack on Iran, should Israel be threatened, is a rational response. Jeebus – even Dubya, as batshit insane as he is, hasn’t gone there.

In Sum…

When push comes to shove, whoever turns out to be the (D) nominee, come November, WILL get my vote. Because a McCain presidency would be disastrous not just to the U.S., but also on a global scale, given the warmongering and resultant fallout it would bring with it.

But I think it’s crucial that Obama be the candidate.

Because it honors the delegate count/popular vote in the primaries and caucuses.

Because it gives grassroots voters the voice that is so important at this time, in this particular campaign.

Because it brings new voices into the electoral process, at a time when they are so essential.

Because it coalesces support around a candidate who can beat McCain decisively and gain the Democratic Party the majority and voice it needs to restore the rule of Law after a tragic eight years of Constitution-Shredding by the Bush regime.

And because it legitimately gives the PEOPLE – not the corporations, not the lobbyists, not the Big Money Donors – the candidate accountability that we so desperately need.

Anonymous said...

Obama is a fucking racist. How can you people even consider him a candidate?

Anonymous said...

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Obama is a fucking racist. How can you people even consider him a candidate?

Anon what did Obama say that was racist?

Yakki.Psd said...

Count,Obama hasn't knelt down and kissed Anonymouse's honky white ass.

So Obama = racist.

Total Pageviews