31. 27. Anecdotally, the Hillary supporters who post on these "NewsBlogs" appear to be overwhelmingly female.

Hillary went way too far when she claimed that the republican candidate (who expects a 100 year war) is more *qualified* than Obama.

Between Hillary and Obama, I had been ambivalent. If George Dumbya Bush has brought about the fall of the House of Bush, Hillary has brought down the House of Clinton. Hillary stands for politics as usual and she has reached a new low.
Captain Negative at 1:15PM on Mar 6th 2008



Dear Captain,

For many years, I have respected and have admired Senator Clinton. Imagine my enthusiasm and the pride I felt as woman when Senator Clinton decided to run for president. I always believed I would volunteer to work for her campaign, because I truly believe in her capabilities. I still believe she has all the qualifications to be an excellent president.

However, I became an Obama supporter after reading his books and his web cite. I watched the debates and I really liked his message for our country, I began to pay attention and his ideals’ won me over. Of course, all along I knew that in the end I would be happy with either candidate.

Today I find that I am very angry at what is happening and I could not agree with you more about Hillary Clinton’s actions on the campaign trail. I am incredibly disillusioned with Hillary’s behavior and that of her campaign. In my opinion her actions on the campaign trail have been well below her standards, in fact I would rank her up there right along Karl Rove’s methods of operations.

I am appalled at her fear mongering tactics and her insinuations without merit about Senator Obama’s qualifications and his integrity. Furthermore, the most infuriating truth here is that she is playing right into the GOP’s hands.

Moreover, I am so angry with my fellow democrats that are also falling into the GOP’s little web of lies. Why would we after eight years of one disaster after another, not stick together and work it out. As democrats we have two extremely qualify and strong candidates that could very well be our next president. Why blow this amazing opportunity on all this pathetic bickering. Let us just blow one more opportunity and allow McCain to be the next president.

It appears that we just never learn; we must hold our representatives accountable for their actions. I can no longer support Hillary in good conscience. When the two sides began the negativity, I wrote both campaigns letters expressing my disappointment in the tone of their campaigns and how high the stakes were, how we could not afford to blow this incredible opportunity to regain the White House. Care to take a guess at which candidate answer my letter.

Today I was compelled to write a second letter to Senator Clinton to express my disappointment in her.

Patty at 7:11PM on Mar 7th 2008

32. Warning to posters:
Somebody on here has a magic miror and can see your sex!

And nobody on the web EVER misrepresents him or her..self as being other than his.. or her... sex.

Right now I'm wearing a tutu and eating funyuns.

Am I Homer Simpson or Marge?

And whom do I support? And do I REALLY support him or her or am I just saying I do in some obnoxious way to subvert my true intention, thus promoting my supposed foe?
Mind you, at this point, even I don't know!

bart at 9:01AM on Mar 8th 2008

33. That's magic mirror

bartypants at 9:04AM on Mar 8th 2008

34. To all the hysterical Hillary-haters who claim to be lovers not fighters ("it's just that she's so darn EVIL!!!" right?):

Please list the ACTUAL crimes Hillary has committed to make her so anathema to you. Besides conspiracy theories.
I thought Starr came up empty-handed. Were you on some secret committees?

Let's see: she's "self-serving." That's specific.
And you are: Mother Theresa?

These ad hominem attacks are even more vague than the "change" promised by Obama, a man 15 years Hill's junior, who has no ambition, we're to believe, and is completely altruistic. Sort of like Jesus!

Also, please explain why Hillary having women supporters is somehow bad. But it's good when O has them.

And those of you on here who claim to have ever been "ambivalent" about Hillary when you've been slamming her for months-- nice try.

If you don't like the Dem party's rules, take it up with the whole party.

The Obama camp, meanwhile, is suddenly obsessed with rules and regulations-- not so much concerning immigration, but hey, he and y'all are uniters, not dividers.
As for talking out of both sides, on NAFTA and troop withdrawal, duplicitous?
Why I NEVER!

And even though approximately 50% of the Dem electorate are for each candidate, your guy's a mandate.

Makes perfect sense, like Bush in 2000.

As long as you're ABSOLUTELY sure who the good GUYS are. You go with that hate, and keep blaming the Clintons for it.

L at 11:36AM on Mar 8th 2008

35. L, thanks for making my point.

Hillary did, indeed, cross the line. She said that Mc Cain would be a better choice than Obama, based on "national security" issues. She said the guy who wants a 100 year war -and is a republican- is a better choice than Obama. That is reason enough not to vote for her.

Just what is Hillary's "relevant expereince?" Is it voting for the Iraq war?

When this campaign season began, your ilk was claiming that her greatest virtue was her husband, Bill. We were getting a "two-fer." Vote for Hillary and get Bill as a bonus. Really? We're supposed to vote for the woman because she has a good man standing behind her?

Hillary says we won't engage in diplomacy during the first year of her administration because of some, 'porotocol.' That's at least one more year of war before we even talk to our opponents. How much will that year cost in lives and money?

If Hillary becomes the candidate, I will have no choice but to hold my nose and vote for her. I won't like it.

Health care is my primary issue. Hillary's plan would force people to pay for insurance whether they can afford it or not. Obama is the only
candidate who would cap and, in some cases, even roll back premiums.

Hillary Clinton is the largest recipient of "soft money" from the insurance, pharmaceutical and health care industies. (1/6 of the economy)

I'm pretty sick of being called a misogynist because I prefer Obama to Hillary.

Mosty though, I don't want the republicans to get into the White House again. Supporting Hillary is supporting Mc Cain and the status quo.

Captain Negative at 2:09PM on Mar 8th 2008

36. Patty, thank you for your thoughtful post. After the debacle of the Bush-Cheney Junta, the democrats *should* be able to waltz into the White House. The election *should* be a formality. Leave it to the democrats to find a way to screw it up.

Captain Negative at 2:22PM on Mar 8th 2008

37. 35. Patty, thank you for your thoughtful post. After the debacle of the Bush-Cheney Junta, the democrats *should* be able to waltz into the White House. The election *should* be a formality. Leave it to the democrats to find a way to screw it up.



Captain Negative at 2:22PM on Mar 8th 2008
************
Unfortunately, for us Captain we are a dysfunctional bunch at times.

Patty at 9:35PM on Mar 8th 2008

38. Dear L.

Do you truly think that Hillary’s behavior in the past several weeks is appropriate? Furthermore, are you prepared to support Hillary's dirty tactics that she has chosen to use in her quest to become president of the United States?

How can we in good conscience believe that what her campaign is doing is acceptable in any way, we were appalled by the way George W. Bush got to occupy the White House not once but twice. It was wrong then and to believe that it is acceptable now, it is nothing short of hypocrisy.

Are you not selling Hillary short by supporting her actions and thinking they are appropriate. Do you not believe that she has the qualifications to run her campaign on her own merits without trashing Senator Obama?

Furthermore, L if you have been paying close attention, and truly cared about the issues our nation is facing today you would agree that there is too much at stake right now. As Democrats, the party has an obligation to unite, and fight together against those who have done their best to trash our nation for eight years.

Senator Hillary Clinton’s campaign has been responsible for drawing blood first at every turn. Furthermore, most of the dirt they have kicked up has been nothing but dirt. You mentioned NAFTA in an earlier post. Had you been paying attention you would be up to date on the denials and apologies from the Canadian Government. They denied having agreements with Senator Obama’s campaign. In fact, the Canadian Government has stated that it was the Clinton campaign that has assure them that her negative NAFTA talks were just politics.

I am interested in finding the following things from you. A) If Senator Obama wins the Democratic nomination, are you ready to support your party come November? Perhaps you prefer to continue fighting with your fellow democrats and blowing any chance, we might have to prevail. B) Are you ready to allow this ridiculous bickering to continue between the Democrats, and end up seeing John McCain in the White House for at least four years?

The point that I wish to make is the following, Senator Clinton did cross the line when she stated that John McCain would bring more to the White House in November than Senator Obama. How can Senator Clinton rectify this if she does not win the nomination?

The actions Senator Clinton and those who assist her in running her campaign might just live to regret what is already out there for the GOP to turn around and use against the Democratic Party. I am curious to know if this is acceptable to you.

As a woman who has always admires Senator Clinton, I am extremely disappointed and disillusioned by her tactics. Furthermore, I am not choosing to attack her, only to share the facts as I see them.

Patty at 11:52PM on Mar 8th 2008

39. I'm enough of a cynic to believe that Hillary was setting herself up for 2012 by promoting McCain. If McCain wins, she can run again in 2012. If Obama wins, she could be out of the picture for two terms, by which time, she won't have any political capital left at all.

Clinton's was a ruthless move, which only fuels the fires of long-time Clinton haters who insist that the Clinton's are all about power. It looks like they are might be right.

Captain Negative at 3:15PM on Mar 10th 2008

40. Dear Negative, I appreciate your more civil response this time than I have oft met heretofore. However, I didn't address you specifically, and if I "proved" any of your "points," I'm still in the dark as to what they are.
You did not actually respond to any of my points, despite addressing me specifically.

However, as Obama likes to say "I'm happy to have that debate" about two serious issues you raised: (1) WAR
Our government doesn’t need to talk to any nations in order to withdraw from Iraq or Afghanistan, so Hillary's claim that she won't unconditionally promise to talk to other national leaders who are enemies is not inconsistent with ending the current wars. It's a smart move on her part to NEGOTIATE with other countries for common goals, rather than to appear to appease them up front. She’s not taking a position of belligerence; she’s taking a give and take position that’s been sorely missing from our international dealings for far too long. And we’ve been getting screwed every which way.
Unfortunately, the world does not currently offer simplistic hawk or dove choices. We have to deal with the world as it IS and HOPE to help make it better. China, Russia, North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, Venezuela. Not exactly doves without agenda.

TWO: HEALTH INSURANCE.
Obama wants to force parents, and others in times of hospital crisis!!! (defeats purpose which would be to try to prevent crisis and therefore lower costs when possible); Hillary wants to make sure everyone has to pay what they can. (I actually know quite a few people who don't buy it cuz they don't think they "need" it, not cuz they can't afford it.) There will be programs in place to help the needy. That's sort of the whole point.

Regarding other contentions about Hillary:
I am unaware of Hillary ever saying she would prefer McCain as prez over Obama. I believe she may have said he has more experience. The guy's a million years old; he's a veteran and an acclaimed war hero. Of course he does.
Obama DEFINITELY "implied" (one of his-- and his friends, the press'-- fave charges against Hill involves her "implications") that Reagan was a more significant president than Clinton. To me that is LOW and NEGATIVE. And very not-a-team-player as regards Democratic values. Reagan started the out-of-control-greed-is-good economic policies and the ideology that has taken the nation to the right of Nixon while calling it left (not that I'm wild about those simplistic notions of R vs. L, but it bears recognition) that led to greater gaps between haves and have-nots, record budget deficits, tax-changes that helped corporations and hurt the poor ,and he kick-started the non-regulated globalization movement-- all sorts of good stuff.
As for contentions of a “crossed line” (was it in the sand?), they seem silly to me, an obsession with gamesmanship that obscures issues that make or break real people’s quality of living.

Regarding contentions you attributed to my “ilk.“
I like Hillary best at this point for her policies, not for anyone else’s, including Bill's. I am not voting based on a social club and have nothing to prove as regards my personal biases.

The press, including Cenk, on the other hand…
By the way, unless there is another L on here, you are projecting. I wrote NONE of the things you ascribed to me. And no one here called you any names, Captain.

And Now, back to Cenk’s Regularly Scheduled Spin:

No issues, all out-of-context-quotes, innuendo, and the almighty strategy! Or talking to oneself. That's what matters in this campaign. And it sure is what can happen on these blogs.
Go cult of PERSONALITY!
Economics, shmeconomics.!Dollar, shmollar! It's rapidly losing value against the euro anyway.
Ecology... etc. U.S.A. ShmU S... oh never mind!

To those who asked: I don't think Hillary's ANY "dirtier," if AS dirty, as Obama. The press continues to choose to ignore his Canada-gate, his Slum-gate, and his troop-withdrawal-gate. And his hit men and women on the web and in the press have been doing so much of his dirty work for him so relentlessly for so long, it's easy for him to APPEAR positive. Anyone can play:
Just interpret EVERYTHING he does as positive, ignore or act indignant about everything else, and do the opposite with Hillary.
Presto-Change-O. It's MAGIC.

L at 3:14AM on Mar 11th 2008

41. L, you are clearly not paying attention to current events.

Hillary has said repeately that McCain is a better candidate than Obama. She has betrayed the party in her bid for power.

You want Hillary because she is a woman. That's all that matters to you and your ilk. You are a single issue voter and that issue is GENDER.

Consider yourself, "dismissed."

Captain Negative at 2:32PM on Mar 11th 2008

42. Hillary's betrayal of her party in her own words...

"I think that since we now know Sen. McCain will be the nominee for the Republican Party, national security will be front and center in this election. We all know that. And I think it’s imperative that each of us be able to demonstrate we can cross the commander-in-chief threshold,” the New York senator told reporters crowded into an infant’s bedroom-sized hotel conference room in Washington.

“I believe that I’ve done that. Certainly, Sen. McCain has done that and you’ll have to ask Sen. Obama with respect to his candidacy,” she said.

Calling McCain, the presumptive GOP nominee a good friend and a “distinguished man with a great history of service to our country,” Clinton said, “Both of us will be on that stage having crossed that threshold.”

Clinton couldn't stop herself from praising McCain: The pro-McCain comments were quickly and widely panned — so Clinton repeated them.

James Fallows reported on Wednesday,

"In a live CNN interview just now, Sen. Clinton repeated, twice, the 'Sen. McCain has a lifetime of experience, I have a lifetime of experience, Sen. Obama has one speech in 2002' line. By what logic, exactly, does a member of the Democratic party include the 'Sen. McCain has a lifetime of experience' part of that sentence?"
--------------------------------------------------

What is she going for? She might as well ask McCain if she can be his VP!!!!

Captain Negative at 2:40PM on Mar 11th 2008

43. If the truth could be told , Hillary would lose many voted.......
Hillary Clinton's convenient turnabout on NAFTA and free trade
Friday, March 07, 2008
Cleveland Plain Dealer Letters Editorial Page

Voters are shopping their jobs away at places like Wal-Mart and now are
vot ing their jobs away by supporting Hillary Clinton. Here is the real
timeline behind free trade:

1956 - U.S. government starts moving factories outside the United
States.

1970 - 120 factories moved from the United States to Mexico.

1980 - 400 maquiladora factories in Mexico.

1980s - While Hillary Clinton was on the Board of Directors of Wal-Mart,
about 1,000 U.S. factories were moved to Mexico.

1992 - 2,000 maquiladora factories in Mexico.

1994 - NAFTA is passed by a Democrat-controlled Congress and signed by
Democratic President Bill Clinton; number of factories moved to Mexico
doubles to more than 4,000; reports tell of "dirty manufacturing" in
Mexico causing health problems and birth defects.

1995 - President Clinton rushes $20 billion to save the Mexican economy.
Then he uses other means to rush even more money to Mexico. ( President
asked Congress for $40 billion but they gave him just $20 billion
instead- he said he would use other means to get the extra money to bail
out the Mexican peso )

1996 - Hillary says NAFTA is good for everyone.

2000 - Hillary, at an economic forum in Switzerland, praises business
efforts in supporting NAFTA.

None of the above stopped the flood of Mexican workers to the United
States seeking economic survival.

Now, after all of that, Hillary says free trade has to be tweaked at
bit.

Ray Tapajna

Cleveland Plain Dealer
Letters Editors
March 7, 2008

See what ten Mexican Bishops think about NAFTA in their signed plea to
censure it.
http://www.bizarrepolitics.com/nafta-cultural-death

View the Clinton Years, The American Dream Reversed artwork by Ray
Tapajna at
http://www.bizarrepolitics.com/clinton-years-american-dream-reversed
See many more related articles at http://tapsearch.com/tapartnews/id40.html
and Open Letter to all Political Candidates at http://www.phillyfuture.org/node/5885

dreamrenew at 11:22PM on Mar 12th 2008