Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where?


Back when this race was getting underway and no one had yet dropped out, I wrote about Barack's style of negative campaigning, in a diary published at kos called "Maureen Dowd, Not," which was a parody of Dowd's column championing Barack for stepping out onto the low road.  He'd made a joke that made Michelle laugh, alluding to Hillary's experience, married to Bill, and he wondered, in his now trademark style, how that qualified her to be president.  

I was astonished; he'd used sexist memes to get his audience to laugh at Hillary?  I had thought he was the nice guy, the one who would elevate the political discourse and treat all candidates with respect, as indeed he had suggested he would, with his words of praise for Bush and his admiration for how Rumsfled had managed the war.  So, months later, when he promised her some Chicago Smack Down, I thought, well, he's at least admitted it and now the media and his supporters will have to admit it too.  Like, right.  

I then saw his strategy as searching out anything in Hillary's or her surrogate's words that could be `understood,' (read misunderstood) to mean something offensive to African American citizens and then to express his manufactured outrage.  I said then that he was predictable, in that he would pass up no opportunity to smear her with the implicit charge of racism.

Although I thought he could probably convince some white people she was `using' veiled racism (for what, to turn off her supporters?), that black people would see right through it, and possibly fear some backlash, but essentially forgive him, because he was a new guy and he was trying to win.  Even I could understand, sort of, I mean new immigrant groups have long used fanning racism against African Americans to `identify' themselves with white Americans, who feared the `Otherness' of black citizens far more than they feared any immigrant `Others,' so they could `bond' over home-grown and common ugly racial prejudice, with the `the enemy of my enemy is my friend and makes a more acceptable neighbor' idea.

But my prediction that Barack himself knew better, and was being only as calculated and cynical as most other presidential candidates before him in `demonizing' his opponent, and so would stop when it no longer `helped' has been proven overly optimistic.  Bush did that to McCain, with his claim that John had fathered an illegitimate black daughter, which could apparently still offend enough racist pugs to sink John's dream. Outside the question of why this would be a big deal even if it were true (is it the illegitimate part or the black part?) it certainly showed what might be seen as `prep-school racist smack down sneer and jeer.'

John Kerry was `taken down,' over the flip flop metaphor, and he was jeered and sneered at on the floor of that now infamous GOP convention, that showed America a mob of fools slapping rubber flip flops every which way and jeering their blockheads off.  That was a smack down for sure, and the fact that racism wasn't involved was the only bright light in an ugly campaign.  

My prediction was wrong, because Barack has kept up his `game,' long past time when it `helped' him win over undecided Hilary Haters, and into overtime, where he's losing support over it, so much so that he's enraged many of Hillary supporters with the disrespect he shows her, so much so that he may have sparked a grass roots mainstream Democratic movement to bring professionalism into our party.  Had he `closed the deal' early on, likely no one would have noticed or cared about his jeers and sneers, and had he realized, in a cynical calculation, that this was no longer helping and stopped, he would have shown himself to be an adept politician, able to shift modes as the race goes on toward the goal of `winning.'  

Had he seen himself as the clear winner, surely he would have stopped jeering and sneering at her, and would have reached out to her supporters in a way that would show us he never really meant it. Surely if his purported style of bottom up governing were his truth, he would have listened to the 70 percent of Democrats who want a unity ticket. He would have used her strengths, asked that she be in charge of agencies like homeland security, for example, that have long needed a professional and expert head.  How nice would that have made us all feel, we'd see him as a big man who knew what it takes to unite and to bring real change to our government.  

But Barack went `a bridge too far,' when he `responded' to an analogy she used that had nothing to do with him: She's been asked countless times by reporters why she hasn't dropped out already for goodness sake, why she keeps dragging out the primary season with her obstreperous refusal to `admit' she can't possibly win even though she's `harming' Barack's chances in the GE by showing it's not yet over, and that she has at least as much support as Barack from Democrats expected to vote in the fall. To this constant, how dare you, she answers with history, other races went on even longer, this isn't new, remember, this primary and that one? And in the end the party will come together, because she'll unite behind the winner.

Barack's response is now the stuff of legends.  He pretended her only hope to win the nomination would be if he's off'd. Since the fears of African Americans that he might be killed have been often expressed, and deeply felt, his unveiled charge was if possible even more ugly.  For a man who attended a church where his pastor and at least some of his fellow parishioners believe AIDS was a government plot against African Americans, Barack well knows that ugly rumors can be accepted as fact, no matter how incredible. Indeed, some citizens hold equally incredible `beliefs' about Barack's background and his agenda should he win the highest office in the land. There are always some who will believe the most offensive and incredible of charges, and Barack must know that.   The only `political' spin I can give him is that this gives him an ugly argument against asking her onto his ticket; `she wants the presidency over his dead body; no wonder she'd like to be a heartbeat away?'

This will be known as his `bridge too far,' in that he's exposed himself, as an unpleasant man, not so smart after all, who will never stop creating `meanings' to smear Hillary (and who else) with the ugliest of motivations. It now seems likely that Barack isn't just a politician; he really hates her, and `believes' she's some monster out to get him.  We can't say that he'll do anything to win the presidency, but may say with some evidence that in his `paranoia' he'll charge anything, even when it hurts him the most.  That's the `fatal flaw' psychologists have noticed in some candidates who can't win the biggest cheese: for some psychological reason they have to be `true to themselves,' even if `themselves' isn't worthy of being true to, and even when it means they reduce their chances. One thinks of Al Gore selecting the impeacher Joe Lieberman as a running mate and excluding Bill Clinton from his campaign.  Fervently held so-called high roads, as much as fervently held ugly low roads are equally stupid in presidential races. Statespersons see themselves as representatives of something bigger than themselves.   (To paraphrase Barack, I'm not against politicking; I'm against stupid politicking.)

But on a cheery note, Barack has shown us all how to play jeer and sneer. Some of us remember this `game' from elementary or `primary,' school, when many little boys still see little girls as scary or creepy `Others' who must be warded off with incantations and spitting at and the like.   I recall a survey taken in a fourth grade classroom, where the children were to choose which children they most wanted to sit next to and which ones least.  There was one little outcast boy named Leslie in that classroom, who was sensitive and bad at sports, and was the scariest `Other' to the rest of the boys, judging by how they taunted him. One little boy answered in the survey that he'd least like to sit next to "Leslie, and all the girls."  

The tried and true way to bond with `the popular group,' is to taunt the common enemy.  It's the stuff of bullying and the making of outcast children, some of whom grow up to be dangerous.  

Thanks to Barack, and with help from Marc Rubin at Tom Paine, we can now all learn how to play this `uplifting and inspiring' game of Jeer and Sneer.  Rubin noticed that after Barack first `assumed' she meant she hoped she would win because she hoped he'd be killed, he called her remark "unfortunate."  He then accepted an apology from Clinton that she didn't give him "because he didn't have one coming."  Rubin sees this as "the equivalent of hitting the ground after you sucker punch someone so the person can't hit back, and if they do you scream that you're being attacked."  How many times have we seen bullies do that with weaker kids, to get an `excuse' to beat up on them, and if not in person, then in movies?  (If any sixth graders who don't know this are watching, that's how it's done.) The real fun part of this trick is the audience who does see through it, sees that she didn't hit him but he acted hit, and then played her victim, and made a weak fool of her, to their delight or dismay. When he pretends to take the high road, and `accepts' her apology, he's taking his bow.  

Then, when it's supposedly over, he must enjoy it more; he takes Keith Olberman's insane rant and sends it out to all newspersons. See what she is, Keith knows, she's a cootie girl. Ick.  It's jeer and sneer.  

On a depressing note, I heard an African American man, who was on a show about the lack of color in the GOP, state that we now know that "The Clinton's" are racists, and no one told him he was full of shit.  

I've often had the strange sensation in this campaign that there are two alternate realities.  Hillary's campaign is old fashioned: reach out to the voters and ask for their votes.  She's cheery and upbeat and optimistic about the future of this nation. It's like a remake of Rogers and Hammerstein's, State Fair, updated with representation from all of America. She's the American Girl candidate, running against Bush, pledging to reverse his policies and bring efficiencies and professionalism to Washington. One of her big applause lines is `it's a tough job, hire me, and I'll clean up the Bush mess."  

Barack's case seems mainly to be about her, how bad she is, how wrong she's been, how awful she is, how racist and selfish and horrid she is.  His campaign is more like Neil La Bute's, In the Company of Men.  

So now we may be delivered a seemingly flawed human being as our candidate, and we'll have to support him, and how much will he enjoy that, because John McCain wants to expand our nuclear arsenal to include more so-called tactical nuclear bombs. John is on the crooked talk express, a nice guy on the outside, and bent on the inside.  Between Barack and John, there is a clear worser.

But we still may get our American Girl, ready and willing to work her buns off to achieve a better nation.

Go Hilary!!

UPDATE: I got this from a commenter, seems I heard the statement incorrectly and here is the correction: his is a follow up to this comment by kasjogren What Anna Shane heard: On a depressing note, I heard an African American man, who was on a show about the lack of color in the GOP, state that we now know that "The Clinton's" are racists, and no one told him he was full of shit. What was actually said: TONY COX: Hurricane Katrina aside, for the moment, what do you think are the main Republican platforms that make minorities shy away from the party, Debra? Ms. DEBRA DICKERSON: Interesting. I think that the - their orientation against considering race to be a prime mover in a lot of situations. That basic disagreement that race is still a big problem for people who are not part of the white race, that's the major stumbling block. I think entrepreneurship in that sort of thing is very appealing to blacks, but it's that we don't want to talk about race, and we believe ourselves to be color blind and it's all just about paying attention and working hard. That is the entry point until the party can understand that we still- that many black people still see race as a major issue and it's not a comfortable place to bring up things about race. So that's the major stumbling block and race is so far down on their list, and I think a lot of black people have a lot of affinity for a lot of Republican ideas. Again, we are a very conservative people. But many of us still agree that race is still a stumbling block. And when they say no it's not, that's your basic problem right there. Mr. ERIC BROWN: And I find it interesting, because this present election cycle has really shown - or should have shown a lot of blacks that, does race really matter with the young Democrats? I mean the Clintons have gone out and their surrogates have gone out to prove that, you know, race doesn't matter. Look how they have gone on to treat the people of South Carolina. Look how they have gone on to talk about how the, you know, working-class white person is more important than a black person, that's who we are going after as far of votes. COX: Yeah, but the counter-argument to that, obviously is Barack Obama, the fact that the party has embraced him and is supporting him.

Display:


So bitter, so sad. (2.00 / 10)

Barack's case seems mainly to be about her, how bad she is, how wrong she's been, how awful she is, how racist and selfish and horrid she is.  

Barack's about to become the nominee of your party. I suggest you take a new look at his "case".


should we go outside? / should we break some bread? / are you'nterested?
by Firewall on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:40:17 PM EST

Re: So bitter, so sad. (2.00 / 11)

his other case is that he isn't McCain,  Works for me.  


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:41:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Your comment... (2.00 / 4)

says absolutely everything.  Pity I can only give 2 points I'd like to turn up the volume to 11.


by tonedevil on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:08:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Your comment... (2.00 / 2)

hopefully some BHO'ers will learn to be as classy as anna, someday


by zerosumgame on Thu May 29, 2008 at 07:07:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

"Barack's about to become the nominee" (2.00 / 2)

Albeit a very flawed nominee.


by izarradar on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:44:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So flawed that ... (2.00 / 4)

... he is on the brink of pulling off one of the biggest upsets in modern American politics.


by Brad G on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:50:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Just because someone wins (2.00 / 1)

doesn't mean they can't be flawed.  


by izarradar on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:54:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: On that, we agree (none / 0)

The poster was commenting that Obama was seriously flawed.  A seriously flawed candidate does not accomplished what Obama is about to do.

Obama is mortal; so is Hillary.


by Brad G on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:02:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: On that, we agree (2.00 / 1)

uh, try JFK or WJC, seriously flawed winners...


by zerosumgame on Thu May 29, 2008 at 07:08:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: On that, we agree (none / 0)

Oh and Thomas Jefferson, a very flawed winner


by trytobereal on Thu May 29, 2008 at 09:42:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That'd be true regardless of the nominee (none / 0)


by Djo Dos on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:20:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So flawed that ... (none / 0)

primary only


by Montague on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:16:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Someone's a sore loser. n/t (none / 0)


by Brad G on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:03:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Someone's a sore loser. n/t (none / 0)

You're right.  That will be YOU in November.  Enjoy.


by Montague on Fri May 30, 2008 at 12:58:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hmmm... Yeah (2.00 / 7)

What's that old saying about not counting chickens before they're hatched?

Oh yeah - that's it :)


Donate to Hillary Now!
by alegre on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:46:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Are you going to support our nominee (1.93 / 16)

if our nominee isn't Hillary Clinton, alegre? I've asked you several times, but you never seem to have an answer.


should we go outside? / should we break some bread? / are you'nterested?
by Firewall on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:49:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you going to support our nominee (none / 0)

Campskunk - why would you downrate that comment?


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:36:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you going to support our nominee (2.00 / 6)

Ratings abuse. Reported.


Obama in November.
by Artemis Jax on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:37:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you going to support our nominee (2.00 / 2)

Is it not spamming Alegre when you are asked the SAME question every diary you write and you ignore?

Why do you ignore.

Until you answer I must assume your answer is no, in which case I wonder why you are here.


http://www.truepat.org/
by CrushTheGOP2008 on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:43:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you going to support our nominee (2.00 / 1)

she has answered it.


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:00:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you going to support our nominee (none / 0)

What was the answer?


by bottl4 on Thu May 29, 2008 at 07:16:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you going to support our nominee (none / 0)

http://www.mydd.com/comments/2008/5/9/23 3114/8698/47?mode=alone;showrate=1#47

and i have posted this MANY times now - yet keeps being asked.


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Thu May 29, 2008 at 08:56:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you going to support our nominee (none / 0)

yes when it has been answered and you simply spam the same question over and over to try to pretend it was not. That is not just spamming it is pure Rove-tactics and lying.


by zerosumgame on Thu May 29, 2008 at 07:11:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you going to support our nominee (none / 0)

politicsmatters -what happened to your shame diary?  I was just reading it and it disappeared?


by interestedbystander on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:43:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you going to support our nominee (2.00 / 1)

I decided to delete it because I wanted to keep in the spirit of Chill - the spirit of the top diary on the Rec list now.

Oh, and also there were some very nasty comments that were getting me mad.  I'd rather feel mellow right now.

But if you want to see the link I posted on that, it's here: http://www.89infdivww2.org/


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:47:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you going to support our nominee (none / 0)

Good move, I guess.

If one is still on the exploit "X" group of people no matter how heinous it seems ticket then there is nothing we can do to save them.

Your diary just gave them another platform.

Good removing it, lets move on....


http://www.truepat.org/
by CrushTheGOP2008 on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:49:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you going to support our nominee (none / 0)

WTF? Why did it get removed, it better not be over some "double posting" nonsense.


http://www.truepat.org/
by CrushTheGOP2008 on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:47:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you going to support our nominee (none / 0)

No, I deleted it. See above.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:49:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you going to support our nominee (none / 0)

Oh, and -- thanks for asking.


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:48:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Are you going to support our nominee (none / 0)

Pleasure - didn't get far through the comments, but the link was awesome.


by interestedbystander on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:01:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Commenter stalking violates site rules (1.00 / 0)

and merits a TR.


by catfish2 on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:51:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Why do people ask alegre personal (none / 0)

questions?  It is grossly inappropriate to do that on the open internets, as everybody here knows. And the Constitution promises that our votes are nobody's business but our own, no matter who or how many times a person asks this taboo question or how loudly or often they DEMAND an answer.  Amemricans have the protection of a private ballot.  Even superdelegates and alegre.

When someone asked, inappropriatly this question of Geraldine Ferraro, she answered something like:

"I am going to do exactly what Michell Obama said she would do if Barack is not the nominee.  Would she vote for Clinton.  Michelle answers. 'I'll think about it'!"  

So lay off.  If anyone here wants to help people vote a winner to the White House, vote for Clinton.  Then nobody will have to work so hard to stop the race and not count the votes and threaten the opposition.  Who want's to be bullied into a vote?

Democrats could select a nominee that nobody has to be pressured into committing to.  Maybe that would help put a Democrat in the White House.  Just a thought.

Has anyone wondered how we got this far away from being fair and respectful and interested in equal treatment and democratic values?

If a candidate comes across to some voters as misogynistic, manipulative, dishonest and not into doing the work of the job, by what reasoning should those voters be forced to vote them in?  Maybe the candidate and their campaign should be paying attention to the problems voters have with the candidate  and actually do something to earn the votes he needs.  Or maybe he is just the wrong candidate to choose.  I would suspect anyone whose supporters tried to stop the race and cut out voters.  Nancy Pelosi, who has not well hidden her preferance for Obama, comes out today and demands that the superdelegates who legally have until August to decide their vote, and have the total right for it to be private forever, should come out now and delcare themselves.  It is so outrageous as to be unAmerican and certainly undemocratic and totally outside her role.

This is one of many attempts to manipulate the election.  It use to be wrong.  Whoever made this seem right cannot be good for us.

I didn't know that the party's goal was to get Obama nomminated and to do it without regard to how many voters they got rid of. Ignore, deny and fight off and shut out any data or person or rules or clear signs that say that this is not a good idea.

It looks like some party leaders have lost sight of the goal, picking a nominee voters want to see in the White House.

Don't ask alegre or anybody else who they are going to vote for.  If you want their votes, earn them.  Behave in such a way as to make your candidate look good to someone who is looking hard.  Don't waste everybody's time trying so desperately to keep people from seeing, from saying, from studying, from knowing what's wrong with Obama. And don't treat Hilary like a piece of garbage!  For starters, that will make Obamaworld less unattractive to millions of voters.

If you really want to help us get the White House and restore the party, help get someone more qualified and suited for the job and more favored by more of the actual voters nominated.


by itsadryheat on Thu May 29, 2008 at 10:13:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What's that old saying (2.00 / 7)

about not bringing a knife to a gunfight?  Oh yeah, that's it.  :)


by JJE on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:53:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hmmm... Yeah (2.00 / 2)

You are so right.  Clinton thought she would have this thing wrapped up by Super Tuesday.  I hope she learned her lesson.


Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius
by Blue Neponset on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:57:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hmmm... Yeah (none / 0)

Or dream up insane paranoid plots before they're "hatched" at Tinfoilis44.


McCainuire, The Wrath Of Not Enough Naps.
by catilinus on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:01:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hmmm... Yeah (none / 0)

At the risk of mixing metaphors, the chickens have hatched and the fat lady is warming up for her performance.


by Same As It Ever Was on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:06:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hmmm... Yeah (2.00 / 1)

Yeah, he's only winning in the only measure that actually matters.

GIVE.

ME.

A.

BREAK.


Obama in November.
by Artemis Jax on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:37:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So bitter, so sad. (none / 0)

Troll diary?  Puhleeze.


by Montague on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:20:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So bitter, so sad. (2.00 / 1)

Maybe we can agree the sour grapes diaries should end. Remember our daughters are watching. As feminists show some class and don't tarnish Hillary's gains for women.


by ImpeachBushCheney on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:58:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 9)

So now we may be delivered a seemingly flawed human being as our candidate

Are you suggesting that Clinton is not a 'flawed human being'?

I doubt it, but that's how it comes across, not only in the above statement, but in the entire diary. I know I'm on the other side, so I won't try to convince you that you WAY overstate the 'dirty' nature of Obama's politics. But aren't the Clintons the ones known for rough and tumble politics? Isn't Hillary the one who said, 'this is the fun part?' Isn't she the one who said something about fires and kitchens?

Come on now . . .


by vadasz on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:47:51 PM EST

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 1)

whoops,

that should say 'heat and kitchens.'


by vadasz on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:48:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (none / 0)

Oh
my
God.

This time we are actually going to nominate a flawed human being?

How could we do that?!!


We care about politics because we know politics matters for people's lives and opportunities.
by politicsmatters on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:18:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (none / 0)

I have no flaws, so, umm... CrazyDrumGuy for President! I'm taking it to the convention, baby!


Stop the racism. Fight the smears.
by CrazyDrumGuy on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:23:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I need more convincing (2.00 / 2)

Sometimes our perceptions are not backed up by empirical data.

Happens to me all the time.

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/5/29/1417 35/976


by emptythreatsfarm on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:48:16 PM EST

Re: I need more convincing (none / 0)

Excellent link.  Thank you.  


by oliver cromwell on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:01:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Falsehoods, innuendo, distortions, and straw men (2.00 / 6)

I'm confident you can do better than this.


by JJE on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:52:02 PM EST

Re: Falsehoods, innuendo, distortions, (2.00 / 6)

You're just upset because your guy is bad and Hillary is winning this thing. GO HILLARY!!!!  STRAIGHT TO THE WHITE HOUSE!!!

PS:  Send money!


by rf7777 on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:18:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Falsehoods, innuendo, distortions, (none / 0)

Don't hold back either!  What's a poor fourteen year old going to do with a new bike anyway?  Especially when he can serve his country by bailing out a failed campaign!


Obama 2008!
by lollydee on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:57:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Falsehoods, innuendo, distortions, (none / 0)

oh, that child is now party of history, she humbly accepted his donation and she spoke of him and respected him, even though he's young. It would have been cruel to refuse his offering, being young and poor doesn't mean you can't be part of history.  


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Thu May 29, 2008 at 06:05:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 5)

I'm proud that Obama has taken the high road in this campaign. He has often been more gracious than he should have been. We should all be proud of our nominee. Now let's get to work beating up on McCain.


"No matter what happens, I will work for the nominee of the Democratic Party because we must win in November." -Hillary Clinton
by fugazi on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:54:35 PM EST

The High Road??? (2.00 / 1)

Did you even see him strutting for the camera in those jeans?  OMG!  It made Bush's codpiece moment seem tame.


by izarradar on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:58:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The High Road??? (none / 0)

Yeah, cause posing in jeans when stuck on a plane with the press for 10 hours a day is exactly like Bush's Mission Accomplished moment.  The stupid never ends around here.



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:02:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The High Road??? (none / 0)

i thought he looked fine.  


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:05:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 7)

Barack's response is now the stuff of legends.  He pretended her only hope to win the nomination would be if he's off'd.

Someday you'll realize just how few view the situation this way.  I'd be shocked if they  number in the hundreds, and I strongly suspect it is fewer than even that.

The fact is that Obama's campaign issued one tepid response when the RFK nontroversy broke that was totally in line with language used by every campaign.  Hillary issued a similar response when the right wing attacked Kerry over his botched joke in 2006.

The Obama campaign did make a mistake when they sent an email to the media list linking to the KO Special Comment, but it does not come close to rising to the level you want to make it.  It just doesn't.

The "outrage" over this seems totally contrived and over the top.  It looks like someone searching for reasons to hate Obama manufacturing yet another reason.



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:57:14 PM EST

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 1)

Obama's gracious response to her RFK assassination remark is just one of many instances where Obama acted graciously, and refused attack Clinton when he could easily have done so.


"No matter what happens, I will work for the nominee of the Democratic Party because we must win in November." -Hillary Clinton
by fugazi on Thu May 29, 2008 at 02:59:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 5)

You mean you didn't see the TV ads, the speeches, the fundraising material, the banners, and the stickers that exploited this issue?  Oh wait... that was HRC and bitter.  It all gets so muddled.



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:02:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 3)

And then there was when Obama said he's not sure but he'll have to take Hillary's word for the fact that she's not a Muslim. Oh wait, that was her again.


"No matter what happens, I will work for the nominee of the Democratic Party because we must win in November." -Hillary Clinton
by fugazi on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:06:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No No No (2.00 / 3)

Hillary's campaign is old fashioned: reach out to the voters and ask for their votes.  She's cheery and upbeat and optimistic about the future of this nation. It's like a remake of Rogers and Hammerstein's, State Fair, updated with representation from all of America. She's the American Girl candidate, running against Bush, pledging to reverse his policies and bring efficiencies and professionalism to Washington.

You remember the "professionalism", the cheeriness, the upbeat nature of the "the sky will open up, a chorus of angels will yada yada kumbayah this and that" right?

That's the professionalism we need.

Why, I clearly remember the scene from State Fair...

Abel Frake starts waving his arms and childishly mocking the other pigs in the fair competition.

It's right after Melissa sends out mailers questioning the bona fides of her opponents mincemeat -- but before she starts ranting "Shame on you" to all the other contestants.


by zonk on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:49:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No No No (none / 0)

clever, wish you were on my side.  


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:54:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No No No (2.00 / 1)

But that's just it.  We ARE on the same side...Aren't we?


by oliver cromwell on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:04:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No No No (2.00 / 1)

not yet


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:17:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No No No (2.00 / 2)

Well then what can I say?  I don't feel like you are "on the other side."  But that must be because I support such an obviously negative candidate.  Go figure.


by oliver cromwell on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:24:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No No No (none / 0)

or I see it as still possible for either and I have a first choice for our nominee?  


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:42:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No No No (2.00 / 1)

It is perfectly legitimate to prefer a different candidate, but it doesn't pit us on opposite "sides."  The opposite side wants McCain to be the next President and I hope to a non-existent god that you aren't on that side.


by oliver cromwell on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:10:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (1.71 / 7)

When things get confusing like that, it often helps to restate your assumptions.  Or maybe just reach for the rosary beads...  

Hail Hillary, full of grace...


Donate to Hillary Now!
by guazatragicness on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:48:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (1.00 / 1)

we need to hide rate the above, his signature is deceptive.


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:59:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 1)

That seems like ratings abuse to me.  /shrug



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:05:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (none / 0)

considering that it goes to youtube and not to where the link title pretends it is then it should be considered malware and a possible attmept to infect peoples PC's. The only abuse is the sig, and you.


by zerosumgame on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:07:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 2)

Ha! This comment is nuttier than a squirrel turd.


Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing glove.
by fogiv on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:12:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 1)

Malware?  On YouTube?  I think this is just an attempt to hide comments of a poster with a signature you don't like.


by Say Car Ramrod on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:23:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (none / 0)

it's deceptive, and you don't find out where it leads until it's too late?  


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:06:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I've got your malware (1.50 / 2)

right here. :)


Stop the racism. Fight the smears.
by CrazyDrumGuy on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:26:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I've got your malware (none / 0)

Ow, my sensory organs!  We must hide-rate you into oblivion!


Donate to Hillary Now!
by guazatragicness on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:14:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (none / 0)

Do you know what Malware is?

You tube can "infect" someone's PC? Wierd. I work for Kaspersky and I am fairly sure we don't have that on our list..


If you are not voting Obama, please let me know so I can replace your sorry ass with another new voter.
by Darknesse on Thu May 29, 2008 at 08:01:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 2)

Uhh, no.  It's not remotely HR worthy.  UPRATED.


Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing glove.
by fogiv on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:08:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 1)

"we need to hide rate the above, his signature is deceptive" Royal "We"? The Black Night is invincible. This video hits the nail, doesn't it? Let's call it a draw!
by french imp on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:04:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (none / 0)

Oh, get over it.  It's Monty Python -- mild stuff by internet standards.  And if you expect links to always take you to where you think they should point, then the web is a dangerous place.


Donate to Hillary Now!
by guazatragicness on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:12:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 2)

"Someday you'll realize just how few view the situation this way."

There's an actual number: 310 people.
The last 100,000 posts at Tinfoilis44 were made by 310 users. Some of our very own here at MyDD are proud to be part of that 310.

310 People making 100,000 posts....


McCainuire, The Wrath Of Not Enough Naps.
by catilinus on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:09:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 1)

A(n admittedly tiny) chorus of cynics that only grows louder and more (irrelevant) dissonant...


should we go outside? / should we break some bread? / are you'nterested?
by Firewall on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:10:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (none / 0)

On one site their cynics, on another they're crickets.


McCainuire, The Wrath Of Not Enough Naps.
by catilinus on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:13:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 1)

Yep, saw that.  Person did a lot of work crunching those numbers.  310 people, 100k posts over 18 weeks.  The definition of a fringe.



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:12:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (1.60 / 5)

But think of it: these people could not-vote 100,000 times in November and totally make Obama fall short!


Donate to Hillary Now!
by guazatragicness on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:51:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (none / 0)

Ratings abuse anna - this is snark, get over yourself.


by interestedbystander on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:17:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (none / 0)

it's the  sign line, click on, if you dare. It doesn't go where it claims to, and that's deceptive.  


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:25:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 1)

Site Guidelines:
"Do not troll rate (rating as 1) another user's comment unless it is a comment that is an attack on another user. Do not hide (rating as 0) a comment unless it is an abuse of the guidelines. Abusing this privilege will result in all your ratings being erased and/or getting a warning, or being banned."

I missed the part in there about downrating for "deceptive" sig lines. Admittedly, my vision's a little off nowadays....

Can you point it out please?


McCainuire, The Wrath Of Not Enough Naps.
by catilinus on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:43:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (none / 0)

I know - it's a joke.  I think most people get how it works.


by interestedbystander on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:45:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 1)

310 People making 100,000 posts....

This is Sparta! No wait, um, I mean...


by looty on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:10:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 1)

Hey  Map, read this quote:  

When asked about her husband's security in the White House and Clinton's RFK remarks at a Phoenix fundraiser Tuesday, she reassures the crowd saying:

"Send us good vibes. Pray for us. Think positive thoughts. But most of all, be vigilant. Be vigilant about stopping this kind of talk. It's not funny. You don't have to like Barack to dislike that kind of talk. Be vigilant about stopping that kind of talk."

And you think I'm overreacting?  This is a very sad thing, indeed.  
 


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:05:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (none / 0)

I read the entire article including the question she was asked.  You aren't fooling anyone.



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:06:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (none / 0)

then I'm fooled too, put it in context for me? I'd like to be wrong on this one.  


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:12:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

And you think I'm overreacting? (none / 0)

Yes.


by batgirl71 on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:20:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You spelled Hillary wrong and yes (2.00 / 1)

Obama is flawed, just like all of us.  I would suggest some self-reflection and reflection into the candidate of your choice as well, you make it seem as if she wasn't fighting with all her heart, warts and all.  

Point being, is you are going to have to get over the fact that your candidate is losing/lost and it's not Barack's fault.


Please don't associate moose with Palin, she likes to kill them.
by KLRinLA on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:02:07 PM EST

Re: Jeering and Sneering All the Way Where? (2.00 / 4)

I'm taking rage's advise, and trying to empathize with the disappointment you must be going through, so I won't comment on your opinions, I do wish you well and hope you can come around to supporting the democratic nominee in the fall.


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:03:07 PM EST

Well one positive thing i can say (2.00 / 5)

about this diary is that it is very well written.

The only Democratic candidate to demonize Hillary Clinton, is Hillary Clinton.  Obama has run the most positive political campaign I've ever seen and she has consistently responde with vile kitchen sink tactics.

Hitting back when attacked unfairly is not ditry politics.  


by Same As It Ever Was on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:03:57 PM EST

Re: Well one positive thing i can say (2.00 / 1)

"claws come out"<---yeah positive.


by soyousay on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:06:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well one positive thing i can say (none / 0)

More like descriptive.  

And exceedingly mild.

It is a political campaign.  


by Same As It Ever Was on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:14:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well one positive thing i can say (2.00 / 1)

It is a political campaign.
That it is...It's nice to see an Obama supporter realize that Obama has not won the primary.


by soyousay on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:24:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well one positive thing i can say (none / 0)

Not yet.  Soon though.


by Same As It Ever Was on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:39:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well one positive thing i can say (none / 0)

Maybe, maybe not. It may be a convention moment in August.


by soyousay on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:58:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well one positive thing i can say (none / 0)

LOL. Care to put a side wager on that?


by PhilFR on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:29:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well one positive thing i can say (none / 0)

What is so horrible about "claws come out"? Perhaps some subtlety of the english language is escaping me here. To me this just means 'my opponent is getting agressive'.
by french imp on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:11:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Well one positive thing i can say (none / 0)

And when he called her "disingenuous" and said that she would "say anything and change nothing" and refused to give "straight answers to tough questions," he was being very positive.  I thought his depiction of her years as first lady as Hillary "holding teas" in the White House was also very positive.


Linfar's co-blogger opposing John McCain
by psychodrew on Thu May 29, 2008 at 05:27:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thank you Anna - (1.90 / 10)

This is an absolutely brilliant essay.  Shame many here won't get it.  They've already bought Extenz and really believe it's made them bigger.


by Tolstoy on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:33:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Great Diary (2.00 / 5)

My prediction was wrong, because Barack has kept up his `game,' long past time when it `helped' him win over undecided Hilary Haters, and into overtime, where he's losing support over it, so much so that he's enraged many of Hillary supporters with the disrespect he shows her, so much so that he may have sparked a grass roots mainstream Democratic movement to bring professionalism into our party.
That's exactly what happen. The disrespect for the Clintons astonishes many of us that actually saw the good that a Clinton administration did. This behavior is extremely damaging to the Democratic party.


by soyousay on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:04:27 PM EST

Re: Great Diary (2.00 / 2)

You know what is more damaging to the Party?  

Not voting for the Democratic nominee for President.  


Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius
by Blue Neponset on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:16:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Great Diary (none / 0)

Actually, not voting for the Democratic nominee is a great wake-up call for the party. They may start listening to the people rather than insiders/supers.


by soyousay on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:26:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Great Diary (2.00 / 2)

trying

not

to

take . . . troll  . . . bai--

okay, you mean like the 100+ 'outsiders' that had lined up to vote for Hillary before the campaign even started?

Or the last Democratic president?

Or virtually the entire DLC establishment?


by vadasz on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:45:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Great Diary (2.00 / 1)

(doh! now I've got hook-in-mouth syndrome again)


by vadasz on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:45:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Great Diary (2.00 / 1)

FYI; those who do not support Obama are not trolls. This is not MyddObama


by soyousay on Thu May 29, 2008 at 03:52:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

truedat (2.00 / 1)

but sometimes it seems like myDDHillary.


*&=4eva
by BlogSurrogate57 on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:04:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Great Diary (2.00 / 3)

It's not your support for Clinton, it's your repetition of the falsehood that Obama is and has been the candidate of the insiders. It's just flat out untrue . . . and if I were wise I would have left it uncommented upon . . . which I will do henceforth.


by vadasz on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:05:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

It's a disagreement, nothing more (none / 0)

Obama has the majority of the supers. In my opinion, that is the support of party insiders. The fact that you don't agree with me does not make me a troll....or does not make you a troll, for that matter.


by soyousay on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:10:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: It's a disagreement, nothing more (2.00 / 3)

I agree.  Let's eliminate the SD's and whoever is ahead wins.



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Thu May 29, 2008 at 04:13:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Great Diary (2.00 / 1)

he's the candidate of Kerry and Dashele and Kennedy.  She has some insider too, but Dean's thumb is on his ballots, as is Donna's. I don't care about that, KDK hate Bill and don't want him back in Washington in any capacity and so of course they'll do whatever they can to bring in a candidate who could reduce her appeal. What I don't like is the same lack of leadership that couldn't impeach the war criminal Bush.  Isn't Scott's book funny?  The best kept secret everybody knew.  They allowed this sexism and over the top racist charges to stand.  Just a little leadership would