Hillary has momentum

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

Obama surrogate Donna Brazil first introduced race as a campaign issue responding to Bill's "fairytale" remarks.  

Accusing someone of telling fairytales is blatently racist, right?

Blacks had initially supported Clinton and held back on supporting Obama until they believed he was a viable candidate.

Brazile said that Bill's referances to Barack as a "kid" with "fairytale" ideas were insulting, if for no other reason than because he is a US Senator.  And she said that, as an African-American, she found the the tone "depressing".  But the main thrust of her criticism was that it sounded like "sour grapes" from Bill, and that he should spend his time helping Hillary get her message out, not "go down the road" of criticizing Barack.  

If you are providing this as an example of Obama's people playing the race card, it's weak at best.  Brazile's answers were far more nuanced.  Interestingly, the Clinton campaign followed her advice...at least until Bill's recent "patriot" comments.  To which, Obama's folks said that it stunk of McCarthyism.  Again, not racism.

[Hometown]

Bill said (I'm paraphrasing) that he wishes the election could be about issues.

I have heard many people say the same thing and not one of them has been accused of McCarthyism.

We've seen some real McCarthyism over the last seven years come from Baby Bush and I think it's a disservice to all of us to lob that criticism at Clinton.

A lot of this is going to look really funny in retrospect.

Now, Mr. Little, a long time ago you made a remark about your political leanings and you left me with the impression that you were an independent on a crusade to squash "truthiness."  Did I misread your earlier statement?

In this thread you leave me with the impression that you believe the Democrats have drifted away from their core beliefs and we have moved too far to the right.

If that is the case, I understand your concern, but I do not believe taking the party back to the left is a prescription for winning in the general election or governing after we win the White House.

I've heard people describe Obama as being more liberal than Clinton but his support of the Bush/Cheney energy bill and his criticism of affirmative action causes me to wonder exactly where he stands.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown



We've seen some real McCarthyism over the last seven years come from Baby Bush and I think it's a disservice to all of us to lob that criticism at Clinton.

Specifics, please?  I know how much you dislike generalities so I figured this was an oversight on your part.

[cannon_fodder]

Yep, I remember the tour of the BOk center.  As we arrived the final pieces were being put in place and sun was shining off of the gleaming terrazzo floors.  The luxury boxes were completed and the leather chairs were very comfy when we sat in them, staring down at the hardwood floor.  "Now that is what happened."

Oh wait, I misspoke.  The building was still under heavy construction, the terrazzo floors were not in yet and the luxury boxes were only framed up - not chair to sit on and for that matter, no hardwood floor to look upon.  I just misspoke.

- - -
That CBS piece is priceless.  She was nailed on an order higher than I can recall in recent politics.  Hell, even the "mission accomplished" banned had loads of wiggle roam.  

This was a narrated story that went on for several minutes.  There were whizzing sniper fire, rushing aids to usher her with her head down to be sped away as death awaited around every corner.  Ceremonies were canceled and she risked life and limb to see the troops! "Now that is what happened."

How, in the hell, is that "oops I misspoke."  
Video again! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BfNqhV5hg4

Her story was as different as my narrative of our BOk center tour.  WE both went were we said we did, but the state of things in the story simply were not true.  No way that was a miscommunication.

[edit]Added "now that is what happened" line[/edit]

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Originally posted by Hometown

Specifics, please?  I know how much you dislike generalities so I figured this was an oversight on your part.

McCarthyism these days isn't about communism.  "Terror" has replaced communism and those who use fear to manipulate us in order to achieve narrow political ends are the modern day perps.

Examples:

"You are either with us or with the terrorists." -- G. Bush 2001

"To those who scare peace-loving people with phantoms of lost liberty, my message is this: Your tactics only aid terrorists, for they erode our national unity and diminish our resolve. They give ammunition to America's enemies." -- John Ashcroft 2001

Hastert saying Al Qaeda wants Kerry to win 2004

Criticizing the war "emboldens our enemies"

And, lately, opposing telecom immunity aids our enemies.  And it's with this last example that I think you can see that, just like McCarthyism 1.0, through overuse and ridiculousness, McCarthyism 2.0 has just about spun out.  It won't be a factor this fall...not like 2004 with John Al Qerry.

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

Bill said (I'm paraphrasing) that he wishes the election could be about issues.

I'm confused...who else has said "it'd be great" if the election could be between two people "devoted to the interest of the country"?  Why wouldn't it be?  I mean, Obama's a patriot, too, right?

quote:In this thread you leave me with the impression that you believe the Democrats have drifted away from their core beliefs and we have moved too far to the right.

If that is the case, I understand your concern, but I do not believe taking the party back to the left is a prescription for winning in the general election or governing after we win the White House.

That's exactly the prescription for winning...and I guess that's where we differ.

[guido911]

quote:Originally posted by guido911

quote:Originally posted by guido911

quote:Originally posted by guido911

The Washington Post points out the whopper told by Hillary re: 1996 Bosnia trip

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/21/AR2008032102989.html

Nevermind that whopper about her Bosnia trip. Clinton says she misspoke. That makes it all better now.

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/24/clinton-misspoke-about-bosnia-trip-campaign-says/

And here's the video story from CBS (Sorry Recycle):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BfNqhV5hg4

And of course in 1992 Hillary was tired of government lying to people:

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2008/03/25/hillary-60-minutes-voters-are-tired-people-who-lie-them

[Hometown]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

Bill said (I'm paraphrasing) that he wishes the election could be about issues.

I'm confused...who else has said "it'd be great" if the election could be between two people "devoted to the interest of the country"?  Why wouldn't it be?  I mean, Obama's a patriot, too, right?

quote:In this thread you leave me with the impression that you believe the Democrats have drifted away from their core beliefs and we have moved too far to the right.

If that is the case, I understand your concern, but I do not believe taking the party back to the left is a prescription for winning in the general election or governing after we win the White House.

That's exactly the prescription for winning...and I guess that's where we differ.

Well, I won't try to pin you down on party affiliation.  You have been such an outstanding advocate for some issues that are near and dear to me that I can't get mad at you.

I wish I could get excited about Obama but I just don't see what 50% of the Democrats see in him. I look at him and I see big time defeat.

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

Well, I won't try to pin you down on party affiliation.  You have been such an outstanding advocate for some issues that are near and dear to me that I can't get mad at you.

Likewise, buddy.

quote:
I wish I could get excited about Obama but I just don't see what 50% of the Democrats see in him. I look at him and I see big time defeat.

I suggest watching the 2004 DNC speech again.

Parts I and II
http://youtube.com/watch?v=awQkJNVsgKM
http://youtube.com/watch?v=1UDKXKGZ3PY

[FOTD]

The coup de gras ending the democrat split....

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4581608&page=1

Pass the butter and jam...she is toast.

Concedes between the 20th and May 2nd.

[Conan71]

It's other's prerogative to decide how much Mr. Clinton's speeches are worth.  Hillary will spin it all into her being victim of bad press.  

You underestimate her ego.  No concession before August 26 or so, if then.

You certainly aren't suggesting that Goldman-Sachs would be circumventing campaign contribution laws by paying a certain Presidential candidate's spouse to come speak at a dinner or two, now would you?  Certainly the Clintons wouldn't stoop to questionable campaign funding!

/mock shock

[FOTD]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

It's other's prerogative to decide how much Mr. Clinton's speeches are worth.  Hillary will spin it all into her being victim of bad press.  

You underestimate her ego.  No concession before August 26 or so, if then.

You certainly aren't suggesting that Goldman-Sachs would be circumventing campaign contribution laws by paying a certain Presidential candidate's spouse to come speak at a dinner or two, now would you?  Certainly the Clintons wouldn't stoop to questionable campaign funding!

/mock shock

The stake through her heart will not become evident until the return goes through close examination. The devil (not me) will be in the details. Unfortunately, Bill's fund raising for his liebarry will not be inclusive.

I bet when there is close scrutiny, everyone will wonder "what would have happened had she won the nomination and then this stuff was revealed?" Perhaps, the age of Clinton narcism is coming to a close.