Who do Clinton "supporters" seem so gleeful about

[Rob Gregory Browne]

this Rev. Wright stuff? This is smearing of the worst kind -- guilt by association -- that we on the left normally condemn right wingers for. So why has it suddenly become acceptable for Clinton's crowd to start bringing up Wright, Farakan, or any of the garbage that, really, has nothing to do with Obama himself?

The only saving grace here is that Obama is Mr. Teflon, and the minor dips these "scandals" cause don't last long. But it's surprising to me that so many Clinton "supporters" here report these smears with such glee.

I use quotes because I'm convinced that a good three quarters of these people are impostors.

[emilyg]

1. I don't see too many being gleeful.

[OHdem10]

2. Fox News Dynamics Poll 70% Americans believe Obama

has been damaged. 64% Democrats.

Obama's Unfavorables are equal to Clintons. Clintons are trending down.

This is one of a very few polls taken after the Wright Blowup.

[Kittycat]

30. You mean Fox news where 88% of O'Liely's viewers voted for bush?

Ah...:rofl:

[Freedom Train]

48. Yep. Mr. Teflon my ass.

He is done for. Nothing gleeful about it, just fact.

[DangerDave921]

3. Not a Clinton Supporter

But I do think the Wright stuff is perfectly legitimate grounds for inquiry in a campaign for president. For someone with whom Obama has been closely associated with for 20 years, it does raise questions. This is not some far-fetched guilt by association tactic.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

8. Why?

And do you have similar questions about Hillary's pastor, Doug Coe?

[DangerDave921]

29. well . . .

Has Hillary held him up to be her spiritual mentor?

[mrreowwr_kittty]

32. So that's the requirement?

You have to "hold the person up as a spiritual mentor".

Ah, I see, once again Obama's association with a nutty person is more problematic because of a certain feature of it.

Reminds me of how many of us tried to point out that Hillary has accepted endorsements from and is even paying $10000 a month consulting fees to homophobic ministers. But that was different, we were told, because she didn't "hand them a microphone" like Obama did McClurkin.

So this time it's "holding up" in whatever metaphorical sense that means that determines how troubling it is. And I'm almost certain Hillary's relationship with Doug Coe will conveniently not meet that standard.

[KittyWampus]

41. yes, Hillary is on record as saying Coe is her mentor. Also, the group she prays with has a stated p

political agenda that is, in a word, Facism.

[donheld]

47. Do you know who Hillary's or McCain's spiritual mentors are?

If not why not. Shouldn't we investigate all spiritual mentors not just the black guys?

[DJ13]

9. omeone with whom Obama has been closely associated with for 20 years

So bringing up Bill's past words and dirty deeds would be fair game under your rules?

[haymakeragain]

16. Yes, it is exactly a "far-fetched guilt by association tactic".

How many of Wright's sermons have you seen or heard? Did you happen to hear or see the Audacity of Hope sermon? Exactly how many of Wright's words are the media basing this horseshit on? 30? 50? What percentage of Wright's sermons are those cherry-picked, out of context words? Try about one one thousandths of one percent, or less. Why hasn't all the rest been even mentioned?

Far-fetched is exactly how it should be described.

[DangerDave921]

26. None

I haven't heard any of his sermons. Have you? I do know the one is called Audacity TO Hope, not OF hope so maybe I know more than you.

[haymakeragain]

34. You might. I'm not saying I'm in the congregation,

just saying that the amount of info that is driving this farce is minimal.

[Rob Gregory Browne]

17. How closely associated are they, really?

As close as some DU'ers are with their parents? Doubtful. Yet I'm sure there are many DU'ers here whose parents spout stuff they are completely ashamed of. Should these same DU'ers be tarred and feathered because of what their parents say?

The man is Obama's pastor. He sees him, generally, one day a week.

Let's face it. WE ALL KNOW exactly what the Wright thing is about, yet some of us pretend that it somehow raises legitimate questions about Obama.

It does not.

[DangerDave921]

24. You minimize it

All I am saying is that it deserves INQUIRY. It does not sink his candidacy or prove anything. But it's certainly fair to make INQUIRY. Why so worked up just because people ask questions?

How do you know Obama saw him once a week? Obama has described him as his spiritual mentor. He married Obama and his wife. He baptized their kids. He took the title of his book from a Wright speech. This is absolutely different from the case of one's parents. We see our parents because of family loyalty regardless of political or spiritual leanings. In the case of a spiritual mentor, we see that person because we admire them, respect them, believe in them, etc. So if Obama has put Wright up on this pedestal, yes, we have a right to at least ask him about whether he shares the same ideals that Wright does. And Obama can answer the questions.

[haymakeragain]

35. Let's get down to it.

You say it deserves "inquiry". What exactly deserves inquiry? Have you ever heard Obama espouse ANY of those misquotes, snippets, or slanders that were attributed to Wright? Or even if you believe the snippet cherry picks as Wright's real meaning and intent, which of those does Obama subscribe to and when and where did he say so.

When you do this INQUIRY, please include all of the messages given out by Wright, in context and percentage of whole.

One more note, it seems like all the Wright obsessing folk think that Obama holds these dark, hidden agendas that he has never spoken of but actually speaks the opposite. Does Obama have some higher standard he must meet with regard to his positions and ideas and motivations? If so, why?

[Rob Gregory Browne]

40. In inquiry, sure, but --

-- what we've been seeing is FAR more than an inquiry. It's character assassination, completely distorted by endlessly repeated video clips of a guy saying two or three stupid things. I would suggest that all of us have said some stupid things in our lives and I don't think our friends, family or the people we advise, spiritually or otherwise, should be blasted because we said those stupid things.

As for Wright being Obama's spiritual advisor, Wright denies it.

[Stand and Fight]

37. Boulderdash....

You cannot choose your parents. Obama chose his pastor.

While I don't agree with guilt by association in relation to Obama and Wright, I could not help but point out the gaping logical fallacy in your argument.

[Solomon]

38. Was waiting for somebody to spout this bullshit.

Spin, spin, spin. It's guilt by association no matter how you slice, dice, and cut it.

Hillary chose Bill didn't she? And she's been with him for more than 20 years.

Now personally, I don't have a problem with it. But when you start spouting that bullshit about "you cannot choose your parents" then I assume you mean that it is okay to go there.

[Stand and Fight]

46. Seems you had a bit of a knee-jerk reaction.

I agree with the poster's arguments on principle -- I am pointing out a gap in logic. Playing the devil's advocate. Now calm down... :evilgrin:

[Rob Gregory Browne]

44. Substitute the word "friends" or "church friends" or "minister"

and the sentiment remains the same. Haven't your friends ever said anything stupid? Did you disown them as friends? Doubtful.

[Saturday]

4. Yea, like Obama supporters have never ever called Hillary

every dirty nasty name in the book they could think of. Not to mention the lovely photos of her. Look in the mirror.

[Rob Gregory Browne]

12. I can look in the mirror without problems, because

I haven't bashed Hillary. I've said she's losing the race, which is true (do the math). I may even have called her a liar, which is also true (re: Bosnia, re: I was always against NAFTA, re: I was against the war before Obama was). But I have never once used "every dirty nasty name in the book" against her.

But that said, I haven't once seen the Obama campaign use smears against Clinton, or use right wing tactics to win this race. Who knows, maybe things would be different if Obama were losing ---

Oh, wait. If Obama were losing he would have dropped out long ago.

[Saturday]

21. Don't remember if you personally have but your fellow BO

supporters do and relish in it. So I see no reason for finger wagging at Hillary supporters from you.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5769813

[Rob Gregory Browne]

45. While I agree with much of content of that OP's post,

I can see how its tone might offend Hillary supporters. But what he's saying is essentially true and doesn't strike me as particularly gleeful or even nasty. Calling her a doormat is a bit overboard, but his point makes sense.

[DangerDave921]

5. Also

They are gleeful because Obama imploding is the ONLY way Clinton can get the nomination.

Isn't that pretty obvious?

[Deep13]

6. Why don't you ask them?

I haven't seen any glee, only disgust. I could just as well ask why O people are gleeful when HC is defamed, except I already know the answer. This is another example of Obama fans accusing HC of what they are guilty of.

The problem is, the friends one keeps does have a bearing on how others view ones character. O. sat in this asshole's church listening to his speeches for years. Now that he's under the spotlight, suddenly saying "god damn America" is a bad thing. Also, whatever you or I think of it, most voters in November will be really offended by O's association with this guy. It is better to point that out now.

1. It will diffuse the impact if it is old news in November.

2. It will give us a chance to pick a candidate who does not go to a church that incites anger and hatred.

[ellacott]

7. It's so ironic

Considering all the questionable associations that the Clintons have.

Many of them are fooled by Hillary's claim that she is fully vetted. Just because they found no guilt in their prior controversies doesn't mean it won't be brought up again. Also if you combine all the past baggage with all the new stuff and that's a lot of stuff.

[haymakeragain]

10. Or that Weather Underground guy Bill Ayers. They act like

it was Obama himself that was in WU. Or that sitting on the board of a CHARITY with the guy and seven other people means he is down for violent revolution. Positively rovian.

[TahitiNut]

11. The Joe McCarthy gene pool runs deep around here.

:shrug:

[backscatter712]

13. Most of the loud Clintonistas probably are freepers.

With all the nasty remarks, smears, lies and trashing they've done, they certainly act like freepers.

[apocalypsehow]

18. Exactly. At least one of the more popular "long-timers" here certainly falls in that category,

as well as half-dozen others with varying degrees of longevity that certainly put themselves in that suspect territory with their behavior.

[Saturday]

23. Here are the real freepers.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5769813

[DangerDave921]

28. Never saw that thread!

Man, they don't hold back!

[rniel]

25. No this is really true

I know of one of them posts on here named Greenwood. He is basically a racist limbaugh listener, yet makes these posts about clinton like he's really a supporter.

[Arkansas Granny]

14. Most of the posts I saw about Rev. Wright seemed to be written by

Obama supporters. I didn't wade through that many of them, but I didn't see any glee from Clinton supporters over the situation in the ones that I read..

[invictus]

15. The Clinton campaign has taken on the characteristics of the Clintons: nasty and dishonest. n/t

[invictus]

39. also greedy, selfish, and divisive. n/t

[Carni]

19. Why are you starting a thread on it? LOL

Pssssttttt! A little suggestion...if you want to let something die down,
I wouldn't suggest drawing attetion to the topic (but by all means do as you see fit!)

[barack the house]

20. It is unsettiling but hopefully after the process we can get back to the same agaenda.

[apocalypsehow]

22. The HRC boosters eat that dittohead crap up with a spoon, and ask for seconds.

They gush with breathless updates about what Sean Hannity is saying on any given day, and have lately become big Bill O'Lieley fans. When called on it they just hiss like scalded cats, or ignore the query altogether.

The Queen's courtiers are quite cranky about the interrupted coronation, and so right-wing guttersnipe's have become their new best friends. Really quite pathetic.

[backscatter712]

27. Why aren't the mods cracking down?

I have to ask this again and again.

Most of the worst behavior comes from just a few people - making trolls, nasty remarks, insults, etc. They do everything from concern trolling to constant ridicule to pretending to be Obama supporters that think he's going to lose, etc.

We all know the games they play and wonder why the mods put up with that shit.

It's time to bring out the ban-hammer.

[AZBlue]

31. They aren't Democrats.

Your last line sums up the situation perfectly.

[adarling]

33. I am a Clinton supporter and i am outraged by all of it

Obama does not deserve this. I like him and Michelle alot and will vote for him with bells and whistles when he is the nominee. I just think the MSM is a piece of shit and found one chink in the armor (if it can be considered one) and are just trying to extend the 2 minutes this story deserved. the more it runs, the more i grow stronger supporting Obama.

[myrna minx]

42. You are a very honorable person.

:hi:

[Nedsdag]

36. Her supporters are practically Republicans anyway.

They use the same smear tactics that Rove and the other GOP operatives have been using against Democrats for years. I guess they believe what's good for the geese is good for the gander.

[grantcart]

43. I have a more sympathetic view

Their candidate has given them nothing to cheer about - just one disappointment after another. They stuck to it and now they see Obama supporters suffering and it is a little payback. I don't think they even think about how it hurts Obama or the party in the long run. Misery really does love company.

The truth be told when there have been similar unfair hits on Hillary Obama supporters relished it because we think that she deserves it.

Its not the supporters its the candidate who continues past a reasonable point when she knows she is not going to be the candidate.