What is it about the desire to humiliate and crush the Clintons?

[question everything]

From a story elsewhere:

"Clinton is doing everything she is asked — and then some — to help the man who defeated her get elected to the White House."

But this, apparently, is not enough. No, both she and Bill have to - as in "1984" - profess their love for Obama, prostrate, pound on their chests and ask for forgiveness. They are not even allowed to grieve.

How many here, and in public, would be able to just shrug their shoulders and smile and pretend that, oh, this was just an exercise?

I have long stopped watching Olbermann and just recently decided to catch the Daily Show, but Cafferty pops on CNN when I least expect him, and every other day, he has to invite hateful comments about the Clintons. If they are around: what are they still doing here? If they are not: where are they?

Enough already. She lost. She is campaigning "and then some" to quote from a story. Get a life. Start talking about the firefighters who died in California, about that innocent mayor of Berwyn Heights, Md., whose house was broken into "without a knock." Now the police "regrets" shotting his two dogs.

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/08/07/Mayors_home_raided_in_pot-smuggling_probe/UPI-15321218117955/

Bill Clinton was a good president, who inherited a huge deficit and ended up with a surplus, under whose administration the economy expanded across all income levels, whose nomination of two Supreme Court justices makes it possible for us to even talk about tilting the court back, who left office with the highest approval ratings and who is the first Democrat to be re-elected since FDR.

Hillary is a good senator from NY - judged by her landslide win two years ago - with an impressive track record of accomplishments and for championing progressive ideas.

No, not everyone agrees with everything that either has done, certainly not the Obamas who would have never arrived to where they are where it not for the - whatever derogatory terms they use - 60s and the baby boomers. But point to me a single person in the whole world about whom there is a unanimous support.

Enough, already. If the only topic you are obsessed is the Clintons, then you really do need some help.

[Kittycat]

1. What is it about the CLinton's that they'd rather hedge thier own hurt and pride against

the party? Suck it up and be a team player. Now is not the time to send mixed signals or whine.

[RedShoes]

27. maybe you missed the first sentence of the OP, which is true,

otherwise you are DEMONSTRATING what it's talking about.

[TheWraith]

88. No, it's not even remotely true. The Clintons keep feeding this story.

They act like they have a reason to feel hurt, when all that ever happened was they lost fairly, and were expected to help clean up the damage they themselves caused.

[RedShoes]

123. oh bullshit they do...I missed it, did the Clinton's write the OP? The article?

Of COURSE they didn't. Why is it clear to some that the media is perpetuating shit for their ratings...unless it's about the Clinotn's or the clenis? Then, of course it must be true. Give. Me. A. Freaking. Break.

[roguevalley]

84. No one is owed anything. you run, you take your chances. then you

help the winner. that is how this is. I hope everyone does that. Oh, and the eighteen million votes she got? 17,950,000 of them have moved on.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

2. I really don't know.

We have an election to win.

I respect Bill Clinton for the past, Hillary Clinton for the present, and Barack Obama for the future.

[dionysus]

3. uh, in case you haven't noticed, bill has morphed into a jackass in recent months...

hillary, not so much...
:shrug:

[zanne]

4. If bitter Clinton supporters don't get their act together...

They'll lose us the election in November. It's time for Hillary's people to start acting like grownups and put their support behind Obama unless they want four more years of Republican rule.

[question everything]

15. Most of Hillary primary supporters do support Obama and will vote for him

and even donate to him. That the media choose to find individuals who say otherwise is their problem.

I suspect that these few would not have voted for the Democratic nominee even if there was not such a fierce battle between Hillary and Obama.

That DUers choose to continue this practice of highlighting these fringe individuals makes me wonder whether they really want to win or, like Cafferty (and Olbermann and Alter?) would rather hang on to the object of their obsession.

[The Doctor.]

71. You talk about 'objects of obsession'....

yet you're so obsessed that you rejected Olbermann for the heinous crime of merely pointing out Clinton's fuck-ups.

What he was doing was his job yet you have yourself convinced it was personal.

Since your obsession over this perceived slight has kept you from watching Olbermann, perhaps it's time someone told you that since Clinton has only been doing things right, he hasn't been reporting on her negatively.

I know, it's crazy... it's almost like he really doesn't have anything 'against' Clinton.


Meanwhile, what has Cafferty said that makes you think he's 'obsessed'?

Seriously, this kind of mentality is more typical of the RW. When someone gets on the air and tells the truth about something Bush has said or done, they also claim that the reporter is 'obsessed' with or 'anti-Bush'.

[question everything]

100. I have not watched Olbermann for many months but he, and the gang

from Newsweek and Washington Post constantly bashed the Clintons.

Jonathan Alter was whining that he was born in the mid 50s and always felt a "step generation" to the older baby boomers. As far as he was concerned, the (older) baby boomers have not contributed anything to our society, not even music. At least, he admitted that the Clintons are "Velcro" while Reagan and Obama are "Teflon."

Of course, it was the older baby boomers who went to science and medicine to develop the cancer treatments that keep him alive. And it was the baby boomers who protested the war in Vietnam and joined MLK in marching in the south - some were even murdered - that made the possibility of a black president a reality.

And when Hillary said that, of course, MLK showed courage and inspire many to follow, but it did take a president to sign the Civil Rights Act, Eugene Robinson, a regular at Olbermann said that "MLK is ours." No, he is not. MLK, like Lincoln, and Jefferson, and FDR, and JFK is ours - all of us Americans of all stripes and shades.

And of course, Olbermann and his gang highlighted every hint that the Clinton were racist, including the one about MLK. They perpetuated the dirty tricks from the Obama campaign which, no wonder, still irk Bill.

Even when Hillary conceded, Newsweek continues to trash her, now they do this to Bill. I was going to cancel the subscription last January, when they came with the Obama coronation issue that, coincidentally, I was leafing through while watching the results of New Hampshire, but will just not renew it.

Last, week, I think, Cafferty question was: where is Hillary these days? And, of course, enjoyed all the hateful responses that he got.

Cafferty does not like it when Hillary is out and about campaigning, and does not like it when... he does not see her.

Again, I don't want to rehash the primaries. We've talked on these points to death. However I realized that Olbermann is just the mirror image of O'Reily. Predictable in his opinions and his guests and, apparently, as with Dana Milbanks, also likes to kick out the ones that do not follow his orthodoxy.

[The Doctor.]

105. Wow.... that's some pretty selective perception.

"Last, week, I think, Cafferty question was: where is Hillary these days? And, of course, enjoyed all the hateful responses that he got."

Really?

So, what... he said, "Gosh I'm really enjoying these hateful responses?"

Lemme guess they were REALLY hateful, like; "She's out shopping." or "She's on vacation."

C'mon, people are going to find ways to express dissatisfaction whether it's legit or not. Seeing 'hatred' everywhere, and then failing to produce actual quotes to support your perception kinda supports my 'you're imagining things' hypothesis.

Oh, before you start bleating that I'm "blind to all the sexism" in the media/internet/world, yes, I know it's about, and I know that she has been the subject of it.

But not by KO, and not by Cafferty. Pointing out that someone has said or done something innappropriate isn't "sexism" just because that person happens to be of a particular sex.

Some people (and yes, I mean you), need to stop working so hard to see things that aren't there. You might as well start calling white people who don't like chocolate ice cream 'racist'... it's about the same as calling KO 'sexist' for calling it like he sees it.

Get the video or quotes that show this 'sexism', or consider that perhaps your crusade is overwhelming your perspective.

[Major Hogwash]

153. They didn't perpetuate a damn thing! They commented on what was said that day.

And for all the horse shit about Bubba not being racist, where do you guys think the term Sister Soulja moment" came from? It came from 1992, when Bubba tried to marginalize Jesse Jackson!!

Jesus Christ, Clinton didn't even have Carter speak at the 1992 convention - and Carter was the lat elected Democrat President!!

So, for Keith to perpetuate any of the stories about Bubba or Hillary, all he had to do was watch the Clintons on the campaign trail. Because it wasn't very hard when they opened their mouths and stuck their foot in it on a daily basis in front of cameras!!!

Just because you don't like Keith doesn't mean shit. Keith wasn't running for office.

Has Bubba apologized for making any racial comments this year concerning Obama?
Fuck no!
He denies that he made any racial comments.

Well, that shit won't work anymore.
He's not the President anymore.
He can't just stand behind the lectern and point his bony finger at us and claim "I did not have sex with that woman" and expect us to believe everything he says.

[RedShoes]

29. assign blame to the nominee for the general, that's why we had the primaries

If Obama loses in November, it is because HE would have lost, not because of the Clintons.

[zanne]

97. If you keep trying to split Democrats...

Have no doubt--you will be the ones who lose the election for us. Nader was small-fry compared to you people.

[RedShoes]

122. it seems as if YOU'RE the one splitting democrats, my dear

I haven't assigned a thing other than the frontrunner. It is HIS nomination, and HIS race to win or lose.

Not Bill's.

Not Hillary's.

One man's name is on that ballot, and I am certain he'll win, but in the unlikely event he doesn't, neither of the Clinton's were on that ballot.

Now you'd think you'd want to reach out to Hill supporters, instead of trying to scapegoat them. :shrug:

[Frances]

34. If bitter Obama supporters don't stop dissing Hillary and Bill,

they may cost Obama the election.

When you diss Hillary and Bill, you diss white blue-collar voters.

Are you saying that you don't want these folks' votes?

If so, you are hurting the man you SAY you support.

Obama would never approve of this kind of comment.

I remember when kids said, "Elvis is dead. The Beatles are King."

Some DUers have that same mentality IMO.

[RaleighNCDUer]

49. Bullshit.

When I diss Hillary and Bill I diss Hillary and Bill for being neo-lib DLCers. I AM a white blue-collar voter.

Why is criticism of the Clintons an attack on white Democrats?

Isn't that assumption just a little bit racist?

[Frances]

52. Obama is no more liberal than Hillary and Bill

If you think otherwise, I expect you will be complaining about Obama on this board when I am defending him.

Criticism of the Clintons divides the Democrats, when Obama supporters should be (and almost all are) UNITING Democrats.

I am not being racist. Statistically, blue-collar Dems support Obama over McCain, but not overwhelmingly. There was an article yesterday (sorry I forgot the source, but probably found the link here at DU) where blue-collar voters were being interviewed in Pennsylvania, a state VERY important to Obama. These voters had all supported Hillary because they felt they knew and trusted her and Bill. They weren't so sure about Obama because they don't know him as well.

It is stupid IMO to give these undecided Hillary supporters reason NOT to vote for Obama.

Personally I just say that Bill created jobs when he was President; Obama will also create jobs, especially as concerns changes in energy (retooling American cars to be competitive with non-American cars in fuel efficiency).

[hedgehog]

58. Some would argue with that statement and say that Obama is waaaay

more liberal than Clinton:

http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/

[RaleighNCDUer]

60. Obama is slightly more liberal than Bill, possibly slightly less so than Hillary,

but he is NOT DLC which makes all the difference. DLC does not = Blue Dog. DLC is about American economic imperialism. I will trust a conservative Blue Dog dem over a liberal DLCer any day.

Those blue collar dems are not "undecided Hillary supporters". They are Democrats who supported Hillary before Obama got the nomination. If they are true to the principles of the party they will vote Democratic, no matter who heads the ticket. If they don't, they are racist fucks and we're better off without them.

Bill was very lucky with the economy. He used the normal Democratic stances that any Democrat would, which happened to coincide with an astonishing tech boom - during his time household PCs went from in in a hundred to one in ten. Even his support of NAFTA was unable to derail that express. It took a republican administration to end it.

Obama can be expected to do much the same - his kicker won't be the Pentium chip, but the green energy technologies that will re-start the economy. And his non-DLC policies will allow the US economy to benefit instead of international corporations.

[Frances]

66. I don't understand why you support Obama

Obama tries to win people over to his way of thinking with reason; you call Dems you don't agree with names.

I hope that you aren't canvassing for Obama because you will lose more votes than win them.

[RaleighNCDUer]

69. Who did I call names?

Calling the Democratic Leadership Council members DLCers is calling them names?

What do you think the DLC is?

I support Obama in a large part because he rejected the overtures of the DLC.

Oh, you mean my reference to those democrats who will not support a black democrat but will vote for a white republican instead racist fucks? Fine. I'll stand by that one. Without shame.

[Phx_Dem]

70. If you don't support the Democratic

nominee, why are you here? Just thought you'd come around to stir up some trouble? Take it somewhere else.

[zanne]

80. Exactly. S**t or get off the can. nt

[Whisp]

98. true, Hillary is more liberal, she liberally threatens to obliterate other nations

along with their women and children, that's her bleeding heart lefty side.
and she liberally applies bullshit excuses when she votes for unecessary wars.

[blm]

135. There is an enormous difference, though. Obama favors open government while Clintons do not and

actively protected the secrecy and privilege of Poppy Bush and his cronies throughout the 90s when BushInc should have been fully exposed at the very least and jailed for the illegal operations involving the covert funding of global terror networks during IranContra, BCCI and CIA drugrunning.

Bush2 regime, 9-11 and this Iraq war should NEVER have been possible.

[otohara]

121. Why Would Obama Supporters Be Bitter

I'm not bitter - my guy won fair and square.

Vote for McCain ladies, all two of you - bite your nose off. http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_10132808

[L0oniX]

138. "When you diss Hillary and Bill, you diss white blue-collar voters" BWAHAHAHAHA

Yea right. Now millionaires are working class people huh. Since when do any millionaires sincerely give a flying fuck about us? Tell me this ...when is the last time you hung out with a millionaire buddy or co-worker?

[DailyGrind51]

83. Thank you!

If we lose the White House because Clinton supporters stay home, the Clinton will be pariahs in the Democratic Party. They might as well join Joe Lieberman!

[marylanddem]

5. Humiliate & crush the Clintons?

What is it about these two that commands so much attachment from people that they are perceived as "victims" of everyone else?
I don't get it.

[DevonRex]

10. I wonder about that, too. Perhaps it's because it has worked for

them for so long. We democrats like the underdog. It's something in our psyche, I guess. But at some point we have to recognize it for what it is, so that it won't be a winning strategy or even a card that's played anymore.

Sigh. They have SO much to offer from a position of strength. They're both brilliant and they're dedicated public servants. And that is the foot they should put forward.

It cannot be denied that they went through hell during the 90s. Sometimes I think that they were hurt too much to be able to let it go completely. Sort of like posttraumatic stress syndrome. And I understand completely how that can happen. But at some point a person just has to decide to let it go and not let it rule them anymore.

[question everything]

19. What is it about these two that obsess so many to keep noting every single

word and gesture and body language of them?

That they still grieve, that they are not enthusiastically embrace Obama - so what? She is campaigning for him - and more - as the story notes. Why does she have to pretend that the loss does not hurt? Would you?

[LittleClarkie]

61. I've seen people react thusly when all an article is doing is criticizing the Clintons

Surely, if they are not perfect, like the rest of us, they are therefore open to criticism, like the rest of us.

I swear it reminds me of Republicans right around the start of the Iraq War. Any criticism was met with "Why do you hate the president? Why do you hate America? Why are you a hater?" as if it were a mindless thing, as if there was no reason.

If the criticism comes out of the blue, that's one thing. If it's attached to a report of some sort, then I think it's fair to comment on. Bashing is one thing. Criticism quite another. Criticism that comes out of the blue, and is flamebait to boot, gets alerted on by me. I don't need to see people taunting Clinton supporters with "And she's not going to be the VP either" and whatnot.

It seems to me that some Clinton supporters are hyper sentitive. But I can understand that. I've had my moments when the topic was Kerry. But I've tried to rein myself in when the comment was civilly stated, even if I wildly disagreed with the conclusions.

Stop whining, and start rebutting.

[liberal N proud]

6. I think it has been too much for too long

[DevonRex]

7. All that needs to be done to stop the speculation is for

Hillary to request that her name not be put up for nomination and to instruct her delegates to vote for Obama.

That would end the bickering immediately.

It wouldn't hurt if Bill could just keep his mouth shut if he can't be enthusiastic about Obama.

Pretty simple. Until those things are done, the questions will remain. We here at DU didn't write the Time article. We didn't choose to have Chuck Todd say what he did. We didn't choose that the ABC reporter interview Bill. We didn't choose to have Craig Crawford voice his opinion on how divisive the convention could be.

We are not bashing the Clintons for fun or out of hatred for them. In fact, I'm not bashing them at all. I just wish that they would put an end to the drama.

I loved Bill Clinton when he was in the White House. I am still angry at what Bill and Hillary went through at the hands of republicans and their operatives. It was shameful and should NEVER have happened. I have always liked Hillary. I just want her to stop this in its tracks before we have a nightmare here in Denver.

[marylanddem]

9. Drama Queens...

[DevonRex]

11. All this drama is exhausting, isn't it? And if it is for us, it has to

be even worse for Obama.

On a kind note, it also has to be exhausting for the Clintons, too. I believe they'll both be happier when all of this is over with, even if they don't realize it now.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

22. I remember throwing up a freaking lung in defense of Hillary and Bill.

I've met Bill several times over the years and he is a nice, personable guy who has so much to offer.

What gets me the most is that the tactics that were played against the Clintons for so long are being used against the Obamas now. The Clintons embraced those tactics during the primaries, also embracing its progenitors, Roger Ailes, Rupert Murdoch. All of the sudden, they are friends with these horrible, evil people who tried to sink them in the '90s and made an entire career of it in the form of Faux News?!??! :puke::puke:

Now Clinton surrogates are members of the Faux Noise choir: Gerri Ferraro, Lanny Davis, Wolfson et al. And yet their supporters here at DU and elsewhere expect us to believe that the Clintons are on our side and want the best for the Democratic party? Really?

And so when we raise these issues, we are accused of wanting to bash and destroy the Clintons when in actuality it is THEY who are trying to destroy the party because they seem to only care about themselves!!?!??!?!

I don't get that at all.

[question everything]

24. You know, I think that it would make the convention more interesting

if someone could speak on Hillary's behalf.

She is not going to be the nominee, everyone knows it, but it could help unite the party if her most ardent committed supporters would have a chance to speak.

The Conventional Wisdom has been to choose our candidate early - as we did with Kerry - and to avoid, at all costs, a brokered convention. But this just makes it boring. Especially coming after the Olympics, where many TV viewers had all the viewing that they cared.

Not every convention has to be like 1968 Chicago. But I think that some dissenting opinions could be healthy.

(Perhaps I am naive, I do trust in the logic and common sense of fellow humans..)

[DevonRex]

33. I sincerely hope you're right, if in fact Hillary is put up for vote.

Mostly I'm a little bit worried and really tired of all the speculation.

If it were interesting and wound up uniting the party, I'd be ecstatic. If the drama hurts our chances in November, then I would be horrified.

What bothers me is that there is no way to tell which way it would pan out.

[DeepBlueC]

45. No, there will something else to bitch about

Count on it.

[DevonRex]

54. I really don't think so. We all fought the good fight for

the Clintons in the 1990s when the republicans completely trashed them.

We all have really good memories of Bill's presidency. We did have peace and prosperity and the world viewed the US quite favorably back then.

I'm absolutely sure that once Hillary puts a stop to this current situation (and she can if she wants to) that there will be no more suspicion about their motives.

[dkf]

8. So you approve of Bill's latest interview?

[question everything]

31. Bill was a friend of the black community

for him to be called racist must still be a sore point.

I will not rehash the specific incidence from the primary season, but he was set up. Some here talk about the tactics of the RWers, they were used against Bill. After all, he is used to speak his mind and all of a sudden his words were twisted.

If I were in his position, I, too, would still be nursing this wound.

And this is the point. He was hurt and the media relishes the opportunity to dig in his wounds. Why can't he be left alone, especially while pursuing his foundation activities?

He said the he supports Obama, that he can be a good president. He did not jump up and down and said Yay! And people hold this against him. This is my point. One cannot demand people to be happy and enthusiastic on command.

[TwilightGardener]

37. Bill was not called a racist.

[Kool Kitty]

91. I think he could have been

a bit more enthusiastic in his reply about whether Obama was qualified to be President. He sounded like a sore loser.

[Raineyb]

96. I hope this isn't going down that

"How dare black people turn their back on the Clintons" road.

No one has such a great relationship with the black community that he or she can insult us and expect no backlash nor does it help to blame the nominee for one's own rotten behavior.

I don't think people are expecting him to be happy and enthusiastic on demand. But Bill Clinton is a politician. He damn sure can fake it for the camera and keep his yap shut if he hasn't anything positive to say.

Regards

[bornskeptic]

144. I do. I agree with Obama on that.

Bill Clinton has been "very supportive," Obama said, adding that he thought the former president had shown "extraordinary restraint in a fairly provocative interview" while on his recent trip to Africa.

"I couldn't ask for him to be any more gracious than he's been, and supportive, since the campaign ended," he said.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/no_20080807_9078.php

Bill Clinton had every right to expect that, when he granted an interview on his African trip, he would be asked about the trip and the work of his foundation. He made it clear from the beginning that he had no interest in talking politics, and that the last thing he wanted to do was to rehash the primaries. It's bizarre that people insist on seeing his obvious irritation with the dingbat interviewer as somehow hostile to Obama. He did not say one thing unfavorable to Obama. "Is he qualified to be President?" has to rank among the all-time stupidest interview questions. Clinton answered it perfectly. The "ready to be President" question was just an attempt to reinforce McCain's campaign ads. Clinton rightly refused to be put on the defensive.

Obama understands exactly what was going on, and the "pundits" are just trying to sow dissension among Democrats. Many DUers seem happy to oblige, whether because they are really that clueless, or whether they just live to find an excuse to bash the Clintons.

http://www.clintonfoundation.org/

[BeyondGeography]

12. "question everything"...except the Clintons and their motives

:eyes:

[DevonRex]

14. That seems to be the message. Given all the news stories lately

about what may happen at the convention, I believe we're not off base to wonder about and discuss their motivations.

I don't think anyone here is absolutely convinced that they have ulterior motives. But many of us, including me, have some serious questions.

[The_Casual_Observer]

13. Obama had better come on as the second coming after all of this.

Otherwise there is going to be some red ass around here.

[DevonRex]

16. Can you elaborate on that? I'm not sure I get your meaning.

[The_Casual_Observer]

20. no

[DevonRex]

28. Why not?

[Alexander]

164. Because as usual, the comment makes no sense.

[Lilith Velkor]

68. Goddamn right. n/t

[SurfingAtWork]

17. Every time I do it, my power level goes up by 1.

Kidding

[Tim4319]

18. The Clinton's are bringing it on themselves!

I have said numerous times that Bill Clinton is the best president we ever had during my lifetime, and I am 36 years old.

I believe the Clinton's "15 minutes of fame" is up. Give some else a chance. How come they cannot throw their support behind Barack Obama that I am sure if the shoe was on the other foot, Barack would assist Hilary in anyway imaginable.

Everything that is being done to the Clinton's is something that they have brought to themselves.

[GoesTo11]

21. Howard Dean set the standard for class in defeat

He went out there and really gave his heart to help Kerry. He had every right to grieve about the way the Scream played out. Instead he got the hell out of Kerry's way then made a second act for himself by putting party first.

[question everything]

36. We each react differently to humiliation and defeat

I don't think others can follow others' example on command.

[PresidentObama]

23. I can dig constructive criticism, but the smears an lies spread about them is totally out of control

[QC]

25. When it comes to frothing, raving, loony Clinton hatred, the freepers are rank amateurs

compared to many of our "good Democrats" at DU. It's enough to make one wonder, isn't it?

[scheming daemons]

26. What is it with the desire of the Clintons to not relinquish the spotlight?

...and fall in line?

[kristyt]

110. The Question is Why Anyone Pays Them any Heed

[Straight Shooter]

30. It isn't about the Clintons. It's about people who enjoy humiliating and crushing others.

It's called a mean streak, and almost everyone has it to some degree. Fortunately, everything that goes around, comes around.

[wvbygod]

32. Denial. Buyers remorse. Lashing out against the loss. Childish

None will admit their real reason but it won't stop them from continuing.

[Occam Bandage]

35. How is suggesting that a former Democratic President ought to sound slightly enthusiastic

about the Democratic Presidential nominee tantamount to "humiliating" Bill Clinton?

[question everything]

40. I don't know about you, but I ceratinly cannot show enthusiasm

on command. And my ego is a lot smaller than Clinton's.

I think that if we, and the media, will leave them alone, not stick a microphone at inappropriate time - he was working on his foundation - not dig in his wounds, they will come around.

But it is hard to heal when you keep picking. And for him, who was such a friend of the black community, to be called racist is a very deep wound, I would think.

[Occam Bandage]

42. Bill Clinton is a successful politician who built his career on his ability

to show just the right emotion at just the right time. The dude might have such an enormous ego that asking him to help his party out is a no-go, sure. However, that doesn't mean that expressing disappointment that he chooses to let his ego get in the way of retaking the White House is "humiliating him." He's choosing to humiliate himself.

[RaleighNCDUer]

51. He was never called a racist, and he knows it.

He DID use race as a tactic, and he knows it.

He's not a racist - he's an opportunist. Always has been. It's what made the the great politician he was.

[ZombieHorde]

38. Some people miss the hatefullness of GD:Primaries.

I know that that may sound strange to many of you, but it is the best explanation for the regular anti-Clinton posts.

[scheming daemons]

39. We've been doing just fine the past several weeks WITHOUT discussing her and him....

...they intruded on the news cycle... we didn't put them there.

[ZombieHorde]

43. they intruded on the news cycle

How dare those motherfuckers make news. I am so offended!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 I just can't handle it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 Whenever they see a reporter they should turn on their backpacks and fly away.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

46. WTF? The OP is about a Time Magazine article.

Which DUer writes for Time? Or do we all take turns? Oh, and I guess we're also responsible for what bobbleheads on cable news talk about too. :eyes:

[ZombieHorde]

55. Which DUer writes for Time?

Zombiehorde does, that rat fucker.

Or do we all take turns?

We are all disappointed that you missed your last two turns.

Oh

And don't you forget it.

and I guess

No guessing at all, you set it up from the beginning.

w

Now I see what you are really getting at.

e're

That doesn't even make any sense.

responsible

You are just part of the blame America first crowd.

for

The word of the new eon according to a secret meeting, a little part of me died that day.

what bobbleheads

The ones right behind you!!!

on

Shhh, don't tell anyone.

cable news talk

I heard that someone watches that, though I need to with check snopes.com.

about too

What about too?

.

A natural part of life.

:eyes:

What is he looking at. I keep checking the top of my screen, but nothing!
---------------------

Sorry, I made a mistake. I saw some anti-Clinton posts here on DU and assumed that your post was about them. I was trying to show support for a claim that I thought you were making.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

56. Well that was creative.

Hope you feel like you got it all out. :eyes:

[ZombieHorde]

62. I still can't tell what he is looking at.

[PBS Poll-435]

41. Sexual Frustration

Or jealousy.

One of the two.

[QC]

64. I wish someone would teach them how to masturbate.

It would be good for them and the rest of us.

[PBS Poll-435]

78. There is that whole "opposable thumbs" problem.

And the mouth breathing...

[QC]

85. True. What would we do without those opposable thumbs?

Post flamebait on DU all the time, I guess.

[mrreowwr_kittty]

44. What is it about the tendency of some people to exaggerate?

I don't anyone who wants to "crush" the Clintons. I certainly don't. I would just like them to act like professional, respectable, statespeople. When they don't, they disappoint and anger me and I want them to go away.

When they are ready to support the nominee and the party, wholeheartedly, they will be welcomed back with open arms.

[burythehatchet]

47. Hillary and Bill are not Republican lite......as far as I know.

They are committed to voting for Obama ......as far as I know.

[backscatter712]

48. Why is anyone paying attention to Hillary?

Last I heard, Obama won - he's got plenty of delegates to go from presumptive nominee to official nominee, even if there are more formalities at the convention.

Excuse me, but we've got bigger fish to fry. Like McCain...

[question everything]

102. Right. But as a smart DUer recently posted: if you ignore

threads about Hillary (and Bill) and PUMA - there is not much on GDP..

This is my point. Leave them alone. Hillary and Obama are working on joint appearances, on helping both raising funds, it is only on DU - and on cable - that some people need to keep on trashing both of them.

[truebrit71]

50. A reminder to BOTH of those egotists that it's not THEIR party it is OURS...

..

[Lydia Leftcoast]

53. I think it would have been the same if the shoe were on the other foot

There are very few differences in policy between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Despite what they say, neither of them represents the kind of change this country really needs.

Given the tiny ideological differences between the candidates, the supporters got all caught up in identity politics, calling the Obama supporters sexist and the Clinton supporters racist.

This is precisely the fight the MSM wanted, and you all fell for it.

Meanwhile, you let the MSM ignore the candidates who actually did represent change.

Campaigning first for Kucinich and then for Kerry in 2004 and seeing how that played out awoke my latent cynicism about the American political process, and 2008 has only intensified it.

Clinton, Obama, it doesn't matter. The powers that be would never allow a candidate who represented REAL change anywhere near the White House.

Yeah, I'll most likely vote for Obama, but I'm going to concentrate my efforts on state and local races, because parts of Minnesota still have room for populist Democratic candidates, and Minneapolis is one of them.

[Ganja Ninja]

57. What is it with all this Hillary stuff coming out of the woodwork?

She not the nominee and she's not going to be the nominee.

[RiverStone]

59. The irony is your post is still...about....the Clintons!

Kinda hard to suggest folks let it go when the focus of your post is why they need to get over bashing the Clintons.

All this will self resolve very, very soon. I'm guessing we will come out of the convention united and with all the leftover Clinton stuff from the primaries fully vetted.

Sadly, much of the Clinton reaction was brought on by the actions of the Clinton's themselves - call it natural consequences. I do agree --- it would be best to focus on Obama's task at hand and there are zillions of concerns more relevant. But rest assured that the Clintons, for better and worse, will no longer be getting this kind of attention after the convention.

That is, unless we are all surpised and Obama picks a Clinton for his VP. Yet even then, our primary chore will be to beat McBush --- and I'd support the ticket no matter who Obama picks.

[cascadiance]

63. Lately presidents have been thinking themselves more as kings than as elected presidents...

And though I certainly wouldn't say that Bill or Hillary think on the same level of Bushes and Reagans, they still seem to be swallowing that pseudo royal family persona at times, which I think at one level bugs us.

I'd look past that notion if I didn't feel they were so much in bed with the corporate lobbies, etc. that they are that are perpetuating this notion of "kingdom" to keep their power through our institutionalized bribery centric campaign finance system and the poor excuse for a "free press" corporate media.

So when the Clintons don't fight what I think many in our party perceive as the fundamental problem facing us today (losing our people control over government), then I think it does get rather emotional at times.

There aren't many of us though that were wanting to "humiliate and crush" them. If some of our heavy response appears that way, I think it is what many feel as a measured response to the notion they have that they are "owed" power in the White House. Keep pushing that to some point, and then yes, perhaps the only way to stop that push of power is through at times appearing to try to "humiliate and crush" them.

I have nothing personal against the Clintons. I DO have VERY personal feelings about Corporate control over our government. And those that stand in the way of shutting that down WILL get a lot of pushback from me.

[WeDidIt]

65. Seems to me they're humiliating themselves

in their unbridled desire to see Obama lose.

[Orangepeel]

67. "profess their love for Obama, prostrate, pound on their chests and ask for forgiveness"

what hyperbolic nonsense. The only thing being asked of Bill is to either be supportive or shut up.

[polmaven]

139. Yeah, maybe he should say something like -

"I think he SHOULD be elected and I think he WILL be elected"! - Oh, wait...He DID say that!

[The Doctor.]

72. It's a small handfull of people.

And the media is just doing what the media is supposed to do; find shit to talk about.

No worries. Hillary is doing great, as I hoped she would, and any perceived 'bashing' of her, real or otherwise, will not effect the result of this election.

[Pisces]

73. Bill should not be commenting if he can't hold back his anger! Not to much to ask.

[Phx_Dem]

74. Bill humiliated himself

this week. All we've heard on TV and in print is how bitter and jealous he is. It's true and he brought the criticsm upon himself. If he didn't have anything supportive to say about the presumtive leader of his party, he should have STFU. He's no statesman. He's a bitter and angry person.

Hillary's little video rant about "respecting" her supporters didn't help her either. Her supporters haven't been disrespected. It was a rough primarily -- mostly thanks to Hillary -- and supporters different sides tend to get angry and hurt. It's part of the process -- like sports. Fan's get pissed when their team loses, but if they have a shred of maturity and dignity, they get over it. The only one who has been disrespected in the Democratic party is Barack Obama. He fairly and rightly earned his place as presumptive nominee, but the Clinton's can't stand it so they keep their "people" riled up because they are bitter about losing and can't seem to get over it.

[mitchum]

75. Bill Clinton not only wants to be the bride at every wedding...

and the corpse at every funeral
apparently he wants to be the flagellant at every whipping post

[A-Schwarzenegger]

76. Where did taking responsibility for the consequences of one's (or two's) own actions

go? :*

[JackORoses]

77. It's unexplainable. Why do the Clintons want to continue humiliating themselves?

[DailyGrind51]

79. It is really the other way around!

The Clintons are acting as if Obama should be begging forgiveness for having the audacity to run against her in the first place! And, now, instead of helping Hillary pay off her campaign debt, Obama has the audacity to be concentrating on the general election! How dare Obama be so thoughtless and inconsiderate!:sarcasm:

[Kool Kitty]

93. Kinda looks that way to me, too.

[DailyGrind51]

131. Thank you, Kitty! The Clintons are only about "The Clintons" and

not the Party. Both Bill and Hillary actually praised John McCain during the primaries, something that Party loyalists would never do. All this "catharsis" stuff is so much psychobabble!

[JoFerret]

81. Clinically it's a form of narcissm

(So I am told.)

[ieoeja]

82. 1993

Everyone thought Bill Clinton would reverse Reaganism when he got into office. Instead, he put the bipartisan stamp on the core elements of Reaganism.

What he did right: moderate tax increase on the wealthy, earned income tax credit for the poor, enforced more regulations to ensure economic prosperity, and let Al Gore build that information superhighway he kept blathering about during his vice-presidential campaign.

What he did wrong: anti-gun, welfare reform, merger-mania (especially the media), encouraged offshoring, laid seige to what should have been our allies in Iraq, and abandoned Afghanistan to our enemies.

And please note that most of the things he did wrong, and that led to so much harm, were ideas he borrowed from the GOP.

At this point you might be tempted to interject that Hillary isn't Bill. But (1) you did write about the Clintons, not just Hillary, and (2) she says she left the Republican party because of how rudely she was treated by Nixon delegates at the 1968 Republican National Convention. Assassinations of MLK and RFK did prompt her to switch. Racism didn't do it. Women's rights didn't do it. No political issues did it. She left because she was treated rudely.

Couple this fact with her husband's precedence in the White House, some of us honestly fear they are rightwingers in leftwing clothing.

[butterfly77]

86. The question is..

why does hillary make all of these concessions to her, when he won? Why does Hillary want Obama to pay off the debt she ran up trying to beat him when she already knew he had won?

[TankLV]

87. If the Clintons are fellating obama or his supporters every fucking second, they're not doing enough

aparently to these idiots...

and too many poster here prove the OP's point in spades!!!

and, now, I'm NOT being racist...

[americanstranger]

95. Using 'Clintons' and 'fellating' in the same sentence...

...not the best way to get your point across.

- as

[polichick]

103. Yes, nobody requires more actual or metaphorical blowjobs than Bill Clinton.

[Fleshdancer]

89. Why are die hard supporters on both sides allowing the MSM to divide one another?

What part of "we're on the same team" can those of you who constantly argue of Clinton vs Obama not get? I'm sick and tired of both Clinton and Obama having to babysit a small group of loud supporters over this crap. They both have shown incredible grace and maturity throughout this process and I think it's time their supporters do the same.

The media is fixated on whether the Clintons are angry? Who cares? They're full grown adults who are capable of handling their own emotions. The media wants to know if Obama is bitter? Who cares? He too is a full grown adult who is capable of dealing with it. We're talking about highly intelligent and mature individuals here. Why is the media doing this? RATINGS. That's it. They get paid when you tune in and you keep tuning in. It really is that simple.

If anyone reading this can't think about Clinton or Obama without getting angry, then do yourself (and everyone else) a favor and take a break. Step away from cable news and your favorite blogs for a week or two and gain a little perspective. We are not each others' enemy.

[question everything]

104. Thank you. A very thoughtful and reasonable post

Cable news has to fill time, and compete with each other, so they dig "differences" and, sadly, the blogs follow through.

A smart DUer recently post that if all the threads about Hillary and PUMA are ignored, there is not much to read on GDP..

[Franc_Lee]

90. Denver will be Hillary's sh*t or get off the pot moment...?

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

92. Those people are crackpots. Not Democrats, and never were.

I've ben reading demented masturbatory shit about Hillary Clinton on the internet since the 1990s, so this is nothing different.

Some of these same clowns squawking about unity today were the first to say they would vote for Nader if Clinton were nominated.

They are not Democrats. They are psychos. Ignore them.

[billyoc]

94. In my case, it's just something to do to pass the time.

[McCamy Taylor]

99. It is GOP divide and conquer politics finding fertile ground among some less than savvy Dems.

[Beacool]

101. Cafferty is an a-hole, always was.

I stopped watching MSNBC months ago and I'm at peace. I never step into KOS and rarely peek at Huff. This is the only place that elevates my blood pressure, but it keeps the juice flowing.

:eyes:

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

106. What is it about the desire to humiliate and crush the Clintons?

Because they are trying to humiliate and crush our rightful Democratic nominee, the Democratic party's chances in the fall, and the country as a whole!

I am beginning to totally hate them, really!!

[LeFleur1]

107. You Clinton Haters are Amazing

If someone had told me about these posts, if I hadn't read them with my own eyes I wouldn't believe them at all. How very far the Democratic party has fallen. I feel no loyalty at all to such extremist haters.
By Bye. I hope you can get "your" candidate elected, but I doubt hate will do it.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

111. I hate their tactics, and the more they continue, the more I GROW to hate them, too!!

[POAS]

112. Just before our Ohio primary

I was still doing daily flip flops between Obama and Clinton.

Then the tactics changed by the Clinton campaign. They started the "kitchen sink" strategy and within days I became a solid Obama voter.

It wasn't Clinton the person that changed my mind, it was the tactics used.

That she professes now to be an Obama supporter, well I'll take her word on that.

[vaberella]

119. Same for me. HRC camp tactics turned me off. After Edwards left, it was bet. those two.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

125. What the Hill-Bill Enablers seem to forget is that many of us were not originally

Obama fans. I started out with Kucinich. As a proud, unapologetic liberal, he was my man and a true American hero. After he left, I moved over to Edwards. It is simply a lie that most black people supported Obama out of the bag. Many of us didn't. And in fact, many of us supported Hillary because we loved Bill. Bottom line: It was the tactics that turned people off. And saddest thing: it was unnecessary!!

[POAS]

128. I don't know about "Unnecessary"--

Given that her plan apparently did not include a strategy beyond Super Tuesday it may have seemed entirely necessary by the time they got to Ohio to throw everything at Obama.

I'm not saying your wrong that it was unnecessary, only that from inside the Clinton camp it may have seemed necessary given the looming Obama freight train bearing down on them.

Now McCain seems to be trying the "kitchen sink" strategy in the hopes of slowing the Obama train. The difference is that in McCain's case he has multiple media sources willing to shill for the Republican party and their candidate. His lies will get repeated over and over and any retraction will be buried on page 12.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

129. I guess that what I mean by "unnecessary," she already had good support from blacks

and Bill could have been out there to diffuse any support Obama was gaining. Rather than resorting to underhanded, divisiveness, he should have been reminding black Americans of the good economic times many enjoyed under his presidency. He wasn't the best but his policies did strengthen the economy. Even if Obama did siphon off votes from her, I am fully confident that she could have worked to be competitive. For one, many blacks will vote for Obama but still have doubts that he can and will win. There's division even in my own family.

[POAS]

130. I see that side of it

I'm just trying to imagine what it may have looked like from inside the Clinton camp.

They thought they had a lock on the nomination. They thought they had the Black vote in hand and that Obama might hurt that but then on top of the siphoning off of the Black vote he was eating into the white vote, witness wins in New England and Iowa.

If Obama could eat away at rural white support as well as urban Black support AND they had no plan for how to deal with any viable candidate, much less one with the skills Obama was displaying then to their eyes the only choice may have seemed the kitchen sink strategy.

The fact that it backfired so dramatically points out that it was not only unnecessary (as seen in hindsight and from the outside) but also unwise. From the outside I saw that early on but for them it was as if looking through a glass darkly.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

132. The other thing that baffled me and many others is that most of the unyielding

support came from blacks, who were by far the most loyal supporters and defenders of the Clintons. The more they attacked Obama, the more they turned off blacks. I will never forget the '90s, defending the Clintons until I nearly threw up. There WAS and IS a Right Wing Conspiracy against the Clintons. With that said, I couldn't understand why suddenly they were embracing the likes of Ailes and Murdoch and going on Faux Noise to cozy up with Bill O'Rielly. I also couldn't understand why they were oblivious to the fact that the Right wanted Hillary to win so that they could run against her, feeling that she was the weaker candidate and that would give them license to target Bill again. I still can't understand why they don't see that and why their supporters seem to turn a blind eye as well.

So now there is much work that the Clintons have to put into repairing their relationship with the black community, that despite the support for Obama, remains loyal to the Clintons. The primaries weren't about betraying the Clintons; it was about Barack Obama. The Clintons took it personally as if black Americans owed them; they have this sense of entitlement. In my mind, black Americans have paid the Clintons above and beyond with their support, especially during and after the impeachment ordeal. That relationship will be repaired if the Clintons--particularly Bill--doesn't work to undermine Obama. If Obama loses and there is a perception that the Clintons had something to do with it, no matter how trivial, I fear that the Clintons risk their political legacy. Hillary cannot win her Senate seat without the support of blacks. Period.

[POAS]

133. Entitlement is exactly the right word to use

and also most appropriate in that it is an often used code word used by the racist right wing as a slurs towards programs they see as benefiting only the Black community.

The Clintons felt an entitlement not only to the Black vote but also to the Democratic nomination and the Whitehouse.

It wasn't only the Blacks that the Clintons owed for unwavering support under a relentless right wing attack, they owed the party faithful in general. Turning to Ailes and Murdock and the rest was a slap in the face to all their supporters.

They could have had the party at their feet, instead they are left hoping to be granted prominent speaking spots at the convention. Hubris, I suppose, carries its rewards.

[Beacool]

115. Hallucinate much?

They are "trying to humiliate and crush our rightful Democratic nominee"???

Oh, the drama, the histrionics......

:rofl:

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

126. They are. Be a smart-ass if you want. Until they come out in full support of our nominee, I don't

trust them. Nor will I ever forgive how they ran their abysmal, despicable campaign.

The shit is not funny, either.

[polmaven]

142. "Until they come out in full support of our nominee"...

You mean something like:

"I am completely committed to helping Senator Obama become the next President of the United States and urging all of you to do the same."

That sure would be helpful, wouldn't it?

[jillan]

108. Excellent post!!!

I couldn't have said it better.

[AngryOldDem]

109. What is it about the Clintons that makes them think everything is about them?

More to the point, why do Hillary and Bill think Obama owes them the vice presidency?

Obama owes them jack. And it makes her concession speech, seen by many of us at the time as one of the most gracious and inspiring we have ever heard, now seem like complete and utter bullshit. She kept the primaries and her campaign going long after most everyone else saw it was going way beyond common sense. So no, I really don't see why they "need to grieve." It was hubris that fed her campaign, pure and simple, and more of that is exactly what we DON'T need right now.

I half wonder if, should Obama be forced to put her on the ticket, HRC would demand to split time between Blair House and the White House. Somehow, that wouldn't surprise me in the least.

[Beacool]

116. It works both ways.

The former President and First Lady owe Obama, zip, nada, nothing.

:shrug:

[Arugula Latte]

140. Oh, lord, it's always about the Clintons, and what they deserve.

The fact that you think that these supposed stalwarts of the Democratic party don't have to show support for the Democratic nominee says volumes about you...FYI, it says that you suck.

[scarletwoman]

163. Are you serious? So, prominent Democratic party leaders don't owe support to the Democratic party

candidate for president?

Wow. That's really fucked up.

[JTFrog]

113. Karma is a bitch, ain't it? n/t

[bunnies]

114. "They are not even allowed to grieve"

Is this a joke? :rofl: Are the thought police in their heads keeping them from grieving? Pathetic. Would people even say such things is Hillary were a man? meh.

[driver8]

118. Ha Ha...that's exactly what I thought. They can grieve all they

want, I just wish that they would do it in private and with their mouths shut.

Hillary supporters seem to think that Hillary was "owed" the nomination. They didn't get their way, and now they are like spoiled little children who want to take their ball and go home.

I am sick of this shit.

If you don't support Obama, that's fine...but quit bringing everyone else down because you lost.

[POAS]

134. What is wrong with

picking themselves up, and getting on with their now very comfortable lives.

They didn't lose a relative, a child or even a favorite pet.

Next we'll here about "closure".

Get your sorry asses up out of that pool of tears and either get back to work for the American people or shut the hell up already.

[Arugula Latte]

141. I agree. What a bunch of emotional wrecks these people are, including the PUMAs.

I've never seen such a bunch of spoiled whiners. Jesus, I wish they'd all just go move to some island where they can sob and tear their hair out for years on end.

[BklynChick]

117. I think it's more about the Clintons seeming interest in humiliating and crushing Obama

[vaberella]

120. Which HRC took great pleasure in. Wasn't it her who gave McCain a nod for Pres. WTF?

[BklynChick]

124. yes, several times, and now surprise, surprise, McCain is using her words in his ads

[polmaven]

143. Of course it is!

"I am completely committed to helping Senator Obama become the next President of the United States and urging all of you to do the same."

"I think he should be elected and I think he will be elcted".

What horrid, humiliating things to say about our nominee.

[barack the house]

127. It's about Obama and Hilalry the rest is distraction I wan tthem to get on for the greater good.

[polmaven]

147. The thing is,

They DO get on. The HillHaters here absolutely refuse to be as gracious as he is. He and his campaign staff understand that the American people do not "fall in line" (to use an offensive phrase from further up in this thread). The Clintons can no more force people to obey what they say than can Senator Obama.

Both President and Senator Clinton are doing WHAT they are asked to do by Senator Obama, WHEN they are asked to di it- BY THE OBAMA CAMPAIGN!

That is exactly what they are SUPPOSED to do! It is Senator Obama's campaign!

He understands that she can urge, but not force her more reluctant supporters to support him. Graciousness rather than animosity is what will convince them.

[Medusa]

136. No one is doing this to them; they're doing it to themselves

with their actions. It's all about them and they want everyone else to make it all about them. They're the ones who need the help to get over this obsession they have with putting themselves first.

[L0oniX]

137. The Clintons are rich. Why should I or we care about them at all?

I fail to understand why anyone would fawn over rich people. Rich people for the most part don't give a fuck about us regular people. They only care about us when it comes time to vote. The Clinton's are worth millions. If you want to love them and fawn over them then that speaks volumes about who you are.

[emilyg]

145. So - all because someone is rich

I shouldn't love them?

[polmaven]

148. What an absolutely ridiculous

and insultingly offensive post! Grow the hell up.

[L0oniX]

151. If it's so offensive to you then alert on it instead of complaining to me like a little kid.

[polmaven]

155. Not everything that is offensive

is against the rules. It is also within the rules for me to tell you when I think you are being childish and offensive. I will say it again....Grow up.

[L0oniX]

157. I have no problem with you playing blog nany if that's what gets your rocks off.

[polmaven]

161. OK

:spank:

[dkf]

146. Hey John Edwards wiped the Clintons off the TV.

No negative Clinton stuff around today that I've seen.

[unfaithful_servant]

149. No real Obama supporter would keep up the attacks on Clinton

Its divisive for the party and weakens Obama's chances of getting elected. I can't imagine anyone who considers themselves a loyal Democrat and Obama supporter would fall for these GOP dirty tricks.

[kristyt]

150. MODERATORS FOR THE LOVE OF CHRIST CREATE A FORUM ALREADY FOR THIS SHIT

All mods seem to do is giggle and TS non-paying DU posters who piss off regs. How about doing EVERYONE a favor and create a forum.

And knowing how this goes I'll probably get TS'd as I'm non-paying and dare to question the almighty wisdom. Whatever, if it results in a forum being set up and ending this absurdity, it will be worth it.

Since it occurs to me that I stand a better than 50 percent shot at being TS'd for this post, my potential last wish is that you name the forum something Clinton Flamewar Dungeon or something...

[pecwae]

152. Too late to rec, sorry.

[Zavulon]

154. If you believe Hillary is actually

doing everything she can to help Obama to win or even WANTS him to win, it's YOU who needs help.

[polmaven]

156. Can you show us any evidence

that she has refused to do anything she has been asked to do by the Obama campaign?

[Zavulon]

159. Can you show us any evidence

that her telling her friends "privately" that Obama can't win was an actual attempt to be private instead of an intentional leak? Obama is leading in just about every poll imaginable, and yet Hillary is spewing this sort of shit? I'm sure you think that was just an accident.

I'm guessing that you believed her when she hid behind Ted Kennedy's brain cancer after the fallout over her RFK remark too, right?

In both cases, she was just saying what she actually wanted to see. But you keep on believing her if you want. I'll be in the other corner laughing.

[polmaven]

160. Well, again...

No one here has shown any proof of the accusations that you have made.

It is, in this country, up to the accuser to prove his or her case. When I see proof, which leaves no room for reasonable doubt, then I will believe it.

Until then, I will take the word of the last Democratic president and a well respected Democratic member of the United States Senate, who earned approximately 1/2 of the pledged delegates and 18,000,000 votes in the presidential primary contests.

That load of hate must be a very heavy weight to carry around. I do not envy your burden.

[Zavulon]

162. Well, that's true only when

the person in question is on trial. Hillary isn't. I'm not required to have unequivocal proof not to trust her. Her politically expedient IWR vote is enough circumstantial evidence for me. Hillary has never shown me any real concern for anyone but Hillary.

As for your support group jargon ("That load of hate must be a very heavy weight to carry around. I do not envy your burden."), I'm sure a beacon of caring and sensitivity such as yourself doesn't hate anyone, including Republicans. I'm also sure you believe that any "hate" (which in your case also apparently includes "distrust") is optional, as in "I think I'll spend today hating Hillary."

Well, while you and 18,000,000 others - more than a few motivated by Rush Limpballs, by the way - supported Hillary, she still lost. I guess that means a lot of other people (enough to keep her from winning) don't trust or like her, either. I guess that means we're all "haters," right?

Too bad that wrestler, Triple H, already took that slogan. If not, I'd have taken the deep and thoughtful inspiration I took from you and started my own "Hating Hateful Haters" club, since my inability to trust someone who doesn't actually deserve anyone's trust has transformed into such a heavy, heavy burden. :rofl:

Lastly, at work I'm surrounded by about a dozen or so of the 27% who actually think Bush is doing a good job. I think I'll pass along your wonderful "That load of hate must be a very heavy weight to carry around. I do not envy your burden." to them, so they can use it on the rest of us who want to throw up at the sight of the man. Of course, since I'm sure you have no problem with Bush (or anyone, since you have no "burden" of "hate"), you'll be in full agreement.

Thanks for allowing me to benefit from your depth, Doctor.

[MasonJar]

158. I am so sick of these threads on DU that I am almost ready to go

somewhere else. The Clintons are fantastic, and so is Obama. Enough said.

[spinbaby]

165. Hear, hear!

:applause: :applause: :applause:

Let's not trash fellow Democrats when there are Republicans to trash!