Genuine anger among Clinton Supporters

I am a Independent woman voter who leans Democratic, and a strong supporter of Hillary Clinton.  Recently there seems to be a lot of attention paid to the fact that women supporters of Hillary Clinton are genuinely angry and upset regarding the blatant sexism that she has been subjected to during this campaign.  

Most people who do not support her for President, and few who do appear to agree that there has been sexism, but then they go on to argue that despite hard feelings on our part, we would be stupid to consider voting for John Macain because of his support for pro life Supreme Court justices.  

Before I give my thoughts on this argument, let me say that this statement is likely to make matters worse.  It in some way implies that not only are women not supposed to feel mad about the sexism, but are supposed to suck it up, shut up and vote for the greater good.  

I believe that Hillary's candidacy for President, has brought about a tremendous upsurge in activism among women who support Hillary.  Many of us, including myself, have become much more aware of our own ability to impact political process in this country for the first time.  We have become aware of the power of our voice, individual as well as collective, largely due to the internet.  We have been inspired by Hillary's ability to not give up in the face of a cacophony of voices asking her to get out of the race.  We have been inspired by her belief in herself and her ability to to be true to herself and her supporters.

I believe that this new activism that has been inspired by Hillary's candidacy will impact the political process in this country for generations to come.  Our young daughters and sons who watch us and get familiar with the activism will continue this in the next generation.

Do you think that once awakened to the power of this awesome process, we are going to make a decision based on anything other than our own independent judgement regarding whom to vote for in the GE?  

Do you think attempting to scare us with the possibility of Supreme Court Justices who are pro choice is going to make us vote for someone who we do not believe is ready to be President at this time?

THe best way forward is to let the process play out.  If Barack Obama is the nominee, and the process has been fair, Hillary Supporters will begin the process of assessing each candidate on his own merit and will make an independent judgement of who is best in terms of keeping the country safe, in terms of making the right decisions for the economy, health care and Supreme COurt Justices.  My suggestion is that neither candidate should take our vote for granted, but shoudl work hard at earning our votes.



Display:


but dont you get, its over! (2.00 / 11)

if i hear that one more time i gonna hurl.


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:38:11 AM EST

Re: but dont you get, its over! (1.30 / 10)

Look, I'm not sure how I feel about you interjecting yourself so fervently into some of these diaries. You're Canadian, you like Clinton, I get it. But you're not doing anything but furthering the divide, it seems, and given you're a foreigner, it doesn't play well to you, or to Senator Clinton. That's my honest take on the matter- that, and a dollar'll buy you a cup of coffee (that's in Canadian dollars, though, of course).


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:44:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

im growing tired of this.... (2.00 / 11)

yes - ive heard your comments several times now on what topics you are 'allowing' me to have an opinion.  its getting tired.  i have let it go until now.  please stop and remember the site rules....


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:49:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: im growing tired of this.... (1.20 / 10)

* shrug * Fine, but like I said, remember, you're only reflecting poorly on yourself, your country, and Senator Clinton.


Hooray for John McCain!
by ragekage on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:53:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

speak for yourself. (2.00 / 9)

diarist, my apologies.


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 02:04:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

please ban the troll ragekage (1.09 / 21)

He only disrupts and never contributes.

Send this ugly person back to KOS where the ugly reside.


Until recently I was selling drugs, and now I'm selling Obama T-shirts.
by switching sides on Thu May 22, 2008 at 02:40:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

He's truly way over the top... (2.00 / 6)

...the fact that he's been allowed to hang out as long as he has is nothing short of an oversight on the blog management's part.

The guy's actually calling out people he rants against in his freakin' signature! (Every time he comments! And, like his comments, he words them in such a way where he can feign some sort of lameass defense for his blatant trollishness, to boot!)

He doesn't engage in dialogue. It's nothing short of a charade. How many folks on MyDD do you know that disrupt a diary, and in the course of doing so accuse others of disrupting the same diary! LOL! He's extremely disruptive, to the point of inciting people at Daily Kos to come over here to support his efforts! (A basic, documented fact.)


by bobswern on Thu May 22, 2008 at 02:54:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He's truly way over the top... (1.90 / 10)

Sorry, but you're mistaken on this one, bob. Everyone gets a bit disruptive sometimes, but that doesn't make them trolls. Switching sides, however, is unquestionably a troll:

Pointless, disruptive comment #1

Pointless, disruptive comment #2

Pointless, disruptive comment #3

Pointless, disruptive comment #4

It goes on...

and on...

and on.

There's a million more in the hide bin -- I just picked the first ones I came across. Some of those comments wouldn't necessarily have been HR'd if they'd been written by anyone else, but I think most people have accepted that this person is a troll. No one bothers to uprate him/her.

*now prepares to be TR'd by the troll for pointing out his/her trollishness*


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:13:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

i feel horrible hijacking this thread... (2.00 / 4)

but since you brought it up... whats your take on any HRC supporters who, unlike you, have not conceded yet - get TR and/or HR by BO supporters in the last few days for simply stating on to denver or seating MI and FL.

(i might add im not one of them)  but rather would like to get your opinion on it.


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:24:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I know, hijacking isn't nice, but I just got (2.00 / 3)

off-track. No, I don't think people should be TR'd just for saying they'll take it to Denver. Are you by any chance referring to the way switching sides was HR'd in the What's really going to happen thread? I would not have troll rated or hidden that comment because it wasn't really warranted. On the other hand, I know that person's history, so I wouldn't have bothered to save the comment from the hide bin, either. I also have a feeling s/he wouldn't have been as readily HR'd by Obama supporters if they didn't already know his habits.

There's a lot of TR abuse on both sides lately, but hopefully it will pass soon.


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:32:41 AM EST
[ Parent ]

By the way, let me add (2.00 / 7)

that I'm very happy you're involved in our politics. I have always enjoyed your perspective. I don't think you reflect badly on Hillary at all. ;)

Also, I think I just really like Canadians. I've had several Canadian "pen pals" (or what is it online, "email pals"?) for years, and they're all very cool.


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:43:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]

thanks for the kind words... (2.00 / 6)

and let me say - ditto to you, well - save for the penpal part, but i do have a father and sisters that live in the us.


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:49:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

CG, I just had a look at your comments (none / 0)

for the last few days, and out of the first 150 of them, you received one troll rate. I'm not sure I agree with the assessment of your victimhood.


by bookish on Thu May 22, 2008 at 08:34:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: CG, I just had a look at your comments (2.00 / 1)

which is why i said "(i might add im not one of them)  but rather would like to get your opinion on it."


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:23:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Sorry. (2.00 / 1)

I didn't notice the last part, and I've noticed far more abuse by Clinton supporters lately, possibly due to the fact that so many of us Obama backers have lost HR and TR status recently.


by bookish on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:39:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He's truly way over the top... (2.00 / 2)

I troll-rated comments by both ragekage and switchingsides. Insults from either side are not welcome.


by berkeleymike on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:03:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He's truly way over the top... (2.00 / 2)

heh same for me, so that means I get to be variously called different names by both sides ;P


by zerosumgame on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:17:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: please ban the troll ragekage (2.00 / 1)

Some people can be pretty boorish, and  hair trigger sensitive about their candidate in this Democratic Presidential Primary season. I agree that no one should attack CanadaGal or give her a troll rating  - ever. She is always honest and willing to discuss a post in light of new information. That statement by RageKage (what does RageKage mean, anyway?) claiming that CG was reflecting poorly on  her "country" was definitely wierd however.It was  personal attack on CG.

There should be a delete your own post function, because I think that RageKage would take his post back. He's gotten better on the anti-Hillary sniping, however, so I'm just going to ask him to simmer down now! But everyone else can do whatever they want with regards to rating, obviously. I'm just going to ask him to apologize to CG at this time and go from there.

Change Before It's Too Late
by Jeter on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:17:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Speak your mind! (2.00 / 4)

I think your country rocks (health care) and your views on this race won't change my mind.  

I've lived overseas for almost five years and I have gotten into numerous Obama-Clinton debates with non-Americans.  Before that it was Bush-Kerry.  Don't even bring up the number of "Why the hell did you people re-elect that warmongering idiot?" discussions.  I don't think that many Americans really appreciate the degree to which people follow American politics outside of America.


Linfar's co-blogger opposing John McCain
by psychodrew on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:47:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I kinder woke up (2.00 / 1)

when the American reporters sent to Iran started getting questions on OUR process. ;-)


*&=4eva
by BlogSurrogate57 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:01:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

oh lord the worst thing about that (2.00 / 1)

is when I was traveling Europe the last couple of years I got that question all the time, trying to explain how our crazy system works that lets a feeb like dumbaya rise to power on the back of daddy's money.


by zerosumgame on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:19:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

FYI (1.71 / 7)

I mojo'd ragekage because some idiot TR'ed him without cause. And for his appreciation of the Canadian dollar :)


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Thu May 22, 2008 at 02:55:51 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I t.r.'ed him and you... (2.00 / 4)

Him for calling out others with whom he argues (not dialogue, but disruptive argument), and myself (indirectly) in his signature...basically, the guy's calling out people every time he comments, which is usually on a disruptive basis, just like he's doing in this comment thread.

And, I t.r.'ed you for calling me an idiot.

Got a problem with either of these things?

My t.r.'s are quite legitimate.

Go ask Alegre and Knowvox what they think of this troll. Then look at his signature line. How many folks around here do that?

Certainly one of the most provocative--and for all the wrong reasons--people in this community. And, for ongoing disruption of dialogue, disingenuous posturing, and downright conspiring to disrupt this place, I agree with others in this comment thread; he should be banned!


by bobswern on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:03:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I t.r.'ed him and you... (1.83 / 6)

On the "Canadian" issue, I believe the commenter was within his right to bring up the issue. So I stand by my uprate. But I don't stand by calling you an idiot because I shouldn't do that. No one should. So apologies for that.

Ragekage is no troll and I really don't want to ask Alegre anything as she never seems to answer any of my comments any ways. The way I see it, many of Alegre's diaries are constructed in a way to peel Clinton supporters from any future support for Obama. So she ain't going to tell me who's a troll and who isn't.


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:12:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Calling out others in your signature line? (2.00 / 3)

I mean, come on! How much more provocative can one be? Everytime they comment, it's a disingenuous callout of other bloggers (and it's other bloggers that look at this commenter with great disdain, too).

As for the "conspiring-to-disrupt-the-blog" matter, there are DKos diaries written by this guy (his screen name on Kos is different than the one he uses here), urging people from DKos to come over here at specific times to support him in his apparent "mission."

I mean look at the sum total of this blogger's behavior!?!?
a.) Callouts consistently in his freakin' signature.
b.) Diaries posted on DKos with specific dates and times for other Kossacks to meet up with him here to support him in his nebulous quest!
c.) Clearcut diary disruptions on an ongoing basis!
d.) Comments on DKos about how negatively he feels towards MyDD.
e.) Feigned conciliatory comments which bely all of the other facts, stated immediately above?

And, now tonight, adding a comment I made to him, and posting it in his signature line, too, calling me a "Wahoo!" (Actually, I think that's pretty freakin' funny! Truly.) KnowVox and Alegre regularly take crap from him; it's easy to see in their comments, they don't like the guy; and he puts their names in his signature line?

This isn't just hubris. It's an outright mindfuck with this blogger: "Let's see how far I can take this charade. Just how many headgames can I get away with before they find me out and no longer put up with me?"


by bobswern on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:42:40 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You owe me a dollar (2.00 / 1)

I'm really tired. But I read the entire comment.

In other good news, today I got our company to issue a $40 dollar monthly gas allowance to all employees. Random as all hell, but this is how I'll end the night.


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:48:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Calling out others in your signature line? (2.00 / 1)

Come on, you're taking it too personally. He honestly isn't a troll. As for that KnowVox/alegre call-out in his sig, I don't see how it's really a bad thing. It's not as if it's a negative thing to say.


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:49:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

He may not be all troll (2.00 / 1)

but he is definitely part troll.  Most of the time (not every time) he just stirs up trouble.  The fact that he uses his handle on Dkos to encourage other Kossacks to come over here and cause chaos is really lame.  I vote for him to stay at Dkos if he can't behave in a better manner.


Unity Ticket: The best damn way to kick John McCain's Ass in November!
by aurelius on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:56:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He may not be all troll (2.00 / 4)

I think he causes a bit more mischief than is strictly necessary sometimes -- especially in alegre's diaries -- but then again, a lot of people do. Also, I'm rather grateful to him for being one of the first Obama supporters to behave civilly enough to inspire me to be interested in his point of view. I got past my anger with Obama and will be able to support him if he wins the nomination, not specifically because of anything the candidate himself did, but because I listened to and learned from his supporters. They helped me look at Obama from a different perspective.

I know the pictures and sarcastic remarks probably seem pretty trollish, but I think most of us have done that sort of thing. I've said some really sh*tty things about Obama and his supporters, and I certainly don't consider myself a troll.


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Thu May 22, 2008 at 04:08:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I doubt I'll ever like Obama (2.00 / 2)

I'll vote for him because he hews more closely to my principles than any republican--but that doesn't mean I'll ever like him (never say never though).  I despise his wife for what she has said about Hillary Clinton and this country.  The thought of her as first lady makes me sick.  But....I'm more about what in the long run is better for the future of this republic than my own particular distaste (even though it is very strong in this case) for any given candidate.

As for RK, well....I find him at times to be reasonable and intelligent and at other times to belligerent and condescending.  I won't deny him his  voice or opinion however.  I do have an issue (as I said earlier) with him purposefully stirring up animosity and/or encouraging others to come over here from DKos to assist him in his efforts.  Many of us (including myself) left DKos because of the unrelenting sexism and disrespect that was heaped on us there--I don't like it rearing its ugly head here.

Side note:  I always enjoy discussing with you--you're one of the most reasonable people here.  Cheers.


Unity Ticket: The best damn way to kick John McCain's Ass in November!
by aurelius on Thu May 22, 2008 at 04:19:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I doubt I'll ever like Obama (2.00 / 1)

Ah, yes, Michelle... well, I had trouble with that, too. But I think this might be of great interest to you, and credit goes to map for linking to it. As it turns out, Michelle's "if you can't run your own house" quote was taken entirely out of context -- it had nothing to do with Hillary. Damn media. We remember what they did to Bill's "fairy tale" comment. I know that article won't make you feel better about Michelle's view of the country or the way she said she "would really have to think about it" before she could campaign for Hillary, but it meant a great deal for me to know that she didn't make a cold, vicious remark about my candidate's marriage.

Admittedly, I tend to turn a blind eye to some of the things certain Obama supporters say and do. But it's because I know that my ability to peacefully accept an Obama nomination is due in no small part to the efforts of people like ragekage, Student Guy, brit, Setrak, thatpurplestuff, fogiv, Dracomicron, mady, etc (there are actually quite a few of them, so I know I'm leaving people out here). I want Obama supporters like that around. Nobody likes an echo chamber. But I agree that I'd rather this place not turn into dKos-lite.

You're also one of the most reasonable people here, and I've always been incredibly grateful for your sanity -- it sometimes seems like a rare commodity in these parts. ;)


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Thu May 22, 2008 at 04:52:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I doubt I'll ever like Obama (2.00 / 1)

Thanks sricki - that is new to me.  Stunning how that has been allowed to fester as an insult where none was intended.


by interestedbystander on Thu May 22, 2008 at 05:51:06 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I doubt I'll ever like Obama (2.00 / 0)

But THIS insult was intended:

Robin Roberts: So what if Senator Clinton defeats her husband, becoming the first woman nominee. Could you see yourself working to support the first woman nomination?

Michelle Obama: I'd have to think about that. I'd have to think about that, her policies, her approach, her tone.

Robin Roberts: That's not a given?

Michelle Obama: You know, everyone in this party is going to work hard for whoever the nominee is. I think that we're all working for the same thing. and, you know, I think our goal is to make sure that the person in the White House is going to take this country in a different direction. I happen to believe that Barack is the only person who can really do that.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/04 /michelle-obama-ill-thi_n_84900.html


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:39:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I doubt I'll ever like Obama (2.00 / 1)

You really think being less than effusive in backing your opponent is an insult?  Then you must agree that every single post of yours here is an insult.


by interestedbystander on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:09:10 AM EST
[ Parent ]

except that Hillary (2.00 / 1)

is demonized every time she is "less than effusive " to Obama so once again the good ol double-standard raises it's head.


by zerosumgame on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:23:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: except that Hillary (none / 0)

No, she is demonized by ranking John McCain ahead of Obama.  


by interestedbystander on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:31:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I doubt I'll ever like Obama (2.00 / 1)

Well to me that is an extremely mild insult. If Hillary Clinton was the nominee I would definitely vote for her, but I would not work for her like I will for Obama. I too don't like her approach or her tone. I do very much like most of her policies (though her foreign policy approach scares me a lot).

But why should someone feel obligated to work to support someone they don't like?


by berkeleymike on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:17:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You call that an insult? please. (none / 0)

For one thing, Michelle Obama isn't running for President so she can support whoever the hell she wants.  I appreciate her honest uncertainty in the matter.  She's a strong woman who can make up her own mind if she wants to campaign for someone or not. If Obama said he wouldn't support Hillary, that would be another issue.


by Tenafly Viper on Thu May 22, 2008 at 02:22:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

sorry guys... (none / 0)

i disagree with map and sricki on this one - she is clearly smiling as she delivers the line and her pause and the audience reaction say it all.  it is meant as a diss but given context so as to not seem that way.



"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:43:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry guys... (2.00 / 1)

Did you read the full quote?


by interestedbystander on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:07:30 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: sorry guys... (none / 0)

yes.  and map even pointed out that the crowds react this way - every time she says it.  so its a clear inference.


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:35:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Ick. (2.00 / 1)


It's an election, not an auction.
by cosbo on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:52:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I doubt I'll ever like Obama (none / 0)

Yeah, I was very pleased to discover I was wrong about that comment. And the belief that she really meant it in a bad way it is incredibly wide-spread among supporters of both candidates. I don't know how that rumor got so out of hand.


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:45:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I doubt I'll ever like Obama (none / 0)

i think you  misunderstood me - i dont think you were wrong.  watch the video and as the line is delivered the crowd gasps and laughs.  then michelle pauses and smiles.  she knows how this line is received and i believe it is intended.  in fact, map said she still uses it and the crowds react in the same way which to me = intentional.


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 05:10:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I doubt I'll ever like Obama (none / 0)

What did Michelle do wrong?
This is the first time I'VE ever been really proud of my country, too.
I was born while we were meddling in Korea, watched the Kennedys and MLK assassinated by the vested interests, listened to Nixon resign, consoled my black and gay friends who were mocked and beaten, tried not to laugh at how incredibly clueless Reagan was as his undlerlings created chaos in the Middle East and Latin America, tried not to sob as Clinton ruined the Democratic brand, marveled at how superficial and uninformed my compatriots were willfully becoming, and then, of course, came Cheney and his neocons (sorry, I can't refer to the Shrub as 'president' since he is in truth about as influential as the queen of England).
This election is a moment when any thinking person should be as proud as any American has been since we stopped Hitler and Japan.
A woman and a black man are the leading contenders for the presidency.
That makes me really proud of my country, yes, for the first time.
Not this time.
by jedley on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:50:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I doubt I'll ever like Obama (none / 0)

Uh, I don't recall criticizing her (or what she said) just now. Why are you preaching to the choir? Did you mean to respond to someone else?


Even John McCain lusts after teh engels.
by sricki on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:59:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I doubt I'll ever like Obama (none / 0)

Sorry if it seemed I was criticizing you, I intended to respond to the person who said they "despise" Michelle for her statement and others in the sub-thread who seemed to accept it at face value.
Cheers
Not this time.
by jedley on Fri May 23, 2008 at 03:06:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He may not be all troll (none / 0)

What do you call the sound of one hand clapping??  Why all the negative reference to DKos?  There is a lot of really good progressive analysis on that site....so far all I've read here has been an infight about troll-rating and who is a "troll".
I came to see what reason you all had to still support Sen. Clinton in her bid for the nomination.  How do you figure, short of changing rules in mid-primary, she could succeed?  That would interest me.  Of course, if all you want to hear is agreement or you troll rate, then there is no reason to stay.
by WAAngel on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:08:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Commenter pushes the envelope... (2.00 / 2)

...in some very uncool ways...to the point of breaking some blog rules everytime he comments...and otherwise playing disingenuous headgames with the community...up to and including disrupting really decent diary conversations like the one in which we're commenting now!

There's a legitimacy to my criticisms, and those of others--even in this comment thread--that share some of my views. And, the legitimacy of my criticism is based upon clearcut, ongoing violation of blog rules.

Ask the other bloggers, even in this thread, with whom he was contentious tonight. Ask the bloggers that are called out in his signature what they think of this blogger's behavior.


by bobswern on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:59:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Commenter pushes the envelope... (1.80 / 5)

I understand where you are coming from but....

citing KnowVox as reference is a bad idea. Somehow his/her sig
is o.k.? Calling out Obama supporters as cultists is fine?

KnowVox has been trolling for weeks. If you're going to call them out, better be fair about it.

I mojo'd canadian gal and hide rate switching sides.

This is a perfect example of 2 types of Clinton supporters.

C.G. is cool. switching sides is calling Obama a fascist.

See what I mean?


No way. No how. No McCain!
by spacemanspiff on Thu May 22, 2008 at 04:08:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]

you're pretty cool too. (1.66 / 3)


No way. No how. No McCain!
by spacemanspiff on Thu May 22, 2008 at 04:09:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

you're not too shabby yourself. (2.00 / 2)


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 04:13:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

I think you folks are all good people...truly. (2.00 / 1)

And, yes, we all go a little overboard from time to time. But, then there are those that do so ALL THE TIME. And, then there are one or two that do so, deliberately, in their sig lines (I suppose that's in case they forget to over-the-top in a particular comment...at least they'll have something uncool in their sig line! LOL!)...calling out a group is uncool...calling out individuals by name...feigning some sort of camraderie with them in your sig lines...when, in fact, those very folks think it's nothing short of a mindgame...and one that breaks blog rules...is very, very uncool...and out of line with this blogs policies.


by bobswern on Thu May 22, 2008 at 04:25:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: you're pretty cool too. (2.00 / 2)

As long as you don't say "you're cool enough" haha


by wasder on Thu May 22, 2008 at 08:57:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Calling out others in your signature line? (none / 0)

If you can't prove anything that you just wrote, then you, bob, are just talking shit. Prove everything you just wrote. The fact is their are clintonites on this site who post on the hate sites hill44 and marshmouth, who when posting here tell people on those sites to come here and rec. their diary. On this I have proof. WHERE IS YOUR PROOF?????


"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 22, 2008 at 12:04:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

All the proof you'll ever need... (none / 0)

...is available by looking up his current comments, and reading his signature line.

...and by reviewing his track record here by clicking on his name and reading his comments...in threads with better-known HRC supporters than myself (and even in his disruptive commentary here on this very diary).

...and by going over to DKos and reviewing a diary he wrote 4-8 weeks back where he was encouraging Kossacks to come over to MyDD at a specific date and time to "engage in discussion." (Gave you that last one so you can contort it with a meaningless response. It is what it is.)

...and by reviewing this blogger's copy over at DKos in his comments, where he alternates between dumping on this place and praising it, depending upon his mood.

Other than that, I'm not wasting another moment on this matter. But, it's all there in black and white. Easily accessible, except if you prefer to call folks full-of-shit, because rhetorically it makes you feel better.


by bobswern on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:16:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: All the proof you'll ever need... (none / 0)

So to sum it up you have no links, and we should just trust you. Yeah right!


"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 22, 2008 at 01:27:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What don't you understand about... (none / 0)

...the basic concept of clicking on the guy's username and reading his signature line?

What do you not understand about looking at his comments towards folks that he simultaneously calls out in his signature line (click on his screenname and review his comments), as if they were political allies, totally misrepresenting their sentiments towards this blogger? (It's against blog rules for people to be called out by other bloggers! Period.)

He has a different screen name over on DKos. I'm not calling him out here by name; and I won't call him out by the screenname he uses on DKos, either.

So, you have all the links you could possibly need, other than his DKos links. But, if you're not even going to acknowledge that he calls other bloggers out in his signature line, then what's the point. You're just being confrontational without any other purpose than that.

Then again, your own comments are quite trollish, too. (Calling someone "full of shit" qualifies you for troll-dom. But, I've seen you do much worse around here, and on a very frequent basis,too.)


by bobswern on Thu May 22, 2008 at 08:30:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I t.r.'ed him and you... (2.00 / 1)

Your TRs are yours to give.

But I disagree with you. The person referred to in his signature line (which I think is rather playful and inoffensive and DOES not violate privacy ("calling out") has as sig ("don't need a messiah...") that breaks the rules of the site by stereotyping and attacking all Obama supporters. Many have complained to that person that they find it offensive and have been mocked for it.
Should I TR every comment that person makes (using your logic) because of the Sig line?

Notice that you attack and call out another user--a TR offense by the site rules.

I guess I'm just not so stridently pro-censorship as those who've recently been engaging in the TR-war.

I hope you'll reconsider those TRs.


by luckymortal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:57:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FYI (2.00 / 1)

well actually - technically if you look at the site rules, calling out another user is grounds for a TR.  rather than disagreeing with them as so many do.  i v. rarely hand them out though and would much rather give the mojo - you know what im giving you one for the canadian dollar reference!


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:05:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FYI (2.00 / 1)

Honestly, him bringing up your nationality and giving an opinion on your level of participation isn't calling you out. I personally think all participation is good, no matter the nationality, and I won't hold it against ragekage because he is entitled to his opinion (and I love the graphics that he attaches to his comments).

So, that's why I though the TR wasn't called for.


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:09:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FYI (2.00 / 1)

he has brought this up MANY times already, and i have let it go. and yes calling out another user be it as a personal attack or otherwise is not kosher here.

and yes - telling me that i cannot have an opinion because im canadian falls into that category. because of my name?  what does he or you for that matter know about me?  do you even know if i am citizen?  the point is, if you have to justify comments based on info from RL then thats a call out.  my two cents.


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:15:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FYI (none / 0)

You should sneak into the U.S. so we can deport you!

In any case. I'm not sure about the whole thing. To reiterate, it's fine and kosher by me for you to be here as a card carrying member of the Democratic party, even if you're in Canada. Participation is good. But, I still don't see it as calling you out on RK's part. Difference in opinion, is all, I guess.

Alright. I go home now. Nite.


_____________
changiness
by lizardbox on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:25:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: im growing tired of this.... (2.00 / 2)

I enjoy reading your comments or posts even if, as ragekage points our, you are a "furriner" (as W would say).


by AnnC on Thu May 22, 2008 at 07:59:38 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Listening is important (2.00 / 1)

Given how much the US throws its weight around the world, I think it is entirely appropriate - no, important - for voting Americans to listen to the perspective of as many foreigners as possible.

Doing so hardly compels us to vote any particular way, all of us are smart enough to evaluate arguments for their strengths, and listening may provide information we find useful in making our own decisions.

If it is advisable for Sen. Obama as president to engage in diplomacy with our enemies, I fail to see how it is dangerous for us voters to listen to our friends.


"We live entangled in webs of endless deceit, often self-deceit, but with a little honest effort, it is possible to extricate ourselves from them". -- NC
by Trond Jacobsen on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:21:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but dont you get, its over! (1.27 / 11)

How in true conscience can I cast a vote for a man who played with women's lives for his own political ambitions by voting present 7 times to ban abortion without an exception for the health or to save the life of a woman? I'll repeat it over and over again: "He put lives of women at risk for political gains" and expect us to vote for him! He fought against fillibustering Alito until Kos got his followers to call him on it! I rather vote for McCain, the devil I know than the one I don't and what else will he be willing to sacrifice which could further harm women for the sake of his so-called bi-partisanship?


by suzieg on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:40:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but dont you get, its over! (1.75 / 4)

This is a stale talking point only spouted by our resident troll.  

It has been debunked so many times I won't even bother to respond. I'll just T'rate for spreading deliberate misinformation and false accusations.


No way. No how. No McCain!
by spacemanspiff on Thu May 22, 2008 at 04:23:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but dont you get, its over! (1.33 / 3)

Yes, Obama's lame position on abortion has been documented many times -- by the National Organization for Women in his home state.

As a State Senator, Barack Obama voted `present' on seven abortion bills, including a ban on 'partial birth abortion,' two parental notification laws and three 'born alive' bills.  In each case, the right vote was clear, but Senator Obama chose political cover over standing and fighting for his convictions.

"When we needed someone to take a stand, Senator Obama took a pass. He wasn't there for us then and we don't expect him to be now." --Illinois NOW.org


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:45:49 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but dont you get, its over! (2.00 / 1)

Just in case you didn't know, PP orchestrated those present votes which were AGAINST the ban.

Your post makes it sound like he voted "present TO BAN" which, if I thought you knew the facts, I would call lying.

Planned Parenthood orchestrated this vote. And Obama VERY BRAVELY went with their smart tactic to his own political sacrifice. Since Planned Parrenthood was going around saying Obama was really voting against, he opened himself up to attacks from the wack-job right at the same time opening himself up to attack from misinformed or opportunistic opponents on the left.  

There were some disagreements among the progressive community on this TACTIC-- this is an old old battle in advocacy about how to fight smart.

You may disagree with that strategy.

Then say you disagree with this strategy.

Anyway, I hope that clears up the confusion.
 


by luckymortal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:12:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but dont you get, its over! (none / 0)

only 7 of the more then 120 such votes, i keep asking for an explination for the other ones and always get HR. gee I wonder why...


by zerosumgame on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:27:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but dont you get, its over! (none / 0)

Which is why the 100% rating from NARAL.


by luckymortal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:42:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but dont you get, its over! (none / 0)

and the other 120-122 votes?

crickets


by zerosumgame on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:47:31 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but dont you get, its over! (none / 0)

NARAL on Obama's voting record:

http://ppaurora.blogspot.com/2008/02/set ting-record-straight-illinois-nows.html

PP on Obama's voting record:

http://www.naral.org/elections/statement s/obama.html


by luckymortal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:01:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but dont you get, its over! (none / 0)

excuse me but that does not address the question at all. are you trying to say that Ill had almost 130 votes for abotrion rights during that time? that does seem a bit extreme, but so far you have not documented that. and re-posting the same thing over and over that does not deal with the question asked is not dealing with it at all.


by zerosumgame on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:13:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but dont you get, its over! (none / 0)

The context: Obama's pro-choice record.

My information was intended to clarify that point.

If you're making some other point I don't understand it.

You could please explain it better....


by luckymortal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:22:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but dont you get, its over! (none / 0)

the context;

The multiple present votes that had NOTHING to do with PP or NARAL or abortion rights. that was the question asked. Trying to derail the conversation only shows your fear.


by zerosumgame on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:31:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but dont you get, its over! (none / 0)

Hey, cool down cap'crunch!

Easy with them there attacks on me person.

I'm just trying to have a discussion with you. No need to lose our cool.

If you don't mind me saying, perhaps the "crickets" you've been getting have something to do with the way you treat people.

I corrected a misleadingly worded post, about Mr. Obama's voting record on reproductive rights. So I assumed you were trying to respond to that, instead of trying to change the subject, cause you know, that would show your fear.

Or so I've heard.;)

Now. As to this new point, I've just compared Clinton's and Obama's Senate record on project vote-smart and they seem pretty much the same as regards "NV"s. You can go there and check it out for yourself.

It's convenient that Senator Clinton lacks an additional record prior to her time in the Senate to compare the two.

However, having lived off and on in the state of Illinois and in Chicago, I'm pretty informed on Mr. Obama's record. Part of the reason of his progressive support in the state is his bold record of taking brave stands
 on issues, such as his stand on the Iraq war. He took a stand when it was politically perilous to do so. Because of principle.

And these PP "present" votes also demonstrate that bravery.

For those reasons I'm just not buying this line that he's somehow politically wishywashy or cowardly. It goes against the VERY REASON for his ascendancy and his defeat of HRC.

However, I appreciate you presenting this information to me. I'll try to look into this in the context of a fair comparison to others....

Peace.


by luckymortal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:49:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

My hypothesis.... (none / 0)

Before I start, I'm just going to take a little guess--Obama's voting record, if unusual nationally, might reflect the Madigan/Blogojavich wars in the Il Democratic party.

There have been lots and lots of silly votes orchestrated to show who has the bigger political dong.

Silly ego-strutting.

There are a lot of people in Illinois who are tired of it.

ANyway, I'll look into this....


by luckymortal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:52:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: My hypothesis.... (none / 0)

that was all I asked, and the same old talking points were served up that did not address it. Let us know what you find out.


by zerosumgame on Thu May 22, 2008 at 02:11:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but dont you get, its over! (none / 0)

you keep on deflecting the question asked to the one you wanted to be asked and you demand I 'cool down'?


by zerosumgame on Thu May 22, 2008 at 02:12:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but dont you get, its over! (none / 0)

I'm sorry if I offended. "Cool down cap'n crunch" was intended to lighten us both up.

It was not effective, so I'm sorry about it.

But if you go back to the source here, I hope you'll agree that you deflected the conversation.

There's nothing wrong with that, and you make a valid point that is unrelated to the initial discussion.

But it's still a good point and I want you to see that I take it seriously, and I'm going to look into it. Don't hold a stop-watch to me, because it might take me a bit.

You could help by elaborating on your point a bit....


by luckymortal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 02:31:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama's Vote of Cowardice (none / 0)

Actually, Obama approached Planned Parenthood, looking for cover. As stated on Obama's own website,

"Sutherland said Obama approached her in the late 1990s and worked with her and others in crafting the strategy of voting 'present.'

Obama's vote was the epitome of COMWARDICE. From Illinois NOW:

To be clear, voting "present" on those bills was a strategy that IL NOW did not support. At that time, we made it clear to the legislators that we disagreed with the strategy. We wanted legislators to take a stand against the harmful anti-choice bills being brought to the floor of the Illinois State Senate.

Voting "present" does not demonstrate leadership and does not send the clarion signal that one is unwavering in their support of a woman's right to choose. IL NOW knew that those bills were unacceptable to women.... the strategy to vote "present" was devised to give political cover to legislators in conservative districts. State Senator Barack Obama did not represent a conservative district and he could have voted "no" with little negative consequence in his district.

Just in case you didn't know, PP orchestrated those present votes which were AGAINST the ban... Planned Parenthood orchestrated this vote. And Obama VERY BRAVELY went with their smart tactic to his own political sacrifice.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:40:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You're good! (none / 0)

IT's AMAZING how that quote that you cite says that Obama went to PP looking for cover!

Because if it didn't say that and since you've been repeating it ad nauseum, I'd call you a liar.

But it does say exactly that! That's Amazing!

Now will you please remove your offensive tagline?


by luckymortal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:51:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're good! (none / 0)

And until you do remove it, could you please not respond to any of my posts?

I don't come here for abuse.


by luckymortal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:52:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You're good! (none / 0)

No. If you've got a problem with my tagline, that's YOUR problem, not mine.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Thu May 22, 2008 at 04:54:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm getting really sick of it too! (2.00 / 2)

Why can't the Obama supporters be more like the candidate?  He is being magnanimous and patient right now.  He seems genuinely interested in party unity.  

SOME of his supporters are more interested in kicking us while we're down and pouring salt in our wounds.  (That said--many of the Obama people here are just awesome!)


Linfar's co-blogger opposing John McCain
by psychodrew on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:49:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm getting really sick of it too! (2.00 / 1)

And why can't Hillary supporters be more like the candidate?  She is constantly telling us that she will support the Democratic nominee who ever it is and work for their election.  She seems genuinely interested in party unity.

SOME of her supporters are more interested in taking their ball and going home and openly rooting against Obama in the GE.  (That said-many of the Hillary people are awesome and hopefully won't be swayed by the extremists on either side.)


by GobBluth on Thu May 22, 2008 at 07:19:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Aw..... (2.00 / 1)

"Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery."

Charles Caleb Colton, 1820

Source


Linfar's co-blogger opposing John McCain
by psychodrew on Thu May 22, 2008 at 07:56:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Aw..... (1.00 / 1)

Maybe many Hillary supporters are taking a cue from Michelle Obama.

Robin Roberts: So what if Senator Clinton defeats your husband, becoming the first woman nominee. Could you see yourself working to support the first woman nomination?

Michelle Obama: I'd have to think about that. I'd have to think about that, her policies, her approach, her tone.

Robin Roberts: That's not a given?

Michelle Obama: You know, everyone in this party is going to work hard for whoever the nominee is. I think that we're all working for the same thing. and, you know, I think our goal is to make sure that the person in the White House is going to take this country in a different direction. I happen to believe that Barack is the only person who can really do that.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/02/04 /michelle-obama-ill-thi_n_84900.html


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Thu May 22, 2008 at 10:49:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Aw..... (none / 0)

Michelle Obama: You know, everyone in this party is going to work hard for whoever the nominee is.

Thanks for clearing that up.  Michelle Obama will work hard for whoever the nominee is.  I have no doubt she'll work harder if the nominee is her husband, but I doubt anyone would expect otherwise.
Nos causidicus Obama , ergo nos non suadeo
by rb608 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:58:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Aw..... (2.00 / 1)

Turn the tables:

Q: So what if Senator Obama defeats Clinton, becoming the first black nominee. Could you see yourself working to support the first black nomination?

A: I'd have to think about that. I'd have to think about that, his policies, his approach, his tone.

Q: That's not a given?

A: You know, everyone in this party is going to work hard for whoever the nominee is. I think that we're all working for the same thing. And, you know, I think our goal is to make sure that the person in the White House is going to take this country in a different direction. I happen to believe that HILLARY is the only person who can really do that.


I'm United Methodist. I already have a Messiah.
by KnowVox on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:05:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Aw..... (none / 0)

I have no problem with those statements either way.    They do not imply sexism, racism, or anything other than a dedication to getting the Democratic nominee into the WH.


Nos causidicus Obama , ergo nos non suadeo
by rb608 on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:13:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Aw..... (none / 0)

I've actually become a fan of Michelle Obama.  She's a real person who makes mistakes.  She's unscripted and seems authentic.  

When I read about what happened with her college roommate, it brought back memories of clashing with the homophobic jocks that lived in my college dormitory.  I'm still not sold her husband (but he'll absolutely get my vote if he's the nominee), but I'd be very proud to call her my First Lady.


Linfar's co-blogger opposing John McCain
by psychodrew on Thu May 22, 2008 at 09:44:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I'm getting really sick of it too! (2.00 / 1)

Totally with you.

As an Obama supporter (hopefully not one of the bad ones--at least I try!) the bad ones are not helping Obama. I suspect they're more interested in the adrenalin of flame war than in advocating for their candidate.

And I also try not to let the bad Clinton supporters overly influence my opinion of the other 99%.

Cheers.


by luckymortal on Thu May 22, 2008 at 11:46:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: but dont you get, its over! (none / 0)

It's over. Commence the hurling.



McCain
by Black Anus on Thu May 22, 2008 at 12:22:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Diplomatic Firewall says... (2.00 / 1)

...your vote is your decision.

But in the ever-increasing likelihood that Barack Obama and John McCain will be the Democratic and Republican nominees of their respective parties, your decision (and that of Clinton supporters across the country) will ultimately come down to whether you'd rather entrust Sen. Obama or Sen. McCain with the most powerful seat on Earth for the next four years.

Really, that's what it comes down to. There's no need to rationalize such a decision in either direction, as long as you're aware of what the fundamental choice will be come November.


should we go outside? / should we break some bread? / are you'nterested?
by Firewall on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:39:50 AM EST

Re: Diplomatic Firewall says... (2.00 / 4)

you are right, that is a decision that each voter has to make on their own.  My point, though is that each nominee has to do the hard work of convincing the voters why they are the better candidate.  Do Not Take Our Vote For Granted!


by SPK on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:42:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Great diary (2.00 / 6)

and much appreciated. I think you'll appreciate this:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/article s/2008/05/clinton_campaign_brought_sexis .html


by phoenixdreamz on Thu May 22, 2008 at 01:57:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Great diary (2.00 / 6)

Thanks for the link.  Great article. That is why I will not give another dime to the Democratic party, or any of its various fundraising arms.  I will donate to very specifically selected candidates, if I find one who deserves it.

I also switched my party affiliation today to Independent and sent a copy of the registration to Howard Dean with explanation attached.


by Susan in Oregon on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:14:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Great diary (2.00 / 4)

From another Susan in Texas who did the very same thing! Didn't you find it easy? It gave me the biggest satisfaction ever because I felt that the party now has to court me for my vote and can never take me for granted anymore!

This primary contest has finally opened my eyes at how badly we were ignored and treated by this male monopoly - never again, will I march in step with any party!


by suzieg on Thu May 22, 2008 at 03:44:36 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Good diary - (none / 0)

it's too bad I had to get through all the nonsense to find you - maybe I missed a comment earlier up.

To me it is cyber bullying for Ragecage for instance to get that first comment out which does nothing for either side. And then the usual suspects chime in - silly.  We are electing a president here people.  </