Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditJed Report, the blog which promoted Hillary Clinton's Tuzla problem with a tough video montage that drew a whopping 400,000 views, is back with a new spot assailing the New York Senator. The three-minute attack ad, billed as a movie "trailer," winds from old archival footage of Clinton backing NAFTA and dissembling on Tuzla and Iraq to her latest complaint that Obama is "elitist." In its first day on YouTube, the video is the fourth highest rated item under "news and politics."
Update 2: By Thursday afternoon, this trailer became the second highest rated video in the world on YouTube. It has 150,000 views and counting -- making it the third most popular of the 160-plus videos that Jed Report has uploaded. The majority of views came from YouTube and general interest sites like Digg; then about 16 percent of views came from this Nation post, and another 12 percent came via links from Andrew Sullivan and DailyKos.
Update: Reader TZIMISCE thinks the video is effective because unlike many attack ads, the devastating parts all stem from Clinton's own statements:
The most effective part of that film was that is was entirely in her own words. Occasionally there were questions or something from the audience, but there was no announcer coming in and dubbing over or reading statements, this is straight from the source.
For more on how web video is changing our public discourse, check out my recent article YouTube for Smart People.
Share this article
- Atrios
- Arts and Letters Daily
- The Caucus
- Campus Progress
- Crooks and Liars
- The Daily Gotham
- Daily Kos
- Echidne of the Snakes
- Ezra Klein
- FAIR
- Feministe
- Feministing
- Firedoglake
- Glenn Greenwald
- Gothamist
- In these Times
- Hendrik Hertzberg
- Huffington Post
- Hullabaloo
- Matthew Yglesias
- Media Matters
- Mother Jones
- My DD
- New York Review of Books
- Openleft
- Pam's House Blend
- Pandagon
- Political Wire
- The Progressive
- RaceWire
- Real Clear Politics
- Roberto Lovato
- Romenesko
- Swing State Project
- Talking Points Memo
- Ta-Nehisi Coates
- Tapped
- Tech President
- Tompaine
- The Washington Note
- Utne Reader
- Wonkette
- ZNet
RSS
I told Mr Nichols last night....
if trade is a real winner with PA voters, Obama should hit Her Nibs hard and often on NAFTA.
Her b.s. "I opposed NAFTA before I supported it" stuff makes the Kerry Flap look truly petty in comparison.
My line for Obama?...."Sen. Clinton says NOW that she opposes NAFTA....she even says she opposed NAFTA back in the 90s when her Husband, whose Administration she seeks to imitate, supported it....Of course, that was back in the 'sniper fire' days...so maybe she 'mis-remembers' her support for it!"
Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 2:16pm
Hillary has become the "me too' candidate. when repubs attack the dem frontrunner in any way, Hillary says me too. a bone headed move to be sure, but what else has she got?
Posted by emile duBois at 04/16/2008 @ 2:22pm
BTW, I'd forgotten how she had Rebecca DeMornay's hair-do back in the 1992 campaign....heheh
Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 2:23pm
Hillary Clinton will say and do anything to get elected, and it is this "politics as usual" that is being rejected by the voter.
Because the gist of the "bitter comment spin" by Hillary is that Barack is an elitist and out of touch with ordinary folks, it may be helpful to remind everyone that Barack turned down lucrative Wall Street offers and took a $13,000 a year job as a community organizer helping the homeless, the jobless, ex-offenders and other poor people.
This is in sharp contrast to Hillary's 15 year stint as a corporate lawyer representing union busters like Wal-Mart and Tyson Foods. How "in touch" could Hillary be with the common man while representing the upper management of these corporations?
Posted by Metteyya at 04/16/2008 @ 2:25pm
The ending... That footage is priceless...
Posted by Lil at 04/16/2008 @ 2:28pm
Soon, soon, my friends, it will be mercifully over. And Obama will be our presumptive nominee. May he be protected from Billary after that. McCain he can handle handily on his own. But it's that vengeful knife in the back that concerns.
Posted by sloper at 04/16/2008 @ 2:30pm
Posted by MASK 04/16/2008 @ 2:23pm
("The Hand That Rocks The Democratic Party")
Posted by drhammer at 04/16/2008 @ 2:36pm
The most effective part of that film was that is was entirely in her own words. Occasionally there were questions or something from the audience, but there was no announcer coming in and dubbing over or reading statements, this is straight from the source. Where was this in Ohio? I guess we are doomed to fight the last battle, in that Ohio was over Nafta thought no one really knew that. Ouch.
Posted by Tzimisce at 04/16/2008 @ 2:49pm
I typo too much to post here sometimes, please please code for us an edit function!!
Posted by Tzimisce at 04/16/2008 @ 2:51pm
I typo too much to post here sometimes, please please code for us an edit function!!
Posted by TZIMISCE 04/16/2008 @ 2:51pm | ignore this person
Alternately, you could just type this out in Word. Run the spell/grammar checks and then copy/paste the post on this site.
Posted by brunowe at 04/16/2008 @ 2:58pm
So I'm feeling guilty. One side of me, says that you just don't attack a fellow Democrat, and yet why do I get such a joy from seeing clips like this? Well there are a few reasons for my moral gymnastics:
1) I always secretly wanted to bash the Clintons. "What the meaning of is, is." NAFTA, top down DNC structure, the loss of the house and the senate, the constant moral flubs, but was I to side with the Gringriches of the world?! No. It's a lot of pent up resentment and it's plain cathartic
2) She started it. Yeah I hate this reason but you know myself and everyone else feels justified because, she started it. This reason makes me feel guilty, I really did just throw out the golden rule with this.
3) It's different. As noted in another thread the tone and substance of the "attack" is different. Attacks on Obama try to paint him as a black nationalist, a terrorist, a Manchurian Candidate, etc etc etc... They aren't grounded in truth and they are the worst kind of scare tactic. At least the "elitist" claim has some basis in fact, or I could at least see what he said being viewed in that light. Attacks against Clinton are mostly about her problems with the truth, tall tales, and flip flops. Also they go to her being calculating and I think there is some evidence to support this. So thats the difference, attacks on Hillary have at least some substance to them (which is not to say that they may not cross the line, but at least there is some meat on the bone); while attacks on Obama, by in large, seem to have this racist, crazed, bizarre feel to them.
Anyway, forgive me for my hypocrisy.
Posted by Tzimisce at 04/16/2008 @ 3:01pm
Alternately, you could just type this out in Word. Run the spell/grammar checks and then copy/paste the post on this site.
Posted by BRUNOWE 04/16/2008 @ 2:58pm |
Curse you and your logic!
Posted by Tzimisce at 04/16/2008 @ 3:01pm
One of the funniest parts of the video is her 1992 attempt at a southern drawl, which has completely disappeared now that she is back home in the northeast.
Posted by kimbiaje at 04/16/2008 @ 3:09pm
Schadenfreude, anyone?
Posted by Butler at 04/16/2008 @ 3:31pm
I wonder what Frank will say about this. Probably some more insane rant than he has already presented a million times to us.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 3:36pm
The irony is that her first statement is the relevant 'lie.'
The American people are far from tired of politicians lying; it's quite the opposite. How many election cycles must we go through before we recognize that Americans truly appreciate politicians who boldly lie where no one has lied before?
Posted by logicfan at 04/16/2008 @ 3:43pm
It's quite a funny video. I like all the faux newspaper reviews of it.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 3:47pm
Posted by LOGICFAN 04/16/2008 @ 3:43pm
It really is true. I'm afraid that St. John the Maverick will be able to pull off the biggest lies this time. Married to an heiress of a beer fortune, a let them eat cake attitude when it comes to the home foreclosures, and yet he is the everyman, the dude you want to drink a beer with. Let us not forget that he is promilitary yet has yet to endorse Jim Webb's expansion of the GI Bill, because "he hasn't had a chance to look at it." His integrity makes me weak in the knees.
Posted by Tzimisce at 04/16/2008 @ 3:48pm
The Great Ann Coulter
Posted by LIBZSUCK 04/16/2008 @ 3:46pm
Anyone who bills Ann Coulter as the great anything needs to get a CAT Scan.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 3:49pm
That Hitlery Clinton is a liar doesn't make either her or Obama any less a supercilious elistist than they're correctly understood to be. As nice a fellow as Obama may be, he has all the instincts and prejudices of a Clos de Vougeot liberal. Obamaites can wiggle and squirm, dodge and deny all they want but people of faith understand contempt, they've been getting it from Democrats and liberals of Hitlery's and Obamas' persuasion for decades. How entertaining it is to see theological questions put to these two as at the affair they both attended last weekend. They have only the most superficial grasp of questions at level. And that superficiality informs just about everything either of them has to bring to the table. God save us from the Obamas, the Clintons and the McCains of this world.
Posted by john lowell at 04/16/2008 @ 3:52pm
Posted by JOHN LOWELL 04/16/2008 @ 3:52pm
Who do you prefer?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 3:55pm
Posted by LIBZSUCK: "just trying to guilt him into driving her"
The verb you intend to use is "shame" or one of its synonyms: "shame him into driving her." "Guilt" is not a verb, but a noun.
Posted by Butler at 04/16/2008 @ 4:05pm
Posted by LIBZSUCK 04/16/2008 @ 3:46pm
QI'yaH 'urwI'
Posted by Benchrest at 04/16/2008 @ 4:10pm
If I wanted to read the hate flowing from Ann Coulter's mind, I would subscribe to her e-mails. Keep that god awful filth to yourself.
Posted by Sleepy at 04/16/2008 @ 4:11pm
Posted by LOGICFAN: "politicians who boldly lie where no one has lied before?"
In Bill's case, that's a wicked pun. ;)
Posted by Butler at 04/16/2008 @ 4:14pm
Soon, soon, my friends, it will be mercifully over. And John McCain will be our President.
Posted by abell12ct at 04/16/2008 @ 4:17pm
"he has all the instincts and prejudices of a Clos de Vougeot liberal."
FYI, for all you non-liberals, this is a typical South Side Chicago juice of choice, comes wrapped in a brown paper bag, best consumed out on the street. Obama undoubtedly raised on it.
Quel con, Lowell.
Posted by sloper at 04/16/2008 @ 4:19pm
Posted by SLOPER 04/16/2008 @ 4:19pm
The best things in life are wrapped in brown paper bags.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 4:22pm
Posted by LIBZSUCK
Anyone who quotes Ann Coulter as a legit news source needs to go away. She is not news she is a modern day shock jockey of the right just like the left has them. Their role isn't to deliver legitimate news but to present some "shock and awe."
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 4:23pm
Posted by CCCOMFO1 04/16/2008 @ 4:23pm
Awe shocks, he's just a moron
Posted by leftofcenter at 04/16/2008 @ 4:28pm
LibZ that is
Posted by leftofcenter at 04/16/2008 @ 4:29pm
Posted by LEFTOFCENTER 04/16/2008 @ 4:29pm
I guess anyone with a name like Libzsuckz is more of a troll than an intelligent human being.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 4:31pm
Posted by DRHAMMER 04/16/2008 @ 2:36pm
Well, she sure wasn't Lana from "Risky Business"!
heheh
Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 4:37pm
And John McCain will be our President.----Posted by ABELL12CT 04/16/2008 @ 4:17pm
Not much good from that possibility.....EXCEPT watching him sell down the river the Hard Right on a few things....stem-cells, global warming, campaign finance...
maybe even pull a "Nixon January '73" and do a "peace with honor" bit to extract himself from Iraq and salvage 2012 for himself?
Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 4:38pm
Posted by CCCOMFO1 04/16/2008 @ 3:55pm
Truth be known, CCCOMFO1, I won't be voting for any of the system candidates. And while Obama may be the least off-putting of the three personally, no one with my outlook is deceived as to the dangers inherent in the kind of presumption serving as a foundation for such as him. I mean really, what have you got when your future is in the hands of people that have as yet to grasp what a human being is? Remarkable, isn't it?
Posted by john lowell at 04/16/2008 @ 4:40pm
Posted by JOHN LOWELL 04/16/2008 @ 3:52pm |
Your tinfoil hat may be interfering with your thought processes. Essentially, Huh?
Also, as well all know Libz is the troll of kings and the kind of trolls. I long ago ignored him/her/it as they have offered little to anything of value to this site. There are a few decent conservatives that post here and can actually make sense, so who really needs this kind of troll.
Yet again we still see people feeding trolls.
Posted by Tzimisce at 04/16/2008 @ 4:44pm
Posted by JOHN LOWELL 04/16/2008 @ 4:40pm
I have to foist upon you a certain respect even though you have view of a cynic at least you have the courage of convictions. I tip my hat to you good sir.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 4:44pm
"I won't be voting for any of the system candidates. And while Obama may be the least off-putting of the three personally, no one with my outlook is deceived as to the dangers inherent in the kind of presumption serving as a foundation for such as him."
Are you such an idealist that you would prefer to do nothing than vote for the best of three compromised candidates? Do you believe, as George Orwell put it, that "half a loaf of bread is the same as no bread at all"?
Posted by Butler at 04/16/2008 @ 4:45pm
Oops, my last post should begin "Posted by JOHN LOWELL"
Posted by Butler at 04/16/2008 @ 4:47pm
Posted by BUTLER 04/16/2008 @ 4:45pm
There is a certain logic to stop voting for the shitty candidates presented to us until there good options given. If we continue to vote with the only options being two bowls of shit we show them that they can keep feeding us bowls of shit.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 4:48pm
Posted by CCCOMFO1: "If we continue to vote with the only options being two bowls of shit we show them that they can keep feeding us bowls of shit."
And if we stop voting we show them that we'll take any shit they want to feed us.
Posted by Butler at 04/16/2008 @ 4:56pm
'Not to dampen any parade, but if one asks if there is a single thing about Mr. Obama's Senate record, or state legislature record, or current program, that could possibly justify his claim to the presidency one gets . . . what? Not much. Similarly lightweight unqualified "white" candidates have overcome this objection, to be sure, but what kind of standard is that?' -- Christopher Hitchens -- 18 January 2008
Posted by HonestLiberal at 04/16/2008 @ 4:56pm
Posted by BUTLER 04/16/2008 @ 4:56pm
True enough but we can vote third party I think was the other fellows point.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 4:57pm
Woo I'm in the update! I'm all tingly.
Posted by Tzimisce at 04/16/2008 @ 4:57pm
DEVASTING?? PLEEEAAASSSEEEEE! HERE IS DEVASTING!!NURSERATCHET11:37PMApr 15th 2008
THE MEDIA HAS HAD THIS STORY FOR MONTHS AND THEY ARE REFUSING TO LET THE AMERICAN VOTERS KNOW ABOUT IT! WHY? I CAN THINK OF TWO REASONS: 1. THEY ARE WAITING FOR OBAMA TO GET THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINATION AND THEN THEY WILL TOTALLY SMEAR HIM WITH THIS STORY AND MCCAIN WINS THE WHITE HOUSE. 2. THEY ARE SCARED TO DEATH TO RELEASE IT FOR FEAR OF RETALIATION FROM THE BLACK COMMUNITY. SO WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE?? WE MUST MAKE THEM INVESTIGATE!!!!__________________________________
Larry Sinclair alleges that on 6th and 7th November 1999 in Chicago, Illinois he met Barack Obama for a social evening which included drinks in a lounge, followed by a drive around town in his hired limousine during which Obama supplied cocaine, smoked crack through his own glass pipe while accepting fellatio from Sinclair.
The next day Obama took the initiative to visit Sinclair's Comfort Inn hotel room in Gurney, Illinois for a "quickie" version of the previous night's activities. Both men were 38 years of age. Larry Sinclair was on parole visiting for a few days from Colorado. Barack Obama was a member of the Illinois Senate.
These scenes are reminiscent of the Oprah Winfrey's show in which she featured J.L. King's book "Men On the Down Low: A Journey into the Lives of Straight Black Men Who Sleep with Men"
The story has produced some newsworthy reactions most of which can be described as a cover-up:
1. A virtual internet and media lynch mob composed mainly of Obama supporters is bent on discrediting Sinclair with allegations about his homosexuality, his convictions for check fraud in the 1980's and his mental and emotional stability. Part of their dirty tricks is to circulate to the media a forged facsimile of a page for the Washington Post which includes numerous lies about Sinclair and to declare that he was in a mental hospital at the time he said he was with Obama, and to attack his family and neighbors.
A noteworthy participant in the campaign of vilification is Andres W. Lopez an attorney for the Obama campaign in Puerto Rico who is a member of the campaign's National Finance Committee. He appeared on Puerto Rico's most popular TV magazine show WAPA TV's "SuperXclusivo" on April 10th 2008 to denounce Sinclair as a major headache and distraction for the Obama campaign and implied that he was mentally ill and working for the Hilary Clinton campaign.
Sinclair has hit back against some of the critics with law suits for defamation in the DC district court filed by his attorney Montgomery Sibley most recently noteworthy for his defence of the "DC Madam".
On 1st April, 2008 US District Court Judge Henry Kennedy granted a motion for discovery in the matter. The aim of the Sinclair-Sibley legal strategy is eventually to discover Barack Obama on oath.
2. Larry Sinclair took a polygraph test in February confident that he would pass and he challenged Obama to do the same. The test was arranged by Whitehouse.com an internet site best known for pornography and anti-Clinton political satire.
The raw computer readings showed that Larry Sinclair passed the test with flying colours. But two testers hired by Whitehouse.com re-interpreted the readings to claim that they showed deception. One of the testers was Edward I. Gelb who has been exposed by specialists in the field for claiming a phony Ph.D.
Whitehouse.com refused to publish the full results or the video of the test and in many other respects breached good faith undertakings they gave Sinclair to induce him to participate. He claims that he and his attorney are in possession of information that the Obama campaign bribed Whitehouse.com to distort the test and spin the presentation of the results.
Whitehouse.com has not denied these allegations but has abruptly gone silent on the matter.
3. Many in the mainstream media are aware of Larry Sinclair's allegations about Barack Obama and rumours in Chicago restaurant and club land since at least 2001 that Barack Obama has been doing the Down Low with gay men. Some newspaper have interviewed Larry Sinclair and visited his home in Minnesota. He has provided them with his criminal record, his health and financial records and his family history.
At least one major Chicago newspaper has indicated that it will not proceed yet because it does not want to be accused of racism or of causing problems for the first viable black candidate. Other newspapers have asked for more proof such as access to the limousine driver who witnessed the events of November 6th, 1999.
Larry Sinclair has said the driver will testify in legal proceedings. But in the meantime he wants to protect him from interference from Obama campaign, from the kind of death threats to which Sinclair has been subjected and from the kind of harrssment that Obama supporters have visited on Sinclair's elderly mother, his siblings and neighbors. However, Larry Sinclair is willing to provide assurances about his evidence to the media through his lawyer.
4. When Larry Sinclair first reported his allegations to the Obama campaign in September 2007 he wanted Obama to correct his claim that he had stopped taking drugs in his teens and had never taken crack. He believes crack is addictive and difficult to shake off.
Over the following months until December, 2007 he was contacted several times by Donald Young who appeared to be Obama's emissary. He was the choir master at the Trinity Church of Christ which was under the direction of Pastor Jeremiah Wright and where Barack Obama is a member of the congregation. Donald Young informed Larry Sinclair that he, too, had a sex and drugs relationship with Barack Obama similar to his.
At first he suggested that Obama was seeking the assistance of Jeremiah Wright in making a statement acknowledging his use of crack cocaine as recently as 1999. But he had second thoughts in early December 2007. Donald Young was murdered in his appartment at Christmas 2007.
Larry Sinclair notified the Chicago police of his contacts with him but received no acknowledgment. Subsequently he has submitted a sworn affidavit which has so far not been acknowledged by the Chicago Police.
Larry' Sinclair's original video on YouTube has received more than 800,000 hits and his blog is in the top ten percentile on WordPress. Links to all his radio interviews can be found at his blog together will all contact details for the media. ________________________
Larry Sinclair's blog with links to all his YouTube videos and radio interviews:
http://larrysinclair0926.wordpress.com
Posted by NURSERATCHET at 04/16/2008 @ 5:03pm
As they say-- you can lead a horse to water, but ...
Posted by hsuBfools at 04/16/2008 @ 5:04pm
Homer: America, take a good look at your beloved candidates.They're nothing but hideous space reptiles. [unmasks them] [audience gasps in terror] Kodos: It's true, we are aliens. But what are you going to do about it? It's a two-party system; you have to vote for one of us. [murmurs] Man1: He's right, this is a two-party system. Man2: Well, I believe I'll vote for a third-party candidate. Kang: Go ahead, throw your vote away. [Kang and Kodos laugh out loud]
(sorry, couldn't resist!)
Posted by Butler at 04/16/2008 @ 5:07pm
Posted by EULER 04/16/2008 @ 4:47pm
The comment that anyone supporting Obama is in a cult, or that the majority of his constituents are cultists is... Elitist. Show me an Obama supporter who's support is contingent on the idea that "Obama is hope" and that alone, and I'll show you a fool. If that is what Obama supporters feel then yeah maybe it is a cult, but I think you demean many of his supporters with this drivel.
I would say that some of the more strident, sycophantic, yes-men found on this site are... Clinton supporters!! Actually two of the more cynical and guarded posters, being myself and Mask are Obama supporters (I think I can say that Mask). And I will be the first to say shame on him if he does something shame worthy. Tell me why, why, I should vote FOR Hillary Clinton. I'm tired of being scare tactic'ed into not supporting Obama, as a ploy to drum up votes for Hillary. So why should I vote for Hillary Clinton over Barack Obama? Skip strategy, skip who can win this state, skip staff, and money, just give me the reasons why I should support Hillary.
Posted by Tzimisce at 04/16/2008 @ 5:07pm
Posted by NURSERATCHET 04/16/2008 @ 5:03pm
Why when Sinclair was offered $100k if he passed a lie detector test he refused to take the money?
If he has no confidence in his ability to tell the truth, why should anybody else?
Posted by Metteyya at 04/16/2008 @ 5:10pm
Posted by BUTLER 04/16/2008 @ 4:45pm
At least some affinity with Orwell, I suspect, Butler. Although I'd add that my concerns as a Catholic are more with a descent into ideology and idealism than with an embrace of them. Not much out there for folks like me, I'm afraid. We're asked to submit to endorsing either murder in some abortuary or murder from the air, and I can countenance neither. One day we'll all look Love in the face and realize how pitiful we are in our arrogance. All the politics and the politicians will have no meaning then and I won't regret not having voted this year or last or the year before. Wishing you well.
Posted by john lowell at 04/16/2008 @ 5:10pm
Then take your hands from underneath your desk and put away the Obama poster.
Posted by EULER 04/16/2008 @ 5:02pm
Umm eww? Again I hate to ignore people, but damn you are just descending to the rank of troll at a lightspeed. Please redeem yourself and make a point instead of this garbage.
You are starting to fall under the old saying, "even a stopped watch is right twice a day, that doesn't mean I should wear it on my wrist."
Posted by Tzimisce at 04/16/2008 @ 5:11pm
hillary,
the ultimate EMOCRAT!
Posted by frosty zoom at 04/16/2008 @ 5:11pm
Cheer up Emocrats, there's no need to /wrists.
Put down the Death Cab and Dashboard cds. Pour that Bass Ale down the drain (though I think PBR has replaced Bass)and please get some jeans that are a little less form fitting.
Posted by Tzimisce at 04/16/2008 @ 5:13pm
Posted by CCCOMFO1 04/16/2008 @ 4:44pm
And I to you, sir.
Posted by john lowell at 04/16/2008 @ 5:16pm
Posted by JOHN LOWELL 04/16/2008 @ 5:10pm |
Wow you are the type of religious person I like. You don't make excuses that lead to hypocritical action. You are are against war AND abortion. Unlike our local LVLiberty. Who is fine with killing children as long as they aren't American.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 5:17pm
Posted by JOHN LOWELL: "We're asked to submit to endorsing either murder in some abortuary or murder from the air, and I can countenance neither."
Yes. I applaud the consistency of the Catholic Church's platform on life. I think good liberal policies fight abortion by attacking its sources in our economics and attitudes.
Thanks for talking, JOHN.
Posted by Butler at 04/16/2008 @ 5:20pm
Posted by TZIMISCE 04/16/2008 @ 5:13pm
That was probably the funniest post I have read all day.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 5:21pm
'Not to dampen any parade, but if one asks if there is a single thing about Mr. Obama's Senate record, or state legislature record, or current program, that could possibly justify his claim to the presidency one gets . . . what? Not much. Similarly lightweight unqualified "white" candidates have overcome this objection, to be sure, but what kind of standard is that?' -- Christopher Hitchens -- 18 January 2008
Posted by HONESTLIBERAL 04/16/2008 @ 4:56pm
This from the same man who stubbornly supported the Iraq fiasco all along. Obama was right about Iraq. Hitchens was, uh, drunk.
Posted by KSP556 at 04/16/2008 @ 5:32pm
It's a shame that even at The Nation's forums we cannot maintain conversations worth having - please just ignore trolling and obviously ignorant posts, replying to them only distracts from relevant posts and interesting conversation.
RE: LOWELL, EULER, and HONESTLIB posts-
I think many Obama supporters (especially here) would never claim that he represents an ideal choice. Personally, I too respect the convictions of Lowell, however I find his assessment harsh. I believe that Obama has an impressive ability to articulate the viewpoints of others and frame them in a manner that is accessible to a wide audience. I think (hope?) that as President, he would succeed in shifting the prevailing notions of our society to more reasonable positions (i.e. acknowledging the oppression of Palestine, introducing some regulation to markets, demilitarizing our foreign policy).
In the end, I think we are coming to the ultimate question: Do you hold that only true revolution is change worth making? Or do you believe that our political system and constitution have defined a system that can fix itself when broken?
Since there is no revolution in sight, I guess I'll keep sipping the Kool-Aid and hold on my audacious brand of hope.
Posted by logicfan at 04/16/2008 @ 5:35pm
04/16/2008 @ 5:38pm
I'm afraid it's too late for all that. At this point Clinton will be lucky to pull out Pennsylvania, and even if she does, she's heading for a huge defeat in Indiana and North Carolina. She has absolutely no chance of winning the nomination.
Posted by KSP556 at 04/16/2008 @ 5:41pm
Posted by TZIMISCE 04/16/2008 @ 5:13pm
WHY would you pour Bass Ale down a drain?!
Posted by Benchrest at 04/16/2008 @ 5:42pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 5:38pm
And the pompous elitist makes his presence known once again. Am I the only one who gets a crack up out of everything he types and the massive hypocrisy that is displayed in every word?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 5:44pm
Bud yes.
Posted by Benchrest at 04/16/2008 @ 5:44pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 5:41pm
Look at the latest polls, Frankie Grits.
Clinton's unfavorability rating is the highest it's ever been, at 54%. She's trailing Obama in Indiana by 5 points and in North Carolina by 13 points.
I'm sorry to say it's over for your little cutie.
Posted by KSP556 at 04/16/2008 @ 5:47pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 5:38pm
He derides Obama, calling him elitist then makes a statement like this "You see two can play this silly game that you children think is important. That's why we can't put the country in your hands. You need to grow up first." If it wasn't so consistent I would think it was a running joke.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 5:47pm
What are you, a republican?
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 5:48pm
Says the man who is going to vote Republican this election cycle. HAHA!
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 5:50pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 5:48pm
I'm afraid the situation is far beyond "waiting to count the votes."
Obama is ahead by 2 touchdowns, and there are only 20 seconds remaining in this game. There is simply no way for Hilly to catch up. The game is over, dude.
All that's left to is for the loser to congratulate the winner.
Posted by KSP556 at 04/16/2008 @ 5:52pm
Perhaps if she had not lied repeatedly about her so called experience, not engaged in the politics of personal destruction, mud slingling, and yes, racism, and smearing her opponent with more lies she would have a chance to be elected President. Hillary Clinton, whom William Safire once called "a congenital liar" and Carl Bernstein, who along with Bob Woodward brought Watergate to the attention of the American people, stated that "Hillary Clinton has a had a long time problem with the truth" is the most polarizing, divisive, and mean spirited candidate to run for President since Richard Nixon. Like Nixon, Hillary Clinton is obsessed with secrecy, revenge against her enemies, and incessant, non-stop lying about her record and the record of her opponent. She is a female version of Richard Nixon. America deserves a lot better than Hillary Clinton. It amazes me how people believe all the many, many lies she and her husband are telling the American people. Are we that dumb that we want another Nixon in the White House???
Posted by mjkoch at 04/16/2008 @ 5:56pm
CCCOMFO1 04/16/2008 @ 5:44pm
If you want the definition of "massive hypocrisy" consider the mental state of someone who thinks a bunch of YouTube hits on a fairly weak video edited out of 16 years of a major public figure's statements, versus some actual journalism in a national newspaper showing that while Obama says he doesn't take money from lobbyists, his staff is filled with them and they're bringing in major dollars.
It takes a really flabby mental process to think that puffing up a decade old story (the Bosnia sniper thing) is somehow a more terrible thing than flat out lying about where your campaign money is coming from.
Posted by MyParadigm at 04/16/2008 @ 5:56pm
Don't get me wrong, although I think Mrs. Clinton would do far more to undo the Bush damage over the next eight years, I can see that Obama has run the superior campaign and I will vote for him with a clear conscience.
But it sure as hell won't be because of anything I've read in the Nation blogs.
Posted by MyParadigm at 04/16/2008 @ 6:02pm
MJKOCH: "It amazes me how people believe all the many, many lies she and her husband are telling the American people."
I think it's only a certain segment of the population that swallows her lies without belching - specifically, older feminists who'd just as soon elect a female serial murderer president than a male saint.
Posted by KSP556 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:04pm
Posted by MYPARADIGM 04/16/2008 @ 5:56pm
An Hillary hasn't lied about where the money is coming from? Considering she didn't want to release her tax forms it's kind of interesting. Or how about lying about her role in and support of NAFTA? Face it Hillary has lied more than McCain and Obama combined.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:07pm
Posted by MYPARADIGM 04/16/2008 @ 6:02pm
Just like I wouldn't vote for Hillary because of anything I have read. All I have seen so far from most of the Hillary supporters on this site is half truths, hypocrisy, flat out lies and a touch of insanity(Frank). I say most not all and I say on these boards because I know more people no matter who they support are sensible people just on these boards they seem to be nuts.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:09pm
If Hilary was smart and is looking towards the future and wanted to preserve her Senate seat she would go out with class.
Carol
Posted by harriscrl3 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:15pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:20pm
Frank give it up. You just look more and more elitist, pompous and frankly insane everyday.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:21pm
you really give serious people like me no other choice.
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:20pm
I lol'ed.
Posted by Tzimisce at 04/16/2008 @ 6:22pm
Posted by HARRISCRL3 04/16/2008 @ 6:15pm
When she doesn't win this, if she goes out kicking and screaming, flailing like a child who just got their teddy bear taken away, she is done in politics all together.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:22pm
It really does amuse me to see you all bash FrankGrits. In past years when we were united in our rage against BushCo, he was the thin edge of the wedge. Smart, informed, and honest, and always well written. His commentaries on the Iraq war while his son was deployed were both enraged and poignant. Leagues above what I read now.
Posted by MyParadigm at 04/16/2008 @ 6:26pm
Posted by MYPARADIGM 04/16/2008 @ 6:26pm
I wasn't here in those days I was bashing Frank from the second I read the insane rants he has been writing lately. The things that have come from his mind have varied from down right amusing to down right prejudiced and everything in between.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:27pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:22pm
Is it that you don't want to understand?
Even if Hillary won 60% of every remaining primary, she would still lose in pledged delegates at the end of the day.
There's no purpose in your girl continuing her candidacy, except to be a poor sport.
Posted by KSP556 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:28pm
Frankie Grits: "But you don't think Obama lies too?"
No, I don't think he does.
Posted by KSP556 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:29pm
These are mostly very young people who don't know much about politics and are very impressionable. It's my pleasure trying to educate them. Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:31pm
Just like those most vaunted rural Penn. voters, we don't like being talked down to in the least. Look I may not have as many years under my belt as you, but that in no way means that I'm "very impressionable" or that I require further education. I have a degree in history and minored in poli-sci. I am currently in law school. Yet you still presume to condescend to me? I have watched Meet the Press and taken an interest in politics since age 10, yeah thats right 10. I would, like a goofy nerd, wake up and watch all the political programs and then finish the morning off with McGlaughlin Group.
Posted by Tzimisce at 04/16/2008 @ 6:35pm
"When she doesn't win this, if she goes out kicking and screaming, flailing like a child who just got their teddy bear taken away, she is done in politics all together."
I'm more worried that if she doesnt go out with class that she will burn the party down in her wake. And all thats left will be a fragmented scorched area where the democratic party use to be. Thats why I think Party elders need to come out and talk to her. I have no problem with this contest going on if Hilary look towards the future rather than live in the here and now. But she doesnt seem to be capable of doing so and that is why I want this wrapped up like yesterday. Give her the VP if thats what it takes because if John McCain gets in the white house in November we all LOSE.
Carol
Posted by harriscrl3 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:36pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:29pm | ignore this person
No she won't no one will want her.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:36pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:28pm
And how much arm twisting did it take to get her too? There were obviously things she didn't want people to know.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:37pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:31pm
Again with the pompous elitism. You assume anyone who doesn't agree with you is somehow less educated than you.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:38pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:34pm
With all the offense statements you have made in the short time I have been here, with all of the shortsightedness, hypocrisy, elitism and just downright stupidity I give you no credit. I've seen enough to know what you come down to when the your back is against a wall.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:39pm
Posted by HARRISCRL3 04/16/2008 @ 6:36pm
She doesn't care about the party is the problem. She only cares about her own grandiose dreams. She just doesn't realize they are already dead.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:42pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:37pm
Old, old arguments, Frankie. They've already been shot down a hundred times.
The superdelegates want someone who's popular to head up the ticket. Popular, no baggage, can appeal to the country as a whole. So, Obama wins not only the delegate count but a popularity contest with Clinton as well. Clinton has no chance.
Posted by KSP556 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:42pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:40pm
Never ceases to prove my point repeatedly.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:43pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:40pm
Hillary's base is old wide women and hispanics. Are you an old white woman or hispanic?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:43pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:43pm
God over and over again. Just dig your hole deeper you only stand to prove me correct. I am educated as in a college graduate. I'm not VERY young but yes I am younger. I have also met people who are younger than me with more political knowledge than people who are 60 so don't endeavor to lob condescending statements at me Frank. I think it is you who has a lack of intelligence to not even be able to see the shit you are throwing.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:45pm
White, that was supposed to be white not wide. Although I am sure with this being America and obesity being a major problem some of them have to be wide.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:46pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:43pm
By the way Frank a piece of advice. Statements like this are you why people who used to like you don't anymore and treat you as a joke because anyone who disagrees with you and votes along a path you don't see as acceptable you automatically claim is either uneducated or or young. LV disagrees with you and he is probably about 50 or 60. Maybe you should try intelligent rebuttal instead of insults. Try contending the main points of what I say instead of attacking me. You rarely actually make a counterpoint to anything anyone says you just rant about how people are dumb and repeat the same tired lines that were wrong to begin with.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:50pm
Frankie Grits: "Obama can't win without Hillary's supporters no matter how you slice."
So far in this primary season, Obama has gotten more votes than both Clinton and McCain. He'll win the general election with or without the old-hags vote.
Posted by KSP556 at 04/16/2008 @ 6:50pm
Congratulations so why then are you supporting Obama. His base of support is blacks and college kids. Are you black?
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:40pm
...........
Well I'm white. I'm from rural Kentucky. And I support him because I want to vote FOR someone rather than vote against someone out of fear. I think he does have that certain something that will allow us as a nation to finally turn the page and work for America's best interest. But seriously we have the following problems: Rising gas prices, education prices that are going way past the cost of inflation, the middle class is getting squeezed through more and more jobs getting shipped overseas and median incomes being stagnate or even dropping below old rates when adjusted for inflation, we have a war that had no basis in reason, no help on healthcare, no help on prescription drugs, global warming has been an issue for many a year now, still no action, and then there is social security and other entitlement programs that still need work.
We need to get over the partisan bullshit and actually start getting some things done. Sure government won't fix all of our problems, but I'll sleep a lot better knowing that we have someone who can achieve progress. Why not vote for Hillary instead? Because none, repeat none, of these problems will be fixed without negotiations and consensus. Given her shrill nature on the campaign trail and the boondoggle that was Hillarycare, I don't think she is that person to accomplish this job.
Posted by Tzimisce at 04/16/2008 @ 6:53pm
Neocon parasites just can't stop their unconscious flailing, confusing Obama over and over and over for their very own shadows. In this sense, yes, "he's" naive / destructive / racist / elitist: he's not Obama, he's you. Same regressive streak that bitterly fought equal rights for blacks, women, gays -
Don't believe this neocons? Just try and alter your behavior and you'll discover how regressed and rutted you are. You can't even imagine it.
Posted by winyahn at 04/16/2008 @ 6:55pm
So it comes back to Tusla--again, and again, and again, and . . .
Beyond the obvious Munchausening on the part of HRC, one wonders why it came up at all? Well, it was because in those desperate days when Clinton had lost 9 in a row, the Team had to come up with an edge--anything, even if it was a baldfaced lie. So why Tusla? It was all about Machismo, of course. Now, HRC could spin yarns about It Takes a Village, Health Reform, and all of that domestic stuff, but how could she compete on the Commander in Chief criterion? She certainly had not been locked up and beaten for 7 years, like McCain. So what did she have? Taking sniper fire from rooftops near the Tusla airport.
My question is: How was this a solution to the Commander in Chief problem?
Since when does getting shot at qualify to you to be the head of all the armed forces?
Looking at crap like this, it's a miracle Mark Penn stayed in charge as long as he did. He must be as big a fatheaded idiot as all his publicity photos show him to be. Sheesh.
Posted by goyadad at 04/16/2008 @ 7:02pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:53pm
I don't care if are on the same side Frank. I like to root out the negative people on both sides. I don't care if you are liberal or conservative you are equally the same target if you present ignorance, elitism, and an ego the size which would rival most small stars.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 7:02pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:53pm
Also on a note of hypocrisy, you say I shouldn't comment about you because I don't know you but you have made plenty of comments about me without knowing anything about me. You have made many assumptions commenting on my private life. I stick to commenting on your writing not you. You have tried to comment on plenty of other things that have nothing to do with my writing I'm sure Mask can pull some up for you. You are everything you insult everyone else for. You stand for everything you stand against and you present an attitude that is nothing short of corrosive.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 7:04pm
Looking at crap like this, it's a miracle Mark Penn stayed in charge as long as he did. He must be as big a fatheaded idiot as all his publicity photos show him to be. Sheesh.
Posted by GOYADAD 04/16/2008 @ 7:02pm
You could more than likely string him up like a Macy's day float.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 7:12pm
That's why the Obama cultists don't like me.
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 7:13pm
Again proving me correct. You call him an elitist but then you rule out the fact that most of his supporters support him because they like his policies. They like his character, which whether you like it or not is important when selecting a leader. You think that anyone voting for Obama is a cultist or someone who is unintelligent. You are in fact elitist.
On top of that you say you never start the argument I start by agreeing with the article but can't I then turn that shallow logic around on you and say that you disagreeing with the article is what started the argument. Isn't it kinda like the chicken and the egg question?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 7:26pm
That's why the Obama cultists don't like me.
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 7:13pm
For instance I am voting for Obama because I think out of the ending candidates he is the best one. I had decided on someone else in the beginning but that person is no longer here and I personally think Hillary and Bill are both repugnant. I have never liked either of them. Even when they were in office and even though I was young at the time I had an interest in politics and I didn't like them then. They are both politicians to the fullest and I mean that in the worst way possible. Two people who wouldn't tell the truth if you put them on the rack. Two people I believe who do nothing but politically posture. Nothing is off the record to them they do everything to gain that much more power. I don't believe the people who lust after power should have it given to them. The people who lust after power tend to be the worst people to lead because they don't care about the positive nature of what that power can do they only care about what they can get from it.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 7:30pm
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:54pm
You're the one who can't count. If you could, you'd know that Hillary Clinton has absolutely no chance of winning the nomination.
Posted by KSP556 at 04/16/2008 @ 7:32pm
Posted by CCCOMFO1 04/16/2008 @ 5:50pm
Careful CCCOM, after FRANK accuses you of being a "Republican"...
he moves on to accuse you of being a "Communist"!!!
heheh
Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 7:36pm
Posted by MASK 04/16/2008 @ 7:36pm
Two things that go perfectly well together.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 7:38pm
In order for Obama to effectively move against Clinton doesn't he really need to be an actual progressive?
Since he's not, he's stuck in the mud with his political twin, fighting over meaningless issues, since there's not a dime's worth of difference between the two on anything substantial.
Posted by neaguy at 04/16/2008 @ 7:45pm
she was only twenty four hours from Tusla...
Posted by emile duBois at 04/16/2008 @ 7:49pm
since there's not a dime's worth of difference between the two on anything substantial.----Posted by NEAGUY 04/16/2008 @ 7:45pm
Sound familiar?.....Nader told us the same thing in 2000.
How many dead GIs and Iraqis would "President Gore" have given us?
Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 7:54pm
many of you are just plain hysterical. here's the story. should Obama win, the rest of the dems will fall in line. even Grits. they just want and need a winner. same with if Hill should get the nod. oh you can talk tough all you want, you WILL fall in line.
the old old soldier is a tomato can. he will not become pres, even if picks god's only son and savior as his running mate. he's fucked.
Hillary too will fall in line. she will campaign for Obama. she'd be a fool not to. it's going to be a dem administration after all, huge gains in Senate and House. huge.
to the twits who like to call up year old posts, put this one in a safe place, you will need it.
Posted by emile duBois at 04/16/2008 @ 7:56pm
Posted by LIBSWARNEDU 04/16/2008 @ 7:48pm | ignore this person
everybody is at least related to somebody who has sacrificed for their country...even non-military types sacrifice for their country.
except for obama supportets...of course...
har har!
Posted by ibbleblibble at 04/16/2008 @ 7:57pm
Posted by CCCOMFO1 04/16/2008 @ 7:38pm
Seriously. He started off, when most of the blog turned "apostate" and refused to worship the Dark Goddess, by trying to claim that those who did were "Republican operatives"....
now, recently, he's moved on to attacking "The Nation" discussing "Communism" and how it "has a checkered past"!!!
Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 7:59pm
Posted by MASK 04/16/2008 @ 7:59pm | ignore this person
YOU WILL HAVE A QUEEN...TREACHEROUS AS THE SEAS!
well, MASK, looking at the new polls and i think 50 foot queenie has thrown herself into the volcanoe.
whats that wizard of oz song? "i would while away the hours, consulting with the flowers..."
no no...not that one...
"ding dong the witch is dead!!!!!"
har har har!
Posted by ibbleblibble at 04/16/2008 @ 8:11pm
http://youtube.com/watch?v=7AqmLH9z9Qw
Pretty funny interview with Michelle Obama on the Colbert report of all places.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 8:15pm
Posted by LVLIBERTY1 04/16/2008 @ 8:06pm
Says the man who supports warfare, argues FOR the killing of Palestinians. You know when a cluster bomb is dropped it doesn't only target soldiers. How many weapons in the war you endorse have killed children? I'm sure you can find the statistic for me.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/16/2008 @ 8:19pm
Posted by IBBLEBLIBBLE 04/16/2008 @ 8:11pm
Frankly...heheh....FRANK has gotten HI-larious. Moving from EULEResque (pissy and snotty)...to HELENDAO (insanity).
Seriously, how much like RIO BRAVO can FG sound like when he starts hinting that "The Nation" has "questions" about being Communist...because they "employ me", how I use Google and Notepad to point out his contradictions, and how "Red" it was to show him for a liar!
Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 8:22pm
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/action/ignore.mhtml?who=LibsWarnedU
in a landslide his vote will not be missed. his commentary neither.
Posted by emile duBois at 04/16/2008 @ 8:50pm
Posted by MASK 04/16/2008 @ 8:22pm
Any validity at all to the following... You tolerate, goad, focus on FQuits precisely because he shows some movement, as you've just mentioned. Stipulating, of course, to zero movement in terms of personal insight, self-righteousness, admitting thinking errors, etc. Any hope to deprogram him, lure him back to the light? What's the pull, some sign of authenticity or desperation? He's shared some personal information that anyone with a heartbeat would acknowledge to be heavy. Or are you just the proverbial cat poking and purring with pleasure when the cornered, fallen, hopeless prey manages yet another pathetic wiggle? Maybe his comebacks weak as they may be nonetheless give you endless opportunities to sharpen your sword. All this is none of my business and you can tell me so. Just curious.
Posted by winyahn at 04/16/2008 @ 8:56pm
His commentaries on the Iraq war while his son was deployed were both enraged and poignant. Leagues above what I read now.
Posted by MYPARADIGM 04/16/2008 @ 6:26pm | ignore this person
Except his son is no longer there and he suddenly finds himself in favor of the pro-war candidate over a candidate who would reduce our troop presence in Iraq.
Re Frank's point on the SDs, they can count too. You have a situation where Obama has a clear lead and needs fewer delegates to go over the top in the first place, they'll choose the candidate who did better and they'll choose to get him over on the first or second ballot instead of having a deadlocked convention.
Posted by brunowe at 04/16/2008 @ 9:12pm
Don't you assholes know how many democrats this trash pushes over to McCain's side? Please smarten up.
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 5:40pm | ignore this person
If it's Lieberman-style Democrats like you, good riddance. Obama is bringing people into the party
I can't let you folks have control of the government.
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 6:20pm | ignore this person
Says the person who will vote for McCain out of spite.
Posted by brunowe at 04/16/2008 @ 9:17pm
"Guilt" is not a verb, but a noun.
Posted by BUTLER 04/16/2008 @ 4:05pm
it's a verb now.
Posted by frosted zoom at 04/16/2008 @ 9:51pm
Obama is ahead by 2 touchdowns, and there are only 20 seconds remaining in this game. There is simply no way for Hilly to catch up. The game is over, dude.
Posted by KSP556 04/16/2008 @ 5:52pm
hillary's got that onside kick in the groin waiting.....
Posted by frosted zoom at 04/16/2008 @ 9:55pm
Frankie Grits: "But you don't think Obama lies too?"
No, I don't think he does.
Posted by KSP556 04/16/2008 @ 6:29pm
everybody lies.......
Posted by frosted zoom at 04/16/2008 @ 9:57pm
I have a cast iron remedy for the Three Stooges problem. None of the above. Consider doing what I plan to do in Nov. Write in Ron Paul.
Posted by jeanette3654 at 04/16/2008 @ 10:20pm
Posted by WINYAHN 04/16/2008 @ 8:56pm
He's a liar...and deserved to be treated as such. First, with his on self-righteousness and arrogance, like JR used to be, less now...telling us "ignorant fools" that he's trying to "educate us"...when it's merely his own zeal for Her Majesty and his own ego nearly as big as hers.
Second with the lies he's told about himself. His claim to "consistancy" when he's contradicted his own hatred and desire to see the Republicans out of power, mostly but not exclusively to the issue of Iraq....and yet, out of spite, he's going to support a guy who loves the Surge, has said "stay until 'victory'", and "hasn't ruled out pre-emptive wars".
No way in hell "old" FRANK would have supported McCain over ANY Democrat two years ago, if Hillary had (for some reason) not decided to run. But she did...and seeking "revenge" (or, as I've noted, a chance for her to run her last run possible....2012...against an incumbent McCain)....is all that matters.
And finally third and really last, is his lies and "subtle" racism about Obama. First "not meaning anything" calling him "boy"....then "mulatto"...then "Obama said Republican had all the good ideas the last 20 years" (a deliberate alteration of the actual quote).
Old FRANK was a little "fast and loose" with his info...actual "mis-remembering" more than Her Majesty's "sniper fire"....but atleast he was on the side of the angels with wanting to get us out of Iraq and punishing the incompetence or worse of the Republicans by throwing them out of office.
"New" FRANK....is a Hillary cultist. Who now is on this bizarre kick where "MASK is an intern for 'The Nation' (and has been for 3 years?!?!?!?...bad career move for me, huh?)...
and with "The Nation's" endorsement of Obama, now "TN" has a "checkered past" with mentions of COMMUNISM!!?!?!?
He's not truly crazy...like LIBSWARN/CONSHAME...or just goofy like HSUBFOOLS and his constant "Al Gore will win a brokered Convention"...
he's locked in his slavish devotion to a politician....bitter....heheh.... and not yet pathetic enough to deserve any mercy for his duplicity and hypocrisy.
Posted by Mask at 04/16/2008 @ 10:27pm
All that's left to is for the loser to congratulate the winner. Posted by KSP556 04/16/2008 @ 5:52pm
That will be a scene, Bill biting his lip, Hillary sniffling, bitter bitter. Then watch out, they can still do damage.
Posted by sloper at 04/16/2008 @ 11:01pm
For pure hypocrisy and re-writing of history, nothing that Hillary has done tops her claim to have been opposed to the Iraq war all along, even when she was voting for it. The historical record clearly and unambiguously shows that she was for the war and for it and for it again before she was against it. On many occasions prior to and following the invasion of Iraq, she spoke emphatically about how the war was right and good.
Hillary Clinton is a complete fraud. I wonder if she even knows who she truly is. Obama may not be perfect, but I believe he has far more integrity than Clinton and McCain combined.
Posted by robgo2 at 04/16/2008 @ 11:02pm
Silly and one-dimensional...that takes one idea and explodes beyond proportion. And this is being touted as grass root democracy.
Posted by kevin99999 at 04/16/2008 @ 11:39pm
June 21, 2005 Mexico City, Mexico Gold Service Intl. $200,000
June 22, 2005 Bogota, Colombia Gold Service Intl. $200,000
June 23, 2005 Sau Paulo, Brazil Gold Service Intl. $200,000
June 24, 2005 Sau Paulo, Brazil Gold Service Intl. $200,000
Clinton elogió la labor del gobierno colombiano en su lucha contra la pobreza y contra el narcotráfico y aplaudió su perseverancia por los avances logrados en las negociaciones de un Tratado de Libre Comercio con los Estados Unidos (TLC).
Esos elogios motivaron los aplausos del público que por más de dos minutos hacían sonar fuetemente las palmas de sus manos, cada vez con mayor intensidad.
"Necesitamos su ayuda para agilizar la firma del Tratado de Libre Comercio (TLC) con E.U. Es de gran importancia para dar una señal clara de lo que deben ser las relaciones entre los dos países", le dijo ayer el presidente Álvaro Uribe, al ex presidente de los E.U. Bill Clinton, durante Expogestion 2005.
"Voy a plantear su punto cuando regrese a E.U.", le respondió Clinton. "Estoy a favor del TLC y tengo la esperanza de que vamos a encontrar la fórmula para que se logre el acuerdo", añadió.
but hillary doesn't support the deal. just bill. right.
Posted by frosted zoom at 04/17/2008 @ 12:11am
Well there's no biz like politics. Do some rhetoric and get tons of money. Ah, smart guy this Obamacaca.
----------
Obama reports income of $4.2 million in 2007 tax returns By BETH Ther's no biz like politics: Do some rhetoric and get tons of money.
FOUHY, Associated Press Writer Wed Apr 16, 7:13 PM ET
PHILADELPHIA - Democratic Sen. Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, made $4.2 million last year as widespread interest in the presidential candidate pushed the sales of his two books.
Posted by HelenDAO at 04/17/2008 @ 02:31am
Great that The Nation is highlighting it. Perhaps someday some publication like the New York Times will attempt that work called journalism and examine this as The Nation has.
Posted by hsansom at 04/17/2008 @ 03:04am
Posted by JEANETTE3654 04/16/2008 @ 10:20pm | ignore this person
whattacopout
Posted by emile duBois at 04/17/2008 @ 08:15am
This is quite an admission....read it and note what I bolded...
"No-one in this country in the political arena deserves to be president more than John McCain."----Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/17/2008 @ 12:10am
"But I'm a democrat so I will support Hillary because next to John McCain she is the most deserving."----Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/17/2008 @ 01:17am |
"No one"...and "next to" John McCain....FRANK's basically saying that Hillary (alone...he added the caveat of "Bill and Hillary"...but Hillary alone) is LESS deserving than McCain to be President.
And why is Hillary ALONE (without Bill) less deserving, FRANK?!!??
Posted by Mask at 04/17/2008 @ 08:59am
Posted by MASK 04/16/2008 @ 10:27pm
I see. Excellent!
Posted by winyahn at 04/17/2008 @ 09:37am
I am no fan of Hillary, but I was unimpressed with this video. It was repetitive and told us nothing that wasn't already well known.
Posted by horvitz at 04/17/2008 @ 11:22am
I wonder if you've evr read any of the objective biographies that were written about Bill and Hillary. Have you?
Posted by FRANKGRITS 04/16/2008 @ 11:56pm
I don't need to read a biography to size up a person. First of all there is no such thing as an objective biography. By researching a person you automatically form an opinion on them which then dictates how you write about them. On top of that I can look at HOW a person acts, in the Whitehouse and in life, and see what kind of a person they are. You think an autobiography BY Hillary Clinton is objective? That is the one you ALWAYS cite. Everyone endeavors to make themselves look better, not like an idiot. so please don't quote to be biographies or autobiographies give me cold hard observable facts. The facts are Clinton 1 abused his power, Clinton 2 lusts after power and will do anything to get it.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/17/2008 @ 12:24pm
You think an autobiography BY Hillary Clinton is objective? That is the one you ALWAYS cite.----Posted by CCCOMFO1 04/17/2008 @ 12:24pm
THAT is pretty funny. FG been pulling that one for months..."Don't believe me how great Hillary Clinton is....Read 'Living History' by Hillary Clinton, which PROVES how great Hillary Clinton is!"
Posted by Mask at 04/17/2008 @ 1:11pm
You know, I never hear about the wonderful nature of Obama anymore, and whose fault is that? You complain about negative campaigning from the Clintons, with some justification but not as much as you suppose, and yet your entire effort over the last months has been to tear down Hillary personally and raise her negatives -- which you've done, congratulations. Then you object to Obama facing scrutiny on minutia, like his contacts with Bill Ayers and his pastor and so on, and I agree -- and then you praise this piece of creative editing, and the efforts of the Jed Report to... tear down Hillary. Kind of weird, huh? As for the video, anybody can string together a series of clips. You don't know the contexts of anything here. Hillary opposed NAFTA? Yes or no, or was it conditional? Was it a deliberate choice in 1995 or whenever, but later happenings have demonstrated that there are big problems? No, you choose "devastation" -- the invisible editing that makes the most of every opposition. You know, the Jed Report guys really should apply to Rove for a job, because they have great propaganda techniques. I expect more from the Nation, and from progressive institutions, than being open vehicles for one Democrat over another. But I'd be disappointed. Psst: hear the one about the murder of Vince Foster?
Posted by Swift2001 at 04/17/2008 @ 1:38pm
Hillary did exactly what she should have done in this speech and in the debate and it's about time the media asked him some tough questions. Of course Hillary will back the Democrat because as Democrats that's what we do. However, she and everybody else who looks at the issues and his negatives, understands that the Republicans will have a field day with him in the fall. Then we will be stuck with McBush III. Hillary on the other hand, as she stated in the debate, "comes to the table with baggage but, it has been thoroughly rummaged through". These are the facts and we Democrats need to rally around Hillary, our clear and convincing chance for victory for the fall. She will beat McCain in the fall.
Posted by moblou at 04/17/2008 @ 1:59pm
the intention of this video is so good. couldn't they have found a better clip on NAFTA tho? in the only one they're using, she's clearly at a union event. it seems like it's taken out of context and that she's making a rationalization.
surely there's video somewhere that has hillary actually endorsing nafta before it was passed. (even if privately, as Carville says, she was against it)
Posted by rozfromnewark at 04/17/2008 @ 2:01pm
Posted by SWIFT2001 04/17/2008 @ 1:38pm
H.T.O.T.D. nominee
Posted by Mask at 04/17/2008 @ 2:25pm
Posted by MASK 04/17/2008 @ 1:11pm
It's backward logic. Of course someone is going to make themselves look great in their autobiography. Who wants to write about how much of a douchebag they are?
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/17/2008 @ 3:05pm
Your absolute hatred of Hillary Clinton makes me sick. That you can call yourselves progressive Democrats makes me sick. That you will not or cannot look at the substantive lies of Barack Obama makes me wonder what the difference is between you and the right-wing.
Somebody puts together a video, pasting together comments over a period of many years, taken out of context -- like any good right-wing news source might do -- as "proof" that Hillary Clinton is Evil Incarnate and you expect people with intelligence to believe this crap?
You really are no better than the right-wing smears-n-lies machine that you purport to hate and want to change. And you - as they - are destroying democracy; you make a mockery of truth and honesty. The ONLY difference is that you do it on behalf of so-called progressive Democrats.
Because of this kind of crap I'm ashamed at this moment to be a Democrat. Good luck winning an election in November without loyal Democrats.
Posted by mabelle at 04/17/2008 @ 5:44pm
It would be nice if somebody could produce a short video clip with Hillary and T. Owens both crying. The legend should be: Hillary for President and T.O. for Vice President.
Posted by pazcaz1 at 04/17/2008 @ 5:48pm
Posted by MABELLE 04/17/2008 @ 5:44pm
Actually there are plenty of loyal democrats who will vote for Obama and Hillary just the same. Give me an example of his lies that have to do with his platform Mabelle? Not some non-issue about Reverend Wright but I mean his platform. For any lie you can produce I will produce two for Hillary. So don't go ranting and raving about lies. Hillary has lied and spun in this election more than anyone. So the challenge is out. Produce me one lie I will produce you two. However they have to be about platform and things pertaining to their platform.
Posted by Cccomfo1 at 04/17/2008 @ 5:54pm
Posted by pazcaz1 at 04/18/2008 @ 9:13pm
How about a TV ad in Pennsylvania with this nothing but this footage? Seems to me it would not only be effective, but wouldn't be interperted as "negative campaigning" because it's Hillary's own foot in her mouth.
Posted by macduck at 04/21/2008 @ 1:45pm