7 reasons I will not cast my vote for Hillary (from a Texas voter)

[LucyParsons]

(I wrote this this morning as a Word document, and have not been able to preserve the footnotes in copying - I include them in list-form at the end).



The Texas primary is on March 4. For the first time in a generation, Texans’ votes will help determine the party’s nominee. Expect both the Obama and Clinton campaigns to spend a lot of time and money courting your vote. Your vote is very important.

In light of this, I cannot help but tell my family, friends, and fellow Texans why I will not be casting a ballot for Hillary Clinton on March 4. Yes, I realize it’s odd that I am talking about who I am not voting for, rather then waxing love struck about the other candidate; in fact, I am not particularly enthusiastic about the name I will click somewhat ambivalently on the touch screen voting machine (which may well render my vote meaningless through either mechanical error or deliberate tampering).

But I will vote for Obama. I am not convinced that he’s a genuine candidate of change his ardent supporters believe he is and that most Americans – of all political persuasions – are desperate for; but I am willing to give him a chance. Many of his policies are similar or identical to Clinton’s, but there are also key differences between the two: namely, that Obama may prove to be less beholden to elite corporate interests. A telling comparison is this: Clinton graduated from Yale Law in 1973, moved with Bill Clinton to Arkansas, and joined the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock - the oldest, most established firm west of the Mississippi, whose clients include Tyson Foods, Wal-Mart, large brokerages and banks; Obama graduated from Harvard Law in 1991 and returned to Chicago, where he led a voter registration drive, taught Constitutional law at the University of Chicago, and joined the Miner, Barnhill & Galland firm, where he represented community organizers, discrimination claims, and voting rights cases.

I will not vote for Hillary Clinton because:

1. She voted for the Iraq War Resolution, which has thus far claimed the lives of nearly 4,000 American servicemen and women, left more than 29,000 wounded, and has resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, as well as untold numbers of coalition military personnel, contractors, and humanitarian workers.

2. She voted for the USA PATRIOT Act, which, in the name of fighting terrorism, unconstitutionally strips U.S. citizens and others of their rights to due process, unreasonable search and seizure, and other basic freedoms. The Act gives the government the power to access to your medical records, tax records, information about the books you buy or borrow without probable cause, and the power to break into your home and conduct secret searches without telling you for weeks, months, or indefinitely; it gives the government the power to redefine “terrorism” to include a number of activities fundamental to American liberty and thus attempts to outlaw the right to dissent (which has happened before, during other wars). The Act expands government power to seize assets without a prior hearing, and without being convicted of a crime. The Act allows for the indefinite detention of immigrants and other non-citizens without trial. The Act permits a vast array of information gathering on U.S. citizens from school records, financial transactions, Internet activity, telephone conversations, information gleaned from grand jury proceedings and criminal investigations to be shared with the CIA (and other non-law enforcement officials) even if it pertains to Americans, information that can be shared without a court order. The Act allows the detention of people engaging in innocent associational activity. The Act is unconstitutional and un-American. Clinton, along with every other member of the Senate save Russell Feingold, who voted “Nay” and Mary Landrieu (who was “absent”), voted for the PATRIOT Act.

3. She voted for the No Child Left Behind Act, which continues the assault on American public education by disempowering teachers and local communities in favor of a devastating over-reliance on standardized testing. This system provides disincentives to lower performing students, no incentives to high-performing students, dominates class time that should be used for actual teaching, and, worst of all, ties performance to funding, which has resulted in even poorer public schools. The Act also facilitates military recruitment in elementary and secondary schools.

4. She voted for the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act (another misnomer – it should’ve been called the “No Credit Card Company Left Behind Act”), which was opposed by a wide variety of groups, including consumer advocates, legal scholars, retired bankruptcy judges, and the editorial pages of many national and regional newspapers. The Act makes it much more difficult, if not impossible, for Americans to file Chapter 7 bankruptcy, under which some debts may be forgiven, and forces almost all debtors into Chapter 13, under which no debts may be forgiven. The Act includes provisions that prioritize the repayment of credit card debt over unpaid child support. The Act does nothing to curtail the predatory practices of credit card companies, such as exorbitant interest rates, rising and often hidden fees, and targeting minors and the recently bankrupt for new cards - which are themselves significant contributors to the growth of consumer bankruptcies.

5. She is a member of the Democratic Leadership Council, a powerful, corporate-financed mouthpiece within the Democratic Party that acts to keep Democratic candidates and platforms sympathetic to corporate interests and the interests of the wealthiest one percent. Her chief advisor, Mark Penn, who seems to be a conscienceless political pollster and operative in the mold of Karl Rove, has ties to Blackwater (a private mercenary army), corrupt foreign governments, and union-busters.

6. I oppose oligarchies, aristocracies, and any form of dynastic politics. In a country of 300 million people, is this really the best we can do? Twenty years of rule by two families? In a democracy, the people with the best ideas should rise to the highest leadership positions. Isn’t it obvious by now that we are not living in a real democracy? The sense of entitlement Clinton seems to have, coupled with the corporate media’s insistence for the past two years that she would be the inevitable Democratic nominee, is an insult to voters.

7. She is running on Bill Clinton’s record, which is neither her own nor admirable. Clinton is now touting her “35 years of experience” – but experience doing what? She was a corporate lawyer, then First Lady of the United States. She has less legislative experience than Obama. If we give her credit for her husband’s accomplishments, we can thank her for:

a. the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), not a “trade” agreement, but an investment agreement whose core provisions granted foreign investors a remarkable set of new rights and privileges that promote relocation abroad of factories and jobs and the privatization and deregulation of essential services, such as water, energy and health care;

b. failure to establish a comprehensive health care plan in 1993; not only is mandating purchase of health insurance from private companies not “universal healthcare”, but the plan failed spectacularly – what evidence is there that now-Senator Clinton, who is backed by massive donations from HMOs, pharmaceutical companies, and health insurance companies, will be either able or willing to spearhead the kind of fundamental changes in health care Americans so desperately need?

c. the massive bombing of Iraq (along with several other countries) and sanctions against Iraq, which resulted in the deaths of an estimated 500,000 Iraqi children, and which then-Secretary-of-State and Hillary Clinton supporter Madeleine Albright famously said was “worth it”;

d. welfare “reform” – in which the Clinton administration, in collusion with the Republican Congress, acted as if getting mothers and their children off the welfare rolls is the same as getting them out of poverty, and which expanded the service-sector nature of the U.S. economy by increasing the number of Americans working dead-end, minimum-wage jobs while shifting practically all of the financial burden of poverty to the states;

e. the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which inevitably gave way to media consolidation as large corporations bought out smaller, independent and regional companies; this has inarguably resulted in a new media devoid of a variety of viewpoints necessary for a democracy to function, and has played a large part in the evolution of news in this country; what is now called “news” is often little more than corporate cheerleading and sophisticated stealth advertising. This is the news media that brought you the war in Iraq;

f. an economic “boom” that proved to be a bubble – Bill Clinton, as chairman of the DLC, did not take any substantial measures to improve the economy for the majority of Americans, instead simply continuing policies that benefit corporations and the richest one percent.

I do not oppose Clinton because I harbor some kind of irrational hatred of her, as demonstrated by many Americans on the right (who also seem to mistakenly believe she is a socialist). I oppose Clinton for the same reasons that I oppose McCain, Romney, Huckabee, and most other Republicans, as well as most Democrats: she represents a continuation of the domination of this country by a powerful, moneyed elite, and of America’s military domination of the world for the profit of this elite – to the detriment of the rest of us, in this country and abroad.

I have little faith that a vote for Obama will bring much “change”, either – but voting for Clinton will certainly change very little.


Relevant articles (email me for a pdf of this post, with footnotes):
“Clinton Remained Silent as Wal-Mart Fought Unions”, ABC News, January 31, 2008 (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4218509)
“As a Director, Clinton Moved Wal-Mart Board, but Only So Far”, May 20, 2007 (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/20/us/politics/20walmart.html)
McClatchy News Service, February 3, 2008 (http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/26377.html)
Boston Globe, February 20, 2007 (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/02/20/obama_got_start_in_civil_rights_practice/)
US Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress – 2nd Session, October 11, 2002, 12:50am (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=2&vote=00237)
Washington Post, October 11, 2006, page A12 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/10/AR2006101001442.html)
CNN (http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/)
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress – 1st Session, October 25, 2001, 1:54pm (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00313)
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress – 1st Session, June 14, 2001, 4:58pm (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&session=1&vote=00192)
No Child Left (http://nochildleft.com)
U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 109th Congress – 1st Session, March 10, 2005, 6:12pm (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=1&vote=00044)
USA Today, March 10, 2005 (http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2005-03-10-bankruptcy_x.htm)
Testimony of Robert Manning, Hearing on U.S. Credit Card Industry and Consumer Credit Issues, Before the Subcommittee on Financial Institutions and Consumer Credit, United States House of Representatives, November 1, 2001 (http://www.creditcardnation.com/testimony-1112001.html)
Anti-DLC Coalition (http://www.cch092775.blogspot.com/)
Corporate contributors to the DLC include Bank One, Citigroup, Dow Chemical, DuPont, General Electric, Health Insurance Corporation of America, Merrill Lynch, Microsoft, Philip Morris, RJR Nabisco, Chevron, Prudential Foundation, Amoco Foundation, AT&T, Morgan Stanley, Occidental Petroleum, Raytheon, and many other Fortune 500 companies (http://www.nndb.com/group/269/000093987/)
The Nation, May 17, 2007 (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070604/berman)
The Washington Post, April 30, 2007 (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/29/AR2007042901661.html)
The Nation, October 5, 2007 (http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?pid=240313)
Public Citizen (http://www.citizen.org/trade/nafta/)
CNN, July 12, 2006 (http://money.cnn.com/2006/07/12/news/newsmakers/healthcare_clinton/index.htm)
http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Clinton_bombing_of_Iraq_far_exceeded_Bushs_in_runup_to_war__Bush_spikes_of_activity_que_0705.html
CNN, August 20, 1998 (http://www.cnn.com/US/9808/20/us.strikes.01/)
Salon, September 23, 1998 (http://www.salon.com/news/1998/09/23news.html)
BBC, May 10, 1999 (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/339489.stm)
Colorado Springs Gazette, October 12, 2000 (http://www.commondreams.org/views/101300-107.htm)
Seattle Post Intelligencer, August 7. 2003 (http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0807-01.htm)
To Leslie Stahl, 60 Minutes, May 12, 1996 (http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1084)
The Nation, August 30, 2006 (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060911/truthdig)
Five-year anniversary reports from National Public Radio, August 22, 2001: http://www.npr.org/news/specials/welfare/010822.welfare.html
Common Dreams News Center, December 1, 2003 (http://www.commondreams.org/views03/1201-13.htm)
See who owns your media at: http://www.freepress.net/content/ownership
Free Press Media Ownership overview: http://www.freepress.net/issues/ownership
The Nation, May 17, 2007 (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20070604/berman)
PBS NewsHour, April 13, 1998 (http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/jan-june98/mergers_4-13.html)
From Wounded Knee to Iraq: A Century of U.S. Military Interventions, by Dr. Zoltan Grossman, The Evergreen State College: http://academic.evergreen.edu/g/grossmaz/interventions.html
U.S. Military Interventions, 1898-2006, by Emil Pocock, Eastern Connecticut State University: http://www.easternct.edu/personal/faculty/pocock/milact.htm

[George_Bonanza]

1. Hillary could make a decent prez, but Obama could be great

Hillary would be nothing more than Bill II (no sexist implication), and you can bet that Willy will do his best to try and bully himself into a 2nd presidency. My entire life has seen the rise and fall of Bushes and Clintons, and I'm goddamn sick of it. This is not the Superbowl: a dynasty is not inspiring or amazing, it's downright tiresome and dangerous.

[BrightKnight]

52. He does like to promise everything to everyone. - n/t

[niceypoo]

56. You claim that Obama would be, "great"

So as proof you attack Hillary and her husband. Which part of your attack is the 'unity' and which part is the 'hope'?

[polpilot]

125. Most can't 'unite' behind a pro-war, anti-worker candidate like Hillary...

This is a very open split from the DLC pro-corporate policies of the DLC

[bluestateguy]

2. If she is nominated, and you post this shit, you will be asked to leave DU

Just a friendly reminder.

[LucyParsons]

4. Do you have any facts diproving any of the "shit" I refer to?

Thanks for the friendly reminder.

[TexasObserver]

pay him no mind

Some here like to try to intimidate new posters. Put him on Ignore, and you'll never have to see his comments again. I just did.

Of course you will not be able to campaign here against Hillary if she gets the nomination. Last I checked, that can't happen for months, and in the interim, one Democrat's opinion is good as the next.

I supported John Edwards for a year, and when he got out, it didn't take me five seconds to move over to Obamba. I've been through many elections, and people who cling to their fallen candidate like he's their favorite teddy bear have a difficult time moving on.

Your posting here will be more enjoyable if you don't give the jackasses more than one chance to insult you. Use the little icon with the red X to the right of their name to add them to your Ignore List. You'll need it, so you might as well get used to using it.

Talk to who you want to talk to, like in real life. No one would stand there and listen to some jerk who walks up and attacks them. Why tolerate it here?

[blayne]

70. I like the way you think.

Thanks for the tips.

[Sherman A1]

98. Well Said!

the ignore button is my friend. You area absolutely correct, that one opinion is no more valid than another. I like you moved from DK, to Edwards (who got out before I had a chance to really get invested in the guy) to Obama. That said if someone wants to post negative threads about him, well, he is an adult running for President. I suspect that he can take it. I don't care who says what, or who endorses who, I can make up my own mind thank you all.....



:toast:

[beezlebum]

114. i'm so confused...

forgive me, i still have sleep in my eyes and have yet to have my morning nourishment (i don't function well before breakfast...not to mention the throbbing headache i woke up with), but bluestateguy has both a john edwards icon and an obama sticker in his siggy. i didn't think he meant "shit" as in "BULLshit," so much as shit as in "stuff." i could be wrong...:hangover:

[Tyler Durden]

117. Actually, they are referring to rule #2.

"2. Who We Are: Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office."

The OP WOULD be well advised to title with something like "I will not vote for Hillary IN THE PRIMARY." Clears up attitudes and is less provocative.

[amborin]

90. tons of facts disprove your lies

[eib1]

108. Tons that you are obviously too indolent

to write here.
Refutations belong in the thread where the attacks are.
Not on other threads.

[AllyCat]

139. Where are they? I'd like to see them because all I've seen is HRC vote

and act exactly as the OP described. And please don't direct me to her campaign website. I'd love to see some other citations that explain why these are lies. Seriously. Convince me that she is the right person.

[Uncle Sinister]

5. ??? I disagree with her spin on the facts, but she states her case well.

[NoPasaran]

10. She already knows what that's like

Having been tombstoned under her previous identity a few years ago.

[LucyParsons]

13. Nice try.

But I wasn't tombstoned under another identity a few years ago.

And, if this board is in the habit of tombstoning people, perhaps we members should ask why.

[donheld]

68. "the habit of tombstoning people..." "members should ask why."

Members don't need to ask why. The rules will tell you why.

[sandnsea]

11. This is not shit, this is what is wrong with Hillary

And this is what we need to make good decisions. I'm outraged that you would tell someone not to post the truth about someone's record.

[stickernation]

136. this post is heartily kicked and recommended by me !

i really dig this list. as an Edwards supporter I have been unimpressed with Obamamania and am incredibly concerned about one of Obama's advisors in particular (Zbigniew Brzezenski or however you spell it).

But this post suddenly makes clear my eyes about what Hillary has voted for and been a part of, it is really sad.

What kind of "underground" is this where we can't talk about our own Democratic leaders without needing to try to scare new community members into silence ? This post sounded appropriately PAINED to me, pained like I am that our party's leadership is either 1) so easily duped or 2) in with the conspiracy.

I'm even MORE pained to see smart Democrats totally 1) unconcerned or 2) fooled.

I am coming to view voting Democratic this November as a stalling tactic - it means Armageddon might be pushed back a little, although who can say if ZB is near the seat of power. This is a sad end to our dreams of really changing things this November.

I think Obama supporters need to send a strong message to Obama to remove Zbigniew Brzezinski from his advisory committee, just as HRC has been slammed for working with Mark Penn. ZB is a threat to humanity and Obama's working with him simply makes Obama, uh, how can I put this, totally untrustworthy on the Iraq-war-imperialism issue. Totally destroys any credibility as an anti-war voice in my opinion, ZB should be in prison for war crimes, not advising Obama.

Seriously wish I could join my friends in the Obama camp, but as long as ZB is in his campaign I am absolutely against it. It is just about as important for DU'ers to keep ZB out of the Executive Branch as it is to stop John McCain. I'm serious. I think Obama supporters need to start a letter-writing campaign to their candidate and make him kick that bastard out. That would impress me that Obama supporters actually have their own voices rather than campaign talking points; two birds with one stone. Hell, I'm going to print some anti-Zbigniew stickers right about NOW. yeah.

[Zodiak]

14. I think telling someone they are not welcome here is NOT a friendly reminder

Do not threaten posters with not being welcome here. That is against the rules, and it is my personal opinion that it is bullying.

As long as there is no nominee, these kinds of posts are legal and appreciated by a large segment of this community.

[Bitwit1234]

24. I have 10,000 why I am not voting even in the GE for the other candidate.

[classykaren]

99. What part of free speech so you dislike? n/t

[northshore]

154. If she is nominated, and you post this shit, you will be asked to leave DU

If we post the truth, and DU finds it offensive, DU can collectively kiss my ass!

This place is getting more Freeperish by the day.

Outright censorship and repression of viewpoints. My how far we have come from the 60's.

Thanks Bill!!

[Uncle Sinister]

3. articulate and well argued. But IF she should win the nomination,..

will you vote for her in November?

[Neo-wobbly]

147. I don't know about the OP...

But I for one will stay home before I vote for a DINO.

More likely, however, is that I will vote 3rd party.

[DireStrike]

158. Personally I haven't put much thought into it

However, Hillary vs. Mccain? Hrm, that's almost a difficult choice. I would have to look into Mccain more first. Hillary would probably still be a little better.

[incapsulated]

6. What I have never seen is a detailed list of why to vote *for* Obama

Other than a bunch of slogans and tripe about Hope and Change and getting along with the republicans and religion is the new cool.

And no, I didn't bother to read your screed. I really don't give a fuck why you hate Clinton.

[LucyParsons]

8. how do you know I "hate" Clinton if you didn't bother to read it?

sounds like blind emotionalism at work to me, the same kind that animates Freepers and fundamentalists of all stripes.

I also say that I am not really "for" Obama. I think his adoring fans will likely be sorely disappointed if he becomes the president. Then again, I also hold no soft spot in my heart for other beloved Establisment Dems, such as the Kennedys.

[incapsulated]

18. Because I've been reading this crap for a year

Why Clinton is the Devil.

I'm sick of it.

So, you are one of those who hate everyone, check.

But you are going to vote for the one who speaks more double talk about loving our enemies across the aisle, who spit on everything you hold dear, than anyone else, the least vetted, the most vague, with a record nearly identical to someone who at least has some experience fighting the republicans.

And who sold his constituency to a nuclear plant leaking radiation to their homes for campaign dollars.

You think he is any different? He just has done less time, so he is less corrupt.

Give him four more years in the Senate or the White House.

Whatever works for you.

[LucyParsons]

23. I agree with your assessment of Obama

"He is less corrupt."

That's why I'll vote for him.

I was a Kucinich supporter, then Edwards, now Obama. Hillary is the nadir in a party that needs a Nader.

[incapsulated]

31. For now. Only because he doesn't have access

That will change when he is in the White House and all those yummy lobbyists come at him.

And he hasn't shown any dislike of their money.

He does, however, have a history of folding like a cheap suit when it comes to issues, running from fights and controversy and imagining his charm will conquer all.

Obama in the White House will be eaten alive by the republicans the moment he steps into office and won't be able to get a damn thing done. Do you remember the first term of Bill Clinton?

You think he can withstand that?

I don't. Few could. Hillary can.

[amborin]

91. Obama is hypocritical on many issues

and vague as to his plans if elected.....

naive, at best, in many of his comments...

our country is at a crucial crossroads....we cannot gamble on Obama

we need Hillary Clinton, a bold, decisive progressive leader, with a demonstrated record of great accomplishments

[beezlebum]

121. liiiiikee....

for examppppple....

this is what i'm not seeing. i am seeing so many coherent breakdowns of why hillary is worse than obama. i'm seeing reasoned posts on why obama may not be kucinich, he may not be edwards, but we'll take a few hits before taking the immense blows hillary would deliver and already has.

and then hillary's supporters come in, and in true robotic fashion, say, "hillary hater." "sexist." "obama's naive."

you say that hillary clinton has a demonstrated record of "great" accomplishments- well the OP just "demonstrated accomplishments" that make her look like bush redux. i'm tellin ya- those don't look like great accomplishments to me, not unless i'm a war profiteer, or a corporate asshole.

how about going down the list (and i know this request will be futile as i have already asked for it several times and have yet to see an answer), all 7 reasons and the alphabet too and telling me WHY these things are okay, why it's not true, or why it seems bad but it's really not, why i should let those things slide, instead of vague talking points like, "obama is hypocritical on many issues and vague as to plans if elected, and he's naive."

WHY is obama a "gamble?" WHY do you consider obama "naive?" because hilldawg said so? because he wants to be diplomatic, and her talking point is that "that would be naive?" or do you have some reasoned response, outside of his age? and WHY do these things make hillary a better option- please, details. i'm trying to have a little optimism, i want to feel like no matter which dem wins, there is reason for optimism- and i'm not feeling that. at this point, i'd feel about as happy about hillary winning as i'd feel if george crowned himself king and hauled my ass of to gitmo!

i'm not trying to be snarky or anything. i honestly want to know. because THEN maybe i'd not feel half as depressed as i do about the thought of a clinton presidency.

[amborin]

181. one example, there are others

The Boston Globe August 9, 2007

PACs and lobbyists aided Obama's rise - Data contrast with his them

Using campaign appearances, e-mails to supporters, and Iowa TV ads, Illinois Senator Barack Obama
has repeatedly reminded voters that his presidential campaign does not accept contributions from lobbyists or political action committees, casting his decision as a noble departure from the ways of Washington.

He hit the theme hard again in Tuesday's Democratic debate in Chicago as he sought to capitalize on rival Hillary Clinton's remark last weekend that taking lobbyists' cash is acceptable because they "represent real Americans." "The people in this stadium need to know who we're going to fight for," Obama said at Soldier Field. "The reason that I'm running for president is because of you, not because of folks who are writing big checks, and that's a clear message that has to be sent, I think, by every candidate."

But behind Obama's campaign rhetoric about taking on special interests lies a more complicated truth. A Globe review of Obama's campaign finance records shows that he collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from lobbyists and PACs as a state legislator in Illinois, a US senator, and a presidential aspirant.

In Obama's eight years in the Illinois Senate, from 1996 to 2004, almost two-thirds of the money he raised for his campaigns - $296,000 of $461,000 - came from PACs, corporate contributions, or unions, according to Illinois Board of Elections records. He tapped financial services firms, real estate developers, healthcare providers, oil companies, and many other corporate interests, the records show.

Obama's US Senate campaign committee, starting with his successful run in 2004, has collected $128,000 from lobbyists and $1.3 million from PACs, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit organization that tracks money in politics. His $1.3 million from PACs represents 8 percent of what he has raised overall. Clinton's Senate committee, by comparison, has raised $3 million from PACs, 4 percent of her total amount raised, the group said.

In addition, Obama's own federal PAC, Hopefund, took in $115,000 from 56 PACs in the 2005-2006 election cycle out of $4.4 million the PAC raised, according to CQ MoneyLine, which collects Federal Election Commission data. Obama then used those PAC contributions - including thousands from defense contractors, law firms, and the securities and insurance industries - to build support for his presidential run by making donations to Democratic Party organizations and candidates around the country.

Though Obama has returned thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from registered federal lobbyists since he declared his candidacy in February, his presidential campaign has maintained ties with lobbyists and lobbying firms to help raise some of the $58.9 million he collected through the first six months of 2007. Obama has raised more than $1.4 million from members of law and consultancy firms led by partners who are lobbyists, The Los Angeles Times reported last week. And The Hill, a Washington newspaper, reported earlier this year that Obama's campaign had reached out to lobbyists' networks to use their contacts to help build his fund-raising base.

This activity, along with Obama's past contributions from lobbyists and PACs, has drawn fire from opposing campaigns. Some political analysts say Obama, by casting himself as an uncorrupted good-government crusader, has set himself up for charges of hypocrisy.

[beezlebum]

183. i was

already well-aware that barack obama took lobbyist money- it's the main reason i was not going to vote for him, until kucinich dropped out, and then edwards dropped out, however, this is not what i'm looking for.

i'm looking for something similar to the OP. i'm looking for your words, or if you're not capable of that, i'm looking for more than one hit-piece, and i'm looking for a comprehensive breakdown of why hillary is so much better than obama. don't give me "one example" and tell me "there are more"- well? where? and make sure you prove he's worse than clinton, not second to her.

because as far as lobbyist money, http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/select.asp - as of 2/1/08, hillary's lobbyist contributions do far exceed obama's (oh, by only about...9 times! and she took more than ANY other presidential hopeful, while obama is 9th on the list, behind even bill richardson & joe biden). and yes, it's hypocritical to attack her for it- but that last sentence in this piece you provided is utterly ridiculous. given her record of vast hypocrisy (see and read thoroughly the OP), he remains lesser of the two evils. especially considering the hypocrisy aside- good granny! look at the chart- i'm choking on my breakfast here!

ps- one last request: please provide a link next time. i was running on hints here as to whether or not you were the author.

[jgraz]

46. Ignore her. Actual information is incapsulated's kryptonite.

[sandnsea]

15. I've posted reasons

They get 1 or 2 responses and fall off the page. Lots of people have posted reasons to vote for Obama. There's a thread with his plan for New Orleans up right now. How come you don't know about it?

That isn't a screed. It's a compilation of the exact reasons we should not be electing Hillary.

[Jed Dilligan]

40. Most of us have never voted FOR anyone

We've only had people to vote against.

[Recursion]

58. Ooh, I can answer: List number 1...

Obama will provide job training, substance abuse and mental health counseling to ex-offenders, so that they are successfully re-integrated into society. Obama will also create a prison-to-work incentive program to improve ex-offender employment and job retention rates.

Obama believes the disparity between sentencing crack and powder-based cocaine is wrong and should be completely eliminated.

Obama will give first-time, non-violent offenders a chance to serve their sentence, where appropriate, in the type of drug rehabilitation programs that have proven to work better than a prison term in changing bad behavior.

Obama will restore fairness to the tax code and provide 150 million workers the tax relief they need. Obama will create a new "Making Work Pay" tax credit of up to $500 per person, or $1,000 per working family. The "Making Work Pay" tax credit will completely eliminate income taxes for 10 million Americans.

Obama believes that NAFTA and its potential were oversold to the American people. Obama will work with the leaders of Canada and Mexico to fix NAFTA so that it works for American workers.

To help all workers adapt to a rapidly changing economy, Obama would update the existing system of Trade Adjustment Assistance by extending it to service industries, creating flexible education accounts to help workers retrain, and providing retraining assistance for workers in sectors of the economy vulnerable to dislocation before they lose their jobs.

Barack Obama believes we need to double federal funding for basic research and make the research and development tax credit permanent to help create high-paying, secure jobs.

The Obama comprehensive energy independence and climate change plan will invest in America's highly-skilled manufacturing workforce and manufacturing centers to ensure that American workers have the skills and tools they need to pioneer the first wave of green technologies that will be in high demand throughout the world. Obama will also provide assistance to the domestic auto industry to ensure that new fuel-efficient vehicles are built by American workers.

The Obama plan will increase funding for federal workforce training programs and direct these programs to incorporate green technologies training, such as advanced manufacturing and weatherization training, into their efforts to help Americans find and retain stable, high-paying jobs. Obama will also create an energy-focused youth jobs program to invest in disconnected and disadvantaged youth.(dmesg's note: same package includes assistance for developing organic agriculture.)

Obama believes we can get broadband to every community in America through a combination of reform of the Universal Service Fund, better use of the nation's wireless spectrum, promotion of next-generation facilities, technologies and applications, and new tax and loan incentives.

Obama supports the basic principle that network providers should not be allowed to charge fees to privilege the content or applications of some web sites and Internet applications over others. This principle will ensure that the new competitors, especially small or nonprofit speakers, have the same opportunity as big companies to innovate and reach large audiences.

Obama will invest in rural small businesses and fight to expand high-speed Internet access. He will improve rural schools and attract more doctors to rural areas.

Obama believes that workers should have the freedom to choose whether to join a union without harassment or intimidation from their employers. Obama cosponsored and is strong advocate for the Employee Free Choice Act, a bipartisan effort to assure that workers can exercise their right to organize. He will continue to fight for EFCA's passage and sign it into law.

Obama has fought the Bush National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) efforts to strip workers of their right to organize. He is a cosponsor of legislation to overturn the NLRB's "Kentucky River" decisions classifying hundreds of thousands of nurses, construction, and professional workers as "supervisors" who are not protected by federal labor laws.

Obama supports the right of workers to bargain collectively and strike if necessary. He will work to ban the permanent replacement of striking workers, so workers can stand up for themselves without worrying about losing their livelihoods.

Barack Obama will raise the minimum wage, index it to inflation and increase the Earned Income Tax Credit to make sure that full-time workers earn a living wage that allows them to raise their families and pay for basic needs.

More in the next post...

[Recursion]

60. List number 2

Obama will create a 10 percent universal mortgage credit to provide homeowners who do not itemize tax relief. This credit will provide an average of $500 to 10 million homeowners, the majority of whom earn less than $50,000 per year.

Obama will work to eliminate the provision that prevents bankruptcy courts from modifying an individual's mortgage payments. Obama believes that the subprime mortgage industry, which has engaged in dangerous and sometimes unscrupulous business practices, should not be shielded by outdated federal law.

Obama supports extending a 36 percent interest cap to all Americans. Obama will require lenders to provide clear and simplified information about loan fees, payments and penalties, which is why he'll require lenders to provide this information during the application process.

Obama will create an exemption in bankruptcy law for individuals who can prove they filed for bankruptcy because of medical expenses. This exemption will create a process that forgives the debt and lets the individuals get back on their feet.

The FMLA covers only certain employees of employers with 50 or more employees. Obama will expand it to cover businesses with 25 or more employees. He will expand the FMLA to cover more purposes as well, including allowing workers to take leave for elder care needs; allowing parents up to 24 hours of leave each year to participate in their children's academic activities; and expanding FMLA to cover leave for employees to address domestic violence.

Obama will double funding for the main federal support for afterschool programs, the 21st Century Learning Centers program, to serve a million more children. Obama will include measures to maximize performance and effectiveness across grantees nationwide.

Workers with family obligations often are discriminated against in the workplace. Obama will enforce the recently-enacted Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidelines on caregiver discrimination.

Obama will reform the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit by making it refundable and allowing low-income families to receive up to a 50 percent credit for their child care expenses.

Obama's comprehensive "Zero to Five" plan will provide critical support to young children and their parents. Unlike other early childhood education plans, Obama's plan places key emphasis at early care and education for infants, which is essential for children to be ready to enter kindergarten. Obama will create Early Learning Challenge Grants to promote state "zero to five" efforts and help states move toward voluntary, universal pre-school.

Obama will quadruple Early Head Start, increase Head Start funding and improve quality for both.

Obama will reform NCLB, which starts by funding the law. Obama believes teachers should not be forced to spend the academic year preparing students to fill in bubbles on standardized tests. He will improve the assessments used to track student progress to measure readiness for college and the workplace and improve student learning in a timely, individualized manner. Obama will also improve NCLB's accountability system so that we are supporting schools that need improvement, rather than punishing them.

Obama will recruit math and science degree graduates to the teaching profession and will support efforts to help these teachers learn from professionals in the field. He will also work to ensure that all children have access to a strong science curriculum at all grade levels.

Obama will address the dropout crisis by passing his legislation to provide funding to school districts to invest in intervention strategies in middle school

Obama's "STEP UP" plan addresses the achievement gap by supporting summer learning opportunities for disadvantaged children through partnerships between local schools and community organizations.

Obama supports outreach programs like GEAR UP, TRIO and Upward Bound to encourage more young people from low-income families to consider and prepare for college.

Obama supports transitional bilingual education and will help Limited English Proficient students get ahead by holding schools accountable for making sure these students complete school.

Obama will create new Teacher Service Scholarships that will cover four years of undergraduate or two years of graduate teacher education, including high-quality alternative programs for mid-career recruits in exchange for teaching for at least four years in a high-need field or location.

Obama supports implementation of a market-based cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions by the amount scientists say is necessary: 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

Obama will develop domestic incentives that reward forest owners, farmers, and ranchers when they plant trees, restore grasslands, or undertake farming practices that capture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

Obama will invest $150 billion over 10 years to advance the next generation of biofuels and fuel infrastructure, accelerate the commercialization of plug-in hybrids, promote development of commercial-scale renewable energy, invest in low-emissions coal plants, and begin the transition to a new digital electricity grid.

Obama will double science and research funding for clean energy projects including those that make use of our biomass, solar and wind resources.

Obama will use proceeds from the cap-and-trade auction program to invest in job training and transition programs to help workers and industries adapt to clean technology development and production. Obama will also create an energy-focused Green Jobs Corps to connect disconnected and disadvantaged youth with job skills for a high-growth industry.

Obama will pursue a major investment in our utility grid to enable a tremendous increase in renewable generation and accommodate modern energy requirements, such as reliability, smart metering, and distributed storage.

More in list 3...

[Recursion]

62. List 3

Obama will create a centralized Internet database of lobbying reports, ethics records, and campaign finance filings in a searchable, sortable and downloadable format.

Obama will use the power of the presidency to fight for an independent watchdog agency to oversee the investigation of congressional ethics violations so that the public can be assured that ethics complaints will be investigated.

Obama supports public financing of campaigns combined with free television and radio time as a way to reduce the influence of moneyed special interests. Obama introduced public financing legislation in the Illinois State Senate, and is the only 2008 candidate to have sponsored Senator Russ Feingold's (D-WI) tough bill to reform the presidential public financing system.

As president, Obama will create a "contracts and influence" database that will disclose how much federal contractors spend on lobbying, and what contracts they are getting and how well they complete them.

Barack Obama will ensure that any tax breaks for corporate recipients — or tax earmarks — are also publicly available on the Internet in an easily searchable format.

Barack Obama will end abuse of no-bid contracts by requiring that nearly all contract orders over $25,000 be competitively awarded.

Too often bills are rushed through Congress and to the president before the public has the opportunity to review them. As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days.

Obama's Transparency and Integrity in Earmarks Act will shed light on all earmarks by disclosing the name of the legislator who asked for each earmark, along with a written justification, 72 hours before they can be approved by the full Senate.

No political appointees in an Obama administration will be permitted to work on regulations or contracts directly and substantially related to their prior employer for two years. And no political appointee will be able to lobby the executive branch after leaving government service during the remainder of the administration.

Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months. Obama will make it clear that we will not build any permanent bases in Iraq.

Obama will launch the most aggressive diplomatic effort in recent American history to reach a new compact on the stability of Iraq and the Middle East. This effort will include all of Iraq's neighbors – including Iran and Syria.

Obama believes that America has a moral and security responsibility to confront Iraq's humanitarian crisis – two million Iraqis are refugees; two million more are displaced inside their own country. Obama will form an international working group to address this crisis. He will provide at least $2 billion to expand services to Iraqi refugees in neighboring countries, and ensure that Iraqis inside their own country can find a safe-haven.

Obama will create 20 Promise Neighborhoods in areas that have high levels of poverty and crime and low levels of student academic achievement in cities across the nation. The Promise Neighborhoods will be modeled after the Harlem Children's Zone, which provides a full network of services, including early childhood education, youth violence prevention efforts and after-school activities, to an entire neighborhood from birth to college.

Obama will fight for farm programs that provide family farmers with stability and predictability. Obama will implement a $250,000 payment limitation so that we help family farmers — not large corporate agribusiness. Obama will close the loopholes that allow mega farms to get around the limits by subdividing their operations into multiple paper corporations.

Obama is a strong supporter of a packer ban. When meatpackers own livestock they can manipulate prices and discriminate against independent farmers. Obama will strengthen anti-monopoly laws and strengthen producer protections to ensure independent farmers have fair access to markets, control over their production decisions, and transparency in prices.

Obama's Environmental Protection Agency will strictly regulate pollution from large CAFOs, with fines for those that violate tough standards. Obama also supports meaningful local control.

Obama supports immediate implementation of the Country of Origin Labeling law so that American producers can distinguish their products from imported ones.

Obama will help organic farmers afford to certify their crops and reform crop insurance to not penalize organic farmers. He also will promote regional food systems.

Obama will establish a new program to identify and train the next generation of farmers. He will also provide tax incentives to make it easier for new farmers to afford their first farm.

Obama will increase incentives for farmers and private landowners to conduct sustainable agriculture and protect wetlands, grasslands, and forests.

[Az_lefty]

128. Excellent post....

[Recursion]

65. List number 4, and a summary

Obama will expand AmeriCorps from 75,000 slots today to 250,000 and he will focus this expansion on addressing the great challenges facing the nation. He will establish a Classroom Corps to help teachers and students, with a priority placed on underserved schools; a Health Corps to improve public health outreach; a Clean Energy Corps to conduct weatherization and renewable energy projects; a Veterans Corps to assist veterans at hospitals, nursing homes and homeless shelters; and a Homeland Security Corps to help communities plan, prepare for and respond to emergencies.

Older Americans have a wide range of skills and knowledge to contribute. Obama will expand and improve programs that connect individuals over the age of 55 to quality volunteer opportunities

Obama will double the Peace Corps to 16,000 by 2011. He will work with the leaders of other countries to build an international network of overseas volunteers so that Americans work side-by-side with volunteers from other countries.

Obama will set up an America's Voice Initiative to send Americans who are fluent speakers of local languages to expand our public diplomacy. He also will extend opportunities for older individuals such as teachers, engineers, and doctors to serve overseas.

Obama will set a goal that all middle and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year. He will develop national guidelines for service- learning and will give schools better tools both to develop programs and to document student experience.

Obama will expand the YouthBuild program, which gives disadvantaged young people the chance to complete their high school education, learn valuable skills and build affordable housing in their communities. He will grow the program so that 50,000 low-income young people a year a chance to learn construction job skills and complete high school.

Obama will establish a new American Opportunity Tax Credit that worth $4,000 a year in exchange for 100 hours of public service a year.

Obama will ensure that at least 25 percent of College Work-Study funds are used to support public service opportunities instead of jobs in dining halls and libraries.

Current bankruptcy laws protect banks before workers. Obama will protect pensions by putting promises to workers higher on the list of debts that companies cannot shed; ensuring that the bankruptcy courts do not demand more sacrifice from workers than executives; telling companies that they cannot issue executive bonuses while cutting worker pensions; increasing the amount of unpaid wages and benefits workers can claim in court; and limiting the circumstances under which retiree benefits can be reduced.

Obama will ensure that all employees who have company pensions receive detailed annual disclosures about their pension fund's investments. This will provide retirees important resources to make their pension fund more secure.

Obama will eliminate all income taxation of seniors making less than $50,000 per year. This will provide an immediate tax cut averaging $1,400 to 7 million seniors and relieve millions from the burden of filing tax returns.

Obama's retirement security plan will automatically enroll workers in a workplace pension plan. Under his plan, employers who do not currently offer a retirement plan, will be required to enroll their employees in a direct-deposit IRA account that is compatible to existing direct-deposit payroll systems. Employees may opt-out if they choose. Experts estimate that this program will increase the savings participation rate for low and middle-income workers from its current 15 percent level to around 80 percent.

Obama will ensure savings incentives are fair to all workers by creating a generous savings match for low and middle-income Americans. His plan will match 50 percent of the first $1,000 of savings for families that earn less than $75,000. The savings match will be automatically deposited into designated personal accounts. Over 80 percent of these savings incentives will go to new savers.

Obama will fight job discrimination for aging employees by strengthening the Age Discrimination in Employment Act and empowering the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission to prevent all forms of discrimination.

Obama will increase funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) which helps low-income citizens — many of them seniors — pay their winter heating and summer cooling bills.

One of Obama's first acts will be reversing the 2003 ban on enrolling modest-income veterans, which has denied care to a million veterans. (Dmesg's note: and can this modest-income veteran get a "Hell yeah"?)

Obama will establish a national "zero tolerance" policy for veterans falling into homelessness by expanding proven programs and launching innovative services to prevent veterans from falling into homelessness.

Obama will crack down on employers who commit job discrimination against guardsmen and reservists.

Obama will demand that the military and the VA coordinate to provide a seamless transition from active duty to civilian life.

Obama will improve mental health care at every stage of military service. He will recruit more health professionals, improve screening, offer more support to families and make PTSD benefits claims fairer.

Obama will establish standards of care for Traumatic Brain Injury, the signature injury of the Iraq war.

Obama will expand and strengthen Vet Centers to provide more counseling for vets and their families.

Now, in summary

I have little to no patience for people who say Obama doesn't have a platform or doesn't have concrete ideas. He's had these and many more proposals published for months, and though you wouldn't know it from listening to his critics on this board, he talks about these in all of his speeches. He really does. Honest. No, it doesn't make the CNN cut, or generally even the YouTube cut unless you listen to one of the entire speeches (which I tend to do).

I like these policies. Yes, some of them could be more specific (what are these methods of preventing veterans from falling into homelessness?) Yes, some of them won't get done, or will have to be compromised.

But damn, people, this is a fine platform and there's nothing wishy-washy, pie-in-the-sky, or style-only about it. Where do people get that idea?

[woolldog]

76. That's all well and good,

but where's the substance? where's the beef?



:hi:

[Recursion]

78. I know, I know...

It's shameful that he can only fill up four DU posts with a very partial selection of his proposals.

I seriously don't get where this meme came from that he has no proposals. It's almost cult-like in its inexplicable popularity...

[woolldog]

84. It's almost as if

people assume that you have to be bored out of your mind listening to a speech for it to be somewhat substantive.

I've listened to the various candidates speeches and neither candidate has a monopoly on substance. And since when are political speeches supposed to be policy lectures anyway?

[Bongo Prophet]

153. It was my experience that the harder I looked, the more I found.

Funny thing that. ;)

[milkyway]

166. You would think nobody knows how to use the Internets to find

this:

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

If a candidate gives a lot of policy specifics in a speech, they're ridiculed as a policy wonk. Let's vote for the guy we'd rather have a beer with instead!

Obama has obviously made the strategic decision to bias his speeches more toward the forest than the trees. You can argue with that decision, but it doesn't mean the trees don't exist. Thanks for the great--yet abbreviated--list.

[skepticscott]

101. And how will Obama PAY for all of this?

We have a 9 trillion dollar public debt that's costing us over 400 billion a year in interest. How will all of these lovely programs be funded without making that even worse?

[PADemD]

103. End the war in Iraq?

[skepticscott]

178. Nice try,

and that's not a bad start, but our debt was going to climb under GWB regardless (tax cuts, don't you know). And all the things Obama is proposing will involve significant increases in a federal budget which, even if it were balanced now, would go quickly back into the red. Where's his budget that shows how all this will be paid for without increasing the deficit and the debt?

[northshore]

157. Heard it all my life

How will we pay for it (sound of hands wringing)

Funny. That question is NEVER asked if its a war expense.

[skepticscott]

180. Never?

If you've NEVER heard anyone ask that question, you haven't been paying very close attention. People who can look ahead objectively know that you can't increase the debt forever without running into a brick wall. Unfortunately, virtually all politicians sell the idea that people can have as much as they want of whatever they want for as long as they want, and that the bill will never come due. No politician ever hurt their re-election chances with that message.

[beezlebum]

124. beautiful. well done.

i'm feeling better and better about obama. and believe you me, i had vowed not to vote, and swore i'd never vote for hillary or obama. i still want my guys, but i'll take obama, and it looks like it wouldn't be too terrible after all.

hey amborin- check out these lists- nuthin "vague" about them.

[sloppyjoe25s]

151. Excellent list FOR obama - please repost as own thread

dmesg thank you for the incredible list of "pro obama" reasons to vote for him - and showing his very detailed substance.

Unlike some on here who hate that young people like him "just because he's cool", i'm ok with it - at least they are listening for once - but your list is a GREAT summation of how DETAILED and WELL THOUGHT OUT his policy positions are.

PLEASE REPOST YOUR FULL LIST as a new thread (all 4 parts - and give it a snappy title like "101 reasons to vote FOR Obama"). There are enough anti-hillary threads on DU so it's getting old - but a good list of reasons why Obama is not just a "rock idol", are really great.

Now I am no "Obama Kidde" - i have 3 Masters degrees - but let me also add a couple of extra points for why to vote FOR Obama:

His principled and reasoned stance on religion and politics - see the video of him speaking about it in ways other politicians do not have the balls to at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35sGJrWKcmY


and also I can relate a personal story - I saw Obama at an "Economic Summit" here in Albuquerque NM - not only was he very substantive and in command of policy and facts - he was also asked very obscure questions by audience, and handled all brilliantly. I asked him about Internet Neutrality (which he first supported)- and he spoke eloquently about it - even demonstrating understanding of some of the technicalities. Later - and old man - who we learned later was a "tribal elder" of of the reservations here in NM addressed Obama - first greeting him in his native language, then asking Obama what he could and would do w.r.t. the plight of native americans. Now Obamas answer was nothing short of brilliant - immediately rattling off detailed statistics about Indian health issues, Indian substance abuse issues, Indian economic and education specifics, and Obama went on to give a very detailed account of how he felt the Bureau of Indian Affairs should be re-structured, and re-oriented to function better, and detailed ideas for better serving Indian intersts.

Now i'm a POWM (Plain Old White Male) - so obviously i'm an idiot - but I was blown away that Obama was able to answer even so obscure a question on indian affairs with such detail, poise, respect, and SUBSTANCE.

Please REPOST YOUR LIST as a separate thread - or I will if you don't - i'll give you a a little bit to do so, since you deserve deserve the kudos for compiling the list. Feel free to add my anecdote, or the You Tube video above on religion as well if you like.

Thanks again - Obama is a person of great substance and intellect and principle. So what if he also reaches people's hearts, and reaches the young based on inspiration?!? IS that such a crime?

[Whisp]

74. he does not have 'the stench'.

yet.
clintons smell like old eggs in the sun.
he has a chance, and even if he becomes smelly, he will have to have years to catch up to those bad eggs.

[AllyCat]

140. There isn't much reason to vote FOR him as far as I can see, but

the OP's description of all the stuff that is wrong with HRC is exactly why I have opposed her from the beginning. It's too bad we no longer have a candidate for whom I feel I can vote, but Obama is has not done the 7 things this poster outlines (and offers citations).

[Recursion]

149. Look just above your post

I filled up four posts with concrete reasons to vote for him.

[milkyway]

163. All too typical. OP makes a very substantive argument, and you refute none of it (I wonder why?),

and instead resort to the whining of a 12-year old. Pathetic.

[noac7]

172. I give

a fuck. dmesg, may I quote your list? I don't have enough posts to PM yet.

[racaulk]

7. One reason I *will* cast my vote for Hillary (from a Georgia voter)

Because she's a Democrat.

Although I do not support her in the primaries, she will be a hell of a lot better than anyone who secures the GOP nomination (which looks like it will be McCain), and she will therefore have my support in the GE.

[LucyParsons]

9. the only thing I see her as being better on, as a Democrat

is that she would not appoint crazy rightwingers to the courts. Otherwise, same old, same old. Bush is the WORST, but Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Carter, Ford - all of them are essentially about keeping things the same for the richest.

[DainBramaged]

12. One reason why I will no longer see this thread

So much hatred for Hillary, so little time.


Why fucking come here if all you are going to do is spread hatred for OUR candidates?

[LucyParsons]

17. you obviously didn't read it

I merely pointed out my policy problems with Hillary, nothing more. I don't "hate" her, which I stated in my post. I think she has been grossly mischaracterized by both the right and the left for decades, and has been unfairly attacked, and is in an impossible position as the first woman in serious contention for the presidency. But I won't vote for her because of that. Other people's hatred of or love for her is immaterial to my reasoning about whether to vote for her or not.

[DainBramaged]

20. Sorry, no cigar, go spread your bullshit elsewhere

I just clicked the red X, goodbye.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

112. no Monica cigar

:rofl:

[Cardboardurinal]

168. ignore that person...

she is one of those people that blindly support Hillary. If you point out consistencies with her record, it is a "personal attack."
There are some people who act just like Republicans and see the Clintons just like the GOP sees Reagan. They will vote for Democrats even if they don't act like Democrats. They are the reason that the Democratic Party ignores the Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party...because we have all these assholes who will vote for them no matter what they do. Sometimes tough love is needed and it seems that the Democratic Party didn't learn from the 1994 blowout. I will vote Democratic down ticket(and holding my nose for my Represenatative, Rick Larsen), but this year I am not volunteering like I had the last two election cycles. That is going to be another problem that only a handful of people have talked about. People like me who are unwilling to help Democrats get elected because they are so turned off by the agenda of the top of the ballot.

[Mme. Defarge]

25. You appear to be

grasping at straws.

[Dogmudgeon]

16. It's the same old same-old

It's the usual accusations from the recherche left. They throw the kitchen sink at you, post a couple of links from their own astroturf factories, and pretend it's a serious indictment.

You even worked the dead-Iraqi-babies blood libel in there. I'm surprised you didn't accuse Hillary of blowing up The Maine and giving smallpox-infected blankets to Indians. (That was actually Bill, but it's hip and smart to blame everything on Hillary.)

No, you're not an irrational Hillary hater. You included links. You made up a list. You even made a half-hearted slap at Obama. You're a RATIONAL Hillary-hater.

--p!

[LucyParsons]

21. Disagreeing with a politician's policies and history is not equal to "hating" them

Just because I don't support your candidate, doesn't mean I am motivated by the same emotionalism you are. And most of my links are from mainstream news organizations and the US government.

[southern_dem]

27. Sorry you're getting such negative reactions from the Clinton Camp

It's not like you are using Whitewater, Monica, and all that other junk in your reasoning. It's all valid policy differences, but some just want to put their fingers in their ears.

[lisainmilo]

145. exactly....n/t

[snappyturtle]

29. Welcome to DU! I think it's democracy in action i.e. learning all

we can about the candidates, be them ours or theirs. Your OP is tough but the facts are of HRC's making not yours. Remember that it's easy to see the good in the candidate we want to win and difficult to see their bad points. People will have to adjust because all of your points will come up again and again by repukes in the lead up to the GE.

[Dogmudgeon]

42. It's hate lit. I've been reading these articles for 15 years.

Come on, now -- you haven't even read most of those scholarly-looking links you posted, certainly not the Senate roll-call lists. Nor did you even count them, so you can't say that most of them are from the MSM or government. It's all cut-and-paste from one or more uber-lefty sources like Counterpunch and the website CommonDreams. YOU may not be in a state of hyperventilating rage, but the people who assembled your sources were.

I was 34 years old when Bill Clinton was sworn in. I initially hated him for these kinds of reasons. But I followed the news pretty carefully, and noticed that within a week of his inaugural, the phony accusations started popping up. By 1996, he was being cited as the initiator of the Iraq sanctions.

Do you know when the sanctions were imposed? By whom? With what rationale? Do you remember the Food-for-Oil program?

Do you remember WHY Clinton started "Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell"?

Do you remember ANY of the bills he proposed that the Congress quashed?

Do you remember WHY Bill's signing of those oh-so-odious bills infuriated the Republicans?

And do you understand WHY guilt-by-association is considered to be intellectually dishonest?

I doubt it. If you did, you wouldn't be piling up decades-old garbage and shit, and calling it an Organic Renewable Compost Site.

One thing I do NOT doubt is your sincerity in wanting to vote for the right candidate. But you won't be able to find out from an uncritical reading of bourgeois agit-prop any more than reading FreeRepublic. They count on their initial hits to leave you so outraged that you can't do accurate research. But if you really are as cool-headed as you say you are, I invite you to at least start.

--p!

[LucyParsons]

44. Disagreeing with policy does not constitute "hate"

People would take you more seriously if you would tone it down a bit.

And, again - try reading my post. I don't reference Counterpunch once, and the CommonDreams link is a reprint from a regional newspaper article.

All but a handful of these citations are standard corporate media (though why we should trust them I'm not sure).

[IndieLeft]

67. To all the questions you ask. Why don't you give us the answers

I'm ready to be enlightened. Watch this folks...

Crickets chirping.

[abq e streeter]

146. Welcome to DU

I'm embarrassed at some of the irrational , hateful replies to your intelligent and well thought out post. I'm right there with you. I don't hate Hillary, but don't find her, in my opinion,, to be someone I think should be my president, for many of the same reasons you listed. And also, like you, I'm highly distrustful of this adoration of Obama, but still prefer him over HRC. I have been very distressed, as a relative newcomer to DU ( since last July 4th) , at the volume of ignorant, vitriolic rhetoric which I associate with the right wing, and am constantly debating whether I even belong here. ( Fortunately, those people are still outnumbered by intelligent, well-informed , reasonable people, a group I'd certainly include you in). I've only put two people on ignore, but that's two more than I ever dreamed that I'd need to, but if I put everyone on ignore whose posts offended me, it'd be a large number. I reserved that for two people who personally and aggressively insulted me for daring to disagree with them...Again, welcome, and I hope to see more intelligent and informative contributions from you, but I'd understand if you threw up your hands and said screw this, who needs to be attacked for posting reasonable and respectful disagreements with others.

[dchill]

141. "RATIONAL Hillary-hater"

Jesus. At least LucyParsons IS rational. It IS a serious indictment.

[Mme. Defarge]

19. Ditto

and K&R!

[sam sarrha]

22. get over yourself.. i am not voting for obama, today on Cspan this guy explained his popularity, he

said that Obama was really good at explaining Republican ideas in ways that were acceptable to Democrats.

http://zmagsite.zmag.org/Feb2007/street0207.html

i am not ready for the ObamaNation, more of the same

[Barack_America]

36. Lol, yeah those Republican ideas....

Like:
-Universal healthcare
-Repealing tax cuts for wealthy Americans
-Reducing military spending
-Increased funding for education
-Support for gay and lesbian rights, including civil marriage

With Republican ideas like that, who needs Democrats!

[jackson_dem]

85. Hillary and Obama are the same on all those except Obama wants to INCREASE military spending

I don't know if Hillary does too but since Barack does presumably she also does. I do know both want to increase the military and that takes money. Obama also wants to spend money to, channeling Romney, rebuild the military.

[amborin]

94. Hillary wants universal health care, NOT Obama

get your facts straight, please

[LucyParsons]

26. Most of the respondents here have been childish, emotional, and/or stupid

It seems that most have not even bothered to read my post.

I will not continue to defend it here. It stands on its own. If anyone else wants to counter, go for it. I'll just watch.

I can't believe how short-sighted and naive people, even here, are. But then I guess that's how we all get the government we deserve.

[TexasObserver]

34. please consider my earlier suggestion

Trust me on this. You will not be able to avoid constant harrassment by certain members if you don't. They live to be crabby with people who don't share their cult like affection for Mrs. Clinton.

You see a bunch of mean comments. I see Ignored in those same slots.

They will badger you until they get you down in the mud and slime with them.

[amborin]

95. your post was nonsense, just pseudo arguments

exaggerated, untruthful, and anti-democratic

[beezlebum]

126. again amborin

HOW was it nonsense. it was the best, most coherent OP on hillary i've seen, and not one post countering ANY of it. how was it a "pseudo" argument? you seem to be describing your own posts. sorry to play the english professor again, but i have to ask:

in what way is it "exaggerated?"

in what way is it "untruthful?"

and to address the most preposterous garbage in your reply- in what way is it anti-democratic?!?!

i'm begging. i gotta have this info. if she wins, i will probably have to take one of them celebrity vacations for "exhaustion."

[latebloomer]

28. K & R

Great summary, thanks!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

30. Good reasons, that I share. K&R

[asjr]

32. I don't need to know why you

will not vote for Hillary. Just don't vote for her. That is your call.

[CatWoman]

113. most intelligent post on this thread.

[Barack_America]

33. Wow. No one could ever say that you made an uninformed choice!

Well done!

I may just have to bookmark this thread.

[CalebHayes]

35. Agreed. K & R

[readmoreoften]

37. Well, maybe I'll switch my Texan vote from Edwards to Clinton just to cancel yours out.

Pull the plank out of your own candidates eye before you pull the...er...plank out of the eyes of other candidates.

[readmoreoften]

38. Nah. I don't care about Clinton. I'll still vote for Edwards just to register my disgust.

Oh wait, no one cares who I vote for... Or you either. Lets not take ourselves too seriously. It's not like we're superdelegates.

[marlakay]

39. well i have two texas kids voting for obama

and they are military...and they like Bill and met him in person at a book signing and keep his book in their living room. They just like Obama better and say she is not Bill.

[IndieLeft]

69. I'm sorry was there substance in what you just said?

You seem angry about the truth.

[Tatiana]

41. I am appalled at the rudeness of some of these responses.

This is a well-articulated, reasoned argument where the original poster has provided proof for reaching her decision.

Is this the sort of discussion we need more of?

BTW, :hi: welcome to DU LucyParsons

[jgraz]

48. I'm never surprised by the rudeness of the Hillaroids

Get ready, you're going to see some serious cornered-rabid-dog posts as their candidate sinks beneath a flood of her own lies.

And yes, welcome to DU. :hi:

[crispini]

43. Please come on by the Texas forum!

:hi: Welcome to DU.

[freefall]

45. Thank you for your excellent research and summation. K&R

:kick:

I have bookmarked your post to use as back-up when necessary for my reasons for not voting for Hillary under any circumstances. My hope is that she does not win the nomination so that I can remain a member of DU.

Peace,

freefall

[jgraz]

47. Excellent, well-reasoned post.

And, sadly, only a fraction of what's wrong with Hillary and her craven slouch toward the White House.

[bigbrother05]

49. I will join you on the 4th

[The River]

50. Excellent Summary

It's all of that and more for me.
Her failure to really fight for health care reform in the 90's
left me vulnerable to become one of the medically bankrupt..which I did
towards the end of those mythically fabulous "Clinton Years".

My bottom line objection is the dynastic bush Clinton bush Clinton aspect
of it all. It's just so wrong in a democracy. There aught to be a law against
any immediate family member of an ex prez from holding that office.
(Just think, it would also prevent Jeb from trying in '12....or ever!)

[gateley]

51. Thank you.

I have concerns about both candidates, and your list includes some of my concerns about Hillary.

Welcome to DU!

[David Zephyr]

53. K&R.

:thumbsup:

[BrightKnight]

54. .

[Triana]

55. Very reasoned arguments...thanks...

...as an undecided myself, you give me plenty to think about.

[Yael]

57. Its funny to me. Someone writes out a well thought out and well documented

page about their thought processes and conclusions and all the Hillaroids (stolen from upthread) see is VINCE FOSTER or something.

:rofl:

[Leopolds Ghost]

59. Welcome to DU, and thanks!

[IndieLeft]

64. I notice that when you make sense people don't respond.

This is true. Anyone supporting Hillary won't have the substantive debate. They debate knik knack points.

But points like these:
Hillary has held meetings in private; meetings that should have been public.
Obama actively advocates transparency.

Which candidate shows a better sense of transparency?
Which candidat shows better judgment?

Hillary authorized war.
Obama did not vote for this war because this candidate was not yet in the senate. But Obama did give a major address vehemently speaking out against this war.

Hillary voted against the Levin amendment and lied about why they voted against it in the last debate.
Obama was never for the Iraq war.

Hillary voted for a bankruptcy bill that increased hardship on poor people and gave a break to thieving credit card companies.
Obama did not vote for this bankruptcy bill.

Hillary voted to assign the label of terrorist to Iran's national guard so that the current president could back into a war with what he deemed an axis of evil.
Obama did not vote for this amendment.


Who will debate you on these points? Not someone who supports Hillary. They want to forget she didn't have the foresight that Obama had.

They want to talk about how he looks. Does he look trustworthy or not. Hillary used her authorization to send some 4000 men and women to their death. Do you ever hear Clinton supporters debate that issue? No!!! Only silence.

[bjobotts]

80. No silence here. Your assumptions as to the motivation behind her behavior start in negatives not o

open mindedness. Rather than discover you merely look for justifications. Clinton has a long vetted history to critique whereas Obama wouldn't even know who to contact in the CIA, FBI, or DoD should he need inside info.
Both these candidates are corporatists. Both want a health care plan that includes the profiteers of wall street when neither is necessary. Both talk about making higher eduction 'affordable' rather than free like it was before Reagan. Neither talk of drastically cutting the defense budget, both threaten(breaking our agreement with the UN) Iran with regime change if they don't change their behavior (How dare Iran act like all of its neighbors...we forbid it...Pakistan..okay we even gave you the technology).Here you are playing the look what Clinton did or what will Obama do. If we don't make them more progressive they will do what the money party has always done. Clinton is much better at playing that game and we wouldn't have to play "WORM" (What Obama Really Meant)
Pick one, I don't care which, but you are distracting from what matters...getting them to listen to us, to world opinion, and not the money party of contractors and ins and energy profiteers. You don't make one candidate look better by belittling the other, you just make the other's supporters look like trolls. Forget 'identity' politics and get the discussions going again.

[IndieLeft]

87. The substance of her votes harms... Negatives are facts too.

You haven't answered the underlying question here though. Because I state a negative doesn't mean it shouldn't be taken into consideration.

If you use a vote to authorize war then it is a negative and when it comes to making decisions about life and death that is what is substantive.

If you say you want to end poverty but you vote to for a bankruptcy bill that undermines that then yes this is substantive.

It may be negative but it's what we should go on. YOu don't even it out by deciding to play tit for tat. You look at his record. You look at her record.

The issue of how you use the military is important. We can't talk about what they may do. Let's talk about what has been done.

Her votes were harmful to people. The IWR was the single most important issue. You have to take that into consideration, I'd say beyond anything else.

How they look and what religion they espouse is irrelevant.

[JMDEM]

61. Notice that the Hillarites don't attack your facts -- just you.

This is all I've seen from them, with a few exceptions. Very vicious, nasty personal attacks on anyone who opposes their candidate. But they never address the issues brought up in the OP.

I'm undecided. I don't particularly like either candidate for various reasons. Factual posts, and intelligent counter-replies are all I have to go on (the MSM doesn't tell you jack). Your post was very informative -- I wasn't aware of Hillary's support of the fuck-you bankruptcy law. That alone freaks me out, because I might be driven into bankruptcy due to medical expenses. I had the nerve to get sick, you know, and the creditors and courts don't give a shit.

[populistdriven]

63. I had one read my personal profile and make creepy comments about my kids

[eib1]

109. Call it what it is.

Irrationality.
It's something neocons excel in.

[tnlefty]

150. Jeeze JMDEM...

I hope that you get well and that things work out for you.

[IndieLeft]

66. I could hug you!!!!!!!!! You are SPOT ON!!!!!!!

[CatnHat]

77. I read your post

and am stunned at the time and care you put into this laundry list, shame you can't come up with a long list of why you are voting Obama; I would really like to see it. Seriously. I myself am writing a "thesis" on the psychological impact on "cult" mentality. Maybe we can trade notes. :rofl:

[Usrename]

86. Psychological impact on cult mentality? A thesis?

Hey, if you're going to include something about Obama in this thesis, you should also include a section about double-speak.

I guess if Obama gets elected, then that will change the whole definition of "cult" to mean "mainstream."

Right?

[IndieLeft]

92. This one is easy...

There are three very good reasons why I'm voting for Obama:

He didn't vote to authorize men and women go to war where mena and women would surely die for a mistake. He gave a well publicized speech against this war when it was unpopular to do so.

Issues regarding life or death are the single most important issues to me. It is why I hold Obama in high regard. Unlike Obama Hillary and John made a huge mistake and supported the war authorization and this is the issue that riles me most. They used a political calculus with our treasure, our men and women. Obama wasn't in the senate and so he didn't vote for it. If you don't start a war then there is no war to fund.

Obama showed that he believed in ending poverty by voting no to that bankruptcy bill that Hillary voted for but was glad it didn't pass because she regretted that vote. John voted for it too. This is why he doesn't get a free pass. It came across Obama's desk and he voted "NO". To vote for this bill undermines a core principle that says why should poor people be ripped off by credit card companies and more importantly why would politicians let credit card companies continue to rip poor people off.

Hillary and Edwards voted for this bill. Obama did not because he had the good common sense to know that people are in debt because of high medical bills.

Obama didn't give Bush anymore latitude to start yet another war by not voting for the Kyle/Lieberman amendment.

These are the reasons he should be president. He showed better judgment than the other two candidates.

Obama gets it. Hillary doesn't. And I don't think she ever will.

[snooper2]

115. If "I myself" am writing a thesis

I would say you need to take some basic grammer lessons first....

I would say "I myself" has multiple handles Jan 12th

[Tresalisa]

71. This is a GREAT post,

well-considered and well-thought out. And to a fellow n00b :hi:

[blayne]

72. I can only add that

I am also glad we are going to see some actual campaigning in Texas this year. I have been so jealous of the early voting states. Who would have thought we were going to get some love as well this year?

[bjobotts]

73. At least she has a history to learn from. Your slant on her behavior is biased

You attribute motivations that you can only assume. You state that she voted for "the war resolution" when she actually voted for an authorization to use military force not a war resolution...all other tactics were to be tried first...this was not an authorization to "go to war" and in fact if you bothered to read it you would have found that Bush was not to use military force unless he wrote a letter to congress to the senate stating that there was a direct link with verifiable proof that Sadam had direct ties to 9/11. Further more, just so you know, Obama stated that he was not against all wars just that he thought this one was strategically a mistake and he still talks regime change in Iran by force if necessary but you act like Clinton voted for Bush to attack Iraq and she didn't. BTW, Bush did finally send such a letter to the senate and the UN stating that he had direct evidence that Sadam had direct links to 9/11 which we now know was a lie.

Nobody read the entirety of the Patriot Act except for Kucinich but the pressure was on to get it passed. The only two people in the House and Senate that could have stopped it from leaving committee and prepared to do that received anthrax in the mail and could not even go back to their offices where their reservations to the act had to be destroyed fearing anthrax contamination. At that time to stand against the Patriot Act was considered treason, everyone was threatened and no one even knew it had a provision for the DoJ to place United States Attorneys without senate confirmation...not even Kucinich as the PA was the size of multiple phone books. Obama was not even privy to information on the AUMF or the PA.

I won't bother writing a huge article here stating the fallacies in your work but you seem convinced that your 'slant' on Clinton is viable reason not to vote for her...but I see another side. Perhaps...and only perhaps if you had set out with an open mind to make positive assumptions about Clinton then you would have been more tolerant and understanding when attributing motivations behind her behavior.
Here's a suggestion since you like to research why don't you look at Obama's economic advisers, what they are advising Obama to do, and what they have done in the past. That should give you strong reservations about your vote.
Does Obama even know who to contact in the CIA or FBI or the DoD to get inside info or to sidestep obstructionists. Experience brings contacts. Ted Kennedy may have thrown his support behind Obama but Bobby Kennedy Jr. is supporting Clinton. They both have good reasons. You're trying to make Clinton appear in a certain light but it's a light you are casting from assumptions you perceive as to motivations behind her behavior. Why did you not apply the same light to Obama?

[Indenturedebtor]

81. Ah finally a response

All of these HRC defenses have been hashed out so many times on DU I don't know that i have the strength to do it tonight ha!

But I will say that even if all of Congress voted for the IWR and the Patriot act that doesn't excuse either of those votes. Obama wasn't present at the time, but we will never know how he would have voted... we do however know how Clinton voted and it's not pretty.

And I'm sorry but NO ONE could have thought that Bankruptcy bill was in any way shape or form good for the people of this country... except for the toop 1% or so.

But man it's nice to see a HRC supporter make an argument instead of calling someone a cultish child.

----------------

Very nice post OP and also very nice platform list! :applause:

[girl gone mad]

75. This Texan..

thinks you got it just about right.

[Norwood]

79. Excellent post and a very complete summary

K & R

[Oldenuff]

82. Good post

Don't let it get to ya.

I won't support or vote for Hillary in the GE,not just because I don't like her (which I don't),but for her vote for the Patriot Act (among many other reasons,some of which you stated).If she is the nominee,then I will exit the board quietly,but until then I have the right (as do you all) to voice your opinion.

Is it permissable to state here, that I will write in Kooch if Hill is the nominee?

[jackson_dem]

83. Obama isn't any different

Him working as a civil rights lawyer and Hillary working as a corporate lawyer is a real difference that may go to their character. The rest, aside from the much talked about AUMF, is the same between the two.

Patriot Act:
Does anyone ever look at who voted for it? It passed 98-1. Kennedy, Kerry, Leahy, Boxer, and Wellstone all voted for it. Obama would have too if he were in Congress. Indeed, Obama voted to renew the Patriot Act.

3. She voted for the No Child Left Behind Act:
So did 47 of 49 Democrats. Who wrote the bill? Ted Kennedy. Obama and Hillary have the same position on No Child.

4. She voted for the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act:
The 2001 version passed 83-15 including Kerrcy and Leahy. I am not familiar with the 2005 one. The 2001 was not as clearly bad as revisionist history holds.

5. She is a member of the Democratic Leadership Council,:
And? Obama has the same positions as the DLC. Al From has said he is "proud" of both Hillary and Obama. DLC luminaries like Gov. Seblieus, Ben Nelson, and Tim Johnson have all endorsed Obama.

6. I oppose oligarchies, aristocracies, and any form of dynastic politics:
Barack's cousin will very likely become president of Kenya at some point in Obama's term if Barack ois elected. Even on this "issue" they are a wash.

a. the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA):
Obama and Hillary are both "free traders" with the same view on globalization and the same voting record on trade.

b. failure to establish a comprehensive health care plan in 1993; not only is mandating purchase of health insurance from private companies not “universal healthcare”, but the plan failed spectacularly – what evidence is there that now-Senator Clinton, who is backed by massive donations from HMOs, pharmaceutical companies, and health insurance companies, will be either able or willing to spearhead the kind of fundamental changes in health care Americans so desperately need? Obama is #2 behind Hillary in cash from cthe same sources. They both are corporate candidates.


c. the massive bombing of Iraq (along with several other countries) and sanctions against Iraq:
You can't blame her for running on the good parts of Bill's record and then attack her for other things Bill did. Everyone supported sanctions, including Gore. It is blind faith to believe Obama would have been any different. Indeed, obama is as pro-sanction as Hillary when it comes to the nations we currently have sanctions on.

d. welfare “reform” – in which the Clinton administration:
Obama supports it.

. an economic “boom” that proved to be a bubble – Bill Clinton, as chairman of the DLC, did not take any substantial measures to improve the economy for the majority of Americans, instead simply continuing policies that benefit corporations and the richest one percent.:
That is false. Clinton improved economic conditions for all Americans. His tenure marked the first time since the Nixon presidency that real wages rose for working folks. Poverty declined by seven million.

[IndieLeft]

93. You're using fuzzy substance to explain your point

Stick to Obama and not members of congress or the senate to explain. That all of these members voted for what she did doesn't mean its right and it doesn't mean he's the same.

Many of his important votes are different than hers.

He didn't vote for the war. He spoke against it.
He didn't vote for the bankruptcy bill in any form. He thought the first one was a bad bill. In the last version he thought the 30 percent credit card companies would strap poor folks too was too high.
He didn't vote for the Kyle/Lieberman amendment.

He is spot on. He thinks that a simple majority will rule the day under Clinton. He believes you need more than a simple majority.

Try this one again.

[eib1]

107. revisionist history?

Quote:
She voted for the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act:
The 2001 version passed 83-15 including Kerrcy and Leahy. I am not familiar with the 2005 one. The 2001 was not as clearly bad as revisionist history holds. end quote.

I don't call the current foreclosure crisis and all its social effects "revisionist history."
Maybe you should try to make that argument to the thousands, perhaps millions, who have been dispossessed of their homes.

[dschmott]

88. Good post - informative.

[amborin]

89. biased and untruthful in so many places....

are you working for some other party?

that's a malicious lot of mistruths about a very progressive, audacious candidate who has worked her whole life to further the interests of the less advantaged

she wants universal health care---a noble and daring agenda

otherwise---why not apply some of your invective to Obama? his campaign is heavily supported by big corporate lobbyists....and worse yet, he hypocritically criticizes other candidates for this, himself

[IndieLeft]

96. This isn't tit for tat

If you talk about Hillary then you should talk about Obama? Give me a break. This isn't high school.

She explained it well enough.

Yes she wants universal health care but there is a certain populous who will never see that health care plan she proposes. Those are the 4000 soldiers that died in Iraq. The one she helped to send over to that hell hole. Did you forget about that? Her authorization enabled Bush.

The substance of the post is that Hillary did authorize war.
Hillary did vote yes on the bankruptcy bill she regretted voting for and was glad it didn't pass. But she also gave credit card companies something else with the bill that did pass. Poor folks would have to pay 30 percent on the credit car. Obama said that was too high.

If you care about ending poverty then you should vote like you do.

Ask yourself this... Should the sanctity of human life matter when you decide to send men and women off to war?

If you want to end poverty wouldn't you stop credit card companies from ripping the hearts out of poor people?

She voted for the Kyle/Lieberman amendment further enabling the current president to ramp up talk of war.

She never learns.

She talked about the current president as if he were a dope and then sided with him on the most dangerous policies he offered up.

What kind of judgment is that? Sounds like she doesn't use good judgment. She uses only politics to drive her decisions. Aftr 7 years I want someone who shows better judgment than that. This is why Obama is the better candidate. He didn't vote for the bills she voted for.

[HopeforChange]

97. This is the best thread I have seen on DU in a long time maybe ever n/t

[lostnfound]

100. As an undecided Texan I greatly appreciate your post as well as the replies to it

I have never had a hard choice to make in an election and never one that mattered.
I am shocked at being undecided at this point but with Edwards out of the race my clarity on issues is gone, and while I would be pleased to see either of the two remaining candidates dislodging Shrub and his ilk from the whitehouse, I really have been leaning toward not voting in the primary out of indecision.

Thank you for your excellent post.

[bluerum]

102. I will take a "financial bubble" over the crap we have now - any time. A 5-6

year financial bubble does not happen without coherent economic policy. MHO.

As for the "Running on Bill Clinton's Record" charge - nice try - but it stinks of desperation and fear mongering. Every politician since Julius Ceaser owes their position to many many people. Those who voted for them, those who supported them and those who pave the way for them. Politicians traditionally and historically invoke the names and records of those that they admire, agree with and claim to emulate.

Why is it that when men drag their families into their political campaigns, parade them up and down and appoint them to positions within their administrations, that no one levels charges of coat-tail riding and nepotism but when a woman does it is a high crime?

Your opinion on Bill Clinton's record does not square. A period of unprecedented economic and social prosperity sandwiched in between repuglican attempts to strangle the government and bring it to heel under the yoke of big oil, big pharma and big health. Blaming Bill Clinton for bills passed by a repuglican congress and senate with veto proof voting margins is simply a "misrepresentation of reality." (Quotes and emphasis mine.)

Your lack of faith is your own. Please do not presume that it is shared, admired or even welcomed by others.

BTW - I usually do not respond to high flying flame posts like yours. It is a waste of time and pointless. But I had a few extra minutes this morning and found your post especially annoying. And I don't even like Clinton.

on edit: added quote marks to first occurrence of financial bubble.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

104. Thank you for an excellent post

One that is quite articulate. I share your concerns with Clinton. Welcome to DU :hi:

[baldguy]

105. Another supporter for President McCain

[bushisdirt]

106. Excellent. One of the best posts I've ever seen here. Nor will I vote

for Hillary Clinton. She is the antithesis of everything I look for in a presidential candidate, a woman...a human being.

[Nihilistic]

110. The best argument against Hillary Clinton I've read thus far.

Kudos. Very well-researched and well-stated.

[1awake]

111. I have every intention of

voting for Hillary should she win the nom. Actually, the only time My support for her ever comes in doubt in my mind is when.. I come here. The Obama people probably win the "most hits" when counting posts, but Hillary supporters have the most venomous ones by far.

[beezlebum]

116. K&R n/t

[adabfree]

118. Most Excellent Post!

[From The Left]

119. Hillary's Harpies Won't Like You, Lucy

I posted 10 reasons not to vote for the Borg Queen on my blog and here. Her supporters went ape-shit.

[Maineman]

120. And, recently, Hillary has been saying, LOOK at us.

At first, I thought, okay, this is just how one would ask people to consider both candidates. Now she wants more debates - on stage side-by-side even though there have been 17,000 debates already. She has been doing a noticeably better job with makeup (face paint). I have to conclude that she wants voters to LOOK at them - race, gender, skin color, etc. How sad it is that a person wants power so badly.

[antigop]

122. I would cut this down and submit it as a LTTE n/t

[paulk]

123. she did not vote for the Bankruptcy Bill -

The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act - she did not vote on this legislation, as she was in the hospital with her husband who was having heart surgery. She did give a floor speech beforehand indicating that she would have voted against it if she had been able to attend.

There is much debate over the IWR, but I don't see how you can justify blaming her for the Iraq debacle. The blame for that lies solely with George W. Bush, who abused the authority given him by Congress.

The Patriot Act passed 98 - 1. It find it intellectually dishonest for you to single out Hillary Clinton.

NCLB was bi-partisan legislation, co-sponsored by Ted Kennedy, the leading liberal in the Senate. It passed by a vote of 91-8 with only two Democrats voting against it. Once again, singling out HRC is unreasonable. By now Democrats realize that the program is a failure and steps will be taken to fix it once we have the White House.

While I would agree that the DLC has outlived much of it's usefulness, to say that it works in the interest of the wealthiest one percent is hyperbole and cheapens your point.

Your passage on "oligarchies, aristocracies, and any form of dynastic politics" is sheer nonsense. The American people have a right to vote for whomever they want.

Your section on Bill Clinton is little more than the usual compendium of the far right and left wing attacks that have been levied against him from day one, and I'm not even going to bother with addressing it, other than to say, despite your protestations to the contrary, Bill Clinton is not running for President.

[JMDEM]

133. Thank you for a response addressing the OP facts -- not attacking her.

This is the sort of discussion that is needed on DU. You disagree with the OP, but you address her statements of facts, rather than call her names. You bring up some very valid points. Thank you for your intelligent response.

[LWolf]

127. Those are all great reasons, and I agree with them.

I can also give more than seven reasons why I will not vote for Obama; here are seven of many:

1. He claimed to be against the Iraq War before he was in a position to back that up with votes, but has consistently voted to fund it since he got to the senate, until the most recent vote that came during his campaign.

2. He reaches out to homophobes; not just to find common ground to work together, but allows them to campaign for him.

3. He blurs the separation between church and state with his too-close public, political relationship with churches, when that separation desperately needs to be deeper and wider instead.

4. He wants to continue the war on terror, and has indicated willingness to leave unilateral military action "on the table."

5. He wants to leave insurance and pharmaceutical corporations "at the table" when reforming health care.

6. He supports merit pay for teachers, which I adamantly oppose.

7. He is too admiring of Ronald Reagan for my comfort.

[Baby Snooks]

137. Ronald Reagan

The reality is that this country was in a mess and rather than dictate to the Congress, he worked with the Congress. Those who hate Reagan will dispute that but it was and is the reality. You have to frame Ronald Reagan in the framework of the country itself. He did. Perhaps not always so wisely. But he was really a "people's president." The problem was those he brought to Washington were not interested in the people's business. They were interested in their own agenda. The agenda of George HW Bush. George HW Bush was the one time Nancy Reagan didn't force the issue. Which was probably the one time she should have.

His sole flaw was not watching his vice-president as his vice-president continued his agenda which was begun long before the election. An agenda that has been continued by the Clintons. Their records speak for themselves. Before, during, and after the White House.

The party system is an illusion at this point in this country. The Republicans seem intent on reviving their party. The Democrats probably need to start doing the same thing. Otherwise we will just end up with another Republicrat in the White House. And both parties will probably become chapters in a history book that will not be kind to any of us.

Ronald Reagan spoke of a shining city on a hill. Kennedy was a vision of Camelot that came only after he was gone. Both really did give a sense of hope for the country. That is something we have not had for a long time but do have in Barack Obama. He is not perfect. But he does offer us all hope.

Imagine an African-American president in a country once again torn apart by racism which has gone unchecked by both Democrats and Republicans.

Imagine a Justice Department with a president in the White House who really truly believed in civil rights and the provision under the 14th Amendment that absolutely guarantees civil rights, far more than the Civil Rights Act does, for all Americans.

That alone is probably the best reason to vote for him. The Clintons had their chance already. We saw the results quite clearly in the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy. And they didn't do too much better with racial minorities and particularly with women. Monica Lewinsky was not the minor aberration Hillary would like us to believe. Any more than the other women were. She was no more shocked by Monica Lewinsky than she was by Gennifer Flowers. Part of the deal as they say.

Liberated women do not stand by their man. And in the end, despite her stating she wasn't, that is exactly what she has done. And she has done so for the very reason everyone in 1992 thought she would. Because it offered her political advantage.

If there really is hope for this country, Democrats will finally move beyond their own racism. And be willing to put an African-American in the White House. The way they were willing to put a Catholic in the White House. There is no right time for change. Change happens when people decide to make it happen. Change didn't happen the first time with the Clintons. Only a fool believes it will happen the second time.

[LWolf]

152. I don't need any explanations of Ronald Reagan.

I grew up in CA when he was governor, and survived his 8 years in the WH. I remember quite clearly the direction he took the nation, and the legacies he left us. He is the only president I ever saw or heard speak in person. Whether you want to lay that direction, and that legacy, at his door, or at the door of his administration, doesn't really matter. Without him in office, there was no Reagan administration, either. I obviously disagree about his "flaws."

I do agree that the party system is an illusion. It is corrupted beyond redemption, in my opinion. At least, beyond redemption without radical restructuring of the system. More radical than anyone in power is willing to attempt.

I also don't need anyone rhapsodizing over the possibilities of an Obama administration to give me a vision of the future.

When I imagine an Obama administration, I see us still engaged in the bogus "war on terror." I see further blurring of the separation between church and state. I see that it's ok to reach out and embrace bigots, thereby feeding bigotry, rather than relegating it to the past. I see that I still depend on for-profit insurance and pharmaceutical companies to decide what health care and medication I may, or may not get for the money I'm already paying. I see that the right-wing call for merit pay in my profession goes forward, rather than being appropriately pruned from the option list. I see that Obama makes a better republican than he does a Democrat, thereby proving your assertion that the party system is illusion. I see a "new democrat" without the DLC label who cares more about embracing the republicans across the aisle than he does about representing those of us on THIS side.

[mistertrickster]

129. Well done. But you left out sitting on the board of Walmart.

Her mentor Saul Alinsky must have spinning in his grave over that one . . .

[johnlal]

130. I have a feeling that there are many like you.

Look at the 2006 elections. There was excitement about change. We were mobilized by the progressive activists, and we all showed up to vote. We were optimistic, and we were able to change the composition of Congress. And how were we rewarded? Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

We were told "Thanks for your support", but impeachment is off the table, and Senators can only put "holds" on legislation if they are republican. And billions more of our tax dollars will continue to flow into Iraq.

I think the betrayals of 2006 are still fresh in our minds. We don't mind doing our part, calling our congressmen, signing petitions, donating money, backing a candidate, showing up to vote. But when we were burned after the 2006 election-- after causing an overwhelming change in Congress-- don't be surprised if we don't show up to vote in record numbers this year.

[Baby Snooks]

131. The problem with Texas

Hillary will win in Texas simply because the Democratic Party in Texas, controlled in large part by the wealthy Democrats, most of them really quite sleazy trial attorneys, decide who the Democrats will vote for. And time and time again the Democrats vote for who they are told to vote for. Except for the Democrats who would have to hold their nose to vote for who they are told to vote for and decide to just stay home. Which explains how the Republicans hijacked Texas. And quite honestly, the Democratic leadership in Texas seems just fine with it. It serves them well. Their interests anyway.

The real problem with Texas is that there are still Democrats who are racist. And will not abide an African-American as president. Blue Dogs and Yellow Dogs. The racism that reared its head after the Civil War remains. Reality of the primary in Texas may be race.

God could write the synopsis of the reality of the Clintons on a stone tablet and send Moses down from the mountain and her supporters would deny it. Which I suppose raises a question about her supporters.

This country is collapsing. With a little help from the Democrats. All eyes turn to Nancy Pelosi. And to Hillary Clinton.

There are conservatives so angry over John McCain that they have publicly expressed the possibility of voting for Barack Obama. Just to keep John McCain and Hillary Clinton out of the White House.

Barack Obama may not be perfect. But he can win. And that seems to frighten the Democratic leadership. Maybe because he doesn't belong to them the way Hillary Clinton does. Which raises a question of who else belongs to them. And whether the real master is a master of deception and a master of both parties.

The Bushes are evil but you know what? So are the Clintons.

[Catherine Vincent]

132. Why is it that everytime an Obama supporter finally decides to vote for him,

the poster come up with this long ass drivel on why they won't vote for the other guy? I realize it happens on Clinton's side but it's definitely moreso with Obama supporters. Sheesh!

[AllyCat]

134. Nicely written. Hope you have your flamesuit zipped. rec

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

135. A must read

:kick:

[fuzzy otter pop]

138. great post, great thread,

K and R

props!

[Hutzpa]

142. Excellent post, from someone who lives in Houston

could not have explained it brilliantly.


:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:


:yourock: :headbang:

[thevoiceofreason]

159. Coming to the Barack Grand Opening tomorrow?

[angrypoet]

143. Amazing

I have read through DU since about the start of Kerry's 2004 run and decided to register the other day. I can NEVER recall so much passion and hate-speech between fellow DU members in all that time. I have to admit that I find it a little disheartening to hear the type of attacks and flaming going on against this post. I admired this place as a free exchange of ideas and as a forum to expose the rethugs hate-mongers and criminals for what really are despite the corporate media machine. Anyone that has used an expletive in this forum as a way to respond to Lucy Parson's post should be ashamed of themselves and I find it hard to believe it is acceptable behavior for this site. I would imagine that these posters are little more than children themselves and unlikely to be of voting age anyway and have no perspective at all of history to give an informed opinion of HRC or WJC for that matter.
I think I am a little confused as well. Is this site an extension service of the DNC in some way? Are we only allowed to speak the official party line here? Let us assume that HRC does get the votes and becomes the candidate, are we no longer allowed to express concerns about her policy planks and only allowed to support her every position here on this site? Lucyparson has clearly and intelligently expressed her opinion and has every right to and has even stated her misgivings for BHB as well. If we are not allowed to question and work to change the position of our elected officials than we no longer have any power at all and should cede our will to those that rule us now, there is no difference at all in the long run. Power that is not questioned and challenged at every opportunity, will always be corrupt and self-serving to its own ends. Not only is the ability to question and condemn those we elect our right, it is our duty as Americans. To cede your opinions and misgivings to the will of the party (whichever that may be) is to give up the rights and desire to be an American.

[Emillereid]

144. Thanks for this excellent post - I couldn't have said it better myself.

Do you mind if I send it out in an email to friends? I'll give you credit of course.

[angrypoet]

148. Thank you

and yes. that is very kind but I feel very strongly about these types of issues.

[DireStrike]

155. Thanks for posting this. I've bookmarked it to send to others.

[CorpGovActivist]

156. Anarchist!

:hug:

Nice to see you. Drop me a PM when you get a chance.

- Dave

[keilsonky]

160. 1 reason I don't care who you vote for

1. I don't care who you vote for


Anyone who garners an opinion based on a bias blogger is an idiot. People can think for themselves and reason out who they want. They do not need somebody with too much time on their hands to think for them. That is why we have republicans, they need brains outside their own body to exist. So keep the "opinion" to yourself and let us thinking Democrats delve into the muck and find who is right for us. Obama....Clinton....Kucinich....Elvis? Inquiring minds like me can think alone.

Keith in Ky

[RunningFromCongress]

161. I've said it before, I'll take a CHANCE of unity/change over a SURE THING of 4 more devisive years

[MUL98]

162. Clinton - Obama

I am a life long Democrat, strongly entrenched in what I thought was the left wing of my party. I agree with much of what the OP says about Clinton. As I look at her voting record and policy positions, I see a moderate Republican. Not really all that different than McCain on many issues. I can't bring myself to pull the lever for her.

Here is my problem. I look at Obama and I see exactly the same thing. His policy positions are only marginally different than Clinton's, and will continue to pull the party to the right. To me he is the same candidate in better packaging, with one exception. I can't see his "unity" message as anything but lying. He is clearly a very smart man, and he must know that the force of his personality is not going to make Republicans abandon their entrenched positions and start voting for Democratic bills.

So I feel like it's six of one and half a dozen of another. I'm leaning toward finding a third party candidate now, but I have to say it really bothers me that my party has apparently moved so far away from the ideas that drew me to it.

[paulk]

182. McCain and Clinton/Obama are not remotely the same

issues wise

and you're going to vote third party?

do you think people on here are stupid or what?

go crawl back under your bridge....

[yardwork]

164. A lot of this applies to Obama as well. There's not a lot of difference between them.

Neither Obama nor Hillary are particularly progressive. They're both a hell of a lot better than any Rethuglican.

These attacks don't help our cause.

[TheModernTerrorist]

165. I have to say

that this is one of the more thoughtful posts on DU. :)

[Kurovski]

167. K&R.

Well-presented case.

[fadedrose]

184. K & R (nt)

[onehandle]

169. But you will vote for her if she's the Nominee, Right? If not, I don't care what you think. nt

[Catherine Vincent]

175. Best response on this thread.

:thumbsup:

[thunder35]

170. I agree with you

[noac7]

171. Great Post

Hi, I've been following the DU forums since Edwards dropped out, so I'm a new lurker/poster. I was a bit discouraged to post when I saw the personal attacks, but this thread has definitely enlightened me much more on the potential nominees. I'll admit, I didn't have too much background knowledge on the candidates. I voted for Obama based on his foreign policy stance especially in regards to the Peace Corps and U.S. Dept. of the State Foreign Service workers, but now I have much broader, in depth, and substantive defenses in a debate.

It's going to be much harder for people to pick on this cultist now :)

[paparush]

173. 20 Years of Oligarchy....Plus an additional 8 with Bush Ist as Vice President

28 years with a Bush or Clinton in the White House.

I'm beginning to dig this whole "Change" meme pretty strongly.

[DutchLiberal]

174. You don't *have* to vote for Obama. Vote for Mike Gravel!

Good work on the thorough footnotes, by the way. I'm impressed.

[DutchLiberal]

176. By the way: Obama voted for the 'Patriot' Act too.

[musiclawyer]

177. The replies on this post are a good example of the problem

with HRC. She's too freakin polorizing. The right wing can't wait to organize,amass, and publicly dismember her. The left wing , which wants no part of the DLC near the white house, presents cogent argumetns in favor of HRC's opponent, and they get savaged by her supporters.


I am an Edwards guy myself, but the point is Obama brings in hella lot of independents, is good for downticket, and creates a greater chance of blowout in Novemebr regardless of what you think of him or how he's voted. HRC brings nothing but risk. That's the problem I have not see one, not one, HRC supporter address.

[_Wayne_]

179. what a giant load of crap. ridiculously stupid post