Hillary supporters...PLEASE READ

[kad7777]

To ALL Hillary supporters:
Do you remember the eight years of sheer ridiculous, unadulterated, relentless attacks on Bill Clinton? Do you remember how embarrassing it was sometimes to be an American, because of what our President had done, and what the Republicans were doing to besmirch his Presidency? All the money that was wasted investigating Bill Clinton, and Hillary? It was one of the biggest black eyes this country has ever seen. In a word, no matter who's fault it was (and I blame both parties), it was disgusting.

So please...think about this...carefully. The hatred for Bill Clinton was SO deep by the Republicans, they were constantly fighting him on every issue, AND they tried to remove him from office. What do think is going to happen if Hillary Clinton were elected? The hatred and the dirt digging will be twenty times worse compared to what the republicans did to her husband. Can you possibly imagine the ruthless dogfights we're going to have in congress? The relentless attacks on Hillary? The DEEP dirt digging? The republicans will fight her tooth and nail on EVERY issue. Nothing, and I mean absolutely NOTHING will get done for the progress of America and its citizens, AND people around the globe.

So let me ask you, is this what we want for our country for the next four years? Gridlock and tabloid freak shows? I for one, DO NOT want to go through that for another four years. And aside from all the sideshow events that will take place, as a country, can we afford to deal with this kind of malarkey? The answer is - ABSOLUTELY NOT. We have Armageddon going on in the Middle East. This is serious stuff here folks. Plain and simple, we need to elect a leader that has a great deal of foreign policy experience, and has their hand on the pulse of middle America. As great as it is that we have a Woman and an African American running for the world most important position, it CANNOT be taken lightly.

Let's stop...and think about this....Really think....Let's get it right this time.

[wyldwolf]

1. Lots of idiotic posts today

You're essentially saying you're scared of the GOP.

[kad7777]

9. What I'm saying is

We cannot afford to take this Presidential election lightly. This is the most important election we've had in decades. We need to get it right. We cannot afford to elect someone and hope it works out. We must KNOW, in ourheart of hearts, that the person we elect, can get the job done. CORRECTLY, without a sideshow.

[wyldwolf]

12. I know exactly what you're saying. We call it "bullshit" where I come from.

[mark414]

110. and we call it common sense where i'm from...

[renie408]

14. Look, you're new here, so I am going to cut you some slack...

But look around. Does it look like ANYBODY here takes ANYTHING lightly??

If all you've got is that the media is going to PICK ON US if Hillary is the nominee, I am thinking you had better duck. You start taking shots at candidates, you had better be loaded for bear.

[LanternWaste]

46. Sorry, man. I'm voting my convictions

Sorry, man. I'm voting my convictions-- regardless of whether it's politically expedient or realistic.

Now-- since I haven't decided on any one candidate, or even ruled one out yet, I'm all open to hearing why I should vote for candidate X. But as soon as someone begins to tell me why I shouldn't vote for candidate Y, I'm out the door.

[ralphmich3]

96. Vote for Kucinich or Gravel, they oppose the Iraq war

DO NOT VOTE FOR HILLARY:

SHE VOTED FOR AND SUPPORTED THE IRAQ WAR.... This disqualifies her as a candidate for president IMHO

[LanternWaste]

127. I'll do my research

I'll do my research on who I believe to be the best candidate and my vote will be based on that. But thanks for your interest-- I'm sure you'd do the same thing.

[Bongo Prophet]

113. Sideshows are what they do. They have NOTHING ELSE.

They have proven they cannot govern.
They cannot balance a budget.
They cannot keep the nation safe.
They cannot make the world better.
They cannot protect and preserve the constitution.
They have PROVEN themselves to be hypocrite, sociopaths and war mongering profiteers.

All they can do is carp and moan and whine and bitch.

Seriously, after what they did to Gore and Kerry - character assassination - you expect anything different?

Is there ANY candidate that they won't try to tear up and do the EXACT same thing?
They love their party MORE than their country, this is obvious.
Their base is into proving that Govt is evil and incompetent by MAKING IT SO.

Which candidate do you think is best equipped to handle that?

Sorry if I seem angry - I am - but not directed at you.
Our best bet is to get a super majority.


There are SOOO many new faces here this last few weeks!
Gosh!
It's like an invasion or something!

Welcome to DU!

[madmunchie]

126. You are afraid of the Republicans .....period

What happened to BC was horrible and embarrassing in that the Republicans were so venemous and without soul and conscience. BC was a adulterer, the frenzy in the U.S. was the only embarrassment. Europeans shook their heads in disbelief that this much shit could be made out of a man's affairs. The problem is the venemous tactics of the Republicans, not who is sitting in office as POTUS as a Democrat. Any Democrat elected will be subjected to the same shit.

[hfojvt]

130. No other Democrat comes with nearly as much baggage as HRC

I got my niece a picture of President Bill Clinton. Her teenage friend immediately made a sex joke.

But it still is a weak argument for not supporting a candidate you otherwise like.

[renie408]

11. But don't you see the logic??If we nominate someone other than Hillary or, apparently, Obama

the media won't hassle them!! We won't have to worry about any more media sideshows.

I have to say, it is QUITE tempting! (I would do the sarcasm thing, but I can't ever remember how)

[ralphmich3]

97. Hillary ain't baking no cookies,,, no siree

(No offense to women - and men - who bake cookies)

SHE IS RUNNING IS RUNNIN' FOR PRESDENT OF THE U. NITED STATES OF AMERICA...

My "conversation" with Hillary at You Tube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wUO8ZxcxOiI

Hillary's Fund Raising "problems"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSfabjRW1eg

[youthere]

2. ...

:popcorn:

[ariesgem]

3. .

youthere, pass the butter.. :popcorn:

[Richard Steele]

10. Any more room on that sofa?

:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

[Bake]

4. Thanks so much for your concern.

As for me (and a lot of others), we'll decide for ourselves whom we will support. That is all.

By the way, should Hillary get the nomination, she'll make a FINE President.

Bake

[FiveGoodMen]

16. As long as you're not trying to get a job without health insurance

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1842813

[rodeodance]

5. Prosperity comes to my mind. (Good try at the fear mongle)

[Adelante]

6. Christ Almighty, do you think this ORIGINAL?

Welcome to DU :hi:

[shaniqua6392]

7. The more people try to persuade me NOT to vote for Hillary....

the more it makes me want to vote for her. I was actually looking at Obama for a while, but now I am not so sure. What is it about her that makes the GOP go so crazy? Thanks for the warning but I am now almost 100% sure I am going to vote for her in the primary.

[Cameron27]

15. Isn't that the truth.

I'm not even close to 100% sure about any of them, but the more I see these type of posts, the more I like her.

[renie408]

18. Me, too. I never thought I would be defending Hillary Clinton.

But I find myself doing it more and more these days.

[ralphmich3]

101. Hillary in 2003, supporting Bush's war in Iraq

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYATbsu2cP8

I thought Hillary was smart....

[murielm99]

24. I'm starting to lean Hillary, too.

And I am in Obama's home state!

I am looking at her more seriously exactly because of all the fear-mongering. Also, if the Gopers hate her so much, they must fear her. I am all for GOP fear.

A big difference with Hillary Clinton will be Congress. I think we will maintain and add to a commanding lead in Congress. Bill Clinton had to fight all those crazies when they had a majority.

The media will crucify her. So what else is new? I think she will hit back when they do it.

I am not sure yet about my primary vote. But the Hillary haters here are having the opposite effect on me.

[renie408]

8. Stop...Think...Really THINK...before you post. n/t

[lojasmo]

13. Excellent example of concern trolling. Thanks! EOM

[MGKrebs]

17. Do you remember WHY they attacked Bill Clinton?

I don't mean the specific issues, but why it was that they hated him so much? Why they went after him with such viciousness? I'll give you a minute...

...

...

...

Time's up. It was because he was a Democrat, and he was President.

There was no special hatred of the Clintons for some reason that separated them from anyone else. Bill just so happened to beat them. The next Dem that beats them will get the same treatment, no matter who it is. It's possible, although not certain of course, that Hillary is more prepared to deal with this than anyone else on the planet.

[rusty quoin]

53. You're right. They will attack fiercely any Democrat.

But I just want to point out that there was a well established attack machine hitting Bill during his Arkansas days. So it didn't take much to use the same people to smear him as president. "The Hunting of a President" Joe Conason, explains it nicely.

[MGKrebs]

106. As if it's going to be difficult to attack populist Edwards or Barak Hussein Obama?

[blm]

58. Because that dog and pony show of meaningless investigations of Clinton obscured

and covered up all calls for finishing the investigations of the crimes of office of Reagan and Bush - and THAT is what Clinton SHOULD have been hounded over throughout his terms.

[PurityOfEssence]

70. Well, since you asked...

They felt he didn't deserve the presidency because Perot split the vote. Clinton only took 43% of the popular vote in 1992, and after winning the most lopsided victory in the history of modern warfare, the reactionaries felt they owned the White House and got cheated. He only took 49.2% in the 1996 election, so they were seething.

They ABSOLUTELY HATED the way he toted around that Bible and played the religion card so flagrantly. They considered this THEIR schtick, and HATED having him beat them at their own game.

They deeply resented that he "got away" with extra-marital affairs (Gennifer Flowers, etc.) and that even though they felt they had the Ace up their sleeves of sexual impropriety, he still flashed his winning smile and played his hangdog routine so well that it drove them to literal insanity.

He taxed the rich, something that absolutely enraged them.

One of the first things he did when coming to office was to deal with gays in the military. This totally freaked out their knotted-up sexual weirdness and they had to harass him just to play well to their constituents.

Bill Clinton was special. He was a bit of a rogue and a bit shady, and they HATED that he got away with it. Edwards and Obama are pretty damned squeaky-clean in comparison, and whether liked or not, they're not viewed as liars or such upstart interlopers. Their policies will get the reactionaries riled, but their personalities won't in anywhere near the same way. Being elected at this juncture in history will also not cause the reactionaries to feel so "robbed"; there's no assumption of being in total ownership of the government as there was in 1992.

See? There are REAL reasons. These are VERY REAL reasons why antipathy toward him were and are revved up to such a different level.

[MGKrebs]

104. None of which would have mattered if he lost.

The only thing that mattered was that he beat them. It doesn't matter what the reason was. The next time they get beaten they will feel just as resentful and just as vindictive. They will make up just as much crap to try to destroy the next Dem as they did against Clinton. And just like they did against Gore, and against Kerry.

So, Edwards or Obama wouldn't be attacked for the same reasons, but they WILL be attacked. And it is pretty clear what they would be attacked on. It doesn't matter whether the reasons are "real" or "justified". It only matters if they are effective.

You think Republicans aren't going to be "deeply resentful" of Edwards populist message? Do you think Republicans aren't going to try to take advantage of the fact that Obama is Black? And that his name is Barak Hussein Obama?

It's not a question of who will get attacked the most. It's a question of who can win anyway.

[MGKrebs]

108. Do you even realize what they did against Gore?

They actually intervened to stop the counting of votes! And their Supreme Court cronies backed them up! There is really only one or two more dramatic steps you can take beyond that. And that was NOT Clinton. It was just a Dem who had beaten them fairly.

And Kerry was a war hero who they attacked on... his war record.

Let's not delude ourselves. It DOES NOT MATTER who the nominee is as far as the Republican attack machine is concerned (with the possible exception of Joe Lieberman or Zell Miller, and they ain't runnin'). They will stop at nothing to destroy them. This is a major issue for this election: Who can beat them anyway?

[AtomicKitten]

19. The GOP Wrecking Machine has a special place in their black hearts for HRC.

Although the GOP are busy bees excavating dirt on ALL the candidates, their cache of anti-Clinton ammunition is formidable. They won't even have to break a sweat trashing her PLUS she's fodder for a Pavlovian response from their base. Make no mistake, the GOP has a special level of ugly for all things Clinton.

[renie408]

20. Eww...Ick...

I know you hate Hillary and all, but...ewww.

I figured you would have more discretion than to jump on this shitwagon. This post stinks to high heaven.

(BTW...you did see where they slipped in a shot at Obama too, didn't you??)

[FiveGoodMen]

29. I think she just pointed out the truth. What's Ick about that?

[renie408]

33. I think that sometimes when you are so hellbent on selling your agenda

you have to be careful who you link yourself to. I am sure that goes for politicians, too.

I understand much of the anti-Hillary bias. But to agree with the tone of this post is...icky. Like the GOP won't have anything bad to say about another candidate. And I am telling you, I live in South Carolina, I know A LOT of Republicans. They don't hate her as much as people around here, including me, seemed to think. I used to bow to the traditional wisdom that Hillary would drag the Repukes out of the woodwork to vote against her. From some of the conversations I have had lately, I am not so sure.

Now, whether that should make Dems take a closer look at her or not, that is the question.

[AtomicKitten]

40. Just another strawman erected to burn down.

But to agree with the tone of this post is...icky. Like the GOP won't have anything bad to say about another candidate.

Never said that. I said the GOP is excavating dirt on ALL the candidates, but have a cache already in stock for HRC.

Perhaps if you actually bother to read posts before knee-jerk going off-tilt, you will find it is you, dear, that not only has a problem with tone but a chip the size of Montana on your shoulder.

[renie408]

48. I was referring to the OP.

And after 'peddle your BS elsewhere', I think that any discussion of chips-on-shoulders might be a glasshouse issue for you.

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[renie408]

57. Thank you for proving my point and try your ignore button if you can'tn have a

discussion with somebody.

Honey, unlike YOU, I don't live here and I don't keep track of the positions of everybody on here. Sorry I haven't bothered to jot your name down with all your likes and dislikes listed. I thought I remembered your making some pretty harsh anti-Hillary comments recently. Forgive the shit out of me if I was wrong.

[ralphmich3]

99. Just Waiting for the other "Hsu" to drop!!!

LOL!!!! get it??? other shoe - other Hsu to drop... !!!!
aw Hill we love ya!! You make a great SENATOR from New York...

[ralphmich3]

98. Hillary: Wrong on issues, wrong on personality

BTW: That's Hillary Rodham Rodham Clinton Clinton to us Democratic peons......

[AtomicKitten]

34. Could you tell? I've been wondering if people knew the real truth

just like you see it and weren't fooled by me defending Hillary for the last two years here at DU. :eyes:

DU is so ironic sometimes.

I hate the IWR vote, dear, and all of the dumbsh*ts that voted for it. I will not support anyone in the primary that voted for this war. You've got a problem with that? Tough sh*t.

[renie408]

39. Nope, I don't . I respect that position. I do not, however, respect the 'they hate Hillary'

position.

[AtomicKitten]

41. well, since that isn't my position, peddle your BS elsewhere

[renie408]

44. "peddle your BS elsewhere" ...oh, I am sorry. I didn't realize that any disagreement with you

was BS.

Forgive me, oh exalted one.


Take yourself seriously much??

[AtomicKitten]

47. I've had enough of your inaccurate accusations for today, thanks.

[renie408]

50. O-kay...n/t

[Adelante]

38. Oh, stop it, AK does not hate Hillary

She has defended Hillary regularly on this site.

[wyldwolf]

28. their cache of anti-Clinton ammunition is old and stale.

Sorry.

[AtomicKitten]

36. It's not stale to the GOP -- it's Pavlovian red meat.

[wyldwolf]

37. it's stale to the rest of the electorate.

[AtomicKitten]

43. The point is it is not stale to the knee-jerk GOP haters.

[wyldwolf]

49. it's a moot point. They're not voting Dem anyway & it will take more than them to win the election

[zulchzulu]

107. It might be a moot point to you, but it's a sheer disaster to the Democratic Party

Word has been out that many Democrats running in tight races or even races they thought would be easy are FRIGHTENED by the negative coattails of a Clinton Reprise. It's like the Bee Gees doing another "Final Tour". It's like re-watching the embarrassing Monica Years...again!

Moot point, my ass.

[MGKrebs]

111. OK. I can claim to have been involved enough in politics to know that

"many Democrats running" don't know any more than I do or "many other Democrats" do, who say that their fear is unfounded. Candidates worry about every possible thing. If Obama were the front runner, I'd say there was a good chance "many" would be worrying about his coattails, or if Edwards were the nominee, they would worry about him too.

I mean, c'mon, Jesus ain't runnin'. They all have weaknesses.

[wyldwolf]

119. oh, that's absolutely brilliant. .. not.

If the GOP will vote against any Dem, it really doesn't matter to them who it is.

Word has been out that many Democrats running in tight races or even races they thought would be easy are FRIGHTENED by the negative coattails of a Clinton Reprise.

Netroots fantasy.

[renie408]

55. But how many of them do you think there are?

Sure, there are Republicans who wouldn't vote for Jesus if he was running as a Democrat. But in '04 it isn't like Bush won in a landslide. If only SOME of the people who voted for Bush in '04 either stay home or vote Dem and we get out the vote on our side, we should win. Since it looks like a lot of Republicans are disenfranchised, I think that we have a good chance of winning this time around.

[zulchzulu]

109. A lot of Republicans are disenfranchised right now...but...

...with a couple Clintons to vote against, you can bet that they will be out to not only vote against them but also vote for other Repugs that were doomed otherwise. We'll lose a lot thanks to the Clintons mobilizing the Right.

Why do you think Murdoch gives Clinton money?



I'd like Clinton fans to explain this photo to me and what they see...

[wyldwolf]

120. more netroots fantasy from you

[zulchzulu]

122. I wouldn't call it a fantasy. I'd call it a logistical nightmare

I'm trying to be your friend. As your friend, I'm just giving you the obvious reality of the situation. Take my advice or not...

[wyldwolf]

125. void of statistical evidence (as usual) it's pure fantasy

[renie408]

42. I am not sure how much that still holds true.

Last week I had a conversation with somebody who has been a Republican for as long as I have known her (ten years). She supported Bush up until about the past year. She told me she was going to vote for Hillary. Then, two days ago my brother sent me an email about how HE was going to vote for Hillary. Now, I know you don't know my brother, but he has always been a Republican as far as I know.

Like I said, 'regular' Republicans are not as turned off by Hillary as a lot of people here think. But, like I also said, that makes me want to take a closer look at her to figure out why. Historically, my brother and I have never agreed politically. The fact that he said he will vote for Hillary makes me start to wonder.

BTW...neither of them are switching party affiliations. I asked and they both said that unless something changed, they were not going to vote in the primary, but would vote for Hillary in the GE. I thought that was weird, but interesting.

[CTyankee]

72. I think some polls are now coming out suggesting some Republicans do favor

Clinton in the General (the poor pubs won't have much to vote for in their own primaries!). If that is the case, I hope they are what we used to call moderate or even liberal Republicans. GW Bush has taken them round the bend.

Hillary will also have historical significance on her side with many voters, IMHO, particularly women. Whether it is "defining" to them, only the election will tell. The first woman president of the United States is a very big deal, if you think about it.

I am still supporting Edwards but we have miles to go before we vote...

[zulchzulu]

105. Amen sister

When I see my rare GOP friend who flies to RNC batcave meetings and tells me over a couple beers that the GOP wants her so bad, I believe him.

I pity the poor Democrat that had the race in the bag that would have to fight to win due to a red-faced Repug voting base out to stop the Clintons and merely voting straight Repug in the rest of the races. We'll lose the White House again and perhaps both the Senate and the House because of the Entitlement Candidate.

A Clinton nomination is a Gay Marriage Amendment vote on Crack.

[AtomicKitten]

123. word

A Clinton nomination is a Gay Marriage Amendment vote on Crack.

[FrenchieCat]

21. This is not gonna quite do it!

try doing it like this instead! http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/9/21/0488/06212?detail=f

It's much more factual and provides evidence backing shit up!

[BeyondGeography]

60. THAT is a veritable dissection of Mr. I'm Really Sorry and I'll Never Do It Again

[FrenchieCat]

67. That kind of "made for television" footage would sink that certain candidate

during the GE in quite a deadly manner...which is why he is unelectable, IMO.
Talking about arsenal of someone's own words!
The authenticity doubts alone would torpedo that campaign on so many levels
in about a nano second.

Which makes this thread that much more absurd.

[BeyondGeography]

80. Yep...it's also why I am more comfortable with Clinton than Edwards if my first choice isn't there

I'm not at all a fan of hers, but she'll give us a much better run in the GE than Edwards. His political history makes her a model of consistency in comparison. Plus, she's smarter...you'll never see her smile, blink into the camera and say nothing because she doesn't have the first clue what the answer is.

[Cameron27]

74. OMG that's lethal damage

waiting to happen. He'll be destroyed in the general IMO.

[mentalsolstice]

22. Me thinks someone's wanting some pizza tonight. n/t

[suigeneris]

23. Here's some sure fire advice,

for the good of the country. Be smart. Vote for the party. The president can take care of themself.

I'm a Democrat are you?

[renie408]

25. I'm kinda guessing...not. n/t

[CTyankee]

75. Ha! Ya think? I spotted this one a mile away.

Too amateurish. We DUers can fling monkey poop MUCH better than that!

[FiveGoodMen]

That's pretty nuts.

Over time republicans have included Lincoln and Eisenhower as well as Bush.

It's not just the party.

[renie408]

35. I went to check a list of Republican Presidents and the only really 'good'

one was Lincoln. Teddy Roosevelt wasn't too bad, but something is floating around in the back of my brain about him...

All the others were either unnotable or actively BAD. Huh.

[FiveGoodMen]

62. My point wasn't that the pugs had a lot of good people

it was that you can't tell the quality of the candidate by the party they've associated themselves with.

We need a good one to come out of the primaries or else the D isn't going to help enough.

[suigeneris]

128. WTF? Are you a Democrat or not?

I AM one. I vote for the party. Our candidate is never perfect but they are always immeasurably better than the Republican.

So are you?

[suigeneris]

76. No. I'm right

Lincoln is no exception to the rule and Eisenhower? Please. Can you say Vietnam and Domino Theory? We'd have been far better off with a progressive Stevenson.


Lincoln is a mixed bag. Read the Emancipation Proclamation and ask yourself was Lincoln freeing the slaves or trying to end rebellion in the states, preserving the union?

Vote Democrat. Ninety-nine times out of a hundred it's the better choice.

What the hell is wrong around here anyway, that I have to point this out?

[FiveGoodMen]

79. I completely answered this post in #62.

[CTyankee]

82. I have long admired Stevenson, but have altered my view a bit .

Here's why: Stevenson was consulted, along with many others who were the best and brightest, by JFK on the Cuban Missile Crisis. Stevenson was ready to make concessions, like giving up our missiles in Turkey. They were, at the time, obsolete and indeed JFK had wanted them dismantled and taken down. But he didn't want to do it under coercion, which this crisis was. JFK's middle position of showing force (the blockade) but not using it irresponsibly and carelessly turned out to be the right thing to do. It's a long story: read "The Missile Crisis" by Elie Abel, great book.

This was a hard realization for me, a lifelong liberal, to come to. Stevenson was just wrong on this one. He was right on other things and his voice was so important. But he could have been a disaster as president during the Cold War.

[Greyhound]

121. I'm an American, are you?

[liberal N proud]

26. My sentiments

Peace and prosperity...

And standing ovations at the United Nations for an American president...

Those were the days...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1870768

Add:
Balanced budgets, reducing the deficit Oh and gas price was $1.26 when Bill left office.

No I was never ashamed of the President. I was ashamed that republicans had done to this country and to the office of the President but that was nothing compared to the last 6+ years

[renie408]

32. Damn skippy. I have never been ashamed of Bill Clinton. Pissed off at him, yeah. Ashamed?? Never. n/

[CTyankee]

77. You are so right! I was furious at the Republicans, not Bill Clinton.

As far as I was concerned, he had a right to a private life. He didn't do one thing and say another, unlike the RW hypocrites. The RW conducted a pogram against both Clintons and they should be condemned for it.

The OP is full of it or...something else...

[Sapphire Blue]

27. As an Edwards supporter, I will say that President Hillary Clinton would be a...

... relief after 8 years of bush; she, like all of our Democratic candidates, would be an excellent President. Each one of our candidates far exceeds anything that the repub party has to offer.

Try your BS elsewhere. :puke:

[StrongBad]

30. "Do you remember how embarrassing it was sometimes to be an American...

...because of what our President had done, and what the Republicans were doing to besmirch his Presidency?"

No, I wasn't really embarassed at all that a man had a consensual sexual encounter with a woman. Seems to me that humans do that a lot.

You sure are embarassed easily if you really do feel this way.

Also, I'd prefer endless tabloids to war, terrorist attacks, economic stagnation and the repeal of essential civil liberties any day of the week.

But that's just me...

[NoPasaran]

68. In contrast to how proud we all feel these days

Thanks to our "christian" manly man Bush?

[mohc]

31. While I am not exactly the biggest Hillary supporter...

the OP was certainly among one of the most clear examples of bad reason to oppose Hillary. No one wants to go through what right dragged us through during Bill Clinton's stint in office. But if we decide that we are not going to nominating someone, legitimate qualifications aside, just to avoid the trouble the right will cause, then we have given up. If they see we are unwilling to go into what may be seen as a "difficult" general election, all they have to do is show they will make it difficult for any of our stronger candidates, and we will be steered towards a weaker one. And do not think for a second there is something special about Bill or Hillary that makes them more susceptible to attacks, they will find ways to attack any of them. They in fact have already laid ground work (Barrack Hussein Osama, err Obama and John "$400 Haircut" Edwards).

Let us decide who we think is the best candidate based on their issue positions, leadership skills, and other germane qualifications. Then we must go about the business of preparing ourselves for the inevitable attacks from the right regardless of the nominee.

[LynneSin]

132. One doesn't have to be pro-Hillary to understand the stupidity of the OP

The 2 major parties are so divided that without a doubt there will be gridlock.

When a pro-choice judge is nominated to sit on the Supreme Court do you think the republicans will let that slide without major gridlock?

I don't think you need to be a Clinton to create gridlock, I think whomever wins the White House in 2008, regardless of party, will deal with plenty of gridlock

Welcome to the world of politics

[Mz Pip]

45. Why should I make my decision

on who I am going to vote for based on the insane ranting of the RW noise machine? I really don't care what they think. I've given up on trying to be reasonable with any of them.

They will turn any Democratic PResident into a pariah. They will have their hate mongers out 24/7 for the 4 or 8 years that she or he is in office. Whoever it is. Clinton, Obamba, Edwards, Biden. Won't matter who. They don't like to lose and will trash whoever wins.

Maybe to solve the problem I should just go ahead and appease the fuckers and vote for the Republican. Then we'll just have sweetness and light for the next 4 years. Just like the last 7 years. :eyes:

Mz Pip
:dem:

[noonwitch]

51. They are going to attack Obama or Edwards just as viciously

It doesn't matter which of them is nominated, in that sense.

Obama admitted to using cocaine, Edwards is a lawyer-everyone hates lawyers, all the way back to Shakespeare and his numerous lawyer jokes.

Probably Richardson is the only one who doesn't earn the open hatred of the GOP, at this time, but if he were to be the nominee, he'd get the same treatment.

If a candidate can't stand up to it, like the Clintons have done consistently over the years, then what good is he or she to us come fall of 2008? Just another swiftboat victim and the GOP wins another 4 years.

[damntexdem]

54. I don't support HIllary. I hope she's not the Dem candidate. But ...

this argument is really lamebrained. It effectively asks us to let the GOP determine who can be a Dem candidate -- all they have to do is carry on a sustained campaign of vilification not against the candidate, rather against the candidate's spouse. Attack Hillary for her positions, her actions, and her announced plans, not on the basis of nonsense like this.

[displacedtexan]

56. Frankly, I'm ready to finish the fight the tightie righties started against Bill.

Thanks for reminding my why I need to support Hillary!

[Bucky]

59. Welcome to DU Kad77

Those are a lot of the original concerns that I had about Mrs Clinton running too. Yet, I also recall how viciously they went after Kerry. The exact same ferver and vitriol, the cheap shots, the distortions, the lies coming out of a few millionaires' secret trashing squads. Whoever we nominate will be hit on and hated on marching orders from the same right wing zealots who've been poisoning our democracy since the hysteria over the 1978 Panama canal treaty.

I do think Clinton is probably a little more vulnerable to that sort of smear campaign. The story on her is already set--an ice cold Lady MacBeth who wants the crown for herself now. But I think most of this crap could and should be ignored.

I'm reluctant to see her as our nominee, but I won't base my judgments on the irrational hatreds of bigots, zealots, and robber barons. She's probably the weakest of the major candidates as a November nominee. As a marketing professional, I'd much rather have Edwards or Obama as the product I'm supposed to be selling. I find myself more willing to quibble with her over minor issues and I know quite a few life long Democrats who cringe at her name. But I base my reluctance on the thought of what she'd do as president, not on my guess of who all might hate her.

[durrrty libby]

61. My hatred for the GOP is soo deep, I often see China

If we have a dem congress things will be fine

Hillary is brilliant and will be an amazing president


If you are such a chicken shit move out of the country, I won't miss you a bit.


When she wins, set up a fund. I'll donate for your one way ticket

I think the Democratic party would be 100x better off without people like you

Happy Travels and Bon Voyage :hi:

[CTyankee]

85. I like that! Happy travels and bon voyage. We should have a little

campaign after our Dem wins where we "help" unregenerate Republicans quietly and peacefully leave and go to some other welcoming country! :evilgrin:

Maybe Argentina?

[durrrty libby]

86. Sounds good to me

:hi:

[kad7777]

63. To clarify for everyone

It's amazing how vicious some people can be when they believe their candidate is under attack. There's no reason to call people names and be mean. What I stated in my original post was my own belief of where we'd be heading with a Hillary Presidency. I never called her a name, or denigrated her service, or her core beliefs. I think she's a fine politician. I just don't think she's the right person for the job right now. I'm a Democrat. I voted for Bill twice. I believe he's one of the best Presidents we've ever had. I was extremely let down and disappointed by him surrounding the Monica fiasco. I blame the Republicans for embarrassing the United States. Yet, it could have been avoided.

We need some smooth sailing with our next President. Someone with a lot of foreign policy experience. Someone who can reach across the aisle and make things happen. We need a President who can unite his people as well as people abroad. I believe there are other candidates who can fulfill these crucial American needs right now.

Let me end by saying I believe the Democrats have a fine field of candidates. I'm hoping people delve deep into all the issues that effect our great nation and choose a candidate who (they believe), is in line with their core beliefs, and has a command on every issue that faces us.

[jillan]

73. Kad777 -

this too shall pass.

Let it run its course, don't bother with it.
And don't let your opinion of DU be based on this one thread.

But, as a friend, I will warn you that if you question anything about any one of our candidates,
you will get more than you bargained for. Better to fight with facts than speculation around here.:pals:

[avrdream]

81. Your words reinforce my conviction that Hillary is the right person for this job.

"Let me end by saying I believe the Democrats have a fine field of candidates. I'm hoping people delve deep into all the issues that effect our great nation and choose a candidate who (they believe), is in line with their core beliefs, and has a command on every issue that faces us."

I have "delved" and Hillary is very much in "line" with my "core beliefs". If you pay attention to any of Hillary's question and answer type events, you will also see that she "has a command on every issue that faces us".

Thanks for the reinforcement.

[oasis]

64. Nominated for "Concern Post of the Week" award.

:applause:

[NoPasaran]

66. Seconded!

[NoPasaran]

65. Gee I never thought of that

:sarcasm:
:sarcasm:
:sarcasm:
:sarcasm:
:sarcasm:
Yeah, those Clinton years were tough. I can't remember which was worse: the eight years of peace, or the eight years of prosperity.

[Dawgs]

69. It's not the eight years while Hillary's in office. It's the eight years after...

[Lucinda]

71. I was NEVER embarrased by the Clinton Presidency

A witch hunt over blow jobs is nothing.
Hillary actually has good working relationships with Republican Senators.
The country KNOWS what the Bush admin has done to America.
It's a different playing field now.

She, or any of our other candidates, is more than capable of taking on the smear campaigns to come.

Welcome to DU! :)

[SaveElmer]

78. The horse is dead...you can stop beating it now...

Hillary is vetted...she is immunized against whatever crap the Republicans dredge up. The public has looked at this and discounted it...nothing new, no news...

Republicans have a much easier time with fresh fish..."Did John Kerry earn his medals," "Did Mike Dukakis parole sex offenders" Brand new charges, nice meaty, juicy charges, against someone that has not had to withstand such attack is what the Republicans live for...why did the Swift Boat attacks work so well..?

Because it was new, controversial, and fresh information dripped out day after day...keeping the story alive...people weren't quite sure whether to believe the story or not...aided and abetted by John Kerry's weak response...it killed him in the general...

How do you think the public is gonna react to another round of Whitewater, or Travelgate, or Vince Foster...I can tell you...:shrug:

[William769]

83. Don't forget some here believe in reincarnation.

:rofl:

[William769]

84. You have my pity, for believing that load of crap.

The only thing I remember is what has happened the last 7 years, thats what you should be concerned about. :eyes:

[GoneOffShore]

87. Here's another thought about Hilary

Consider this:

Bush Sr. Vice President for 4 years
President for 4 years
Bill Clinton President for 8 years
G W. Bush pResident for 8 years
Let's say Hilary gets elected and reelected 8 years
Total number of years= 32
Do we really want two families to have controlled the White House for that long a time?

[Clintonista2]

89. That's up to the majority of the voting population to decide, not you.

Your statement comes off as very elitish.

[GoneOffShore]

90. Really ?

I merely pointed out that we as a country, if we were to elect Hilary, would be moving away from democracy to dynasty - And there are nothing more elitist than dynasties.

And there is nothing wrong with being elitist - Look where not being elitist has gotten us - The Shrub in the White House.

[Clintonista2]

91. I've never heard of dynasty that is democratically elected

... and that can be democratically kicked out of office.

[GoneOffShore]

93. No, but 32 years of the same two families holding the highest office in the land

Looks a bit dynastic, doesn't it?

It would almost appear but possibly not (putting on :tinfoilhat: now) that the Bushes and the Clinton's almost have a deal going:

"Hey, it's your turn - We'll do the total repression thing for a couple of years and then you can ease off a bit. That way we can get them used to total control".

I'm not saying that Hils & Bill have made a deal with the BFEE, but for CT folks, it could look that way.

Remember it's not whether your vote counts, but who counts the votes - and right now I'm not trusting either of them to count the votes properly.

[William769]

95. I think it would behoove you to look up the word dynasty in a dictionary.

[GoneOffShore]

102. Yes and?

I did.

"A line of hereditary rulers of a country. ie - the Tang dynasty.
A succession of people from the same family who play a prominent role in business, politics or some other field."

8 years of Bush
8 years of Clinton
8 years of Bush
8 years of Clinton

Looks like a duck, walks like a duck, smells like a duck, talks like a duck - Coincidence?

[GoneOffShore]

103. And I meant to ask ...

Is "elitish" the same as elvish or just a lisp?


:shrug:

[MGKrebs]

112. We should choose someone possibly less qualified because you are bored?

You would like us to make our decision based on the spelling of their names?

Not to mention that the assertion that Bush I as V.P. "controlled the White House" is questionable.

[ChiciB1]

134. NEVER... NEVER! But Then Of Course, Democracy Is Dead In America

anyway, so if THEY have decided it will be Clinton, we simply can call ourselves a MONARCHY AGAIN!

Maybe it's time to head back over to England and start ALL OVER!

[Milo_Bloom]

88. Hmmmmm

"Do you remember how embarrassing it was sometimes to be an American, because of what our President had done"

Nope. Never.

[Sparkly]

116. Yeah, I'm having the same amnesia. nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

92. I Have Never Been Embarrassed To Be An American..

I have been embarrassed by some of our leaders but it certainly wasn't the Clintons...

[calteacherguy]

94. BS, but you did an excellent job spewing Rove's talking points.

I don't buy any of it.

[michaz]

100. Well, I for one would rather have 8 more years of Bill Clinton...

any day, then what we have now! The hatred of ANY Democrat is so deep by the Repugs that it doesn't matter who it is in the Presidency. They will fight whomever it is on every issue. That is just who they are and how they are. Haven't you gotten that yet? I have not yet decided who I will vote for but I would like to make up my own mind, thanks!

[MODemocrat]

114. They've already spent 90 million digging up crap on Clintons

The fascists will "dig up" or better yet, they'll lie and make up unbelievable stories on anyone the
Democrats chose. Nothing will keep me from voting for Hillary if she wins the nomination. Bill Clinton
had a sleazy affair; he did not kill millions of civilians, nor did he kill nearly 4,000 troops. This
is the biggest bunch of nonsense anyone can put out. Republicans are ruthless, and most of them are
mentally unbalanced hypocrites.

Hillary is not a wimp; she fights back, and that's more than our wimpy Senate or congress can say. :spray: :spray: :spray: :spray: :spray:

[Sparkly]

115. So we're to believe they WON'T be assholes if we elect somebody else?

Sorry -- it doesn't matter who we nominate/elect. The rightwingers will be assholes. They will obstruct, besmirch, gridlock, and have "tabloid freak shows."

It's what they do.

[BenDavid]

117. I will dissect your post:

The answer to your first question is yes. Of course we all remember the attacks but WJC kept doing his job and the American people did not turn their backs on him.

You wrote, "I was never embarassed to be an american during Clintons eight years". If I remember correctly folks overseas were laughing at us for how stupid it was to try and get rid of our president.

Yes, WJC did something awful and stupid but NOTHING was going to stop that impeachment because the republicans had the fever.The GOP was "caught up" with impeachment fever - that's all they could see or hear. Bill's approval rating was in the 70s - and voters clearly didn't want him to be impeached, but like the criminal who can't stop until he assaults enough, it was GOING to happen.Hell, the GOP lost seats in November of 1998 - but that didn't matter to them. NOTHING was going to stop that impeachment because they had the fever. They lived and breathed impeachment the way some people are now living and breathing "Stop her!"

I agree money was wasted....but in December 1995 Former Assistant Attorney General Barr gave a report before the Senate from Pillsbury Madison that said President Bill CLinton and Hillary Clinton did nothing illegal nor was there any laws that were broken...Yes, the republican senate and house could have stopped then, but oh nooooooooooooooooo they had the fever.....and here we had the stupid thing WJC did but as before the american people did not want clinton impeached....

Well sure the repubs fought him on every issue but on every issue they fought him, WJC came out ahead and who benefitted> uh huh the american people....Do ya remember who was to blame for the government shut down?

Dirt digging will be 20 times worse".....Excuse me but HRC is the most invesigated woman in american history and there is nothing for no one to uncover.... Hell, anyone with common sense will know the right wing will come after her with something sexual about Bill.I suspect that Bill and Hillary know this is coming and have protected themselves against this with accurate accounts of where, who Bill meant with and at the proper time will present said evidence and smear the right wing zealots......You can bet yo ass they will be ready if this type attacks comes....

Your assumption is way off that nothing will get done. if the dems hold both houses in 08 and pick up about 5 to 8 seats in the senate then the dems will be able to pass more legislation and her budgets...Her budgets will be what the american people will want passed and that being the case then am sure there will be little trouble with defeating cloture.....

I have to stop because you were going wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy out there....foreign policy experience...excuse me but the man that has been with her for 30 plus years will be giving her his expert opinions in foreign policy matters...That is good enough for me....

We will get it right this time...The american people will get it right this time too.....

[suigeneris]

129. Skoal! n/t

[Perry Logan]

118. Thanks to the Republicans, Hillary will have dictatorial powers. She can nationalize the news media.

Until we take down the news media, no one will ever hear a good word about any Democrat anywhere.

[proud2BlibKansan]

124. Plus she is just another corporatist politician

She will take great care of big business if she is elected. She will also bring home maybe half of our troops in Iraq.

And the right wing will crucify her every day she sits in the White House.

[LynneSin]

131. What delusional world do you live in that you think only Hillary would cause gridlock?

Once again we have another anti-hillary rant from desparate people trying to convince real democrats that Hillary is unelectable.

I don't care who the democrat nominee is - there will be gridlock by the republicans. Hell there would be gridlock even if it was Joe Lieberman who was the nominee since Joe is quite liberal when it comes to unions, choice, environment and healthcare. (yes, I know Lieberman is no longer a democrat).

So seriously - I'm thinking the anti-Hillary people need to go start their own web forum where they can post all the doom & gloom they want without being annoying to the rest of us who want to fight to get a democrat nominee in the White House which may or may not be Hillary Clinton.

As I've said many times - Hillary is not the nominee of choice for me; however, I'm just very tired of this bullshit which is nothing more than some 'progressive' type people drinking too much of the repuke kool-aid

[ChiciB1]

133. I Happen To COMPLETELY Agree With You... And I've Said The Same

thing too many times to count! And NOW, The Idiot DECIDER, & I FINALLY agree on something!

He says, that if SHE is the nominee she will be the one to MOTIVATE all Repukes to get out and vote... and while many here just laugh this off, just STOP AND THINK for just a minute!! In the almost 7 years he's been holding this country hostage, please tell me exactly what WE HAVE WON from him!

Sure some people left office, and he's pretty much "the worst president EVER" but STILL he GETS WHAT HE WANTS!! He still has those DIE-HARDS and THEY have money and CLOUT!! This was the FIRST reason I didn't want to have Clinton as the nominee, many other issues have followed... but I'd bet money I DON'T REALLY have, that she will be the one they will come out AGAINST!!

So, go ahead and do what Democrats do... but I won't be part of this! It's bad enough that that OUR LEADERS abandon us, and now we are LETTING Repukes AND MSM tell us who OUR nominee will be!!!

I'm NOT falling on the sword anymore!