Seriously folks, you can stop writing about how angry Hillary makes you now.
Bashing Hillary, fairly or unfairly, is both unnecessary and increasingly beside the point.
I think most of us are well aware by now that you and other members of the community think she's disingenuous and cynical and that she should drop out. I'm not disagreeing with any of those things, but can't we come up with other things to talk about?
Just sayin'.
Advertisement
Indeed
May 28, 2008 3:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
After 6 solid months of repeating the same palavar, it would be asking too much to quit cold turkey. These people would end up running around in circles chewing on their tails, knawing on their excrement.
May 28, 2008 10:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd say the same about all of the VP speculation.
May 28, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Veep speculation is different, because it's an actual open question. But yes, it is something that can be way over-obsessed on by we political junkies.
May 28, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
This makes me really angry.
um. sorry. Reflex.
May 28, 2008 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
How can I stop when she and her people won't stop making me ANGRY! Every time I hear her raise the bar and change the rules, my f*&^%$@ head feels like it is going to pop. The lies, attacks, lack of respect for fellow party members. ARGHHHHHHH!!!!!!
May 29, 2008 12:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
The lies, attacks, lack of respect for fellow party members.
Funny. Exactly how I feel about Obama-bots.
It's my understanding that Obama supporters believe that they are the "new" Democratic Party and that all Clinton supporters are no longer needed ... or wanted.
I'm reasonably certain that Barack Obama cannot be elected to national office without my vote, and the votes of the millions of Clinton supporters you want to disappear.
Just sayin'.
Thanks.
mp
May 29, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
"I'm reasonably certain that Barack Obama cannot be elected to national office without my vote, and the votes of the millions of Clinton supporters you want to disappear."
Don't include yourself. My vote will nullify yours.
So there!
May 29, 2008 1:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
And can we please knock off the "Open Letter to _____ Supporters." Please??? Or I'll be forced to write "An Open Letter to Crazed TPM Open Letter-Writers."
May 29, 2008 2:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes We Can!
But we don't wanna, I'm afraid.
May 28, 2008 3:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Trying to do my small part to help begin to unify the Democratic Party, I had promised myself that I would halt criticism of Clinton in print and on the Web. There is, after all, so much to be said about McCain and Co. But this evening I find myself unable to carry through on this pledge. There are two significant reasons."
From "Why I Can't Stop Criticizing Hillary, yet (although I wish I could)"
http://msa4.wordpress.com/
[I wrote the above on May 26....sadly, I am still trying, although I have refrained from new writing blogs on her.)
May 28, 2008 10:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. I've done my share of dialing for Obama. But my heart sinks when I look at the rec list these days, and see so many versions of the same point.
May 28, 2008 3:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
What's this? Why I do declare, it's a whiff of fresh air!. It's something new!
(scrolls down)
Oh well, nice while it lasted.
:(
May 29, 2008 12:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
Andrew,
It is like telling Josh to stop writing muckraker. For too long we have had the wool pulled over our eyes. Lies, corruption, deceitfulness.
Most of us have been posting here before this whole election got started. I personally started posting during the US Atty scandal.
Most of us here have a pretty good bullshit detector and when the fate of our nation depends on who will be the next president we have 2 democratic choices:
A decent, honest, ethical person with good judgment
or
A Fox news, Karl Rove, Richard Melon Scaife loving candidate.
You might as well tell us to stop criticizing the Bush Administration.
May 28, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, Josh doesn't write Muckraker.
But setting that aside, we focus on uncovering new information and persuading people to think about new things. Notice that we're not still writing about the US Attorney scandal, since folks picked up on that and everything...
May 28, 2008 3:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
On that -- I generally agree that the TPM talk blogs could be a little more interesting (including some of the junk I write -- usually reactionary). Maybe you guys could start highlighting good reader blogs on the from TPM page or the TPMEC or Muck front pages (as in highlighting in posts by you guys; not just those voted up on the side).
May 28, 2008 3:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or maybe folks can just vote on better blog posts :)
May 28, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha. That would be nice. But maybe a little persuasion through publicity or exposure-by-example might help.
Think of the more successful DKos diaries. They are nurtured by those who run the site. I know this isn't meant to be Kos2.1, but the idea of nurturing the good isn't terrible.
May 28, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
They are doing a good job of rescuing posts here these days with "The Ones That Got Away."
May 28, 2008 4:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the RBC meeting coming up and speculation on HRC's arguments are pretty current. As well as speculation that legal activities might ensue from the decision. There are many topics on this primary that are still current and news is being added everyday. I'd love to say "forget it, lets concentrate on other newsworthy events" but this seems to be the most important in a lot of posters minds right now. It would be a mistake to ignore her and assume it is McCain vs Obama.
In my mind it is no different than posting the newest outrage in a congressional hearing. Granted there are different players, but they are all part of the Bush Administration. So too with the outrages of HRC campaign.
We can agree to disagree, but the recommended list speaks for itself. This is what people want to talk about.
I am sick of it too, Andrew, but ignoring it will not make it go away. Things will calm down once we have a definite nominee.
May 28, 2008 4:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great points.
As long as there is something to discuss that is topical (and let's face it, Hillary keeps making mistakes that cause a good portion of Obama's supports to scream "WTF?" at the TV) and there are agent provocateurs of whatever camp spreading disinformation or out-right lies about Barack, I am afraid this is what will be discussed and recommended on the site.
I've tried non-election related posts before and they fail miserably.
I also take exception to the idea that the current crop (or most past crops) of Recommended Posts are all based on Hillary Hate, an idea that is taking hyperbole and promoting it to reality. Most blogs that are critical; of Hillary or her surrogates carry a faint (sometimes not so faint) hint of disgust and disbelief, but are mostly on recent topics form the campaign and are hardly fact-less diatribes.
Some may even approach the level of vitriol that would be worthy of pause or censure. Most, though, are simply musings on the state of the campaign or attempts to debunk the corporate media narrative or highlight something that escaped under the radar. They use strong, uncompromising language, but that doesn't mean they are hateful.
This is what truth feels like. It can be ugly. It can be loud. But it is almost always helpful to move the discussion forward, no matter how uncomfortable it may be in the short-term.
May 29, 2008 8:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
But Andrew, we don't have a nominee! Can't we please whine until, like, June 4? Then we'll stop. We promise.
May 28, 2008 4:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ahhh..but can we keep that promise Bunnykit?
May 28, 2008 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think it will die down once the stories on TPM die down. You're asking the community to ignore fairly constant Lanny, Ickes, and Hillary quotes that are being posted all over the Election Central site.
I'm done with the primary, too. But until she decides she's done, she's is sucking all the oxygen out of the room (as someone else recently said). She's doing her best the poison the well.
May 28, 2008 3:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good point. If TPM would quit posting annoyingly meaningless polls and articles explaining how Hillary still has a chance to win, I think people would be a lot less inclined to express their feelings about her.
May 28, 2008 5:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. But those annoyingly meaningless polls and articles will continue being posted until Hillary gives up.
But Hillary won't give up. Ever. When Obama takes the oath of office, she'll be twisting arms to become President Pro Tem of the Senate, and reminding people that seven Speakers of the House have died in office and Spiro Agnew had to resign as Vice President, so, you know, anything can happen.
May 28, 2008 7:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not getting what's wrong with telling us what's being printed elsewhere. Hell, Greg Sargent posted quotes from a thing with quotes about Clinton's screwy calculus, pointing out in his post that her math was screwy, and the entire post got clogged with angry accusations that by posting it he was arguing that Clinton was right.
I'm guessing that there'll be posts here about Hillary even after Obama gets elected. That's what happens when we get too partisan. It's like the movement feminists who can't allow for the idea that women should be able to vote for whomever they want. They're still fighting the old fight; some Obama supporters will keep yelling the rest of their lives.
May 28, 2008 10:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not saying there's anything wrong about those items being posted. They're being posted because the issues are unresolved, so the news items are relevant. When the issues are resolved, then those sorts of news items will no longer be relevant, and for the same reason, the comments about Hillary will drop by a couple of orders of magnitude.
Hillary will still be in the news, but I hope (without high confidence) that at some point she'll stop endorsing McCain, arguing that Florida voters should vote for McCain if the DNC doesn't seat all of the delegates, and all the other things that serve no purpose other than keeping her campaign on life support at the expense of hurting Democratic chances in November.
May 29, 2008 1:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
There's nothing wrong with it. But they should expect us not to respond to the items they post. And hearing, day after day after day, that Hillary still thinks she can win this thing is annoying and insulting to one's intelligence. We know, we know, we fucking know what she thinks.
May 29, 2008 6:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'd much rather yell about the deplorable state of the country than some two-bit politician who can't seem to get much done despite years of diligent effort.
I am pretty sure most Obama supporters would love to talk about anything but the primary election. Hillary won't concede, though, so the drama continues.
As soon as Barack is the nominee, we can turn to eviscerating McCain and use that as a springboard toward eviscerating the political and financial elites that are killing this country's future in exchange for 1,000 acres in Argentina.
May 29, 2008 8:10 AM | Reply | Permalink
i wholeheartedly concur. if those who run TPM would prefer to see less criticism of Hillary because its a done deal and she is no longer relevant, they should stop breathing oxygen into the hypocritical and bankrupt arguments the candidate and her surrogates put forward to justify their claim to a place in a continuing and relevant contest.
cuz, ya know, those kinds of arguments are what get us anti-hypocrisy/bankruptcy types riled.
May 29, 2008 2:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, it's like you're serving us big, steaming bowls of poo and telling us to eat up and keep quiet about it.
We want some good chow, dammit!
May 29, 2008 10:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Seriously Andrew, you should complain to whichever joker came up with the brilliant idea of an eight-month primary campaign. After so many months of spin and lies and bullshit, sanity is becoming scarce. Folks just want it to be over, but are absolutely powerless to make it so. Of course they're restless.
May 28, 2008 3:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am looking forward to the 10 July, 2008 hearing of Karl Rove in the House Judiciary Committee in light of Scott McClellan's memoir.
May 28, 2008 3:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now you're talking!
May 28, 2008 4:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting. I'd like to know more. Does McClellan get into the selective-prosecution angle at all? I had the impression that was why Rove was testifying.
May 28, 2008 4:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll believe it when I see the Master of Darkness actually appear at the hearing in his black cloak and mask.
May 28, 2008 10:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
OH, come on, we all miss BionicSoy. Did you ban him or what? Let him come back! Free BionicSoy!
Just kidding.
May 28, 2008 4:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
This really is good news for Hillary.
May 28, 2008 4:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have found it depressing how simple minded so many of those kind of posts are and at their great quantity. I once looked to TPM for pre-eminent political analysis and I really don't understand why TPM has let it go this far as to be branded with the Hillary obsessive compulsives therapy group.
If it was my website, I would have made a statement along these lines quite some time ago. If I were you, I'd make it clearer that it's coming from management, not just Andrew Golis, member. Of course, I'm not you, but you really should be aware that you have been branded this way by many elsewhere in the blogosphere after the big influx of bloggers with your new system They took over the website brand, and management just let it happen, and it is the website brand now according to many comments I have seen elsewhere.
It's not just the blogs, I have been struck by how many of Greg Sargent threads simply ignore the topic after a few comments and go into Hillary-hating group meeting mode, with reaffirmation after reaffirmation.
I am an Obama supporter but I am interested in politics, and a site specializing in Hillary hating is not at the top of my list, sorry. Many of the Hillary obsessed are going to continue until she leaves public life, so the nomination of Obama is not a solution to the problem of attracting this audience.
May 28, 2008 4:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you're consistently confusing the reader discussions with the content created in house. We don't censor reader contributions, so with the exception of posts like mine pushing back on particular dumbness, the community will be what it decides to be.
If you don't like the reader posts, I think there are a few things to do:
1. recommend good posts.
2. write good posts.
3. ignore them and read the vast majority of the content.
I'm hoping to encourage folks to do 1 and 2.
May 28, 2008 4:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kudos! (and good luck!)
May 28, 2008 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think more needs to be done here, Andrew. It sounds so convivial and idealistic to call the readers a community. But if more isn't done by management to provide the sort of structure that makes a real community possible, you eventually just get a mob. Over time, bad content drives out good. Pretty soon, the Reader Posts section will just resemble the comments sections on tabloid sites like Huffington Post, 600 or 700 one-line fragments of barking idiocy.
I'm particularly concerned about the effect of the reader generated posts on the in-house content, apart from whatever changes should be made to the Reader Posts section. It strikes me that the in-house side of the site is at risk, and the number of comments on Book Club posts and other non-election posts is shrinking, because the site is being swamped by the pure political junkie community being steered in from TPM EC. I'd like to see the reader generated content and the in house TPM Cafe content separated out into separate sites. When I'm in the mood to get into it over elections and political fights, I could visit one site, and when I am in the mood for more elevated discussion on issues and ideas, I could visit the other site. Maybe then you could then start to rebuild the Cafe community, and reverse the diaspora.
If things keep going the way they are going, soon Todd Gitlin and William Hartung are going to find that there is nobody left who is interested in commenting on their posts. It was somewhat embarrassing that old friend Matthew Yglesias could find so few people here who were interested in discussing his new book.
May 28, 2008 8:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. There are some comments on TPM which are really worthwhile, and there needs to be a distinction between the 'low' and 'high' brow stuff. I enjoy reading short, snappy and witty threads about Clinton, or Election-related threads on VP (I think this contributes in large part to what TPM is all about) - but then I really prefer policy suggestions/discussions, or slightly more intense theoretical point made in more elaborate, considered posts.
Ultimately though, this division that you suggest shouldn't be properly contemplated until possibly the entire election season has died down. The end of the primaries will go a long way to re-establishing the balance here, and post-November will be a good time to step back and then re-evaluate, rather than doing so in the midsts of a heated election season.
May 28, 2008 9:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Your points are well taken, Dan K. And some of us could see this happening - including all the dangers you mention - within days of the "new Cafe" back in Feb.
We were at times considered nay-sayers and complainers but what you write is a big concern and your points are well taken.
TPM was, except for EC, a site of "discussion" and basically a calm place. I still value the reporting. But am dismayed at the chaos.
Inner peace is called for. "Insight Meditation." I'm not kidding! It begins in our hearts. Peace. Calm reflection. Because retaliatory mobs do not make for reflection and wisdom.
That's what I meant above about "good luck." I applaud Andrew's finally turning his own personal attention to this matter. But boy... good luck, Andrew!
May 29, 2008 11:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
I, for one, am getting better at clicking on a post, scanning it, and if it's flamey I go back to the list. Move on, folks, nothing to see here...
May 28, 2008 10:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
The problem, Andrew, is that she just won't stop making us MORE angry.
May 28, 2008 4:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Have a drink, take a deep breath, and move on.
May 28, 2008 4:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you ever read TPM EC?
If you don't want people discussing the primaries, stop posting news related to the primaries. Seriously. Just today there are four or five news items straight from or about Camp Hillary.
I can see where you're coming from and why you don't like the incessant Hillary bashing. But you can't feed the frenzy and simultaneously complain that there is, in fact, a frenzy. (Well, you can, but it leads nowhere.)
May 28, 2008 4:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, but you see, those are NEWS and have NEW information. Also, the proportion of our HRC reporting (see Muck, the front page, analysis and opinion at Cafe) to other things is drastically different than in these discussion areas.
May 28, 2008 5:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly, it's NEWS. Which is why folks get pissed off ANEW under the onslaught of freshly shoveled BS.
What you are really arguing for is shorter nomination process (and I'm with you on that). A nomination process that takes this long will always end up like this. I see no way around that.
May 28, 2008 5:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's really it. Clinton continues to fight, and so Obama's supporters are forced to continue to fight as well. If we Obama supporters were to somehow let this slip away in the final minutes and let in a Hillary miracle buzzer beater, because we grew complacent and stopped playing defense, we would never, ever, ever be able to forgive ourselves. So until she quits the battle goes on.
A couple of weeks ago, there was a vague message floating about in the media that the Clintons were just going to stay in until June 3rd, for the sake of honor and dignity, but were scaling down and beginning to pack it in. But that turns out not to have been true. She is still out there battling hard every day, disparaging Obama's candidacy and chances, working the refs on Michigan and Florida, etc. What are we supposed to do, just lie down and let her walk all over our guy?
May 28, 2008 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly.
May 29, 2008 8:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Ahh, I see, you don't want to know about the things that you don't like. If TPM tells you whatever insanity there is in the world, that means they are trying to upset you.
This is a classic "if you can't take the heat" moment. I'm for Obama, and I want to know what Hillary's saying. I'm beginning to be horrified by Hillary's antics, and sometimes I even find it kind of funny in a painful and sick way. And most of the time I don't get mad anymore; I file it away in case someone wants to hear it later.
This isn't an Obama-centric site, no matter how many Obama supporters congregate here. If you want Obama-centric, I hear DailyKos is the place to be.
May 28, 2008 10:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey! Give credit where credit is due!
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/05/hillarys-concession-speech-pla.php
May 28, 2008 4:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Okay Dad...but can we still bash McCain? How about Lieberman?
May 28, 2008 4:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know that the reason I have trouble laying off of Hillary is the sense of betrayal - she was one of the good guys (gender neutral "guys") but then it changed...
May 28, 2008 4:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think there's anything wrong w/ folks feeling betrayed, or generally being frustrated and upset with Clinton. I've had my moments, for sure.
But at a certain point I think folks need to just accept what's happened and start to talk about something else. For the good of the progressive movement (Obama's people can't live in a PTSD state forever) and for the sake of this community being an interesting place to exchange ideas.
May 28, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. Seriously.
May 28, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Andrew, when this is all over, we'll all look back on this time and vomit.
May 28, 2008 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama's people can't live in a PTSD state forever
wow, that's an ugly and generalizing statement.
May 28, 2008 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh come on, take it easy. I'm not saying "all obama people" are anything. Conversations like this are really boring if people are just looking for reasons to be offended.
May 28, 2008 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not looking for a reason to be offended. I'm taking it easy. No worries.
I am calling you out on your snarky generalization, because you're snarking on the people you are trying to influence.
Otherwise, I agree with you. More often than not I stay away from reader posts for the reasons you state.
I think I recall you writing about how hard snark is to pull off, and is better left off a comment or post. Atleast it was in one of your recent threads.
May 28, 2008 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's a puzzling comment anyway. We're not in the "post-trauma" stage yet. The primary campaign is, regrettably, still going on.
Believe me, I'm exhausted and can't wait until this thing is over. But I don't feel I can afford to check into the PTSD center yet, while the battle is still going on and my side is still taking fire.
I've been hearing several versions of this same argument from Clinton people for a few weeks now. The Clinton forces want to reserve the right to keep fighting, but demand that Obama supporters stop, because when we fight back it hurts their feelings. The healing can begin once Clinton suspends her campaign. If Clinton supporters really want that process to begin now, they should pound out an email to the Clinton campaign and tell them to stop.
May 28, 2008 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am not asking Obama supporters to stop fighting. I am asking them to stop hating. There is a difference between opposing someone and hating them. Some Obama supporters do not know that.
I prefer Clinton to Obama, but I certainly don't hate him. In fact, I like him and if I didn't think she would make a far better president, I would support him. If he wins, I will vote for him without holding my nose.
I have misgivings about him. Very serious ones. I am troubled by how conservative he is and how unambitious his policies are, particularly in contrast to his rhetoric. You could argue that his nomination is the true death of liberalism - since he has not argued a liberal agenda at all for the nomination. His rationale for being elected is all about "changing politics" but not with specifics.
I also have qualms about his open religiosity. I know I won't get to vote for an atheist for president in my life time, but I am not happy about someone who argues for increasing the presence of religion in politics and says having to say the pledge of allegiance, etc. never hurt anybody. Obama has expressed opinions about atheists that offend me. However, that's a given. I accept it. I don't hate him for it.
The thing is....I have many reasons to oppose Obama and yet still manage not to hate him. Now, if I wanted to I could obsess about his "you're nice enough" comment or rail against his arrogance in running for the presidency during his first Senate term...mainly based on the media reaction to one speech. If I obsessed on it, I suppose I could work up a good hate, but that's counter-productive.
May 29, 2008 6:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Haha...okay, now it's time to roll out the necessary West Wing reference:
Andrew, you've descended into LemonLyman.com. Once you get these folks riled up, there's no stopping them. It's like Lord of the Flies in here. Watch out or all the anti-Hillary folks will just start fixating on you, instead.
Seriously, though, I'm behind you. If you leave the site for a week and come back it's a little unsettling because the main page is all new, and the cafe NEVER CHANGES.
I haven't complained because, then, I'd like have to, um, POST something different, and I just, like, don't have the time? But if YOU'RE complaining, I'll back you up :)
May 28, 2008 10:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
And for those of you who didn't know, I had Hobbes FIRST. BLEH.
May 28, 2008 10:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Andrew, I guess it depends on what personally bores you. I'm bored by and will therefore gladly skip reading the "stop talking about Hillary" posts, if you'll skip the posts where we keep airing our thoughts on the topic.
There are obviously people with a great deal left to say about Hillary -- and Hillary and company fuel this fire daily. When she stops fanning the flames , the fire will die. Until then, people WILL react.
May 29, 2008 2:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not PTSD. The trauma isn't over, it's ongoing.
Look at it this way, Andrew - it's going to be over by November :)
Well, unless some kind of repeat of 2000 happens. In that case, it might take a bit longer.
May 28, 2008 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Andrew, you say: "But at a certain point I think folks need to just accept what's happened and start to talk about something else."
Problem is, it isn't "what's happened", it is what is happening. Now.
It's a bit premature to be accepting and moving on. If what she is doing is newsworthy enough to be reported here, surely we're allowed to take it seriously too, enough to comment about it.
May 28, 2008 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
A fair point...
May 28, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let me try ..... If I have to listen to grumpy old McJohn McLame prattle on like a fascist lite Grampa Simpson for four actual years I might not make it. America will not make it. The World will not make it. Gimme the skinny kid.
May 29, 2008 1:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
We'll go away when she goes away.
May 28, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
You bastards!!
LEAVE HILLARY ALOOOOOOOOOOOONE!!!!!!!!!!!
May 28, 2008 5:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Charming Lamont.
May 28, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
They can't stop. They hate her more than they like Obama. They're doing more to hurt Obama's campaign than she is.
OK, maybe not more, but really, guys, you're making me look bad.
May 28, 2008 10:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I actually thought it was funny. But what the hell do I know? I have PTSD apparently, after all.
May 29, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that the Hillary bashing will quit the day after she makes a gracious concession speach. When do you think that will happen?
May 28, 2008 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Soon. She is not crazy. She or Edwards should be VP. I am serious to win this. They both help Barry a lot where he needs it. What if McLame takes Leiberman? Has anybody polled this stuff?
May 29, 2008 1:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
The VP choice has been polled. Edwards does best but claims he is not interested. I do not blame him. Webb polled almost as well and would make one hell of an attacke dog in the general.
PS I gave Hillary credit for not being insane several times in the process only to have her prove me wrong. I will wait for her to prove it this time.
May 29, 2008 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
On a more serious note, I think this fixation with Hillary has many deeply rooted causes, that actually are very interesting from a policy and political perspective. Her candidacy has raised the following issues:
1) sexism, or the lack thereof, in politics, and society
2) racism
3) entitlement, in the sense that we have moved into the deeply uncomfortable realm of family dynasties in power
4) electoral politics (how the DNC apportions delegates)
5) voting strategies (caucuses versus primaries)
6) fundraising, disclosure, and conflicts of interest
7)a palpable shift in the blue/red map as African American voters can really transform the southern vote--actually being empowered
8) integrity in the process--when can you bend the rules?
So, although it has been tiresome, I don't think it is all chitchat for naught. There have been some really raw and enlightening conversations about feminism, racism, and other issues. If Obama and Clinton were further apart on the issues, there would be more to debate there. I can't wait to see the real substantive discussions start once it's Obama v. McCain.
May 28, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Those discussions won't happen on TPM, not if its past history is anything to go by. The only Republicans on TPM have always been trolls and troublemakers. Sensible Republicans have been very, very rare. Not so surprising since TPM has never had what you could call a pro-Republican slant.
I would be happy to be wrong about this.
May 28, 2008 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, and those things have been hashed out over and over and over and over again on these pages.
I mean, there are still valuable things to be said on these topics, I'm sure. But I'm reading a lot of rehashing and short angry emotional posts that don't move discussion forward at all.
May 28, 2008 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, come on, Andrew. Look at the current list of posts by Greg Sargent. It's like an invitation to engage in asinine conversation. I mean, do we really need to read about a Gallup poll that shows Hillary beating McCain by a wider margin than Obama at this point in the election cycle? I think not. Greg's one of the main instigators here. He seems to go out of his way...
May 28, 2008 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've got to say I agree - the bulk of the reporting at EC in the last couple of months has been what Hillary said, what Hillary is doing, what Hillary might do, how such and such piece of news will affect Hillary, etc. At least that is my impression. (And if it isn't, one of our usual trolls will be sure to drop in an OT comment to change the topic.)
Many of us have had pretty high expectations for Greg and Eric, based on past reporting, so it makes it just that much harder not to take the bait when they start to fall into White House Press Corps mode instead of applying a dispassionate, critical eye on the information they are forwarding to us.
Emotions are high, too - this isn't a baseball game with some of us rooting for one team and some for another. The stakes are real, and the consequences of the Democratic infighting might be paid for decades, just when we were experiencing real hope for the future.
That said, I do understand and share your frustration, Andrew, and look forward to the day when we are talking about other things! I just don't want those topics to have anything to do with McCain's nominations for the Supreme Court, or how many bombs we have dropped on Iran.
May 28, 2008 6:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, especially when the point is, for the Democratic Party, that both are beating McCain.
May 29, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Kate, I wish we had more talk about that. Some threads touch on it, but usually peter out into flames. I'm particularly interested in the changing electoral map and the influence it'll have on the Democratic party. After all, they're excited to have a real fundraiser on their side, and will want to capitalize on that as much as possible.
Maybe sometime in July we can start having intelligent conversations about that.
May 28, 2008 10:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope so too. I think emotions are running high, but these issues are below the surface.
May 28, 2008 11:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just want to let everybody know, for historical reference, that this was the day Audie Murphy died in a car crash.
I just automatically think of May 28 as Audie Death Day, in case that ever pops up in conversation and it seems inexplicable or inappropriate to you.
So don't freak out or make a big deal out of it if I bring it up.
May 28, 2008 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, I was just about to post something about how tired I am of all of this, but it has a decidedly "tired of Hillary specifics" bent to it. So I shall resist in honor of your request. Although I am sad because I thought it was much needed humor in this regard. But, I do get you point. Besides we need to save up our energy for McClain bashing, and stopping Iran bashing, and speculative oil price bashing, and Republican VP whoever they may be bashing, and blogging, hoping, praying that Rove finally gets his from Congress bashing!
May 28, 2008 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amen.
May 28, 2008 5:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I for one will be so glad when this primary is over, because I finally won't have to put up with all the so called Democrats who have turned into haters ...
May 28, 2008 5:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
Krugman is a douche bag and that opinion piece is a piece of shit based on zero investigation or an ounce of objectivity. If you are going to link to fantasy at least make it interesting fantasy.
May 29, 2008 9:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
Haters, eh?
You wussies can lay down for this hypocracy but I won't:
Last August, when the DNC Rules Committee voted to strip Florida (and Michigan, if it persisted in clinging to its date) of its delegates, the Clinton delegates on the committee backed those sanctions. All 12 Clinton supporters on the committee supported the penalties. (The only member of the committee to vote against them was an Obama supporter from Florida.) Harold Ickes, a committee member, leading Clinton strategist and acknowledged master of the political game, said, "This committee feels very strongly that the rules ought to be enforced." Patty Solis Doyle, then Clinton's campaign manager, further affirmed the decision. "We believe Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina play a unique and special role in the nominating process," she said, referring to the four states that the committee authorized to hold the first contests. "And we believe the DNC's rules and its calendar provide the necessary structure to respect and honor that role. Thus, we will be signing the pledge to adhere to the DNC-approved nominating calendar."
(KOS POST 5/29)
The relevance of the continuing frustration is coming to the forefront on Saturday. Given recent statements by camp-loser, the shenanigans won't end soon.
Until the door hits her in the ass--The beatings will continue as scheduled. No Mercy.
'Bama '08-- "Kickin' Hilary Ass Fo' Eh-va!--'cause she just don't get it!"
May 29, 2008 12:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
I would like to toss my 2 cents in with those who point out that much of the reaction responds to the coverage that the TPM staff provides. Over 50% of the coverage could/should be expected to incite negative feelings in Obama supporters directed at Hillary Clinton. Of the 12 topics on ElectionCentral, these 6 are all about BS that Clinton is pulling - most of them different angles on the exact same thing:
"Hillary: All Evidence Says I'm The Stronger Candidate"
"Dem Party Lawyers Say Rules Committee Can't Seat Full Delegations"
"Gallup: Hillary Is Right About General Election -- Sort Of"
"Hillary's Letter To Super-Delegates: I'm The One"
"Hillary Camp Again Invokes Florida Recount Debacle; Obama Camp Says They're Not Encouraging Protests"
"Harold Ickes: Hillary Will Need "A Few" More Super-Dels Than Obama To Catch Him"
That's like yelling "FIRE" and expecting nobody to scream and run for the exits.
Maybe first you should start by having a little talk with Greg. He doesn't even seem to think that the Idaho republican primary is worth mentioning, but we get 6 stories about Clinton's party-wrecking emotional breakdown. Is it any wonder why people keep obsessing?
May 28, 2008 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
To restate this, the reader blogs don't make news, they respond to news.
May 28, 2008 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
That should be "of the 12 topics from today on ElectionCentral" (Yesterday was similar though).
May 28, 2008 6:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
EC is one of four active sites here at TPM. You might consider checking some of the others out.
May 28, 2008 6:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, I think kgb999's point is a fair one. He's not suggesting that we need more alternatives to election news. He's arguing that we need more alternative election news. EC still spends a lot of digital ink on the Clinton-Obama contest. People who read about the contest on EC are more likely to write about it. I think that if EC spent a little less time on Wolfson's latest charade and more time on the general election, the reader blogs would evolve more quickly to the GE.
My last post offers a case in point. I'm trying to focus on the GE, and my previous post was about Republicans. But my last post, while not a Hillary hit piece, was a Clinton-critical analysis of the primary contest which was directly inspired by one of Greg's news stories. When so much of what I read is still Clinton-Obama, it's hard to get it out of my head.
May 28, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Has Obama won the nomination and we just haven't heard? You're asking Andrew to adopt the mindset of the Obama supporters that "He's Won!!" But he hasn't won. Is it a 3 foot putt? OK. Sink the putt rather than asking for a gimme and TPM will cover it as it unfolds. It's what they do.
May 28, 2008 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is not a 'three foot put'. The ball is hanging on the rim and we are waiting for it to fall. Studay the RBC will stomp.
May 29, 2008 3:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed, Genghis. Although I did notice that Greg and Eric posted several general election pieces this afternoon.
May 28, 2008 8:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent, excellent point, kgb999. Well done.
May 28, 2008 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Very, very cool avatar. Dr. Who, I presume?
May 28, 2008 10:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Scheiss. That was a reply to kgb999's first comment.
May 28, 2008 10:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's Christopher Lloyd as Judge Doom from Who Framed Roger Rabbit.
May 29, 2008 1:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
It was the buggy eyes that got me; it was hard to see the details. Cool avatar, cool name. You're so cool.
May 29, 2008 9:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
NOT UNTIL SHE DROPS OUT!
May 28, 2008 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
What????????????????????????
and spoil all of our fun???????????
No way.... Besides everyday there is something new to be angry about or befuddled by or shocked and disappointed or something we must reject AND denounce (because simply denouncing or rejecting is not enough).
May 28, 2008 6:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know how you people can be so angry at Hillary when right now Rachel Ray is walking the streets wearing the scarf of our Islamofascist Oppressors.
May 28, 2008 6:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excuse me, that's "Rachel Abu Ray" now, or hadn't you gotten the memo. She's cooking up some WMD/IED/PDFs that can blow up thousands of people through their e-mail.
May 28, 2008 7:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
IEDs in just 30 minutes, kids!
May 28, 2008 8:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Anyone can become angry; that is easy. But to be angry with the right person, to the right degree, at the right time, with the right purpose and in the right way — that is not easy." Aristotle
May 28, 2008 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Except with Hillary. With Hillary it's easy." FreeBubba
May 28, 2008 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Bashing Hillary, fairly or unfairly, is both unnecessary and increasingly beside the point. "
It is not beside the point. Hillary is a person of very poor character who is right now, at this moment, trying to force her sociopathic will upon the USA.
May 28, 2008 7:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
So are Dick Cheney, John McCain, Bill O'Reilly, Elizabeth Hasselbeck, Harvey Weinstein, Carrot Top, and the guy who invented pop-up windows.
All I'm sayin is, let's hear more about them too.
May 28, 2008 7:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Heavens! What could you possibly have against Carrot Top?!
May 29, 2008 2:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: Ecclesiastes 3:1
Now is the season for "Hillary Hating". The season ends the day she quits trying to subvert the rules for her selfish benifit with no concern for any one else or any principaled postition. The day after she is forced to withdraw by the supers then McCain is in the sights all alone. Till then it is dual season.
May 29, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bashing is always besides the point. Anger keeps us from thinking clearly. Thus Obama's supernatural calm.
May 28, 2008 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually I think it is Reverend Wright who is trying to force his sociopathic will on the USA .... just a guess. Hey Barry sure slid the knife in him when he got ripe. The Clintons are great politicians, and all politicians are good liars. You really don't want to know the truth anyway, it will be in Chinese and you won't understand it.
May 29, 2008 2:19 AM | Reply | Permalink
Then bring up a new topic yourself that is worth discussing. Whining about others' whining is pretty weak.
May 28, 2008 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary Clinton has spent her entire adult life in public service of one kind of another.
You may think Barak Obama is a better choice for president, you may not agree with her policies or the way she's run her campaign. But she has dedicated her life to trying to make things, in her opinion, better, and she deserves better than that kind fo comment.
May 28, 2008 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jonestown has to blame someone this November. Doubt has crept into the Peoples Temple. Bashing Hillary is their way of anticipating the worst, and of absolving Rev. Jones for the loss.
May 28, 2008 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
My god they WILL blame her if Barry doesn't pull this off. It wasn't his fault. She did it. She did it.
May 29, 2008 2:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
If you support Obama, I would have to agree there is no reason to attack Clinton.
Repeat to yourself:
I want PRESIDENT OBAMA
Then think about nasty posts against Clinton and ask, "do they help you achieve this goal?" I don't always do that but I should and so should more of us.
Then talk about McCain or even throw in a conversation about an issue.
Failing that, pick on Andrew Golis (did you volunteer for the sake of the cause to be the surrogate for HRC when we are angry?).
May 28, 2008 8:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Andrew,
This is the most disingenuous post I've seen from the "official" TPM staff. Stop posting every burp and belch from the Clinton Campaign if you think the election is over!
Hillary doesn't think the fight is over. She is now going to try GOP tactics to use the DNC ruling on MI and FL as a pseudo-referendum on the 2000 election. Complete with protesters a la what the Bush people did in 2000.
Do you remember how the Dems said "let's just let the process play out"?
That's the reason why we ended up with Bush. He simply acted as if he were elected.
For the record, I will note that my peak oil posts don't get nearly the same airplay -- either in terms of comments or recommends -- as my posts on the election. I have many ideas as to why. Perhaps it's because you actually have to have a deeper appreciation of issues to read them. I see similar "low-turnout" from other serious blogs here. But everyone now has an opinion of Hillary -- and she really does polarize everything she touches.
That's not leadership.
Hillary is toxic to the American political process. As David Geffen said (and I now believe): the Clintons lie so easily. She has made this campaign a referendum about her: her as a woman, her as a Clinton. I can't remember the last time she talked about a substantial issue facing the country in a careful manner.
Can you?
She has clearly shown that the only way she will let the process move on is to have been literally beaten into submission. I am happy to oblige.
May 28, 2008 8:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
You just made my point for me.
May 28, 2008 8:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly.
What he (or she) said. Clearthinker really is.
May 28, 2008 9:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is the most disingenuous post I've seen from the "official" TPM staff. Stop posting every burp and belch from the Clinton Campaign if you think the election is over!
Really sums up all I had to say, and does so with more tact that I generally use.
May 29, 2008 1:22 AM | Reply | Permalink
Talking about beating a woman into submission is more than distasteful. If you can't remember when she has last discussed a substantial issue ..... you have a bad bad memory. The enemy is McLame. FOCUS YOURSELF.
May 29, 2008 2:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
umm, today she talked about the GI Bill of Rights. Yesterday, tribal sovereignty. Day before, housing prices.
I could go on, but it would be silly. Saying Clinton is not specific on the issues while supporting Obama is the ultimate. In fact, thanks for the big laugh.
May 29, 2008 5:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is hilarious
May 31, 2008 2:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Watching this nomination campaign unfold has been like viewing two good personal married friends of my wife and I going through an ugly divorce. It didn't need to be like this.
May 28, 2008 8:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Everytime I think I'm done she or bill pulls yet another disqusting move, and I'm right back in it. I'll stop when she concedes,so it may be a long,hot summer. Feel the Hillmentum.......
May 28, 2008 8:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Andrew Golis:
"HALP!"
May 28, 2008 9:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
It seems that what you're really asking for is a different set of criteria for us when we hit the recommend button, rather than a different mindset for what we write. The turnover is so fast on the 'recent' thread that I doubt many people manage to read anywhere near all of it. But perhaps we should just be more selective on our choice of what we think to be recommend-worthy.
May 28, 2008 9:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well if I wanted to talk about someone other than Hillary, Obama or McCain, I probably wouldn't be on a political blog. Hillary Clinton is still running, still claiming that she's the best candidate for the job. When/If she drops out, I'll stop criticizing her.
May 28, 2008 9:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'M ANGRY WITH HILLARY CLINTON!
I'm in complete agreement with Bserious. If Hillary would have stayed in her good sport silent mode and finished out the campaign like fellow Arkansan Mike Huckabee, then your plea for people to be silent about their unhappiness with her would make sense. She hasn't done that now. She's gotten worse! For goodness sake, it was not even a week ago that the woman had the nerve to make the sick, uncivilized suggestion about the "A-word" in invoking Robert Kennedy as a reason for staying in the race.
Then, she characteristically tried to blame Senator Obama for her remark and said that she was simply commenting on the dates of the primaries, even though because of this year's unparalleled early start date in Iowa, her reason was nullified (this primary has gone on much longer than Bill's or RFK's)
Lanny Davis, Howard Wolfson and the whole disgusting gang are out there with the awful Hillary Clinton trying to further divide the Democrats and only proving that she really is too divisive a figure, even for the Democratic Party. If she really cared about the party and beating the Republicans, she would shut up and help unify the party around the presumptive nominee, Barack Obama. Instead, proving again she has no class and is a sore loser.
Hillary Deathwatch on Slate.com still has her chances of winning the nomination at 0.5%.
http://www.slate.com/id/2192271/
"So Clinton is pushing her "popular vote" argument harder than ever. In a letter to superdelegates today, she wrote that "when the primaries are finished, I expect to lead in the popular vote and in delegates earned through primaries." The popular vote is within reach, assuming huge turnout in Puerto Rico. (Her claim that she's currently winning it is disingenuous, though, since that count includes Michigan, where Obama wasn't on the ballot.) The pledged-delegate count—or whatever she means by "delegates earned through primaries"—not so much...
...Still, Obama picks up three more superdelegates today. The campaign says it's now 46 delegates away from securing the nomination."
May 28, 2008 10:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Republicans aren't hard to spot.
May 28, 2008 11:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
What kgb999 said up above.
Physician, heal thyself.
May 28, 2008 10:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Seeing No Evil Can Come to No Good
http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/xxfactor/archive/2008/05/27/seeing-no-evil-can-come-to-no-good.aspx
We've been ill-served by a See-No-Evil media, by mavens who want to ref the game but then act like they're too cool to stoop to calling foul.
Josh is not afraid to call foul. That's what got me hooked on TPM. Don't get all righteous when readers respond to TPM EC's reports of the latest Clinton strategery by seeing evil.
May 28, 2008 11:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent comment, Chino.
May 28, 2008 11:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
On the money.
The studied gullibility of the media, is the most frustrating thing about the political process.
The idea that they are the fourth branch of government, a check on over reaching political power, seems to have nearly evaporated.
Most of the the DC press corps act like a steno pool, instead of peers of the politicians they are covering. Lot's of self importance but little skepticism.
May 29, 2008 12:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks.
Speaking of self importance, I've decided to post this comment.
http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/05/seeing-no-evil-can-come-to-no.php
May 29, 2008 1:15 AM | Reply | Permalink
The media does know better, but they play on public naivete, rendering them complicit with the administration. And that is unforgivable, particularly given the grave consequences that we have suffered as result in these last 8 years.
May 29, 2008 10:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
On recommending posts:
I suggest that rather than recommending every post you agree with, recommend posts that approach problems from a new angle or even propose issues you haven't thought of. If enough of us did that we wouldn't end up with half dozen each of Kennedy, MI & FL, Angry Women, or whatever posts clogging up the recommend list.
This site is not about venting your spleen about what's written or what Hillary says. Personally, I don't come here to be agreed with; I come here to learn stuff and figure things out and refine my own opinion. Bashing, insulting, perseverating on evils done to our beloved candidate--all of this is just venting. You don't think straight when you're mad. So how is this productive? How does this solve any problem?
May 28, 2008 10:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm writing to express my agreement with you. But perhaps I shouldn't do that: you didn't come here to be agreed with. This is so complicated.
May 28, 2008 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't come here to be pandered to, I guess. If you're pandering, get thee hence!
Seriously, though, thanks. I think you and I will win out over time. I should be more tolerant of people's need to vent, I guess. I might as well; I don't think they're going to stop soon.
May 29, 2008 9:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
Though the conundrum posed by TTGZ is puzzling, I'm going to agree some more, because I think Eliyah's point may be the most important one in this thread.
This isn't just about Hillary. Things go sour whenever we start to treat this site as a substitute for political action -- arguing and recommending blogs as if we were somehow "swinging" public opinion by doing it.
The audience here is small, and more importantly, it's made up of people with unusually firm political opinions. If you wanted to shape public opinion, it would be a better use of time to call your relatives. They're more likely to be undecided. The advantage of TPM is that we actually learn things -- new facts, new perspectives, new questions. That ought to be the main reason we push "recommend."
May 28, 2008 11:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
And maybe especially new opinions.
May 28, 2008 11:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary who?
May 28, 2008 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Go ahead; no one's stopping you. What did you want to talk about?
May 28, 2008 10:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Woof.
May 28, 2008 11:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am a recommend whore.
I've recommended posts without reading them. I've recommended posts because I like the poster's name or picture.
I recommend because I'm tickled by a particular use of italic, or a tasteful application of bold. I've recommended because a poster has abstained from using HTML altogether.
Does your post have a hyperlink? I've recommended it. If not, I've probably recommended it, too.
I recommend because I suspect a poster is drunk. I recommend to commend sobriety. I recommend gay posts. And straight ones. I have recommended ladies' posts to gain their favor.
I sometimes cruise late at night in disreputable districts of town, looking for posts to recommend.
God help me, I do love it so!
May 28, 2008 11:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
(((applause!!!)))
May 28, 2008 11:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do you recommend opium? You look like you might!
May 28, 2008 11:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hey! My kind of poster!
I do the same thing.
Byrn, Ai'' ber tarn eirdae sai tia paeraesari cal.
May 28, 2008 11:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Right on!
May 29, 2008 12:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, Lamont, after the "Blog Post Title" post, I'll forgive you just about anything. Most fun I've had on this site since Genghis and a few friends posted enough "replies" that they disappeared over the line, onto the dark side and the next dimension.
May 29, 2008 9:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
That was fun, wasn't it?
May 29, 2008 8:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
When are you usually online, Lamont? I'll make sure to post then... :)
May 29, 2008 9:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Part of the reason every thread devolves into tired rehashings of the same argument is the four or five people who do nothing but post obnoxious and hate-filled rantings a that derail each EC thread into arguments.There are people who really who really do nothing here but troll and it might be nice if there were some way to deal with that--either being able to hide things from specific posters or some enforcement of the terms of service. I believe it would help the atmosphere around here enormously and discourage a lot of the irritation that leads to HILLARY SUX, NO OBAMA SUX postings.
May 28, 2008 11:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Absolutely correct. And I think we all know who you're talking about here.
May 29, 2008 7:29 AM | Reply | Permalink
Greg, you really can't expect people to cease commenting/complaining about the latest HRC development at this juncture, just when we are approaching the climax of a legitimately amazing/appalling/stupefyingly weird primary process that so many of us are passionately engaged in! This is it, man - this is life, this is participatory democracy and free speech in all its glory and ugliness.
May 28, 2008 11:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ooops, I meant Andrew, not Greg! Obviously Greg cannot expect anyone to cease when he is feeding the inferno (as noted above by many others).
May 28, 2008 11:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
No. Hillary is just another Republican who pretends to be a Democrat for her convenience (just like Bill), and she makes me angry. She makes me just as angry as Bush, Rove and Lieberman. There.
Hillary => angry.
OK? Angry.
May 28, 2008 11:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are angry (crazy) because you obsess with personality and not policy. I imagine a lot of people are attracted to politics as some soap opera street theatre starring a cast of characters, but dude, it is POLICY that is being decided. The Clintons are basically trying to look out for lower and middle income people and the Bushes are trying to look out for the rich and richer. Hillary is nothing like Rove. AT ALL. Those opposite purpose worlds intersect massively in America. Get over it. True believers always freak out when they find out ....gasp .... no one is pure. Not even Barry.
May 29, 2008 1:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Politics is policy, but it is also process.
It is terribly naive to think that you can ignore the process. If the process is not understood, there is no reason to trust those who gain power by such a process to then enact policies in our favor.
The bickering may not be useful, but attempting to shed light on the process is.
May 29, 2008 2:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm angry, but not crazy, exactly because it's the Clintons' policies that make me angry. Weren't they the ones who did not want to help Bosnian people when they were murdered by the thousands in Nazi-like concentration camps just because that might have distracted American people from her precious healthcare plan. And how proud is she exactly of that plan? Why aren't we seeing more of Ira Magaziner, or in fact not seeing him at all, on Hillary's campaign trail?
May 29, 2008 9:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
"This is it, man - this is life...
That's really sad.
May 29, 2008 12:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
What I actually said was:
"This is it, man - this is life, this is participatory democracy and free speech in all its glory and ugliness."
Is that so sad? If so, please feel free to weep for me.
May 29, 2008 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hillary stole my watch.
May 29, 2008 12:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
Seriously, I left it in my locker when I was playing basketball and after I showered I came back and it was gone. The next day I saw her wearing one just like it and she saw me looking at it and laughed that cackle. Then she smiles and arches her eyebrows like she's daring me, "you got somethin to say? Huh, do ya? do ya?" Then she cocked her head at her secret servi