Hillary's Camp Responds To Obama's Latest Attacks

I thought rather than clutter up my earlier diary regarding Hillary's pop quiz with a third update, I'd post these in a diary in their own right.  I don't have much to add to all this really but I do want to make one point here before we get to the memos etc.

Do you think maybe all that moaning and groaning Camp Obama's done over the past few days might (just might) have something to do with their plans to launch all of these attacks today.  This sudden claim that Hillary's gone all negative and Republican on him seems a bit ironic knowing they'd planned to launch all of this negative cr@p today.

And they accuse Hillary of using "Rovian tactics."

Ok first up is a memo in response to that comment by a supporter of Obama's on one of their campaign calls today.  Take a look...

Obama Decries Slash & Burn Politics While Practicing it Himself
4/19/2008 5:41:10 PM

"When it comes to negative campaign tactics, Senator Obama has been a hypocrite from day one, decrying attack politics from one side of his mouth while he and his campaign wage a character assassination effort from the other. The juxtaposition of Senator Obama's comments in the debate and the remarks made on his campaign conference call this afternoon prove the point." -Campaign Spokesman Phil Singer

On Wednesday's debate, Sen. Obama falsely asserted that his campaign only discusses Hillary's bosnia comments when asked:

MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator Obama, your campaign has sent out a cascade of e-mails, just about every day, questioning Senator Clinton's credibility. And you yourself have said she hasn't been fully truthful about what she would do as president.

Do you believe that Senator Clinton has been fully truthful about her past?

SENATOR OBAMA: Well, look, I think that Senator Clinton has a strong record to run on. She wouldn't be here if she didn't. And you know, I haven't commented on the issue of Bosnia. You know, I --

MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Your campaign has.

SENATOR OBAMA: Of course, but --

SENATOR CLINTON: (Laughs.)

SENATOR OBAMA: Because we're asked about it. [ABC News, 4/16/08]

Today, the Obama campaign called a conference call with the express purpose of attacking Hillary's character over Bosnia. Obama surrogate Gen. Walter Stewart said the following:

"One of the inherent duties of the president of the United States is to lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier on Memorial Day. Now we can assume, and let's keep in mind that Senator Clinton has said she was under sniper fire, or she joked about, which to me was the cruelest part of all this, she joked about it with Jay Leno. We can make an assumption here that the honored dead within the Tomb of the Unknown was killed by a sniper. Imagine the lack of moral authority she has now to lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier on Memorial Day. I'll say this as a Vietnam veteran, hundreds, we can speculate about how the unknown died. But you go over to the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Wall and will certainty there are hundreds on that wall that died under sniper fire. That's the incident I think in a nutshell."

...So, let's look at moral authority as the essential element of leadership. President George Bush, Sen. Clinton, Sen. McCain have squandered the moral authority of the United States of America and our ability to lead the free people's of the world; and the oppressed peoples of the world towards freedom. Sen. Barack Obama displays the moral authority we need for a change in Washington D.C. [Obama Campaign Conference Call, 4/19/08]

What do you think the reaction would be if Hillary's camp had said this about her opponent - especially on the heels of his claim that they're not pushing this issue with the press and media, or the voters?

Now this conference call crack by BO's mouth-piece isn't the only example of negative campaigning.  There's more...

From: Howard Wolfson, Communications Director
To: Interested Parties
Date: Saturday, April 19, 2008
Re: Obama Campaign On The Attack In Last Weekend Of Pennsylvania Primary

A major theme of Sen. Obama on the stump is that Hillary Clinton is running a negative campaign based on "slash and burn politics" and that he represents a break from that kind of politics. In fact, in just the last 48-hours, Sen. Obama has flooded airwaves, radio, phone lines and mailboxes with negative and false attacks against Hillary. This unprecedented barrage coincides with a weak debate performance and Sen. Obama's slide in the daily Gallup poll.

1. In the most outrageous attack of the campaign, Obama surrogates held a conference call attacking Hillary's character, claiming she did not have the "moral authority" to lay a wreath on the Tomb on the Unknown Soldier. [Link]

2. Launched a television ad featuring false, negative attacks on Hillary's health care plan. [Link]

3. Distributed negative mail about Hillary's trade positions, complete with citations even Sen. Obama has acknowledged have been debunked. [Link]

4. Flooded voters with robocalls saying Hillary will "say anything" to win.

And lastly, Hillary had a few things to say about all this.  Specifically as they relate to that healthcare attack ad of Obama's.  Take a look...

Hillary Clinton Responds to New Attack Ad Released Today by the Obama Campaign

New Obama Attack Ad Features False And Widely Discredited Claims About Hillary's Health Care Plan

Hillary Clinton today responded to a new attack ad launched by Senator Obama's campaign. Hillary made the following statement at a "Solutions for the America " event this afternoon in York , PA :

"I just heard that my opponent has put up an ad attacking my health care plan, which is kind of curious, because my plan covers everybody and his leaves out 15 million people - just leaves them out in the cold.

"Now, instead of attacking the problem, he chooses to attack my solution.  

"I don't think that we can just make speeches about this - we have to have a plan that we can actually implement that will provide quality affordable health care. That's what I've been fighting for for 15 years, and that's what I will fight for as your president."

Get the facts here: http://facts.hillaryhub.com/archive/?id= 7183

Sen. Obama is attacking Hillary Clinton about health care in a television advertisement with claims that have been widely discredited by experts.

1. The Obama ad claims that Hillary's "plan forces everyone to buy insurance even if you can't afford it." Health policy expert Ken Thorpe reviewed this claim and found it to be false. Under Hillary's plan, everyone will be able to afford coverage.

"Ken Thorpe, a health-policy expert at Emory University who has advised all three major Democrats, said he ran cost estimates for the Clinton plan at the Clinton campaign's request, and found there should be enough money to make insurance affordable for all." [Wall Street Journal, 12/5/07]

2. The advertisement also claims that that Hillary's plan would make people who fail to enroll "pay a penalty." Sen. Obama's own plan would fine parents who fail to enroll their children and he has said he will consider imposing penalties on people who don't enroll.

Hillary would consider a range of ideas, including automatic enrollment, to ensure everyone is covered. Sen. Obama's plan, would, experts agree, leave 15 million people out.

3. The ad also claims that Sen. Obama's plan reduces costs more than Hillary's plan. There is no citation for this claim because it is false. Hillary's plan has more aggressive cost cutting measures and has more generous subsides. Because Sen. Obama's plan leaves 15 million people out, it would drive costs up, because everyone would have to subsidize emergency care for the uninsured.


Tags: 2008 election, Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Pennsylvania, president, Recommended (all tags)

Comments

184 Comments

Have Fun Guys

Just wanted to get these out there.  Enjoy!

by alegre 2008-04-19 07:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Have Fun Guys

Fun indeed.  But it would be funner yet to read about the Hillary camp's response to Obama's bird flip.  You did share that with them, and not just us here, didn't you?

by haystax calhoun 2008-04-19 08:16PM | 0 recs
can you not read the front page

of this very web site?

In fact, no reading skills required - just look at the picture.

I like especially how alegre purposely let this lie just float out there without correcting you.  you are both disgusting.

by OhPlease 2008-04-20 06:01AM | 0 recs
In my life, I have met two people from Bosnia

Both of them had extremely high respect for President (Bill) Clinton, they felt that he had saved their country.

We should remember that while candidates are making molehills into mountains..

by architek 2008-04-20 06:23AM | 0 recs
Why does the Obama camp attack Hillary?

Because she is there.

http://narc-attack.blogspot.com/2008/04/ blaming-victim-of-narcissism.html

by architek 2008-04-20 07:16AM | 0 recs
Re: Disgusting

So are you, for troll-rating the tip jar.  Read the rules.

by creeper1014 2008-04-20 06:32AM | 0 recs
Re: can you not read the front page

Sorry, but that was little bit of undeclared snark.    Do I need an emoticon in here?

by haystax calhoun 2008-04-20 09:09AM | 0 recs
I remember listening to Ed Schultz

(whose head has, unfortunately, not yet exploded!) and he had a full day of "Valor Theft" crap going on about the Bosnia story.

It was sickening to listen to - HRC being condemned by supposed military people for demeaning the troops who served in Bosnia because now people will think that Bosnia was not really a bad place to serve.

I picked my jaw up off of the floor, shook my head and turned those idiots off!

by CoyoteCreek 2008-04-19 08:31PM | 0 recs
Re: I remember listening to Ed Schultz

**So you think the military people are "idiots" for not liking the lying?

by greylox 2008-04-19 11:34PM | 0 recs
"Supposed" military.

I remember one who was in the national guard during VietNam....I respect his (and all troop) service very deeply, but it was sad to hear him rant about Hillary as CIC and spout the Eddie-line, word for word.

by CoyoteCreek 2008-04-20 09:47AM | 0 recs
Thanks alegre!

Very well done.

by durendal 2008-04-19 09:04PM | 0 recs
I apologize

It seems as if in my partisan fervor, I've been ignoring the obvious path to the nomination for Hillary. Please forgive me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uBGyuYKlx Ig&eurl

by bookish 2008-04-20 06:04AM | 0 recs
Re: I apologize

heh.  that was funny.

by fogiv 2008-04-20 10:46AM | 0 recs
Re: What Wolfson Should Say...

To this:

We can make an assumption here that the honored dead within the Tomb of the Unknown was killed by a sniper. Imagine the lack of moral authority she has now to lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier on Memorial Day.

Is this:

Imagine the lack of moral and military authority Obama has now to lay a wreath at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier on Memorial Day--when his advisors have to remind him to salute, and to put his hand over his heart during the playing of the national anthem.

http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0, 29307,1662530_1446035,00.html

http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/mark-fi nkelstein/2007/10/20/obama-no-hand-heart -pledge-either-will-msm-notice

http://www.pajamasmedia.com/2007/10/obam as_disheartening_behavior.php
 

by Tennessean 2008-04-20 05:03AM | 0 recs
weak-minded fool

everyone you know about the world you learned from a right-wing pervert who sends out emails about Obama from his mommy's basement

by OhPlease 2008-04-20 05:59AM | 0 recs
hypocrite

First, you attack him because "he won't fight".

Then when he fights, you attack him for attacking.

by OhPlease 2008-04-20 05:55AM | 0 recs
Hillary: Daddy Only Drinks Because You Cry

Her campaign needs a social worker.

by bernardpliers 2008-04-20 08:27AM | 0 recs
Hillary can't handle a tough campaign...

"Saddle up" and let's have an argument, right?  If Hillary "doesn't want to mix it up" she should drop out.

Hillary wanted it handed to her on a silver platter.  She is shocked anyone would dare challenger her.

If she can't take a tough campaign, she should not be running.

by OhPlease 2008-04-20 05:57AM | 0 recs
COUNTDOWN to alege's next cut and paste

hit job.  5, 4, 3, 2.....!!!

Alegre thinks because the Clinton campaign gave her the secret dial-in phone number, that she personally is changing the world!!!  Do you honestly think you have changed one mine?  All you've done is antagonize and bully, and prove every Clinton opponent right.

Alegre - they will give the secret number to anyone willing to lie and prostitute themselves for their dirty campaign.

They are using you, alegre.  They have no integrity and neither do you.  What a poor example for your children.  Sickening and pathetic.  Later, you will have powerful regrets about how wrong you have been.

I would love to see you defend yourself in person to Barack or Michelle Obama, with their two children in the room.  In person with them, you would cry like a baby.

by OhPlease 2008-04-20 07:50AM | 0 recs
Re: COUNTDOWN to alege's next cut and paste

Oh please...indeed.

What a whiner you are?  Bullying?  Hell no we leave that to the Obamington Post and dkos aka daily Obama.

by Jjc2008 2008-04-20 12:46PM | 0 recs
stuff it

Alegre needs to cut the shit.

by OhPlease 2008-04-20 02:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

Wonderful diary, Alegre. How could the BO campaign constantly harp on Hillary and say she is being "Rovian" while then saying that she does not have the moral authority to lay a wreath on the tomb of the unknown solidier? That kind of stuff is classless, and certainly doesn't sound like "new politics" or "change you can believe in".

by zcflint05 2008-04-19 07:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

What gets me is that they spent the last 3 days pointing their fingers at Hillary, calling her Rovian, a Republican... the whole nine yards while planning all of this negative crap.

Hypocrite thy name is Barack.

by alegre 2008-04-19 07:41PM | 0 recs
here is a question

can you come up with diaries where 90% of the diary is not made up of giant quoted sections?

by kindthoughts 2008-04-19 07:43PM | 0 recs
Re: here is a question

Where are yours?  I don't see you fighting as hard as Alegre posting diaries daily for her candidate as you do.

Show us some meat from you, then we'll talk back.

You're just a commentatoror, not a diarist, as far as I can see.  Show us your hard-working ddiaries, and  comments before you go out loudmouthing against Alegre.

She does far more that I've seen you do, ever, except for criticize in comments.  That's so easy to do.  Writing diaries, day after day - not so much.

Hold your mouth until you show us the stuff you're made off, and not just in wimpy comments.  Got a record?  Show it.  Otherwise, shut up.

by Gabriele Droz 2008-04-19 08:02PM | 0 recs
Re: here is a question

There's almost no reason to post a diary at this site unless you're pro-Hillary.  People won't rec it and it falls off the list pretty quick.  The Clinton ones, no matter how absurd (fingergate?) will get recommended right away.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 08:07PM | 0 recs
thats bs
Many obama diaries make the rec list around here. The Bob Johnson, dailykos recommending scheme ensures as much. More whining?
by linc 2008-04-19 09:03PM | 0 recs
Re: thats bs

Are we on the same forum? Which pro-Obama diary is on the list now? What was the last one that was?

by ragekage 2008-04-19 09:38PM | 0 recs
Re: thats bs

So go to the daily Obama and be content there.  No Hillary folks welcomed there.  Or go to Obamington Post where they HIGHLIGHT IN RED anything the can spin negative about Senator Clinton and anything negative about Senator Obama is either trashed by the messianic movement known as Obamanation, or hidden on the back pages.  

by Jjc2008 2008-04-20 12:49PM | 0 recs
Whine anyone?

You know the same thing we're always accused if we we question things?

It's almost too much to respond to the hypocrisy.  Good night you all.

by Gabriele Droz 2008-04-21 06:09PM | 0 recs
Re: here is a question

First of all, there are more ways to show support for one's candidate than making the same repetitive diaries at mydd.

If anything, Obama supporters are more proactive with their support. That's why he pulled in 50 million a month. Hillary hasn't raised half of that through her followers. Barack draws crowds of the tens of thousands...Hillary can barely fill a elementary school gymnasium.

Barack has organized support on every level from the internet base to foot soldiers.  

That's why we are winning.

by april34fff 2008-04-20 08:32AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

Based on exit polls, more Democratic voters see Clinton's campaign as the more negative one - and that's even among people who voted for her.  

Criticisms of Clinton on this are in lots of PA newspaper endorsements of Obama.

And several superdelegates went to Obama because they didn't like her more negative campaign. (example below).

I guess you'll just say that all those folks are somehow duped, that they can't possibly have come to that conclusion themselves.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/us/pol itics/20loyalty.html?pagewanted=2&hp
"Perhaps most painful among Clintonites are the lower-profile defections. They are the losses of former supporters like Mrs. Larson, people who revered the Clintons in the 1990s and still regard them highly. Both Mr. and Mrs. Clinton called Mrs. Larson on her cellphone earlier this year, telling her how much they needed her. Mrs. Larson even declared her support for Mrs. Clinton in mid-January.

But then the race got nasty in South Carolina, and Mr. Obama started winning and Mrs. Larson started reconsidering. "There was something about Senator Obama that I found really fresh and exciting," she said. "I like how positive he has been." She also spoke of "the destructive negativity" of the Clinton campaign."

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 07:45PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

So, basically, she bought the race baiting and media diversion tactics that the BHO campaign propagates. The whole "Clinton campaign is negative" thing is a media narrative and far from the truth, if anyone could be a little more unbiased they could obviously see the same tenor of arguments--or worse--from the Unity Pony campaign.

by zcflint05 2008-04-19 07:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

OK, you've confirmed it.

Every person who thinks the Clinton campaign has been negative must be duped. They can't have reached that decision themselves, using their own brains and powers of observation. And that holds for newspaper editorial boards, superdelegates, and Democratic voters.

Thanks for clearing that up.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 07:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

You're putting words in my mouth. My argument was based on the fact that the Clinton campaign has been much less negative, and there's plenty of supporting evidence for that. Obama's campaign has had to go negative from the beginning, or else he would have never been able to overtake Hillary. Only someone trailing runs a negative campaign. Here's some examples of negative campaigning from Saint Obama:

National Co-Chair Jesse Jackson Jr:
"Hillary Clinton didn't cry for Katrina"

4 page memo before SC primary tries to name Bill Clinton as a filthy rotten racist

Hillary Clinton is "literally willing to do anything to win"

Hillary Clinton is attempting to "deceive the American people"

Hillary Clinton has a secret 20-year plan to become president

Hillary Clinton is "making the run for the best actress nomination"

Hillary Clinton a calculating, poll-tested, divisive figure

Hillary Clinton's campaign is "playing politics with war"

He said John McCain is seen as more honest and trustworthy than Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton "lacks the moral authority" to lay a wreath on the tomb of the unknown soldier

(thanks in part to Alegre on those)

While there have been some aspects of the Clinton campaign being negative, the negativity of the Obama campaign has had a blind eye looking at it--the supporters of that campaign and the media should be taking a look at the literally daily negativity coming from that group and then try to condemn HRC for going "negative" in this election.

by zcflint05 2008-04-19 08:09PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

I have no doubt that you sincerely believe this.

But...

Newspaper editorial boards, superdelegates, and Democratic voters disagree with you. More of them think Clinton's campaign has been the more negative one.

And if you think they're all just been duped, well, that is pretty insulting to all those folks.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 08:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

But yet you fail to respond to the fact that Unity Pony's campaign has been much more negative, with examples and everything. Peace!

by zcflint05 2008-04-19 08:29PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

Peace to you as well.

But the persistent call that Clinton hasn't been negative just doesn't ring true. Just the other night she jumped on him for being on a board with him for a foundation. I've been on several nonprofit boards and never felt responsible for the views and actions of the other board members.  

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 08:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

Getting tired...my reference was to being on a board with Ayers.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 08:33PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

BHO was at a small gathering at his home during his run for the IL senate. doesn't sound like a casual relationship. Look, it would have been better if he had said yes I know him, yes i served with him on a non-profit board. I even went to his house for a meeting. After all I am a politician and that's what we do. And, I absolutely do not share his outlook.

That's much better than being defensive. It makes him look like he has something to hide.

by LadyEagle 2008-04-19 09:20PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

Granted, Obama should have responded that way. I think we all understand that is the case. However, this was a debate. More than likely both candidates weren't ready for a barrage of BS to fly at them - they had probably been studying up on their issues hoping to finally be able to address something substantive after 6 weeks of utter madness and nitpicking. I'm sure Obama knew he'd need to address the Bitter thing, Hillary probably knew Bosnia was coming - but lapel pins? William Ayers? "Do you think Reverend Wright loves America as much as you do?" Some questions are so patently stupid that it's hard to actually come up with the sensible answer on the fly - especially if you've been boning up all day about issues the public actually gives a shit about like the economy, gas prices, or the war. I think to most people it's a given that Obama attended a variety of small fundraisers, probably all over Chicago. It's part of politics. To claim there was something insidious to it like Obama is colluding with terrorists (which, while the term may be true, it's never really mentioned that Ayers is a pasty white guy who was protesting the Vietnam War) is so off the wall it's insane.

by TheSilverMonkey 2008-04-19 11:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

I have been on three non-profit boards. I don't vet my fellow board members and if we decide to meet at one of their houses, I go to the meeting.

It's just absurd to consider those things more than part of a professional-community relationship.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-20 07:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds
Oh please Obamanation goes nuts if Hillary Clinton even talks to anyone they deem as evil. I dislike Murdoch and Scaife as much as anyone.  But it is ridiculous what the Obama fans have done on the bbs to Senator Clinton. Ditto with her not spewing hatred of any and everyone the Obama folks deem evil.
Sorry you guys sound more and more like the wingers who put W into office.  Anyone says anything slightly negative about Senator Obama and it's angry hysteria.  I still shake my head at how inane it was that so many went nuts when Bill Clinton  said "Senator Obama was an unknown."  Sheesh.  I knew when that put the Obama camp over the edge what was happening.  The race baiting started and it has not stopped.  Axlerod was using Rove's playbook...attack the strengths of an opponent. One of Senator Clinton's great strengths was that she was embraced and trusted in the African American community.  The Obama campaign implied "racist" toward Clinton so many times that even though there is not one ounce of truth in it it stuck.  I admire Senator Clinton for her restraint in responding to that ploy.  No lie could be more hurtful, more nasty, more negative than that.  So spare me the whining.
The Obama campaign has alienated many of us who know what a rotten swift boat was used.
by Jjc2008 2008-04-20 12:59PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

Your list is full of all sorts of odd things.

For instance, polls DO show that McCain is seen as more trustworthy than Clinton. There's not a one where that is reversed.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 08:30PM | 0 recs
McCain makes a lot of subtle changes to healthcare

that will INCREASE costs to people, I think.

Obama isn't as bad, he will probably slow the rate at which people are becoming uninsured, but I don't think he will reverse or lower it, and it comes at a big cost because to get the statistics up, he is going to be covering less, so health-related bankruptcies will probably INCREASE.

They are already more than 50% of all bankruptcies.

(that is under BOTH Obama and McCain)

So, whatever trust people have placed in McCain, its MISPLACED. They just don't realize that his green light to industry to steal will effect them.

by architek 2008-04-20 06:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

Give me a break.  Voters, considering how openly sexist NBC and MSNBC have been, how anti Clinton the press has been for years, are split pretty evenly.

As for blogs, dkos is openly and often nastily pro Obama and anti Clinton.  Sexism and ageism are acceptable "isms" there.  Huffington aka Obamington Post is nothing less than nasty and lying when it comes to the Clintons.  ANY negative headline they can come up with is highlighted in RED.  So some of us come here for discussions.  And yet, people like you imply "How Dare You have a Blog that has more pro Hillary diaries recommended than pro Obama diaries."
HUH?

You mean if one is for Hillary and chooses to come here rather than dkos and thus makes this blog lean more to Hillary, it's wrong??????
When you go and complain to Markos that his site is unfairly biased toward Obama, maybe your comment will have some merit.

by Jjc2008 2008-04-20 06:36AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

No, I just said that it doesn't make sense to invest a lot of time in a diary if you're pro-Obama, as it will just roll off the rec diary quickly. This was in response to a diarist who said that people for Obama should just write their own diaries.  I'm not complaining about this, but have found a strategy to get my views in the dialogue.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-20 07:38AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

What race baiting?  If you mean South Carolina, you need to give your candidate's husband a swift kick to the shins for his race baiting behavior.  Don't attack Obama for standing up to him and his irresponsible behavior.

by Renie 2008-04-20 08:41AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

I notice you seem to have overlooked other comments before responding to this one. But nonetheless, you're saying he's a hypocrite for engaging in the behavior he's decrying. So I get the feeling you're condoning your candidate's behavior in a "But HE'S doing it, too!!!" way.

By the way, on a completely different topic, are you a parent?

by ragekage 2008-04-19 07:46PM | 0 recs
Actually, Hillary is neither a hypocrite

nor a negative person.  She is just telling the truth and it feels like hell to all of you.  If I supported such a weak candidate I would be in the same sad shape that you are all in.

Thank you Alegre for another honest and truthful diary.  Hillary will be a great president for all of us even those who neither appreciate nor deserve her.

by macmcd 2008-04-19 07:57PM | 0 recs
Re: Actually, Hillary is neither a hypocrite

Mac,

You're happy, however, to insult and dehumanize Obama supporters. But I wonder; how is it that Hillary is just telling the truth, and Obama is lying, and not the other way around?

Here you belie your prejudice clearly. You're going so far as to say Clinton's never engaged in negativity; her conduct has been exemplary.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 08:03PM | 0 recs
Its not an insult, and its not dehumanization..

What we Hillary supporters are trying to point out is that Obama has not stated his position in sufficient detail on many issues to establish that he is really a progressive, instead he has stated enough of a skeleton to give that IMPRESSION while also leaving himself enough wiggle room that he could end up being a very un-progressive candidate in many areas that count to poor and sick people, like healthcare. Also, on the economy. The kinds of changes that America needs to turn our economy are going to cost BILLIONS OF DOLLARS. They are expensive. Lots of rich people are doing just fine without them, riding this country into the ground and stripping it and its people of assets as they go. Its not sustainable. If they can prolong the denial a few more years, their robbery will almost be complete. And at that point, the damage will be irreversible. One more war would let them do it, fast.

Hillary has not left those big ambiguities. Hillary understands the nuances and she's clarified them rather than left big, intentional holes and manuvered her language to maintain them.

That manuvering verbal behavior of Obama's makes me HAVE to assume the worst. It makes me not trust him.

The fact that when these things come up, Hillary makes an effort to point them out, differentiates her from him and makes it clear that HIllary, at least, understands her fiduciary duty to explain them.

Obama is ignoring his fiduciary duty to explain in his 'contract' with us that many things are left unsaid.

On healthcare, this is going to hurt a lot of people. I can see it coming. And how do you think people will react in 2012 or 2013 when he tackles healthcare when they realize they STILL CAN'T AFFORD INSURANCE? They are going to be angry..

by architek 2008-04-20 06:51AM | 0 recs
stop propagating these lies

by OhPlease 2008-04-20 06:04AM | 0 recs
out of date

Is it so impossible for you to use a source outside of the Clinton pr machine?  

The Obama campaign repudiated that surrogate's remarks hours and hours ago, which you might know were you to read one of the most read and influential political sites, The Page.
http://thepage.time.com/2008/04/19/satur day-conference-calls/

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 07:38PM | 0 recs
Re: out of date

I'm so sorry... I've spent the past few hours feeing my children, reading them stories and putting them to bed.

SOme of us don't spend 24/7 on these blogs - ya know?

BTW - if you'd bothered to follow the links in the memos you'd know that this stuff is all sourced.  You know... from outside sources.

by alegre 2008-04-19 07:42PM | 0 recs
Re: out of date

Following links in a pr machine's press release is not a way of gauging information that's out there. It should go without saying that a pr machine will only use and selectively quote sources that agree with them. They won't use material that is commonly available that goes against their views.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 07:47PM | 0 recs
You amaze me.

I had believed that even a troll could follow all of the links and see how perfectly sourced everything that Alegre puts in her diaries are 100% true and accurate.  I guess some Obitter trolls aren't able to do that simple thing.

by macmcd 2008-04-19 07:59PM | 0 recs
a lot of what

alegre puts in the diaries are opinions.

So no there are not 100% accurate.

by kindthoughts 2008-04-19 08:02PM | 0 recs
Re: You amaze me.

Very funny!  Thanks for a good laugh!

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 08:02PM | 0 recs
That's it, I've had it.

Scroll down through the comments on this diary and look at the number of comments by Obama supporters where Hillary supporters in toto are called derogatory names.

Then look at the number of comments (including yours) where Hillary supporters have responded to a single commenter by insulting all of Obama's supporters.

Can you have a discussion, even a disagreement without calling millions of Americans insulting names?

by GFORD 2008-04-20 01:30AM | 0 recs
Re: out of date

So, Clinton sourced it and you copied it. And this answers my question from earlier. When your children misbehave, do you allow it because someone else started it, or do you say "I don't care, they may have misbehaved, but it's up to you to stop it"?

Apply this to this back and forth between our candidates, and let me know what you think.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 07:48PM | 0 recs
Re: out of date

When children misbehave, they suffer the consequences. Which is exactly why MyDD admins determined you no longer have the ability to recommend diaries on this site OR rate comments.

by KnowVox 2008-04-19 08:11PM | 0 recs
Re: out of date

Well, thanks for addressing my point and not attacking me personally, anyway.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 08:14PM | 0 recs
That is KV's

MO for proof of that see Alegre's diary about Ezra Klein.  KV went berserk on me because of a typo and said I was slamming Krugman's ability when I praised his ability, I just questioned if 80k people was a small town.

by Student Guy 2008-04-19 08:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Slamming Krugman

When you attack an award winning liberal economist like Pual Krugman, you're going to be criticized. I merely compared Krugman's extensive writings on this topic and his qualifications to yours. No surprise, yours came up short.

by KnowVox 2008-04-19 08:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Slamming Krugman

You don't know what my qualifications are, do you?

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 08:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Slamming Krugman

No, nor do I care. My comments were addressed to Student Guy.

by KnowVox 2008-04-19 08:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Slamming Krugman

And yet you ignored him and his point (and his refutation of your point), and continue to rail against him.

This is akin to me demanding your name isn't KnowVox, and then decrying your negativity and trollish-ness when you correct me.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 10:07PM | 0 recs
I didn't slam Krugman.

I praised his analysis in the comment.  I like Krugman, he does a good job. I said that Youngstown ins't a small town.

link is here:
http://www.mydd.com/comments/2008/4/19/0 2617/7923/22#22
That has the whole sequence.

by Student Guy 2008-04-19 09:04PM | 0 recs
LMAO. That has to be one of the best

smack downs I've read in these diaries. LMAO.

Thanks for giving me such a laugh.

by LatinoVoter 2008-04-19 08:42PM | 0 recs
Re: LMAO. That has to be one of the best

LOL I know it's sooooo funny! Smack him down instead of addressing concerns! We can be just like Hillary!

by ragekage 2008-04-19 08:46PM | 0 recs
You're nothing but a common troll.

You and that yapping little thing that goes buy "kindthoughts" that follows you around do nothing but troll and try to derail diaries here just because they are pro-Clinton.

Addressing the concerns of a troll who has had his privileges revoked because of his behavior is something that even I wouldn't stoop to.

:-P

by LatinoVoter 2008-04-19 08:53PM | 0 recs
Re: You're nothing but a common troll.

Heh. Obviously you occupy the moral high ground, judging by your behavior. Obviously I just troll pro-Clinton diaries; no original content of my own, no conceding point to Clinton supporters, no agreeing with them on downsides or arguments against Obama, none of that.

You are truly admirable. As seeing by the list of ratings you've given, I see no Obama supporters have been the recipient of one as far back as I'm willing to click to look, and an interest pattern of downrating comments, even those uprated by other Clinton supporters, made by Obama supporters.

If only I could be more like you.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 09:06PM | 0 recs
Re: You're nothing but a common troll.

Let's see.

"Barack can't turn the page on the Ken Starr Report"

versus

"Clintonistas and Obamaniacs rejoice, your candidates have the same policy on just about everything." Comparing Obama and Clinton's policy differences.

"More slurs, lies, and slander towards Clinton" Complaining about rightwing smears against Clinton.

"Exposition for your candidate" Open thread for everyone to say why they liked their candidate.

"270 To Win- The Road to November" A look at how and why both Clinton and Obama can win in November.

"Solutions for America? Or misrepresentations?" An even-handed addressing of some of Clinton's positions.

"What happens to Hillary after it's all over?" Speculating on what happens after Clinton loses the nomination, and hoping she'll get an important role in the process.

"I'm proud of MyDD, and our community" Talking about why MyDD is great because Clinton and Obama supporters can exist together.

Yep. I'm a troll, for sure.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 09:22PM | 0 recs
My diary is sourced and expresses

my "thoughts and feelings." You know those qualities that you keep trolling Alegre for not exhibiting to your tastes.

And my diary is well researched and sourced. If you have a problem with it feel free to debunk it. And if you want to compare trolling since you have so much time on your hands compare the number of comments I've left on pro-Obama diaries to the number of comments you've left on pro-Clinton diaries.

I'll wait.  

by LatinoVoter 2008-04-19 09:32PM | 0 recs
Oh btw

in your troll by troll comparison also make note of which of the two of us has the ability to rate comments or diaries. I have it, you don't.

Dusts dirt off my shoulders

by LatinoVoter 2008-04-19 09:34PM | 0 recs
Re: Oh btw

And I suppose the enormous number of Obama supporters who share that dysfunction compared to people like you and KnowVox, macmd, zerosumgame, etc, that still are able to do so is indicative that you're right, and not being enabled by a pro-Clinton set of admins.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 09:37PM | 0 recs
Re: My diary is sourced and expresses

Interesting you mention that...

Nonetheless, hey, claiming I just trolled alegre is pretty disingenuous. I brought up a valid question, which she never addressed. You, sir, on the other hand, didn't hesitate to insult me personally.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 09:35PM | 0 recs
Re: My diary is sourced and expresses

Oh, almost forgot. Please reconcile my list there with my status as a clearly evidenced troll. I'd love to hear your reasoning.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 10:01PM | 0 recs
Some of your recent comments...

- Talking about Obama being named in a Norman Hsu suicide note

  • Insulting an Obama supporter seeking clarification on an issue by responding "Of course you don't get it"
  • Comparing an Obama supporter to someone to the kind of "people that tell battered women it is their fault because they didn't stay and try to work out the problems with the guy who was punching her in the face"
  • Demeaning an Obama supporter for saying they were going to pray for him.
  • "Funny to hear you cultist bring up religion considering the hate church Obama belongs to." Which KnowVow, of course, in his moral clarity and superiority, uprated.

But, really. I could learn from you.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 09:32PM | 0 recs
Yup, I stand by my comments.

If you have a problem with me mentioning that Hsu named Obama in his suicide letter you should go talk to HuffPo editors about it.

Hsu Penned Suicide Note Blaming Obama For Scandal.

by LatinoVoter 2008-04-19 09:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Yup, I stand by my comments.

Well, that's a good way to ignore your other posts I brought up.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 09:40PM | 0 recs
You're ridiculous.

But I have a few minutes...so I'll indulge you.

*  Insulting an Obama supporter seeking clarification on an issue by responding "Of course you don't get it"

There was no insult there. I said that to your shadow, kindthoughts, because he/she was acting dumb in the comments section of the trolling diary he/she put up.

* Comparing an Obama supporter to someone to the kind of "people that tell battered women it is their fault because they didn't stay and try to work out the problems with the guy who was punching her in the face"

Yes, I did say that. I said that to the person who said or defended the tenor of the DK by saying that Clinton supporters were responsible for not staying there and fighting for a place to post.

* Demeaning an Obama supporter for saying they were going to pray for him.

No demeaning there. I was making fun of a diary that was very bitter (titled: "y'all make me sick") and making a joke by referencing Barack saying that people cling to guns and religion. But if you want to argue that people clinging to religion is demeaning-by all means go ahead.

* "Funny to hear you cultist bring up religion considering the hate church Obama belongs to." Which KnowVow, of course, in his moral clarity and superiority, uprated.

Yes, I did say that so some Obama supporter that wanted to bring up "The Family" and who mentioned that Hillary was part of the prayer group for Senators...the same one that Barack attended.

Anything else you want to pull out of context that you need me to smack down?

by LatinoVoter 2008-04-19 09:53PM | 0 recs
Re: You're ridiculous.

Heh. You just insulted kindthoughts and I again, in claiming you didn't insult us. You certainly made an appropriate comment with the "battered woman" thing, as evidenced by Clinton supporters joining in your troll-rating there. You called an Obama supporter a cultist- but I suppose there's nothing wrong with that, eh?

Who are you trying to convince, anyway? Eh. No matter. The undecided voters who lurk around these parts certainly don't take any stock in your brand of demagoguery, and we won't have to suffer it after Clinton gets the nomination, of course.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 09:59PM | 0 recs
Re: out of date

Huh?  You regularly post 2-3 sometimes more diaries a day, which is far more then the average poster here.

by Bobby Obama 2008-04-19 07:48PM | 0 recs
Re: out of date

Thats funny because I know I see you on atleast 4 other websites posting throughout the day and at night...

by hootie4170 2008-04-19 08:44PM | 0 recs
Re: out of date

why was I downrated for this?

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 08:25PM | 0 recs
Re: out of date

Why was I downrated?

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 08:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds To Obama's Latest Atta

Alegre, when was the last time you had a diary that brought out your own thoughts and feelings and insight instead of quoting large portions of tracts from the Clinton website and official sources?

Hide or troll rate this if you like; but I think it's an honest question. Feel free to disagree with me. But I'd like to know. And furthermore, I'd like to know how you plan to bridge the divide that exists between us, and try to bring undecided voters/Obama supporters into the fold for your candidate?

You have talent; that's clearly evident. But I don't see it displayed here, and I want to.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 07:39PM | 0 recs
yeah
I noticed that.
Alegre does not really write diaries so much as copy paste them.
by kindthoughts 2008-04-19 07:41PM | 0 recs
Re: yeah

That's a crock and you know it.

by alegre 2008-04-19 07:43PM | 0 recs
how is that crock?

Why are majority of yout diary copy pasted? I mean seriously? Can you not write something on your own?

by kindthoughts 2008-04-19 07:46PM | 0 recs
Re: yeah

How about if you post a link to a single diary where the material did not come from the Clinton campaign?

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 07:48PM | 0 recs
Re: yeah

Look, everyone on this site has a pretty well formed opinion about who they want to vote for and what they think of the candidates in general.  I always find it interesting to read a personal account of whatever the topic relating to a candidate is.  If, and this is an if, you want to reach those of us who are not your "natural" audience, an occasionally more personal slant on the race, on Hillary Clinton, on issues that you find important would draw people outside of the group that "automatically" reads and recs your diaries.

I do not mean to be obnoxious about this at all, and I hope I'm not stepping over any lines here. You work hard at this, and write well, but it would be nice to see more of you in them.  

The other thing is, it is hard to post to your diaries.  Even when I try to be polite on these threads, I always end up getting troll or hide rated here, and I like to avoid that if I can.  

I guess what I am clumsily trying to say is I'd like to get to know something about you in your writing, not just rote information compiled in one place, at least sometimes.

Respectfully...

by mady 2008-04-19 07:53PM | 0 recs
Re: yeah

Meh. She's welcome to post what she likes. We all are. I don't care where she gets the info from, as long as it's not freerepublic or redstate, as so some other members are wont to do.

If there's a problem, it's with the recommendations that keep the rec list clogged with the same diaries for a day or two at a time.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-04-19 08:52PM | 0 recs
Re: yeah

You're right and I realized how presumptuous I sounded.  I should not have posted that.

by mady 2008-04-20 05:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds To Obama's

It is strange that people just don't go to the official Clinton website themselves.

by rfahey22 2008-04-19 07:44PM | 0 recs
that quiz is cool

comments take out of context!!

And of course if you feel like winning the quiz, you got to blame obama for everything,

by kindthoughts 2008-04-19 08:01PM | 0 recs
I made the same comment a while ago RK

And I agree with you fully.

Alegre is an excellent writer.  She could outwrite me hour of the day.  She has a good grasp of rhetoric.  Sadly, snip jobs like this don't live up to her talent.  I am not making this point about the content of the diary (I am neutral in this primary war and have disdain for both sides here) but about the construction of it.  She could put this elegantly in her own words.

by Student Guy 2008-04-19 07:44PM | 0 recs
Re: I made the same comment a while ago RK

Hey come on guys - whattya want from me? I've been busy tonight and already posted a diary on this stuff today.  Look up top - I said at the start that this was just a post to get the press releases out there.

I'm zonked - sometimes this is all I've got the time or energy for ya know?  We're all human after all! ;o)

by alegre 2008-04-19 07:46PM | 0 recs
the problem is that

you do it A LOT!!!!

by kindthoughts 2008-04-19 07:49PM | 0 recs
Re: I made the same comment a while ago RK

The first one was the same in approach and tone, as are virtually all of the ones you post.  

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 07:49PM | 0 recs
I was just saying

that I enjoy it when you write with your own words.  I was complimenting your writing ability (though a comparison to my own is like comparing a working spotlight to a firefly).

by Student Guy 2008-04-19 07:49PM | 0 recs
Re: I made the same comment a while ago RK

Yet, you find enough time to fill the rec list with this same sort of diary.

I think our concern is well-founded. I am jiggling a teething baby on my lap, and a diary I'm trying to write to be very insightful and well thought out sits half finished, along with homework, a revision of my will, etc. So I understand your problems in that regard. Maybe that's why I am frustrated with you; I put a lot of time and effort into research and insight, and you seem to grab large portions of text and immediately get rec-listed.

The worst part is looking at some of your past work and knowing you could write circles around me, but you're not actually engaging in any effort; yet here you are, with 3 or 4 diaries on the rec-list. Hell, you ought to be able to write a diary good enough to convince all Obama supporters to switch over to your side. I want to see it!

by ragekage 2008-04-19 07:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

What a load of bullshit. You've made it a consistent habit of accusing anyone who disagrees with you of being a freeperville troll, which is why you've been disciplined on this site.

by KnowVox 2008-04-19 08:24PM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

Well, KnowVox, you're the only one I've ever made that comment to, which you never disabused- merely hide-rated- and so I find your claim I make it a "consistent habit" laughable and, combined with the behavior you yourself are currently displaying, is evident of your stunning hypocrisy.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 08:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

Disabused and debunked numerous times, including earlier today:

http://www.mydd.com/comments/2008/4/19/2 2159/4623/67#67

by KnowVox 2008-04-19 08:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

I don't get it; you're linking to a comment I made forty minutes ago in a thread a few posts up on this page... what am I supposed to be seeing?

by ragekage 2008-04-19 08:43PM | 0 recs
by KnowVox 2008-04-19 09:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

Aha. Alright, now I've responded to those two.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 09:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

Respond all you want. You're just providing more evidence to admins and users of this site why your privileges to recommend diaries and recommend comments was removed.

by KnowVox 2008-04-19 09:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

Heh. And you of the stunning hypocrisy of it all, as people like you can retain them while displaying behavior akin to a... well, I best not make a comparison here, lest you hide-rate me again. As it stands now, this comment complies 100% with the site FAQ.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 09:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

Keep digging and keep freeper name calling, then wonder why you can't recommend or rate.

by KnowVox 2008-04-19 10:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

Uhh, KnowVox. Stop. And address this point-

I have never "freeper name called". I asked you, point on, if you were or weren't that person. You neglected to respond. Even now, in this thread, when I'm bringing up this very point, you're again ignoring it. Interesting considering it would prove you were disingenuous.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 10:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

You CHRONICALLY have accused me of this bullshit, which has been debunked MULTIPLE TIMES. It's pure bullshit that you resort to when your out of ammo.

http://www.mydd.com/comments/2008/4/19/2 2159/4623/67#67

by KnowVox 2008-04-19 10:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

You linked to another post farther up in this thread again. But I just spent awhile going back through my own comments, so I'll address it now in finality.

"There's a KnowVox at Free Republic... seems to be active over there. That's not you, is it?"

Upon which you immediately hide-rated me. Your one hide-rate sent that comment into hide-rate status for everyone... which striked me as guilty behavior. You obviously know how to game the rating system; my first day as a MyDD diarist, you railroaded me for misusing it, and then ignored me when I asked for you guidance on how to do it correctly. Interesting, you were so hostile against me without any track record behind it.

So I pointed out to others you had acted as such, and you continued to try and hide-rate instead of respond. Finally, almost three hours later, you responded with a bit from the site user agreement on how I was harassing you.

Never once did you deny it; and by the time you finally did, I was off changing a diaper and trying to sleep, and the whole little brouhaha had been over. I notice other Obama and Clinton supporters didn't take much stock in that response, since it was troll-rated by one of each.

Oh, and I had my rec/rate abilities yanked before you came around. Don't flatter yourself, it certainly wasn't about you.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 10:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

First of all, there is no "knowvox" over at freeperville and never has been. Anyone can google my name and confirm. Weeks ago, you initially spammed these off topic accusations 7 times in one of Alegre's diaries merely to derail the conversation then as you are doing now. It was bullshit then, and it's bullshit now. You have been told REPEATEDLY.

Secondly, every time you make these types of personal attacks and false accusations to derail legitimate discussion in a diary, you will be hide rated, consistent with the rules of this site.

Third, Administrators here have suspended your rating and recommendation privileges, with good reason. Don't flatter yourself that there was any other cause other than your own behavior.

by KnowVox 2008-04-20 10:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

Well, sir, noting the ratings left in this thread, I'd say your view is held almost only by you. I see other people can decipher it was not meant as a personal attack against you, unlike that diary here recently that accused another Clinton supporter of being a white supremacist; that would be considered a personal attack.

Otherwise, bobswern would have been kicked off for calling me on being a Little Green Footballs/dkos troll, using your own logic.

Your behavior is inappropriate and very defensive; I've never seen you yield a point in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, and it really plays badly on how you are perceived by the community; including other Clinton supporters. It only lends credence to the possibility you're nothing more than a troll. I've never seen you contribute a diary, contribute anything constructive to the discussions held here; you engage in hit and run troll-rating, you bash people who try to agree with you!

But, nonetheless. I don't think I need to explain that; this is a useless conversation. Everyone else around here knows the truth and can judge it. If you'll excuse me, I've got more pressing things to do, like get Democrats elected into office.

by ragekage 2008-04-20 11:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

Oh, KnowVox. Hide-rating a comment... why again? Because I made a good point?

by ragekage 2008-04-20 04:27PM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

Keep making these baseless accusations, and you will continue to be hide rated.

by KnowVox 2008-04-20 06:22PM | 0 recs
Re: Ragekage

Uhhh... could you point out what, in that statement, warranted a hide-rate? You certainly should be able to; otherwise, it could be considered a violation of the site's terms of service.

by ragekage 2008-04-20 06:23PM | 0 recs
Considering your other responsibilities

Why compromise your reputation with diary after diary of cut and pastes? Why not concentrate on diaries in which you add something new and original rather than merely parroting campaign hacks?

Obviously you have a devoted following around here that will cheerlead whatever you put out, whether it's truly Recommend worthy or not. Mazel tov on having cultivated that. But as all the comments indicate, your writing is becoming more and more...not your writing. Someone else obviously did the heavy lifting here.

It's admirable that you juggle a hectic life and still find time for blogging for Hillary. But is it so important for you to get affirmation around here, even if it means becoming nothing more than a campaign stenographer.

by John Campanelli 2008-04-19 08:53PM | 0 recs
Re: I made the same comment a while ago RK

Since KnowVox and LatinoVoter were happy to run interference for you, I just wanted to know I haven't forgotten you've yet to address the concerns we've brought up. I even shared a very personal story in trying to build a bridge of understanding and empathy between us; I commented upon your writing ability; but if you want to keep your credibility amongst those who aren't diehard Clinton supporters, and especially after the nomination, I suggest you at the very least take our concerns into consideration.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 10:52PM | 0 recs
stop posting the same crap over and over

I think that's the message.

by OhPlease 2008-04-20 06:16AM | 0 recs
That should be

she could outwrite me any hour of the day (see I am not a good writer).

by Student Guy 2008-04-19 07:47PM | 0 recs
You don't disagree with the diary, ragekage?

I notice you're not critiquing the content. You're critiquing the use of blockquotes and the practice of citing sources.

Glad to know you've noticed Obama's negative campaigning. We thought you were in denial.

by catfish1 2008-04-19 08:04PM | 0 recs
Re: You don't disagree with the diary, ragekage?

Hmmm. I have no idea how you segued those ideas together there, you'll have to draw me a picture.

Well, I am critiquing the content. There is no content. It's all just copy/pasting from other people, most notably Clinton's fact website.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 08:10PM | 0 recs
So Obama is going negative

still haven't heard you dispute that.

Actually it's been pretty obvious for a while.

by catfish1 2008-04-19 08:14PM | 0 recs
Re: So Obama is going negative

Sure, hell, I'll admit that. Here's my take on the sequence of events, though. I think he was naive enough to think he could get through without having to go negative; I think going up against Senator Clinton quickly disabused him of this notion, which is probably good. McCain, who I once thought highly of, is showing he's more than willing to give up his Maverick, cross-aisle dealing, fair, willing to criticize his own party persona when he's need to this primary season- so it's obvious he needed to deal with it. Might as well have dealt with it now, but I think the level Clinton counterbalances it too is truly atrocious.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 08:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds To Obama's Latest Atta

What I want to know is WHY do you CARE, ragekage?

Don't like her diaries, then don't read them. I really LIKE her diaries and am getting tired of your attempts to stop her over and over again. It's as though you want her to shut up, because she actually gives us good information in one of the few places where we can get it without so much abuse. What is wrong with you that you can't just leave well enough alone?

You show the bullying behavior that is causing the estrangement of Clinton supporters against Obama supporters. Why do you think that's just fine to do? Are you paid to do it? Is that why you show up EVERY TIME?

by splashy 2008-04-21 09:42PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds To Obama's Latest Atta

Intellectual honesty is not to be found here. Just talking points and spin with the terms of the Clinton campaign on leaving 15 million out.

You know as well as anyone that Clinton would require those 15 million to buy insurance. Her plan doesn't cover them, it just makes them make the private insurance companies richer.

This is not a progressive health care plan. The approach was hatched up by libertarian-conservative think tanks.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 07:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds To Obama's Latest Atta

You consider the Obama campaign's health care plan progressive? Hillary's plan is the closest to UHC we've ever seen, in addition to helping drive down costs. There's a reason why BHO uses right wing smear points to try to tackle it, and it's not because it's "too conservative".

by zcflint05 2008-04-19 07:43PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds To Obama's Latest Atta

Her policy would never pass congress....NEVER.....

by hootie4170 2008-04-19 08:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds To Obama's Latest Atta

Libertarian-conservative think tanks?  Are you shitting me?  Paul Krugman's written on this stuff extensively.

If you'd bothered to read anything other than the Obama camp's press releases, you'd know that.

by alegre 2008-04-19 07:44PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds To Obama's Latest Atta

i think he got confused with Colin Kahl, Obama's adviser, who wants to keep 60,000-80,000 troops in Iraq through 2010.

by campskunk 2008-04-19 07:49PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds To Obama's Latest Atta

Krugman is not a health economist; he is not an expert on health policy.

And, no, I don't like Obama's health care plan either. I want Medicare for all, a much superior approach that actually "covers" people.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 07:51PM | 0 recs
Most ethical medical professionals

This includes Nurses Docs, Medical Techs would prefer medicare for all.  The only concern would be getting everyone into the office (a lot of docs are nearly full up already).

by Student Guy 2008-04-19 07:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds To Obama's Latest Atta

Exactly. Obama needs some yes-men supporters instead of ones who disagree with him; that's exactly why Clinton is doing so much better in this campaign than Obama.

by ragekage 2008-04-19 08:11PM | 0 recs
I was for Obama until the mandate controversy

You can check my comment history at dailykos.

Mandating health care is similar to one of the most successful legacies of the Democratic party: Social Security.

The way Obama dug in his heels on mandates made me wonder about a) his attitude toward Social Security and b) his stubbornness and fragility when challenged.

It was around January I decided I would NOT vote for Obama.

by catfish1 2008-04-19 08:06PM | 0 recs
Re: I was for Obama until the mandate controversy

If Social Security was designed like Clinton's health care plan, all would be mandated to purchase annuities sold by insurance companies and others.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 08:10PM | 0 recs
Re: I was for Obama until the mandate controversy

I see that either you are forgetting the public option in her health care plan, or are ignorant of it.

Or, are ignoring it to do your spin.

by splashy 2008-04-21 09:47PM | 0 recs
I love robocalls of Hope(tm)
There is a serious mismatch between what the Hope campaign says and does.

Word to people on the ground in PA: bring your camera phones, and be prepared to protect the voters. Call the cops if you suspect illegalities. If this is like Texas, our job is to prevent intimidation and chaos.

Be friendly and professional, but do not take any shit. These neg ads are, among other things, a signal to the Hope people to play rough.

by Pacific John 2008-04-19 07:46PM | 0 recs
yeah...

vs what? the Hopelessness, accept things as they are and shut up campaign?

by kindthoughts 2008-04-19 07:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

I find it mildly ironic that instead of speaking to the fact that the BHO campaign is attacking Hillary up and down using the save "Rovian" tactics they so decry; the diarist here is attacked without any discussion of the topic. It speaks volumes about the true truth of this article--it is no hit piece but points out that the tactics used by Obama's campaign are markedly similar to those they talk down about so often. Certianly does not sound like "Change you can believe in" to me.

by zcflint05 2008-04-19 07:46PM | 0 recs
this diarist has

long lost respect because of the amount of personal attacks the diarists like to levy on Obama and his supporters.

by kindthoughts 2008-04-19 07:48PM | 0 recs
excellent...

campskunk rating people as trolls for observational comments.

by kindthoughts 2008-04-19 07:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

Uhh, are we reading the same comments?

by ragekage 2008-04-19 07:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

Alright I'll say Obama got sick of being attacked and playing nice...It all began in the debate when he was going to let her slide on her lies of Bosnia, but then later when Clinton had the chance to reciprocate the favor...she screwed him over (Wright, Farrakhan, Hamas, Ayers, Flag Pin)...So he said screw it I'm going to bring up all her gaffes and make sure the people know about it...Good for him.

by hootie4170 2008-04-19 08:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp

I don't know if you're trying to influence people into voting for Hillary, or what the ultimate purpose of your diaries are, but if you are, don't you think the average fence-sitter is going to see this for what it is, basically a cut&paste straight out of the campaign website?
I could see if there were some neutral voices added for discussion, but for the all your efforts you may well just post a link to hillaryhub.com.  Not sure you'll win the hearts and minds of the fence-sitters that way.

Or maybe you're just trying to rally "the activist  base of the Democratic Party", you know, the ones that got dumped at the Clinton fundraiser.

by haystax calhoun 2008-04-19 07:48PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp

well, quoting the campaign website seems to be the best technique to draw out all the obamaspammers. your parents owe us babysitting money, you know.

by campskunk 2008-04-19 07:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp

My mom is 80, my dad is dead. Do you know them?

by politicsmatters 2008-04-19 07:52PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp

i wasn't talking to you, but your compulsion to respond is noted without comment.

by campskunk 2008-04-19 07:54PM | 0 recs
as is yours.

by kindthoughts 2008-04-19 07:56PM | 0 recs
see

this is why people call you a troll

You call obama supporters spammers
You call them all teenagers

by kindthoughts 2008-04-19 07:53PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp

That was actually pretty funny. Now that my 3 kids are in bed, I'll ask my mom if it's OK to talk to the strange man on the computer.

by haystax calhoun 2008-04-19 07:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp

your parents owe us babysitting money, you know.

stay classy.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-04-19 07:56PM | 0 recs
Hey, campskunk, when we were on the same side

when we both supported Hillary before I switched to Obama and you migrated here, we usually would defend Hillary with substantial arguments. And when we resorted to snark, they did not resemble the venom coming from partisans for other candidates.

I stopped supporting Hillary because, when the going got tough, she started to resort to the sort of tactics the GOP have always resorted to and which we Democrats have always decried. Unfortunately, it appears that, since segregating yourselves here at MyDD, Hillary supporters are following her lead. You are better then these kind of comments.

by John Campanelli 2008-04-19 08:11PM | 0 recs
Re: Hey, campskunk, when we were on the same side

I wasn't going to TR it, but then I saw people actually giving that insulting comment mojo.

by Johnny Gentle Famous Crooner 2008-04-19 08:33PM | 0 recs
On the other hand:
You could respond to the point that the Hope campaign went way negative.

To each his or her own.

by Pacific John 2008-04-19 07:56PM | 0 recs
You forgot to add a significant development

Yes, Gen. Walter Stewart made some bone-headed remarks. But what did Obama have his campaign do? Repudiate the remarks

Spokesman Hari Sevugan: "We obviously do not agree with that sentiment."

And when Samantha Power inappropriately called Hillary a "Monster," Obama had her leave the campaign.

Just as Hillary cannot control all her surrogates, neither can Barack. What matters is how they deal with these missteps. Once again, Barack showed character.

by John Campanelli 2008-04-19 07:50PM | 0 recs
HELLLOOOOOO!!! Alegre????????

you need to respond to this "oversight".

Or don't you have the integrity to do so?

by OhPlease 2008-04-20 08:32AM | 0 recs
I think that Hillary is incredibly UNGRATEFUL

She goes around bashing Moveon.org who were initially created in the 90's to push back against Bill's impeachment and she also bashes Democratic activists.

If Hillary gets the nomination, she is going to need every Democrat she can get including support from Democratic activists.

So incredibly UNGRATEFUL!

by puma 2008-04-19 07:56PM | 0 recs
They endorsed, fundraised for her opponent

I was pissed off at moveon too - they endorsed Obama while I was still making up my mind. I unsubscribed.

by catfish1 2008-04-19 08:13PM | 0 recs
Re: I think that Hillary is incredibly UNGRATEFUL

Oh no, you mean she turned on the very people who supported her family when they were down?

Wouldn't that make her a...Judas?

by Renie 2008-04-20 08:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds

Thanks for another great one, Alegre!

by Nobama 2008-04-19 09:05PM | 0 recs
Is this what you signed up for?

Those comments from Gen. Stewart are tasteless.

And for the campaign to prove Barack a liar within days of his campaign would not talk about this unless asked..

Obama supporters, I know this isn't the new politics you were promised.  I know this isn't what you signed up for.

by bobbank 2008-04-19 10:22PM | 0 recs
From the blogging community...

...that gave us Fingergate.

Everyday is like Christams here.

by jaywillie 2008-04-19 10:23PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds To Obama's Latest Atta

Another day, another three phony outrage diaries by Alegre. Forgive me for yawning.

by amiches 2008-04-19 11:22PM | 0 recs
diaries

I'm new her. how do you start a diary?

by Ignored and Disgusted 2008-04-20 07:37AM | 0 recs
Re: diaries

first, swear an oath that Hillary can do no wrong and that she is an angel straight from Heaven, and Obama is the devil.

by OhPlease 2008-04-20 08:31AM | 0 recs
Re: diaries

If I do that will celestial choirs sing?

by Renie 2008-04-20 08:50AM | 0 recs
why do people recommend this shit?

by OhPlease 2008-04-20 08:30AM | 0 recs
Vicitm, victim, victim, victim, victim

This really is like an Al-Anon meeting

by bernardpliers 2008-04-20 08:31AM | 0 recs
Obama's Latest Atta

On MTP Clinton's rep is taken on for suggesting Obama can't win, but Obama's rep gets to say that she can't bring about change.   And they call her negative?  He's been bringing her down in the trustworthy polls with his attacks and with all that she's still seen as fully capable of running the executive branch and of accomplishing her goals.  So, she's seen as untrustworthy, with no little help from Bam, and trusted to accomplish her goals.  I'd say that  makes her the best, she's withstood Obama negative campaigning.  

by anna shane 2008-04-20 08:32AM | 0 recs
NO, he has withstood hers.

stop the lies

by OhPlease 2008-04-20 08:34AM | 0 recs
Re: NO, he has withstood hers.

No need to dichotomize this.

They've both used a combination of positive appeals and negative rhetoric. Most voters think Clinton has been more negative than Obama.

by politicsmatters 2008-04-20 09:03AM | 0 recs
Re: NO, he has withstood hers.

that's party because that is Obama's negative campaign against her, to accuse her of being divisive and negative, and party because she's female and that's the stereotype, so as they say, anything she says that can be called into question fits the narrative, and party because the media hates her, it's not just that they favor him, they also favor McCain.  

His whole negative campaign is that she's attacking him and he's withstood her. And, it's sunk in.  

by anna shane 2008-04-20 09:24AM | 0 recs
By "negative campaign"

you mean he DARED to run against self-appointed QUEEN HILLARY, I see.

by OhPlease 2008-04-20 10:30AM | 0 recs
Re: By "negative campaign"

wow, make my case thank you. There has never been any candidate however much a long shot that doesn't say they're going to win. McCain said it when he was way behind. But it's only the girl who gets mocked for being so 'uppity?'  Yep, that's the odds she's been against. Obama didn't invent misogyny, but he's sure played to it. I guess his mighty supporters are going to tr me for this too? Wow, bunch of brave supporters he has, that can tr what you don't want to hear or disagree with?  He's got quite the followers.  

by anna shane 2008-04-20 01:47PM | 0 recs
Re: NO, he has withstood hers.

Well, the Clinton campaign hasn't shied away from calling theirs the "kitchen sink" strategy.  You can't say that she doesn't play into the very stereotype you've raised, whether intentionally or not.

by rfahey22 2008-04-20 10:31AM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds To Obama's Latest Atta

OK let's get some things straight-

Attacks on differences on policy are fair game.  Obama never said that his campaign wouldn't discuss their differences on policy issues.  Health care, her vote on Iraq, her shifting support for NAFTA, and so on are all valid issues which he has every right to discuss.

Rovian attacks are different.  These include the acceptance of a Republican framing of the issues which are tested in focus groups and then passed on to the media who eagerly repeat them to the American people over and over and over again.  This hurts ALL Democrats chances of being elected.  Two of these frames include fear mongering and painting your opponent as an "elitist."

These are typical divide and conquer tactics that split the Democratic vote by causing some to be fearful that the Democratic candidate will not keep them safe.  The "elitist" slur is used to get people with middle-low incomes to become alienated from the Democratic candidate and vote against their own interests.

I have no problem with Hillary OR Obama highlighting their differences on healthcare or other policy issues.  When I see a DEMOCRAT running for president use fear mongering and charges of "elitism" against another DEMOCRAT I lose all respect for that person.  These are tactics that are not only "Rovian" but are incredibly dangerous because they contribute to party division in all races, not just the presidential race.  When you have a major party figure repeatedly accept the frames developed by the Republicans you give validity to any Republican who decides to use them.  THAT is why so many of us have problems with the tactics Hillary has used in this campaign.

You can attack Obama for going after her on policy issues all you want.  The only thing you succeed at is further convincing his supporters that your candidate and her supporters have gone past reason and are indeed engaging in "silly season" in politics.

by Renie 2008-04-20 09:05AM | 0 recs
Some in the media, catching on

Slate gets it:
http://www.slate.com/id/2189485

Audacity?  Or just simple Hypocrisy?

Growing sense of reality to good-natured Obama supporters: this is not what you signed up for.

by bobbank 2008-04-20 12:38PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds To Obama's Latest Atta

How is that 20 point blow out by Clinton in PA looking?
You know...part of the 10 Primary sweep that would seal the deal for Sen. Clinton being touted here by Clinton supporters 3 weeks ago?

(and before ya all get into how much Obama has outspent Clinton in Pa? ....(because he has raised the money to do it)....(wait for what he can spend in IN v what she can spend)

by nogo war 2008-04-20 02:56PM | 0 recs
Re: Hillary's Camp Responds To Obama's Latest Atta
Oh and alegre etc...
This needs more exposure..even though it is a month old, only one paper picked it up....
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/bla ck_guy_asks_nation_for_change
by nogo war 2008-04-20 03:04PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------