Hillary...clinging to her husband's coattails...

[carpe diem]

Isn't it ironic that the first 60's era feminist with a chance to win the presidency has to cling to her husbands coattails to do it...just sayin'...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content//article/2007/03/01/AR2007030101877.html


At Site of '65 March, an '08 Collision
Sunday's Selma Event to Be a Stage for Obama -- and Clinton(s)
By Anne E. Kornblut
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 2, 2007; Page A01


Bill Clinton will join Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton at a commemoration of the 1965 civil rights march in Selma, Ala., on Sunday, bringing his star power and popularity among African Americans to a weekend of events that had been shaping up as a showcase for the candidacy of Sen. Barack Obama.

It will be the former president's first major public appearance with his wife since she launched her campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination last month.

bama (D-Ill.) announced several weeks ago that he would deliver the keynote speech at a service honoring the march across the Edmund Pettus Bridge, joining Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) and other veterans of the civil rights movement in marking the historic event. Obama has gained significantly among black voters in recent months, according to a recent Washington Post-ABC News survey, jeopardizing Clinton's early lead in the Democratic primary field.

Reluctant to give any ground to Obama even at this stage of the campaign, Clinton (N.Y.) decided early last week that she, too, would go to Selma this weekend. She arranged a simultaneous appearance at a church just steps away from the one where Obama will speak Sunday morning, and she agreed to accept a civil rights award on behalf of her husband.

Late yesterday, after organizers initially said that the former president had not committed to attend, the Clinton campaign announced that he would be making the trip after all.

[EST]

1. I am not a Hillary Clinton fan, but I must say this is an

unfair and gratuitous criticism.

If she did not make superior use of all her available assets, she would fail the test as to her qualifications for president.

Dissecting a candidate in this fashion does not strike me as a particularly useful exercise.

[carpe diem]

2. rest assured...

I will not be the only one to make note of it over the course of this campaign...

[ShortnFiery]

22. Yes, it's "my husband" THIS and "my husband" THAT ...

Just like all those General Officer wives used to babble at all those mandatory Officer Wives' Command Calls.

Yes, HRC is now the quintessential Officer's wife who wears HIS RANK on her collar while throwing her weight around us "little people" whose spouses rank lower than HER illustrious "Husband." :puke:

I'm disgusted with HRC's recent behavior. Hell, I'm not from NY State but I'll be sure to send money to her next State Democratic Primary Challenger just to help make her GO AWAY. I'm sick of "The Clintons" in general.

Clinton Fatigue? You got that right!

[oasis]

26. "NY State Democratic Primary Challenger". She'll be residing at 1600 Pennslyvania Ave.

by the time her senate seat is up for election.

It may not cure your "Clinton fatigue" but it'll save you a buck or two.;-)

[ShortnFiery]

28. Nope, IF nominated, the M$M will rip her to shreds, they KNOW that

these big media conglomerates will get many more perks with a Republican President in office. We know that, don't we? ;)

But thanks for helping to set HRC up for the fall into the political abyss ... all that polarization and good material. Thanks. :sarcasm:

And yes, when the dust settles, I'll be promoting her challenger in the next Democratic Primary in NY State.

[rinsd]

32. Yeah her challenger got all of 20% last time

As a fervent anti-war candidate in one of the most anti-war & wealthy states in the union, he was able to raise all of $200K and 20% going against a supposed war hawk.

Could it be the impression had by many Duers is not the impression of many Democrats and Americans?

[ShortnFiery]

34. Yes, but if you look at his background and credentials, he was more worthy.

But hell, fluff and political swing rule all. :eyes: And we all know The Clintons can both smooze and BUY THAT? Well, I guess we'll see if they can swing it this time? :shrug:

[BenDavid]

3. I agree with you..Undue and

WJC walked over that bridge with John Lewis and many many more african american leaders several times in the 90's. And of course Mrs Clinton was there too. So why should she not go back to an event she has been invited too and celebrate with them.

I think too many people hear that old tired expression , She can't win...Well excuse me but I want all to think a moment when you hear this expression. Each time you hear a talk radio Nazi say "She can't win," it means they're afraid of her. Talk radio whores are saying great things about Obama, which should make you wonder. Why would a facsist bastard say nice things about Obama?

I have nothing bad to say about Obama.If Obama wins - whoever wins the Democratic nomination, I'm behind him/her all the way.(That's a sentence you won't hear from most on here.)

But seriously, between Obama with two years experience and the only team to win back-to-back presidential campaigns since FDR,(the team that beat war hero Bush and war hero Dole), ...who do you think the super-racist GOP wants to run against?

[Colobo]

5. I don't care about what they want, and no Democratic voter should

[EST]

8. I suppose it may be that one of the biggest reasons

that there is so much angst and argument about things that are,in fact, of little import is that we are all - even some republics - so very concerned with the craziness that has resulted from allowing the nation to fall too far under the sway of the so-called conservatives.

On another note from your post, please correct me if I'm wrong in properly appreciating sarcasm, but, as I understand it, Dole was no hero, unless it takes being a hero to even show up-highly possible.
My understanding was that he had just barely gotten in country and pulled a newbie gaffe and got shot.

His being shot got him instantly out of the war and gave him the heft to parlay a dumb mistake into a political career.

He certainly has never set any real standards of political courage, deep intellect or personal honesty in his long career of being just barely sub-average.

Bush, on the other hand, had real guts. It takes real guts to be able to throw up as much jack daniels as he has without a prolapsed stomach.

[Missy M]

10. I am in full agreement with your critique...

they are afraid of Hillary and you have to question why they are playing nice with Obama right now.

[Clark2008]

14. I'm not a right-winger, nor am I scared of her, but I don't think she

can win.

I think it has more to do with where I live. I live in a purple state and know how swing voters feel about her (which isn't popular). Granted, her lack of popularity in the purple states is a result of an overly-zealous rightwing media, but it's still there and still a valid concern of mine, particularly when I read polls that say Guiliani would beat her in the blue state of Pennsylvania. I mean, if she can't win Penn, how does she have any chance in red-leaning states? We have to flip a few of those in order to win.

[MADem]

40. I have to agree with you. In fact, Bill would have been toast on MANY occasions were it not for

her interventions and political savvy.

The whole construct of the 'little woman, tagging along' idea is a bit of an insult. She's got a long CV, despite having to do the First Lady thing to help her husband achieve his goal, going all the way back to the Watergate Committee. And she's been elected twice from a very large and diverse state.

It's a cheap shot, and an unworthy one too. But then, those are the easiest to take.

[Erika]

4. Evidently you don't know much about Hillary

She can stand on her own two feet quite nicely.

Mr. Clinton is a huge draw. If Al Gore had used Bill in his campaign, Al would be our president right now.

[Lobster Martini]

9. I agree

A Gallup poll last month ranked Bill Clinton between JFK and FDR among the greatest Presidents. (Apparently everyone who responded to the poll forgot about Washington and Jefferson. I guess they don't look at the portraits on their money. But that's another issue.)

Al Gore chose to put some distance between himself and Bill Clinton in 2000 and lost six states by less than 4%. If riding Bill's coattails had helped Gore tip Missouri, Tennessee or Ohio in his favor, he becomes President, the U.S. ratifies the Kyoto Protocol, and maybe avoids a war. So if riding Bill's coattails in 2008 keeps John McCain from becoming President, I wish Hillary a pleasant ride.

[mtnsnake]

15. Good post,

Although it was a hard call which way for Gore to go, as far as whether or not to distance himself from Bill after the Monica affair, it looks like he took a gamble and paid dearly for it, but that's easier said in retrospect than it was back then to foresee.

[Lobster Martini]

18. In hindsight.

All you can say in retrospect is that Bill Clinton might have helped Gore and couldn't have hurt, since if you lose, it doesn't matter by how much.

[oasis]

6. In 2000, President Clinton delivered a stirring speech at the site. "Without

Selma (Bloody Sunday) Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton would never have been elected president of the United States" said BC on that day. He was accompanied by Coretta Scott King, Jesse Jackson, Ethel Kennedy, Josea Willaims and John Lewis. Andy Young and Julian Bond also attended the evemnt.

[Porcupine]

7. She is now part of the American political nobility.,

We have too much oligarchy in politics these days. Too many political families. While Ms. Clinton is a fair and able candidate on her own right I question wether we want to have a oligarchy in the US.

Even in this last election the vast majority of congresscritters faced no real opposition. The congressman from my district barely pretends to run anymore. I'm tired of it. I want my country back.

[twiceshy]

13. The congressman in my district....

Has a city maintenance building named for him. And he's not even dead yet. He is apparently our congressman for life!

[paulk]

11. yes, this will be the Republican meme

keep it up and

Thanks for helping.

-karl

[Dr Fate]

38. If she plays it right, she can use it to her advantage.

I am no Hillary supporter, but if i was, I would not really mind this framing.I honestly think that most voters wont mind- since everyone really likes Bill.

I have always thought that if she did win the nom, the ONLY way she can win the general is by attaching herself to Bill at the hip. The public will not mind, I believe.

[paulk]

42. oh, I think it will be to her advantage also

but, the "riding on the coattails" bit is definitely an attempt by the right to paint the partnership in a more negative light.

[MaryBear]

57. Bill won by attaching his hip to hers.

Why not the other way around?

[SaveElmer]

12. Isn't it ironic how so many alleged Democrats...

Are so quick to adopt the dishonest talking points of the right wing when it comes to criticism of Hillary Clinton?!

[mitchtv]

74. disgusting!

"Demorats" not Democrats

[mtnsnake]

16. You call it "clinging". Most people would call it "smart politics".

She'd be a dummy not to use all her tools, and her husband is just one of many power tools that she has in her arsenal.

[Bridget Burke]

17. Bullshit.

If she was ever "behind" the Big Dog--she was pushing! Senator Clinton is not my favorite. But many of these attacks aren't based in fact.

If you prefer another candidate--please, let us know his good points!

If you don't prefer another--stop sowing dissension.

[mitchtv]

75. they have no crediblity now

who cares now?

[loyalsister]

19. I've said this for a long time

I think a monarchical presidency sets women back, slightly.
The implicit message is that the only way a woman can acheive power is if her husband hands it off to her.
Her previous contribution is only well known to actual Clinton fans, not people who need to gain some understanding regarding equity of the sexes.

I find it a little disappointing although it would not erode my support in the general were she the candidate.

[Larkspur]

20. Hillary has to cling to Bill's coat tails because she has no charisma herself

Philanderers, like Bill, have natural charisma. It's the tool they use to seduce others.

[Colobo]

21. Agreed!

[ShortnFiery]

23. As a person who's aware of Bill Clinton's natural charisma but refused to be seduced by it ...

I'm watching some of these "We'll all get new shoes" when Bill's Wife get's the Presidency type delusional thinking :eyes: and pinching myself.

But then again, I almost didn't vote for him the second time over both his centrist views and Jennifer Flowers. Perhaps every marriage has problems where one or both of the spouses are unfaithful, but SERIAL infidelity can't help but detract from a world leader's integrity. IMO, like other sexual disorders, Bill's chances for a cure are nil to zero.

Do we really want to relive another Monica Gate? :crazy:

[paulk]

24. "monica gate"

another right wing talking point

[Forkboy]

27. I've heard everyone use the term

Right,left,and the squishy middle.Easier than saying the "Lewinsky Affair" with added effect of it not sounding like a bad Ludlum novel.

[paulk]

44. "monica gate" is another RW talking point

in that we're supposed to be upset about it and look down on the Clinton's for his indescretions and her acceptance of them.

To say - "who wants another 'monicagate'" as if that should influence our vote in 2008, is very definitely a right wing talking point, IMHO.

[ShortnFiery]

29. I'm far from right wing ... and yes, Bill Clinton has a compulsion.

Remember how he was raked over the coals in 1996? No person without a sexual compulsion would later CHOOSE to tempt fate with another affair. But old "big dog" just couldn't stop himself. Tell me I'm wrong? You know I'm not. ;)

No, if anything I'm a dyed in the wool LIBERAL. But I'm sick of "The Clinton Mystique." You know us liberals do not care much for a political ruling class. :shrug:

[MADem]

43. So did JFK, so did LBJ, for that matter (he used to complain that his

reputation as a swordsman was superior to Kennedy's, but Kennedy got all the --whispered, mind you-- praise, and it was undeserved).

Woodrow Wilson had an eye, too. So did Eisenhower, so did FDR. Some dogs are hard to keep on the porch.

Only in America (and perhaps, in rigid, fundamental societies in other countries) do we get so concerned about the personal lives of politicians. Who cares who they're fucking, so long as it isn't, say, Kim Jong Il??? It's not our business.

I also think the custom of forcing the spouse of the President to "work for free" is bullshit, too. Yes, they can make a big payday out of it by writing a book or two, but they aren't really given an option, and are criticized up the yingyang by a voyeuristic public. I don't blame them for writing the bullshit book and getting some dough for that level of scrutiny and stress. We're electing the individual, not the "package." If there's benefit to be accrued by electing someone with a savvy spouse, that's nice, but it's not a selling point. The person should be allowed to run on their own merit.

Some of the best liberals came from a political ruling class--look at Teddy Kennedy as the liberal lion of the age, from a political family. If the "No Dynasties" rule applied, we'd have had no RFK and we'd have no Ted, to say nothing of the minor Kennedys in their various roles.

Look at FDR, whose cousin had his job before he did.

A name helps, and absent publicly financed campaigns, famous names usually mean money to afford to run, and I simply think it's unrealistic to expect people who come along in the world close to the political process not to have some interest in it, if it appeals to them and they have aptitude in that area.

[ShortnFiery]

48. Believe it our not, not all LIBERALS think the Kennedys are "way cool" :(

No, many of us liberals are fed up with the political elites. It's their particular type of "I'm entitled" prejudice and discrimination that disgusts me beyond belief. Words to the effect, "We need political dynasties to help us poor dumb ass peasant and non-investing classes."

Want to talk about hyper-focusing on Camelot - it was The Press and some morAns within The Public. :puke: I could have cared less for The Kennedy Dynasty's past and corrupt behaviors and personal excesses. :eyes:

The Iraqi People understand us liberals: The USA Centrists and Conservatives think that they too are too damn idiotic to run their own country. Whoa! .... sort of like you FEAR those of us who demand little things from our Political Class ... you know, like having them serve the people and "The Public Good" before they kiss the asses of their large corporate contributors?

I didn't approve of Teddy :puke: being Attorney General. And I don't believe the seemingly inbred political elite are entitled to rule over us little people because they are "special." The rich and political classes need to fear people like me. :evilgrin: We're the Americans not prone to being "wowed" by arrogance, money and/or power.

[MADem]

49. Well, Teddy wasn't attorney general. That was his dead brother Robert.

Teddy was the liberal you apparently don't like who voted against the Iraq War.

But hey, whatever. Your mind is made up.

[ShortnFiery]

50. I stand corrected. Yes you have it right. OK Robert should not have served in his brother's -JFK's

Executive Branch. :blush: OK, now I have it straight.

Thank you for graciously correcting me. ;)

Have a good evening.

On Edit: No, I don't like The Kennedy family dynasty. Every family and person has their faults, but no ONE particular family deserves to reign like royalty within a democratic republic.

I don't concur with the sense of entitlement among the political elite, democratic or republican.

I hope that clears things up.

[Marrah_G]

52. Ted Kennedy doesn't reign.

He is the ELECTED representative for the Commonwealth of Mass. He has earned the respect of our citizens.

[ShortnFiery]

54. Yes, and he serves well. HOWEVER, another Democrat whose last name isn't KENNEDY could

serve this country as honorably. Too bad, especially in the Senate, it takes either corporate whoring or being in one of the Politically Elite and Dynastic families in order to get yourself elected.

Nope, Ted Kennedy serves honorably, but he too, like many powerful men and women has lived his life with with far too many *excesses* to be dubbed saintly or even a "Knight of Kennedy Camelot." :eyes:

Perhaps part of the answer is term limits along with public financing of campaigns. :shrug:

Face it folks, we are not having another "Camelot" with Bill and Hill's Clinton "mystique." No matter how much we'd like to bring back the 1990s, those days are lost forever. What we are left with is a fiercely ambitious woman who USES her husband's popularity, like General Officer wives throw their weight around. That's not women's liberation but sycophantic. :(

[juajen]

82. Honestly, it's ok for a woman to be ambitious!

Without ambition, we would have no takers; it's a thankless job. I have seen no example of HRC throwing her weight around. IMHO, you seem just a tad biased. (sarcasm)

[MADem]

55. I and my fellow Massachusettsians actually VOTED the guy in

He's not royalty--he's chosen by the people of his state, again and again, because he represents their interests and defends their rights.

Such a concept, the guy with the most votes winning. I hope that clears things up.

Oh, and he knows he's rich, so he takes a one dollar salary every year.

[Forkboy]

60. He's one of the few politicians I'm always proud to vote for.

We keep voting for him because he does a good job,both for the nation and the country.

Imagine that :)

[MADem]

63. Yep, me too--Ted's our fellah!! He does right by us, I'd say! And he does right by the nation as

well.

We're lucky to have him, if he WERE actual 'royalty' rather than our chosen senator, well, we could do a lot worse!

[ShortnFiery]

66. Yes, good ole' Teddy is allowing the Business Community set the guidelines for illegal immigrant

amnesty. Oh yeah, he's a peach. :P NOT!

Again, another intelligent person could replace ANY Kennedy and perhaps do their jobs with a whole lot less CRONYISM and personal excesses.

Chalk me down as a liberal who was NOT EVER in love with the Kennedys. :thumbsdown:

Check his scorecard:

http://grades.betterimmigration.com/testgrades.php3?District=MA&VIPID=358

[MADem]

69. So, you're an ANTI-immigration advocate, eh? Thanks for telling us that!!!

That website of yours that you throw up so dramatically to CONDEMN Ted has THIS as a mission: http://www.betterimmigration.com/

Americans for Better Immigration (ABI) is a non-profit, non-partisan organization which lobbies Congress for reductions in immigration numbers.

ABI believes the problem with immigration today is not the individual immigrant but the numbers. "Better" immigration is lower immigration.

By grading federal politicians on their immigration actions, ABI provides one of the essential tools for helping citizens demand the policy they want.

Let's have a look at the HEROES of ABI:

A+
4% Received This Grade
Barrett, J. Gresham (R-SC) - 99%
Emerson, Jo Ann (R-MO) - 98%
Coble, Howard (R-NC) - 97%
Deal, Nathan (R-GA) - 97%
Duncan, John (R-TN) - 97%
Hayes, Robin (R-NC) - 97%
Hunter, Duncan (R-CA) - 97%
Rohrabacher, Dana (R-CA) - 97%
Tancredo, Tom (R-CO) - 97%
Hastert, Dennis (R-IL) - 96%
Kingston, Jack (R-GA) - 96%
Smith, Lamar (R-TX) - 96%
Stearns, Cliff (R-FL) - 96%
Everett, Terry (R-AL) - 95%
Goode, Virgil (R-VA) - 95%
Goodlatte, Robert (R-VA) - 95%
Johnson, Sam (R-TX) - 95%
Royce, Ed (R-CA) - 95%
Wamp, Zach (R-TN) - 95%

A
7% Received This Grade
Byrd, Robert (D-WV) - 94%
Davis, Geoff (R-KY) - 94%
Sessions, Jeff (R-AL) - 94%
Taylor, Gene (D-MS) - 94%
Vitter, David (R-LA) - 94%
Baker, Richard (R-LA) - 94%
Roberts, Pat (R-KS) - 94%
Bachus, Spencer (R-AL) - 93%
Chambliss, Saxby (R-GA) - 93%
Coburn, Tom (R-OK) - 93%
Gingrey, Phil (R-GA) - 93%
Herger, Wally (R-CA) - 93%
Isakson, Johnny (R-GA) - 93%
Bartlett, Roscoe (R-MD) - 92%
Bilbray, Brian (R-CA) - 92%
Boozman, John (R-AR) - 92%
Bunning, Jim (R-KY) - 92%
Cubin, Barbara (R-WY) - 92%
Culberson, John (R-TX) - 92%
Gallegly, Elton (R-CA) - 92%
King, Steve (R-IA) - 92%
Lewis, Ron (R-KY) - 92%
Sessions, Pete (R-TX) - 92%
Burton, Dan (R-IN) - 91%
Davis, Jo Ann (R-VA) - 91%
Jones, Walter (R-NC) - 91%
McKeon, Howard (R-CA) - 91%
Peterson, John (R-PA) - 91%
Saxton, Jim (R-NJ) - 91%
Westmoreland, Lynn (R-GA) - 91%
Aderholt, Robert (R-AL) - 90%
Barton, Joe (R-TX) - 90%
Brown-Waite, Virginia (R-FL) - 90%
Burr, Richard (R-NC) - 90%
Hall, Ralph (R-TX) - 90%
Sensenbrenner, James (R-WI) - 90%
Thune, John (R-SD) - 90%
Whitfield, Edward (R-KY) - 90%

A-
5% Received This Grade
Akin, Todd (R-MO) - 89%
Bishop, Rob (R-UT) - 89%
Dent, Charles (R-PA) - 89%
Fortenberry, Jeff (R-NE) - 89%
Lungren, Dan (R-CA) - 89%
McHenry, Patrick (R-NC) - 89%
Schmidt, Jean (R-OH) - 89%
Sullivan, John (R-OK) - 89%
Calvert, Ken (R-CA) - 89%
DeMint, James (R-SC) - 89%
Shadegg, John (R-AZ) - 89%
Doolittle, John (R-CA) - 88%
Grassley, Charles (R-IA) - 88%
Inglis, Bob (R-SC) - 88%
Inhofe, James (R-OK) - 88%
Platts, Todd (R-PA) - 88%
Forbes, Randy (R-VA) - 87%
Pickering, Charles (R-MS) - 87%
Shelby, Richard (R-AL) - 87%
Jindal, Bobby (R-LA) - 86%
Keller, Ric (R-FL) - 86%
McCotter, Thaddeus (R-MI) - 86%
McCrery, Jim (R-LA) - 86%
Ramstad, Jim (R-MN) - 86%
Wicker, Roger (R-MS) - 86%

http://grades.betterimmigration.com/view_all.php3?Flag=GRADE

Damned few DEMOCRATS on that list, eh? If these are your heroes, no WONDER you're so unhappy with the likes of Ted Kennedy...and no wonder most of your posts here are so angry. See, the Democrats don't feel the way you do on this issue.

I happen to LIKE immigration--I'm not in your Pat Buchanan/Americans for Better Immigration crowd. The tree of liberty is refreshed by the blood of these immigrants, who come here to work, to defend our country, to participate in the process that is America, to provide us with new ideas, new perspectives, and strengthen us as a nation.

Frankly, if that's your attitude, you might be on the wrong side of the aisle, here. But thanks for letting us know just where you stand, it's helpful to have some context when you get angry at classic liberals like Edward Moore Kennedy.

Now, just in case you are still unclear as to the mission of that bunch you quoted to diss our Ted, the reason Ted gets such shitty grades from that RACIST outfit is because they want to keep all the BROWN and YELLOW and BLACK huddled masses, yearning to breathe free, AWAY from our shores. Better immigration, you see, is just Caucasian, EUROPEAN immigration---at least that's their perspective. But then, I don't know many Europeans who see this place as the land of Milk and Honey nowadays.

Ted is a "Si se puede" kind of guy. But if you knew anything about him, and didn't quote the Tom Tancredo crowd to make your points, you'd know that. Here, read, and learn:

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Ted_Kennedy.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Kennedy

[ShortnFiery]

70. I'm a FAIR immigration advocate. All your bold text won't prove otherwise. n/t

[MADem]

72. Ohhhhh....Kay. So you support the "FAIR" immigration mission of this group, then.

You quoted them to make your point, after all. Why would you use them as a cite if you did not support the goals of this (damned near entirely GOP) outfit?

Or is there something I'm missing in your use of the classic code word "FAIR?"

You were the one who threw down the citation, after all--with a vengeance. You did it to prove a point about Ted, and now you seem irritated that I point out that it says something about YOU.

That bold text you are getting a bit, shall we say, snippy about is from a CITE THAT YOU PROVIDED TO ME.

Thanks so much for articulating your position, though. As I noted above, they see FAIR immigration as WHITE immigration, and you've told me all I need to know...no WONDER you don't like Ted--it's his "Si se Puede" and 'justice for ALL' attitude that has you in a knot!

[ShortnFiery]

77. You extrapolate inappropriately,

shame on your own prejudices that assumes racism.

You should be ashamed but you're not. Anything to further your agenda.

I believe that those who waited years to LEGALLY immigrate should be put to the front of the line. Further, I can't be the only liberal democrat who believes that our borders must be made secure before we address amnesty for illegal immigrants.

This is not a Democratic - Republican or Left - Right issue.

People who follow the rules should not be forgotten in this fervor to bring illegal immigrants into the fold, i.e., make them legal.

Again, shame on you for using the other people who I don't agree with politically (I'm a liberal on most topics) to stereotype what kind of person I am. You have no idea and as a democrat, you should entertain the fact that we don't all AGREE on the multifaceted topic of illegal immigration.

[MADem]

92. No I did not. If you posted a KKK website, I'd make assumptions about your affinity for bedsheets

and hoods. That website you posted is funded by a bunch of far right, intolerant RACISTS. The heroes listed are all far right, ultra conservative, GOP. And you have the STONES to suggest this isn't a partisan issue? Give me a big fat break.

If anyone should be ashamed, it is you. And you might want to check out Jimmy Carter's views on the immigration issue--he might not be your avatar choice in future. He actually agrees with BUSH on the matter, and Bush is in favor of increased guest workers, a program for those here to provide a path to citizenship, all the things that the website you threw at me oppose.

So what AM I supposed to think about you? By your OWN WORDS, by your OWN CITES, I know you. You're the one with the shovel, digging your own hole deeper and deeper. Not me.

This IS a Democratic-Republican issue, so don't pull that BS argument out of your hat. There are only TWO Democrats of the dozens and dozens and dozens that are listed on that website that got high marks from that racist, exclusionary bunch. TWO DEMOCRATS. TWO. None others support their racist goals. The rest of our, or maybe I should say my, party, are all in the low and failing marks category. Why? Because they don't think we should limit immigration to "white Christian folk." Or is that too hard for you to comprehend?

So, if it isn't a partisan issue, why are all the Democrats on the other side of the fence from this website you tout , eh???

Again, shame on YOU for throwing out far right crap, and trying to put a nonpartisan patina on it. Amd shame again on you for trying to deny something that's plainly obvious.

No one here is stupid--they can read. And the list of your heroes on your Let's Exclude Immigration By The Colored People website are NOT members of our party. So stop with that nonpartisan nonsense, and maybe do a little research on Carter's immigration stance. If you like him, you DON'T like that racist, intolerant website you tossed at me like a fetid bomb.

Shame, shame, shame, indeed.

[ShortnFiery]

95. I have admitted that I made a mistake with citing this source.

But you are unforgiving and still fly the "undeserved" racist banner and tacking it on to my person.

I was too quick off the mark but you are unforgiving and IMO, mean spirited in your inappropriate extrapolations.

Keep it up though, it only detracts from the true compassion and honest sincerity of those others with a similar cause but divergent tactics, i.e., amnesty for illegal immigrants though common ground consensus NOT degradation.

[MADem]

97. Well, you certainly didn't say that to me up to this point.

Go read through our exchanges again. I take it, then, that you are disavowing that racist web site you used to denigrate my Senator? Your arguments about him sort of collapse in that case. Do I take it that you withdraw those objections too, because he doesn't support that GOP/Tom Tancredo/XTIAN WHITES ONLY immigration policy, and his stance is close to former President Carter's on the immigration issue?

Understand this--it isn't my job to chase you around this forum to see if you've retracted your stated positions elsewhere. You can't expect me to read your mind, either. So it's not a question of my "keeping it up" -- it's a matter of your inarticulation of your change in position when discussing this subject with me, and your expecting me to magically know that you've had a change of heart about your support for that racist webpage and organization. So you can stow the snarky, ill advised 'compassion and sincerity' comments--as far as our discussions have gone, you haven't told me, up to now, that you disavow that crapsite you posted. And you've got the stones to get shirty with me? Give me a break.

And I would suggest that you do some research on Carter's support for amnesty and path to citizenship for the millions of 'mostly law abiding' people who are already here, many of whom live in Plains GA and worship with him and his wife at his local church. You have his avatar, one would think you support at least a few of his compassionate views.

It might open your eyes. And maybe your heart.

Si, se puede, indeed.

[ShortnFiery]

98. I would suggest that your rude behavior hurts an potential noble cause.

How proud those who seek the same goals as you must be of your inconsiderate and self-righteous narratives. :eyes:

I'm done with you.

[MADem]

99. I beg your pardon? The rude person here is you. You were the

one who touted a racist, right wing website, you were the one who made the rude and insulting remarks about my liberal hard-working Senator, and then you have the sheer gall to say such a thing? I suppose in your curious world, people who AREN'T rude are the ones who agree with you all the time, is that it?

Thank you, though, for revealing yourself so transparently. By your own words, you have let us all know precisely what you are and where you're coming from.

And way to go, too, not answering my questions--see, I did notice. The 'high dudgeon' tactic to try to deflect the attention from your non-response didn't work.

And say, guess what, I'm done with you too.

Again, thanks for letting us know exactly where you stand on an essential plank in the Democratic party platform. It's helpful.

[Forkboy]

71. He should be damned proud of that.

Look at the fucking idiots that score well. :shrug:

Is that really a source you want to tout?

[ShortnFiery]

78. Yes, I got a bunch of low level republican reps and you have Dimson on your side.

Plus, your hero Teddy Kennedy allowing Big Business to formulate the guidelines to legal status is far what you folks love to stereotype LIBERAL.

All those bold, large type words can not detract from the fact that this is NOT a Republican - Democratic or Left Right Issue.

Or are you proud to have George W. Bush and Teddy Kennedy joining forces to allow Big Business to open the floodgates for unfettered immigration of Mexico's poor into the USA?

IMO the issue is much more complex and Teddy is NOT NECESSARILY looking out for the best interests of his constituents when he hands over the reigns to the Business community to write the specifics. :thumbsdown:

[Forkboy]

80. Does this mean I lose my "good soul" standing?

All I know is Kennedy is one of the only Democrats that hasn't run screaming from the word "liberal".Is he perfect? No. Is he better than nearly all the rest? You bet your ass.

And 87 Republicans and 2 Democrats (from your source) is hardly indicative of it being "NOT a Republican - Democratic or Left Right Issue."

Looks pretty right from here :shrug:

[ShortnFiery]

81. No, it's not right! There is not altruism in his giving Big Business the reigns.

Again, this should NOT be a Republican vs. Democratic type issue.

I am a liberal but I believe that the FAILED STATE of Mexico should do right by their people. I also believe that it's asinine to demand a National ID card when we can't account for 11 Million Illegal Immigrants.

Believe it or not, there are GOOD Democrats who believe that our borders should be first made secure before we start any program to provide legal status to those who entered our country illegally. I believe that many of our democratic representatives are NOT expressing the will of their constituents.

Because I believe in FAIRNESS does not make me less of a Democrat.

I don't believe in FAMILY celebrity idolization in politics. Too many of you seriously over estimate Teddy Kennedy's supposedly *altruistic* motives.

p.s. the act of bringing up a past exchange is below your usually good behavior and high intelligence. ;)

[Forkboy]

83. "good behavior and high intelligence."

Are you sure you're talking to the right person? :)

[ShortnFiery]

84. But of course, you have been a thoughtful opponent who presents

viable arguments. :hi:

On Edit: Yes, it does trouble me how many democratic representatives are slack, if not openly supportive of giving illegal immigrants amnesty.

Honest. I don't feel that it's nationalistic to demand that those who are here legally be cared for first. :shrug: Also, it doesn't seem right wing of me wanting for us to have MORE secure borders, i.e., 100% is NOT attainable but it can be much better.

No, you're right in the fact that it's low level republicans who are pushing border security. But it troubles me because I'm not a right winger ... not at all. :shrug:

[Forkboy]

85. I don't think you're a Republican

But you have to admit,the source you used would hardly support the idea that it's a bi-partisan thing (which I agree that it is).If there is widespread support from the left there has to be a better source to illustrate it.

you have been a thoughtful opponent who presents viable arguments.

I still think you got the wrong guy.I don't think I've ever made a viable argument here.And I bet there's lots of folks who would agree :)

But thanks! :hi:

[ShortnFiery]

86. OK, then let's say for the record, IMO, it should not be a Left -Right issue.

You are correct (and yes a viable argument) without implying some ghastly leap like "racism" that most of these people are goof ball, kool aid drinking right wingers who scored an "A."

Yes, I could have done much better with citing a source. :blush:

But I can't be the only person who is left of center who does not feel properly represented on this issue :shrug: There must be a better way to resolve the illegal immigration issue other than allowing the Business Community to write the guidelines for Legal Status? In essence, that's like Cheney letting the Oil Industry run our energy program.

There must be a middle ground that is less than full amnesty and will involve LABOR. I don't believe that Teddy Kennedy is reaching out for that solution. I hope that I'm proven wrong, but I fear not.

May peace be with you ... I still think you are a good soul. :-)

[Forkboy]

87. I actually did some research...a rare feat!

Here's his votes on immigration;

http://www.ontheissues.org/International/Ted_Kennedy_Immigration.htm

and his votes on just about every other issue;

http://www.ontheissues.org/Senate/Ted_Kennedy.htm

and I found this fascinating tidbit there as well;

Background on Immigration

Immigration Buzzwords

# The biggest components of the immigration debate is how many legal immigrants to allow, and how to prevent illegal immigration.
# Liberals and libertarians generally oppose restricting immigration. Look for buzzwords like "promote diversity" to define the liberal attitude, or "we're a nation of immigrants" to define the libertarian attitude. Any reference to providing illegal immigrants with services beyond emergency medical treatment, or any reference to "clemency" for illegal immigration, implies a strong pro-immigrant stance.
# Moderate liberals and libertarians will oppose restricting immigration while paying lip-service to restrictions on illegal immigration. Look for buzz-phrases like "promote immigration, block illegal immigration" and "separate the functions of the INS and the Border Patrol," which mean the same thing.
# Conservatives and populists generally favor restricting immigration. Look for buzzwords like "protect our borders" or "strengthen the INS". A call for "Official English" is a strongly anti-immigration stance, because most immigrants are from non-English speaking countries. That's the same attitude as "End bilingual education," which focuses primarily on Spanish-speaking immigrants.
# Moderate conservatives and populists will favor restricting illegal immigration while paying lip-service to allowing legal immigration. The result is the same as moderates in favor of immigration: calls for separating out legal immigration from illegal, but with a focus on enforcement against illegals instead of a focus on respecting immigrant rights.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Background_Immigration.htm

[ShortnFiery]

88. Thanks. Verying interesting research on a complex problem.

I need to study this in much more depth before expressing any further opinion. Duh. :-)

[Forkboy]

89. Thta's why I didn't include any commentary

Still reading it all myself.So far it seems like him and you are far closer than you might suspect,and I hope you don't take that as an insult. :)

[ShortnFiery]

90. Not at all! If someone is open and basically respectful, it's not a hit on my EGO

to be corrected. In fact, if we don't remain open to new information, we become what we both fear and hate most: Ideologues. Oh the horror! :scared:

It's a knack with some people ... they can correct others without threatening their person. Yes, we need more Diplomats - even here at DU.

Excellent site references - keepers for my favorites list.

Have a good one and no regrets. :hi:

[Forkboy]

91. No regrets at all.

Nice to have a normal confab here.

Have a good night.

:boring: <----- me in about half an hour!

[rinsd]

25. Geez what a hypocritical feminazi!

First she lets Slick Willy get away with murder and now she needs her man to remain politically viable.

Maybe a woman shouldn't run for elected office.

:sarcasm:

[MaineDem]

30. What utter crap

More proof that some people are troubled by strong women.

[rinsd]

31. Bingo!

[ShortnFiery]

33. Strong women go on their own credentials and don't use "my husband" to boost

their own personal credibility. It's all becoming absurd. To this old broad who burned her training bra for FEMINISM, HRC is merely, IMO, a sycophant to those of the power elite. In essence, she's turned into an Anti-Feminist by constantly referring to her husband's accomplishments AS IF they were her own.

HRC, Strong Woman? No, I don't think so. At least not in the area of demonstrating personal integrity and moral courage. :(

[Bolo Boffin]

53. Wow, do I disagree with you on this.

Would Bill be there if Hillary didn't want him there? No.

There may be coattails in this election but Bill is the one with cloth between his fingers...

[amandabeech]

62. I'm with you.

I can only add two asides.

When I saw Bill's video biography, "A Man from Hope," I knew that we were in trouble. Bill grew up in a violent, alcoholic-dominated family. He came through that as well as could be expected, but experiences like that leave their mark, and there was no hint that Bill, or anyone around him, realized that. Bill is so adult-child-of-an-alcoholic that it hurts--everything from his need to please to his sexual addiction.

I was in counseling in '92 due to my own family "issues." When I told my therapist about Clinton's background, she was horrified. She said that he would have an achilles heel somewhere. We found it.

Back in '70s therapy culture, Sen. Clinton would be considered co-dependent for seeming to enable Bill. Co-dependency carries its own problems. Go look it up.

I spent two years of grad school with a peripheral member of the Kennedy clan. He was nothing special in that realm, and repeatedly made fun of me for being a "populist," and in a not-so-nice way. Teddy's done a lot of good, but his clan member hasn't, so far as I know.

I myself am proud of being an economic populist and my pocket book shows it.

Now I'm off to duck and cover.

[HuffleClaw]

35. if she DIDN'T appear with bill now and the headlines would scream 'marital troubles!'

that said, yes, imo her entire political career is dependent on bill.

[NDP]

36. Well, one thing is for sure. Her's would drag down every Democrat running in 2008.

[SaveElmer]

39. Any scrap of evidence to support that...? nt

[paulk]

45. who needs evidence?

this is a Hillary thread!

[oasis]

47. Well, now that you've registered your 2 cents, Hillary knows what she's up against.

:eyes:

[Dr Fate]

37. I am not supporting Hill for the nom, but I have no problem with this.

I disagree with Hill on some major issues, but I dont have a problem with her associating herself with her own husband.

[MADem]

41. Heh heh...how DARE she!!!

Cogent point, there!

[AtomicKitten]

46. regardless of how you feel about her

... purposefully overlooking her stellar curriculum vitae is just snarky. Surely you can find concrete points of criticism; this isn't it.

[bagrman]

51. Let's look at her voting record, Who's side is she really on

Forget what Hillary says and what other people say about her. Look at her voting record. Pro-war? Check. Pro-tax cuts? Check. Pro-torture? Check. Pro-corporations? Check. Anti-choice? Check. Anti-privacy rights? Check. Anti-gay marriage? Check. Anti-immigrants? Check. Anti-working class? Check. Anti-unions? Check. Anti-environment? Check. Besides the Iran contra planes were coming out of her state while her husband was Govenor. She's just part of the machine.

Latr

PS Google : Mena Arkansas and see what all you get, or Clinton body count.

[oasis]

56. Let's look at the facts that you've provided to back up your assertions.

Z-E-R-O

Check.

[paulk]

58. Clinton Body Count?

Are you fucking kidding me?

You list one of the most virulently anti-Clinton right wing sites on the internet as a place to get info on the Clintons?

A place that accuses the Clinton's of MURDER?

You post lies about her voting record and then tell us to confirm your accusations by going to the

CLINTON BODY COUNT WEBSITE ?????????????????????

You know what?

Fuck you.

You're a fucking troll!

HEY MODS -

This guy is a fucking troll.

Do I have to get my post deleted to get you to pay attention to this bullshit?


?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

[bagrman]

65. Well there were 1,340,00 hits, in .14 seconds, And they are all RNC sites?

Iran / Contra being ran out of their state, guns , drugs and money, what fun. Nothing to it, to think that there would be any funny business there. Most asshole's in this country were watching OJ walk while the Senate hearings were going on, and don't even know where Mena is. A right wing Troll I don't think so, I thought Clinton was one of the best presidents we've had, except for signing that NAFTA thingy. If Hillary had gotten to be Senator of Arkansas instead of NY, I could understand it. But they pulled Guliani and ran some milk toast kid against her, and now Gulianni wants to run against her for Prez. I think she's part of the present power structure that we have now and all she has to do is stand there and keep her mouth shut and she'll be elected, it's probabaly already decided.

Latr

[Forkboy]

61. You could save us time and just link directly to the RNC website

Where at least we'd get this shit straight from elephants mouth.

[Clarkie1]

59. "clinging" has a kind of negative connotation to it.

But then again, what other word is there for it? Can't blame her, really. It's just the reality of the situation...she's going to do what she has to do to win.

[donsu]

64. 'clinging' is a word that can't describe Hillary

I have never seen any signs of 'clinging' in Hillary's personality.

Rove must have thought of using it.

[ecstatic]

67. Bill has campaigned for many Dems, not just his wife

To be fair. He is a great person to have on your side, whether you're his wife or not.

[Tellurian]

68. Heard Hillary's speech at Selma was fantastic...nm

[ddeclue]

93. People giving speeches who didn't actually march there don't impress me much..

The only politician whose speech I would care to hear on this topic is Congressman John Lewis, D-GA - who was actually there.

The rest is just self promotion.

Doug D.

[mitchtv]

73. Ithink your time would be better spent

trashing republics,that includes all the so called "dems" that pile on with you. Go home! (I do not support Sen. Clintons's aspirations, but I don't trash Dems.) * time is better spent advocating for your candidate.; However do this kind of crap and you lose votes for your guy.

[AZBlue]

76. You're grasping at straws.

We get it, we get it...you hate Hillary. Your many other posts today alone was proof enough. Stop wasting space on the board. You're entitled to your own opinion, but your "arguments" lack any substance.

[styersc]

79. Bill spent a lot of time standing on Hillary's shoulders...

...time to repay the favor.

[Ethelk2044]

94. Clinton

I actually like both candidates. However, the media has started to say she keeps depending on her husband too soon. It looks like they will drive it home during the election campaign. She should be carefully to only use him in the end.

[thatsrightimirish]

96. right wing talking points to bash Clinton

FDR once said "They hate me and I welcome their hatred" Hillary needs to say that.