Skip to main content

What to do when you run across a diary that sets your teeth on edge when you only have your puny iPhone keyboard for responding?  That happened to me while traveling last week when this blow-out diary rocketed to the Rec List and garnered over a thousand comments.  There were over 300 Recs and one HR.

The HR was mine.  I blew my stack and received my first red ink warning from the Help Desk in over 10 years of posting here.

Now that I am back at a proper keyboard, I will try to succinctly explain, for the record, my objections to this diary.  Please note that I am not interested in rehashing the Hillary Rox-Sux issue, but in simply explaining, below the fold, why my finger was driven inexorably to the Hide Button on that fateful day.  

(1) Right out of the gate this diary smacked to me of CT.

First off,  there is the title: "The Real Reason Behind All The "Go Hillary" 2+ Years Before Election."  The implication is that there is a "real reason" that we suckers don't know about and the all-knowing diarist is going to reveal to us:
.  

I won't discuss why the establishment wants HRC to run. I think we all know that. Instead, I'd like to propose a simple theory why the Hillary caucus is out early and often blowing their horns -- the Establishment fears a populist challenge. It really is that simple, yet I've seen no one put it out there yet. The reasoning makes sense.
Yikes!  The Establishment!  (is that like The Bilderbergers? The Freemasons? The Kiwanis?)  The Establishment "fears" a populist challenge?   And who the hell is "the Hillary caucus" if not another shadowy, unnamed group?  But, wait, I'm a Hillary supporter so that must mean me!  I never knew I was part of such a behind-the-scenes group.  Nor did I know that I fear a populist challenge even though I want to see Elizabeth Warren in the primary.  All this hocus-pocus was unknown to me.    

For the record, I am not a member, nor have I ever been a member of of The Establishment.  No Hillary Clinton supporter that I know personally is a member of or has ever been a member of The Establishment.  I could list all of my progressive bona fides here, but that would never suffice before a DK purity court.  

(2) The diary is rife with personal insults to the many Clinton supporters here who speak up for their favored candidate.

As one of them, I did not appreciate being told that I  thrive on victimhood or patronize others or am insistent or shout down critics or insult them or dismiss them.    

"the onslaught is at least weekly. It has become predictable. It thrives on victimhood. It is patronizing. It is insistent. It is the now steady stream of diaries attempting to reinforce Hillary Clinton as the Inevitable Nominee."

"Play victim and shout down the critics. Insult them. Especially, dismiss them."  "Gin up Fear"

(3) The diary is telling the first serious female candidate for The White House to back off and enjoy her family and her good health and bask in the rewards of her suffering:
I'll close by saying I wish Hillary a long and happy life, filled with family and good health. She has suffered, but she's been richly rewarded for her patience and willingness to hang in there.

OY!  No wish for any continued professional life, just a push out to pasture where she can tend to her family and count the blessings earned along her path of sacrifice.  How patronizing.  How insulting.  And how sexist, frankly.  

So that is what I think.  It isn't a simple disagreement that caused me to hide-rate this diary.  It was the flirting with CT and the personal insults to myself and to all of the honest and sincere Hillary Clinton supporters who persevere here. I did not appreciate the derision or the attempt to categorize Clinton's support as a function of some ulterior motive of some amorphous "Establishment" group.    Add to that the final whiff of patronizing sexism.  

I regret that I was technically unable to reply to the diary at the time it was published and I know that my HR was taken as improper because it was thought to be made out of simple disagreement.  

Hillary Clinton's support is founded on millions of voters who think she would be a terrific president.    That's the "real reason" she is considered the frontrunner right now.  
If you don't like her, then get busy and find someone else.  

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  Great post. (25+ / 0-)

      I agree with everything you said.

      Deeply sexist posts like the one you HR'd should be allowed to be HR'd in my view. I think we should take this up as community, and adjust those rules in advance of 2016. Let's take it through the proper channels.

    •  "then get busy and find someone else." (9+ / 0-)

      Is that so hard?

      Just need one palatable candidate with the grassroot support and guption to go head to head vs HRC, is not like it never happened before right?

      And after a process call primaries folks go to an event called a convention and the Democratic party will appoint whoever won.

      May I suggest the anti HRC crowd to go out an recruit someone.

      who knows a lot of HRC's folks might like the new guy/gal better, is not like it never happened before right?

      "First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win." -- Mahatma Gandhi

      by IamTheJudge on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:06:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Being "for" someone, and actually making (8+ / 0-)

        that someone a genuine, real candidate is too much hard work. Much easier to be "against" someone.

        Personally, I'm hoping Governor Martin O'Mailley runs. He's expressed interest and I think he would be an excellent candidate. He's got strong liberal credentials. He's got executive experience at multiple levels, and he's nowhere as beholden to corporate interests as HRC.

        A great article just a few days ago:

        Martin O’Malley Looks Stronger For 2016

        KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

        by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:42:34 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I like O'Malley (6+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          fcvaguy, ccyd, Chi, Smoh, Ahianne, Dr Swig Mcjigger

          I don't think he is ready yet to win the general.  In my opinion, the Obama out of left field run for the win is a once a generation thing.  I'd love for him to wind up in the number 2 slot next time around.  In part because I think it would toughen him up and also give him some experience in areas he has no reason to grapple with now (foreign policy comes to mind.)

          Of course I'll be supporting the nominee regardless of who it is.  The court and my kids' futures are at stake.

          Certainly from our standpoint, this gives us a sense of momentum -- when the United States has accolades tossed its way, rather than shoes. - PJ Crowley

          by nsfbr on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:55:39 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Precisely because Obama (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            frostbite, Denver11, askew, nsfbr

            Do I honestly feel O'Malley has a genuine shot at it. IMO, he can beat any Republican opponent.

            Can he beat HRC? All he needs to do is to draw stark contrasts between HRC's corporatism and the need to address income inequality. And, while O'Malley isn't the orator Obama is, he can do a better job of making the case than Edwards ever could and do so with credibility. He was the Mayor of Baltimore and Governor of one of the most progressive states in the nation.

            KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

            by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:03:15 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well, I'm not convinced. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              fcvaguy

              But I'm open.  To be clear, the concerns are about his being able to win, not govern.  To me, and this isn't always the case, in 2016 (and more acutely, 2014) winning is everything.  I foresee the next presidential election being based largely on who can spend enough to win and who can deal with the onslaught that comes from the Kochs and their ilk.  My gut tells me that you can't hurt HRC much more.  I don't know what they will dream up about O'Malley.  It is precisely because he has had a comparative cakewalk (B'more and MD being about as blue as it gets, especially after the disastrous experiment with an R in Annapolis previously) that I'm concerned.  

              I'm also more open to HRC being a good president than many.  That is currently being reinforced by my surprise at T'Mac doing a good job so far in Richmond.  

              Certainly from our standpoint, this gives us a sense of momentum -- when the United States has accolades tossed its way, rather than shoes. - PJ Crowley

              by nsfbr on Mon Jun 30, 2014 at 08:44:57 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  This can't get lost in the trees (10+ / 0-)
            The court and my kids' futures are at stake.
            Whoever is the next President may have as many as three appointments.  If he/she is a Republican, then Kennedy and Scalia may retire so that a conservative reactionary majority will be cemented for another two generations.

            May you be spared from people who tell you, "God never gives you more than you can handle."

            by ccyd on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:51:04 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  I don't get it (61+ / 0-)

      I did the same thing in 2008 that I'll be doing in 2016, and for me it's simple:

      1. Vote for the candidate I like best in the primaries.

      2. Vote for the Democrat in the general election (because anything else is essentially throwing away my vote).

      I don't care about personalities. I care about platforms and policy issues.

      Plus, I'm not going to throw away my vote or sit home simply because I dislike one policy position. For me, it's about the balance of the platform.

      Whichever candidate has the highest percentage of agreement with what I want (meaning what I think is best for the country as a whole) is the one I vote for. Primary, General, Period.

      I really don't understand Dems who get so sold on a single candidate that they refuse to vote for anyone else in the general election - or who get to the point of hating anyone in their party so much that they'd refuse to vote for them even at the expense of others.

      We're not going to date or marry this person - we're looking for someone who will move our county/state/nation/planet in the right direction, and as far as I'm concerned, that's all that matters. If their platform is the best of what's out there, it's what I'm going for.

      I don't go to the store looking to buy something that isn't there... I look for the best of what is available, because damn it that's how reality works. If all the peaches are bruised, then you buy the least bruised one - or make peach cobbler.

      Why do people have to make this so difficult?

      Plus, I get sick to death of people who say that I'm wrong because I'm not voting for THE MOST PROGRESSIVE CANDIDATE IN THE WHOLE FREAKING WORLD WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU YOU MORON?

      If that most progressive candidate has a chance of winning, hell yeah I'll vote for them.

      But if the only realistic choice is between a moderate Democrat and an insane Republican - I'll take the moderate every fucking day with toast and jam, thank you. Because my life is not the only one on the line here (although it is one of them) and it all matters. It's REAL. It's not some stupid game. What we do makes a difference in the future of everyone involved, so I hold voting as a high honor, a right, and a civic duty.

      I will always vote, and I will always choose the best possible candidate that has a chance of winning.

      Always.

      "We have only the moral ground we actually inhabit, not the moral ground we claim." - It Really Is That Important

      by Diogenes2008 on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:26:00 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't agree with *everything* you wrote (7+ / 0-)

        But my hat's off to you regardless. Damn fine comment, there.

        P.S. I am not a crackpot.

        by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:50:42 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Actually, this is kind of funny (9+ / 0-)

          Your peach comparison cracked me up.

          I love fruit. Love it, love it, love it. But I hate fruit products. Peach cobbler? Blech. You'll never see me eating a fruit pie of any type. If fruit is adulterated in any way, I will not touch it.

          So if all the peaches are bruised, I just won't buy it because if I can't eat it as is, I won't eat it at all.

          So in your metaphor, I am the purist. I'm not going to eat fruit if I have to turn it into something else before I eat it. I want my peach to be a peach, not a peach cobbler.

          And I want my Democrats to be Democrats.

          P.S. I am not a crackpot.

          by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:58:54 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I love fruit products (10+ / 0-)

            But then, I grew up part-time on a farm, where you see produce at all stages. You can pick it fresh, but you can't get a perfect piece of fruit every time. Plus, you do a lot of canning because you can't possibly eat it all at peak.

            You make apple pie, cobbler, crisp, brown betty, applesauce, cider- we even made fruit leather (now known as fruit rollups with a lot of junk added).

            Zucchini - that's a different story. You eat all you can, including zucchini bread which is quite good - but then you sneak up to someone's doorstep in the middle of the night and leave them ten tons of zucchini because that damned stuff will produce more than any one family can possibly use.

            Point is, you make the best of what you have. Especially if you don't have a whole lot of money or choices.

            And I want my Democrats to be Democrats.
            Uh, yeah. Me too. Which is why I didn't vote for the Republican posing as a Democrat here in Florida a couple years ago. Fortunately, even with his massive budget and ad buys, people saw through him. He LOST in the primaries, thankfully.

            I vote for Democrats, always. But I vote for the best one available, and sometimes, in some areas, that's going to be a Blue Dog. So you make peach cobbler and deal with what you get.

            Because a Blue Dog is still several degrees to the left of a Tea Partier or Republican - which is often what you'll get if the BD doesn't win. And that's untenable in my view.

            "We have only the moral ground we actually inhabit, not the moral ground we claim." - It Really Is That Important

            by Diogenes2008 on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:16:01 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well, as I stated downthread (21+ / 0-)

              I'm one of the progressives that stayed home in '12. The only real election at the time in my district was between Walt Minnick and Raul Labrador. Minnick was beyond Blue Dog, he is a conservative. He stood with the opposing party on nearly everything, and, most egregiously, he ran what I believe was a racist campaign against Labrador.

              So, I disagree that BDs are better than republicans and I wish that, as a party, we would quit allowing that attitude. When push comes to shove, the BDs are republicans. They're what republicans used to be when Democrats were Democrats. We have moved the center so far to the right that conservatives get Democratic nominations. That, to me, is what is truly untenable.

              I am only loyal to those who are loyal to me. I'm 35 years old. I've never, ever had a chance to be in a Union, and unions were the reason my grandparents were able to provide for their family and live comfortably. Yet today we have far too many Democrats all too willing to crush Unions even more than they already are.

              When I was a child, my dad went to school full time and my mom worked to provide for us. Can you imagine two twenty-somethings today being able to provide for four kids on the salary of a high-school dropout? People struggle to get by on TWO salaries in supposedly "middle-income" jobs.

              This is the world I know. The only world I've ever known. To put this in perspective, because I think a lot of the people here forget this, consider my life, what has happened over the course of it. Carter was defeated when I was a baby. I grew up with Reagan, then Bush, then Clinton, then Bush, now Obama and people are seriously contemplating putting another Clinton in office.

              And what has happened over that time frame? Wages are worse than stagnant. Our debt is sky-high and our savings are nil. This is not because we are lazy. Democrats talk about cutting our social safety net. People have been unemployed for years and have been cutoff. Sorry! Sucks to be you.

              Meanwhile, the stock market is thriving so the rich keep getting richer and the poor are just dirt fucking poor.

              This is the only life as an American that I have ever known, and my party loyalty reflects that. I'm tired of it. I am tired of being in the trenches, suffering, and the party that is supposed to stand for people like me has completely sold me out.

              Clinton's welfare reform almost destroyed my family when I was a teen, because even by then , after the Reagan era, it wasn't possible for my mom to support all of us financially after the divorce. So what to many seems like a slow decline was rather rapid, in my view, and there were very few Democrats who cared or noticed.

              P.S. I am not a crackpot.

              by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:38:19 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  And if Romney or Christie wins (12+ / 0-)

                real people are going to get hurt.

                Maybe you're "tired of it." I think the troops that died or were mained in Iraq were tired of dying too, but we elected W in 2000 so they didn't get that choice.

                The kids who are not going to be able to eat lunches because the Repubs want to deny them are not tired of eating.

                The poor people who are going to die because of lack of health care due to HCR not being expanded are probably tired of not being able to go the doctor.

                There are real world consequences, literally life and death consequences, of elections. We like to pretend that our sensibilities are more important, but they're really not.

                8 years of Bush should have taught you that electing a terrible regressive wingnut regime does not "wake up America" and lead to some massive progressive wave that changes the country.

                When we stop putting leaders from the past up on pedestals and ignoring their flaws, we can start seeing our present leaders for what they really are.

                by PhillyJeff on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:31:04 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Um, do you not see all of that happening NOW? (9+ / 0-)

                  Do you really think there's a huge difference in America between 2000 and now? I've got a cousin in Afghanistan. Obama likes surges, too. We've got boots back on the ground all over the world. Obama's foreign policy isn't that different from Bush's. Yeah, I think it's better, but the previous administration set the bar remarkably low and I don't think it's been lifted all that much since then.

                  And good grief, do you realize how ridiculous it is to use the ACA as a rebuttal against my assertion that we've moved too far to the right? Hello, President Dole. Thanks for your proposal! The ACA is what republicans used to want. Now it's supposedly liberal.

                  And that's what's wrong. When even Democrats remain blind to this reality there is no hope.

                  P.S. I am not a crackpot.

                  by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 03:03:49 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I agree (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Radiowalla

                    we've moved to the right for sure, the new Democratic party is more like the old republican party, the ball has been moving to the right.  But Obama is a real Democrat, and ACA is worth a lot, especially in this new hate filled eat the poor world.  

                    And Hillary will surprise you probably, although not anyone who has followed her closely.  She's also a real Democrat, what you'll see in her is practical arguments for a level playing field, for a basic living wage and for a strong safety net - she'll make it on morals, but she'll sell it on 'it's good for the economy.'  And she'll be right, she has the facts.

                    Too long there have been 'moral' reasons for policy, for and against helping the poor, and there isn't agreement, but sound social policies are factually good for everyone, they actually do lift the boat for everyone.

                    She can't start talking that way until after the mid-terms, she can't make the discourse about her, she's not running in '12, but as soon as that's over, and she will announce fairly quickly after that, then all you'll hear from her is wonk.  

                    How investing in inner cites makes money and investing in early childhood education saves money and makes money. And she would have called Rangel to congratulate him on his win.  She isn't moralistic about anyone, she's actually someone a real libertarian would appreciate, not an ayn rand one, one that wants personal freedom and the government out of everything that isn't improving all our lives. She won't be showing her disapproval, she's no Gore in that respect, she's tolerant, she credits everyone with having sense to make their own personal decisions, and accept the consequences good or not good, even if it's the decision is considered unhealthy.  But not the ability of business to sell products that are harmful without, at the least, admitting it, if that makes sense to you.  Not allowing business to degrade the environment, but she'll sell that on money too, on how doing the right thing makes money. She's given little hints about how she'll sell doing the right thing and not doing the wrong thing.

                    And that to me is very left, only not the sanctimonious variety, the results variety.

                    plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

                    by anna shane on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:34:52 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

              •  Well said (6+ / 0-)

                I see the obligatory "But Christie" reply has already been posted.

                Aspire to nothing better. The Village has left you to choose between two crappy options. Be grateful they have given you a choice. Oh, and be quiet.

                If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about answers. - Thomas Pynchon

                by chuckvw on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:46:13 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Unless you're looking for armed revolution (7+ / 0-)

                  You have to start somewhere.

                  "We have only the moral ground we actually inhabit, not the moral ground we claim." - It Really Is That Important

                  by Diogenes2008 on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:59:19 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Not Well Said (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Smoh, Ahianne, PsychoSavannah

                  It's not "be quiet."

                  It's- in the Real World these are the choices for the top of the ticket.  The powerful banks and corporations have huge amounts of money that negate your vote.  Or the votes of the progressive elected officials we have.  We already KNOW that.  

                  Given that....what's the best we can do with those FACTS.

                  Oh, and as for "that sucks", we all know that already.  

                  That attitude help elect both Bushes- in 1988, 2000, and 2004.  Those 3 terms represent 3 of the sitting Supreme Court Justices.  Those 3 have joined with 2 Reagan appointees to pass Citizens United, and to probably pass the decision tomorrow that will seriously hurt unions.

                  So tell me again....how is there no difference?

                  In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man may be king.

                  by Bring the Lions on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 05:05:08 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  May I ask if you have a daughter? (10+ / 0-)

                Because I will not trust mine to any Bat Shit Crazy Fuckin Republican. If they are in power they will throw women's rights at their base for their daily red meat.

                My Daughter is one of those in the so called"Coveted Status" of being a rape victim. I will not take any chance that she gets put on some National Registry to make sure everyone knows of her special status. God knows what else they will do to women if they get control of things.

                So things are tough, I agree, but things have been tough for the lifetime of our Democracy. Slavery, women's rights, and a host of other obstacles have faced us from the get go. History was not changed for the better by those who decided to stay home and say it is a little to tough out there right now.

                Do you think the Founders of this Nation had it easy. How about the troops that landed at Normandy, or at Okinawa. Talk to the Coal miners that were at the Battle of Blair Mountain, that was pretty damn tough.

                We still have the right and obligation to vote and keep voting. I am not saying it will always be the best but Republicans are ready to run this country completely into the ground without blinking an eye.

                Or maybe we should just change the mission of this site:

                KOS: Where Progressive come to piss and moan and give up
                KOS: Where Bat shit Crazy Republicans are pretty much the same as Democrats, so just stay home.
                KOS: Women's Rights....no big deal

                I have an old saying that goes like this:

                GIDDY UP OR GET THE FUCK OUT OF THE WAY!

                My conscience will never have a picture of the smiling Koch Brothers on it, let alone Hannity and Limbaugh, I will fight them to the very end. I may lose a few battles, but they will never conquer me or any true progressive, they can wheel me to the voters booth in an Iron Lung if that is what it takes.

                "We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." -- Albert Einstein

                by lynn47 on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 03:43:34 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Again, do you not see all of that happening NOW? (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  jbsoul, JVolvo

                  I'm not interested in being held hostage because the republicans are so fucking crazy.

                  And don't get me started on women's issues. I do give Obama credit for being pretty damn good on those. But I have needed a hysterectomy since my early twenties and I've not been able to get one. Apparently fertile women aren't capable of making their own decisions. So no, I don't have a daughter. My uterus wouldn't be able to handle one. But I still have a uterus that causes me a great deal of pain.

                  You can argue all you want about your principles, but don't try to change mine. Life is no different now than it was under republican rule. That is a fact. If you want to convince people that it's NOT, then get reality and facts on your side. Don't threaten them with "it could be worse and you're going to make it that way!!!!!"

                  P.S. I am not a crackpot.

                  by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 04:12:53 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  BB, I would like to discuss this concept with you (4+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Diogenes2008, Smoh, Ahianne, DiesIrae

                    sometime, but in a fresh diary where it can be the real focus.   I am very interested in your concept of feeling that you are held hostage.  At the same time, I agree with much of what lynn47 just said.    

                    It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

                    by Radiowalla on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 04:30:42 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I'm just replying to comments that are made to me (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Radiowalla, DeadHead

                      I am not trying to derail the diary, this is where the conversation has gone.

                      But, it has motivated me to write my own diary. Not as a response to yours, but as a way to vent my frustration with the where the D party is now and where it's been my entire life.

                      P.S. I am not a crackpot.

                      by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 04:42:25 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  Oh, I wasn't suggesting that at all. (3+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        Smoh, DeadHead, anna shane

                        This diary is pretty much played out anyway.  It's just that your idea is worthy of its own space, away from all the hubbub here.  It would be easier to follow and develop the idea in a fresh diary.  I have heard others say somewhat the same thing as you are suggesting and I really want to understand it better.  

                        It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

                        by Radiowalla on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 04:48:05 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

              •  The Difference Is (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Smoh, Ahianne

                ...those BDs in Congress allow the Democrats to be in the majority.  

                You're acting as if there is no difference between a BD and a Republican.  There may be little to no difference between them and a run-of-a-mill Republican. But tell me how there is no difference between Pelosi or Boehner running the House.  Tell me how there is no difference in Darrell Issa running his committee or not.

                As for the economic issues, that's the result of conservatives exercising their power, regardless of which party is in power.  But again....are the people in Congress that are on our side in the Democratic party or the Republican party?  The people that you can name (from Elizabeth Warren and Al Franken on down) are on ONE side.  The people that hurt the issues you talk about are on both sides, but dominate ONE side.

                Your frustrations speak to the fact that Americans that can't write big checks to the political system have little power.  And people that can't be manipulated to carry the water of the oligarchs (Tea Party) are invisible.  This is old news.  But they're not solved by sitting anything out and cementing that invisibility.

                In the land of the blind, the one-eyed man may be king.

                by Bring the Lions on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 04:59:45 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  What the heck is wrong with you? (4+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Diogenes2008, BoiseBlue, Chinton, AnnieR

            You don't like fruit products?

            I'm re- thinking our whole friendship.

            ;)

            Tell me you at least like huckleberry ice cream.

            (Which is seriously the best substance ever put on earth, well, besides pizza.)

            © grover


            So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

            by grover on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:30:53 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Thank you. :) n/t (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          etherealfire

          "We have only the moral ground we actually inhabit, not the moral ground we claim." - It Really Is That Important

          by Diogenes2008 on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:16:37 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Beautifully said. Worth a diary, IMO. n/t (7+ / 0-)
      •  Yes!! (7+ / 0-)

        “Listen--are you breathing just a little, and calling it a life?” ― Mary Oliver

        by weezilgirl on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:04:29 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  And anything other than #2 gets us (6+ / 0-)

        President Santorum.

        Oh, I forgot "Hillary Clinton and Rick Santorum are practically the same person, so it doesn't make any difference which one you vote for."

        So I see only tatters of clearness through a pervading obscurity - Annie Dillard

        by illinifan17 on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 04:28:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  If anyone cares to delve into the archives (10+ / 0-)

      at this site, they will find, from 2008, a truly horrific record of hatred and insult directed at Hillary-- exceeding even that which typifies right-wing hate sites.

      The hungry judges soon the sentence sign, And wretches hang, that jurymen may dine.

      by magnetics on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:24:51 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I think the pot is on automatic stir at this (16+ / 0-)

    point. Still, a logical explanation. Whether it was reasonable - I don't expect to see a whole lot of reasonable around the HC fight here in the next six months or so, so no comment.

    mouseover the bar (I'm practicing for DK5)

    by serendipityisabitch on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 08:47:05 AM PDT

  •  You got a warning (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    corvo, Laconic Lib, BentLiberal, 3goldens

    Get over it.

    I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

    by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 08:51:21 AM PDT

  •  The Closing Line is Everything. (24+ / 0-)
    If you don't like her, then get busy and find someone else.
    Right now we're some 9 months earlier than the moment of the 2004 campaign when Howard Dean's nomination run began to catch fire. Since Hillary has so much party / institutional support, it's doubly critical that any opposing candidacy be getting organized and rolling out in the field right now.

    Draft organizations for Sanders and Warren would be 2 obvious prospects, with Sanders being a low bar to clear since he's steadily conveyed some interest in running. Warren might be convinced to go along with a draft organization as a progressive-issues candidate, and long shot just in case things happen with Clinton.

    But we have to answer something with something-else of our own choosing, and now is the time to be making it.

    We are called to speak for the weak, for the voiceless, for victims of our nation and for those it calls enemy.... --ML King "Beyond Vietnam"

    by Gooserock on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:05:49 AM PDT

  •  Thank you for pointing out that diary, (23+ / 0-)

    which I had missed.

    I have now read, recced, and tipped it.

    Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

    by corvo on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:07:51 AM PDT

  •  best to read rec list diaries with care (7+ / 0-)

    avoid rox sux gun I/P Outrage and probably a few other types of diaries I can't think of. Nasty insults are de rigeur on rec list, just skip to diaries that don't have them.  

    “Conservation… is a positive exercise of skill and insight, not merely a negative exercise of abstinence and caution…” Aldo Leopold

    by ban nock on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:09:15 AM PDT

  •  The massive tactical error that Markos committed (32+ / 0-)

    by declaring HRC the candidate, the nominee, and the eventual winner in 2016 was the impetus for all these Clinton diaries -- on either or any side.

    She hasn't even declared, the election is 2.5 years away, and political surprises and even shocks come a dime a dozen!

    Sure, there were diaries before Markos' error, but he ignited emotions on all sides with his finality assertions.

    Meanwhile, there are many urgent, important, critical decisions now thin the elections of 2014. Yet Markos chose to highlight HRC and the rest is history.

    Each person can decide if the 2014 elections are important to them or if conflict over an undeclared candidate is more urgent. It's a shame attention was diverted in that way.

    "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

    by YucatanMan on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:21:46 AM PDT

  •  If she runs, she'll win (5+ / 0-)

    The purists are a fractionally tiny group that keeps getting smaller and smaller every week. In their desperation, the diaries will only get worse from here, but ultimately the purists lack the money, structure, and will to seriously challenge her.

    This revolution is not scheduled!

    by harrylimelives on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:24:22 AM PDT

    •  Websters dictionary defines purist as... (15+ / 0-)

      people who are tired of Democrats who sell their souls to wall Street and support wars of choice and refuse to take any stands on social issues until the polling tells them it's safe.

      You are supporting politicians who have no integrity so one must assume you have no integrity.

      I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

      by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:31:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  "one must assume you have no integrity"? (8+ / 0-)

        Childish logic, utter bullshit and worst of all weak sauce.

        ...wispy longings for a time before Elvis and the Beatles, back when "a girl could cook and still would". You know before the troubles.~Hunter.

        by denig on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:44:35 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Stop supporting.... (8+ / 0-)

          Politicians who have no integrity and I will stop thinking you have no integrity. Until then you have no integrity.

          I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

          by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:49:37 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Oh nos! The pitiful projection of the pedantic (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            fcvaguy

            flock peeples!

            hahaha!

            ...wispy longings for a time before Elvis and the Beatles, back when "a girl could cook and still would". You know before the troubles.~Hunter.

            by denig on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:07:03 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Not really a projection (5+ / 0-)

              If a politician is a well known wall Street shill who voted for a war of choice for political reasons and doesn't support the social issues the Democratic party supports until the overwhelming majority supports them that shows a clear lack of integrity. Now if you support wars of choice, wall Street and poll tested social issue support then Hillary Clinton is the candidate for you, but if you don't and you still vote for Hillary Clinton you are lacking integrity.  

              I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

              by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:14:58 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  That's not good enough (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                vcmvo2, Greenfinches, sviscusi

                Ripping someone apart is too easy. Propping up and defending your own candidate is much, much harder. Haven't seen you do much of that.

                KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

                by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:04:56 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Because no one has declared they are running (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  3goldens

                  I would support Elizabeth Warren if she ran and I'll get behind the alternative to Hillary Clinton once one emerges but she's sitting on the throne right now so she gets the slings and arrows. Hillary Clinton has a track record and I judge her based on that.

                  Why do you support her?

                  I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                  by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:13:49 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Oh I see.... (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    sviscusi

                    So you're kicking back in your barko-lounger, taking shot at misguided HRC supporters and WAITING for your ideal candidate to come along.

                    ahahahaha.  For fuck sake.

                    Why do you support her?
                    Support HRC?????  I DON"T !!! I would NEVER vote for her in a primary. Is that clear enough for you???

                    Go do some reading on Martin O'Malley. He's a candidate worth WAITING for and WORKING for.

                    KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

                    by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:17:32 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  is that the same as the (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              denig, DeadHead

              Nattering Nabobs of Negativity?

              You may think that. I couldn't possibly comment.-- Francis Urqhart

              by Johnny Q on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:04:40 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  what or who do you support? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Bill W, Flying Goat

            "We'd"  like to know so "we" can judge whether or not you have integrity.

            KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

            by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:03:55 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Look at my track record (4+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              akze29, CenPhx, 3goldens, Chi

              And I support very few politicians. Elizabeth Warren is currently one of my senators and I agree with her most of the time. I have worked for russ feingold and I agreed with him about eighty percent of the time. I am an unabashed Bernie Sanders supporter. I am a liberal who likes smart liberals who fight for what they believe in. I don't support wall Street Democrats who vote for or against things because they might muck up their running for president.

              I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

              by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:09:28 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  What track record jbou? (0+ / 0-)

                I'm not seeing it. I've not seen a diary or a comment indicating any positive support for any candidate who has expressed interest in running. Did I miss it?

                I'm pretty confident EW is a Clinton supporter. Why is beyond me. But it certainly seems to be the case.

                I think Feingold could possibly run. But, his polling is Wisconsin is horrible and thats where he's best known.

                I certainly hope Sanders runs in the Dem primaries. He'd be a much better candidate than Feingold or Kucinich or Howard Dean (who wasn't really a liberal anyway).

                And, there's Schweitzer, a libertarian who will run as a populist fake progressive and many leftists will support him just as many leftists showed empathy towards Ron Paul.

                Then, there's a candidate like Martin O'Malley, a candidate who has demonstrated experience as a Mayor and Governor, who has worked hard for other Dems and who is spending quite a bit of time in Iowa and New Hampshire. A classical liberal with liberal values.

                Like I said Jbou - very easy to barko-lounge. Not so easy to stand behind and actually work for a candidate that best supports your values. WAITING is a losing proposition.

                KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

                by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:23:31 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Yes it is (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  3goldens

                  And I am not in the business of backing anyone at this point. I wouldn't say anything about Hillary Clinton if she wasn't putting herself out there. Hillary Clinton is promoting a book and running for president. She's opened herself up for this. I am under no obligation to support anyone as an alternative yet. I also loathe horse race politics. I am not going to indulge you.

                  I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                  by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:46:15 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  You mean this Elizabeth Warren: (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                snoopydawg, BoiseBlue

                "I was a Republican because I thought that those were the people who best supported markets"

                What were her expressed views on the Iraq War in 2002-2003?

                I think you're projected a lot onto her, not unlike many people did with Barack Obama in 2007. Warren is considered "liberal" now because of her work on one issue: inequality...but she was solidly Republican before 1995, which means she almost certainly voted to Reagan (twice) and Poppy Bush (twice).

                As Barney Frank might say, (some people) get to luxuriate in the purity of their irrelevance.

                •  And markos voted Republican... (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Chi, 3goldens, CenPhx

                  And so has Hillary Clinton. Elizabeth Warren has been fighting inequality and wall Street with her actions in the Senate. Hillary Clinton has been giving speeches to Goldman Sachs for six figure paydays. People are irrelevant in today's political landscape because they don't have money. Tons of money poured into the campaign for marriage equality and the issue is moving in the right direction. There's been a ton of money thrown into the fight for marijuana legalization and that is moving in the right direction. You either need money or you need to elect people willing to stand up to the people with the money.

                  You can choose to kiss the Rings of the sellouts in our party or you can work to elect better Democrats.

                  I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                  by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 02:15:38 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I worked to elect Warren (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    BoiseBlue

                    And I knew who she was BEFORE President Obama brought her onto the national stage, as I read her Harvard study on the vanishing middle class.

                    She is not, by the way, very liberal.

                    She's still a helluva Senator. I doubt she will run, or could win, nationally, but if she's the candidate, I'll support her 100%.

                •  that is exactly what I posted (0+ / 0-)

                  people are only looking at her in one dimension.
                  No one really knows where she stands on the other issues outside of the banks, student loans, and income inequality.
                  I wonder where she stood on the TPP, and another poster showed her statement that said she strongly opposes the TPP.
                  But where does she stand on the wars, drones and kill lists?
                  She needs more vetting before people think she should be the nominee.
                  Plus, she is on record supporting Hillary.
                  Does that mean she supports Hillary's hawkishness?  

                  "Americans don't understand that terrorists cannot take away habeas corpus, the Bill of Rights, or the Constitution. Terrorists are not anything like the threat that we face from our own government in the name of fighting terrorism."

                  by snoopydawg on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 02:41:55 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  Ignore jbou (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Radiowalla

          The court jester's not so funny anymore

          This revolution is not scheduled!

          by harrylimelives on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:28:22 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Ignore me if you want (8+ / 0-)

            But you all who support Hillary Clinton are supporting the worst kind of politician. One who poll tests things to death and uses corporate pollsters who skew their polling to fit their viewpoint. Mark Penn has a long history of being a scumbag but Hillary Clinton keeps employing him.

            I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

            by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:32:48 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  +HR for this - symbolic of course. (0+ / 0-)

              Can't hit the actual button without a spank on the write.

              But calling the top Democratic female politician in U.S. history "the worst kind of politician" - ie worse than Republicans etc - is beyond the pale.

              ....at least to me.

              HR.

              •  Listen (4+ / 0-)

                Republicans support policies that I would never ever support but I don't vote for them, I don't raise money for them, I haven't walked around new Hampshire knocking on doors in support of them. I have done all that and more in support of Democrats. I am judging Hillary Clinton in that context.

                I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:29:10 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  It's a tryout for Jerque du Soleil. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Radiowalla, Ahianne

            I'm repeating that, because it's funnier than anything jbou ever said when he was trying to be something other than the site Jeremiah.

            Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

            by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:45:41 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  So... (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              3goldens

              Are you a Wall Street shill or a supporter of wars of choice or did you wait until marriage equality had overwhelming support before you backed it?

              If you all are really going to support Hillary Clinton you're going to have to answer for her record and that's not funny. Me? I'm fucking hysterical, weird, sometimes wrong, sometimes a dick but I can say my integrity is not under scrutiny. Hillary Clinton supporters can't say that.

              I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

              by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:00:27 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Ad hominem attach from jbou here (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Catte Nappe

                Just calling it out.

                I'm sure everyone sees it.

              •  To repeat what I said below: (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Greenfinches
                Can't we have civil discussions and arguments without questioning each others' motives and integrity?
                I'm supporting Hillary, at least for now, and I'm perfectly aware, for example, that she voted for the AUMF. I think that is a black mark on her record, but in my personal judgment that is not enough of a black mark to mean she loses my vote. If I decided I wouldn't vote for anybody who was wrong, even on an issue of the magnitude of Iraq, I wouldn't have anybody to vote for. To me, "integrity" doesn't demand perfection from every politician I vote for.
                •  It's not about perfect (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  CenPhx, 3goldens

                  Hillary Clinton has shown us who she is and I don't like quite a few stances or in her case lack of stances on big issues. It's not just the one vote for the war in Iraq that stops her from being perfect.

                  I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                  by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:44:55 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  OK, fine. (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Greenfinches, Diogenes2008

                    That's your opinion, and I respect that. But deciding whether a particular politician is too imperfect to support is a judgment call, not an issue of integrity. Saying "you lack integrity" is an unnecessary personal attack.

                    •  No... (5+ / 0-)

                      It is an issue of integrity. If you support a politician but don't support the politicians stances and record on the issues your integrity comes into question. We yell and scream about the people in the Republican party that vote against their own self interest and I am holding my fellow Democrats to the same standard. If you want to back a candidate who has clearly demonstrated that she is a Wall Street shill who voted for the war in Iraq and decided to support marriage equality once there was overwhelming support for it then you have to deal with the consequences of your support.

                      I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                      by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:55:03 AM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

              •  Just asking the question, huh? (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                fcvaguy, vcmvo2, Greenfinches

                Not saying anybody is a shill or homophone or anything, just askin'.
                And what makes you think your integrity isn't under scrutiny?

                “Texas is a so-called red state, but you’ve got 10 million Democrats here in Texas. And …, there are a whole lot of people here in Texas who need us, and who need us to fight for them.” President Obama

                by Catte Nappe on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:24:54 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  Look at my track record. My integrity is in tact. (0+ / 0-)

                  I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                  by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:42:09 AM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Tell us what you're for (0+ / 0-)

                    then we can judge whether you have integrity. until then, I'd say your integrity is at issue while you attack others for making stands while you refuse to do so.

                    KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

                    by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:08:42 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Or not. (0+ / 0-)

                    Your accusations come a little too quick and admist to much hate for anyone to believe your good faith.

                    Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

                    by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:11:06 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  That's your judgment (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      CenPhx, 3goldens

                      I want a president willing to go out on a limb for their beliefs. Hillary Clinton has shown she won't even climb the tree let alone go out on a limb unless mark Penn has poll tested the tree the limb and the grass around the tree and he won't release his data so we can check his work.

                      I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                      by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:18:29 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Unlike your "good faith" (0+ / 0-)

                      Which is without reproach.

                      After all, six years is plenty of time to go from "basher" to "Ready for."  




                      Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

                      by DeadHead on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 03:30:18 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                  •  If you say so (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    aggieric, annominous

                    And while you may believe it to be intact, I assure you it is far from in "tact"

                    “Texas is a so-called red state, but you’ve got 10 million Democrats here in Texas. And …, there are a whole lot of people here in Texas who need us, and who need us to fight for them.” President Obama

                    by Catte Nappe on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:12:58 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  the problem with integrity is that, you know, (2+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Catte Nappe, annominous

                    most people think their integrity is in tact (sic).

                    History is rife with people who believed they were operating with perfect integrity. John Wilkes Booth is but one example.

                    A homo in a bi-national relationship - at 49, I had to give up my career, leave behind my dying father, my family & friends and move to Europe. And I'm one of the *lucky* ones: Immigration Equality

                    by aggieric on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:29:55 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Yup (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      3goldens

                      And history is full of people who took stands that moved a country to change. Martin Luther King had integrity. It works both ways. But you can settle for the wall Street shill who supported Goldwater while MLK was fighting for civil rights.

                      I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                      by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:06:44 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  non sequitur you were talking about (0+ / 0-)

                        integrity, so that's what I was talking about. You've change the subject. You do that a lot, presumably because you think it makes for irrefutable logic. Or something.

                        A homo in a bi-national relationship - at 49, I had to give up my career, leave behind my dying father, my family & friends and move to Europe. And I'm one of the *lucky* ones: Immigration Equality

                        by aggieric on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:51:32 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

              •  Your integrity is indeed under scrutiny (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                vcmvo2, sviscusi

                You've criticized others' choices of candidates, and go so far as to accuse them of lacking integrity. Yet, you have cloaked your own choices, not subjecting your choices to the scrutiny your tossing at others.

                Where's the integrity in that?

                KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

                by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:07:34 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  No one has declared yet (0+ / 0-)

                  I don't know enough about the alternatives yet and I'm not going to invest in anyone at this point.

                  I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                  by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:29:28 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

              •  Well, I guess if I thought about it (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Greenfinches

                I might comment on your integrity, and if I gave a shit about you I'd answer your questions.  But you're just here for the pie.

                Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

                by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:07:47 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  And you're not? (5+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  jbou, DeadHead, JVolvo, CenPhx, 3goldens

                  P.S. I am not a crackpot.

                  by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:10:03 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                •  Cool (0+ / 0-)

                  But you'll never be as smart, or as funny or as humble as I am.

                  I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                  by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:26:38 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I hope not. nt (0+ / 0-)

                    Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

                    by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:31:52 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You should shoot for higher than average (0+ / 0-)

                      and unfunny.

                      I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                      by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:38:55 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  More evidence that HRC will, should be (0+ / 0-)

                        nominee.  People like you are giving up on everything except being sore losers and dicks to everyone who isn't eating your shit up with a spoon.

                        Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

                        by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:52:28 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  You engaged me (0+ / 0-)

                          You don't say why you support Hillary Clinton you just do. Then you get dismissive when people question your integrity for supporting a Wall Street shill who voted for the war in Iraq because it would help her when she ran for president and she eventually backed marriage equality once mark Penn told her it was safe to. If you're OK with all that I will never say another thing to you because I'll know where you stand but I think you're waiting for some poll numbers to come in so you can take just the right stance so as to not arouse any enthusiasm or anger.

                          I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                          by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:58:51 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I didn't say I supported her at all. (0+ / 0-)

                            If you were actually engaging and not just inventing strawmen for the purpose of being a dick, you'd have noticed that.  

                            I'm simply reading the cues from an angry clown: it's all over but the booing.

                            Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

                            by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:12:09 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Pathetic (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            3goldens, DeadHead

                            If you don't support Hillary Clinton then why do you engage people who don't support her?

                            I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                            by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:48:13 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You're just BAD. (0+ / 0-)

                            You're way past discussing her and into angry sore loser lashing out at everyone territory.

                            That's why you are all about accusing users of lacking integrity.  

                            That's not engaging.

                            Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

                            by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:54:14 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  No (3+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Chi, 3goldens, DeadHead

                            I told you and everyone else why I don't support her. She is a Wall Street Democrat who voted for the war in Iraq and didn't come out for marriage equality until it was safe and her latest remarks about marijuana legalization are more triangulation. I can't support her run for the presidency because of her record on issues that are important to me. Is that clear enough for you?

                            I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                            by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 02:06:55 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oooh, left the important part out. (0+ / 0-)

                            as you yourself said:

                            Then you get dismissive when people question your integrity
                            Yep. You questioned my integrity and I got dismissive. Now you leave that out, but I'm pretty sure that getting to the insult was pretty much all you have left.

                            Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

                            by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 05:55:41 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Everything is about you (0+ / 0-)

                            I get it. You'd make a great child  

                            I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                            by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 06:08:17 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I don't engage you. That's "everything"? (0+ / 0-)

                            Alpha and Omega?  

                            Pretty grandiose claims from the clown wannabe.  You seem like the kind of egomaniac who thinks he gets to denounce people as lacking integrity AND have them like it.

                            I guess it's easier than politics.  

                            Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

                            by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 06:19:22 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You don't discuss anything (0+ / 1-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Hidden by:
                            indycam

                            You don't stand for anything. You have no integrity, none. What's it like having no conscience?

                            I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                            by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 06:34:09 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Well, it's like (0+ / 0-)

                            someone who would rather not discuss issues throwing in  enough personal insults to make sure nobody engages, him, and then complaining that people take his personal insults personally and won't play with him.  Oh, wait, that's what it's like to be you.  

                            Whatever.  You know it's all over but the insulting.  People like you aren't even trying to convince, you're just spouting hate at people who didn't eat your shit up with a spoon.

                            You're not alone, of course: there's a party largely populated by people who think politics is about voicing hatred and self congratulation.   But you're still not going to be tolerated.  Sorry, Jerque du Soleil.

                            Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

                            by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 06:49:34 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Don't butt into my conversations anymore (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            DeadHead

                            I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

                            by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 06:53:02 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You're amazing. (0+ / 0-)

                            You complain about others being insulting, as you lace your own comments with them.

                            You pat yourself on the back for being "above the fray," while standing in the middle of it.

                            You tell others they "aren't going to be tolerated," yet here we are, suffering you.




                            Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

                            by DeadHead on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:45:00 PM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

    •  I think it's far too early to say (6+ / 0-)

      that she will run, let alone win.

      For the record, my opinion is that she currently has every intention of running and is methodically laying the groundwork for her campaign, but if the political situation changes, she may decide not to do so.

      The situation is fluid. I wouldn't venture to make any predictions as to whether her candidacy will be viable six months or a year from now.

      "In America, the law is king." --Thomas Paine

      by limpidglass on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:19:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I would think Radiowalla would object (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      JVolvo, CenPhx, 3goldens, TracieLynn

      to the language in this comment, based on the diary above.

      "I'm not a number" --84,414

      by BentLiberal on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:35:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  A Fable (2nd printing) (6+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      waiono, JVolvo, 6412093, CenPhx, chuckvw, jbsoul

      once there were some people who lived on a little brook, from which they drew their drinking water.

      one day, they discovered that the land upstream, which heretofore had been a public park, was to be sold for agricultural purposes, and that proposals were invited.

      at the next Town meeting, there were two competitors for the land. one of these competitors proposed to put in a gigantic hog farm, with 10,000 animals, the copious effluvia of which would be sluiced directly into the stream. 52% of the people in the hall were aghast.

      the second proposal was for a beef cattle feedlot. this feedlot would result only in the unavoidable-though-not-deliberately-engineered fecal runoff from the few hundred head of cattle that would be watered at the stream.

      This proposal was received by the audience with somewhat less horror. However, one of the householders whose property was on the stream objected, pointing out that although the feedlot plan would at least not render the stream a foul and fetid stenchflow, it would, just as would the hog farm, render the stream's water irremediably pestilent.

      At which point, a helpful fellow citizen offered the observation that truly pure water was found only in fables, and what is more, that the previous speaker was not of unimpeachable virtue, and therefore should STFU.

      The End.

      To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

      by UntimelyRippd on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:53:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Your last sentence makes no sense: (22+ / 0-)
    If you don't like her, then get busy and find someone else.  
    And yet it's precisely any attempt at getting busy and finding someone else that's provoking so much preemptive rage.

    Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

    by corvo on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:26:01 AM PDT

    •  I don't see that, corvo (6+ / 0-)

      All over the diaries, it is suggested that new candidates be identified and that support be organized around them.  I think the preemptive rage is because no one seems able or willing to actually do that.  Names bubble up, but there is nothing but hot air surrounding them:  no campaign organization, no site to visit, no mailing lists being gathered.  It's all just talk and none of it seems to be going anywhere.  Meanwhile, there is lots of anti-Hillary rage.  

      As I said before, I hope Warren decides to jump in the primary.  With all the verbal support she gets here, you'd think there would be some site that is collecting signatures and money and endorsements.  I may be mistaken, but I've never seen it.  

      It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by Radiowalla on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:35:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Please don't pretend that politics (13+ / 0-)

        works that way.  No one or three of us out in Anonymousland can identify a candidate and create a campaign organization for said candidate; that requires massive infrastructure and huge sums of cash.

        And yet everyone unhappy with Hillary is somehow guilty for not launching a countercampaign?

        Actually, HRC supporters should be delighted if Warren enters the primaries; the party hierarchy would Kucinich or Dean her in no time flat, and her political career would be over.

        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

        by corvo on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:53:18 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oh, I don't know about that at all. (5+ / 0-)

          What happened to the grassroots?  Now especially with the tools of social media there is opportunity to organize around a candidate or policy.    There are hundreds of Warren supporters right here on DK, aren't there?  Certainly enough to start an online campaign, that, with time, would garner more and more support around the country.  You raise a little money, eventually you can hire some staff and you are on your way.

          Contrary to your claim, I would not be delighted at all to see Warren marginalized as you claim she would be.  Her voice is badly needed.  

          It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

          by Radiowalla on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:02:19 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Such an approach might work (10+ / 0-)

            in a small-town city council race.

            I'm sure there are mainstream Democrats who think that Warren's voice is "badly needed" -- not because they actually want any of her ideas to succeed, of course, so she can never accede to any real power.  Rather, the showcase existence of the occasional Warren type helps keep the DFHs and other barely tolerated types from bolting the Party.   But really, that's about it.

            I don't pretend to be speaking for you.

            Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

            by corvo on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:09:43 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Grassroots? (7+ / 0-)

            Dang, party faithful in both parties will crossover to insure that any true "grassroots" populist gets crucified.

            Grassroots is the biggest fear of both parties. Always has been.

            The question is "why?".

            The only answer that resonates is that both parties are ruled by the elite. Status quo for wall st. and wars. Nuff said.

            Throw the proles a few biscuits now and then, keep 'em in debt slavery, put up an electric gate, militarize the police and ignore them.

            •  you seriously HR'd the diary?? (5+ / 0-)

              KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

              by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:40:05 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Yup (0+ / 0-)

                I'm sick to death of false progressives and their hypocrisy.

                HRC, both Clintons and their corporate minions

                Hey, I must be a poet?

                I can't decide which is worse;

                Obamapologists  or those that support a return to the age of the Clinton corporatists. Very sad.

                lesser of two evils my ass.

                Played for Suckers
                Obama’s People Show Their True Colors
                by DAVID MACARAY
                For those who wondered what happened to Robert Gibbs, President Obama’s former campaign advisor and mealy-mouthed White House press secretary, he has resurfaced in the private sector. He is the co-founder of Incite Agency, an upscale public relations firm. Apparently, going from an underpaid shill for the White House to an overpaid shill for Corporate America was a seamless (and guiltless) transition.

                Gibbs’ public relations company’s first major assignment is going to be a real whopper. Hold on to your seat. Incite Agency is going to launch a national public relations campaign aimed at destroying America’s teachers’ unions. It’s true. Gibbs and company have announced that they will be preparing the groundwork for lawsuits across the country, challenging tenure and other teachers’ job protection.

                When you consider that Obama has surrounded himself with anti-union people (Rahm Emanuel, Arne Duncan, Eric Holder, et al), this vile announcement should come as no surprise, not to people who’ve been paying attention. Still, the naked audacity and venality of the move caught some of us off-guard. We’re reminded of that Lily Tomlin line: “I worry that no matter how cynical I become, it’s never going to be enough.”

                http://www.counterpunch.org/...

            •  spot on, waiono n/t (0+ / 0-)

              Rivers are horses and kayaks are their saddles

              by River Rover on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 02:30:50 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Damn (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          vcmvo2, Ahianne

          this is so cynical and defeatist. There is a real candidate out there who has expressed real interest in running - Martin O'Malley. Why isn't there any discussion from anyone here about him? He's got strong liberal credentials. He's been working it hard, spending a lot of time supporting other Dems and spending a lot of time in Iowa.

          Its really easy to say what your against. Much harder to say who you're for and even harder to rally support around that person.

          You're offering nothing but cynicism and negativity.

          KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

          by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:13:07 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  How many O'Malley diaries have you written? (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            JVolvo, chuckvw, 3goldens

            Just curious.

            Not that it really matters, of course; it's HRC's presidency and nothing but unspeakable disaster -- not even her speaking in public -- will prevent it.

            Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

            by corvo on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:44:49 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  You're right, it doesn't matter (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              sviscusi

              because I've not written ANY O'Malley diaries and you haven't written any either, for ANYONE.

              But, here's the difference: you take potshots at HRC supporters and I don't.

              KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

              by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:51:59 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  I would never expect you to. ;-) n/t (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                JVolvo

                Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                by corvo on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:55:27 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  because I'm a closet HRC supporter (0+ / 0-)

                  haahahaha. you all are a hoot.

                  KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

                  by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:00:04 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  there's more than one of me? (0+ / 0-)

                    Do tell.

                    Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                    by corvo on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:01:09 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Accusation of sock puppetry!!1@ Reported!!!!!! (2+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      3goldens, corvo

                      So #notallwomen is cool here. Who knew? Ahh, the New Big Tent...

                      by JVolvo on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:08:59 PM PDT

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  well, I could accuse my conversation partner here (0+ / 0-)

                        of "Darfur Syndrome" if you know what I mean ... but I won't ;-)

                        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                        by corvo on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 02:58:05 PM PDT

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  oh ya, Darfur Syndrome (0+ / 0-)

                          because I have the audacity to support an actual candidate other than HRC, rather than doing what you prefer to do - sling arrows at HRC supporters while not supporting anyone. Got it.

                          Seriously, is this all you have? To accuse people of Darfur Syndrome?  You add a lot for someone who has so many more meaningful things to do than this blog.

                          KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

                          by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 04:05:26 PM PDT

                          [ Parent ]

          •  There is a discussion about him. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            fcvaguy

            I posted a diary about him that made the recommended list. But, people keep ignoring it so they can make their point that this is an-anti HRC site.

            President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

            by askew on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 06:34:01 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  Doesn't even need that much (5+ / 0-)

        Don't need web sites, campaign organizations, "draft" committees. It would be an improvement if there were positive diaries about those names that bubble up making the case for why they would make a good candidate. Their positions, their background, their campaign skills, whatever. I've said it before (and no doubt will again); instead of bashing the one likeliest candidate, present some options, and you might peel off some whose support for Clinton is lukewarm for lack of any apparent viable and electable alternative.

        “Texas is a so-called red state, but you’ve got 10 million Democrats here in Texas. And …, there are a whole lot of people here in Texas who need us, and who need us to fight for them.” President Obama

        by Catte Nappe on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:41:09 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  It's 2014. We're months away (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        limpidglass, Ahianne

        from a very important midterm election. Primaries are now in progress. It's far too early to be focusing on who's going to be our nominee in 2016, a contest that 'officially' hasn't even started yet.

        But Hillary has her operative machinery in place still from 2008, and once again we are gifted with the 'establishment wisdom' that she is an "inevitability." Those of us who are not particularly thrilled by the prospect and don't believe she's so inevitable tend to see this kind of gun-jumping as diversionary. We don't have to find someone else and push them now in any sleight of mind distraction from the immediate politicking that needs doing THIS cycle. That's totally absurd.

        I heard here at DKos regularly in 2007-8 that Hillary was the "inevitable" Dem nominee. Turned out she wasn't. It just might turn out that way again in 2016. I surely don't mind if she wants to run. Run all you like, anyone who thinks they've got something to offer and a chance of success. But picking fights (those are real inevitabilities just like last time she ran) at this point in time is counterproductive. So I mostly ignore Hillary diaries in favor of important coverage of THIS year's candidates and campaigns.

        There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves. - Will Rogers

        by Joieau on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:56:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  And the second someone else's name is mentioned (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      corvo, CenPhx, Chi, TracieLynn

      Hillary supporters tear the person down.

      President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

      by askew on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:34:39 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think that... (11+ / 0-)

        ...Clinton supporters are a lot less harsh toward potential rivals than Clinton opponents are to her.  I don't think I've seen anyone here say that they won't vote for the Democratic ticket if, for instance, Elizabeth Warren turns out to be our nominee.  Nor have I seen anywhere near the vitriol aimed at Warren, Sanders, Brown, O'Malley, or any of the others as I've seen aimed at Clinton.

        •  People would have to know who O'Malley is (6+ / 0-)

          to aim vitriol at him.

          The front runner always gets to fend off the most attacks.  More or less by definition.

          Myself, I find HRC a figure of remarkably few actual accomplishments and a lot of positions I find questionable to offensive.  

          Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

          by corvo on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:09:42 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I've never seen this (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Radiowalla, Bill W

        With respect to Warren, for example, No one "tears her down." I see people pointing out that she claims not to be running, repeatedly and pointing out that she might not be a great candidate, but that isn't tearing her down by an stretch of the imagination. I've never seen any Clinton backer say that they won't vote for her if she's the nominee or threaten to leave the party in a hissy fit.

    •  are you trying to say you've been busy? (0+ / 0-)

      I just searched your comments/diaries. No you haven't.

      KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

      by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:10:09 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Oh, I wasn't talking about myself, and no, (0+ / 0-)

        I've had more meaningful things to do.  

        Kos himself said that challenging HRC was pointless, did he not? ;-) -- although I'm sure his choice of words was more colorful.  I just don't care to look up his statements on the matter.

        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

        by corvo on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:49:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I should also add that when it comes (0+ / 0-)

        to meaningful political engagement, you can't do much worse than this site.  If you can't buy an election outright, then pounding the pavement is where it's at. ;-)

        Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

        by corvo on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:52:20 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Then why do you bother coming here? (0+ / 0-)
          when it comes
          to meaningful political engagement, you can't do much worse than this site.
          Your first comment says:
          I've had more meaningful things to do.  
          but then say coming here is a waste of time.

          LOL

          KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

          by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:55:19 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  It's a waste of time (0+ / 0-)

            in terms of promoting progressive change, something actively opposed by much of the Party and Site leadership.  Still, there might be some value to exposing them for what they are. ;-)

            Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

            by corvo on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:57:39 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  ahhh so shit stirring. got it. (0+ / 0-)

              KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

              by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:58:39 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  The truth isn't always pretty. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                DeadHead

                You've been modestly amusing, but not very, so I'm going to run along now and leave you with the last word.  Give it your best shot. :-)

                Dogs from the street can have all the desirable qualities that one could want from pet dogs. Most adopted stray dogs are usually humble and exceptionally faithful to their owners as if they are grateful for this kindness. -- H.M. Bhumibol Adulyadej

                by corvo on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:06:32 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

  •  What bothered me (17+ / 0-)

    about that diary was the mind-reading on the part of the diarist. It is rude to act as if you know what other people think, especially if they're telling you "no, we don't think that." The idea that Hillary supporters are only posting pro-Hillary comments because we all know she's a weak candidate and we want to silence the opposition is... ridiculous. And offensive. Yet that was the thesis. It would be equally ridiculous and offensive to suggest that the anti-Hillary commenters are all motivated by sexism and a fear of powerful women.

    We're going to have primary wars, whether there's an actual primary or not. Can't we have civil discussions and arguments without questioning each others' motives and integrity?

  •  Radio, I remember 2008 as well as you do, I'm sure (24+ / 0-)

    I never supported Hillary and I still don't, but many people here thought I did because I grew so tired of the BS surrounding her.

    I don't know what it is about her that makes everyone crazy, whether they love or hate her, but the hysteria is just weird.

    I don't want Hillary for personal AND political reasons.  Politically, I simply don't believe that she's the best face of our party, especially at this time when we need a strong push to the left.

    Personally, geez, I'm 35 and I don't suffer from Clinton nostalgia. They've been around for most of my life. I'm tired of them. People my age have really known nothing outside of the Bush and Clinton dynasties. So it's just deflating to think of more.

    All that said, I am not interested in beating her down and, just as in 2008, I'm not interested in CT about her. I'm not interested in lazy arguments about her. I'm not interested in any of this. So I understand your frustration. I don't know what the answer is, but I don't think most people know how to discuss Hillary without bearing fangs, so I will continue to avoid diaries about her.

    Hang in there.

    P.S. I am not a crackpot.

    by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:35:30 AM PDT

    •  Hi, BoiseBlue! (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tomwatson, BoiseBlue, sunbro, YucatanMan

      Glad that you are hanging in, too.  

      Your comment

      I don't know what it is about her that makes everyone crazy, whether they love or hate her, but the hysteria is just weird.
      will be the subject of many a doctoral dissertation.  

      I think much of it comes from projection and the fact that she represents a perceived threat to our established order.  What to make of a woman who dares to knock at the White House door?  

      It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by Radiowalla on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:46:07 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  She lived in the fucking white house (14+ / 0-)

        She was a senator and her last job was secretary of state. She is the establishment candidate. She is not a revolutionary because she was born a woman. She is a Wall Street shill who voted for the war in Iraq and decided to take a stand on marriage equality once there was overwhelming support for it and her pollsters told her it wouldn't hurt her chances of being president.  

        I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

        by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:55:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I don't entirely agree with that (20+ / 0-)
        I think much of it comes from projection and the fact that she represents a perceived threat to our established order.  What to make of a woman who dares to knock at the White House door?
        I think that, certainly, there is a lot of that on the right. Here, though, I really do believe that it's just what I described: many of us feel that she's simply not the best representative for us as a party. I have stated that if the Democratic Party nominates her, I will no longer identify as a Democrat, and I'm barely hanging on to that anymore anyway. I will not work against her, but I won't put any more time or energy towards the party.

        I don't like that negativity she receives, but I'm even less of a fan of having misogyny hung over every person's head who doesn't support her. I'm an unabashed feminist but I clearly don't want Hillary in the White House. I would LOVE to see a female president, just not this female. And for the record, I wouldn't support my damn self for prez either! ;-)

        P.S. I am not a crackpot.

        by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:07:33 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I am registered as an Independent now (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          YucatanMan

          because I have been very angry at the Democratic party.
          However, I will never vote third party or Republican.  I just want to keep the Democratic Party guessing.  

          A lot could happen between now and the 2016 elections and we all may be in for some surprises.  

          It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

          by Radiowalla on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:20:09 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Disappointed? (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Laconic Lib, 3goldens

            Was it the lack of support for wall Street or was it the lack of will to lead the fight for marriage equality or was it the expedient votes for the war in Iraq?

            I sing praises in the church of nonsense, but in my heart I'm still an atheist, demanding sense of all things.

            by jbou on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:27:26 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Well, that's exactly the thing (13+ / 0-)

            To me, Hillary represents everything that I'm angry about wrt the party. I'll never vote R either, but I can't think of anything that will demoralize me more for GOTV efforts than having her on the ballot.

            For the record, I'm no longer in Boise, in my deep blue district 19 where Dems ran unopposed. I'm now in a deep red district where Rs run unopposed. In 2010 the only choice on my ballot was between Walt Minnick and Raul Labrador. I stayed home because A) Minnick ran what I believed was a racist campaign against Labrador and B) Minnick stood with the Rs on damn near everything anyway. So if my choice is between a conservative who calls himself a Democrat and a conservative who calls himself a conservative, I'm not wasting my time on either one of them.

            If I'm still in Southern Idaho (which I hope to a God I don't even believe in that I'm not) in 2016 and the only choice is Hillary and someone else, I'm probably not going to the voting booth unless there's some crazy urgent local proposal that needs my vote, and in that case I'll leave POTUS blank. I'm tired of having things like SCOTUS spots hung over my head like I'm a hostage. Look at everything that's happened over these last six years while we had a Democratic president. I dislike 90% of it, which is just a slightly better margin than versus R rule. Citizens United killed us. It completely killed us. I don't trust Hillary to fix that. I don't trust most Ds to fix that. The reality is that most of them are okay with it, too.

            P.S. I am not a crackpot.

            by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:57:13 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I can't imagine living in such a deeply red (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Catte Nappe

              place.  I truly would not know how to adapt given that I've always lived in the bluest of regions.

              How you decide to vote or not vote is entirely up to you.  But you might consider just focusing on one issue that is important to you and voting based on that.  Given what you have said, there is not going to be a good fit for you on the ballot, but there might be someone who will respond better than the others on an issue you care about.   I've done that before and it makes me feel better than not voting at all.  

              It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

              by Radiowalla on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:13:19 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  It's not that hard, actually (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Radiowalla, JVolvo, jbsoul

                Most people are liberal here, they're just not tuned into politics and they don't vote to represent their beliefs. Whether people want to acknowledge it or not, their truly is a feeling on the ground that their is no difference between the two parties. And who can blame them?

                I'm openly gay and haven't gotten a ton of grief about it, although I do get some grief. My gf's truck was vandalized because she had an Obama sticker on it. Shitheads live everywhere, and I confess to once defiling a Bush/Cheney yard sign. I was drunk, walking home from the bar, and had to pee. Immature, yes. But it was worth it at the time.

                What most people don't realize about Idaho (and I've been meaning to write a diary about this since the day I signed up- in fact I signed up specifically to write this diary during the Larry Craig scandal), is that there are three types of people here: Mormons, gun-loving rednecks, and people like me. The Mormons vote. Half of the rednecks vote. A tiny fraction of people like me vote. See the problem? It's not as conservative here as you'd think. It's just that the conservatives are the ones who show up to vote.

                P.S. I am not a crackpot.

                by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:36:53 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  When Democrats don't vote (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Ahianne

                  they don't win.   They think they deserve to win, deserve to win because they have superior ideas, etc., etc., but they can't be bothered to vote.  Go figure.

                  It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

                  by Radiowalla on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:23:53 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  When they don't even run, we can't vote for them. (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    jbsoul

                    The only reason I went to the polls in '12 was to vote against the Luna laws. Other than that, there were only TWO Dems on the Ballot. The rest was a list of unopposed republicans.

                    P.S. I am not a crackpot.

                    by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 03:35:31 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

            •  I should point out (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Ahianne

              that Bill's two Supreme Court justices, and Obama's two as well, all agreed with you on Citizens United. I see no reason to assume Hillary wouldn't pick justices along those lines. The fact that we're 5-4 down on the Supreme Court reflects the last 30-40 years of control, not the current president.

          •  even 2000 couldn't lead the dem elites to (5+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            BoiseBlue, JVolvo, CenPhx, 3goldens, jbsoul

            second-guess themselves. when people switch to independent, the conclusion is always the same: we must move to the right!

            To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

            by UntimelyRippd on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:59:06 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  Sickening line here... (0+ / 0-)

          "She is not a revolutionary because she was born a woman."

          Something's happening among a few voices - see it for what it is.

    •  And yet, (4+ / 0-)

      your perspective is really valuable. One thing the community, and those diaries in particular, desperately need is more people who are willing to call out bad behavior from "their side".

    •  Felt like responding, even though (6+ / 0-)

      this wasn't addressed to me.

      I've never been more disappointed in this site than I was during the primary shit storm.  Some of the stupidest, meanest shit I've ever seen occurred during that time. And some of my favorite kossacks (fabooj, anyone?) left because of it.

      You and I are about the same age, BoiseBlue, and I've got plenty of reasons why I didn't (and don't) support HRC for POTUS.  I think we can do better.  But I get a little nauseated when I see the disrespect of the woman, and of her supporters, at a place that oughta be above that.

      I'm sure this comment will mainly get passed by, but, if you read it, I beg you, do not help degenerate this place to the level it was in 2008.  Advocate for your positions, for your candidates, and do it passionately, but don't stoop to cheap, shitty invective.

      BoiseBlue, always good to read you.  Keep on keepin' on.

      We're trapped in the belly of this horrible machine,

      And the machine is bleeding to death.

      by Marcus Tullius on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 02:12:42 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  It's a great comment and I'm glad you made it (3+ / 0-)

        As for me, it's just not in my nature to spew hate about Hillary. I think she's pretty cool, I just don't want her to be POTUS. I'm not about to jump on the rabidly anti-HRC bandwagon. I can state my case without a lot of emotion. I, like you, am disappointed that so many others are incapable of that when it comes to Hillary.

        I usually just avoid Hillary diaries but I'm fond of Radiowalla and was interested in her POV. I don't share all of it, but that's okay. Hell, as I stated elsewhere I was an Edwards supporter in 2007-8. I'm not interested in mocking people for the candidate of their choice LOL.

        P.S. I am not a crackpot.

        by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 03:23:06 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  BTW- I haven't seen you around much lately (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Marcus Tullius

        I haven't been around much lately so that may be it, or maybe we're just rarely in the same diaries anymore, but it's good to see you again.

        P.S. I am not a crackpot.

        by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 04:45:13 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I am not able to interact as much, (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BoiseBlue

          and when I do, it's on my phone, so...

          Life changed drastically for me a few years ago, and I just don't have as much opportunity to interact here. I read, though, every day.

          And yeah, likewise. Always good to read ya.  :-)

          We're trapped in the belly of this horrible machine,

          And the machine is bleeding to death.

          by Marcus Tullius on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 05:27:12 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  Sure. But more importantly, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    sunbro

    the diary proposed no alternative and seemed to be looking for excuses.  And the comments more so.

    To me, each such diary is evidence that Hillary will be and should be the nominee.

    Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

    by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:50:04 AM PDT

    •  Offering an alternative isn't a requirement... (13+ / 0-)

      ...for voicing one's disapproval with a potential candidate who's being foisted upon us this far out from the election.

      Some HRC supporters, even fair-weathered ones, seem to think it is, for some reason.

      That you would consider diaries in opposition to her candidacy to be "evidence" of her inevitability is absurd.




      Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

      by DeadHead on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:01:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Of course it's not a "requirement" (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Inland, sviscusi, AlexDrew, etherealfire

        The world is full of people who want to piss and moan and  announce "gee ain't it awful" about one thing or another.  It doesn't do anything toward changing the situation, but presumably it gives them some sort of emotional relief. But they shouldn't be particularly surprised if, after awhile, others start suggesting they find some alternatives that will change the situation. Folks get tired of listening to the whining after awhile.

        “Texas is a so-called red state, but you’ve got 10 million Democrats here in Texas. And …, there are a whole lot of people here in Texas who need us, and who need us to fight for them.” President Obama

        by Catte Nappe on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:34:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Heh. Piss and Moan must be the byword. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Catte Nappe

          I'm surprised that it's not phrased, "we don't have to do more than gripe and throw pie, do we?". "No, lamb, be as worthless as you like."

          Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

          by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:53:00 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Well... (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          CenPhx, chuckvw, 3goldens

          It seems to me that the "pissing and moaning" that's occurring at this point is more in response to the inevitability meme that was in large part encouraged by Markos himself, at least as far as it's manifesting itself on his site.

          Not to mention, every new instance of tone-deafness on HRC's part tends to elicit a reaction from those who are alarmed by it. She can help alleviate that by....not saying or doing those things. Same goes for any politician or candidate.

          In regards to people "not being particularly surprised" by calls to find alternatives, well, how could they be?

          They've been bombarded with that question from the start, because it's thus far served as one of the "workhorse" replies used to bolster the inevitability meme.

          They'd be surprised if someone didn't ask for an alternative, for a change.

          It's not that the question shouldn't be asked, it's that it shouldn't be used as a way of dismissing criticism out of hand, this far out from the election.




          Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

          by DeadHead on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:32:08 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You've got it backwards, I think (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AlexDrew, etherealfire
            calls to find alternatives,...[has] thus far served as one of the "workhorse" replies used to bolster the inevitability meme.
            The lack of viable and electable alternatives is what bolsters the inevitability meme. If you want to "weaken" the meme - present some alternatives.

            “Texas is a so-called red state, but you’ve got 10 million Democrats here in Texas. And …, there are a whole lot of people here in Texas who need us, and who need us to fight for them.” President Obama

            by Catte Nappe on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 03:04:32 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  People have... (0+ / 0-)

              And they're met with any number of reasons, as to why those alternatives can't possibly challenge the Hillary juggernaut. Some valid, some still open to debate.

              And no sooner does a diary appear calling attention to another of her missteps, does the "who ya got?" badgering pick up again, right where it left off.




              Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

              by DeadHead on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 05:31:51 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Well, sure (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Inland, etherealfire

                Diary 1 - Here's a candidate I can support! Because...
                Commentary - s/he can't possibly win because xyz

                Diary 2 - Here's a candidate worth getting behind, because...
                Commentary - s/he is not worth getting behind - have you forgotten their position on....?

                Diary 3 - The candidate who has the best chance of moving us in the right direction is....., because...
                Commentary - but s/he isn't electable

                All of that is part of the pre-primary debate. None of that calls for diaries exclusively targeted at pulling down any given candidate. And frankly, I have seen very few diaries offering arguments for any viable or electable candidates other than Hillary. O'Malley being the exception to date. The Warren supporters are ardent, but can't seem to express a strategy beyond "if we just encourage her hard enough she'll run, and if she runs we just know she'll win"

                I'm wide open to considering candidates other than Hillary. Wide open. But I need a lot more than wishful thinking. Right now, I don't see many alternatives to her. That may change, but the stream of anti-Hillary diaries aren't going to contribute to that change.

                “Texas is a so-called red state, but you’ve got 10 million Democrats here in Texas. And …, there are a whole lot of people here in Texas who need us, and who need us to fight for them.” President Obama

                by Catte Nappe on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 05:57:08 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  He doesn't know. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Catte Nappe

                  He doesn't realize that "who ya got?" is an opening that someone with a potential candidate could exploit.

                  He doesn't know that the end of the primary is when people STOP ASKING "who ya got?", because that shows that they aren't interested in ANY alternative no matter how much negatives are bruited about.

                  So he's refusing the opening and calling for the door to close, right now.  

                  They aren't good at the entire idea of convincing anyone of anything, and mostly for lack of interest in trying.  They can't see past complaining about a blog and pretending that they are being persecuted by whoever might ask for their plan.

                  Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

                  by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 06:22:20 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  This: (0+ / 0-)
                    So he's refusing the opening and calling for the door to close, right now.
                    Is one of your better Rovian spins.

                    Well done.

                    By the way, I'm looking forward to you showing readers some of your previous Hillary commentary.

                    If you need some help in this regard, don't hesitate to ask — site search can be tricky, sometimes.




                    Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

                    by DeadHead on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:19:38 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                  •  Because some people (0+ / 0-)

                    Mine old comments and post them.

                    Some people do not argue in good faith. Their only purpose is to disrupt and cause strife. Best to not engage them.

                    by Drewid on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:30:11 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

                •  Well, I WAS going to rec your comment... (0+ / 0-)

                  ...for the civil reply, but since you apparently feel Inland's mind-reading on my behalf, above, more accurately represents my position than anything I might actually offer myself, I'll pass.




                  Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

                  by DeadHead on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:02:19 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

      •  It is for the Nom. Not for pissing and (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Catte Nappe, Ahianne

        moaning and throwing pie on a blog, sure, but in choosing a nominee, it's really important.  

        So I guess we are all showing what's important to us.  

        Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

        by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:50:42 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Of course an alternative is needed... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          3goldens, CenPhx

          Eventually.

          It's not that it's an invalid question, it's that it's oftentimes used as a way of dismissing valid criticism and/or opposition to her candidacy, at this early stage, that's the problem.




          Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

          by DeadHead on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 02:06:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  How much do you anti Hillary's think you have? (0+ / 0-)

            SMH.

            New Republic: So are the left-wing blogs as bad as the Tea Party ones in this case? -------------------------Chuck Schumer: Left-wing blogs are the mirror image. They just have less credibility and less clout.

            by AlexDrew on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 05:00:10 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  (....). To a hammer, everything is a nail. (0+ / 0-)

            You're putting all your energy and time into trying to fight with the owner and the strawman of someone "dismissing".
            It's basically another meta fight.

            And you're putting off finding an alternative person to "eventually".

            To a hammer, everything looks like a nail.  You're a person like you who doesn't know much beyond meta and likes to complain.  Naturally, you say it's the time for meta and complaining, with some candidate you can actually be FOR later.

            And every day people like you spend on making excuses and not finding an alternative shows that HRC will, and should, be the nominee.

            Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

            by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 06:03:53 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  See? (0+ / 0-)

              I reply to you in a completely civil manner, no ad hominem or insults, and you can't find it within yourself to reciprocate for one fucking comment.

              I forgive you though, because your opinion regarding HRC 2016 is valuable, and I wouldn't want you to stop offering it.




              Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

              by DeadHead on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:47:09 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  I don't really have a comment about (25+ / 0-)

    Hillary, per se, or the diary in question but I did want to say that it can be considered insulting and offensive to appropriate a phrase which refers to the genocide of Native Americans to describe her travails.  To that end, it would be considerate and kind, I think, to remove your reference to the Trail of Tears.  

  •  the real reason everyone's talking about Hilary (20+ / 0-)

    is because the media prefers talking about personalities and horse races to issues, especially in an election year.

    She's voter-nip: you just mention her name and watch people freak out arguing for and against her. The page clicks mount and the forum threads balloon exponentially. That's why the media loves talking about her: because they make money from spectacle and sensationalism, and anytime the Clintons are involved, spectacle and sensationalism are guaranteed.

    If they actually tried reporting about the current state of this country, rather than future hypothetical contests that have nothing to do with what's going on at the moment, people might actually be pissed enough at the political class to do something, and they don't want that.

    I'm not looking forward to the endless primary wars around here that will start immediately after the next election. It's profitable for the site to encourage them, so I'm sure there will be plenty of pot-stirring.

    "In America, the law is king." --Thomas Paine

    by limpidglass on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 09:56:38 AM PDT

  •  Some anti-Hillary stuff grates on me, too. (6+ / 0-)

    It seems sexist, or otherwise irrational and hysterical. The diary you mention, however, I had no problem with. It didn't smack to me of CT. I thought the criticisms the diarist made were fair and well-taken.

    I tipped you, for voicing your discomfort.

    It's here they got the range/ and the machinery for change/ and it's here they got the spiritual thirst. --Leonard Cohen

    by karmsy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:10:20 AM PDT

  •  I've been skeptical of the conventional (14+ / 0-)

    wisdom here since I joined, when John Edwards was far and away the site's most popular candidate.

    the woman who is easily irritated

    by chicago minx on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:19:03 AM PDT

  •  What is "CT"? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Radiowalla, etherealfire

    Sorry to be so clueless.

    Radiowalla, agree with everything you've said in your diary. I'm a Hillary supporter and if she is the nominee I will happily vote for her.

    'Nuff said.

    "Religion is what keeps the poor from murdering the rich."--Napoleon

    by Diana in NoVa on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:33:18 AM PDT

  •  Well, you've explained reasoning... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laconic Lib, JayRaye

    ...and it confirms that your HR was, indeed, misguided.

    Seems you went out of your way to look for reasons to be offended.

    Some HRC supporters have a tendency to do that.




    Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

    by DeadHead on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:35:01 AM PDT

  •  I just found "the onslaught is at least weekly" to (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catte Nappe, Radiowalla, Pandora, sviscusi

    be funny. I suppose the 5-10 daily anti Hillary diaries must be a "deluge of biblical proportions" if weekly is an "onslaught."

    In the end I think that anyone who has already picked a candidate 2 1/2 years out when we don't have a clue of who will be in the field is just downright silly.

    Most of the people taking a hard line against us are firmly convinced that they are the last defenders of civilization... The last stronghold of mother, God, home and apple pie and they're full of shit! David Crosby, Journey Thru the Past.

    by Mike S on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:46:14 AM PDT

  •  Does anyone remeber the vitriol lobbed (4+ / 0-)

    against Hillary supporters in 08? I do and I learned a valuable lesson. Internecine wars are the worst. I'm glad as a group we don't own guns. :)

    Have fun peeps.

    Even if I knew that tomorrow the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree. -Martin Luther

    by the fan man on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:55:06 AM PDT

    •  It is part of this site's collective memory (5+ / 0-)

      and there are scars to prove it.

      It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by Radiowalla on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:16:26 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I happened to like the sociopath Edwards, so (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Radiowalla

        I was kind of on the sidelines,  except I thought Obama was the weakest of the three in terms of platform. Anyway, since then I've seen dkos as a many headed hydra.
        By the way I am not a Hillary champion,  I agree with some of the sentiments against her, I am just more concerned with getting a progressive Congree to sit on whoever is in office. The rhetoric here can become kind of infantile in excess.

        Even if I knew that tomorrow the world would go to pieces, I would still plant my apple tree. -Martin Luther

        by the fan man on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:27:05 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I didn't even bother to open that diary. (10+ / 0-)

    Some pie fights I walk into unknowingly but that was one with flashing danger signs.

    I missed the original Rox/Sux wars but if the last few weeks are an example, I'm not looking forward to the redux.

    p.s. I see some are trying to tell you that your opinion has no merit. F*ck 'em.

    In our criminal justice system, a Republican is presumed innocent until the 2nd Coming. - Gooserock

    by ExpatGirl on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:12:15 AM PDT

  •  The title of that diary... (9+ / 0-)

    was a "DO NOT OPEN" warning. At least to me. Everything I've read referencing made it clear to me that I was wise to follow that warning.

    Will Clinton be the Democratic nominee in 2016? Almost certainly unless she decides not to run. Do I have a problem with that? Really, I don't. Are there people whose views better comport with mine? Certainly. Are they likely to win the nomination? Probably not. Will I be disappointed by that? Mildly. Will it keep me from supporting the Democratic nominee in 2016?

    Absolutely not.

    Will I want us to press the nominee to take more progressive positions if we are concerned about that? I definitely will and will do what I can to see it happens.

    Seriously there'll be all this noise between now and 2016 and no matter what anyone says, that's all it will boil down to.

  •  Your HR was wrong and was a drive-by (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DeadHead, 3goldens

    You words tell me that you don't think it was wrong and that you should get a pass for what you did.

    Using your phone as an excuse:

    I regret that I was technically unable to reply to the diary at the time it was published
    And not admitting or being sorry for an drive-by HR and content-free comment:
    and I know that my HR was taken as improper because it was thought to be made out of simple disagreement.  
    Also I think you are misusing the word "personal insult." You could, if choose, feel insulted by the diary, but it was not a personal insult.

    By the way your commment, which said

    what a load!
    was content free.

    "I'm not a number" --84,414

    by BentLiberal on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:29:58 AM PDT

  •  Tipped and rec'ced (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    grover, Matt Z, Lysis, Ahianne, etherealfire

    And I don't support Hillary for President.

    That diary was exactly as you described it - an attack on HRC supporters.

    To me, it wasn't much different than the comments that were posted here a few weeks back which actually claimed that the entire focus on that woman-hating nut in Santa Barbara who killed 4 people was all a plot contrived by HRC supporters. For real. And if anyone doubts me, I'd be glad to share the links to those comments which were heavily HRd.

    KOS: "Mocking partisans focusing on elections? Even less reason to be on Daily Kos."

    by fcvaguy on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:34:35 AM PDT

  •  I made the positive case for Martin O'Malley (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CenPhx, Chi, chuckvw

    for the nominee in this diary. I personally am more interested in discussing his nomination than in hearing more about how opposing Hillary makes you a sexist. But, I am in the minority on this site.

    President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

    by askew on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:38:40 AM PDT

    •  You misunderstood me (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DiesIrae

      if you think that I believe that opposing Hillary makes one a sexist.  Please reread (3) in this diary.  I was calling out the underlying sexism in a statement that tells a female candidate to go away and tend to her family, basking in the rich rewards of her suffering.   It is nauseating to read such crap as this.  

      It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by Radiowalla on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:54:29 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  In this diary, you aren't doing that. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Portlaw, JVolvo, chuckvw

        But, there have been scads of comments and diaries saying that if you oppose Hillary, you are sexist. I remember that nonsense from 2007 and am uninterested in wading through it again.

        That said, I'd love for her to just retire and go away. Not because she is a woman, but because I find her to be mediocre on every level.

        President Obama at Madison Rally 9/28/2010 - "Change is not a spectator sport."

        by askew on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:00:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  Warren and Sanders will have to make ... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Catte Nappe, martini, OrganicChemist

    their own move to 'the middle' if they hope to survive a national election. It will be interesting to see if they lose any of their luster when they begin to moderate their views to appeal to a larger voting block.
    With Hillary, her views and actions are fairly well known at this point. Regardless of how you feel about her politically and personally, she is a known known. As of now, Hillary is sucking all of the oxygen out of the room. You go to a presidential election with the candidate you have---not the candidate you might want or wish to have at a later time.


    I’m not a big fan of vegetable gardens. Like my chickens, I prefer my salads to be cage free.

    by glb3 on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:39:26 AM PDT

    •  gore was losing to w until he made a move (5+ / 0-)

      to the middle -- but of course, the middle was to his left, as it almost always is for any mainstream american politician.

      hillary would need a gigantic step to the left, if she wanted to move closer to the middle of the electorate's political spectrum.

      To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

      by UntimelyRippd on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:09:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I think many here... (0+ / 0-)

      will be truly chagrined to find out how much of a conservative Warren will become on many issues. If she does run, she will be an older candidate. This would be the capstone of a long and distinguished career. Unfortunately, in my opinion, she would have to work with at least one Republican controlled house. She is very intelligent and driven. I really don't think that she would go into the whole mess this late in her life only to accomplish nothing because of gridlock. I think she will become very pragmatic and will work to compromise on many, many issues just to move the ball forward and roll up some accomplishments.

      This is only my opinion, but I could really see this happening. Extremely driven and successful people don't want to spend the capstone of their professional lives basically fighting and accomplishing little.

  •  This won't get the recs and comments (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Radiowalla, grover

    that steaming pile received, but that's ok.

    Great diary!

    A homo in a bi-national relationship - at 49, I had to give up my career, leave behind my dying father, my family & friends and move to Europe. And I'm one of the *lucky* ones: Immigration Equality

    by aggieric on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:47:28 AM PDT

  •  Please (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CenPhx, Chi, 3goldens

    Stop.  All of you.  It's sickens me.

    That other diary is gone.  It is no longer on the rec list.  Whether people agreed with it or not, why re-hash it?  

    This strikes me as a very defensive diary.  If you wish to argue for HRC's candidacy, then do so, but bringing up an old anti-HRC diary that most of us have moved on from is ludicrous in my opinion.

    Don't justify your offense and your HR of that diary to me.  I feel that this diary was written only to soothe your own ego.  Be better than that.  Don't write the why the anti-HRC diary was awful, write the why I support HRC without any reference to it at all.  

    This diary merely allows more discord, antagonism and trollish behavior to appear all over again by resurrecting past grievances by pro and and anti HRC people here that one would think had already been discussed enough in a 1000+ comment thread.

    I suggest your better course of action would be to take this diary down and re-write it without any mention of that "other" diary that so offended you, and instead tell us why HRC is the best choice for the Democratic ticket in 2016.  I strongly suspect my advice will not be considered however.

    "If you tell the truth, you'll eventually be found out." Mark Twain

    by Steven D on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:58:12 AM PDT

    •  Thanks for stopping by. (0+ / 0-)

      It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by Radiowalla on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:03:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  In a perfect world? Sure (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ahianne

      But this isn't a perfect world, it's DailyKos.com and whether Radiowalla wrote a diary about the positives of a Hillary nomination/election or this diary, the results would be the same. The comments would be the same.

      And she has a right to explain herself. We usually demand that people explain their HRs, then when they do we mock them for doing so. It's a lose-lose for HRC supporters, of which I am not one. But I see it.

      P.S. I am not a crackpot.

      by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:07:35 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Well one can choose (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        3goldens

        to roll around in the mud, or one can choose to attempt to be constructive.  It's a choice, and I'd prefer to see more people choose the latter than the former

        That's my view.

        I ask people to explain an HR in the comments on occasion, because that is the proper place and time for it, but I don't ask them to explain their behavior in a diary, nor do I see any value to it, for them or the community.

        An apology diary would be fine, but this isn't one of those.  It serves no purpose, imo.  

        So I guess we will agree to disagree.

        "If you tell the truth, you'll eventually be found out." Mark Twain

        by Steven D on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:20:49 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  I didn't open the diary (14+ / 0-)

    (Until just now, and I skimmed it very quickly).

    This is the same guy who said this:

    That anyone knows who Hillary is at all (0+ / 0-)
    is a simple byproduct of being a President's wife, period. She had the potential and certainly might have succeeded on her own, but instead, she achieved it by the fortuitousness of the accident of her marriage. I don't say that was purposeful; neither had a secured future when the met and married.
    Has she truly earned her fame and success? I submit she's the definition of a coat tail rider, made even worse by the fact that she stuck with her husband, I suspect, purely to protect her political ambitions and connections.
    A great feminist leader?  Uh huh. She's an opportunist who, when she did finally get a position of power (by running from her roots for the easy win in NY) did nothing of substance, has no distinguishing achievements.
    The shock to me is that any Democrat with sincerity and intellect (and/or who has earned his/her place by the sheer pluck and self-determination on his or her own) who possibly endorse Hillary.
    http://www.dailykos.com/...
    Highlighting mine

    He uses the term "coat tails" to describe HRC a lot as though she has never accomplished anything on her own.

    I knew his diary would likely infuriate me.

    I have no problem with discussions and even arguments with whether HRC should be our nominee. I don't think she's inevitable.

    But sexist (rightwing meme) crap like this should not be tolerate by this community.

    Yet it is.

    © grover


    So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

    by grover on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:07:43 PM PDT

    •  Yuck (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      grover, Radiowalla

      That's an outrageous and disgusting comment. Not yours, of course, but the one you quoted. Just to be safe and make that clear. :-) I know you know my intent, but in a diary this contentious I have to play it safe LOL.

      P.S. I am not a crackpot.

      by BoiseBlue on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:14:17 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yeah, (4+ / 0-)

      that's sexist, no two ways about it. A whole lot of people in that comment section, including the diarist (but not limited to people who agreed with him/her) were doing their best to prove their critics right.

    •  I was not at all aware of this. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      etherealfire

      How pathetic that this kind of discourse is applauded here.  

      It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by Radiowalla on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:23:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Same guy who announced a Rand Paul surge (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      grover, etherealfire

      because Rand got applause at a meeting within Berkeley city limits.

      Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

      by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:00:58 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Berkeley? (0+ / 0-)

        Heh, that's funny.

        © grover


        So if you get hit by a bus tonight, would you be satisfied with how you spent today, your last day on earth? Live like tomorrow is never guaranteed, because it's not. -- Me.

        by grover on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 01:25:36 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Here... (0+ / 0-)

        Is the diary to which you refer.

        Predictably, it wasn't quite the way you now portray it.

        Since we're bringing up his other diaries, he also happens to be the author of this one, wherein you were rather decisively pwned.

        And given the fact that you oftentimes jump at the chance snipe at people who've embarrassed you in the past, your doing so again, now, is hardly unexpected.




        Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

        by DeadHead on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 06:08:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Frantic handwaving business not doing well? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          BigChiefRunningCommentary

          I see that you're trying to make yourself feel better by bringing up other diaries, pretending that they meant something or other.   Is the present so sad and lonely that you have to pretend that you had some glory day way back when?  

          Wow.  Why don't you do yourself a favor and leave the site?

          Retrospectives on 25th anniversary of Tiananmen at Chinafile.com

          by Inland on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 06:44:01 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  You brought up "other diaries" ... (0+ / 0-)

            I just provided the link to the one you "brought up."

            And I added one, because I figured you'd want to mention that one, too.

            I was trying to be helpful.

            As an aside, I think I finally understand why you like to apply "frantic handwaving" to me so much. It's what you do, and you think that my responding to your "frantic handwaving" is itself "handwaving," when it's really just you engaging in Rovian projection. Again.




            Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ Garcia

            by DeadHead on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 11:01:09 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  I'm not an HRC fan, but you make a lot of good ... (8+ / 0-)

    I'm not an HRC fan, but you make a lot of good points here. And I see that diary in a different light now. Thanks.

  •  Clinton is going to have to stand on her own (7+ / 0-)

    without any of the "first female" accolades or emotional devices attached.   This country is in dire straights as is the planet, we don't need any gamesmanship along those line.  It makes no difference whether she is the first serious female candidate or not, that's for the history books.  

    "Fragmented and confused, we have no plan to combat any of this, but are looking to be saved by the very architects of our ruination."

    by BigAlinWashSt on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 12:28:49 PM PDT

    •  first serious female candidate (5+ / 0-)

      she had that distinction back in 2008, so we can check that one off.

      _______________The DOD/ War Department, which consumes 22% of the national budget, is the world's largest employer with 3.2 million employees.

      by allenjo on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 02:17:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Shirley Chisholm was a very serious candidate (6+ / 0-)

        And on the issues she was light years ahead of Clinton.

        It's true she didn't have Clinton's team of publicists, but...
        She served four years in the NY lege and then seven terms in the House.

        She was the real deal.

        If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about answers. - Thomas Pynchon

        by chuckvw on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 03:35:12 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  She wasn't taken seriously (0+ / 0-)

          By much of anyone, even the black political establishment, particulary the black male political establishment. Her candidacy was historic, but was entirely symbolic. She come remotely close to winning a primary.

          •  The entire party establishment (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            gulfgal98, dkmich, YucatanMan

            disrespected her and went out of their way to belittle her. The sexism and racism then very common in the Democratic Party doesn't lessen the seriousness of her campaign, nor that of her as a person. She won delegates at the convention. That was a first for the Democrats at a time when it was unimaginably more difficult for a black or a woman to run for president... or any other office, for that matter. She was an incredibly brave person and she was the first.

            If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don’t have to worry about answers. - Thomas Pynchon

            by chuckvw on Mon Jun 30, 2014 at 12:13:09 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  She was brave (0+ / 0-)

              and first, but it was not  credible campaign. Partly for the reasons you mentioned above but also, because she didn't have much experience at the time and the House is historically a poor place from which to mount a credible campaign.

          •  Symbolic or no, First is First, right? n/t (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Dr Swig Mcjigger

            "The law is meant to be my servant and not my master, still less my torturer and my murderer." -- James Baldwin. July 11, 1966.

            by YucatanMan on Mon Jun 30, 2014 at 12:30:55 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Yes (0+ / 0-)

              of course it is. But there are other firsts as well. Al Smith was the first Catholic nominated by a major party and that was historic, but he got bombed. JFK also made history by being the first, and only Catholic to win. Jesse Jackson made history by being the first black candidate to win a Presidential primary, but Obama was even more historic by winning the nomination and the presidency. The historical nature of one thing doesn't make the other any less important.

  •  An HR is too easy (0+ / 0-)

    You might recognize me as one of the persons who objected to your HR, here:

    From dKospedia (4+ / 0-)
    Hide rating: Comments whose only purpose is to disrupt the discussion. Do not hide posts simply because you disagree with what the commenter is saying.
    You can still remove your HR, you know.
    I stand by my comment.  It's not up to you to HR a diary out of existence that you think might be CT.  That's up to the site managers.  As you see, an HR is pretty much used if you think that a poster is an obvious troll.  Did you really think that OP was a troll?  Really?

    I think the poster was more than legitimate, and was telling us what he thought, and some simply didn't like the message.  Again, look at the situations where an HR is to be used.

    Ok, so you were on the phone at the time.  When you off the phone, you could have taken a different action - you could have expressed your concerns in a manner that added to the conversation.  Go ahead and tell us that you think it was insulting CT - at least others could join in on a conversation about that.

    Ironically, your misused, hit-and-run HR likely did more to "disrupt the discussion" than perhaps anything else in that diary. And a reminder that you still could have revoked that choice long after your phone call was concluded, which informs me that further information could still be forthcoming from you about your desire not to "stir the pot".

    I'll applaud you on writing a diary discussing your choice, however, albeit days after the event.  People really look for an HR's rationale while the diary is still fresh.

    Note: please know that the record indicates that I didn't participate in the original diary, and that I seldom if ever participate in diaries like it. That's for those that think I might be an agitator for a particular "side" - clearly, I'm not. I do think that the keyboard is mightier than the HR, though, and that more free speech is almost always a better course of action than shutting down someone else's.

    We need to invade the Cheney compound. It's ok. They'll greet us as liberators.

    by thenekkidtruth on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 03:32:26 PM PDT

    •  You are right about some of what you said. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ahianne

      However, I think my HR was entirely valid and I listed my reasons above.  I did explain what I found insulting and what I felt was CT.  To me, those were and are grounds for HR.

      What wasn't so great was that I left the HR and did not explain why at the time.  The lack of a keyboard was what prevented me from doing so In the future, I am going to avoid flame diaries when I am traveling and avoid any HRs that require an explanation.  I do own up to that.

      OTOH, you misread this diary.  I was not on a phone call.  I was traveling and could not type adequately on the iPhone keyboard.  So I waited until today to explain the HR.  That was not good.  I will avoid the lag time in the future.  

      It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by Radiowalla on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 04:39:24 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  There is no such thing (0+ / 0-)

      ..as HR'ing a diary out of existence. An HR on a diary's tip jar does not affect the diary. Any rating on a tip jar signifies approval or disapproval of the diary, but it affects only the tip jar and maybe the diarist's mojo.

      Cogito, ergo Democrata.

      by Ahianne on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 06:04:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  A partially correct technicality (0+ / 0-)

        Site management disappears diaries with great regularly - sometimes in as little as an hour - that have had their tip jars HR'd out.  In point of fact, this is perhaps the usual practice - the norm, rather than the exception.

        While this technicality has no true bearing on the real meaning behind my commentary. I thank you for pointing this out nonetheless.

        Do you perhaps have an opinion about whether or not it is our job to police the site for CT, or if that is the stated function of site management personnel?

        We need to invade the Cheney compound. It's ok. They'll greet us as liberators.

        by thenekkidtruth on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 06:24:51 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Not in my observation. (0+ / 0-)

          Site management can delete diaries but does so rarely. Most diaries that disappear are deleted by the diarists.

          Have you heard of community moderation? As far as I know it applies to CT.

          Cogito, ergo Democrata.

          by Ahianne on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 07:08:52 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Well, those Indonesians aren't deleting their own (0+ / 0-)

            diaries, but again, thx.

            We need to invade the Cheney compound. It's ok. They'll greet us as liberators.

            by thenekkidtruth on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 08:22:24 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Oh, yeah. (0+ / 0-)

              You're right about the commercial spam. And there's a lot of that, so they are disappearing a lot more diaries than they used to. I'd say it's a lot more rare for genuine user's diaries.

              Cogito, ergo Democrata.

              by Ahianne on Mon Jun 30, 2014 at 08:38:29 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  I don't think that's accurate. (0+ / 0-)

            Just from observation, I think diaries tend to get deleted by admins when the tip jar gets 10 or more HRs. Might be more than 10, but I've seen it happen. The obvious troll diaries are obviously not something the diarist would self delete but they do disappear.

            Corporations, which should be the carefully restrained creatures of the law and the servants of the people, are fast becoming the people’s masters. -- President Grover Cleveland, 1888

            by edg on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 08:40:43 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Let's face it (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Garrett, Ahianne

    A populist candidate isn't going to bring much revolution when it comes to the economy, unless money is removed from politics. Obama was a populist candidate, and I devoutly believed everything he said he would do. But as we see, and this isn't Obama's fault, the powers that be only allow so much change. The banks got bailed out, not punished or nationalized. A Monsanto exec is head of FDA. A top cable lobbyist is head of FCC. Wall Street and Fed Reserve devotees were put in charge of the recovery.

    I'll vote for Hillary for several reasons. It's time for a female president. Hillary has done a lot of good work for women and children. Hillary has endured the propaganda wars of the right wing and survived brilliantly. Hillary is very smart and pays attention.

    But no matter who the Dem candidate is. If we don't get more progressive Dems in Congress, a Dem president will face more obstructionism.

  •  All due respect, Radio, there is an Establishment. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Portlaw

    There is a Democratic Party establishment. There is a media establishment. There is a corporate and business establishment.

    This is not at all to suggest that you're a part of it. Similarly, when presented with the idea of a "Good Ole' Boys Club" made up of white men, I would note that I've never received an invitation to that club. But of course, there IS a good ole' boys club, in the concept and context people mention it in, right?

    I think we can admit those things without labeling individual Kossacks. Hilary is a favored candidate among the party establishment, and she is accepted, if not favored among the media and corporate establishment. That seems fairly clear to me, though I certainly understand the issues you raise here, in terms of including regular, American voters who like HRC as a part of some string-pulling Establishment. I think that is unfair to the people who genuinely admire her. And I can say that as someone who has been pretty damn clear on my distaste for her as a candidate.

    Hope this all makes sense. Appreciate the diary and explanation, Radio.

    •  You are right, I am not part of it. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      etherealfire, SixSixSix

      And neither are the many other Clinton supporters here.  To be a Kossack is by definition a disqualification for membership in The Establishment.

      It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

      by Radiowalla on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 10:03:45 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Fair enough. I think the diary in question... (0+ / 0-)

        Which I appreciated, went too far in the areas you mention, implicating regular Kossacks in some type of pro-Hilary rush job to quell dissent. I don't agree with that. I do think it's fair to ask why Kos, as the man in charge around here, was so quick and so willing to say that if Hilary runs, she will be the nominee, and she will be elected President. You can certainly make the case that her numbers look very good, but speaking for myself, I find those kinds of statements to be undermining and unhelpful. Many of us believe Hilary is a fatally-flawed candidate who has taken positions we can never support. And certainly, when Kos, and other FPers push her, that DOES send signals not just to us Kossacks, but to the party establishment.

        All we want is a strong, competitive primary with a populist challenger. If Hilary emerges from that, I imagine most all of us will do all we can to make sure she beats the GOP nominee. But until then, some of the inevitability talk is discouraging.

        •  The inevitability meme (0+ / 0-)

          has never appealed to me.  I think there should be a vigorous primary, no matter what.  Whether it will be competitive or not will depend on all the challengers and how well they campaign and how well they make their case.  

          What annoys me, however, is that in spite of all the hand-wringing here about the need for a populist challenger to Hillary, I can't find any evidence of a real effort to actually recruit one.  Where is the Draft O'Malley Group?  Or the Draft Warren Group?  It's time to get busy and find some credible challengers before it's too late.

          It's the Supreme Court, stupid!

          by Radiowalla on Tue Jul 01, 2014 at 08:58:29 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  OK But (0+ / 0-)

    I really want Elizabeth Warren to seek and win the nomination and believe that HRC would continue to be at best an average candidate. As we get closer a presidential election that kind of thinking around here gets blitzed and bombed by many pro-Hillary kossacks.

    There is a fairly compelling argument to be made that HRC has not been strong on the campaign trail and that she may not be progressive enough for the electorate in 2016.

    Canada - where a pack of smokes is ten bucks and a heart transplant is free.

    by dpc on Sun Jun 29, 2014 at 08:18:11 PM PDT

  •  Not agreeing with anyone or disagreeing (0+ / 0-)

    But one point. Some people want whichever Dem who can most likely beat the Republican to win the nomination regardless of how well the nominee matches their own personal politics. Many of these people think that HRC is more likely to be able to beat any Republican nominee than people like Senator Warren.

    If someone believes very strongly that it isn't as easy to beat Republicans than some people think, and that a Republican President would be catastrophic, they might hold their nose and hope that HRC wins the nomination even though they think she is more flawed than other candidates.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site