A comment to Sum Up Hillary vs. Obama (And those who are still conflicted)

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 4:20 AM GMT
    I was reading comments on the washington post website and it just stood out to me. For those people who support Obama or are conflicted about it, here is something to think about.

    I think both people are great, but Hillary has to come first.

    Washington Post Comment (Posted by: Thomasmwall) I just love this debate and this process, and honestly believe that this discussion has been and will continue to be good for the Democratic party and for the nation as a whole... it seems to me that too often, this whole process is rushed and we end up dissatisfied with all of the candidates.
    At least this time we have some real choices to make that are not simply symbolic. For the first time in years, I will not be voting against the Republican candidate.

    That said, although I support Hillary for the nomination, I do like Obama tremendously. I can state right now thaqt I will absolutely support and vote for either candidate if they become the nominee.

    One of the things that I just don't understand, though, is why so many Obama supporters are so negative and nasty towards Clinton. I just don't get how a self-proclaimed "movement" that has set its sights on change and hope can attack Hillary with such gusto and vehemence.

    These attacks and this intense negativity towards Hillary is making me doubt the Obama camp's sincerity. How can you profess to stand for hope and change while viciously attacking someone like Hillary Clinton, who has a long and distinguished record of service and patriotism?

    Also troubling to me is the petulant suggestion that Obama supporters would not support Hillary in a general election. This, also, strikes me as more of the same. That is a childish and dangerous thing to say.

    Obama supporters should be careful to not undermine their candidate's message of optimism and hope, and they should also be willing to act maturely and with unity in the event that Hillary wins.

    To conclude with a few good old aphorisms - talk is cheap, folks, and actions speak a lot louder than words. Obama supporters should start acting the part, lest their rhetoric be revealed as empty and meaningless.
  • redheaded_dud...

    Posts: 408

    Feb 09, 2008 4:34 AM GMT
    Hillary has given me the creeps for a long time. I recall in 1992 when she and Bill did a 60 Minutes interview during the primaries, and she said, basically, that she wasn't some kind of Tammy Wynette "stand by your man no matter what" kind of woman. Yet that's EXACTLY what she turned out to be. Love? Maybe. Or political convenience? Who knows. But it's her past that makes me wonder why she makes the choices she does. Remember how the "vast right wing conspiracy" was to blame before Bill finally admitted to his inappropriate relationship with "that woman, Miss Lewinski"? That could just be a wife wanting to believe her husband, but come on--if Hillary hadn't figured out that she was married to a HUGE philanderer by that time, maybe she's too naive to be president!

    I guess what really turns me off with Hillary is her "entitlement attitude" that she deserves the presidency. As sexist as this sounds--but it really is meant to be a complement-- I think her greatest accomplishment is Chelsea.

    Maybe Obama doesn't have the sordid history, and is "slicker" than Hillary, but I frankly like his style more. (And no, I don't mean his Ferragamos!)


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 4:45 AM GMT
    So if you were in an accident, you were dying for help...and Hillary was there as a trained paramedic, so was Obama but he can't put much more of a band aid on the wound and whisper "it's gonna be alright"...you can have one, you'd take Obama simply because his voice and words are more soothing?

    That seems to be what you are saying...

    Hillary May not have the Best past (But most of those are personal and didn't effect the good she strived for), but her better accomplishment outshine certain things you consider "character flaws". Which is a personal opinion and not a fact. A fact is this, She has opted for change and though not all her attempts were successful, her ones that have have changed the lives and directions for millions of people, here and abroad. No politician will ever be perfect, Obama hasn't and won't be, he just hasn't been challenged enough or entrepreneurial enough to make those mistakes yet, but he will.

    I can't put the countries future into a man who has missed almost 200 votes in his political career when his scope didn't go much beyond the state of Ill.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 6:44 AM GMT
    Slayerstrppd,

    I love how readheaded dude's comment perfectly illustrates what you're saying. There ya have it I guess, huh?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 6:53 AM GMT
    readhead_dude said:

    As sexist as this sounds--but it really is meant to be a complement-- I think her greatest accomplishment is Chelsea.

    So, what would you consider Bill Clinton's greatest accomplishment? These are both very accomplished people -- how many people becomes senators of a state in this country? and obviously you are not one. If you consider Chelsea Bill's greatest accomplishment, than no it wouldn't be sexist, if yes, than well, yes, I'm guessing it would be a sexist comment. Chelsea is a product of two very accomplished people. She may be their COMBINED greatest accomplishment. But personally how can I decide between a person's child or their professional accomplishments? And why should one be asked to decide in the first place, and what difference does it make whether the person is male or female?

    I'll happily vote for either Obama or Hillary in November (I did vote for Hillary though in my states primarey, but don't prefer really prefer by much)

    Honestly I don't understand the Hillary hating, or why people judge her based on her marriage or lack of marriage. Does anyone have the right to say what constitutes another persons marriage? Is it love or someting else or whatever? I don't know, but is staying married for whatever reason better than divorcing for whatever reason? I certainly can't say.

    I think both Hillary and Obama could make a good president -- not that I'm saying either would or will, but that they both have potential and both have flaws. On many issues they are similar, but definitely there are differences and not just of style, and I like both of them for different reasons -- though I guess I slightly prefer Hillary for her, and this is what I perceive, stability, and that she doesn't seem likely to rush into anything, and take things in stride. I must say that after the current Bush, a president of stability and clear judgement appeals to me more than anything else. But both could do well in office and both could demonstrate the abilities needed to lead the nation, but I can't really say which one would do it better.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 7:07 AM GMT


    Although i think Obama is sexy. I still want Hillary for prez man.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 7:12 AM GMT
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 8:30 AM GMT
    ROTFL

    I heard someone today say to look at the two candidates web sites and the differences were immediately apparent.

    Clinton is a PC, Obama is a Mac.

    icon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gificon_lol.gif

    It is SO True!


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 8:54 AM GMT
    Here are two news stories I've found...spread it around

    Obama Refuses Photo with Gavin Newsom
    From mydd.com by linfar, Tue Feb 05, 2008 at 11:38:46 AM EST

    Some background in case you forgot who Newsom is.
    Newsom issued a directive to the San Francisco city-county clerk to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples, claiming that the California Constitution's equal protection clause gave him authority to do so.

    According to a high level Obama staffer via Ben Smith, ""He [Newsom] is never going to serve in our administration, and we may give San Francisco to Canada."
    This was in respose to a story which appeared this morning in the San Francisco Chronicle:
    "I gave a fundraiser, at his (Obama's) request at a Waterfront restaurant," said former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown. "And he said to me, he would really appreciate it if he didn't get his photo taken with my mayor. He said he would really not like to have his picture taken with Gavin."
    Obama's deputy campaign director, Steve Hildebrand, who lives with his partner as an openly gay man, is reported in the Chronicle report as calling this "a ridiculous story."

    But according to the published report both current and former members of Newsom's staff, remember the incident well. And they say that you can bet that Newsom hasn't forgotten it either.
    "He was pissed," said one former staffer.
    More from the Chronicle story: "In fact, early last year, Newsom alluded to the incident in an interview at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. Speaking to Reuters on Jan. 26, 2007, Newsom was asked about three potential Democratic candidates: Obama, Hillary Clinton and Al Gore.
    "One of the three Democrats you mentioned as presidential candidates, as God is my witness, will not be photographed with me, will not be in the same room with me," Newsom told Reuters, "even though I've done fundraisers for that particular person - not once, but twice - because of this issue."

    Obama campaign spokesman blasts gays at Gospel concert; white preacher and Obama say nothing
    by John Aravosis (DC) · 10/29/2007 09:00:00 AM ET

    UPDATE: Per the NYT, the anti-gay activist turned the entire final half hour of the concert into an anti-gay harangue:

    The whole controversy might have been forgotten in the swell of gospel sound except Mr. McClurkin turned the final half hour of the three-hour concert into a revival meeting about the lightning rod he has become for the Obama campaign.
    He approached the subject gingerly at first. Then, just when the concert had seemed to reach its pitch and about to end, Mr. McClurkin returned to it with a full-blown plea: “Don’t call me a bigot or anti-gay when I have suffered the same feelings,” he cried.
    “God delivered me from homosexuality,” he added. He then told the audience to believe the Bible over the blogs: “God is the only way.” The crowd sang and clapped along in full support....
    Mr. McClurkin’s support for Mr. Obama could signal to some black evangelical voters that race and religion are more important than Mr. Obama’s support for gay rights.

    My two cents worth...
    This guy is such a sham! He won't be shown with San Francisco's former mayor because of his support of gay marriage and he allows Evangelical Anti-Gay rants at venues he speaks at. The more I find on this guy the more two faced he seems. In the past three months I've dug up so much dirt on him I have a hole six feet deep and enough to bury him in it. I've been tempted to post everything I've found but haven't because it always leads to a cat fight on forums. But this is so petty and disappointing that I felt I had to.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 12:13 PM GMT
    The last time I checked, it was Bill Clinton who signed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) into law and created the military's policy of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Was he two-faced as well? Politics is a messy business, and though i don't particularly like those two stories about Obama, I do think he represents a fundamentally different type of politics. I think anyone who thinks that Hillary is going to support our community and work to get us the rights that we deserve (full marriage rights and federal workplace non-discrimination, for example), then you're fooling yourself.

    All should also be aware of the fact that Hillary Clinton does not support a full repeal of DOMA...Barack Obama does.
  • redheaded_dud...

    Posts: 408

    Feb 09, 2008 1:10 PM GMT
    readhead_dude said:

    As sexist as this sounds--but it really is meant to be a complement-- I think her greatest accomplishment is Chelsea.

    WRERICKSo, what would you consider Bill Clinton's greatest accomplishment?


    Point well taken. Bill's greatest accomplishment may have been effective bi-partisan cooperation in passing welfare reform. I was trying to say that I think anyone who could raise a poised, intelligent child under the spotlight can't be all bad!

    And maybe I didn't make effective use of a "topic sentence" like we learned in English class. My topic sentence: "I have a visceral, intuitive distaste for Hillary Clinton, perhaps not based on any ONE thing, but I have explored it to the satisfaction of myself, and the distaste is still there." Whether I can fully explain an intuition or not, I don't know, but I think I did a fair job in my previous post.

    If you've ever had a dating partner who was terrific on paper, but there was just no chemistry, you may know what I mean. My feelings towards Hillary are similar, although I'm deciding whether to vote for her, not date her. There's just bad "chemistry" between Hillary and me.

  • redheaded_dud...

    Posts: 408

    Feb 09, 2008 3:18 PM GMT

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 3:44 PM GMT
    Well if it comes down to the super delegates having to make a choice, it'll favor Hillary, want to believe it or not, Obama cannot woe A vast majority of Hillary supporters come the general election. It's just a truth that's out there. Besides, if we risk too much that those supporting Obama now will make a difference come November. Sadly, his majority cannot be counted on to come out and vote. Yeah he has a huge number of young voters but sadly, they only made up about 14 percent of the total vote so far. Not nearly enough to win in the white house. Liberals may like him but they also swing for Mccain so there runs a risk they'll be split down middle there.

    Obama cannot support enough votes come Nov. The Latino vote is KEY for important states.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 4:19 PM GMT
    I wouldn't say many Obama supporters are anti-Hillary.

    There are both Democrats and Republicans who are anti-Hillary -- have been since '93 and always will be; only now, some of them happen to be Obama supporters.

    Also, she's the opponent, the obstacle to his presidency, and there may be some that are overly zealous with their efforts in support of Obama.

    Instead, I would argue there are more people out there like me (and the delegate counts of both candidates seem to reflect this) -- that is, I love both Hillary AND Obama and would support either for president or vice president.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 4:28 PM GMT
    This is probably the MOST exciting election in a LONG while! Guys, we are watching/seeing history unfold in front of our very own eyes! Yet at the same time it also seems as though the fact that we have a Female and a Black candidate doesn't seem to be as big of a deal as many may have believed, which to me, is great thing; just shows that we as Americans are evolving and moving forward.
    It's GREAT to see that we have GREAT choices in Obama, Clinton and EVEN McCain (he's got some points). Regarding Obama and Clinton, I will say that I would be happy with either one. Yes I voted for Obama in my State's primary and will continue to follow BOTH him and Clinton all the way through. A couple of minor reasons for supporting Obama; the President should be a "wordly" individual and one MUST admit Obama has that "wordly" upbringing, education & experience since his youth. Also, when Benazir Bhutto was assassinated Clinton suggested that we go and assist Pakistan with the investigation; not a bad thing to do. However, Obama stated something that struck a cord with me and has stuck. When the assassination occurred and after stating his condolences for Bhutto's unexpected death, he stated (something to the effect of) we as American's should not assume that Pakistan needs or even wants our help, however if they do we will be there. Pakistan is its own country and can handle their own issues, however should they want us, the US, to assist we will should and will assist. His statement to me came across as not wanting to lead the US on this continuous path of arrogance in regards to World Domination and that we ARE the Super Power of the world. In lieu of what has been going on in this world, it was just refreshing to hear a Political official not wanting to force ourselves upon another country and their "issues".
    Again, I am not STRONGLY opposed to Clinton, just I have YET to hear anything from her that has really STOOD out for me, yet should she become the front runner, of course I'll support and vote for her. However in the meantime I will sit here and watch history unfold in front of my eyes and revel in the fact that I am here, present and alive to witness this historical event! Got popcorn????
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 4:41 PM GMT
    One idea I dislike when considering another Clinton presidency is, *if* Hillary is elected president, then we will have at least 24 years of either a Bush or Clinton president.

    89-92 George Bush
    93-00 Bill Clinton
    01-08 George W. Bush
    09-13 Hill Clinton


    This doesn't mean I won't vote for her, but, how about some CHANGE!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 5:00 PM GMT
    I'm not moved by what one forum poster to the Washington Post says. He's complaining about campaign tactics. Yes, they suck, but every candidate reduces their talk to the lowest denominator during this process.

    So what if Obama is not the most upstanding or tactful during our election process? The whole convoluted system and its ties to the corporate media bring out the worst in candidates anyway. I don't hold his clumsy political tactics against him. He won't be in this ridiculous situation again for another four years.

    So...if actions speak louder than words (as the o.p. asserts), shouldn't I be going to web sites that prove a candidate's voting record and other accomplishments rather than listening to, and complaining about the candidate's rhetoric, selectively sensationalized through our corporate funded media outlets?

    Alas the reality is that the words seem to trump the actions, or we would have never had Bush as prez in the first place. But this is America, where PR and advertising are good enough for us.

    So what I glean from this post is that you, the WP poster, and too many others are still focusing on the wrong stuff.

    I'm on the fence, and I clicked this post expecting something enlightening. Oh well.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 5:28 PM GMT
    redheaded_dude saidHillary has given me the creeps for a long time. I recall in 1992 when she and Bill did a 60 Minutes interview during the primaries, and she said, basically, that she wasn't some kind of Tammy Wynette "stand by your man no matter what" kind of woman. Yet that's EXACTLY what she turned out to be.

    I guess what really turns me off with Hillary is her "entitlement attitude" that she deserves the presidency.

    Maybe Obama doesn't have the sordid history


    This has nothing to do with the original post, since I would vote for either (and I voted for Clinton in the California primary). But it has everything to do with the unreasonable "Hilary" bashing I see going on.

    Good grief. You're criticizing her for a emotionally defensive position she took with respect to her personal life? She's to be commended for her utter trust, even if it was ill-founded. And, WTF does her and Bill's personal life have to do with anything? Geez.

    I don't sense an "entitlement" attitude. Where is that coming from? What I do see is an assertive person. That she is a woman bothers people a lot....who are used to men being assertive and women not. "assertive" for men means that they have plans...assertive for women evidently mean they are bitchy. Puhhhlllleeeeaaasaeee.

    Finally..."sordid history"? What "sordid" history? Her husband got a blow job, and that makes her history sordid? It doesn't even make his history sordid in my book? It was a stupid but meaningless act.

    And, the last time I checked, those two are still together. Whatever issues came out of that cheating incident, they evidently worked out as mature people.

    John
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 5:35 PM GMT
    Yes, as FastProf said.

    We yammer on about how marriage is important, and should not be abandoned lightly, but worked on when inevitable bumps in the road come along.

    So Hillary and Bill had some major bumps over a blow job, and we are supposed to dislike her because she DIDN'T dump him? What kind of double standard is that? Are we just looking for reasons to hate her?

    I admire her even if I don't always agree with her.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 5:43 PM GMT
    I really haven't heard much Hillary bashing, but you have to figure if you have decided to vote for one candidate over the other you have reasons for doing so. So if you don't like one candidate and you voice your reasons for saying so I don't think that is necessarily bashing. When it come to making outright lies about the other person, that to me is more disturbing.

    On the other hand, I have heard a lot of Obama bashing. My mother already told me that she thought Obama was Muslim, he won't pledge allegiance to the flag, and he won't swear on a Bible. When I asked how she knew, she said a friend forwarded her an email. Of course I think the claims are utterly ridiculous. I don't think I have heard anything so outlandish about Hillary.

    What I don't like about Hillary has to do with some of the things she has supported as senator. I also don't think she is in touch with the plight of the average person whereas I think Obama connects with me in that way. You can connect anyone with scandal like the degrees of separation thing with Kevin Bacon and I pretty much disregard those things right away. I am going with my impression of the candidates and whatever information about them that I can verify. I can tell you what my impression of Hillary is, but that may not mean a whole lot to you.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 6:05 PM GMT
    ActiveAndFit said What I don't like about Hillary has to do with some of the things she has supported as senator.


    That makes sense. Now that is a reasonable stance. Really...one can debate the relative strengths and merits of these candidates based upon their decisions. And, of course, I agree that there is a similar bashing of Obama going on nationally from the racist, xenophobic fringe.

    But, I think my point is that Democrats engage in Clinton bashing (just as a gentle aside...I think it's interesting that people refer to Clinton by her first name, but Obama by his last name...as if we would confuse Hilary with Bill?), and I don't hear many Democrats bashing Obama, even if they support Clinton.

    John
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 6:25 PM GMT
    Obama is a wonderful speaker but there is no substance to him other than "lets have a new beginning and feel good" I also worry that deep down there is a lot of homophobia. With Hillary we have a known quanity.

    So true about the hostility of Obama supporters to Hillary supporters. At my caucus in Denver the other night I thought the 94 Obama supporters were going to assault us 21 Hillary supporters.

    I noticed the other day the Obama's middle name is Hussein. I can only imagine what the Republicans will do with that if he's the nominee
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 6:30 PM GMT
    What I do base my decision on is facts and analysis and this is how I see it- Obama has had many positions that I don't support. He's for 1) decriminalizing marijuana, which I don't support 2) increasing the size of the military (how does that help the economy or makes us less a police force?) 3) non-universal health care (his plan costs 80% as much as Hillary's but does not provide universal care. Hers, while more expensive, ensures universal care). Three things float my boat- drug policies, military policies, and health care policies, and I happen to disagree with Obama on all three.

    As to Hillary bashing- it's funny that many women in power have come to power via nepotism- as the wife or daughter of a powerful man. Benzair Bhutto herself came to power partially as a result of the legitimacy of her family name. Nepotism is the one of the ways they have been able to break the glass ceilings and get to the upper reaches of power. Do you all think Hillary would be a viable candidate if she wasn't attached to Bill?

    I like it that Obama's people are actually bashing Hillary now. Because if he becomes the nominee, then the real bashing from the Republicans will begin. They are soft-balling him now because they know McCain can eat him up alive. Pre-eminent in their minds is WWKRD (What Would Karl Rove Do?). Obama will be Swift-boated over his past drug use, over his name, over his growing up overseas and not necessarily by McCain, but by conservatives who know that they are up against a wall. And what do cornered animals do? I can already see the tv ads in my head. At least with Billary, we know all the skeletons, and expect them.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 6:46 PM GMT
    Devildog78 that comment by the Obama staffer has swayed me to cheer for him! Canada would love to have San Francisco icon_biggrin.gif

    Seriously though Barack Obama may be liberal in terms of gay rights but I have serious doubts about some of his staffers. Furthermore, African-Americans are more conservative it seems when it comes to gay rights then other groups, and Obama is trying to court them big time.

    Although I am a bit concerned about a Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton dynasty shaping up, I think Hillary Clinton over all is the best choice. Some of the most effective leaders in the last 100 years have been women (Margaret Thatcher despite her politics, Golda Meir), and when you think about great British monarchs three come to mind right away, Queen Elizabeth I, Queen Victoria, and Queen Elizabeth II.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 09, 2008 7:14 PM GMT
    I am overwhelmingly tired of Clinton's tactics already. The whole Michigan/FL fiasco, the attempt to remove the caucuses from NV strip after the unions endorsed Obama and her stealing every line from the Obama speech book get annoying.

    Anyone who says Obama is just emotion is too lazy to go to his website and read his stances. Do your freaking homework, don't say, "geez, I watched tv for 15 minutes and Barack didn't go over every point." Look it up. His writings on his stances are more extensive than Hillary's.

    The deal is that this is like Bill Maher said. Obama and Hillary are the same, but Obama is a movement and Hillary is a candidate. Obama's phrase is "yes, we can." Hillary's is "yes, she can." There is a major difference there.

    There are few differences between the candidates on stances, but what they stand for are vastly different.

    And if you think that Barack can't stand up in a general election, you are kidding yourself. My evangelical family supports Obama. That will be the first time they vote democrat ever. I guarantee they would not vote for Hillary. Hillary has the democrat base because of her name, but McCain will get the independents. Match up polls already show that.

    And the Hispanic vote will change. Richardson as a running mate could handle that. Ted Kennedy is trying to change that. We'll see.