Hillary Supporters unite part 2; no bashing please

[chobie]

She has a political career of her own.

Yes, but she also touts her experience as being the wife of a President and factors that into her years of experience doesn't she?

 

[OceanAnnie]

Yes, but she also touts her experience as being the wife of a President and factors that into her years of experience doesn't she?

That's all from me, I saw something that referenced me so I responded.

Sorry for my part in this thread veering off track.

 

[chobie]

That's all from me, I saw something that referenced me so I responded.

Sorry for my part in this thread veering off track.

So, you don't want to answer the question here? You may go to the Obama thread and answer there.

 

[moon]

See, this is the biggest problem I have with Hillary supporters. I have in NO way attacked Hillary supporters as a whole. Not once. The closest I've come was in the post you just quoted when I said that I believed many were acting out of an emotional place rather than one based on reason. Yet you seem to insist on claiming that I have done so, and when I ask you to point to a post where I have done that, I'm sure I'll get no response.

Sigh. You've made me go to the OS thread {{Shrudder}} gladly I didn't have to look far.

If you haven't seen the video of the crazy lady that was a Clinton supporter at the DNC meeting today, you've got to go check it out. It's on YouTube, but I can't link to it because of language issues. Just search for "Clinton Supporter Thrown Out of Rules Committee Meeting", as that's the title of the video.

Hmm...makes me wonder where a couple people I know of were today.

So much for "being on the same side"

As for attacks on Hillary herself, yes, there have been many on that thread, including some that I posted. Usually, it has to do with what we see as "negative" tactics or something along those lines (I'm not going to list them all here). The few times I've seen them cross the line - as with jokes about her possibly harming Obama as a reason not to have her on the ticket - I have spoken up and called those posters out. I even posted on this very thread that I thought the flap about the RFK comments was a bit silly, as it was just poor phrasing on her part, not the expression of a wish for something bad to befall her opponent.

If you go back through and look at my comments throughout this thread, I think you'll find that you're wrong, and that I've been saying much the same things all along. We disagree on who would be best to represent our party and our beliefs in the general election. Other than that, we agree on most everything else. My posts here have nearly always been about defending Obama from what I saw as unfair attacks, and trying to keep the big picture out there that, first choice or not, Obama is still much closer to your stated beliefs than McCain has ever been. I've long since moved past trying to convince anyone here that they should choose Obama over Hillary. That's your choice to make as a Democrat, and I respect your decision even while disagreeing with it, provided it was made for the right reasons. But how anyone claiming to hold the same liberal beliefs as Hillary Clinton could even consider voting for someone that will actively work against those beliefs is just beyond my understanding.

Again, you've said that'd you actively campaign for McCain if Hillary got the nod. Regardless of the circumstances. Look in the mirror

 

[moon]

You're absolutely right. I did make those statements...in anger over certain things done by the Clinton campaign. Would I have stood by them in November when walking into the voting booth? I honestly don't know.

But when you said "according to your standards", keep in mind that you are talking about the standards of the Democratic Party itself. If she did not receive the majority of delegates, the majority of votes, and lost the vast majority of states yet was given the nomination anyway..........yes, I see that as being anathema to the beliefs of the party as I understand them. Giving Hillary the nomination after changing the rules at the end of the game would have just been wrong, in my opinion, so I made those comments out of anger.

According tho the Democratic Party standards, if the SD decide to give the nom to Hillary, that's within the rules.

But that hardly changes the fact that many people here are openly advocating casting a vote for someone that firmly stands in opposition to everything Hillary Clinton believes in.

Maybe many are making those statements in anger? Why don't you let them be?

 

[chobie]

According tho the Democratic Party standards, if the SD decide to give the nom to Hillary, that's within the rules.

I agree, I will accept that ruling and I will vote for her should that come to be. I will leave this thread now and I hope someday to be back on the same side here on the Dis as many of you, arguing against the cons for keeping abortion legal, gay rights, the end of the war, universal health care etc.

 

[moon]

As to your first post - written by a direct opponent of Senator Obama's that is running as nutjob Ralph Nader's VP candidate and therefore subject to a great deal of cynicism .

What do you mean? He lied? Where?

As to the above quoted post, frankly, I'm every bit as sick of hearing about how Obama's church has caused people to turn against him as you seem to be of hearing about the Catholic Church's support of pedophiles. If the president of a conglomerate of daycare centers issued a memo urging his employees to hide sexual abuse from law enforcement and public scrutiny, and went out of his way to assist in the transfer of known pedophiles from one daycare center to another to help avoid prosecution, that president would be in jail as an accessory. Yet this pope is not only not in jail, he was recently honored by the President of the United States ("Awesome speech, your holiness!"). I'm sorry, but if you still sit in and tithe to a Catholic Church - a church that preaches obedience to the will of the church that is set by that very pope - then YES, you are just as culpable for those actions as Obama is for the actions of the leaders of his church. Denial of that simple fact is selective ethics at best...and massive hypocrisy at worst.

No, that's not the point. The point if that if someone had stayed listening to a priest who advocated child abuse from the pulpit You could make thw Wright analogy.

I have nothing against the Trinity Church. In fact I believe everyone is responsible for their actions.

Wright is responsible for his sermons -at least he accepts responsibility for his words- and Obama is responsible staying and supporting a pastor who hold those views for 20 yrs. He is responsible for that

 

[moon]

Thanks for the hugs and welcome backs!!

I also want to say welcom back, JARNJ3!

 

[wvrevy]

Sigh. You've made me go to the OS thread {{Shrudder}} gladly I didn't have to look far.

So much for "being on the same side"

Again, you've said that'd you actively campaign for McCain if Hillary got the nod. Regardless of the circumstances. Look in the mirror

1 - That was a post making fun of one rather nutty lady, not all Hillary supporters. Nowhere have I done as many here have and generalized about all Hillary supporters.

2 - And, again that is not what I said at all. The circumstances had everything to do with my saying that. It was not Hillary's ties to criminal figures, the comments of people associated with her that she refused to denounce, or her stance on the issues that caused me to say that. It was the possibility of changing the rules after she had lost by those rules just to give her the nomination that I had a problem with, and still do.

 

[moon]

1 - That was a post making fun of one rather nutty lady, not all Hillary supporters. Nowhere have I done as many here have and generalized about all Hillary supporters.

So under certain circumstances, it's OK to bash SOME Hillary supporters. Got it

2 - And, again that is not what I said at all. The circumstances had everything to do with my saying that. It was not Hillary's ties to criminal figures, the comments of people associated with her that she refused to denounce, or her stance on the issues that caused me to say that. It was the possibility of changing the rules after she had lost by those rules just to give her the nomination that I had a problem with, and still do.[/QUOTE]

And again, If the SD give her the nomination it'll be legally, and within the rules.

 

[DISUNC]

The Trinity church has done a lot for the community - have you gone to their website and seen what they do to help poor people in their community? To disregard all the good they do because of a few insane comments from the preacher is a huge injustice and do you condemn every church that has a preacher that says some offensive things? By that token should the whole Catholic church be held accountable for what that Priest said at the Trinity church? He may have not been speaking in the Catholic church but wearing the priest garb while doing it made him a spokesman for Catholics...

The same can be said about the Mafia! If you are comfortable with that, then so be it!

I suggest you google "michelle obama tirade" and catch up on the GOP's October suprise!!!!!!

 

[DISUNC]

Hi folks.

I'm venturing back into the world.

.

 

[DISUNC]

I will agree with this about "some". I'm constantly dismayed to see the attacks on Bill Clinton who I remember so many supporting through the troubled times. It's amazing how that has changed.

Reminder Bill Clinton was The ONLY democrat who got elected in the past 25 years!!!!!!! And the OS attack him! The rather have the support of the Democrat party Presidential loosers, Kennedy, Carter(no 2nd term), Kerry!!!!!

 

[DISUNC]

I do not like Obama's health care plan. I believe only a single payer plan to which everyone MUST subscribe can work. Otherwise, it's a waste of money and will not work. McCain has no plan to speak of. At least that's a cheaper alternative to Obama's half way there, but not enough plan.

The troops will not come home ASAP no matter who is elected, and even McCain has been saying that they should come home before 2013. That is a matter for Congress to force and we will have a majority there I am sure.

Thus we are back to Roe v. Wade. It's a conundrum. I'll give you that.

Obamas health care plan is laughable. IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN!
Obama is incapable of ending this war. He only has been to Iraq ONCE. He hasn't even talk to Petraus. And his plan was a product of his own whim. He has had NO input from any Military person.

 

[DISUNC]

Yes, but she also touts her experience as being the wife of a President and factors that into her years of experience doesn't she?

She was a very political ACTIVE first lady of both the US & Arkansas. Not to mention A US senator who HAS ACTUALLY ACCOMPLISH NEEDED THINGS!

 

[jacksonsmom]

Holy cow!!! Talk about insulting. I'm sorry, I just can't stand it anymore. Now I know more than ever why I could never support Obama. I feel for you guys, I really do. You can't even have your own thread without OS constantly coming over here and insulting you beyond belief. I really do feel bad for you all.

If you ignore them they will go away!!!!

I have learned to just quickly skim over their "hope in a jar" now days

 

[jacksonsmom]

So, Obama expects apologies from Hillary when nothing was said against him for an apology to be given to? Yet, when his friend, and I think this guy was another ‘spiritual mentor’, directly attacks Hillary, Obama doesn’t feel that he should issue an apology?
I could leave at this - but I'm sure you all want a little morning reading.

Of course Obama doesn't feel there is a need to send an apology to Clinton OR her supporters He is the great Obama, you know

That's OK, we will see how far he gets in the general without us Clinton supporters

 

[DISUNC]

Harold Ickes and Tina Flournoy made the following statement:

Today’s results are a victory for the people of Florida who will have a voice in selecting our Party’s nominee and will see its delegates seated at our party’s convention. The decision by the Rules and Bylaws Committee honors the votes that were cast by the people of Florida and allocates the delegates accordingly.

We strongly object to the Committee’s decision to undercut its own rules in seating Michigan’s delegates without reflecting the votes of the people of Michigan.

The Committee awarded to Senator Obama not only the delegates won by Uncommitted, but four of the delegates won by Senator Clinton. This decision violates the bedrock principles of our democracy and our Party.
We reserve the right to challenge this decision before the Credentials Committee and appeal for a fair allocation of Michigan’s delegates that actually reflect the votes as they were cast.

They also gave Obama, the Edwards votes in FL!
What about the DNC "punishing" Iowa, New Hampshire, and yes, South Carolina. Those states also violated "THE RULES"

http://power-2-people.blogspot.com/2008/02/dnc-primary-rulesdisenfranchisement-of.html


THIS PRIMARY WAS FIXED FROM THE GET GO!

 

[moon]

They also gave Obama, the Edwards votes in FL!
What about the DNC "punishing" Iowa, New Hampshire, and yes, South Carolina. Those states also violated "THE RULES"

http://power-2-people.blogspot.com/2008/02/dnc-primary-rulesdisenfranchisement-of.html

ummmmm......I wonder what's the OS take on this? Particulary those who care so much about the rules being followed? Is it only wrong to change and break the rules when it favors Hillary, but right when it favors Obama?

And where's Obama's sense of decency, his ethics, when he accepts delegates he did not win?

 

[jacksonsmom]

Oh what fine reading this Sunday afternoon
I thought I went into the wrong thread, had to look and make sure it said Hillary supporters unite Yep, it did. I guess things were a bit boring on the Obama thread this morning.

I AM a Democrat, for those who feel the need to question it, been one all my life Thank you very much.
But Obama is NOT the Democratic candidate I can feel proud of!

In case you missed it before, I do not trust him, I think he is shady and yes, I think he would make a lousy President!
These are MY opinions, if you have different opinions that is FINE, but let me have MY opinions of the man. NO ONE will change my mind so coming over to the Hillary thread with all the reasons why Obama is so great and better then McCain do not matter. All I hear is blah, blah, blah (same thing I hear when Obama talks)
I do not want this man any where near the White House. I think it will hurt our Country, more then we are already hurting.

Yes, the Court is important, but that isn't the only thing important.
So is the SAFETY of our Country and I will not feel safe with Obama at the wheel! We are in a war, we have groups that want ALL of us DEAD. Obama is not the man I feel that can keep us safe from those people.

So, what does that mean for November, well if Hillary isn't on the ticket then I need to do some thinking. Obama will never get my vote that I can tell you honestly.
At first I thought of writing in Hillary, because she is the best candidate to run the Country.
But after thinking about it I don't know if that is such a good idea.
I want to do everything I can to make sure Obama is not taking the Oath in January, if that means I vote for McCain, then that is what I will have to do for my Country. McCain is NOT Bush, despite how some people want to put that fear into people.

Does that mean I SUPPORT McCain, far, far from it, but he is definitely the lesser of the two evils if he is going up against Obama. Obama is just a Democratic George Bush

Now, I am just hoping a great Independent that I can support comes into the picture. Maybe we will have a President who isn't a Dem or a Rep this year!

Funny thing is Obama HAD my vote. He lost it along the way when I learned more about him. He should have been more careful about letting those skeletons out of the closet.

Oh and I also been hearing from people who DID vote for Obama in the primaries back in February and they REGRET their vote. So although Obama won some of those states I think things would be very different if another election was held.