The Liberal Thread #2 - No Debate Please

[robinb]

Yesterday the shrub said "peace and prosperity" are at stake in this election. For goodness sake on what planet does this man reside?

I just spit coffee all over my monitor.

 

[Planogirl]

Eck, if Bush campaigns for McCain, Bill can say anything he wants to and it won't matter. I wonder if McCain really wants Bush involved?

 

[chris1gill]

Interesting that Rasumussen and CNN/Time had polls out yesterday with Clinton losing to McCain but Obama beating McCain.

I think they still have that poll up... if you follow poll's...

 

[wvrevy]

Not for anything - but how great was Al's endorsement of Dean?

Things have changed in the party since then, and obviously, Dean was his own worst enemy with his campaign killing YEEAAAAHHH!!! Howard Dean is no Barack Obama.

 

[chris1gill]

I just spit coffee all over my monitor.

You all have me spitting water on my screen!!!

 

[NewJersey]

Things have changed in the party since then, and obviously, Dean was his own worst enemy with his campaign killing YEEAAAAHHH!!! Howard Dean is no Barack Obama.

 

[crazyforgoofy]

A right-wing talking head being interviewed on MSNBC this morning said (with a straight face): "McCain's pro-war, pro-gun and pro-life, conservatives will get behind him."

***?? Who is pro-war?

 

[wvrevy]

Speaking of kids, I fully plan on raising my daughter as an independent thinker, too...which basically means there's no way in heck she'll end up a republican.

Unfortunately, I think she's a Hillary supporter, though...she was quite offended by the idea that there had never been a girl president.

 

[punkin]

Speaking of kids, I fully plan on raising my daughter as an independent thinker, too...which basically means there's no way in heck she'll end up a republican.

Unfortunately, I think she's a Hillary supporter, though...she was quite offended by the idea that there had never been a girl president.

And she is right. How come we've never had a woman president? It is so time.

 

[robinb]

***?? Who is pro-war?

Ummm ... McCain! At least he isn't a Chicken Hawk.

 

[crazyforgoofy]

And she is right. How come we've never had a woman president? It is so time.

Yep, I agree. Except I also agree with this:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/02/08/chris_matthews/

What I really wanted to say to Chris Matthews

The "Hardball" host wanted to know how a feminist like me could support someone other than Hillary Clinton. Well, here's how.

By Kate Michelman

Feb. 8, 2008 | As the red light atop the camera went dark on Monday night, there was still much more I wanted to say to Chris Matthews, much more that I needed to say.
So for the moment, my time on "Hardball" continues here.
Knowing that I had just announced my support for Barack Obama for president after having earlier supported my old friend John Edwards, Matthews had me on his show Monday. His first Hardball to me was one of his typical zingers: "Kate Michelman, how does it feel to have abandoned the cause of your life?"

The simple answer, Chris, is that I haven't -- in fact, my endorsement of Barack, just like my earlier embrace of John Edwards, is all about exalting the causes of my life. Not about repudiating them.

I haven't abandoned my commitment to the women's movement -- and anyone who knows me understands I never will. My endorsement of Barack Obama is actually a celebration of that commitment, and an honest reflection off what I have been fighting for for over 40 years.

The women's movement is about free choice, self-determination and challenging a status quo that fails a lot of Americans, not just women. And it is not about going along. It's about transcending, about having the freedom to follow one's heart, about creating and pursuing new opportunities, and about the American dream being for all Americans.

Chris' gotcha-type question to me and the semi-criticism implicit in it -- that as a woman I have some biological obligation to unreservedly support whatever woman is running -- are exactly the sentiments I faced when I first started working for a woman's right to choose. If women who vote for men are traitors, then are men who vote for women also traitors? What about African-Americans who vote for whites? Or whites who vote for African-Americans?

Laying this guilt trip, this hypocrisy, on women -- saying that those women who don't vote for other women are turncoats -- is tantamount to saying that women who exercise independent thought haven't the right to do that either. Could there be a more anti-feminist contention?

When a presidential candidate's core values are unity, equality, opportunity and creating an atmosphere of respect and harmony, both nationally and internationally, then that candidate's vision aligns with the best hopes and dreams of the women's movement. And that is precisely Barack Obama's vision.

For me, the choice between supporting Barack or Hillary was the choice between supporting someone who I know would be very good, Hillary Clinton, or supporting someone who I know could be truly great. And right now, on those causes that define me and millions of other women, we shouldn't settle -- and I won't settle -- for anything less than "great."

My cause has been to create a society in which women are not judged on the basis of gender or subjected to sexist attitudes or expectations. My cause has been to ensure that every woman, and not any government, has the sole right to make the decision about when and under what circumstances it's best to become a mother. And as a woman who was once a single mother of three little girls and who was forced onto welfare and lived without healthcare and childcare, my cause has been the economic security and dignity of all women and their families.

Matthews' other Hardball, which also deserved more time than the red light gave me, was: "How can you pass, Kate, on the opportunity to support a woman for president when this may be the last chance for that to happen in your lifetime?"

Nothing in life is guaranteed, but I sure do plan on being around a while longer. And just how long does Matthews believe it will be before another supremely qualified woman who currently sits in Congress or occupies a governor's mansion throws her hat into the presidential ring?

In his mind, aren't Gov. Kathleen Sebelius and Gov. Janet Napolitano already at least as qualified as, say, Gov. Mike Huckabee?

It may be news to Chris Matthews, but great women have already arrived on the national stage -- and they are here to stay. They are running state governments, big cities and major corporations. And every day in the armed forces they are defending our families and our country.

Hardballs are just part of the game -- and I am happy to stand in the batter's box and take any of them on. But spitballs aren't part of the game.

 

[Laugh O. Grams]

A right-wing talking head being interviewed on MSNBC this morning said (with a straight face): "McCain's pro-war, pro-gun and pro-life, conservatives will get behind him."

***?? Who is pro-war?

Let's hope they keep up that tired old litmus test when choosing their party nominees at all levels of government! It's driving away new voters from the Republican party in droves!!

 

[crazyforgoofy]

Let's hope they keep up that tired old litmus test when choosing their party nominees at all levels of government! It's driving away new voters from the Republican party in droves!!

Yeah, baby.

 

[robinb]

According to CNN re: the "Stimulus Plan":

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23052292

Democrats said Republicans would pay a political price for their opposition. The more expensive proposal would have extended unemployment for 13 weeks for people whose benefits had run out; added $1 billion in heating aid for the poor; and provided tax breaks for the home-building, renewable energy and coal industries.

Why the coal industry? What am I missing?

 

[Peter Pirate 2]

Things have changed in the party since then, and obviously, Dean was his own worst enemy with his campaign killing YEEAAAAHHH!!! Howard Dean is no Barack Obama.

Now, now, now...I really like Dean. Further it speaks volumes to the media and this Country that a victory yelp could bring down a campaign and that simple pulpit like preaching is enough to bring one to prominence. Now I'M NOT saying Obama is simply an orator, clearly he is not, but we're still a brand label society first it would appear.

Dean energized the youth too and the internet campaigning was brilliant. The young people just didn't see the war as so bad then I think and too many staid people thought a silly yelp was unprofessional and certainly unpresidential. "I'll be back" isn't ungubinatorial though?

 

["Got Disney"]

No. I do not. She is only 9 years old and I am very proud that she has a political opinion that, frankly is a lot better thought out than many adults I know. I do tell her my opinions and why I am voting for Hillary, but I will not in any way denigrate her opinions. My job is to raise an independent thinker, not a Mama clone.

Both my boys ages 11 and 14 follow politics. I have explained both parties to them and let them know that just because I am a Dem does not mean that that is where they fall. Dad is a Rep than told them them that he was evil ...what ...not really just wanted to throw that in
They have been talking at school also. They have also sat down and watched some of the Dem and Rep Debates and asked me questions...I must say that they do sway to the Dem side....I love my kids

A right-wing talking head being interviewed on MSNBC this morning said (with a straight face): "McCain's pro-war, pro-gun and pro-life, conservatives will get behind him."

***?? Who is pro-war?

There are many Conservatives that are pro war...mostly since they believe that the surge is working...pro war I mean in that they feel we should continue in war and that is the only way to fight terrorism. To a point I believe that but not to stay in war but go if we truly have no other choice.

 

[JARNJ3]

Any thoughts on this analysis from the UK?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/gerard_baker/article3330288.ece

Latte liberals v Dunkin Donut democrats
Trouble distinguishing between Obama's policies and Clinton's? Here's a consumer's guide
Gerard Baker

I'm not sure when the term latte liberal replaced the old champagne socialist as the favoured term of derision for the well-heeled leftie but it looks an increasingly useful metaphor for understanding how the deadlock in the Democratic presidential primary election might be broken.

The two candidates have fought themselves to a standstill. In the closest race in any US presidential primary campaign in decades, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are more or less tied in total votes received and in delegates elected for the party's nominating convention.

Super Tuesday, when almost half the country voted in the nearest thing ever to a nationwide primary, was supposed to break the logjam but has merely tightened it.

The reason the race is so close has nothing to do with policy differences. I'd wager that not one voter in a hundred could name with any confidence a single difference between the two candidates' stances on the war in Iraq, healthcare, taxes, public spending, abortion or anything else. That's because there isn't one.

The fault lines in the contest instead fall largely along differences in identity - ethnic and gender - and values. Mr Obama and Mrs Clinton have, as we have noted before, both established massive, almost identically sized coalitions of voting blocs aligned along these cleavages.

Mrs Clinton wins heavily among white women, older voters and Latinos. Where they voted in large numbers on Tuesday, she won by large margins.

Mr Obama won states where his following of younger voters, African-Americans and white men predominated.

But one other critical factor - the one that may ultimately determine who wins this race - is whether the voter is sinking or swimming in the modern economy.

Mr Obama wins disproportionately among people who may be considered the winners in the global economy: the well educated, the mobile and the financially secure. Mrs Clinton's voters are the strugglers, the class that feels itself left behind by an increasingly unfair global economic system.

Consider the exit poll from California, the largest state to vote on Super Tuesday. Mrs Clinton's largest single demographic voting bloc was those who did not complete a high school education, where she won 82 per cent, against just 15 per cent for Mr Obama. The more educated you became - from high school drop-out, through high school graduate then some college, college graduate and finally postgraduate - the more likely you were to vote for Mr Obama. The only category he won, in fact, was the propeller heads with postgraduate degrees.

Income was another crucial determinant of whom you voted for: 59 per cent of those earning below $50,000 went for Mrs Clinton against 33 per cent for Mr Obama. The only broad income category won by Mr Obama was the top one - more than $100,000. (Intriguingly, in California there was one exception to this rule. The super-earners - those earning over $200,0000 - went narrowly for Mrs Clinton. I can only think this was because of all those louche Hollywood types who long for a return of the moral compass of the Clinton years. Jack Nicholson was making calls for Hillary on Tuesday, telling people to vote for her because “she was the best man in the race”.)

The saliency of economics then, is crucial. Those who said the economy was the important issue facing the country went for Mrs Clinton by 20 points. Those who thought Iraq was the main issue chose Mr Obama by five points.

This is where coffee preferences come in. Among voters whose voting choice is not based on identity politics, Mr Obama's supporters are the latte liberals. These are the people for whom Starbucks, with its $5 cups of coffee and fancy bakeries, is not just a consumer choice but a lifestyle. They not only have the money. They share the values.

They live by all those little quotes on the side of Starbucks cups about community service and global warming. They embrace the Obama candidacy because to them he transcends traditional class and economic divides. He is a transformative political figure - potentially the first black man to be president - and is seen as the one to revive America's faith in itself and restore America's status in the world. For these voters the defining emotion is hope.

Mrs Clinton is the candidate of what might be called Dunkin' Donut Democrats. They do not have money to waste on multiple-hyphenated coffee drinks - double-top, no-foam, non-fat lattes and the like. Not for them the bran muffins or the biscotti. They are the 75-cent coffee and doughnut crowd. For them caffeine choice doesn't correlate with their values but simply represents a means of keeping them going through their challenging day.

Though they don't doubt that global warming is important, they think it can wait. They want to make sure first they can pay the heating bills. They're not in favour of the Iraq war but neither are they so focused on restoring America's image in the world. They're not necessarily racist, it's just that they're not especially animated by the idealism represented by the first black president. For them anxiety, not aspiration is the defining factor.

So who prevails? That may well depend on the state of the economy. The more voters worry about it and the less they focus on ideals, the better Mrs Clinton's chances. For her, bad news is good news.

As it happens, the latest figures out this week suggest the US is now very probably in recession. Unemployment is rising, house prices are falling, stock prices are slumping, spending is fading, confidence is sagging. There's a whiff of panic in the air. Last week the Federal Reserve cut interest rates by more in the space of eight days than the European Central Bank has done in its entire existence.

People are trading down from Starbucks to Dunkin' Donuts. These may not be the best circumstances for Mr Obama's soaring rhetoric of hope in the future. His hope has to be that things do not get so bad that fear overwhelms it.

In 1992 Bill Clinton rode to an election victory under the slogan, “The economy, stupid”. Sixteen years later, we could say, given the apparent inevitability of a recession and given Mrs Clinton's strong following among the less well educated in American society, that it is an even more fitting message for his wife.

 

[Fitswimmer]

No wonder I'm confused about which one to choose! I'm a poor propeller head!!

 

[JARNJ3]

No wonder I'm confused about which one to choose! I'm a poor propeller head!!

Wasn't the coffee a great analogy though?

It explains this whole netroots against Hillary phenomenon - reading all the various blogs, and message boards - they write sort of from a "how dare Hillary challenge Obama" mentality.

Most of Hillary's supporters are not surfing the net - just making ends meet - drinking their Dunkin Donuts coffee!!!!

Though I have to confess - I have imbibed on a few Starbucks Decaf Mochas in my day!

 

[JennyMominRI]

Wasn't the coffee a great analogy though?

It explains this whole netroots against Hillary phenomenon - reading all the various blogs, and message boards - they write sort of from a "how dare Hillary challenge Obama" mentality.

Most of Hillary's supporters are not surfing the net - just making ends meet - drinking their Dunkin Donuts coffee!!!!

Though I have to confess - I have imbibed on a few Starbucks Decaf Mochas in my day!

I drink Dunkin Donuts AND Starbucks....I don't know who to pick