Why do so many love Bill and dislike Hillary?

I always find it amusing on DU that so many people seem to like Bill "Big Dawg" Clinton but disdain Hillary. Yet she is pretty much the same type of pragmatic Democrat that Bill is. Bill had a reputation for governing from the middle. I think they are also saying the same things about Iraq. Is it that Bill is charismatic and Hillary is well,...not?

The Big Dawg is the shit. I love Bill, and is one of the only political figures I ever truly wanted to meet in person to hang out with.

Just somethin about him.

Many people, men and women alike can not handle a strong woman.
Personally I have no problem with Hillary or strong women, after all, us men have screw the hell out of the world, maybe it is time the women have a hand at it.

Ten years ago, even five years ago, I found HC quite admirable. My current disgust with her is based on (1) her unwillingness to come out against Chimp's disastrous Iraq war, particularly now that the facts are known about how he lied us into it; and (2) her pandering to the right wingers - worrying about the content of video games and flag-burning at this moment in time is rearranging the deck furniture on the freaking Titanic. Her priorities, unlike those of, say, Barbara Boxer, are completely screwed up and that's what earns a politician my contempt, man or woman.

..when she sponsored the flag burning crap, my first reaction was that Bill has totally abandoned her - I don't think he would have catered to that degree...

worrying about the content of video games and flag-burning at this moment in time is rearranging the deck furniture on the freaking Titanic.

When she supported te flag burning amendment that was the last straw for me. I can never support her again.

You can be a strong woman without being a sell-out to the right-wing.

Barbara Boxer, Cynthia McKinney, Sheila Jackson Lee, and many others pop into my head immediately.

Stand for something dammit.

I never had a problem with Hilary. I admired her. The last year or so? Pander bear. Big time and for no good reason (see, flag burning).

I'm not much of a Clinton fan, period, whether the first name is Bill or Hillary. I don't hate them. I would just rather have someone else as president, someone who doesn't give in to corporate interests.

I don't think she is strong at all. IMO, she is a wilted flower who will bend whichever way the wind is blowing.

If I ever went on national television to defend the honor of my marriage and then discovered that my husband was a cheating louse... well, there would be some extra trash on the curb come collection day. The fact that she - at the time the most powerful woman in the world - didn't even make a public fuss about it speaks volumes to me about who she really is on the inside. (Just as having the scandal pushed to the forefront of my nightly news spoke volumes to me about what really seems to matter in DC -- but that's probably fodder for another post.)

The fact is that millians of affairs happen and each person has a right to decide how they want to deal with it.

And the fact is, every marraige is different. How I handle problems with my mate is nobody elses business. And the same is true for Hillary.

I frankly don't know if I care for Hillary as a politician or as a person, but you know how lib's like to tell people to stay out of their bedroom and stay out of their marriage? Well try doing the same here! It's NONE of your business and you have no right to make judgements on HOW she handled his tawdry affair. Just like religious nuts have no right to judge gays or judge people who have abortions.

It's HER personal business not yours!

How SHE handled HIS affair. He cheated and people love him. She stood by him despite his lying and betrayal and people hate her. WTF?

I'm not a big fan of Mr. Clinton either -- and mostly for the same reasons. I think he was a great President and did many things to help both the Democratic Party and our nation. Unfortunately, I must now second-guess him on everything he seems to be passionate about based on the way he has treated the one person in the world he chose to spend his life with.

I didn't go snooping around their bedroom to dig up dirt. She came on national television to defend her husband and her marriage. While I could have went my whole life without intimate knowledge of her and Bill's bedroom activities or non-activities, the Republican Party felt it was in the best interest of the nation for us all to know about it.

Now, all that being said, she is responsible for her own actions. I'm also allowed, once something is placed before me, to have an opinion about it. My opinion is that a truly strong woman would have done *something* publicly after being humiliated by her husband.

Furthermore, she continues to walk around the political pond, sticking her toe in here and there to test the temperature. I don't find that to be a habit of strong women either.

In closing, I do admire how she went to bat for the Sept. 11th first responders. It showed both compassion, thoughtfulness and initiative. Those are the traits of a strong woman, IMO. Unfortunately, her actions within that circumstance have not translated to other arenas (Iraq, defense spending, poverty elimination, etc.). I think Hillary could be very effective and I hope we have not seen her full potential. As it stands now, however, she is not a person I'd want to be leading our nation.

She married a cheating louse and she knew it at the time. Him cheating was ancient history. She bought it, for whatever reason. Her business.

don't want to admit it. Or can't see past their denial.

or is that just "denial"?

Wes Clark has almost the same position on Iraq and national security as Hillary. Oddly everyone wants Wes as the VP for their candidate but hammer Hillary. The only logical explanation is her sex.

I like neither Clark nor Clinton.

It has nothing to do with her gender.

:eyes:

Hillary, honestly, seems particularly so.

For example, I recently received a large oversized mailer from here (I am in California and have no idea how I got on her mailing list) with the following printed across the top:

AT REPUBLICAN HEADQUARTERS THERE'S A LIST OF DEMOCRATS THEY WANT TO GET OUT OF THE WAY

MY NAME'S AT THE TOP.

My question is first, has Hillary seen this list and second, why in the world would her name be at the top? It's very tasteless propaganda, and shows exactly what kind of person she is: she will lie to get what she wants, if necessary; she will also put her own ambitions ahead of the good of the party. Of that I have no doubt. And while she may be of some benefit as a Democratic Senator (albeit with an imperfect record), she is also a danger the Democratic Party's future hopes.

Edit: I don't suppose it would be possible that if indeed this Republican hit-list story is true her name could be at the top because that's what they want Democrats and the MSM to think while the "real list" is kept undercover? Would Karl Rove ever do something that devious? Surely Hillary is not blind enough to play into their hands...then again blind ambition does blind.

Many Republican's do hate her, I get e-mail from them as well. What are the Democratic parties future hopes, BTW?

I have no evidence that there is a Republican list with her name at the top at their headquarters.

If there is, I find it strange that Hillary is the only one publicizing it. Therefore, I assume it is political propaganda on her part unless proven otherwise.

<http://stophillarypac.com/>
<http://www.ipdi.org/politicsonline2004/GDN_PAC.htm>
<http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Campaign/111804_dole.html>

He doesn't ride coattails.

Also, Wes advised Congress in 2002 NOT to go to war in Iraq.

There was actually a thread here about 2 weeks ago reminding everyone that she voted for the Patriot Act. As if she wasn't just one of 98 that did!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why was she singled out for it??

doesn't want Wes as their VP candidate. They want Clark as the presidential Democratic nominee! He is the most qualified to lead this country in these turbulent times. Someone said we view him as Caesar;no, I consider him more like a great leader with many attributes. I believe he would never accept the VP spot.

:shrug:

Past and present: Barbara Boxer, Cynthia McKinney, Marcy Kaptur, Pat Schroeder, Barbara Mikulski, Stephanie Tubb-Jones, Sheila Jackson Lee, and anyone else who doesn't play "Let's see if I can suck up to the Republicans and persuade them to like me."

Count me as a former fan of Hillary.

That is just my impression.

politics is VERY subjective, as we know...Bill has an unmistakable charm. Hillary strikes me as quite transparent, despite their "similar" politics.

I don't believe in monarchy.

She's fine as my Senator (I'm in New York) but the idea of her as president when her husband was president smacks too much of monarchy to me.

On the level of personality I do not disdain Hillary however.

On the level of policy, I have about the same view of her as I do of her husband.

I think 4 years of Bush I, 8 years of Clinton and 8 years (oh my god) of Chimpy Bush--is enough and we don't need 4-8 years of another Clinton. We need a change.

I think that she makes a fine senator and I am proud to have her as a fellow Democrat. However I just dont see her getting one red state and if anything she'll cost us votes.
Senator Clinton is an exceptionally brave and powerful figure, however we have to start playing the red state numbers game in order to win. And I really want to see a Democrat in the oval office in 2008

Whereas Bill radiates warmth and sincerity.

She would energize the right wingers and scare off alot of centrist dems. She has way to
many skeletons in the closet.

But I also think it has to do with her being a female. Strong females are still scary for some.

Bill Clinton did a lot to get us into the mess we are in now.

The 1996 Telecommunications Act opened the door to the right wing media conglomerate that takes it's orders from the White House.

Bubba's welfare reforms really fucked over a lot of poor struggling Americans, and made it impossible for them to get any benefits without working long hours at far-away jobs.

Why waste time inciting the faithful against someone that isn't eligible to run for President again.

Apparently, Clintions seem to care much more about their own PR exposure than anything else.

Next, HRC is more of a celebrity than politician as such. The way she became a Senator - as a victim of Monivcagate - is really unhealthy.

Yes, they are both rightist pro-war dems, undistinguishable from the GOP.

trolls that have the nerve to puke that kind of illogical bullshit on a forum that prides itself in telling the truth.

Now I am not saying that you are one of those trolls. I'm just saying that your last sentence of your post is the epitome of absolute trash-filled lies, and if it isn't, then how about supplying a few facts to back it up. Prove to everyone here that the Clintons are "undistinguishable from the GOP". Why don't you start with Hillary's voting record in the Senate and see how far you get with that one alone?

You may not have liked his ideas and plolicies at times, but at least he would explain them at length, intelligently, and eloquently. You might think "well, I don't agree, but I see his point and I appreciate his explaining it to me".

Hillary may also support some unpopular ideas, but she doesn't explain herself and leaves people scratching their heads as to why she does the things she does.

Take the flag-burning issue. She has made no attempt to explain why she is advocating a policy that clearly violates free-speech.

In the end, you think that it's only a clumsy political move to make herself appear more "moderate".

So, she's thought of only as an opportunist, rather than an original thinker.

Just my opinion.

I agree with you on this.

Conyers doesn't. Kucinich doesn't. and there's a few others I could name.

It's the in thing to do, keep beating up on a scorned woman.

of what she got was handed to her (in terms of politics).

Flame away if you want to, but there is noo way in hell some outsider can just show up to NY, claim to understand and represent their values, get zero contenders in primary, and get elected....she got that because of her status thanks to Bill.

She also became an immediate top player in the senate...why does she get that over the other dem sens that have been there a while.

She appears to be the party's annointed one too, after doing what for us?

Does anyone look at Elizabeth Dole and think she is the best of the GOP and should be the front runner for them? IF not, then why Hillary for the Dems.

She has just had so much handed to hear when people like Boxer or other Sens have been there a while, fought more battles for us, and yet don't have her annointed status.

New York would have been a lost cause if she hadn't shown up. Hillary wins cause she's the best we have. I can't wait to hear the whining when she clobbers all the men in the primaries.

That's why he didnt' run....Hillary was lucky Rudy didn't run, not the other way around.

Kerry had prostrate cancer surgery and ran for pres.

Hillary would have faced a strong opponent and lost.

Could you imagine Hillary putting on the Yankees cap and pretending to be a fan compared to Rudy having the hat on.

She would have gotten trounced, and she was only their because of Bill. Sorry , but it is the truth.

Guiliani was the best the RepuKKKes had and Lazio was a close second. Hillary is the best the Dems have and she will easily win the primary.


BTW, if divorce is such a cross to bear then Feingold with 2 of them should just bow out.

at beating Hillary.

Hillary is not the best Dems can offer assuming anyone is game to run at this point.

"BTW, if divorce is such a cross to bear then Feingold with 2 of them should just bow out."

Guiliani was going through a divorce at the time he needed to run;it wasn't a matter of him having had a divorce.

THe OP was about why HC has so much more perceived disdain than BC...because we aren't talking about that anymore, I'm dropping discussing her NY senate campaign.

She intimidated Rick into submission in the debates just like she will in future debates.

I guess you would drop her senate campaign since you've been proved wrong.

Zogby also said himself Kerry will beat Bush on the Daily Show a few days before the election.

" guess you would drop her senate campaign since you've been proved wrong."

You would like to think so, so you can have 5 seconds of self esteem and actually think you have won something for once in your life.

Some of us just don't see the point in discussing an issue with an HC fanatic. You'll probably slit your wrists in support of her too.

"She intimidated Rick into submission in the debates just like she will in future debates."

Tell me about this..I didn't know she and Rick were going to debate again. What time is it on?:hi:

I guess you don't believe in exit polls.

I can't wait for Hillary in debates and Bill out there on the stump for her. Sorry, you don't get into it. Personal insults are sad and your contention that her senate win is flawed is also sad.

And I agree with Township75.

Enough of the ruling class! I realize that the Clinton's come from far more humble beginnings than the current Sith Lord, but the fact remains that her ability to govern will remain suspect.

Love him or hate him, Tom Clancy introduced a concept that has always resonated with me in one of his books: THe concept was "Of the People, for the People" leadership. This concept was quickly watered down into a retail line of clothing called FUBU.

For Us, By Us. And that perspective simply does not exist in our government any more. I'm thankful for the constitution as a blueprint and guide for our society, but at some point, our citizens need to be the top priority, and all of the needs associated with being a citizen.

No more Sons, Daughters, Husbands, Wives, Brothers - no more Heirs. Our leaders should be the VERY BEST citizens that we have to offer. Not C Plus Students - and that includes John Kerry.

I want Extraordinary persons. Not Empire.

And if we ever hope to achieve a state of leadership unencumbered by Lobby or Status, we have to start with our own.

I would like to see grassroots lefties and righties make an agreement:

No Clintons in 08 in exchange for no Bushes in 08.

I would love that, and I bet most swing/independent voters would too.

It's not like they had a NAZI grandfather and banking leaders before him. It's not like they had governorships in states while they were running for President. To compare the Bush crime family to the Clinton's is baseless slander.

seriously, I can understand enthusiasm for a candidate, but not fanatacism.

There is no comparison in my post.

I think they could be the last hope for America. My girlfriend, my 3 sisters and many of my neighbors feel the same way.

of what she got was handed to her (in terms of politics).

Flame away if you want to, but there is noo way in hell some outsider can just show up to NY, claim to understand and represent their values, get zero contenders in primary, and get elected....she got that because of her status thanks to Bill.

She also became an immediate top player in the senate...why does she get that over the other dem sens that have been there a while.

She appears to be the party's annointed one too, after doing what for us?

Does anyone look at Elizabeth Dole and think she is the best of the GOP and should be the front runner for them? IF not, then why Hillary for the Dems.

She has just had so much handed to hear when people like Boxer or other Sens have been there a while, fought more battles for us, and yet don't have her annointed status.

I don't like either of them.

He's a much better president than bush, but which president wasn't better than bush.

I kind of wish they would both go away. Bill's libido - no matter what you think of Ken Starr - fucked the Democratic party bigtime, and his running around with George Bush Senior makes me ill. They both (bill & hillary) like the limelight way too much.

Bill. Don't get the same feeling from Hillary.

that Bill does not. Bill seems to be quite aware of his human flaws. But I can get past that with her. A lot of politicians are there because of their early benefits of money in their families and good schools etc.

Gee whiz. Her dad owned a fabric store.

are very intimidated by that.

It's the same situation with Martha Stewart. People either love her of hate her, and there's few if any who are in the middle.

Personally, I think she's the only woman in politics who could make a good President, but I don't think she can win either, and mainly because she's a woman!

i like Bill because he reaches out to the people. I like Hillary too, just not as much.
I don't like her hawkish stance, but i'd vote for her over any GOP any day.
I have never had "the problem" with her, i've always liked her style.
She's just another of the conservative demo types..and that goes for Bill too.

Add to that...

This country is still very sexist and she's an unapologetically aggressive woman which a lot of people aren't comfortable with.

For many of us she's been entirely too supportive of Bushco and Bushco policies. The old DLC Republican lite version of a politician.

Maybe Steve Jobs.

Bill Clinton is a uniquely gifted politican. Hillary Clinton is a basically competent politican. That's the difference between them. I agree that there is a slice of the population that has a reflexive aversion to women in positions of power. But Bill Clinton is one of the most gifted politicans in modern times. It's no surprise that his wife doesn't rise to the same level, gender issues aside.

Hillary also has the disadvantage of appearing blatantly two-faced on the war. Instead of providing leadership to fight the Bush war machine prior to the March, 2003 invasion, she dutefully helped to start the engine going. So when it comes to what one war historian has called the "most foolish war in the last 2,000 years", Hillary gets to say she helped make it happen, in her own small way.

Bill has the skills to be two-faced without actually appearing so. Hillary does not.

If my hubby did what Big Dog did, I'd take him for everything he had, and more. I don't want a doormat for a president. I understand that their life is "personal" but this is how I feel about it. I have a hard time believing she can keep a country in line, if she can't keep her own hubby in line. Just my personal opinion..I don't think highly of her priorities either...There are much bigger issues facing us as a nation than sex in video games. I also have a problem with volleying the presidency between the Bush and Clinton families for our foreseeable future.

Like FDR and Eleanor.

edit- to make clearer

Nevertheless, all marriages aren't built around sex.

But the focus here is Hillary, and I find her weak in many areas besides her marital decisions. I don't care for people that try to play the middle, and that is what she does. There are more pressing issues out there than video games, and flag burning...

Last time I checked, Clinton's welfare reform program coincided with an unprecedented drop in crime, a decrease in poverty, a decrease in infant mortality, and an increase in minority income levels and home ownership levels. How was welfare reform a failure? I'm all ears.

success? I don't. I don't think the "work first" method will ever work. Education is the key. Shuffling a person from one low paying job to the next isn't the answer, imho. You just keep the cycle going. Poverty is poverty...Does not really matter if someone is "handing" you a tiny check, or if you are "earning" a tiny check, the poverty is the same.
http://www.4children.org/news/502welf.htm#chart
Snip-
"A federal review of welfare-to-work programs found that none "met the long-range goal of making enrollees substantially better-off financially."
Snip-
"Many left welfare without steady work: Some may have gotten a job, then lost it; others were scared away by requirements and red tape; cut off in error; or made ineligible by new restrictions on welfare for immigrants. They are the most likely to be homeless and depend on free meals."

http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/ed31_democrats/rel101905.html
Though millions have left welfare, studies document that many former welfare recipients remain poor and lack a steady job. We cannot judge welfare reform by the number of people on or off of welfare assistance but by how many families still live in poverty. Welfare reform will be successful when families leave welfare for decent jobs and economic stability.

http://www.wpunj.edu/~newpol/issue30/mandel30.htm
Read this report in its entirety, and tell me what a success it has been. Go rent Bowling for Columbine while your at it. It does a great job illustrating what welfare to work does to a family.

for the middle-class coincided with an unprecedented drop in crime, decrease in poverty, increase in minority income levels and home ownership levels, etc, etc.

You're not all ears, you're all propaganda.

His loyalties were very fluid. To the Constitution, his wife, his policies, you name it.

it's the trust. I could never trust again.

My goodness! If you'd said, "if he can't keep his own WIFE in line," what a can-o-worms to go opening up!

Besides that, don't the RWers who like to blame all the world's ills on Bill say, "If he lied about that, he'd lie about anything"?

That seems to me to be the same sort of logic. :shrug:

Governor of Ohio? :shrug:

I haven't kept up with Ohio politics lately. :shrug:

if that's what you mean.

on you or not.

to the situation though...And I'd own him. I'd have everything he owns, and more. I would not tolerate being disrespected like that for any reason. I have a hard time respecting anyone that lets themselves become a doormat.

in line? I didn't know we were expected to keep our men in line. Should we smack them around like they used to do to us if they get out of line?

I wouldn't "smack" him around, but his assets would be mine.

Sorry if that's "cheating" or something. I can't wait to see wing nut heads exploding when when Big Dog starts campaigning for her. For all the people who say they hate her there will be more people who wouldn't normlly have voted, who come out just to vote for them. I'm thinking of tens of millions of pink collar workers.

What a goofy question. It's not like they're twins or something.

Bill is "against" same-sex marriage, and then sends Elton John and his husband a wedding gift. He can kiss my ass. Both of them are too far center.

http://www.now.org/issues/lgbi/marr-rep.html

The Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), passed in 1996 and signed by former President Bill Clinton, defined marriage as "the legal union between one man and one woman," and asserted that no state is required to recognize a same-sex marriage performed in another state. In addition, 38 states have passed their own Defense of Marriage acts.

Like I said. They can both kiss my ass.

Hillary's popularity with the left, and the right, has always been a mystery to me. I marvel at how this fairly innocuous little woman is always at the eye of the storm. Saint to many on the left, devil to all on the right... She's smart and I like her fine, but is she really worthy of so much intense, polarizing, love and hate?

into privilege.

Bill knows what it's like to be working-class, which makes it much more plausible when he claims to feel our pain. Hillary has never done without a single material necessity in her life.

Bill is likeable while Hillary is not. (She is far, far warmer in person than on tv, but how many people get to meet her in person?)

Having said that, I don't hate Hillary. I won't vote for her, but that has to do with her catering to the financial and military interests like the moderate Republican she used to be and still is at heart, not her sex or her general air of coldness and entitlement.

Her Dad owned a fabric store and she married a poor guy. That's fairly middle class.

which is pretty fancy. They have large, expensive houses. My sister lives down the street from where Hillary grew up.

But then, I don't live in Buckhead.

If you can't bear to hear contrary opinions, which is obviously the case, as everyone who's been around here for more than five minutes can attest, then maybe a discussion board is not a happy place for you.

your peception she is of privilige ...... baby...... that does not make it fact, nor reality. quite the opposite, it is a non truth, or as some would like to say, a lie.

baby...... bah hahaha

Not that I would expect anything different, of course.

In comparison to the experiences of most people in this country--if not most people at DU--growing up in Park Ridge, IL, and going on to Wellesley and Yale is, in fact, pretty damned privileged.

"Hillary was Daddy Hugh's girl but what does this mean?



Hillary with family

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

She was Hugh Rodham's victim who wanted his love and approval even as she tried to escape his stinginess, irascibility and perfectionism. The victim survived and was marked by an identification with the aggressor. Like Hugh the adult Hillary became irritable, demanding and the family breadwinner but that's getting ahead of her story. When she brought home a report card with all A's, Daddy replied that it must be an awfully easy school. We're not told what Dorothy Rodham said when she saw the grades maybe because this wasn't important or perhaps Mother Dorothy was also hard to please. It was Dorothy who said there was no room in the house for cowards when little Hillary ran home after an attack by an "obnoxious girl." Forced to confront her attacker, she won the battle and now had the respect of the neighborhood players, says biographer David Brock.

A curmudgeon was the way one Hillary biographer, Norman King described Hugh while another, Roger Morris finds him guilty of the "psychological abuse of his children. Chief Petty Officer Hugh Rodham was a drill instructor who trained recruits in the Navy during World War II. Afterward he became a successful businessman in Chicago who moved his family to Park Ridge, an upper middle class suburb from a city apartment three years after Hillary was born. He was a regal presence in this family; Hillary says it was like the television sitcom, Father Know Best. But the humor was lacking according to Dorothy who said of Hillary, "She had to put up with him." Of course, Dorothy did too.

The current picture of Hugh as a genial task master is a sanitized version of his behavior thirty years earlier. After his death, he was characterized as "confrontational" by Hillary's brother Tony. Family symbols were Hugh's new Cadillac every year and the elegant Georgian suburban home on the corner which was ice cold each winter morning because Hugh turned off the heat at night. Was this a family purification or atonement ritual led by Hugh, the high priest who wanted to turn off the libidinal night dreams? "



he was a chief petty officer in military until later becoming a businessman and being successful, upper middle class. is that privileged to those that have below poverty income, yup.....so you want to argue she is privilege, fine. i dont care. she had no different from an upbringing than i and many others. we started poor. my father had a cow so we had our milk, chickens for meat and eggs, and would raise a steer to butcher so we would have our meat. we became middle class then upper middle class. i was as "privilege" when i was drinking milk from the cow in our back yard, as when we were buying it from the store at later years.

it sounds like more of an argument oreilly would make agaisnt clinton, or that the right made about kerry. that he was privileged. he wasnt poor, but he wasnt rich either

You obviously do care, or you wouldn't be stalking me all over the board this afternoon.

it sounds like more of an argument oreilly would make agaisnt clinton, or that the right made about kerry. that he was privileged. he wasnt poor, but he wasnt rich either

Just can't resist that McCarthyism, can you? Fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly, and seabeyond gotta smear anyone who has the audacity to disagree with her.

funny. this is one thread that i am responding to you. tis called communication. yousay something, then i do. what a concept. if i have talked to you on another thread, oh well, i dont much pay attention to the name or people, but what they say. seems you know me, and have decided who i am. i on the other hand, know squat about you and easily can say.....huh

but you seem to have me all wrapped up in a neat little red bow. what, have there been other times i have disagreed with you? i think we are allowed. dont take it personally, easier to do boards if you dont take things personally. really.

or am i not to reply to this post you made to me, replying makes me a stalker? just suppose to keep quiet.

Another poster with a very similar name was doing the McCarthy bit on me in another thread.

Hard to keep the march-in-lockstep-or you-re-a-Republican types straight these days.

i dont remember you from the next person. let me ask you, were you making the same comments about the "privilege" in another thread. then i can equally ask why you are harping on the same issue over and over. i do remember another thread going on about people that dress up..... oh oh oh country club people. you are the one attacking a group in our society.

oh that is funny. so now i understand your issue. well i dont feel shame or guilt because of who i am and what i have. you readily judge a person because of income. sounding to me like this is your issue.

by the privileged. Who is going to represent those who work every day of their lives and never get ahead? Those who aren't sure how they are going to pay their heat bills this winter? Those who cringe when they feel themselves getting sick because they know they can't afford to go to the doctor?

Back when labor had a prominent voice in our party, those people were at least at the table, but now that organized labor is practically dead and our party's leadership is drawn from more or less the same circles as the other party's, they are very rarely heard and even more rarely taken seriously. Sometimes I think that Gore Vidal is right in saying that there's one party in America--the money party--that has two wings, Democratic and Republican.

If we are going to turn things around in this country, we are going to have to do some things--like redistribution of income--that the monied will never allow. So long as they utterly control our party, we cannot do those things and thus cannot be a force for good in this country.

i am pro business, have studied in business, worked in business all my life, a lot in small business. my father is an owner of businesses and husband owns business. i also worked in major corporation in the 80's. i see the difference in the then and now as far as how the company actually valued the employee. i have seen change in a couple areas, not just with employer, but employee also which concern me. i see both as a factor. but now it is the employee being stomped on. i agree as a party we have to support the worker and put more pressure on companies. i also see it as cyclical too, and that corporations become greedy until they greed themselves out of profit. that is the universal law in corporation, customer and employee relationship. it is healthiest, most productive and strongest when all three work together. now, it is too unbalanced in power. eventually it isnt going to work for company and they will have to adjust.

i was all for the strike in new york. i am not sure what happened today, but i felt regardless of hazards and certainly inconvience it was so important for this labor movement to work. sounding like it didnt, but as i say, i dont know, i havent read up on it

i think there were a lot of things that kerry was addressing that were issues to business and in extension worker that would allow a company to be more employee friendly. this is one of reasons husband and i were so desperate to get kerry in. i think our health care and insurance companies are a huge part of the mess, and until that is addressed, we will continue with a lot of the problems

i just dont feel the argument you were putting out is indicitive of a party that isnt for the people. they arent my kinda people that go to the champagne drinking parties, but i can see they still are for the people. one reason i am not a fan of hillary, i think she will be too easy on corporate

but no, i do not see both party as the same. and to me that is just too easy of an argument and not justified. i see too much of a difference of what is proposed to say they are the same. i dont think they are anything alike in some areas.

but thank you for expressing your issue.

I have seen them get way too much alike over the course of my life.

You know, I'm only forty, but when I tell my students that when I was growing up my family had good insurance and got to spend a week at the beach every summer, even though my dad worked in an air conditioner factory and my mother was a housewife, they look at me like I'm speaking in tongues. They simply cannot comprehend that there was a (very recent) time when blue-collar workers could live decently, if not luxuriously. That's how far things have gone in only thirty years.

No, it seems perfectly normal to them that people who are not professionals with advanced degrees should have to work two jobs each--and pray they never get sick--in order to afford a trailer and some groceries. That's all they know. In most cases, it's what their parents do and what they will do.

One reason so many more comfortable people think everything is hunky dory in George Bush's America is that working-class voices are seldom heard anywhere in the public sphere. There's the party leadership, of course, but there's also the media. It was once common for journalists to start working the copy desk right out of high school and learn the trade there, which meant that at least some people at prominent media outlets knew a little bit about being working class. Now, most of them come from prestige journalism programs and the upper middle class. The only prominent journalist I can think of who actually grew up poor and worked his way to the top is Rick Bragg, and of course the Times fired him for the relatively minor offense of not crediting a stringer while allowing Judith Miller to work her evil with impunity. It's a pity, because Bragg was so good on class issue.

If you doubt that this has an impact, just consider how nasty and anti-labor most coverage of the MTA strike has been. Or, consider how journalists do tend, according to a survey discussed in Franken's Lying Liars, to be much more conservative on economic matters than rank-and-file Americans. They're a lot more likely to support NAFTA and Social Security privatization, for example, and to believe that corporations do not have too much influence. And why not? These people are living pretty high themselves. The system has always worked for them, so why would they question it?

This sort of thing is why I think it's so unhealthy for our party to be dominated by the rich. Do I think that all people with money are evil and must be silenced? No. But neither do I approve of the virtual silencing of the poor and working classes. I think it's very dangerous.

And I do agree with you that Hillary is too pro-corp. I have a lot of respect for Hillary, and got to meet her once, when I found her to be very warm and obviously intelligent. But there's something about her that makes it hard for me to have any real enthusiasm. Perhaps it's the way that she calibrates every position down to the micron, like the flag-burning business and the video games and her support for the war. I know she must really believe something, but damned if I know what it is.

i told him, the pay is the same as it was for me in the 80's. and expenses were a hell of a lot lower. i barely made it. we were talking about my almost 18 year old niece going out on her own, without being dependent on us taking care of her. we have been taking care of her father for two decades now. hardly taught the kids fiscal responsibility, after all a haircut and fingernails are a neccesity.

but the reality, job pay has not increased for a lot of our population. expenses increase. it isnt challenging fuzzy math. our kids arent being taken care of, and it is going to make for a messier future. who was it santorium with a family package to make families stronger. all them to be less stressful paying hte bills, after school programs where the kids are going to get tutoring and cared for, those will make the family stronger. saying god wants you to endure......and be good, and thankful for lack, and and and .... not gonna cut it

i was totally opposed to nafta. made absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. if there werent going to be restrictions put on overseas, how in the world would that help this nation in free trade.

i use to live in that world, on and off. i have friends and family that are still in that world. anyway, i DO appreciate the last couple posts. i couldnt agree with you more.

i dont like the way both of them talk to the american people of late especially. i didnt feel this so much when he was in office. when he said i did not have a sexual relations with that woman, husband and i looked at each other and said blow job. he is pretty clear even in his manipulation of word. but last handful of years with bush, both clinton public statements have left me wondering, what part do they have in this. why are they saying this. what is their motive. if i have to do this with a person, then it puts up flags for me. not to mention, it is more work trying to figure it out. they play us. i say fuck you to playing me. i am not playing. dont like it

she is a wonderful senator for ny, a growing power, kick ass female. i can respect that. and smart. i really really like that. i use her, it takes a village, all the time. i use it a lot in the christian fundie school niece is going to and sons use to go to. with the hugest of smiles i will say to teachers adn administrators alike, talking about our children..... it does take a village, after all, to raise our children. i wont accept anything less. and i am willing to do my part. how about you. a wonderful tool i say thank you to hillary for

to our current Idiot in Chief.

Would love to go fishing with a guy like Bill. Bill is likable, but Hillary?

that i'm OK with Hillary. I wasn't for a while, because i'd really like someone totally not a bush or a clinton. just new blood.

however with the latest news on the budget - it convinved me Hillary is the only person with a track record for being able to undo repub damage. If not her than MArk Warner for me, because he's got a track record for getting out of deficits as well.

golden age of the 90's, while Hillary has been faced with the tough realities of current politics?

He was too moderate and his selfishness and ego caused us to be where we are today.

He is not my "big dawg" - look at the Katrina fund raising with poppy, where has that money gone. Look at the Fairness Doctrine and NAFDA -- nope, he is not my hero.

i will just leave it at that and not get into all the glaring reasons why but you pretty much summed it up

though i really only need say this
DLC

and like everyone else i am truly sorry about the entire katrina tragedy
which continues every moment

glad if youre "ok" though im sure you must have experienced a form of hell that the majority of us will never know (and too many wont even think about it)

continued love and light to everyone who suffers because of that

his major bills besides passing the assualt weapons ban (which cost our party dearly) were all on the right.

Anything he showed off to the left was that he prevented Newt and company from taking over.

I don't know many lefties that voted for him in order to get the dismantiling of welfare, NAFTA, and so forth.

I don't think highly of him, and his personal matters cost us a lot.

I suspect a lot of the disdain for Hillary really has to do with her strength and self-sufficiency as a woman. In the eyes of traditional archaic society, she has "overstepped her bounds" - she's smart, she's tough, she's focused and goal-oriented, she knows what she wants, and she makes no apology for it. Traditional male traits. How dare she, eh?

Okay, coming from the viewpoint of Rethug knuckledragger males and barefoot-n-pregnant "little women," I can understand how they'd be threatened. But from liberal men? From liberal women, even? I don't understand it. Seems like Hillary should be a role model for us, not someone to tear down.

I know there are a lot of people here who have said "I can never forgive Hillary for her vote on such-and-such issue." Of course we've heard that about almost everyone we've ever discussed here. Please note that you will never find a politician, male or female, whom you agree with on every issue, every single time. If someone casts a vote that looks like an inexplicable mistake, well, be angry, be disappointed, write to them in protest - but look at the big picture. If a friend makes a stupid mistake, you might be disappointed, you might be angry at them - but unless it's a make-or-break betrayal, wouldn't you still stand up for them as a friend, and defend them from their enemies? Same thing in politics. In a big picture sense, it's pretty clear who the "good guys" and "bad guys" are.

Why does anyone like one person and not another?

to the DLC, when she is pretty much the same as her husband.

And a poor judge of what is right and wrong, given he got a blow job in the oval office because "he could" (his words) and then lied about it.

I personally could care less what Bill Clinton was doing in the oval office.

There's a lot more to liking someone than just their policies. And personal charisma is not to be understimated.

Personally, I like the Clintons best as a tight team, with Bill as the public face because he's more charming.

My mom is a huge fan of Bill, and has been since his first presidential campaign. I never liked him. :shrug:

When I say I don't like him, I don't mean that I don't respect his intelligence, or appreciate the positive things he accomplished. I recognize his charismatic appeal to others; it just never reached me.

Why? For purely personal, not political reasons. I was married once for ten years; the marriage ended due to my husbands infidelity. A few years later I married my life-long best friend, because I'd always loved him and knew I could trust him. 12 years later, that marriage ended due to his infidelity, and I lost a life-long friendship, too. I HAVE NO TOLERANCE FOR CHEATERS.

And that is exactly how I viewed Bill; a cheater. I never trusted him. My world view includes the observation that a cheater is a cheater; when someone lacks integrity in one area, you can't trust them in any. So, while I appreciated his strengths and talents, I was never a fan. When monicagate blew up in his face, I had little sympathy. Were the repubs ridiculous to take a blow job to impeachment? Yes. Did that excuse the cheating, the lying, or the fact that his cheating and lying gave the opposition a wide open path to the "family values" campaign? No. If he hadn't cheated, it never would have happened. I don't forget that.

And what about Hillary? I wanted to admire her. I respected her intelligence, and before she became a senator, she seemed to stand for things I could support. Still, I had, and have, a hard time relating to her or trusting her, as well. I don't relate to the "forgive the philandering husband and take him back over and over" mindset; whether it springs from low self-esteem, honest desire to heal a relationship, or political ambition. So while I wanted to "like" her, there was a part of me that could just not join in. Then her hawk-like performance in the senate just turned me off.

These are mostly personal, not political, reflections. They don't single one or the other out for approbation or disdain. It's a complex matter. Supporting someone because of their political astuteness, when you find their personal choices distasteful, is a complex issue. Deciding where to draw the line is not simple. Public vs Private? Yes, but I don't believe that anyone is really two separate people; they carry their private strengths and weaknesses into public life.

You said it better than I did, thank you

:hi:

It must be!! since she has a uterus, the misogynistic masses who dislike her policy are obviously women hating misogynists.
:sarcasm:
It has absolutely nothing to do with her support for the Iraq war, her support for a bill to ban burning the flag, her alliance with Lieberman to put censorship controls on video games, and the fact that she's a carpetbagging demagogue?

The enemy of my enemy is not always my friend.

Charisma? how about policy. I wont speak to her charisma.

on edit, I guess people are too busy to recognize the sarcasm DRIPPING from the post.
so here you go

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

I don't want her to run for President because she has moved too far to the center. THAT'S her policy. That makes ME a misogynist? Give me an f'ing break.

:sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm: :sarcasm:

I wasn't picking up on your sarcasm until your edit.

:toast:

The idea that the DLC will be defeated is absurd. Get ready to get your heart broken in the primaries or go start a new party but don't go crying when a fascist RepuKKKe is elected when you vote Green. The Clinton's gave America a chance to elect Al Gore and America blew it.

And for the stupid remark about me voting green? Priceless.

You've added so much to the discussion in this post, :eyes: I guess I shouldn't be so snarky in return.

She seems to come off stiff and guarded. Too much the "politician" for my taste. Snarky comes to mind.

It's amazing how far a good story and a pretty smile will get you.

But in the face of fairly naked fascism, a conciliatory approach to the right and the big business interests that own them is like trying to make nice with the guy eating your baby.

Hillary is smart and ambitious but lacks her husband's easy charm and I think too his finer political touch.

Bill can sell sincerity and she can't.

But it doesn't come across as much on camera. Al Gore had a similar problem, if you recall, of seeming stiff and standoffish though he's supposedly a very witty guy. Unfortunately in this modern age being telegenic carries an inordinate amount of weight for a politician so she'll need to improve in that area.

needs to get off their lazy behinds and take the time to go and see her speak sometime and meet her for yourself instead of taking for granted the garbage and rumors that are spewed about her on this forum 24/7 by people with an obvious mission.

started losing respect for her.