http://www.regressiveantidote.net/Articles/No_Prisoners_-_How_To_Win_In_2008.html
Clinton, if she gets the nomination, will enter the general election campaign with one major strike against her: the person at head of the Democratic ticket. She brings together into a singularly toxic brew more baggage than JFK airport the day before Thanksgiving, less charisma than a pile of dirty laundry, and all the principled moral exhilaration of a down-on-his-luck bail-bondsman. Even holding out the very real prospect of becoming the first woman president cuts both ways. Seven percent of American women tell pollsters that they would never vote for a female to hold the office (now that’s a truly scary barometer on the state of the union); who knows, maybe twice that many men feel the same way. Democratic voters could hardly choose a more laden and uninspirational standard-bearer if they sat down at a drawing board to design one on purpose (Let’s see here – add one part Michael Dukakis to one part Mark Foley and one part Margaret Thatcher, and presto!, an instant boring and alienating candidate is born, complete with sex scandal history.)
Bart, read every word of your Green article. The guy sounds as though he’s out of breath from saying the same things over and over – you know the feeling.
Two bones I wish to pick with him:
– The public is not tired of Conservativism. GHWbush and his son are NOT CONSERVATIVES!
They are country club republicans and I’m ashamed to have voted for the guy that won’t lift a finger to get control of our borders (while at the same time whining about the same problem in Iraq).
– The second bone is his inferrence that the American people are stupid. He indicates that if you do the Marxist thing and endlessly repeat the same stuff people will believe it. Bullshit.
I guarantee that will backfire, big time. The way for the Democratics to win is to have a better agenda for improving things.
Sorry for saying the same thing over and over, but perhaps sooner of later you will believe it if I keep on doing it… right?
Comment by grimgold — November 19, 2007 @ 3:22 pm
I asked BC for a blog where we could discuss Dem candidates, and here it is. Not worth discussing any Republicants except Ron Paul, and he is basically a Libertarian.
I, unlike many others who write to BC, will not “take the pledge”, that is, vow to vote for any Dem that is nominated. I’ve held my nose and voted for Dems who failed to perform, have no spine, and don’t ACT AS MY REPRESENTATIVE to mindlessly vote Democratic any longer.
My present Dem Senator Leahy, is a total fuckwad disappointment. So is my Rep, Dem Peter Welch, who is toeing the Pelosi line about impeachment being a distraction from the urgent issues that Dems need to act on, like minimum wage.
I won’t deny that there are many important issues that Dems need to act on, but IMPEACHMENT of the entire fucking criminal Bush Administration is certainly the most important one.
By the way, where is Hillary on that issue–I hear a roar of silence. Dennis Kucinich is the only Dem candidate for Prez that is totally out front on this most crucial issue. Most Americans now agree with him. So Bartcop, why do you not support Dennis the K?
Bill Richardson has said he will bring all the troops home immediately–ALL OF THEM. Hillary wants to keep a few thousand there forever to protect “our interests”. Our interests? What about the Iraqis? It’s too late for over 500,000 of them, but the other 23.5 million left in country have interests that are far more legitimate than “ours”. To protect our largest embassy in the world? We should turn it over to the iraqis for a hospital and social service center. That one building complex exposes the true intentions of our elite bastards–and Hillary wants to stay to protect it.
BC, you think Hillary is so superior, but she is a calculating, triangulating, non-leader. Now, I don’t really want a leader; I want an honest, competent administrator, one who had the character, vision and intelligence to NOT be a Goldwater Republican when they were a bright young thing graduating an upscale private Ivy league college.
I was 3 years behind Hillary, but at the same time, a Viet Nam war resister, who told the FBI to fuck off when they came searching for a disappeared draft dodging co-worker of mine.
So, to have an ex-Right Winger as my Pres is completely unacceptable. And a AIPAC tool to boot. Screw the Bitch. Worthless. Praised for working across the aisle. As I told my Rep, the only way I want him to “work across the aisle” is to reach “across the aisle” to slap the cuffs on the Rethugs before the police drag them away.
Basically though, I want someone to prove why Hillary is “brilliant”, because I don’t see it at all, and I’m pretty perceptive. She may be a pretty good Senator, certainly is a fighter (an she’ll fight for those corporate interests for as long as they “donate” to her cause, which is “her”), and has the moderate republican politician as a husband to help (let’s be real folks, Bill is a Republican, that’s why he is so comfortable with George Herbert Herbert) and why he was so destructive to the middle class as Prez. It would be good to finally have a woman president, but not just for that reason (witness Thatcher, the fascist iron lady–wish the IRA had gotten her).
So, there is your challenge. COnvince me that she is worth voting or (not just to vote against the Rethugs).
Comment by VTindependent — November 20, 2007 @ 12:58 am
VT, you are not “pretty perceptive.” You simply think you are.
As much as I, a card carrying neo-con, loathe Pelosi, I, unlike you, see why she won’t push for impeachment.
Pelosi won’t do impeachment because she knows it’s a waste of time – it won’t succeed.
It may make your liberal heart all warm and give your overwrought emotions a place to drain into so you don’t drown, but it’s a waste of time.
I’d love to see GW impeached for his refusal to deal with the border problem and for increasing govt so dramatically LBJ would be embarassed. How could I, a “rethug”, think about this after the Nazi meeting I attend every tuesday evening? Because GW is not the conservative he pretended to be. And I voted for the jackass twice. I’m thoroughly embarassed.
But do I push for impeachment, which he richly deserves? No. Waste of time – never happen.
So quit being blinded by your hatred, put on your political glasses so you can see at least as well as Pelosi, and vent your spleen on issues where you can do some good rather than pissing away your energies on the fruitless impeachment endevour.
Comment by grimgold — November 20, 2007 @ 10:56 am
Grimgold, but your very admission that you are a neoCON, you prove your own unfathomable ignorance (not to mention all the other characteristics, barbaric greed and monstrous murderousness, as well as not being able to behave yourselves in the public men’s rooms).
Bush was obviously not a true conservative (Bruce Fein is an example of a true conservative, and a pretty good one) so the fact that one jackass voted twice for another one is no surprise.
I disagree about impeachment–the only reason it would fail is because of cowardly Dems (and Rethugs) like Pelosi, and my own Rep Welch, and Leahy. It’s a political game they are playing, hoping to let Bush and the Rethugs go on making fools of themselves, while our good soldiers die in the desert. It is totally shameful.
But OK with you, apparently.
And to have The Worst President Ever allowed to continue his reign of destruction, is frankly, insane. Keith Olberman put it best; “The Nightmare Presidency”.
And you worry most about the darkies coming across the border. True rascist Rethug.
I suggest that rather than wasting time posting your crap to the blogs, you put all your effort into pulling your head out of your ass.
And as far as my hatred of Bush–he started it all.
Comment by VTindependent — November 20, 2007 @ 8:03 pm