Hillary? How do you manage to lose more of my respect every time you open your mouth?
How?!
So, this is a couple of days old, but Huffington Post reported Friday that Hillary Clinton had the audacity to slam “what she called the ‘activist base’ of the Democratic Party — and MoveOn.org in particular — for many of her electoral defeats, saying activists had ‘flooded’ state caucuses and ‘intimidated’ her supporters.”
She went on:
“Moveon.org endorsed [Sen. Barack Obama] — which is like a gusher of money that never seems to slow down,” Clinton said to a meeting of donors. “We have been less successful in caucuses because it brings out the activist base of the Democratic Party. MoveOn didn’t even want us to go into Afghanistan. I mean, that’s what we’re dealing with. And you know they turn out in great numbers. And they are very driven by their view of our positions, and it’s primarily national security and foreign policy that drives them. I don’t agree with them. They know I don’t agree with them. So they flood into these caucuses and dominate them and really intimidate people who actually show up to support me.”
Okay. First of all, she’s lying. (Put on your surprise face! Hillary? LYING?)
Celeste Fremon’s post at Huffington goes on to quote Eli Pariser, Executive Director of MoveOn.org:
“Senator Clinton has her facts wrong again. MoveOn never opposed the war in Afghanistan, and we set the record straight years ago when Karl Rove made the same claim. Senator Clinton’s attack on our members is divisive at a time when Democrats will soon need to unify to beat Senator McCain. MoveOn is 3.2 million reliable voters and volunteers who are an important part of any winning Democratic coalition in November. They deserve better than to be dismissed using Republican talking points.”
Okay.
But also? Hillary Clinton wouldn’t actually BE “Senator Hillary Clinton” if MoveOn hadn’t established itself on the fly to provide a counter to the Republican frothing over Hillary’s husband’s sticking-his-dick-in-an-intern’s-mouth-and-then-lying-about-it.
The question “How dare you, you bitch?” comes to mind…
Speaking of MoveOn.org, Pussybritches over at Hurricanes and Hand Grenades has posted and commented on their list, “10 things you should know about John McCain (but probably don’t).” It’s a worthwhile read.
April 21, 2008 at 11:33 pm
Good read from moveon. I don’t trust them at all…but they had their stuff sourced…
Pretty revealing on McCain. Great…so now I feel like America is roally hosed no matter who wins.
I feel more hopeless than when it was Bush and Kerry.
Good thing Jesus is bigger than American politics….but not science, apparently not science -reads forum at crn.info-. lol =)
April 21, 2008 at 11:34 pm
eh, shaddup.
April 21, 2008 at 11:47 pm
But seriously? What’s the deal? Do all the candidates suck or something?
This Obama guy though….
April 21, 2008 at 11:51 pm
Yeah, I really, really don’t think Obama sucks.
I don’t think he’s perfect, but then again, no candidate is, but I think he’s the closest chance we’ve had in a couple generations for a candidate who could actually turn things around in a good way.
April 22, 2008 at 12:11 am
I’m trying to still figure that out. You just have to be patient with me you Obama fundie you.
I definitely don’t like McCain…or Hillary. And the only reason I’m on the fence with Obama is because of all I’ve heard about him. I’m only now starting to sift through the crap. And you know, this would be much easier if like…the media actually stuck to issues….and the debates actually talked about things that matter to common folk like myself.
Joe
April 22, 2008 at 12:25 am
yeah, i seriously dislike McCain and Hillary, but for an entirely different set of reasons, and on balance, if she steals the nomination, i’ll throw up in my mouth, but i’ll have to vote for her, because, even though i seriously don’t trust her, McCain’s wrong about just about everything, and Hillary would at least have to be accountable to the Democratic party and its constituents on what she SAYS she wants to do, such as getting us out of Iraq yesterday, and pursuing a sensible foreign policy.
McCain is just so completely scary when it comes to foreign policy, and he would be able to feel free to thumb his nose at everybody who knows better, just like George.
and yes, the debates suck, which is why i’m glad Katie Couric isn’t getting one.
April 22, 2008 at 3:25 pm
mccain is TERRIFYING on foreign policy, which is why i was a little shocked when i read time’s article about iranian expectations in the upcoming election (i linked to it in post #6 at my blog, btw – thanks for the mentions)
April 22, 2008 at 5:18 pm
that paragraph honestly confused me a bit…
it said some Iranians who OPPOSE the regime were secretly praying for a McCain victory, but then it went on to say that Mahmoud & Friends probably would secretly support a McCain victory, because Bush’s policies (and by extension, McCain’s) are very very good for Mahmoud keeping his tenuous hold on power.
i didn’t quite get why anti-regime Iranians would secretly feel the same way?
April 22, 2008 at 10:09 pm
my best guess is that the prospect of a mccain victory would give separate hopes to each side. ahmadinejad would be benefitted by having a solid enemy in the west, what with all the fierce rhetoric coming from our side (just as the pentagon always keeps us at war with eastasia or eurasia so they can defend their ridiculous budget) – it would solidify his hold on power…however, if we were to resort to all out war with iran, america would succeed militarily, thereby removing ahmadinejad from office. the problem there is that the likelihood of the opposition gaining any traction at that point would be slim to none. just as has happened in iraq, the anti-west hardliners would gain more footing within their society and our country would probably have even less of an exit strategy than we do with our current war. i think the only one that would stand to gain anything, albeit briefly and for selfish reasons, would be ahmadinejad.