Vicious Debate Blogging

by: Matt Stoller

Mon Jan 21, 2008 at 20:39


Democrats are going crazy.  I'm hearing from friends in DC, friends that are mostly apolitical, and blog friends that the tone of the primary is just vicious.  Beyond that, it's not just the candidates, but supporters have now become nuts.

And the tone of the debate is just vicious.  Barack Obama is basically calling Bill and Hillary Clinton liars, Obama attacked Clinton for being a corporate lawyer sitting on the board of Walmart, and they are each misrepresenting the facts.

Wow.

... Oh damn Clinton just attacked Obama for representing slum lords who contributed money to his campaign.

... Wow, Edwards is now tearing into Obama for voting 'present' over a hundred times.  Clinton got booed, and Edwards is actually funny.

... I am really enjoying this debate.  Obama is going at Edwards and Clinton on health care and mandates.

... These are good answers on Iraq.  Hillary really nails the surge answer, and Edwards is going at no residual troops and no permanent bases. 


... Yes, that was Dave Chapelle on the audience.

... Lots of discussions of racial disparities in the prison system, gender pay gaps, etc.  They've all become nice and kissy kissy with each

Matt Stoller :: Vicious Debate Blogging

Tags: , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Vicious Debate Blogging | 84 comments
"President Clinton"? (0.00 / 0)
Obama should start referring to her as President Clinton.... do it 3 times in the same sentence and then say something like 'oops, I forgot, I mean Senator Clinton'.

This is vicious.... Bill Clinton is an ass. I used to like and respect him.

Bill (4.00 / 1)
Yeah I lost a LOT of respect for him.  I don't remember Elder Bush doing this shit when W ran... he campaigned POSITIVELY for W.  If Bill would just stick to Hillary's imaginary good points (sorry, the Florida Ad stuff was the last straw...I'm uber pissed) it would be fine.
[ Parent ]
Yeah (4.00 / 1)
My respect level for Bill Clinton was always very low, but at this point, it must be measured as a negative number.
[ Parent ]
MyDD (4.00 / 2)
I had to leave MyDD... The CLinton Suckass fest over there was making my head explode.  The Front Pagers do a good job (although i think Jerome is a bit harsh at times on Obama) but the diaries and the idiots are just ridiculous.  I miss the Bowers Ban Hammer there. 
[ Parent ]
Me Too (4.00 / 1)
I left mydd a long time ago, for the exact same reason. That place is nothing but a Clinton shout-down-fest.
[ Parent ]
Lost it (4.00 / 1)
I lost it today... I mean just lost it... I made some VICIOUS posts today.  Not proud of it, but its like talking to a bunch of Neo-Cons over there in the sense they don't care about truth or logic and will blindly parrot the Clinton Talking Points.  I still say there are some paid Clinton Bloggers on there although I can't prove it.

[ Parent ]
Mydd (0.00 / 0)
Glad to hear I am not the only one. I left about a week after Open left was started....
[ Parent ]
For a week (0.00 / 0)
For a week, after Iowa, it was nice.  I actually gained a little respect for the Clinton people who toughed it out.  Others like a certain Poll Posting guy whose name starts with a G (most of you know whom I am talking about) were just too cowardly to return... but when she own NH they were right back on the bandwagon. 
[ Parent ]
yep... (0.00 / 0)
Agree with you 100%

Logic or truth mean nothing to these people.

End this war. Stop John McCain. Cindy McCain is filthy rich.

[ Parent ]
Me, too (4.00 / 1)
As someone intending to vote for Barack, I tried to engage in some talk last weekend. What a waste of time.

I can't read Jerome's stuff anymore. He can be a Clinton supporter, that doesn't bother me -- but he's not even trying to look even slightly impartial anymore. I still like hearing what Todd and Jonathan have to say (although the former appears to be getting on the anti-Barack bandwagon also as of late), but I just can't venture over there anymore.

It just seems so strange to me -- from Crashing the Gates to ... backing the Clintons? What's the point, exactly?

People can still get heated (see, the threads this weekend at this site), but we can do so in an intellectually honest way. Not at MyDD.

[ Parent ]
Agreed (0.00 / 0)
MyDD has just deteriorated since Stoller and Bowers left. I'm fine with logical and reasoned critique of Obama, but recently it's gotten way out of hand. Jerome especially has gone off the edge. As a former Edwards supporter, I used to like his glowing JRE posts but I just can't take any more of this. I'm reading Open Left, Future Majority, and Daily Kos from now on.
[ Parent ]
Agree also (4.00 / 1)
Openleft is much better than MyDD ever was.  Bowers was the only reason I ever read it anyway.  Thouogh Jerome definitely knows the party well.

The Politics of Bruno S.

[ Parent ]
I stopped lurking at MyDD too. (0.00 / 0)
But I dropped it as a regular site back when they started the candidate ad threads.  The front page was always filled with a single post by a partisan linking to dozens of vids.  I can go the candidates' sites if I want their propaganda!

I still like their horserace analysis, but it got to where it took too long to find amongst the morass of candidate threads.  I think someone was posting pro-Bill Richardson threads even after he dropped out!

The comments can be fun to read, but I have grown so depressed at how this primary has devolved into identity politics.

[ Parent ]
Liar (0.00 / 0)
Barack Obama is basically calling Bill and Hillary Clinton liars

Is Obama vicious for telling the truth? 

Liars (0.00 / 0)
Boy he is HITTING that Liar theme heavily...
[ Parent ]
Go With What Works (4.00 / 1)
If he's going to win, this is how he can do it.

Of course, the "liar" attack is only the second best attack on Hillary. The best attack against Hillary is that she's gullible and easily fooled by powerful men. She was fooled by Bush, and fooled by her own husband.

Now, that's not nice to say, but it's a hell of an attack. Obama can't use it, but if Hillary wins the nomination, the Republicans will brand her as gullible, and it will work.

[ Parent ]
hmm (4.00 / 3)
Now THAT would be a stupid attack by Obama... He would lose the women support even more.  I don't know if the GOP is even that stupid. 
[ Parent ]
Yes (0.00 / 0)
It would be a stupid attack by Obama, which is why he won't use it.

For the Republicans though, it's the perfect attack.

[ Parent ]
Remember (4.00 / 2)
The Republicans were stupid enough to attack a decorated war hero as a traitor.
[ Parent ]
and succeed at it /nt (0.00 / 0)


Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
A decorated war hero (0.00 / 0)
Who seemed to only act against their smears days after the damage was done. Clinton doesn't seem nearly as timid.
[ Parent ]
Hillary's unfavorables (4.00 / 1)
Hillary's current mid-forties unfavorables will mean that the Repubs won't even need much of an attack, as long as they have an OK candidate (i.e. not Romney). Thinking about Clinton-McCain makes me ill. 

In her one real general election race - I don't count incumbent Dem senate races in NY - she ran 5+ points behind that noted political virtuoso Al Gore (this even with 3.5% going to Nader). For all her other strengths, she is not a skilled campaigner. I wish the Democratic Party would stop nominating for President people who aren't strong campaigners. 

[ Parent ]
No the DLC's aim is to put in 'puppets' (0.00 / 0)
...with people like Carville and Matalin you really wonder what the real game is behind the scenes...

[ Parent ]
At this rate ... (4.00 / 1)
maybe Edwards still has a chance ...  it would be nice if Hillary and Obama torpedoed each other
! (0.00 / 0)
That would be interesting to say the least.  I wonder if Edwards won SC if he could somehow win... Bowers thinks not... his analysis was great.

Go Mitt Romney!!!

[ Parent ]
Time (0.00 / 0)
Edwards needs to win SC to be viable on Super Tuesday. If there were a month to go, I'd say maybe. There's less than a week before SC. They can't demolish each other by then.

I know that a lot of blogateers loved Edwards, but I think the fact is that Edwards is cooked.

[ Parent ]
if the democratic (4.00 / 1)
primaries were about something more than identity politics at this point (clinton is doing well with women, obama with blacks, an blah blah blah, it wouldn't even be a close call in terms of who passionately represents our issues- seriously.) i am a black guy and i amazed when is him that anyone thinks there is any better candidate. but there you have it.
[ Parent ]
Edwards main problem... (0.00 / 0)
His main problem still remains that his positions have radically shifted on a number of topics from 2004 to 2008. Had he maintained similiar positions, I think he'd be fine.  He also is hurt by Obama being there.  I know if Obama hadn't run, Edwards would have gotten my support.
[ Parent ]
His main problem is that he is white (4.00 / 2)
in a year in which identity politics feels trumphant. please stop insulting my intelligence.
[ Parent ]
His main problem is (0.00 / 0)
that he's not running as "the white guy."

He should have pressed an aggressive campaign as the "anyone but Hillary" candidate putting together a strange coalition of progressives who say that HRC is not liberal enough and more conservative Democrats who think that she is too liberal or unelectable, crafting a possibly ambiguous message that would allow both groups to think he was speaking directly to them, tied together by a populist economic message.  Edwards failed to make use of his own identity and own that segment of the Democratic Party which is whiter, more Christian, and perhaps more culturally conservative than average within the party and  then signal to the left wing of the party that if it wanted someone not Hillary Clinton, then he was their boy as the most viable alternative.

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both

[ Parent ]
his one flaw is not to have manipulated the media (4.00 / 1)
everything else is just crazy. he didn't need to run as the white candidate. he needed for voters to be more sosphisticated on the issues. coming out of this election what i am reaffirming is that id trumps all. next time some conservative says it I willl be hard press to deny what we've seen this cycle.

i've had so many supporters of obama come up to me saying i should support him due to my race (just this week some fellow black guy told me that he was mad at this girl because she's voting for clinton  (because she's a woman and understands her) while he's voting for obama because he feels "they all say the same things" so why not vote black.). thats the level of discourse among non activists. i know its hearesy to point that out on blogs, but thats the reality.

[ Parent ]
But... (0.00 / 0)
You are basing all this more on anecdotal evidence than actual facts.  Now maybe you are right, but then how do you explain black men and women who vote for Edwards or Clinton... women who vote for Edwards or Obama and White Men who vote for Obama and CLinton.  It seems we'd see a lot different numbers if this was solely about identity politics. 
[ Parent ]
if he can't manage the media in the primaries (0.00 / 0)
Why should I expect that he can manage the media in a general election in order to get his message across?

Running a campaign dependent on American voters not being themselves is kind of like having a post-war strategy of marching into Baghdad and expecting Iraqis to greet their occupiers with kisses and ticker-tape parades.

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both

[ Parent ]
The better question (4.00 / 1)
is what bowers posit (although he probably didn't realize it) the other day. If the media is making the narrative such that facts no longer matter, do we still live in a democracy? sure i agree edwards should have played it 'smarter.' my problem with smarter here is that it requires not just that one not be pure, but buy into the corruption of the system wholesale. i dont question whether obama and clinton care- i question what part of their souls they are giving up to be president. you think its worth it. i think we lose something by it.
[ Parent ]
by the way (0.00 / 0)
the second part of your post is why this country inthe long term is then screwed.
[ Parent ]
Oh come on... (0.00 / 0)
You don't manage the media unless you are running the business.  It is hard to see Edwards ever cracking the MSM with his platform.  I had hoped that 2006 was showing that there are major cracks in the MSM's ability to control the message.  It seemed like people were waking up and seeing through the media spin, but I am now thinking it was the id tipping the balance not a real move to look beyond the MSM for information.

If you just look at the Edwards demographics since the campaign started you see how completely unable he has been to change the dynamic.  His support has always been with conservative white male Democrats and he has never been able to break that mold and build a larger coalition that would support his policies over those of Clinton or Obama.  Even when you do hear a sound bite on the TV it is populist, but still people see him as the conservative Southerner.

This is what depresses me the most about the state of our country.  I looked at this election as an opportunity to change the dynamics in a meaningful way, but it is apparent that the message is controlled and corrupted by forces we can't currently control and getting that power back just seems almost impossible, especially when we can't elect people who want to take it back.

[ Parent ]
BS (0.00 / 0)
That's simply not true.  Its not because he is the white guy.  I don't support Obama because he is black.  I support Obama because I like his vision for the country, I like his movement of getting people involved and I also support him because he is my Senator.  His color has NOTHING to do with it. 

I don't have an issue with Edwards.  But the policy changes alienated some people.  He also happens to be in a primary with much much better funded candidates who receive more media attention.  I feel bad for the guy.

BTW, OT here but they have Ann Coulter on Boondocks tonight...  FUNNY AS HELL! 

[ Parent ]
oh give me a break (4.00 / 1)
this isn't about you. i am referring to the damn polling that backs up what i am posting here. this election cycle when we cut through all of the crap is about identity politics and, with clinton,  her last name.
[ Parent ]
I disagree (0.00 / 0)
I was giving an example on why I... a WHITE MALE... supports Obama.  I fundamentally disagree with your assertion, but if you are so sure of it, then please provide some proof in form of a diary.  I'd be very interested to read it... seriously, its an interesting topic, even if I think you are mistaken. 
[ Parent ]
thats not how this works (0.00 / 0)
One anecdote (you) does not trump actual evidence.

http://www.openleft....

Its like saying that universal health care will lead to longer wait times because your aunt in montreal had a long wait one time.

"Keep the Faith"

[ Parent ]
i am really over spending that kind of time (0.00 / 0)
on these things. look it up, and try to be objective about the data.
[ Parent ]
and by the way (0.00 / 0)
identity politics isn't about what race or gender you are. it's about what race or gender the candidates are, and how that affects your vote. very different things.
[ Parent ]
Yer all missed the point.... (4.00 / 1)
...Edwards main problem is that he's challenging the American conviction, so expertly nurtured by the ReichWing, that if you are poor or sick that that is your fault and that you deserve what you get!

Calvinism much?

This goes down not at all with the nutbags of the Reich, who in the grip of a fearful insecurity, as Paul has pointed out, have a pathological need to have someone to look down on to denigrate. Poor, sick, brown, black....presto! I'm okay 'cause I'm none of them.

Neither do the folks who are the direct cause of the growing impoverishment of the average citizen want their role in this legalized theft to come to the citizenries notice. Nooooooo....thank you to that. Presto...no media coverage of Edwards, other than his haircut. So scared are the Upper Tenth of his message that they don't even attack it since in order to do so they'd have to let people know what it is...to some extent anyway; so they just 'disappeared' him.

Nope, Edwards main problem is that, like Socrates....Obama eat yer heart out, he's telling the fat, lazy, self-centered citizenry.....

The Truth.

And to their credit they are starting to respond.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
Totally agree (0.00 / 0)
Edwards best chance is if the MSM decides to run video/audio clips of him chastizing Clinton and Obama for getting caught up in their personal sniping.  His, "How does this help our economy? How does this help children get health insurance?...." moment was golden.  But, the focus will be on the TWO candidates and Edwards will not be one of them.

Although, Cooper was nice enough to talk to him for few minutes before he began to ignore him....


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

[ Parent ]
Exactly right (0.00 / 0)
people pretend as if it's merely a matter of a candidates acts that will determine his fate. That's true to a degree- but only in the sense if he plays a long with things that aren't about being a Democrat to some degree. It strikes me that Bowers post about how the media creates narratives without regard to facts can be seen squarely in the case of Edwards. Their blackout especially before NH was just one example.
[ Parent ]
The MSM is a major factor (0.00 / 0)
Especially when they "edit" the race/debate to make it appear as if only two candidates are involved.

I wonder what the result would be if the MSM focussed on the responses of Clinton and Obama to Edwards' reminder that the race is not about the individuals - but, rather about the nation.  While Obama stood with his eyes fixed on Edwards - almost glaring at him, Clinton was smiling and laughing.  It really struck me as strange - did she not understand that she was a TARGET of his scolding?  Does she think its FUNNY that she and Obama have turned the Democratic nomination into something akin to a school-yard fight? At least Obama knew enough, or was actually listening enough, to understand that HE was being smacked down by Edwards.


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

[ Parent ]
Destruction (0.00 / 0)
I had hoped that this would be the primary that tore apart the GOP. But at the end of it all, the Republicans will be united by their most basic urge, their will to obtain raw power. Meanwhile, the Democrats are pulling each other apart to choose between two candidates whose positions on most issues are basically the same.

Compared to the Democrats, the Republicans right now are having a 70s style love-fest.

healing (0.00 / 0)
If Hillary wins, she can heal the party by offering Obama the VP slot.  I doubt it will happen, but that would be the smartest move.  I still think that Mondale made a huge mistake not picking Hart, and Hillary could make the same mistake.

If Obama wins, he has the personality to hear most of the rifts.  Hillary won't take a VP slot, BUT he'd be smart to include her somehow if he can.  Picking a CLintonite like Clark would go a long way. 

[ Parent ]
Not Gonna Happen (0.00 / 0)
How could she possibly run with him after all the attacks? The Republicans can easily say, "Look. Even *she* called her own running mate naive."

Also, the veep slot is generally given the duty of attack-dog. Has there been less of an attack-dog in politics for the last 10 years than Obama?

[ Parent ]
Yeah... (0.00 / 0)
...John Edwards circa October 2004.
[ Parent ]
Dog (0.00 / 0)
I don't think Hillary needs an attack dog.  I don't know if I would call Gore an Attack Dog... and Dan Qualye?
[ Parent ]
Apparently, Bill Clinton disagrees! (0.00 / 0)
" I don't think Hillary needs an attack dog."


"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."
[ Parent ]
Remember "voodoo economics"? (0.00 / 0)

That's what George H. W. Bush called Ronald Reagan's proposals in the 1980 Republican primaries.  They not only kissed and made up in the end, but they won the election.  There's hope for a Clinton-Obama ticket yet!

I would be just as happy with an Obama-Clinton ticket, mind you.  I see that as less plausible, however, because of the age difference.  At 47, Obama can serve out his time as VP and still run for President.  At 60, Hillary would do better (for both herself and us) to aim at becoming a "lion(ess)of the Senate", if she fails to get the nomination.

Either way, they should offer Edwards his pick: Attorney General, or DHS Secretary.

-- TP

[ Parent ]
Chapelle (0.00 / 0)
Was that Dave Chappelle in the audience?
Thanks (0.00 / 0)
Thanks Matt!
[ Parent ]
Matt, you are confusing me (0.00 / 0)
It sounds like the "debate" you are talking about is this messy food fight that's happening.

Then you say this:


These are good answers on Iraq.  Hillary really nails the surge answer, and Edwards is going at no residual troops and no permanent bases.

and it sounds like you're talking about an actual debate going on somewhere.

What am I missing?

sTiVo's rule: Just because YOU "wouldn't put it past 'em" doesn't prove that THEY did it.

Well.. (0.00 / 0)
There have been some vicious hits in this one.
[ Parent ]
d'oh (0.00 / 0)
I didn't realize there was an actual debate on now.  D'oh!

sTiVo's rule: Just because YOU "wouldn't put it past 'em" doesn't prove that THEY did it.
[ Parent ]
Wow (0.00 / 0)
Good Answer on that Stupid Toni Morrison quote by Obama.  That was a minefield.
Well (0.00 / 0)
Let's remember this is the first really contentious debate we've had in the race so far. The Republicans have been a lot worse.

I was going to say something else but as I was typing this post up the candidates have all returned to hugs and kisses. Completely inexplicable. These guys can change faces instantly.

That's why... (0.00 / 0)
That's why I think the attacks have been more Business and not personal and why I still think Obama could be VP if Hillary wins . 
[ Parent ]
Pundits: Obama wins! (0.00 / 0)
The Freaking debate isn't even over and the great punditocracy has already seen fit to declare Obama the winner.

http://politicaltick...

Just cuz I like their verdict doesn't mean I like the way it's being forced on us.


Our Dime Understanding the U.S. Budget

But he is... (0.00 / 0)
Winning.  The line on the one Good Thing Bush and Cheney have done was fantastic.
[ Parent ]
Nice (4.00 / 1)
Nice hit on lobbyists of Clinton by Edwards.
Cool (0.00 / 0)
Its getting nasty again.
[ Parent ]
Wolf (4.00 / 1)
God he sucks...
[ Parent ]
seriously (0.00 / 0)
WTF.
[ Parent ]
LOL (4.00 / 1)
We are out of time but have time for one more question... MY GOD! 
[ Parent ]
The first twenty minutes was hot (0.00 / 0)
it was like vivid girls nasty! it was smokin', they were saying all the things you would want them to say to each other, calling each other out on the mat - no more mister nice girl/guy. but then their aids must have pimp whipped them all during the half time furniture shuffle show, resulting in one of the most boring debates this cycle. Blitzer as usual was horrible. He was constantly mumbling something about minutes or saying thank you or who knows what. he should be nuclearized. preferably somewhere far away where it wont hurt anyone else. maybe on the moon.

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
? (0.00 / 0)
Nuclearized?
[ Parent ]
k? (0.00 / 0)
nuKulerized?

Michael Bloomberg, prince of corporate welfare
[ Parent ]
Better than MSNBC (0.00 / 0)
Although I have mixed feelings about Blitzer, I thought that CNN did a much better job with this debate than MSNBC did with the last one. I remember the first 20 minutes of the MSNBC debate were completely consumed by questions about campaign gossip. At least CNN seemed to make a conscious effort to focus mostly on substance and issues.
Running Beyond South Carolina? (4.00 / 1)
I was driving from the airport and heard this on the radio. 

I think conflict creates a great bit of theater for Hillary.  She gets to look like she can beat up men and be tough and assuage the fears of a women being strong in the office.  She was sharp and clear in her first three or four statements.

I also believe she opened strong on the economy.  Following the NYT story today she was running a more direct polarized(vis a vis Republicans) middle class economics from the get go. Obama should not let her get too far ahead of him there.  They all have one eye on Wall Street but the currency is votes now and beating up CEOs and hedge funds is fair game and will not cause the money to dry up.  Getting ahead will bring in the money.  Especially with the Republicans so weak.  It often runs from money to votes.  Now I sense votes will inspire donations.  You want to buy a ticket to White House and if you are under weight an emerging winner you get the equivalent of  a short covering rally in a stock as everyone gets on board. 

Hlllary is running as age and experience (and having been down in the plumbing) against youth and innocence.  Her real estate slumlord reply to his Wal Mart board thrust and staying on the offensive about Reagan affection by Obama (even if her facts are slippery) was serving to bring him down.  After all Obama's brand is hope.  If he is shown to live in the same muck as the other politicians it cannot but harm him.  If they trade dirt that sticks, I think he loses. It tarnishes his brand more than hers.

On the other hand taking on the Big Dog shows that the man is up for a fight and self respecting.  He is going through the fire and showing he is Presidential by getting the chance to fight with a former President.  The Clintons should take that away opportunity. 

I cannot help but think that Hillary was running past South Carolina.  I think her middle class economics is out front of Barack and it will help her. 

Obama's use of humor in the second half was talent.  He showed he could take a punch and smile.  Reminds me of Ali telling Foreman "Is that all you got George?"  Good composure. 

Finally I heard nothing from a pundit tonight that felt anything like what I heard on the radio.  Why are you not surprised??

 

entertaining but discouraging debate (4.00 / 1)
Hillary once again proposed doing some actual legislative work NOW to prevent Bush from cutting a permanent occupation deal with the Iraqi parliament, and before the others got a chance to respond, Wolf cut to commercial (the only one of the night, if I'm not mistaken). How convenient.

And has anyone else noticed that the word "peace" is totally absent in mainstream American political discussion? I know a lot of you have strong feelings about these candidates, but I don't see or feel much of a net difference among the three (they each have things I like and dislike about them, and I'm not going to pretend I know who's more or less electable in the fall). If my feelings don't really change by February 5, I could see myself casting a protest vote for Kucinich. Yeah, I know......but there's something to be said for endorsing a truly coherent and unapologetic progressive worldview.

For the dishonest stuff that Clinton says about Obama (0.00 / 0)
And that is pointed to by Josh Marshall, such as the "present" voting, and the made-up inconsistency on the war, someone has to give Obama some humor lines, a group of them, for use in the following circumstances (use as needed):

a.  For when Hilary goes on and on (if I could get a word in here, my plane is leaving soon.)
b. For when Hilary interrupts (which she tends to do) - alternate between straight denials of her dominating the time, and humorous denials of it (the rules say that I in my turn I get to speak as least as long as it takes George Bush to misunderestimate something)
c. For the dishonest attacks from Hilary, he needs a couple of things:

i. , he needs three "cool" answers per dishonest attack (because she'll come back, of course).  McCain had a good example, "say as much as you want, won't make it true", something like "wishing doesn't make it so", or more bluntly, "Well Hilary, congratulations, I never knew you were such a great actress.  You speak falsehoods so aggressively!"
ii.  Simple, short, clear responses affirmative dismissal ("that's silly, and isn't true" (and then if SHORT and CLEAR, why it isn't true)

I've gotta say, as much as I've now committed to Obama, he was getting more flustered than he should with Hilary. 

He is smart and flexible enough, to have a collection of not controversial one liners, and also a collection of clear statements of affirmations of his innocence "saying something doesn't make it true, and I assure that accusation isn't, but is simple desperation.  (if there's time) And this is why".  But get that injected.

There are ways of smartly handling false accusation coming at you, and Obama makes the mistake of explaining too much.

Luckily, he did much better when things calmed down.


So this is where the Obama supporters (0.00 / 0)
go to get away from us stupid Hillary supporters who get paid to blog for her.  Interesting. 
Its not that you support Hillary, its when her supporters act like tools. (0.00 / 0)
If you act in a rationale manner, I have no issue with you supporting Hillary.  While I'm pissed at the out and out lies of the Clinton Campaign over the last few days, her supporters on MyDD are far worse and much much much more ignorant of politics or as I like to say, they don't let a little thing like the truth Fuck up their argument! 

[ Parent ]
Don't be silly. (0.00 / 0)
We Hillary supporters identify strongly with her complaint of Barack, and his supporters, being unreasonable.  They are unreasonable because no matter what Barack says, any questions are taken as dirty politics and fair criticism is called a lie.  When supporters of Barack talk about the truth it turns into something very convoluted that we distrust.  Like that defense of voting for 30%, saying people were already paying 29%.  Well my credit isn't perfect, but I've never paid 29%.  I thought his answer made absolutely no sense.  The other candidates couldn't even figure out what his point was either.  I tend to take convoluted answers as a dodge to avoid answering the question.
[ Parent ]
It's been a real haven of fairly cool discussion here.... (4.00 / 1)
let me introduce myself. I, A.Citizen, like it here becuase whenever a Obam cultist that's the type that espouses the 'double-secret dog-whistle'  reasoning, short form: 'you are too old, dumb, 'progressive'...yeah they use that one, to get Senator 'Dope' shows up here either I or Paul Rosenberg git to kick him/her until they go away.

This also applies to Hillbots and others of that genus.

It's kind of a hobby with me and since neither Matt nor Chris have chosen to upbraid me for doing it I continue to point out to such as are described above where they might improve their thinking about the issues.

Others lurk here also who are somewhat intolerant of the one or two line comment which says, 'My candidate's mom can whip your candidate's mom with one hand tied behind her back...nyah...nyah...nyah.

View us all as antibodies for the sort of drivel which has come to pass for 'discourse' on other sites. Sites I will not name for obvious reasons...Kos.

Not that every word Matt has written since Jan 1 has not been a willful distortion of the facts as I understand them.

But that's a story for another time.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
Much as I enjoy the sniping.... (0.00 / 0)
this statement says it all: "I, A.Citizen, like it here becuase whenever a Obam cultist that's the type that espouses the 'double-secret dog-whistle'  reasoning, short form: 'you are too old, dumb, 'progressive'...yeah they use that one, to get Senator 'Dope' shows up here either I or Paul Rosenberg git to kick him/her until they go away."

Your's is an almost exclusively negative approach. 

Paul's, not so much.

Like I say, its fun to read and I sometimes appreciate the humorous way you can summarily dismiss those that disagree with you.  Just one question:

How do you figure to build a party with such an approach?  Or, maybe you're not interested in party building?



"It sounds wrong...
     ...but its right."

[ Parent ]
Interesting that your 'response' implies that... (0.00 / 0)

..........party building begins at the top.

It doesn't.

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
Oh A Citizen (0.00 / 0)
how nice of you to give us your words of wisdom, and how your remind us how grateful we should be, that you allow us to accept your marxist/socialist rhetoric wrapped in pseudo progressive rice paper. How we should be grateful for your vile attempts at 'hootenanny humour" by calling Obama "dope', you are simply a vile transparent megalomaniac of the worst kind. So I repeat
"IN CULO DE LO TEJO"
Take your pseudo intellectual drivel and do with it what you do best........
[ Parent ]
Yawn.... (0.00 / 0)
Really, this the best you can do?

Checking my notes.....

Yep, it would appear so. And no the attempt at 'diversity' in your use of Hispanic profanity impresses me....

Not at all.

Try engaging on the issues sometime. I have wide range of responses to various approaches to our ongoing political dialogues here and elsewhere in the 'sphere but suffer fools, that's you so far, not well.

But hey! It's all about change! I seem to hear that a lot anyway. You must not recognize me as even the equal of a racist republican or Xtian zombie death cultist or you'd be trying to 'persuade' me to your way of thinking not attacking me as per the standard ReichWing methods. Right?

Methods now quite in vogue with 'some'. With some politicians who call themselves 'Democrats' that is.

Sadness....just sadness here.........

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

[ Parent ]
Sad.... (0.00 / 0)
one word for you..............

Homeostasis.  Right?

Unfortunately the quantitative variance that had equated
the resistance .... is disproportionate to the amount of inorganic material you ingested all these years.

[ Parent ]
Vicious Debate Blogging | 84 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox