There is no way I will support Hillary in 2008

[ButterflyBlood]

I've always held that she is far too polarizing to be elected and would be a terrible candidate, but the recent whining about violence and sex on TV and siding with RICK SANTORUM on it is the last straw. I'm sorry, but there is no way I will vote for someone who sides with that disgusting fascist excuse for a human being to nanny state our TVs some more. The Democrats need to learn it does not help them to nanny state and censor nonsense like Lieberman did a couple years ago, and must never side with fascist scumbags like Santorum.

I will reluctantly vote for her if we end up nominating her, but for now I am really hoping that does not happen. As far as the 2008 primary goes for now, I'm Anybody But Hillary.

[davidinalameda]

1. Hillary shot herself in the foot with this

and blew off a few toes

she's dead in the water as far as 2008 goes

[rodeodance]

2. I crinch with Hil teaming up with the likes of Santorum but....she is

doing what she thinks she has to do. I will give her leaway on this.

[ButterflyBlood]

4. No, she does not have to censor and nanny state

and side with a worthless piece of human garbage like Santorum either.

[Just Me]

20. I cringe at the thought Rs will run Rice while we won't support Hillary.

x(

Rice would obviously perpetuate the endless warring and new world order proposed/sought by the neoCONs.

I find it stunning that, a mere week or so after the right-wing announced its intentions to target Hillary,...there are posters here doing the targeting and destruction.

Stunning!!

x(

[ryan_cats]

31. I agree

I agree, the thugs triangulation policy is working. They're trying to knock off Hillary now before her support becomes formidable.

When they run Rice, Hillary will beat her. I don't agree with everything Hillary does but I know she is a %100 progressive who supports progressive causes and will continue to support them.

Her political sense appears to be equal to Bill's and that's saying a lot.

Go Hillary!

[thecorster]

33. they won't run rice n/t

[tsuki]

44. Therein lies my problem..."she is doing what SHE thinks

she has to do."

[madrchsod]

3. she will not run for president

maybe chelsa will

[Sparkle]

5. Actually, there is too much violence and sex on tv.

[ButterflyBlood]

6. watch other countries' TV if you think that

and besides, I can watch whatever the hell I want. If parents don't like it, they have ways to stop their kids from watching it. We don't need this nanny state nonsense.

[noonwitch]

14. I support censorship of broadcast tv-check out soaps sometime (violence)

Cable tv (HBO in particular) is a whole different matter, as it's by subscription. People with kids or delicate sensibilities should not be offended by hearing crude language on network tv, nor should there be overly graphic violence or nudity.


My soap (GH) has been extremely violent of late. This week features the bloody death of a sociopath who had just apparantly killed a child and threw his body in a swamp. This is following several shootings, a brutal rape, and the glorification of a mobster and his hitman over the past several years. I wish there was too much sex on the show!

[starroute]

19. Is your problem violence on tv or just on your favorite shows?

I don't like hyper-violent shows either, and I would feel offended if a show I enjoyed suddenly started featuring material as disturbing as what you describe. But I don't see that as a reason why a cop show, say, shouldn't be able to deal with grisly murders.

The problem I see is that our entire culture has been pushed in the direction of extreme action, sensationalism, cinematic shock and awe. But the answer to that is not to do a comics-code type of thing where you censor out the grosser bits but leave the generally violent context intact. Rather, it's to examine what our real values are and what sort of stories we want to be telling.

[ladeuxiemevoiture]

7. Absolutely.

Me, too. Even if she's the dem candidate, I may just vote for someone else.

[onehandle]

9. Welcome to Democratic Underground.

A non-Democratic vote is a Republican vote.

[Speed8098]

21. Not if it's Green....................n/t

[onehandle]

24. President George W. Bush. Elected 2000. nt

[Speed8098]

43. What kind of reply is that???????????? n/t

[iconoclastNYC]

8. Well here's an upside to her candidacy....

If the Republicans start smearing her a la Kerry it could majorly backfire.

In my mind the biggest challenge to getting a democrat elected is the fact the mouth breathers on the right love when the Republican campaign smears the Democrat but our base is turned off if we use those tactics against the Republicans.

So maybe if they smear her it will turn thier base against that tactic.

[OrlandoGator]

29. Saying "if the Republicans start smearing"....

...is like saying "if water is wet".

[rniel]

10. I'm with ya

I hope she never gets nominated. But if so. It's just too bad we have this 2 party system we're stuck to.

[ChiciB1]

11. Posted Yesterday That I Can't

Support her. I was never one who supported her BEFORE she turned to the Right, but for different reasons!

Before I thought they would bash her too much, now I think we'll bash her too much. She's lost a lot of credibility with me. Guess she's going back to her roots BEFORE Bill!

[daninthemoon]

12. She also failed to vote against the bankruptcy bill

[beyurslf]

18. She wasn't there! Her husband had heart surgery...

maybe you heard... Pres. Bill Clinton ....

[Just Me]

22. For crying out loud!!!! Her husband was having surgery!!! KRIST!! n/t

[Radical Activist]

13. She has spent her entire term running away from her liberal reputation

It has made her a terrible Senator and I would never support her for President. We learned in '04 that it doesn't help to nominate someone who votes based on what they think will get them elected President instead of voting based on your principles. If Kerry had voted against the IWR he would have won.

[ruggerson]

37. Kerry was a lousy candidate

with absolutely zero charisma. He didn't lose because of his vote for the war (though voting against it would have prevented the disastrous voted for it before i voted against it thing), he lost because Americans elect the most LIKABLE candidate. And Kerry was simply not likable.

Which is going to be Hillary's problem too, btw. If the Repubs nominate someone who is more avuncular than she, they will stand a good chance. You can really dress up extremism with an affable personality, unfortunately.

[tinonedown]

15. Yes we can

If she is nominated, and is running against Condi or another Bushite, we can. The nomination process is another matter, and can see the diversity of opinion there.

[PATRICK]

16. A deeper misgiving

I have is yet to see ANY candidate primed for the REAL political and legal war necessary to restore democracy. Instead we have issue parsers thinking they are clever by adopting some pose as the horrendous monsters who have invaded and captured a naive system. While others have worked furiously to deceive and steal the Dems have been ineffective- to put it politely and in massive understatement.

The mere possibility of a new generation of candidates and the grass roots rapid rise is alone heartening, at least unproven in failure. However, two relative mavericks, Clark and Dean have also been sunk when their consciousness was not mired in Foggybottom myth land. The POSSIBILITY exists in people who get it immediately or fast and effectively. Dean MAY be on the right track. Winning is something else and unforeseeable.

But the warhorses of the long retreat from Carter to now are NOT the leaders for today or tomorrow. Nor, as has been demonstrated amply, were they anywheres near up to the crisis of 2000, 2002, 2004. A lot of people and things have died for that failure. And as one would really expect who is a student of human nature and history, they are busy repeating their vices and strangling their virtues and playing childish catchup so they might get back to the good old days when they still were in the game- a game that never existed as they thought it did. The whole Clinton ethos- of getting a peaceful civilized world to gently deal with the looming crises after a rational world wide peace and positive capitalism NWO has been obliterated in the power and money circles. The world populace vaguely longs for it still but let's see what happens as more and more we are divided and set at each other's throats because of the fear and loathing of the ruling elites.

If there are political candidates who will truly overcome the current "game"(Obama's rebuttal of his DLC listing is hopeful)most or all of the big names in DC cannot be among them.

But personal attacks on Hillary? What about all the ineffective institutions and leaders and employees who are mostly enabling the Coup every day rather than facing up to its imminent and unprecedented threat to everyone? The media that finally people see as the blinders on the work horse. The cops and soldiers who shed blood for Bush. the banks, businessmen and world heads of state who cannot cope with the oldest evil so unprofessionally and daringly resurrected by dolts. The thinkers who cannot think, the writers who cannot write, the religious leaders who have lost the compass somewhere in the wilderness. The righteous and rational who can't think of a single way to reach the decent majority.

Hillary bashing is quite useless. The real tragedy is that she really cannot be boosted by any REAL enthusiasm after the Kerry debacle. You have to know that any rallying around her will be grim and hopeless next time around. A lot of that is history not her personal attributes.
I venture to say in the change in stakes and vision that she has about as much chance as Lieberman had in 2004. The candidacy has become that radicalized because the disease is that much deeper spread.

I am sure, like smoking Joe, she will give cause both to fear and ridicule and grow wrathful with her statements, but in the main, barring a sea change that would allow democracy and fair elections for ANY Democrat, her candidacy is DOA. The lights and whistles of excitement you hear are the emergency ambulance taking her to the ward operating on the thrill of memories unrequited and name recognition. Like the "New Coke". This isn't personal, it is the determinism of the death of democracy in America and those co-opted into enabling it.

[beyurslf]

17. Anybody but Hillary huh? What about Lieberman? Or Zell?

There is always someone worse...

[applegrove]

23. You know they have done studies and little guys especially are very

vulnerable to the combination of sex & violence represented in video games, cartoons, etc. Very, very vulnerable. You could create a long term sadist out of a normal 13 year old.

I think that is what Hilary is getting at. There is no reason why we should stick our heads in the sand when we have specific and credible information that some stuff is really, really bad for us.

Corporations will of course argue that that is the parents responsibility. I say even if a few thousand sadists are created...that is too many. And I agree that markets are the most efficient thing. So when I want to stop young boys from getting material that could ruin their lives and the lives of the people around them (as adults)... I want to use the efficiencies of the marketplace to make that happen.

What is with the "one set of rules for me the corporations (get to use the market for their ends) and another set of rules for human being (force family by family to deal with the danger inherent in some video games & videos).

That is just stupid. Little guys should not have access to some material at all. It should be so highly regulated that it is virtually impossible for them to get.

[Swamp Rat]

25. Just say "NO!" to 'Hillary/2008'!!!

NO!

[RedSock]

28. she said yes to chimpy's blank check for war

and she lost me forever. (not that i was a big fan to begin with)

there are many others reasons to avoid her, of course, but saying YES to committing tens of thousands of war crimes is the most blatant.

[Al-CIAda]

26. This country is fucked. Hillary or Condi?

I'm fucking out of here. The dems are merely spineless traitors, while the fascists are murderous traitors.

Take your pick, either way, I'm gone.

[Meeker Morgan]

36. This country is fucked? Hillary or Condi?

I do not believe it will be either Hillary or Condi.

Especially not Condi. She's never been elected to anything.

[Floogeldy]

27. People should STOP saying that Hillary is polarizing!

She has never done ANYTHING to make herself a polarizing figure.

It is much more accurate to say that the right wing radio media has UNFAIRLY AND FALSELY DEMONIZED her.

It sounds like some of you have tasted that kool-aid.

[Pepperbelly]

30. RIGHT ON!!!!!!!

You took that thought right out of my head!

You must be a secret agent or something.

[Quixote1818]

32. She is polarizing in that 35% of the most Right wing ass holes hate her

They were never going to vote Democrat anyway. Your post is dead on correct.

[Floogeldy]

34. Thank you PepperBelly and Quixote

There is another thread with posters saying, "I just don't like her. I don't know why." Gimme a fucking break!

I can't believe I'm seeing the right wing spin machine manipulate alleged democrats!

[Ladyhawk]

35. I think I'm with you. ABH, man.

But I think the DLC types might pull it off. I would have to hold my nose to vote for her. She's a politician and I don't think she has our best interests at heart.

[Cascadian]

38. If a woman is going to run in 2008 it should be Barbara Boxer.

At least she is unafraid to stand up to the Bushites and at least she sticks to the Democratic principles. She is a far better candidate than Hillary would be.


John

[JHBowden]

39. As long as it is the primary.

After that, we need to rally around our nominee and crush the Republicans.

[Cascadian]

40. Just like we did with John Kerry?

I am less inclined to do so in 2008 if the Democratic nominee is going to be in the milquetoast middle and run away from being "liberal" like Kerry did, I am not going to support that candidate. When Kerry caved in the day after the election instead of fighting on, he lost me. I decided after that I was not going to make the same mistake again. Hopefully with Dean at the helm of the DNC, we can get somebody who is not going to be a "me too" candidate.


John

[Disturbed]

42. The RW and MSM are pushing Hillary Clinton

because they feel that she will lose big. Progressive Dems don't want her and the RW knows it. The RW machine won't smear her. In fact, even Rove has complimented her. This is a move by the RW to pick a candidate for the Dems.

[anonymous44]

41. me too