We are the 99%

April 29, 2008

Questions! I have questions!

1) While in a completely uncharacteristic move, Keith Olbermann made NPR’s Ken Rudin his Worst Person in the World last night for comparing Hillary Clinton to Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction, did he miss Eugene Robinson comparing Hillary to a "homicidal cyborg from the future" for her "sheer relentlessness" or is Robinson given a pass because he's a frequent guest on Countdown?

2) Is it more "all-consuming"ly ambitious for a man to start running for president after only being in the US Senate for a year or for a woman to refuse to drop out of a presidential race when her opponent cannot win the pledged delegates needed to put him over the top? Would the media be asking a male candidate -- say if Edwards was in Hillary's exact position now -- to drop out or even call him "ambitious" in a bad way? How often is the word "ambitious" used in a positive way when being an attribute assigned to a man and in a negative way when being attributed to a woman? When these guys see or even think of Hillary is there an actual physical occurrence of, uh, shrinkage?


3) Now that Barack Obama has gone on Fox News and even Kos himself and MoveOn are, um, "testy" about it, does that mean some of the folks who comment here will start lamenting that Barack is a tool of Murdoch like they say about Hillary? (Relax! That one was rhetorical.)

4) Will all the folks who got pissed off at Hillary here for saying she would have left Rev. Wright's church get pissed at Obama if it turns out that he has to throw Wright under the bus now that Wright has thrown him under the bus? (Again, rhetorical!)

5) Did the media (CNN, MSNBC, FOX) broadcast an hour of Rev. Wright LIVE! yesterday morning because they actually believed it was actual news or were they playing GOTCHA! with Obama -- and, are they playing GOTCHA! with Obama now merely because they are momentarily bored with playing GOTCHA! with Hillary Clinton?


.

28 comments:

Anonymous said...

Maria,

You sound like a gleeful schoolgirl who has just been asked on her first date.

Why all the effusiveness?

Actually, you sound like a gleeful schoolgirl whose gossip network just put you in a temporary, postive light, in the eyes of your would be beloved.

Anonymous said...

Those are absolutely fair questions, and fair-minded people should consider them. But here you go, beating up Maria again. Fools!

Bram Reichbaum said...

1. Robinson's comment was a compliment, clearly stated. I'm not sure what you're finding objectionable. The "homicidal" part was explicitly excepted from the analogy by the columnist.

2. It is highly unlikely that Hillary is going to win the nomination (it is highly unlikely that over 3/4 of the superdelegates will vote for her when there is no such split among voters), so some concerned Democrats are asking her to bow out. This is normal; this kind of thing happens to men in every election cycle. You should be proud.

As for "all-consumingly", I would say that adverb has something to do with the launching of attacks that mimic and legitimize the politics of the opposing political party. It is a scorched-earth strategy, and not something you do if your party's agenda is as important to you as your own.

3. At least Obama didn't kiss FOX's um, ring, calling them fair and balanced and outstanding, like some Hillary surrogates.

4. Hypothetical much?

5. So although the media is now beating up on Obama, you are still unhappy because you imagine it is only because they are "momentarily bored" with beating up on Hillary. It must be exhausting, thinking like this.

BOTTOM LINE: Hopefully, the next Obama will be a woman.

Anonymous said...

Bob Herberts in todays Times column presents the argument that I have been using against O for a long time. In referring to Wrights "tour" he suggests it is a payback to O and he acknowledges a "growing perception" that O is "weak", "unwilling or unable" to fight. This won't do for a new President who will be dealing with some pretty big fights.

Anonymous said...

Hillary hits 2 new lows today.

1. She accepts an endorsement of a NC governor who has to wield a gay slar at Obama in order to say something positive about Hillary: she made him, the governor says, "look like a pansy." There was not followop denouncemenmt or rejection of the endorser or the endorsement.

2. She agreed to go on the O'Reilly Factor on Wednesday night. Some important questions here. Will there be more "nuke our enemies" comments? Better yet, will Hillary show up with a non-concealed weapons permit and a gun to boot? Maybe Hillary with leather hollsters? Sexxxy!!! She may win over the S& M crowd, to offset her losses with the gay/lesbian crowd, w/ the NC governor's derogatory remarks.

Fillippelli the Cook said...

Since they seem to have sworn off the stuff, I'm sure Heir or John K. have some of their special medicine that helps the bats go away, if, uh, anybody, uh, wants to borrow any. Just sayin'...

Maria said...

"4. Hypothetical much?"

Bram,

What was that you were saying? I was busy listening to Obama throw Wright under the bus.

Anonymous said...

Obama was brilliant. And, Maria, as Andrew Sullivan says:

That was a very impressive, clear and constructive re-framing of the core message of his candidacy; and a moment given to him by Wright. No one will ever be able to say that Obama threw his father-figure and pastor under the bus. We all know that the reverse happened. We also know that this clear repudiation of Wright's toxic, indeed "ridiculous" views on AIDS, 9/11 and permanent immiseration of people of color could not have happened unless Wright had made it necessary. Skeptics may wonder whether Wright actually deliberately did Obama a favor. I doubt it. But a favor it unintentionally is.

Maybe God does bring good out of bad. Maybe these racial and cultural divides can help us understand how better to move beyond them. Cynics may scoff - and certainly will. They will parse every nuance and try to paint Obama as another cynical, positioning pol. I don't believe it. He has more sincerity and integrity than the vast majority of politicians, more honesty, and more resilience in a very tough spot.

And today, we found that he can fight back, and take a stand, without calculation and in what is clearly a great amount of personal difficulty and political pain. It's what anyone should want in a president. It makes me want to see him succeed more than ever. It's why this country needs to see him succeed more than ever.


Yes, Maria, Hillary would have thrown him under the bus from the get-go. But, again, Barack is an entirely other league.

Maria said...

"We also know that this clear repudiation of Wright's toxic, indeed "ridiculous" views on AIDS, 9/11..."

Which of course Obama had never heard before yesterday.

Anonymous said...

Hey Anonymous 1:31pm

People like you are the reason I won't vote for Obama...the people that follow him are so uninformed.

"1. She accepts an endorsement of a NC governor who has to wield a gay slar at Obama in order to say something positive about Hillary: she made him, the governor says, "look like a pansy." There was not followop denouncemenmt or rejection of the endorser or the endorsement."

Read this story...do you think Rocky Balboa and Obama are the same person??? Hillary compared herself to Rocky and the NC Gov was commenting that she is even tougher than Rocky

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/04/29/956457.aspx

"2. She agreed to go on the O'Reilly Factor on Wednesday night. Some important questions here. Will there be more "nuke our enemies" comments? Better yet, will Hillary show up with a non-concealed weapons permit and a gun to boot? Maybe Hillary with leather hollsters? Sexxxy!!! She may win over the S& M crowd, to offset her losses with the gay/lesbian crowd, w/ the NC governor's derogatory remarks."

There is so much stupidity in this comment I dont know where to start. First, the Gov was not making anti-gay comments, and me being a gay male I am not offended that he used the word pansy (I didnt know pansy was a gay slur...am I wrong? It wasnt in my gay handbook). Second, she said the USA could destroy Iran if they attacked Isreal with nuclear weapons. As a Jew, and someone who believes we should stand up for and defend our allies, I was glad she made those comments.

People like you need to know the whole story or the contexts of those comments instead of doing nothing but listen to sound bites. Inform yourself!

Anonymous said...

Okay, okay Maria, we get it. For you, the list of attributes that are important in leading this country the next four years begins and ends with gender.

For this male voter, I'd rather be asking questions like 'Who cynically voted to allow Bush to send kids over to be killed in a useless war so that they might polish their foreign policy resume?' Yes, there were many men that did the same. I wouldn't vote for them either.

I agree with the feminists who have said 'This country is definitely ready for a woman president, just not this woman.'

Anonymous said...

Maria,

Good one.

Are those from Hillary's or McCain's most updated talking points? Oh, I forgot; they have streamlined their efforts lately. Which side of the new fused campaign are you now suporting, btw?

Maria said...

So Kos and MoveOn are part of the McCain campaign?

I did not know that!

Anonymous said...

I do vote Hillary, BUT this attack by Obama's minister must be the most painful thing he has had to endure----as yet. Can he endure more? Wright is his Judas, will he have the arguments to survive the crucifiction? The "ideal" is worthy of struggling for, but our kids have to exist NOW, not in some futuristic universe. Sincerity

Anonymous said...

If you paid attention at all you would see that Obama did not "throw Wright under the bus"

Wright's comments the past few days regarding Obama were wrong. Obama clarified that there was more to Wright than the soundbytes, but then Wright did his best to say, no that is me and Obama's just a politician.

So please stop the BS.

Either you can see what's happening as a mature adult, or will play games and act like a wingnut.

Anonymous said...

my name is Sincerity. I have read on this blog that we should not acknowledge Anonymous posts, but that's not fair. we cannot all be "known" in the media, and maybe the unknown have a little contribution. I am coming from an "advanced age" but I have been there, done that, as the saying goes. I have a vested interest in the leadership of this country because my grandchildren will exist long after I pass. We have done many things wrong, but living in the past prevents any discussion of change that is good.

Obama is a man I could want to follow, but is this the time for another "Jesus"? Or do we need someone who will keep our Nation supperior in strength and ecomony? This is Now! Do you think Obama can reconcile all the religions of the world? Can he unify the racial devide? Can he bring a halt to the gang related killings, the drugs that keep it going? Can he stop us from hate? That is what I see he promises, but Can he deliver?

Or do we need another 150 years of nice homes, good TV, fast cars, long romantic vacations, opportunities to travel to exotic places,cell phones that do everything but wipe my but, and on and on.? My kids want those things. Do you?

A promise of eternal bliss weighs nothing against the NOW! Eternal bliss will only be acquired by monumental sacrifice by your generaton for the next seven. Can you handle that? If you are ready to do that, Then let's elect Obama.

Schultz said...

Is there anyway to filter the 2PJ's blog posts by author? Your posts are tiring.

Anonymous said...

Shultz, my spoiled Darling, what tires you so? Is it introspection or comments that are not allgned with your little self-involved views,or is it a lack of sexual relief? Tell us,tell us. Speak, we are all here to listen. You can earn a stcker, a beautiful little sticker for your "try".

Anonymous said...

Retired Millhunk says:
Anon 3:39 You don't quite understand Maria. She could give a shit less about who dies in Iraq: She doesn't have to go. It doesn't matter to her if Hilliary voted to go to war, if she voted to expand the war to Iran, Maria doesn't have to go other people go and die. Maria only knows Hilliary is a woman so she gets her vote. If innocent people die. Like Cheney says: So!

Anonymous said...

"Is it more "all-consuming"ly ambitious for a man to start running for president after only being in the US Senate for a year or for a woman to refuse to drop out of a presidential race when her opponent cannot win the pledged delegates needed to put him over the top?"

Hear, hear! I was wondering if it bothered anyone else that not so long ago, Obama was voting on important issues like the state vegetable of Indiana...

Maria said...

ROTF!

Anonymous said...

maria has presented the very best argument I have heard on "who" should drop out. This is a good debate that can only clarify some plusses and minusses of both Obama and Hillary. Wonder what the state veggie is, though?

Anonymous said...

I have a question about "Pork". Is a grant of $350,000 for a table tennis touring company considered Pork Barrell spending? I know Hill is the biggest spender, for fire companies and bridges and home security. So a little measly 350 for a fun game shouldn't bother anybody and if that company wants to donate 100,000 to Obama's campaign that would be ok, Right? I'm just asking.

Maria said...

Schultz,

"Is there anyway to filter the 2PJ's blog posts by author? Your posts are tiring."

And, yet you keep reading them. I'm thinking I may be missing a real opportunity here. Since it hurts so much to read my posts and yet you still insist on not only reading them but responding to them, I can only conclude that you are a masochist and I am serving some need of yours: that will be $100.

Bram Reichbaum said...

"Anonymous" of 0:26 said:

"Hear, hear! I was wondering if it bothered anyone else that not so long ago, Obama was voting on important issues like the state vegetable of Indiana..."

This is the silliest comment evah. You should know darn well that weighty and critical issues are discussed even at the level of city councils, and that Congress itself has its share of feel-good banalities.

What this should indicate to people is that Barack Obama has more experience *as an officeholder* than Hillary Clinton -- and that her inexperience shows. It is the hallmark of inexperience to conveniently forget your principles get carried away with the tide of popular sentiment.

We don't need more of that, and we don't need the Clinton machine focus-grouping everything to death.

Anonymous said...

According to the Times, Obama did not specify on disclosure forms for 2001 and 2002 that EKI provided him with most of his private-sector compensation.

So ignore this and keep dreaming of your perfectly wonderful Politician to be any different

Anonymous said...

In addition, Clinton is asking for grants of up to $400 million for interoperable emergency communication, $335 million for emergency planning, $190 million for port security and $225 million for transit security.


Golly, all i want is to get a little table tennis going here. Hilliary is a real money Hog!

Anonymous said...

R.M. says:
Her requests for grants of over 1 billion dollars for emergency communications, planning and transit were all these grants for her Woodstock request?