Would Hillary be banned from DU?

[JMDEM]

She has now actively promoted a Republican over a Democrat in an extremely damaging way.

[hisownpetard]

1. Absolutely. (Don't remember who, but someone said this before).

[againes654]

5. You probably mean someone else, but I said it

earlier today.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4989232&mesg_id=4989285

[Samantha]

60. I said she would be tombstoned

a couple of weeks ago. Does that count? I have to ask because by today's standards I am unsure what counts and what does not!:)

UPON READING THE REST OF THIS THREAD AFTER POSTING THIS REMARK, ALLOW ME TO CLARIFY -- I DIDN'T MEAN THAT IN THE LITERAL SENSE, JUST THE LITERARY ONE!

[hisownpetard]

64. Yeah, that's where I saw it - and I totally agree with both of you on that score.

No two ways about it.
We don't even mention the name of Republican sites on DU, let alone endorse them!!

I think what she has said (and repeated several times) is truly unforgiveable in the political context.

[stevenleser]

70. I did. There is no question that she would have broken the rules...

she deserves tombstoning.

[backscatter712]

2. Why'd the thread suggesting Clinton get an honorary tombstone get locked?

It's not like she didn't do anything to deserve it, like BETRAYING A FELLOW DEMOCRAT BY ENDORSING A REPUBLICAN OVER HIM!!!

It's not like we don't have those acts on video.

[Omaha Steve]

13. It suggested the death of a D in NY, but I'm not a mod

Clinton has drawbacks, but she is a damn good US Senator. To date my union has spent more than $5 million to elect her. I'm tiring of all the in fighting in the ranks. But then there are trolls and Reps in disguise.

[stevenleser]

68. I am the OP of that thread, and I was upset it was locked

I complained to the mod who did it and wrote to skinner and all. I thought it was a completely appropriate suggestion.

[Kittycat]

3. Hillary W. McLieberman

[mtnsnake]

8. Are you by any chance a Republican?

[Kittycat]

Are you?

What kind of question is that? I've been a member here even longer than you. :eyes:

[SKKY]

4. I think that McCain comment would at the very least get her a very...

...stern talking to by Skinner.

[Maddy McCall]

6. Of course not.

:eyes:

[Evergreen Emerald]

7. Obama promoted REagan over Clinton--but, of course there are

different rules for Obama than for Clinton.

[IndianaGreen]

9. Stop repeating that lie that only the Monster and her lapdogs repeat

Obama did not praise Reagan's policies, he only mentioned what is an irrefutable historical fact, that Reagan was a transformational President. How many Democrats became Reagan Democrats?

Are you being paid for spouting this shit?

[Evergreen Emerald]

11. So, when Obama praises Reagan--he was just citing historical fact

When Clinton cites historical fact, she is praising the republican?

Double standards abound. You must tie yourself up in a pretzel to sustain that logic.

[IndianaGreen]

15. Typical Hillarista twisting of words. You are just full of shit!

Do you have a reading comprehension problem, or are you being paid to be deliberately obtuse?

[Evergreen Emerald]

16. more double standard.

Reagan's presidency was praised while Clinton's was attacked. And you tie yourself up in knots attempting to distinguish the difference between historical fact and historical fact...and then you use it to dehumanize Clinton so you can continue your self righteous attacks against her.

You. Are. WRong.

[davidinalameda]

77. don't let them get to you

have a drink


:toast:

[Hepburn]

55. Hello?

Get a dictionary: Obama noted that Reagan could put together one hell of a coalition and that it had a one hell of an effect on our political process. That is a fucking fact...if you don't like it, tough.

On the other hand, the Monster rated a viable Dem candidate lower than the Repub running against him for the same fucking office, did it publically and did it for her own advantage.

If you don't see the difference, then I suggest you take off your Hillary blinders and take a good look at it again.

JMHO

[hell-bent]

12. What does "transformational" mean?

Were you transformed into voting for the idiot? Obama was appealing to those so called Reagan Democrats that were responsible for the huge defict that Ronnie produced at the expense of the working class. Shame on Obama for even praising that jerk in anyway. It demonstrates that he is just a opportunistic politician like most.

[Evergreen Emerald]

17. Wow. You have dehumanized a progressive, intelligent

Senator who has fought for progressive rights her whole life. And you feel justified in calling her a monstor.

How ugly. Are you the new DU?

[IndianaGreen]

25. The Monster voted against a ban on cluster bombs

How many children and women have died because of cluster bombs, long after the war was over? Hillary is not a progressive! She is a Lieberman clone, and I mean an Avigdor Lieberman clone!

[Hepburn]

57. LOL....

...a former member of the Board of Walmart, a former Goldwater Girl and the former head of the College Repukes is a progressive.

May I ask in what altered universe you dwell? Just curious....

[Evergreen Emerald]

63. Do you honestly believe your distortions?

Read up on Clinton...or do you have to completely dehumanize her in order to continue your over-the-top attacks? Does it help you sleep at night?

Clinton, while on the board at WalMart did alot for workers rights. But, you would not know that if you only read right-wing talking points. She was in college and discovered that she was better aligned with liberal views and values and changed parties.

She is more progressive than Obama...and yet you don't question one thing about him. Just cover your ears and close your eyes and yell to avoid anything entering your made-up-mind.

That, does not sound progressive to me. Liberals open their minds.

[awaysidetraveler]

66. Liberals aren't so open minded about cluster bombs or pro-torture votes.

That's not what we're liberal about.

[againes654]

76. Her WHOLE life??

Wasn't she a repuke in college?

Edited to add: I believe that people can change their minds. I DO NOT fault Hillary for this; I only bring it to question the statement of her WHOLE life. I see this has already been discussed, so I am behind.

[JVS]

18. Reagan has been out of politics for many years and dead for a few.

I don't think he can be promoted

[Evergreen Emerald]

19. If you do not understand the issue, why even post?

[JVS]

24. Reagan is a non issue. Your candidate fluffing McCain is a major issue.

[hell-bent]

56. fluffing?

No, she just stated the truth which apparently you fail to accept. Obama's foreign policy experience amounts to zilch. Face the facts, Jack!:rofl:

[apocalypsehow]

26. Reading is obviously not your area of expertise, but I'll try to distill it down to the basics:

Senator Obama was making a historical point based on a factual knowledge of what actually happened during the 1980's: he never said he agreed with it, or that it should have occurred, or that he embraced the trans-formative changes that took place during the Reagan era. Further, Reagan is dead and no longer running for anything.

Senator Clinton, on the other hand, openly embraced & endorsed a living, breathing Republican who is running for President against the Democratic nominee this year. She did this unprompted, and in a vicious, backhanded way that showed genuine resentment of her Democratic opponent. Starting to see the difference here? Or should I break out the poster board and the crayons?

:shrug:

[Evergreen Emerald]

29. I see that double standards are your strong point.

Telling the truth about McCain--that he has more experience than Obama--is not supporting him. She has been consistent in stating that she does not agree with his politics and will support the democratic nomination.

So, you are attempting to distort what Clinton said--while giving Obama every benefit of the doubt in suggesting that he was "only citing historical fact." Reagan's presidency was not about transformation--Obama was sucking up to the conservatives to gain an endorsement.

To give him the benefit of the doubt--and not give Clinton the same benefit, is being intellectually dishonest. You look for ways to dehumanize her so you can continue to call her a monster.

You have tied yourself up into a pretzel to get to that point. And I will never agree with you. You. Are. Wrong.

[apocalypsehow]

35. There is not a "double standard" in sight: nice try. Go back and re-read my post above. Take it slow

and easy, and really give it your best in an attempt to decipher the meaning of each word, and place it into a coherent context in the sentences that are on the screen in front of you. Then get back with me. Thank you.

[BigBearJohn]

71. Evergreen Emerald -- I agree with you utterly and completely!

I love the fact that you are not easily bullied
into submission by people who use every trick
in the book to embarrass and belittle Hillary
supporters.

[hisownpetard]

69. "Senator Clinton, on the other hand, openly embraced & endorsed a living, breathing Republican..."

Are you sure about that? Has anyone held a mirror under McCain's nose, just to make sure?

[apocalypsehow]

20. Funny, I wasn't aware Reagan had been resurrected from the dead, nor that he was now actively

challenging McCain for the GOP nomination...it's a miracle!!! :eyes:

[Evergreen Emerald]

23. There you go--good job. When you lose on the facts...

change the subject.

[apocalypsehow]

27. My post was right on point - yours, eh, not so much.

n/t.

[Evergreen Emerald]

32. Your post is nothing but illogical

drivel as you attempt to justify dehumanizing a progressive senator who has fought for human rights her whole life. Have at it.

[apocalypsehow]

37. Ah, and now comes the grubby little ad hominem attacks. Typical.

n/t.

[Evergreen Emerald]

40. I was repeating in kind

typical tho of you--more double standard on DU. One standard for Obama and his supporters. Another for Clinton and hers.

[apocalypsehow]

42. No, you weren't. Do you know what "ad hominem" means? Like I said, reading seems to be an area in

which you struggle - which is an accurate observation, as opposed to your personal attacks.

[Evergreen Emerald]

45. really? Your holier than thou smart ass posts are nothing more than

attacks. Perhaps it is you that needs a dictionary.

I can read fine. I see your posts for what they are.

[apocalypsehow]

47. And your repeated personal attacks are a sure sign of someone without anything coherent left to say.

Sad.

[Evergreen Emerald]

actually, I had quite a bit to say, but you devolved this conversation

into something personal. The facts are that most moderates on DU have left the building (and democracy along with it). I come back occasionally, only to be blown away by the debauchery that is left. Constant attacks against Clinton, mostly lies and distortions with no one to offer a different perspective. And if someone dares suggest an alternative, they are attacked by seeming attack-gnats waiting to buzz in for the kill.

You have dehumanized a great leader. And left DU in ruins. And you respond to any alternative view by smart-ass posts. But, have at it. Keep up the pretense. If that is what gets you through the night.

[apocalypsehow]

53. I "devolved" the conversation! Wow, I'm good! ... Actually, what you had to say was proven wrong -

repeatedly. Instead of either reassessing your views or simply leaving the thread, you started indulging in abusive behavior and hurling personal attacks. This is a typical tactic of those who have been shown the falsity of their stated views, but still wish to cling to the tattered remnants of them.

Oh, and by the bye:

devolve

Main Entry:
de·volve Listen to the pronunciation of devolve
Pronunciation:
\di-ˈvälv, -ˈvȯlv, dē-\
Function:
verb
Inflected Form(s):
de·volved; de·volv·ing
Etymology:
Middle English, from Latin devolvere, from de- + volvere to roll — more at voluble
Date:
15th century

transitive verb: to pass on (as responsibility, rights, or powers) from one person or entity to another <devolving to western Europe full responsibility for its own defense — Christopher Lane>intransitive verb1 a: to pass by transmission or succession <the estate devolved on a distant cousin> b: to fall or be passed usually as a responsibility or obligation <the responsibility for breadwinning has devolved increasingly upon women — Barbara Ehrenreich>2: to come by or as if by flowing down <his allegedly subversive campaigns…devolve from his belief in basic American rights — Frank Deford>3: to degenerate through a gradual change or evolution <where order devolves into chaos — Johns Hopkins Magazine>


Just FYI, to help you with the word "devolved" and it's actual definition the next time the whimsy overtakes you to use it in a sentence - this will aid you in finding one where it might actually make some sense...

:rofl:

[hell-bent]

50. No, it's not a miracle;

but, ignorance on your part for not recognizing that Saint Ronnie is an icon in the Rethug party which every Rethug candidate wants to emulate. Any recognition of his achievements is insult to most Democrats that are aware of the damage he caused to many in this nation. That's not to say anything about his scandals. Poor judgment on Obama's part for giving him any praise or recognition.

[apocalypsehow]

72. That's got to be the dumbest post I've ever read on the internet.

n/t.

[againes654]

75. He didn't actually promote him

at least not in the way I understand promoting. Also, Reagan is not running in this election is he?

Let me ask you two questions.... Do you think what Hillary said could potentially hurt Obama in the GE? Do you think what Obama said could hurt Hillary in the GE?

[hell-bent]

10. No, I think you should

for posting such an idiotic suggestion! Sip some more of the special drink. And, check in for further instructions periodically.

[JMDEM]

14. Why? It clearly violates the DU rules as I understand them.

Thanks for the insults -- it shows I struck a nerve.

[hell-bent]

31. What nerve could that

possibly be? Observing such a dumb post from an Obama surrogate only confirms my suspicion that as a whole they are extremely immature and bordering on the bizarre. Did you get the idea for such a post from one of your little meetings or from the staff of the Chosen One?

[proud2BlibKansan]

21. Only if she posted what she said

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

33. Several Here Have Posted Exactly What She Said, In Their Own Words. They Weren't TS'd.

There goes your brilliant theory.

:rofl:

Oh the ignorance of some. Too funny!

[proud2BlibKansan]

38. Did you alert on them?

They can't get TSed unless you let the mods know. But then I think you might know that.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

41. Why Would I? Their Comments Were Perfectly Fine In Context.

And rest assured, I'm sure many of the Obama zealots almost hurt themselves with how quickly they lunged for the alert key.

Fact is, you are dead wrong and quite foolish for thinking that to be the case.

[proud2BlibKansan]

43. Yes it is certainly not foolish to praise a republican over a democrat

especially here on DU. Not foolish at all!!

:sarcasm:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

46. Get A Grip For Chrissakes.

[BleedingHeartPatriot]

22. LOL.

:rofl:

[ozone_man]

28. I think according to DU rules

promoting a Republican over another Democrat is likely to result in a deleted post and if it persists, I think a tombstone is warranted.

If not, then it would be nice to cut some slack for those that speak highly of Nader. At least Nader is progressive, which we are supposed to be here. But McCain is not progressive in any sense of the word. I vote tombstone, since it was such a high profile and destructive endorsement. :)

[hell-bent]

39. Well, you will be

able to vote for Ralphie when Obama doesn't get the nomination. That's probably your first choice anyway.

[ozone_man]

49. Or maybe I should vote for McCain?

Hillary seems to be endorsing him, so I'm no longer sure who to support. Obama doesn't have the experience that McCain has. I ask what kind of experience is that? Vietnam war experience and voting for the Iraq war. Is that good experience or is it bad experience?

I think voting for the Iraq war is inexcusable, particularly if a candidate feels no remorse about doing so.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

30. No She Hasn't And No She Wouldn't. Any Other Ridiculously Twisted And Nonsensical Questions To Ask?

:shrug:

[KoKo]

34. WORD...

http://current.com/items/88854218_the_democratic_messiah

[ozone_man]

44. That was cute.

Thanks! We have to remind ourselves on occasion that we're dealing with two corporate candidates with few differences.

[Seabiscuit]

36. So "promoted" is the new Obamanoid buzzword for "endorsed"?

Hillary's speech neither "promoted" nor "endorsed" McCain.

Your panties are in a bunch because on the subject of "experience", her zinger, which was the whole point of that speech, was that "all Obama has is a speech he made in 2002."

The deliberate distortions motivating these whining posts and threads are juvenile, stupid, dumb and pathetic.

[Thurston Howell III]

48. No but Lee Mercer would!

It's a tragedy how the media and corporatist DLCers have marginalized him! All because of this!!

"7. To prove the United States Government needs a government debriefing in Business and Commerce through Business and Commerce Intelligence National and International."

[JMDEM]

51. The fact that Hillary supporters aren't aghast at this move

Is mind-boggling. Apparently they are capable of letting ANYTHING slide by.

Absolutely shocking in my book.

[Poll_Blind]

52. I was going to say yes, but only the 2nd time she said it. But after thinking about it...

...if someone worded it exactly as Hillary Clinton said it- yeah, she probably would have been tombstoned sometime later that evening.

  And if not, definitely the second time she said it.

PB

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

54. Hillary's probably on DU under an assumed name bashing Obama. I think I know who she's posing as.

[hell-bent]

58. Can you let us

in on your secret? Holy crap, I can't believe these ideas and statements coming from the Obama surrogates.

[Skinner]

59. No, she wouldn't.

What she said was highly distasteful and strategically unwise, but (contrary to the DU conventional wisdom) it was not an endorsement of Senator McCain. As the admin, it's my job to pay attention to what our members actually say, and disregard how others spin it.

(And speaking of "how others spin it," I suspect it will not take long for someone to take this post out of context and claim -- in this thread or elsewhere -- that I have either endorsed McCain or agreed with what Senator Clinton said.)

[stop the bleeding]

65. What? You endorsed McCain or agreed with what Senator Clinton said?

:spank::beer:

[cbayer]

61. No, she would not. nt.

[Unbowed]

62. Nah, not until she actually pulls a Lieberman and runs against the democratic nominee

in the general election.

Mind you, if she can't cheat, lie and steal her way to the nomination, I fully expect her to challenge Obama running as an independent.

She's not well.

[Johnny__Motown]

67. Yep. this video is the proof

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZsYWiywdCA&feature=related

[awaysidetraveler]

73. Any definitive answers on this one yet?

[awaysidetraveler]

74. Proof that she would not be banned from DU:

Though she would apparently be deeply humiliated.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4996556&mesg_id=4996556

[suston96]

78. "Actively promoted"? What crap......nt