Point:

[ProSense]

Hillary's primary run doesn't place her above criticism forever. She is still a public figure, in the Senate and in the news. Claiming that any article posted about Hillary or the Clintons is rehashing the primary is beyond ludicrous.

Anyone still advancing the argument that criticizing Hillary is rehashing the primary should take his/her own advice and stop rehashing the primary.

I've seen angry posts here because clips of Hillary making statements in the primary are shown on TV. It's as if some people believe those clips should be put away in a vault forever simply because they're embarrassing.

And no, people are not emulating neocons by criticizing Lieberman, Hillary, the DLC or anyone who has earned criticism.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

3. Have you lost your mind? n/t

[JVS]

4. It's a reference to an old SNL running gag

http://www.jibjab.com/view/159106

Jane Curtain would always be on the Point side. Then Dan Ackroyd would begin the Counterpoint by calling her an ignorant slut.

[walldude]

5. Are you young? That is an old Saturday Night Live joke

Dan Akroid and JAne Curtain used to do a segment on SNL called Point:Counterpoint and Dan always started the counterpoint with "Jane you ignorant slut".

[ProSense]

6. OK, I take it back.

This is me lightening up. Apology. :)

[JVS]

2. What about bashing of Richardson for being a "back-stabber"?

[ProSense]

8. Are you serious?

You found merit in Carville's moronic position?

Still, the point is these claims that criticism of Hillary is rehashing the primary are ludicrous.

[JVS]

9. No. I was asking you if you think that bashing Richardson is rehashing the primaries.

I think Carville sucks ass totally.

[jenmito]

11. I assume you're asking that question because someone called Richardson a "backstabber" on another

thread. I don't think anyone but Carville and a few die-hard Hillary supporters ever believed that BS.

[ProSense]

13. The whole argument was and is ridiculous.

The primary is history, literally a part of the public record. People can try to run from the details, but they're out there and they are relevant. I beleived Carville was an ass before the primary, and his actions during the primary confirmed my belief.

[AtomicKitten]

7. She is a politician and as such open for discussion.

The fact that some here have glommed onto her as if she was their mother, sister, or significant other speaks to the weakness of their argument on her behalf. Their symbiosis with this politician is ridiculous and their brow-beating and recriminations on her behalf absurd.

[jenmito]

12. How DARE you talk about the "Goddess of Peace" that way!

:rofl: :hi:

[AtomicKitten]

14. Soup nazi!

:hi:

[jenmito]

15. Seinfeld!

:hi:

[Life Long Dem]

10. And who brought up Hillary to begin with?

Hillary was introduced by the media to divide us, so the media can say Obama is not starting out very well, in reaching out when even his own party is divided.

Make sense? This way, even if we did have 60 in the senate, the Democrats in the senate would have an excuse to be divided, when in fact we have not been divided.

And I don't see going any further than saying this is a rumor started by the media. So I don't even speak of Hillary or her qualifications, because I'm pissed at the media trying to divide the party.

Don't let this get to you, because it's a media stunt.

[TexasObserver]

16. Of course it is legitimate to criticize Hillary on the issue of Sec of State.

ANY person who is considered for any post is fair game for criticism, as long as that criticism is over the skill of the person to fill the role, or to the politically advisability of such an appointment.

It is not legitimate to rehash the primary ugliness, however, in pursuit of such a discussion.

For example, I like Richardson and Kerry a great deal. They both were significant supporters of Obama when he was fighting Clinton. No one was more unhappy with Hill and Bill than me during the primaries. But, I still think Hillary would be the best choice for Sec of State. If Obama chooses Richardson or Kerry for Sec of State, I'm good with that, too.

We can talk about the skills of the people proposed for appointments without fighting the primary battles once again.

[ProSense]

17. "It is not legitimate to rehash the primary ugliness, however, in pursuit of such a discussion."

Reference to Hillary's actions or comments relevant to the discussion is not rehashing the primary.

Hillary's statement about obliterating Iran is relevant, as are other things she said.

That's the point, expecting people to simply overlook those comments forever because people can't deal with hearing them is ridiculous.

[TexasObserver]

18. Hillary's policy positions are not part of the primary ugliness.

Certainly, it's fair to point out where she differed from Obama on key foreign policy matters.

But Hillary is a grown up. She understands that when Obama is president and she's SOS, her job is to be HIS voice. She's not out there on her own. She's doing his bidding.

Obama wants people who are strong enough to push their ideas and opinions at him. He wants that, and Hillary will provide it.

[ProSense]

19. "She understands that when Obama is president and she's SOS, her job is to be HIS voice."

She hasn't gotten the job yet, but the bigger point is that she isn't qualified.

[TexasObserver]

21. Of course she's qualified. You're not qualified to assess her skills, however.

[yourguide]

23. Nor are you.

:eyes:

[TexasObserver]

24. Sure I am.

[yourguide]

25. Well then prosense and I are as well.

[TexasObserver]

26. It doesn't work like that.

Some opinions are educated, and some are not.

Since you allow petulance, not reason, to form your opinions, I know for a certainty you lack the ability to evaluate Hillary or anyone for a top job.

[yourguide]

27. I would say the same for you.

But you keep thinking you're superior to the rest of us, oh and I challenge you to show me one example of my petulance towards Hillary since the primaries...you cant do it, which makes your oh so superior opinion and evaluation skills flawed at best.

:eyes:

[Booster]

20. I love Obama, but by your standards we would have to bash him

for scoffing at Hillary's foreign experience then considering her as Sec. of State. Let the man decide for himself who he picks for whatever position he wants.

[ProSense]

22. See, those are not my standards.

Criticism isn't bashing, and Obama is not above criticism.