Oh Joy! David Brooks Believes Hillary is a great pick for SOS.

[leftchick]

very telling.

[IndianaJones]

1. so does Obama...very telling. nt.

[PeaceNikki]

2. A lot of Democrats believe she's a great pick.

What are you implying?

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

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

[Dogmudgeon]

13. Now, let's not personalize this

Anti-liberalism has long been a bad habit of MOST of the "uber-left". (They usually refer to themselves as the "Principled Left" or "Leftists of Conscience"). In 2000, it directly destroyed Ralph Nader and indirectly destroyed (for a while) Al Gore; but the main thing was that it became a turf fight when a united front was required. Because the minor squabble gave the GOP enough room to steal the election lock, stock, and hanging chad.

Most of us are happy with the impending Obama Revolution. We should use the occasion to learn how to argue for our dreams without rancor. For example, I was a strong Hillary supporter. She lost the primary, and it took me about 30 seconds to become a balls-to-the-wall Obamaniac. I hear it took Hillary and Barack all of three days to kiss and make up. That's good politics.

And we can probably convince some of the stiff-necked ones by example. Perhaps we, too, will embrace more strident positions now that it is easier and more urgent that we do so.

--p!

[Dragonfli]

14. Nothing "so-called" about Her. She is a kind woman and a true liberal.

I have read thousands of her posts (not so much here) - I can assure you she reserves a special place in her image of hell for both Limpballs and the Loofa-monster.

Like most liberals she has been fighting in the real world to help the less fortunate and preyed-upon. I don't know you, so I shall not call you names, but I doubt you are good enough to insult her as you do.

[PeaceNikki]

17. What is the implication of the OP?

She said "very telling"... of what exactly?

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

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

[PeaceNikki]

23. Obama thinks she's a good pick, too. Nice personal attack.

Real knee-slapper. :thumbsup:

A ha ha! Oh gosh that's funny! That's really funny! Do you write your own material? Do you? Because that is so fresh. You know, I've, I've never heard anyone make that joke before. Hmm. You're the first. God what a clever, smart person you must be, to come up with a joke like that all by yourself. That's so fresh too. Any, any Titanic jokes you want to throw at me too as long as we're hitting these phenomena at the height of their popularity.

God you're so funny!

[leftchick]

27. apparently

you did not bother to read my views or accept the fact that she is a hawk first and foremost.

"la-di-da la-di-da" :eyes:

[PeaceNikki]

29. Apparently you think you can make a judgement about someone based on 2 posts asking for

clarification.

You don't know shit about me.

[leftchick]

32. I did not say I knew you

But I can safely recognize one of these...







I do not believe you ever asked for clarification. But I will be happy to help you clear the sand out of your eyes. And gee, I thought this was common knowledge.....

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-rees/clinton-obama-and-clust_b_84811.html


<snip>

Cluster bombs and landmines are particularly terrifying weapons that wreak havoc on communities trying to recover from war. They are fatal impediments to reconstruction and rehabilitation of agricultural land; they destroy valuable livestock; they disable otherwise productive members of society; they maim or kill children trying to salvage them for scrap metal.

Over 150 nations have signed the 1997 Mine Ban Treaty. It pains me that our great nation has not. But in the autumn of 2006, there was a chance to take a step in the right direction: Senate Amendment No. 4882, an amendment to a Pentagon appropriations bill that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.

Senator Obama of Illinois voted IN FAVOR of the ban. Senator Clinton of New York voted AGAINST the ban.

Analysts say Clinton did not want to risk appearing "soft on terror," as it would have harmed her electability.




http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/10/07/clintons_iran_vote_prompts_a_h.html


<snip>

Clinton's Iran Vote Prompts A Harsh Back-and-Forth

Randall Rolph said he came to New Hampton, Iowa, on Sunday to see Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) with an open mind about whether to support her candidacy. After a tough exchange over Iran, he left saying he had ruled her out.

Rolph was one of several hundred people who turned out in this small town in northern Iowa for Clinton's appearance. When she called on him for a question, he pulled out a piece of paper and read a question about Iran.

Rolph asked Clinton to explain her Senate vote Wednesday for a resolution urging the Bush administration to label the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization. Rolph interpreted that measure as giving Bush authority to use military action against the Iranians.

"Well, let me thank you for the question, but let me tell you that the premise of the question is wrong and I'll be happy to explain that to you," Clinton began.

She offered a detailed description of the resolution, which she said stressed robust diplomacy that could lead to imposing sanctions against Iran, and then pointedly said to Rolph that her view wasn't in "what you read to me, that somebody obviously sent to you."

"I take exception," Rolph interjected. "This is my own research."




Once a Hawk, Always a Hawk.

[PeaceNikki]

33. mmm hmm. You still haven't clarified

what you are saying about people who support her for SoS. Like... oh, Obama.

I get it, though. It's your way of vaguely implying that anyone who supports her is less of a "lefty" than you.

You just don't have the nads to come out and say it.

[leftchick]

34. I believe that you have just stated the obvious

I believe Obama is listening to his Hawkish DLC handlers and not his heart. Other than that it is obvious her supporters approve of her neoliberal world views. Or are completely unaware of them

:eyes:

facts are a nuisance for you aren't they?

[Dragonfli]

24. I do not read minds - I took it to mean she has her hawkish bona fides in order

I have known leftchick to be a staunch supporter of peace. She has always advocated for diplomacy and is a very harsh critic of pre-emptive imperialistic strikes.

I will ask her exactly what she meant if you like, next time I see her in a common post. I have already warned her that liberal minded people are not well received here. If she chooses I am sure she will answer you herself. I have already decided that this is becoming the DLC underground, she will likely choose to make that judgment on her own and will allow you to ask her personally.

I just found it absurd that a poster decided, over one post, that she was some sort of right wing troll, you have no idea how absurd that assumption was.

[leftchick]

19. actually

I have not heard one bad word about her from any repuke pundit. Face it, she is a hawk and makes no apologies for it. Someone like Richardson for instance, who actually believes in diplomacy not bombs, would have been a superior choice.

Oh and her 'compassion' for innocents is telling in her vote against the banning of cluster bombs. Our gifts to our "enemies" that just keep on giving.

:puke:

[leftchick]

20. lol!

oh, and... sticks and stones. :eyes:

[Dragonfli]

25. Howdy Stranger!

:hi:

So nice to see you again.

[leftchick]

28. it is great to see you as well

I was starting to feel a little lonely stating uncomfortable facts.

:hug:

[EFerrari]

3. Brooks has been very positive about Obama in general.

He looks to be having some kind of breakdown. :silly:

[LostinVA]

4. And David Broder thinks she's a horrible pick -- very telling

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. Hardly surprising. Hawks of a feather..

[TahitiNut]

16. D'uh

:rofl:

[leftchick]

22. thank you!

I mean wtf? Has everyone forgotten her Margaret Thatcher hat she has been wearing for the last few years? We need a fucking DIPLOMAT not another Hardline/RW/AIPAC supporting war hawk!

:crazy:

[Taverner]

7. Well so do I

But I think she would do better work domestically - given her background and experience

[Sarah Ibarruri]

8. Well, I'm was never a Hillary supporter, and disagreed with Pres Clinton on a lot, however......

I admire the Sen. Clinton.

I think she suffered GREATLY during the 8 years she was president at the hands of the Repuke assholes, who accused her of being a murderer, called her names, accused her of having a lesbian lover, tried her husband for having committed adultery, and tried to remove him from office, and much more.

My ANGER with Repukes for what they did to her caused me to wish Obama would name her attorney general so she could at least go after some of the assholes who did this to the Clintons.

However, the former First Lady remained strong, calm, stoic, and fought them at every turn.

I think she'll do a good job as secretary of state, and to be perfectly honest, other countries have a good feeling when they see President Clinton and Sen. Clinton. Under the Clintons, relations with other countries were GOOD.

It wasn't until the Chimp-in-Office, Bush, that the ENTIRE planet began to hate us with a degree of hate never known before. All this now has to be patched up. The world loves Obama, and that's good. And they don't hate the Clntons.

What's your opinion of what I said?

[Maven]

9. So...when a Republican expresses approval of something Obama does that DOESN'T involve Hillary

it shows Obama's ability to appeal to a broad coalition. It also shows that that Republican has "seen the light."

When a Republican expresses approval of something Obama does that DOES involve Hillary, it shows that Hillary, a solid Democratic Senator, is aligned with Republicans.

Is that right?

I just want to get the Hillary hater "logic" down.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

10. He also thinks the sky is blue and water is wet.

Your point is?

(Although, actually, right now the sky is a horrible grey colour where I am, and it's snowing...)

[Dragonfli]

11. The Right only like her hawkish foreign policy views

Outside of that they love to hate her.

The neo-libs and DLCers appear to be getting the lions-share of appointments.

I should warn you leftchick that you can not even attempt to advocate a balance of left-leaning to right-leaning appointments without being accused of of calling for "purity" or "pouncing" on Obama.

Also any criticism of Clintons or DLC invites a barrage of ridicule and vehemence.

Sorry to say I have been attacked just for advocating some balance.

You will get far worse from your post.
3...2...1....

[leftchick]

26. oh hell, I knew that

real liberal posts are pretty rare these days. I just thought to try and make a point. I don't even ask for balance. All I wanted was for Obama to at least throw us a bone. Just once.

:(

[Dragonfli]

30. LOL I used those same words!

You'd of thought I was asking for communist rule.
I dared to say that one or two would be nice for balance.
To be honest, there are still a few here that are more than just attack dogs for the neo-libs, but they are loosing ground.

edited to add:

A watered down version of my argument still appears to have survived in a reply
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=7908453&mesg_id=7909264

[shoopnyc]

12. I reserved this pic for Brokaw...

...but I'll "defer" to Brooks...this is a good representation of his philosophies...

[Phred42]

15. This should worry everyone in the Reality-based Community.

[leftchick]

35. where is that exactly?

I feel like a stranger in a strange land these days.

:(

[Phred42]

36. Love the jpeg

[wuushew]

18. How can someone who never repented for the IWR be a good fit for SoS?

doesn't the same "logic" used to destroy Iraq also apply to any real or fictional weapon Iran is developing?

[leftchick]

31. and cluster bombs!

She voted against the ban of cluster bombs which are devastating civilians around the world. She follows the AIPAC script to a T. I am not hopeful here.

Your point about Iran is very true, I see another four years of the same regarding Iran. :(