My wife Barbara has begun yelling at the television set every time she hears Hillary Clinton. This is abnormal behavior, since Barbara is a meditative practitioner of everything peaceful and organic, and is inspired by Barack Obama’s transformational appeal.
For Barbara, Hillary has become the screech on the blackboard. From First Lady to Lady Macbeth.
It’s getting to me as well. Last year, I was somewhat reconciled to the prospect of supporting and pressuring Hillary as the nominee amidst the rising tide of my friends who already hated her, irrationally I thought. I was one of those people Barack accuses of being willing to settle. I even had framed a flattering autographed message from Hillary. But as the campaign has gone on and on, her signed portrait still leans against the wall in my study. I don’t know where she belongs anymore.
At least Hillary was a known quantity in my life. I knew of the danger of her becoming more and more hawkish as she tried to break the ultimate glass ceiling. I also knew that she could be forced to change course if public opinion was fiercely opposed to the war. And I knew she was familiar with radical social causes from her own life experience in the Sixties. So my progressive task seemed clear: help build an anti-war force powerful enough to make it politically necessary to end the war. Been there, done that. And in the process, finally put a woman in the White House. A soothing bonus.
But as the Obama campaign gained momentum, Hillary began morphing into the persona that has my pacifist wife screaming at the television set.
Going negative doesn’t begin to describe what has happened. Hillary is going over the edge. Even worse are the flacks she sends before the cameras on her behalf, like that Kiki person, who smirks and shakes her head at the camera every time she fields a question. Or the real carnivores, like Howard Wolfson, Lanny Davis and James Carville, whose sneering smugness prevents countless women like my wife from considering Hillary at all.
To use the current terminology, Hillary people are bitter people, even more bitter than the white working-class voters Barack has talked about. Because they circle the wagons so tightly, they don’t recognize how identical, self-reinforcing and out-of-touch they are.
To take just one example, the imagined association between Barack Obama and Bill Ayers will suffice. Hillary is blind to her own roots in the Sixties. In one college speech she spoke of ecstatic transcendence; in another, she said, “our social indictment has broadened. Where once we exposed the quality of life in the world of the South and the ghettos, now we condemn the quality of work in factories and corporations. Where once we assaulted the exploitation of man, now we decry the destruction of nature as well. How much long can we let corporations run us?”
She was in Chicago for three nights during the 1968 street confrontations. She chaired the 1970 Yale law school meeting where students voted to join a national student strike again an “unconscionable expansion of a war that should never have been waged.” She was involved in the New Haven defense of Bobby Seale during his murder trial in 1970, as the lead scheduler of student monitors. She surely agreed with Yale president Kingman Brewster that a black revolutionary couldn’t get a fair trial in America. She wrote that abused children were citizens with the same rights as their parents.
Most significantly in terms of her recent attacks on Barack, after Yale law school, Hillary went to work for the left-wing Bay Area law firm of Truehaft, Walker and Burnstein, which specialized in Black Panthers and West Coast labor leaders prosecuted for being communists. Two of the firm’s partners, according to Treuhaft, were communists and the two others “tolerated communists”. Then she went on to Washington to help impeach Richard Nixon, whose career was built on smearing and destroying the careers of people through vague insinuations about their backgrounds and associates. (All these citations can be found in Carl Bernstein’s sympathetic 2007 Clinton biography, A Woman in Charge.)
All these were honorable words and associations in my mind, but doesn’t she see how the Hillary of today would accuse the Hillary of the Sixties of associating with black revolutionaries who fought gun battles with police officers, and defending pro-communist lawyers who backed communists? Doesn’t the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, whom Hillary attacks today, represent the very essence of the black radicals Hillary was associating with in those days? And isn’t the Hillary of today becoming the same kind of guilt-by-association insinuator as the Richard Nixon she worked to impeach?
It is as if Hillary Clinton is engaged in a toxic transmission onto Barack Obama of every outrageous insult and accusation ever inflicted on her by the American Right over the decades. She is running against what she might have become. Too much politics dries the soul of the idealist.
It is abundantly clear that the Clintons, working with FOX News and manipulating old Clinton staffers like George Stephanopoulos, are trying, at least unconsciously, to so damage Barack Obama that he will be perceived as “unelectable” to Democratic superdelegates. It is also clear that the campaign of defamation against Obama has resulted in higher negative ratings for Hillary Clinton. She therefore is threatening the Democratic Party’s chances for the White House, whether or not she is the nominee.
Since no one in the party leadership seems able or willing to intervene against this self-destructive downward spiral, perhaps progressives need to consider responding in the only way politicians sometimes understand. If they can’t hear us screaming at the television sets, we can send a message that the Clintons are acting as if they prefer John McCain to Barack Obama. And follow it up with another message: if Clinton doesn’t immediately cease her path of destruction, millions of young voters and black voters may not send checks, may not knock on doors, and may not even vote for her if she becomes the nominee. That’s not a threat, that’s the reality she is creating.
Tom Hayden is the author of The Other Side (1966, with Staughton Lynd), The Love of Possession Is a Disease With Them (1972), Ending the War in Iraq (2007) and Writings for a Democratic Society: The Tom Hayden Reader (2008).
Copyright © 2008 The Nation
It’s been suggested that the Democratic Leadership Council doesn’t want to win the presidency in 2008. They don’t want to have to deal with Iraq, Afghanistan and economic depression. This is beginning to look more plausible.
But the alternative is McCain!
What to do. What to do.
Why is anyone surprised that Clinton would stoop to these tactics? She has proven over and over again she is a professional political whore who will do or say anything to elected. It runs in the family.
Hoa binh
I too am a woman pacifist. This is new to me–only the last 6-8 years have I considered myself a pacifist. Prior to that I had been a moderate Republican who accepted the line of the Republican machine.
I don’t consider myself a Democrat–though many who know me believe me to be one.
Instead–I subscribe to no party as I have seen the workings of both and am thoroughly disgusted with the notion of American political parties.
I have yet to scream at the television when Hillary appears with her nasty comments—condescending tone and her actions that make it seem as though she believes she is more entitled to everything than any other. But I do respond negatively and comment on her actions often.
As a woman only 1 year Hillary’s junior–I indeed would dearly love to see a woman as President. That being said–I do not wish to see Hillary in that position. I believe she will impede the women of this country in attaining progress in government and industry positions if she happens to squeak by and become elected.
I will not be one of those voting for her. Neither will I vote for McCain. I will vote–but not for either of these terrible candidates.
I am not as thrilled with Obama as some folks are–but of the three–he is the best choice.
The two others have been involved in politics for so long that they have lost ANY connection to real people and real problems. At least with Obama he hasn’t been part of the political machine for as long and still has some connection to realities of everyday life.
If the Democratic machine goofs up and puts Hillary in as its candidate they will lose all the new young voters that have joined to see CHANGE. they will NOT come out to vote for Hillary come November and the party faithful cannot elect her by themselves.
Ever since I have been old enough to vote, it has ALWAYS been the lesser of two evils and I am SICK TO DEATH OF THIS!
This year, for the first time, I really thought I FINALLY had a choice. I had intended voting for the ONLY progressive candidate in the running - Dennis Kucinich - and then he left the race.
WHY?
So what is the choice? Of the 3, I’d have to vote for Obama - I voted for him yesterday in the Pennsylvania primary. Personally, I’d LOVE to see a woman in the White House, but not Hillary. When I lived in NY I voted for both Bill and Hillary but times have changed. I’d prefer Obama over Hillary any day.
There are some registered Democrats who are threatening to vote for McCain if Obama becomes the party nominee. Are these people deranged? To keep a Black man out of the white house they will vote for someone to the extreme right of Bush? What are they thinking? Is there no end to the racism and stupidity in this country?
Cynthia McKinney. Woman. Green. Presidential candidate.
Hillary, this day after PA primary, has a new strategy and it’s all about superdelegates. She will tell them:
1) Barack cannot win alone due to racism.
2) Nominate me and I’ll take him as VP.
3) Both of us together CANNOT LOSE to McCain.
She might even be right. But if she is, it will not be because she’s either smart or good. It will be about the racism—a thing that probably swung Pennsylvania.
Peaceseeker67 is absolutely right. A vote for Hillary is a vote for McCain. Most Obama supporters would never vote for Hillary.
What is wrong with all of you? She’s a very likable woman, who makes mistakes. She’s NOT lady Macbeth! He’s not a hero! She has much better policy positions, and is a much better candidate - she can get things done, he can’t. Neither is anti-war, neither will do the things I most want, which is why I’m voting outside of the duopoly. But he has accomplished ZERO - his rhetoric is “change” and “hope” - but for what exactly? No specifics!
I admire and even sort of like Hillary Clinton. It has been dismaying that so many have demonized her. He is a likable man, but he’s not President material!
I too now scream at the television when Hillary Clinton speaks, and my screams are heavily laden with curse words. It’s gotten so bad that my husband has to say, “Now, now, let’s try to be civil.” But I’m way beyond civility at this point.
I read somewhere that Hillary and Bill Clinton consulted Rev Jeremiah Wright when they were having marital difficulties when they were in the White House. Does anyone know if that is true?
impeachbushco,
The lesser of two evils arguments was used by Nader in 2000 to sway democrats from AL GORE, who became A NOBEL PEACE PRIZE WINNER AND CHAMPION OF THE CAUSE OF GLOBAL WARMING so yeah, was he the lesser of two evils? No I don’t think so. Sometimes negativity is just BAD and its just not gunna get the job done.
Ahem, but to make my points…
Why can’t Hillary win in her bread and butter states like Barack does, say in Louisiana were it was 70% - 30% Barack?
Barack win’s the states he’s supposed to win by very convincing margins… while Hillary seems to squeak out victories in her own backyard?
And this notion about battleground states. Barack won Iowa, the first contest, and Missouri - a huge battleground victory where they didn’t even know the winner til 90% of the precincts were counted. He won Delaware , a state next door to Clinton’s adopted home state.
Clinton is supposed to have this huge advantages, like say in Ohio and Texas - and yet she barely squeaks out victories.
Texas, though Clinton called it for herself - actually proved to give more delegates to Obama when all the votes were finally cast…
Now what Americans need to value is there is a huge movement toward one candidate - its authentic - its legitimate and its valid - the hopes and dreams of people are going with this man and he’s not out there arguing for the nomination he’s out there earning it.
It’s time for Americans to give credit where credit is due and tip your hat and get behind the stronger candidate, and the stronger candidate is Barack Hussein Obama
Jane M believe it was Billy Graham they met with.
Trying to understand PA results. In my view, the “Deer Hunters”, which is my family background, voted against their own interests when they chose Clinton over Obama. Racism played some part I am sure, but that is incomplete explanation. Another part of the explanation has to do with the devil you know.
In PA Clinton seemed to have the support of many many mayors and local Democratic politicians and clubs. If you were mean, you would call it the machine.
But there is another side - Clinton has a long history of supporting domestic needs like day care center funding. This has gotten her loyalty from some decent local folks, including African-Americans, who remember situations when her intervention may have prevented closings.
However, Clinton has not been willing to challenge the fact that the govt spending is increasingly tied up in the military, in corporate welfare and breaks for the super wealthy. Neither she nor her husband has addressed the jobs issue, but in fact accelerated the jobs losses. Practical people who live in the moment from week to week are not sure what Obama would do either. They are not completely stupid in this skepticism.
The amounts for education and children come from an ever smaller pie. Her trade policies support draining away jobs. Her program increasingly amounts to throwing a few bones to the locals while promoting NAFTA and militarism in a big way.
She is a LOIC, a leftist only in college. We need real leftists in the sense they are first and foremost for hard-working, hard-pressed Americans - the real ones, not the stereotypes.
The Democrats have occupied the white house for only 12 of the past 40 years (30% of the time). If the Democratic Party leadership lets the neocons win the white house in 2008 as one contributor alleges, there will be no more Democratic Party.
If Hillary became a leftist in college, it was only after serving as President of the Wellesley Young Republicans in her freshman year there.
The sad thing is that to win an election, you have to give the voters the stuff they heard last time. You can’t afford to appear different. You have to talk tough. The US is nothing if not a tough place.
If you sound too intelligent or propose something intelligent, voters will toss you out.
If you want the highest office in the land, you still have to be the best beer buddy. Sure, everyone wants change—but NOT in his own backyard.
Change is for other folks. Let THEM make a change.
Mr. Hayden offers a very careful diagnosis of the disaster that the Clintons have become to American politics, trying the destroy the very integrity that Obama wishes to offer in terms of the change in American. The people who think nothing will change if Obama is elected are extremely cynical for some and very skeptical with others and with good reason. Yes he like Clinton is presently surrounding himself with many party hacks, former Clinton advisers and will be in the future controlled in some measure with party influence, as a result of an agenda that has existed in the USA since the robber baron era.
Having said that knowing that I, as well as many of you writing here, have prompted the response of so many skeptics, but many are hoping that something will shake this country into a new direction that includes, ending the war, which is robbing every single person in the USA of wealth, health care and a reasonable life which is paramount.
Also the budget that goes to iraq in just a few days of expenses could be used effectively to control some of the most negative effects of climate change. but it is all about Oil not alternatives. As well Obama offers a plan to raise the business dialog as he know too well that comforts promised by the industrial revolution have yet to be forthcoming. the price for food alone is one many cannot pay! Clinton promises a life of ease, education and so many more the political machinery uses to get the public to do what the leaders want done.
If the average US citizen has some comforts it has come at a price that is questionable. The prices are generations of young people killed to support an ideology that was flawed from the outset. A work ethic that has the wage-earners in families in the USA, working two and three jobs to pay for their basic needs and forty million people living in poverty.
Moreover,the system supports another form of slavery. The people who think nothing will change if Obama is elected are extremely cynical in some and skeptical with others, with good reason. Having said that knowing that I, as well as many of you writing here are hoping that something will shake this country into a new direction. Obama cries for change as every thinking person wants.
All this based in a “free enterprise” system of government that allows corporations the right to, exploit their workers, go where they wish with government subsidy- thereby destroying communities which they were part- and the lives of people without any checks by government; also to pollute the population and communities with toxic waste leading to any number of health related issues. The public is left to pay for the medical attention caused by the pollution the corporations have caused, if they have the money to do so.
The “American Dream” has caused endless abuses to its population, with the false promise of fame and riches that are legend, supported by the Hollywood myth and media indoctrination will somehow come to all. The claim that anyone can be president is manifold. However by some fluke of chance and hard work a man has come along that somehow defied conventional wisdom and possibility. He has made the inroads into populist thinking. The masses and particularly the young who want to be heard have embraced him.
Clinton on the other hand uses the traditional smear tactics and Republican bending of the truth to win, at any price. bill has been mentoring Hillary all these years, after all he did become president. Many people have given voice to the dissatisfaction felt by so many people in the USA and the world.
Obama has offered change, and yes, we who have lived long enough, know it is necessary to be critical. Obama echoes many of us who know intrinsically, what Americans understand: The USA must move in another direction quickly for its citizens and the world! He knows, as we all do, human life hangs in the balance and America bears twenty-five percent of that responsibility but the important thing is that the young people want him and not the hack policies of the past. Clinton on the other hand want their continuation and to bomb Iran out of existence.
For those who are cynical and pessimistic, I support your views but there is not too much time left! OBama, Kucinich, and even Edwards plus a few others out there have some good ideas that are worth supporting and trying to get the public behind. Given the nature of the political machinery, this is not a simple task and will require a congress sympathetic to Obama’s ideals. It is necessary not only to elect a new president that embraces change but a congress as well that also wants these changes. Obama is not a fool! He knows that this will be difficult, he admits as much. he has experienced the Hillary machine and his advisers think he must respond but i fins suspect the methodology of the response!
Obama is populist president, it is his intention to go back to the people to help him get his plans through congress should he encounter difficulty and a deadlocked Congress as is the situation at present. We need only look at the surveillance bill that was hung up for Bush because the House recessed before giving its approval. It was a way to allow it to expire before approval, knowing there would be a howl of public anger if the house moved to put it into law. but it will become law because there is no courage in congress but for a few.
The American people voted for a change with this Congress, yet to be realized because it is still tied to the “failed policies of the past” with people like Pelosi and others like her, or the Clintons who are part of that inner back-room type of political deal. Obama is a realist and knows the difficulties in front of him should he get the nomination and the presidency. Some say unstoppable but this is a strange country?
The ideas that we all put out here are necessary for others who can convey them to the candidate. While it necessary to maintain a healthy pessimism, I think we must shelve cynicism for a while and not let it affect reality. Nothing is perfect; nothing will be perfect, including the nomination of Obama. But we must do what we can to make it work, as I am certain we all try to do, as does Hayden. This is necessary to deal with the last possibility of change in the American way for both the US and global survival.
The war must end! The money spent on the war must be diverted to the rebuilding of the infrastructure of America, as well as to the social services that Americans want. The tax on the excessively rich as well as the diversion of policies away from everything in the world but American need must be looked at differently. It is important to help the world but not with military adventures, excepting those, which take place through the UN although, it too must change.
It is necessary to make America and the world a more environmentally aware place. The export of American technology can help its economy and also make it energy self-sufficient. It is not only America that must be assisted but also the world; Obama, I am happy to say, suggest these beliefs in his rhetoric. The USA lives in a world with other nations like China, whose environmental policy can sink us all.
These are the challenges that Obama has made reference to in his speeches. Yes, one can look at him and the entire process, with pessimism, as many do quite rightly including myself. Yes, there is a possibility that Americans may be wronged once again by the political process. However, if we do not take this last time to try, by helping Obama if we are able, we may also give up one final chance to make the changes the entire world needs. I believe as a fervent, committed environmentalist, working in communication, we have lost our last chance if we don’t try.
It is good to hear people write their different points of view. Great thoughts are brought forward in dialog and exchange not presumption. But some who write here think they have the edge on intelligence and awareness. There are some here who believe that the democratic will of the people should be overturned by the presumption of power as in the super-delegate issue of the democratic party. This is raises the specter of large-scale defections toward Republican stupidity.
Should this occur it would affect world security and the issue of climate change directly. These issues are dependent upon radical solutions, which include global economic changes. Defection of democrats and particularly the young people -who have hope and believe that change is necessary-risk an upheaval that could possibly tilt the election toward the Republicans.
This reflects the basic problem of this so-called democracy of America where a win in the popular vote does not guarantee the change in direction that the Electoral College can make as we saw in 2004. The Democratic Super-delegate issue is a reflection of the absurd non-democratic American condition of the Electoral College. Should Barak Obama win the popular vote from America’s Democratic caucuses, delegates and committed states prior to the convention I do not believe that he should accept second place as vice president, which seems to be the mood of the media controlled races and spin jockeys. I believe that he should maintain himself as the democratically designated elected leader of the Democratic Party.
Further, should he be forced to that position by the party of super delegate control he should leave the Democratic Party and form a third party and run against both Hillary Clinton and John McCain. This is what every one who is really thinking in this country wants and thinks the USA very much needs. He has stated he has run because the time is now not in the future. The changes needed, are as he puts it, “right now”, not in the future and the perils of environmental collapse are approaching so quickly that we do not have the luxury of another eight years of “business as usual”, which would be the Clinton way, before he can claim the office of president.
He is a populist candidate that has offered hope! He should continue that platform with the courage to take the courageous steps necessary if the standard-bearer position is denied to him to effect party change and changes in American direction. He should do it, if necessary, not in the Democratic Party but by creating a third party, should the party be given to Clinton, we all lose and the possibility of change goes down with him.
Should he follow the Clinton policy as suggested by some pundits we all fail. But if he takes half the country with him to a third party we have a chance. He believes that the failed policies of the past exist within the entrenched two party systems in congress. I believe the only way of preventing another move to those failed policies is not to allow Hillary Clinton to win. But we all know that this idea in this system is a fantasy.
Obama’s public denial of allowing super-delegates to determine the election would be a way of circumventing being moved to second place. I heard one of the super-delegates speaking from Georgia. He was black and under examination by the press, it was clear that the direction of the super delegates would be to overturn the national-will and cause the disaffection of the youth of America. This is the spin after the Pennsylvania primary.
No one has a right to do that since the older generation through “the failed policies of the past” has put us in the present circumstances of possibly destroying their future and their life. In the final analysis this country did not rise to the level of intelligence and courage by electing George Bush to office for two terms and I doubt that it will if it chooses Hillary Clinton to lead.
Should she win with the super delegates it will lead to chaos and the disaffection of the youth and could possibly elect John McCain by default and continuation of war for another hundred years; no just thirty because that is the time we have left to make the radical shift in global politics and
if we are to deal with global climate change.
The USA is in trouble because there are no longer people who can think and create ideas for others to consider. Half the country does not vote and is not capable of choosing anything other than their selfishness. Another part of the USA thinks the American Ideal is worth exporting by force. And if exported and not accepted than annexation without compensation or discussion, as was done to the native peoples.
Never mind all that, of course we know that history is unimportant to creative thought! Or is it? The models of the Greco/Roman history of its expansion are unimportant, why should there be anything to study in the ways that people have laid waste the Earth or destroyed other cultures for their own ends based on greed? Given the fact that the globe is disintegrating with climate change, that a new form of resolving differences is in order and another form of economy must be developed perhaps the right man has come to lead? Do we not think that a new form of economic justice is in order? If I can avoid looking at what I know is the usual American character and rejoice that we have spawned a new type of politics based on the present human crisis we can still hope. If this is what democracy and free speech are about, than the experiment is worth continuing.
I am SO sick of the Hillary and Bill show as is the rest of the nation. She has NO chance of beating John McCain. And I am SO sick of the DLC and DNC pushing lame candidates up there to be skewered. Al Gore, John Kerry and now Hillary. They just go up there, act Republican and lose.
They don’t get it. The American people vote for authentic, genuine leaders. In each of the past elections, we get shadow candidates who stand for NOTHING. Wanna gag. Watch Hillary at the Democratic Convention saluting our heroes….
I’m sick of the Clintons. I used to think Bill Clinton’s heart was in the right place. And shrewd. Now I’ve lost all respect for the guy. It’s one thing to work hard to get a nomination, and quite another, to trash everyone around you. The Clinton’s have forgotten that it’s the what’s best for the country, not what’s best for the Clintons.
No way I’m voting for her.
JaneM,
Rev. Wright was invited to a prayer breakfast, where the total in attendance was 130. I believe that’s all we know at this point about the Clinton’s connection to Rev. Wright. You can see the picture, read the invitation and story in general, here:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/photograph-of-bill-clinton-and-rev-wright-surfaces/
ike kay__ ever hear of “short and sweet and hard to beat”
Thanks, guys, for clearing that up.
anne faith — Watch out, she’s likely the __s p i t t i n g ___v i p e r__
type, that can blind their opponents at 15 yards, and that’s just the snakey hair do
Hillary and Barack are performing in the way they deem to be most likely to win voters — like bowlers trying to bowl a strike. Their handlers are brainstorming non-stop to get just the right message, just the right tone, to appeal to the largest segment of people. Millions are at stake — dollars, that is. The winner-take-all system makes this obligatory. Clinton and Obama are the final contenders for the title, so you have to admit their approaches have been the most effective in appealing to the masses of Democratic voters. Such is the soup of American society. Being a Green, I’ll probably vote for Cynthia McKinney.
I am glad I am not the only one who is screaming at the computer screen. I watched her in an interview the night before the elections. She was basically talking about being a role model for women breaking the “glass ceiling”. If losing one’s integrity is what it takes to break the “glass ceiling”, thanks, but no thanks Hillary.
oh please, if either Hillary or Obama can’t win against John McCain in November, they don’t deserve to. The economy and the occupation of Iraq are inter-connected, and if people think either will improve under McCain, there’s no hope for the rest of us.
And it may not even matter, considering the last two elections were fraudulent, and there’s little that’s been done to prevent the next one from being stolen.
yeah, I’m cynical today.
In her autobiography Hillary Clinton mentions that she and a girlfriend lied to Mrs. Rodham, telling her they were going downtown shopping at Fields, and then sneaked around the corner down to Michigan Avenue saw someone “throw a rock at a policeman while calling him a ‘pig’,” so “no wonder the police got angry” and then she and her girlfriend decided the demonstrators were a bunch of miscreants and they drove back north to the racist enclave of Park Ridge. p 37, “Living History Hillary Rodham Clinton.”
I was there in the streets that day and saw the police riot and the peaceful protesters beaten bloody with my own eyes. When I read that passage from Hillary’s book (which was offered at the checkouts of Wal-Marts throughout the land, resulting in $10 million or so profit for Hillary) I knew I could never trust her or have respect for her intelligence or judgment.
Tom you need to read Hillary’s biography and see for yourself that the only reason she was in Chicago then was because her family home was in Park Ridge.
My family lived in Park Ridge then. My cousins, who were a bit older than I, were classmates of Hillary at Main East High School. My family, at least the people who lived in Park Ridge at the time, have all migrated to the whiter sections of McHenry in the intervening years, and just sold their home there because of all the “Mexicans” moving in, so when I speak of the racist attitudes of Park Ridge residents, I have some inside information.
I cannot deal with 4 more years of the neocons under McCain. I’ll leave the country.
Hallas as they say in Arabic-ENOUGH-
Hayden wrote:
“And follow it up with another message: if Clinton doesn’t immediately cease her path of destruction, millions of young voters and black voters may not send checks, may not knock on doors, and may not even vote for her if she becomes the nominee. That’s not a threat, that’s the reality she is creating.”
And that is just what we did when Humphrey was nominated in 1968. He wasn’t pure enough. Oh, many of us held our noses and voted for him anyway, considering the alternative, but we wouldn’t send checks or knock on doors, and we got what we deserved.
It is sad. I once looked forward to the choice between two wonderful candidates, Clinton and Obama. But she has poisoned the well. So sad. And the price we will all pay.
Ridiculous. This isn’t misogyny because “my wife” says it, I suppose. Well, let her speak for herself then. Or are you speaking as the head of the family?
I really hate to say this…..but….it true.
I live in Pennsylvania. I know I should move.
After the idiots of the press have given you all the reasons for Clinton’s win please let someone who has lived in this state all his life tell you the secret.
This state without question is the most RACIST state in the good old US. They are bigots but they lie about it.
If she won so big how does she do that with her polling showing that she is not trusted, she lies and plays the race card just like Willie the pimp.
Also there is the exit polls. Works for the whole world but not in the good old US. But the world uses paper we use computers. Hackable computers.
So from now on Mississippi and others in the deep south you lost you place in American lore a PENNSYLVANIA puts them to shame. Keystone State more like BIGOT state
Some of us are not racists, we just don’t like Obama. I’m leaning towards Cynthia McKinney, a black woman, for President.
Obama will INCREASE military spending and advocates for Reagan/Bush I foreign policy positions. He is not our friend, and he is no nero. Elitists refuse to recognize the class issue since they are implicated in it in the way they treat other human beings on a daily basis.
One good thing that I wish would come out of this dog and pony show is that everyone who does not support Obama to become the Democratic nominee would quietly ask him or herself what the REAL reason for that decision is.
When you say that Obama is not president material, what does that REALLY mean? If he were not running against Hillary would he perhaps then be president material? What would it REALLY take for him to become president material? Is his intelligence, service to everyday people, time spent in national politics, willingness to TRY (not necessarily always successful) to remain positive not enough to make him president material?
It just seems to me that a lot of people refuse to face their prejudices. African American people have been voting for white candidates for years, you know once they could actually vote. African Americans overwhelmingly supported Bill Clinton, especially in the 96 election. Yet it seems to me that many white voters seem to have a problem with voting for a Black candidate (even one who’s 50% Black).
Of course the rhetoric is couched in politically appropriate terms. And when non-issues like Rev. Wright, “bitter”, etc. are spotlighted it gives certain people excellent cover for their hidden views, views that they themselves are not even comfortable articulating.
In the end, if Obama is the nominee, will you vote for him then? I know there are some diehard Nader supporters and Green Party supporters here and I would not expect them to vote for any Democrat chosen. But for those who say they are Democrats, would you vote for Obama or not? If not why?
“But let a man examine himself….” I Corinthians 11:28
Why Mr. Hayden would want to support either of the democratic candidates is beyond me.
If the progressives had continued their movement started in 2000 (in which Mr. Nader clearly identified what was needed and why it was needed) instead of retreating back to the shadows of democratic party hacks, we would maybe be discussing the war, universal health care, corporate fraud, GMOs with the candidates instead of focusing whether the voters are bitter or not.
no longer bitter since I joined the Green party.
so it goes
Words,
I understand your respect for the Green Party. Although the Greens are not as big here where I live, I vote for a Green Party candidate in local and state elections whenever I can. I have much respect for those guys. I can tell you that I am majorly tired of this two-party system. Desperate to hear some different voices.
This is not intended to disparage the entire great state of Pennsylvania, but I recall living in Philadelphia in the late 1980’s and going to a public pool somewhere around 20th Street. I was there with a bunch of other white folks and then three black boys showed up to swim in the pool. The looks they got! Then all at once, the white kids got out of the pool and sat alongside their parents with their arms crossed glaring at the black kids in the pool. The three kids swam briefly and then left. I was horrified. This was 1987, not 1957.
I also lived in Indiana, which is next up on the primary calendar along with North Carolina. From my experience, Indianapolis was just as bad as Philadelphia. I think it’s a miracle that Barack has gotten as far as he has in this primary race, given the racism in this country. While I do believe that some have chosen not to support Obama because they feel he is too inexperienced (I am not one of those people), there are many others who simply will not vote for a black man, period. That includes my own parents, so-called liberal Democrats, who are in their 80’s and who subconsciously fear the black man.
Anne Faith:
This is where the healing just might begin. The real problem is that people try to pretend that everything is alright, when we know it isn’t. This country will never move forward if people don’t address their prejudices. Just think what it must be like for the average Black man if a spit-shined, well-educated, upstanding, church going, so-called elitist family man like Obama can’t get white people to like him.
Another question: Was Bill Clinton ever called elitist? Both he and Obama both were raised by single mothers and cared for by grandparents. Both were able to achieve much through education.
It saddens me that people who work hard, play by the rules and try to achieve something still have their efforts negated by people who look first at and judge by the color of a person’s skin. Pitiful. Dr. King died for this????
Rich Griffin (April 23rd, 2008 12:33 pm), once you get past the lying about Tuzla, NAFTA, et al, and her willingness to cozy up to right-wingers like Richard Mellon Scaife who spent millions trying to destroy her family, and whose PA paper endorsed her, what’s not to like about Hillary?
I saw a cat in an alley once, tenaciously ripping apart a bird — the look in the cat’s eyes, as the blood ran out of both sides of her mouth, reminded me of Hillary’s eyes in victory — feral, vicious and victorious. What’s not to like?
anne faith (April 23rd, 2008 12:35 pm), I’ve been screaming at the TV for months now — it’s a shame it doesn’t do any good.
I posted this in another thread, but have you heard that Hillary’s campaign has been getting free oppo research on Obama from the RNC? MSNBC mentioned it this afternoon. Another reason to like her, huh, Rick?
Yep, camus13 (April 23rd, 2008 4:33 pm) the exit polls had Obama losing by 5 points, but he never had a chance of winning — Penn. is run by what’s left of Eddie Rendell’s machine and Fast Eddie was on Hillary’s team, just as the major Dem office-holders in Ohio supported her. I’d be interested to know how many Pennsylvanians voted on computerized voting equipment made by Diebold, ES&S or Sequoia. Nice of Rendell’s state government to reassure the media that there were no major dislocations or abnormalities in the voting, especially in Obama strongholds like Philadelphia. Disregard those on the ground, like the SEIU workers, who claimed there were a massive number of problems with the voting in the big cities.
In New Hampshire, Hillary got about 80 percent of the vote on Diebold machines while Obama got 70 percent of the paper ballot vote. Our Big Media hasn’t seen fit to investigate this statistical anomaly. Better, and easier, to focus on Rev. Wright and lapel pins.
Give me a break, Hayden.
They BOTH make me scream. Both political twin, Obama and Hillary make me scream every time I read:
that they both favor the death penalty
that they both critize, wrongly, the excellent Hugo Chavez
that both refuse to support justice for the Palestinian people
that they both want to increase troop levels
that they both want HMOs to continue to run health insurance
that they both are free traders
that they both want to keep the illegal economic blockade on Cuba
that they both refuse to call for ending the U.S. empire (800 + military bases world wide)
etc., etc., and on and on.
Your distinction about these two makes no sense.
Instead of helping to lead a progressive movement you are siding with one corporate Democrat over the other one.
one of the very very worst harmful things voters can do is to reward and elect someone that has done harm… hillary voted for the war… hillary and bill help push nafta and gatt to lower wages to help the robber barons.. if she says she is changed and then people vote for her… what will this do??? it will make it easy for ANY govt official to do ANYTHING.. they can always come back and say i have changed… we should always accept NO excuses cause then all future politicians will know they MUST do right or else….
no people don’t know what obama will do BUT people say NO excuses like kicking clinton to the curb for her errors that has harmed 90% if people would do this then the NEW leaders will know they must not do bad and wrong…
scratch that in my earlier posts and below…..where i said obama lost 1000 votes when the totals went from 99% counted to 100%.. but i see that he gained 3 thousand and hillary 2000 from last nite and from this person’s math… so obama had gained 1000 votes over hillary so instead of her winning by 9.4% its more like 9.3%..
now this showing on 100% counted is not thru yet…. the philadelphia county is the only county that don’t show 100% counted and it shows 99%.. and this is where obama won by 30%.. so 4 or 5 thousand votes could still be yet to be counted and from that… obama may gain 1 or 2 thousand more votes to bring down the winning percent to 9.2 or 9.1 percent..
so any way you look at this.. hillary did not win by double digits but by single digits and the media should put it correctly as a 9 % win not a 10% since she won by less than 9.5 %..
suspicious vote counting……..
last nite on cnn.com their county results showed all countys at 100% reporting except 2… one philadelphia which showed 97% counted which was going for obama by 30 points and the very next one also showing 97% counted and which was going for obama by 10%…
the philly county had about 450,000 voting so 3 percent left would make around 13 or 14 thousand votes left to count…
now at this time all the sites was showing that 99% of the total vote has been counted and this with all the other counties showing 100% counted.. this should mean more votes than obama over clinton coming….
now i have checked the vote totals and they show 100% counted and not the 99% as last nite… now one would think obama would gain a few thousand votes since the 2 counties that had only 97% of their votes counted the biggest went 30 points for obama… so low and behold when i checked tonight it shows hillay gaining 2 thousand votes and get this Obams LOSING 1000 votes… how could he lose votes when 13 or 14 thousand votes were still uncounted and they are from where he was winning by 30 points…
very suspicious stuff… the clintons and their people all have been PROVEN already as corrupt as any politician ever.. so one would logic look in that direction ..
now the big deal ..thing is did hillary win by double digits or single digits….
its extremely important for hillary to look like she won by double digits not single digits…so this would be suspicious stuff on them or their supporters..
now even tho the totals now show 100% counted still the philadelphia county shows 99% counted which could mean still 4 or 5 thousand votes not counted yet this county is where obama won by 30%..all other countys show 100% counted.
now even with obama LOSING 1000 votes from when the totals said 99% counted and today 100% counted even with this.. the margin for hillary over obama is 9.2 or 9.3 % and with this one has to say hillary won by 9% and not 10% a single digit win not a double digit win…
some people are really corrupt and the history of the clintons and their supporters are really scary for america…. hitlers can be easily elected with how their voters seem to care nothing for truth and real value…their voters really are voting for their very worst enemy in the clintons.. but they have been so brainwashed that they don’t care…. This is what elects hitlers and brings destruction for the whole country…
those debates are nonsense and just trying to help the corporate candidate to help keep slavery on americans…. saying there was no significant differences in the candidates…. really….
how bout one voting yes to this war and the other saying NO.. the biggest difference in the world for 90% of americans cause this war for the robber barons for oil has hurt 90% of americans.. and then the other that has hurt 90% of americans nafta and gatt.. which the clintons brought to this country to help the robber barons rob from the people….
the moderators had 2 big big issues to ask about it was THESE 2 issues.. and they did not…
in fact rhe vote for the war was also a vote to tell the world we are a fraud on democracy when we went against world democracy the UN when they voted NO…. so this issue was very very important to talk about in the debate.. cause world hate on america harms these 90% in a million different ways..
america is in very very serious trouble…. just watching the response to hillary shows this… shows how a hitler could be elected very easily and destruction coming for the whole country.
scratch that in my earlier posts and below…..where i said obama lost 1000 votes when the totals went from 99% counted to 100%.. but i see that he gained 3 thousand and hillary 2000 from last nite and from this person’s math… so obama had gained 1000 votes over hillary so instead of her winning by 9.4% its more like 9.3%..
now this showing on 100% counted is not thru yet…. the philadelphia county is the only county that don’t show 100% counted and it shows 99%.. and this is where obama won by 30%.. so 4 or 5 thousand votes could still be yet to be counted and from that… obama may gain 1 or 2 thousand more votes to bring down the winning percent to 9.2 or 9.1 percent..
so any way you look at this.. hillary did not win by double digits but by single digits and the media should put it correctly as a 9 % win not a 10% since she won by less than 9.5 %..
suspicious vote counting……..
last nite on cnn.com their county results showed all countys at 100% reporting except 2… one philadelphia which showed 97% counted which was going for obama by 30 points and the very next one also showing 97% counted and which was going for obama by 10%…
the philly county had about 450,000 voting so 3 percent left would make around 13 or 14 thousand votes left to count…
now at this time all the sites was showing that 99% of the total vote has been counted and this with all the other counties showing 100% counted.. this should mean more votes than obama over clinton coming….
now i have checked the vote totals and they show 100% counted and not the 99% as last nite… now one would think obama would gain a few thousand votes since the 2 counties that had only 97% of their votes counted the biggest went 30 points for obama… so low and behold when i checked tonight it shows hillay gaining 2 thousand votes and get this Obams LOSING 1000 votes… how could he lose votes when 13 or 14 thousand votes were still uncounted and they are from where he was winning by 30 points…
very suspicious stuff… the clintons and their people all have been PROVEN already as corrupt as any politician ever.. so one would logic look in that direction ..
now the big deal ..thing is did hillary win by double digits or single digits….
its extremely important for hillary to look like she won by double digits not single digits…so this would be suspicious stuff on them or their supporters..
now even tho the totals now show 100% counted still the philadelphia county shows 99% counted which could mean still 4 or 5 thousand votes not counted yet this county is where obama won by 30%..all other countys show 100% counted.
now even with obama LOSING 1000 votes from when the totals said 99% counted and today 100% counted even with this.. the margin for hillary over obama is 9.2 or 9.3 % and with this one has to say hillary won by 9% and not 10% a single digit win not a double digit win…
some people are really corrupt and the history of the clintons and their supporters are really scary for america…. hitlers can be easily elected with how their voters seem to care nothing for truth and real value…their voters really are voting for their very worst enemy in the clintons.. but they have been so brainwashed that they don’t care…. This is what elects hitlers and brings destruction for the whole country…
those debates are nonsense and just trying to help the corporate candidate to help keep slavery on americans…. saying there was no significant differences in the candidates…. really….
how bout one voting yes to this war and the other saying NO.. the biggest difference in the world for 90% of americans cause this war for the robber barons for oil has hurt 90% of americans.. and then the other that has hurt 90% of americans nafta and gatt.. which the clintons brought to this country to help the robber barons rob from the people….
the moderators had 2 big big issues to ask about it was THESE 2 issues.. and they did not…
in fact rhe vote for the war was also a vote to tell the world we are a fraud on democracy when we went against world democracy the UN when they voted NO…. so this issue was very very important to talk about in the debate.. cause world hate on america harms these 90% in a million different ways..
america is in very very serious trouble…. just watching the response to hillary shows this… shows how a hitler could be elected very easily and destruction coming for the whole country.
Clinton wins by half the margin that was project only a month ago, and only because she used smear & scare tactics, abetted by a last minute push from Snuffleupagus and Gibson during ABC’s slimefest. She also got a little push from Larry King & the vast robocall assault of the last 24 hours.
And as usual she accused Obama of doing what she’s doing & acting as she’s acting.
Any time I refer to her, it’s as Hilary Rodham Nixon, and Wolfson & Company sound exactly like Ehrlichman and Haldeman did back in the day.
When will we hear the Ralph-Nader-Made-Dubya-President crew weigh in on the topic of Hillary R. Nixon’s attempt to destroy Obama in favor of McCain?
OF COURSE SHE IS HURTING the party’s chances in November. If there’s one thing we as Democrats can count on, it’s that when confronted with an incredibly poor Republican choice, we can somehow manage to LOSE!!!
Worse still is the effect that this continuing saga is having on the state races still to be voted on. NO ONE wants to even HEAR that there’s another on the way June 3.
Assembly and State Senate as well as two incredibly important ballot measures…and hardly anyone outside of the candidates and staffs KNOW! Chalk that up to our wonderful hometown newspapers that fewer and fewer read, and the crime/star segments that substitute for real news on the networks.
In California, our legislators arranged for us to PAY FOR TWO this year, in spite of the looming deficit that threatens to cut ALL government spending 10%.
best for 90% of americans to flee to canada…especially families and go to a conservative province… the voters who voted for hillary proves too many people in america has been dumded down so much that there will be always the corp robber barons making slaves out of we the people
..
seeing that hillary got that many votes speaks volumns.. there is no HOPE in this corporate controlled system of brainwashing to make slaves out of americans…and america is a magnet to draw the worlds most corrupt and greedy to come here and make the slaves in more misery so they can also get rich… america is fast becoming a third world country..
the clinton yrs in power was about SETTING us UP for all this.. with their nafta and gatt bringing to america … THAT set this up for all of 90% of americans to be harmed…… and then hillary did it again with voting for this war for the robber barons again to hurt the 90% of americans…
the clintons work for the robber barons to make sure americans are in slavery!! and their voters are the types that would elect hitler even after knowing what hitler has done.. they are brainwashed so strongly by the corp evil.. that there is no hope here … destruction will be the ONLY way that solves this problem.. so best to get away and maybe come back AFTER the destruction..
I’ve NEVER been the type to say, my candidate or no one. I’m not in love with Obama, but I see his potential, and for the most part I admire how he responds to attacks, as he is someone like me, and seems to carry my same convictions about ethical behavior and sticking to reality-based arguments while under duress.
Hillary on the other hand is someone I now see as alien to my beliefs. I was wrong about her. The way I view life and the people I admire are nothing like her. She has been behaving in ways that are the antithesis of what I believe in. With a heavy heart I’ve come to the conclusion that if the superdelegates overturn Obama’s lead and nominate Hillary, I can’t vote for her on moral and ethical grounds. I just can’t. It has nothing to do with tit for tat, or revenge, or taking my toys and going home. I simply can’t vote for someone who knows the truth about all of her arguments, but won’t live by that truth. Sticking by the truth is a harder path to follow. It isn’t expedient, it can be momentarily diminishing, especially in this world we live in today, but it is the right thing to do, and we need a leader who has a higher calling than fighting in such a primitive manner in order to win at all costs. Aren’t we sick to death of politicians winning at all costs?
Nice essay, but Hillary Clinton took a turn to hard right many years ago, serving on the board of Wallmart, promoting an insurance-company-centered healthcare plan, supporting the wars, etc.
It’s weird that Tom Hayden is only now claiming to wise up. It’s probably because Hayden’s series of essays here are written with the aim of pushing left progressives to support Obama.
No thanks, Tom. Obama is still a war funder. He’s a NAFTA supporter. He wants to bomb Pakistan and screw the Palestinians. He’s got Zbigniew Brezinski as an advisor. He’s got a pocketful of money from Wall Street. And he’s annointed by a Democratic Party that voted to support the wars and stifle impeachment, even when they have power to make positive change.
What happened to you, Tom? Why do you support soulless corporatists? Let’s have neither Dem frontrunner. They don’t and can’t represent us.
I think the DLC is right. There’s no way Clinton or Obama can clean up the Rethug mess so let’s all vote for McInsane; let HIM try to clean it up. If he bomb bomb bomb, bomb bombs Iran so be it. They broke it let them fix it if they can.
They direction Hillary is heading, might as well just let Bush stick around another 4 years.
For anyone interested Chris Hedges just published an AUTHENTIC progressive article about why Obama and Hayden make his scream. If Clinton wrests the nomination from Obama Hayden will swallow hard and do what he is told just like all the other little sheeple marching lock step. What would Hayden do without his CD soap box to stand on?
Heav y runner (April 23rd, 2008 3:55 pm), my friends and I were at two events during the 1968 Dem convention in Chicago. We went down to Lincoln Park on the first night and watched as the police chased people out of the park at 11:pm — they not only chased them out of the park, but all the way down Division St., North Ave. and Wells St., blocks away. They were completely out of control, attacking people blindly. We were lucky that they didn’t catch us — we were chased and ducked into the entryway of Hugh Hefner’s mansion on N. State Parkway, and the Playboy folks were nice enough to let us wait there until the police passed — but we saw innocent people just trying to get out of their way, including a Sun-Times photographer wearing press cards and cameras, getting clubbed bloody by the Boys in Blue.
Two days later, we went to a daytime event at Grant Park. The police had lined up in long ranks on either side of the crowd, leaving no exit when they marched toward us from both sides swinging billy clubs, apparently when someone raised the North Vietnamese flag near the stage. (I saw the guy who raised that flag and he didn’t look like a young protestor to me.) The cops flailed away wildly at anything that moved. Less than ten feet from me they beat a young pregnant woman bloody who was crying and begging them to stop. It was insane and the cops were again out of control. My own ex-wife was pregnant at the time, and we decided we had to get out of there before she was assaulted. Fortunately, we made our way to the bandshell and squeezed around it, to the taunts of busses full of young police cadets threatening and cursing us. We had planned to go to the protests at Balboa and Michigan Ave. later, but we had had enough bloodshed for one day. I’ll tell you one thing I did not see: anyone throwing bags of crap nor anything else at the police. To the contrary, all of the event marshals were going through the crowd encouraging every one to be peaceful and not provoke the cops. Years later a friend told me that all of the people throwing crap, bricks, and the idiot who raised the NV flag, were all agent provocateurs planted to make the event appear violent and anti-American for the benefit of the national media and it worked. I was also told that the NV flag-raising was the signal for the cops to charge — the violence against the demonstrators had been planned in advance and approved by Mayor Daley and was designed to ‘break the back’ of the peace movement.
I haven’t read any of Hillary’s books but, if that was her reaction to what was happening during the Dem convention in ‘68, then it just gives me another reason not to vote for her.
Booksense (April 23rd, 2008 4:43 pm) and Anne Faith (April 23rd, 2008 5:05 pm), good points. There are a lot of closet racists ashamed of themselves for being bigots, but bigots nevertheless. A guy I know who lost his good-paying job and is working part-time for minimum wage now, had to sell his truck because he can’t afford the gas anymore, and has had to move to a smaller, cheaper apartment, is blabbing idiocies like, “If Obama loves his country so much, why does he want to change it?” He’s camouflaging his bigotry in a slew of rhetoric about Obama not being tested and too inexperienced and ‘liberal elitist’ to be president, but his ex-wife clued me in to what he really thinks — he doesn’t know any black people and he’s deeply afraid of them, and consequently bigoted against them because they reveal his knee-quivering cowardice and stupendous ignorance to himself. Rather than learn about the unknown, it’s much easier for him to hide behind talking points conveniently provided by the right-wing as a cover for what he knows deep down to be wrong and stupid. Psychology 101: They feel weak because they are irrationally afraid and they hate themselves for being irrationally afraid so they transfer that hatred to the object of their fear. “It’s your fault I’m scared,” rather than “Why am I afraid?”
Fortunately, there are fewer closet racists like this guy these days, although you’ll find them in the small bitter towns Obama talked about, trying to cling to an American ideal that never existed rather than face the grim reality we live in today.
RSJ: Thank you for the interesting “historical” posting. I went to protests in New York, which perhaps was a genuinely liberal bastion in the 70’s. I never saw the police get out of hand. Things were so liberal we got to smoke joints walking down the street and at protests and no one ever did a thing. Rock concerts smelled like a cosmic camp fire, and WE thought we were changing the world to more inclusive ideals of brotherhood, sisterhood, peace and the beginnings of a respect for Sacred Ecology.
Folks, If we really want change, then voting for status quo candidates and expecting different results afterwards is not the answer. If enough citizens voted for progressive candidates, and we have them in the Green Party, things just may change for the better. The Dems have taken working class people for granted since the post FDR period to date. I could care less if a candidate is white, black, brown, yellow, pink, male, female, gay, tall, short, skinny, fat, handsome, ugly,…you get what I’m saying? Vote for the candidates who have OUR interests in mind. And then, keep your fingers crossed.
Siouxrose: Under 9/11 Rudy, “America’s Mayor” the NYPD got out of hand, and continues so under Bloomberg’s rein.
AnneFaith: If you ever heard the vile diatribes coming out of my mouth watching these vicious criminals on television since the American blitzgreig of Iraq in 03, your husband would find you polite, in comparison. Even my coke bottle eyeglasses steam up during my verbal rampage.
Proud to be in the Green Party, the anti-war, pro people, pro environment party.
Siouxrose: New York reaction to protests has varied. You were around during a brief moment when the people rose up in such numbers that they were uncontrollable.
In the beginning in the 60’s we were chased by horses, beaten up, arrested, hemmed in until we couldn’t breathe, etc. during anti-war, anti-draft and civil rights protests. Streaming blood was a common sight. The police went totally red-faced wild at an anti George Wallace vigil. Construction workers and other civilians sometimes attacked protesters.
By the 70’s there were just too many protesters to control and national opinion had shifted. The mayor was John Lindsay, a liberal Republican (really) and things were better run.
In the recent period under mayor Bloomberg there have been many arrests for peaceful protesting in NY. The streets were cleared of protesters and homeless poor people during the Republican convention. My own spouse and several friends were arrested for basically no reason while standing around during a peaceful and legal protest of the Iraq invasion. The Grannies have been arrested numerous times, resulting in hilarious trials in which these older ladies are accused of interfering with the business of the Army. There are many lawsuits pending for false arrest and for nerve damage from too-tight plastic handcuffs and other physical problems caused by massive holding of the arrested for long periods in filthy warehouses.
The police are no longer wall-to-wall white men and tend to be less invested in chaotically beating up peaceful protesters. They act professionally and efficiently to keep protests confined and invisible and sweep protesters up when they are told to do so. They say please and thank you a lot when they bring you to jail.
Peaceman, :). I too have been cursing and screaming and crying, a lot, since December 12, 2000, the day the Constitution was pronounced dead and George Weasle Bush was coronated (see Bush v. Gore Supreme Court decision). If I were a believer in the end times, I’d say it feels like we’re on our last legs. But as has been true in my own life, you’ve got to hit rock bottom before true change can come. So I try to tell myself that when the s–t hits the fan (and we are just about there), the sheeple will finally wake up and rise up and scream, “We’re mad as hell, and we’re not gonna take it anymore!” And true change will come. It’ll be ugly and scary and dangerous, but maybe something better will rise from the ashes.
Mr. Hayden: Get over yourself and tell your wife to take a chill pill. Sorry all of you are so constipated about Hillary and her campaign, but she is, after all, running for the President of the United States and that campaign is not for the faint-of-heart or the bleeding do-gooder hearts of the world who don’t understand politics and how to get elected.
As I have said before, the problem with so many of the “progressive” websites, is that all the commentators and posters have never run a political campaign or even worked for a candidate for an elected position; so you and your sensibilities are continually assaulted by those who know and understand the ups and downs of politics.
Whether Hillary or Barack prevails in this contest is really unknown presently; whoever becomes the nominee, will have to contend with McCain. He is not a nice person; so toughen up your hides, because it is going to get a lot more bumpy than just this tift between Hillary and Barack.
anne faith: Excellent post! I’m waiting for that time to come. You made my day, Anne. I was wonderin’ what the “W” stood for. Thanks!
OldBadgertoo writes:
“Ridiculous. This isn’t misogyny because “my wife” says it, I suppose. Well, let her speak for herself then. Or are you speaking as the head of the family?”
The cute stratagem of using the “pacifist wife” truly sucks. That the overseers of the “left” have come to this is pathetic.
And the piece — which was on HuffPo BEFORE the PA primary Obama couldn’t buy — seems to be mostly an excuse to red-bait Clinton (and, of course, to denigrate women in general, and to infuriate “radical” women).
I don’t support Clinton, but have come to find her less annoying than Obama, teevee-wise.
The “left” should be demanding the nomination of John Edwards, instead of tying itself in knots over hothouse hustler Obama.
Clinton is just plain VILE, the whole lot of them. I couldn’t stand them when Bill was in office and over the years, that has intensified to white hot hatred for them. I’ve absolutely had it with people apologizing for her behavior, she’s exactly what is wrong with this country and will only perpetuate more of the same if coronated as Queen. I’m sick to death of “playing nice” so as not to damage Dem chances in November against an even bigger pile of crap, neo-con dirt bag. One thing is certain, if she gets the nomination she will NOT be the President EVER. She’s alienated entirely too many Dems with her Rovian tactics to EVER get out the vote in November. Obama supporters that have had it with her will simply not vote or vote Nader. Hundreds of thousands of new voters will do the same as will the vast majority of the AA population. I’m sick to goddamn death of hearing about how he can’t win because of rural blue collar workers. How in the HELL does she think SHE can win without AA vote or the youth vote…Quick answer, SHE CAN’T!
As far as I can tell Obama supporters find something to scream about daily — as regularly as the sunrise — I wonder if it’s some subscription service that’s part of signing up with the campaign … It certainly seems that there are regular well-distributed “talking points” that show up in various forums, repeated endlessly … particularly noticeable when the “narrative” turns on a dime and an old outrage is abandoned to champion “the” new one.
As far as I can tell most Obama supporters are so breathlessly eager to add “their 2 cents” that they rarely read much of what anyone else is ACTUALLY saying or notice if “their 2 cents” is relevant to the subject of the discussion… and then they get annoyed no one responds to their posts …
Whatever .. I’m far from a Clinton supporter, but the regular hysterics by Obama supporters is a MAJOR negative in my opinion of them and his campaign … and so much of what they have to say is confined to anti-Clinton diatribes …
I’m rather meh about the candidate himself. He has a ponderous quality I find really really irritating (particularly since he is so often being so deliberately “vague”) and have even felt it was even sorta pretentious in a professorial kinda way. He reminds me of my father in a not-so-good way in this.
Whatever.
Tom Hayden should be talking about other making people scream!!!!! ?????? He’s the writer of ‘Writings for A Democratic Party Society’, isn’t he? What a clown the guy is!
Poor guy, I worry for him and his angst when he’ll probably be out talking about why we all have to vote Hillary in just another few months.
An excerpt from the following article, “Hillary Clinton threatens to ‘obliterate’ Iran,” by Joe Kay –
“Clinton’s comments (about obliterating Iran) are revealing not only in what they say about her own campaign, but what they say about the Democratic Party as a whole, including Obama. No one in the Democratic Party establishment challenges the basic premise underlying the threats by Clinton against Iran: that US policy in the Middle East is aimed at countering Iranian aggression. Neither of the candidates will point out that the policy of unprovoked aggression has been practiced not by Iran, but by the United States, which has killed over 1 million Iraqis, and turned 4 million into refugees, in its determination to gain control of the country and the region.
“The danger of war against Iran—or against China, Russia, or some other country—does not come just from the Republican Party. While the Democrats seek to posture as critics of the Iraq war, they are just as committed as the Republicans to the aims the war was meant to secure, and they will just as surely use military force in the future to achieve these aims.”
Click here for the entire article — http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/apr2008/iran-a24.shtml
Kristina40 (April 24th, 2008 2:14 pm), I am coming to the same opinion. I don’t think she can win in November either. No matter how nasty she gets with Obama, he’s been a gentleman, relatively speaking, and the GOP, with McCain deploring their nasty tactics publicly while benefiting from them, as Bush did in 2004 with the Swift Boaters, will unload both barrels going back to Whitewater and beyond.
Every ugly smear and half-baked rumor ever heaped on the Clintons will be resurrected and paraded by the McCain-friendly media and it may just work well enough to shoehorn Cap’n War Hero into the White House, despite the economy and the Iraq debacle.
Susanparker (April 24th, 2008 2:36 pm), it’s interesting the number of posters here who say they don’t support Hillary and then go on to vigorously defend her. They also defend her with the same talking points and attacks I have seen by paid pro-Hillary flacks. Isn’t that curious. Sorry you have problems relating to your father. Whatever.
wsws.org website (April 24th, 2008 5:02 pm), it’s chilling that the Big Media hasn’t really explored the ramifications of a massive nuclear attack on a nation of 70 million people. Aside from making the US a mass murderer on par with Hitler and Stalin, there’s the matter of nuclear fall-out possibly raining down and sickening our troops in Iraq or Afghanistan or even Israel or Southern Europe. (The low-level leaked radiation from Chernobyl was detected in cow’s milk in Sweden.) It’s a shame this bit of horrific sword-rattling by Hillary didn’t have reporters asking her if she fully realizes the consequences of obliterating Iran.
Peaceseeker67: What caused you to give up your republicanism?
Rich Griffin: What are the better policy positions that you think your beloved Hillary has?
look, my state held it’s caucuses in SuperTuesday and went for Obama by a wide margin … there is no way in hell I would vote for McCain … so, I have felt very much like a spectator for the last couple of months.
I’m not impressed by either Democratic candidate … Like Mr. Hayden, a year ago, I was holding my nose trying to avoid “hating” Clinton so much I was unable to vote for her in November (I’ve voted Green more often than not in the last 20 years) since — yes — I think a democratic victory in 2008 is important.
Barack Obama reminds me of Bill Clinton in 1992. That’s not a great thing. I did vote for Clinton in 1992 because I wanted the Kyoto Protocol passed and universal health care … so, as folks say, how’d that work out for me???? I thought Clinton was a say-anything “charmer” whose charm was lost on me. I voted for Nader in 1996 and 2000. I live in what was then a red state.
I’m “trying” to like Barack Obama as a candidate …
But I fear that as I hoped that if elected Hillary might remember her roots (as amply reviewed by Mr. Haden) …. I fear Obama’s supporters similarl hope that some sort of liberal supehero lurks to be unchained “later” …
If wishes were horses then beggar’s would ride …
Like many here, I was supporting Edwards …
It’s funny because I expected Obama to do better than he did in Pennsylvania … much as I, back in March, would have expected to be happily supporting Obama by now … quite simply, neither have happened…
Gore, to some extent, ran as the not-Clinton … and I recall wondering where the enthusiasm for his candidacy was… there was an air of inevitabilitiy … and he a good man and supremely qualified … but I felt little “momentum”
Team Obama will need to cultivate that enthusiasm within the party as a whole … I’m not seeing or feeling much of that promised “positive energy” … or seeing much “change”
Mr Hayden- you are a buffoon. At least “SOMEONE” can make your wife scream- I doubt that you can.
Hillary isn’t much liked anywhere, going by nearly all these comments and similar ones at the ends of other CD articles. But if anyone thinks they understand politics and don’t like how this interminable campaign is going, yelling at the TV and radio, just let Rockerbabe condescendingly set your naive selves straight. Rockerbabe has apparently worked on political campaigns, so she’s got the straight poop unlike us inexperienced rubes who can’t stand the serious heat of politics the way the oh so jaded with it all Rockerbabe can. She “knows and understands the ups and downs of politics,” in contrast to the likes of us who merely yell and complain about what a political opportunist and cynic Hillary is. R-babe is super- sophisticated, and here we sit complaining about esoteric stuff we can’t begin to understand. So everyone STFU and let real pros like Rockerbabe take care of politics. Sheesh, what a bunch of losers, acting as if we even understood the complex world of ballsy politics like the awesome Rockerbabe.
In mr Greg Plast’s book “The Best Democracy Money Can Buy” on page 62 “Bad TRIPS at the WTO” , Argentina has the ability to make the AIDS drugs dirt cheap . With 25.3 million people going to die in Southern Africa , Argentina proposed to ship the drugs to Southern Africa for $2.00 per day per patient . The gaint pharmaceutical companies howled about the proposed shipments and complained to the U.S. President Mr W.J.C. ( whose wife is presently a presidental candidate ) who then put his V.P. Mr A.G. in charge of the U.S. trade cops . The shipments to the dying people were HALTED and poor Argentina who was already having economic problems was threatened with sanctions . Later in 2000 the N.Y. Times reported that Mr W.J.C. had saved Africa . He proposed a billion dollar a year loan to the African nations . The pharmaceutical companies had just agreed to sell the drugs at reduced rates . $2.00 per day per patient .
This took Argentina , India , and Brazil who all have the ability to produce and ship the drugs completely out of the picture . Mr W.J.C. ( lobbyist ) had put millions of people’s health in jeopardy while he worked a deal . It also meant that the U.S. and or the World Bank coughed up a large sum of money to some nations that may not be able to make payments on the loan . But the big pharmaceutical companies and the dealer ( lobbyist Mr W.J.C. ) are collecting .
I know this information will not change the minds of us that are facinated by Mr W.J.C. and wife . We have seen the line the media has drawn in the sand and have chosen which side to stand on and will defend our side with every vowel at our disposal . With the media fanning the flames we have brought out our heaviest artillery and have begun firing at those on the other side . And now that the media has us mired deeply in this war VICTORY is our only objective . We must destroy the candidate and all the candidate’s followers who are on the other side of THAT line and WE will not allow ourselves to think any other way . But if we win , what will we have ?
Jane M –
Michael Moore mentioned the Wright connection with the Clintons. Here’s a couple of links for you:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/photograph-of-bill-clinton-and-rev-wright-surfaces/
http://www.michaelmoore.com/words/message/index.php
Hayden’s take on the 60’s is far different than mine.
FYI both Hayden and Rodham were never down in the Anti-War trenches in Chi Town in `68, they were too engrossed in being oh so radically chic plotting and scheming and while scoring some good shit.
As I remember Hillary and him back then, neither of them had any street savvy.
Like many of their snooty contemporaries, both aspired to be the Leading Lights in the Trendy Left movement.
To Peaceseeker67, who wrote, “I am not as thrilled with Obama as some folks are–but of the three–he is the best choice.”
Welcome, Peaceseeker. I want to disagree with you and state that Obama is NOT the best choice for progressives. May I suggest you take a look at the Green Party and the candidacy of Cynthia McKinney?
To Rockerbabe1, who wrote, “The problem with so many of the ‘progressive’ websites, is that all the commentators and posters have never run a political campaign or even worked for a candidate for an elected position; so you and your sensibilities are continually assaulted by those who know and understand the ups and downs of politics.”
I’ve never been a police officer, either, but I sure know when I’m getting a truncheon shoved up my ass.
To bojanglesA1, who said, “It’s best for 90% of americans to flee to canada.”
Allow me to suggest two of the destinations I and my partner and our 57 feline friends are considering: Venezuela and Cuba.
To RSJ: I should let Rich Griffin speak for himself, but I wanted to point out that s/he has pretty much consistently posted where s/he urges (D) party loyalists to vote for Cynthia McKinney. I think the one posting here was just a case of “but speaking of the two (D) candidates…”
To impeachbushco, who wrote, “I had intended voting for the ONLY progressive candidate in the running - Dennis Kucinich - and then he left the race. WHY? So what is the choice? Of the 3, I’d have to vote for Obama - I voted for him yesterday in the Pennsylvania primary. Personally, I’d LOVE to see a woman in the White House, but not Hillary.”
Please think about voting for McKinney! She’s dedicated to the issues that matter to progressives, she is the woman you want HRC to be, and YOUR VOTE WON’T BE WASTED, because garnering enough support in November would allow the Green Party to elude the draconian ballot access laws erected by the (D) & (R) parties to maintain their hold on power. It also enables (D) party members like Reid, Pelosi, Hoyer, et.al. to flip us progressives the finger and sneer, “What! You’re gonna vote for a Republican instead?” It makes them unaccountable. So, send them a message!
And to those who, when all else fails, finally fall back on the old, tired argument of “What about the Supreme Court” I can only point out that the (D) party was responsible for giving us Clarence Thomas, Antonin Scalia, John Roberts, Mukassey, Rice, Gates, ad nauseum. The (D)s in Congress can block any fringe nominee the eventual president puts forward.
A vote for the lesser of two evils is still a vote for evil.
kgarry (April 26th, 2008 5:12 pm), at the moment, the way I feel about Hillary Clinton as the Dem nominee might just drive me to vote for a third party because the more I see of how she operates, the less I think she’ll be any different from McCain, including, as you pointed out, in her choice for the Supreme Court.
I’m apprehensive about McKinney and her promises to build the Green Party since this is exactly what Ralph Nader said in 2000 and he jumped ship as soon as the election was over. However, if I did vote for a third party, it would be for someone who would dedicate themselves to building and energizing a realistic challenge to the two-party status quo.
Rockerbabe1, I have helped out in campaigns and know several people who have done the same. What Bush did in 2000 and 2004, and what Hillary is doing now is outside the bounds of the usual campaign tactics — that’s why it’s called the Kitchen Sink strategy, as pioneeered by Karl Rove; Toss as much mud as you can and see what sticks, whether it’s true or not, while covering your own tracks as much as possible.
Rove used this against Ann Richards in the 1994 Texas gubernatorial race. Rove started a nasty rumor campaign against Richards and the one that stuck was that Ann was a lesbian in anti-gay Texas.
In 2000, Rove did the same thing in South Carolina GOP primary where Bush was running against McCain. The rumor that stuck with the bigots down there was McCain’s ‘illegitimate black baby.’
If Obama had wanted to go nasty on Hillary in Penn., he could have run non-stop TV ads showing her lying about being under sniper fire in Bosnia, and quoting her speeches supporting NAFTA and the later lies she told in the Dem debates. Obama didn’t want to ‘go there’ and get down in the mud with Hillary, although those two ads would have been factual, unlike the distorted guilt-by-association smear jobs Hillary’s campaign was peddling.
The way the two have campaigned tells me a lot about who Obama is and who Hillary is — does anyone really want another serial liar in the White House for four years?
I am sorry to say that the media is after that given how they deal with the two candidates.