Dem Celeb Politics

Quicksearch

Blog Administration

Open login screen

RSS Readers

Monday, November 26. 2007

With Iowa coming up soon, it's been a tough month for Hillary Clinton with a whirlwind of uncomplimentary stories.

The Hu contribution�scandal, the radical law firm story,�her strange reversal on illegal driving licenses, her unwillingness to take a firm stand on anything, new polls that reinforce the idea that she might not be electable, the Vin Gupta story, news articles reporting that people do not trust her honesty�- and now the lesbian theme comes out of the closet today, a theme which has been whispered around Washington for many years. That's enough to short-circuit any rapid-response team.

The Dems do have two excellent candidates who are substantial, savvy, accomplished,�and�ready for prime time: Joe Biden and Chris Dodd - Dodd being�perhaps the more impressive of the two. If primary voters�take a look beyond the two celeb candidates (Clinton and Obama) they might find something to like.

When candidates were chosen by wise men in smoke-filled rooms, Biden and Dodd would have been on the top of the list and Clinton and Obama would have been viewed as arrogant, presumptuous�lightweights and�laughed out of the room and instructed to return when they have accomplished something.

Are voters so celeb-intoxicated these days that solid guys ("solid" as politicians go - even though I would not be voting for any of these)�don't have a chance?

Posted by The Barrister in Our Essays, Politics at 19:22 | Comments (22) | Trackbacks (0)

Trackbacks

Trackback specific URI for this entry

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)

re smoke-filled rooms--I agree--this country was set up to be a republican constitutional democracy (with news spreading at horse speed), and the mass comm revolution has thrown us all into a river of continual informal referenda via for-profit media. Upshot, celebs rule the popular culture, and mob rule is coming up the road.

This is not helping USA worldwide, as it declaims for the bona-fide excellence of the underlying system.

#1 buddy larsen on 2007-11-26 20:07 (Reply)

Barrister, please... Biden? If anything, he is perfect illustration of the shallowness of the Dem field this cycle. If not for the media, none of them would stand the scrutiny of candlelight. At least the 'pugs have some accomplisments they can speak of.

#2 Luther McLeod on 2007-11-26 20:11 (Reply)

At least he has been around the block a few times, and seems to know what he is talking about without a memorized script.

#2.1 the B. on 2007-11-26 20:15 (Reply)

Dodd has the corner on smoke filled room, IAFF endorsment.

Edwards is only dem who has a chance against anyone but Fred.

#3 Leag on 2007-11-26 21:20 (Reply)

--got to agree that some awfully puerile nonsense has come recently from the mouths of both Sens Dodd and Biden.

#4 buddy larsen on 2007-11-26 21:43 (Reply)

Geez, Buddy, this debate is about which fat girl sweats the least. The entire gamut (aside from Kucinich) ranges from jejeune to puerile - these guys are the upside, as B noted.

#4.1 Rick Ballard (Link) on 2007-11-26 22:20 (Reply)

Agree--Biden would make the best pres of the lot. Wish I could forget that chia-pet thing he did to hisself, tho.

The article on Hil's rad summer omits a couple things (well, that I noted):

The Oakland cop whose murder she was defending the Panthers from had been tortured first, before he was "offed"--propane lighter and cigaret burns were all over him.

And that Gen Partner of the Panther's law firm (her 'summer job') was not only an open Communist but at one time the director of the Communist Party of California.

Hil now plays off the job as a trifle (she worked a child custody case, she has claimed) but the job had been arranged for her--and it was 3,000 miles from Yale (one way).

That summer in California working for the communist law firm is when she & Bill lived together--and later married.

Bill at the time was but a few years before election as Arkansas Att'y Gen'l, and a couple years past from his trip to the USSR as a sort of ex-pat "student dissident".

Be interesting to know who backed that first campaign in Arkansas. No, not the backers of record--the other backers.

Hey, folks, quack quack quack--it's a DUCK!

#5 buddy larsen on 2007-11-26 23:09 (Reply)

i ask plaintively, could we please have a president without known associations with enemies of the country? is that asking too much ?

#6 buddy larsen on 2007-11-26 23:16 (Reply)

Hey Habu
Yeah
Is it worth mentioning again?
Yeah
OK dude....

We still do not know any of the particulars of Bill Clintons trip to the Soviet Union while he was suppose to be at Oxford. Yeah we know bits and pieces but it doesn't get to the heart of the matter.

Was Bill Clinton recruited by the KGB? He fit every profile for a likely candidate MICE..remember? Money, Ideology,Compromised, and Ego. He fits 'em all. Then on his return to England he begins organizing against the USA in just the exact manner the KGB proscribes.

Hillary fits all the categories also. So they stayed moles for years and then bingo they have money to run campaigns on , communist friends by the boatload.

I've said this for years and you know what..somebody somewhere knows or knew (dead now).

We've been had. Bill sells the Chinese all kinds of TS info for cash. Who knows what he just gave the Soviets.

OT....I think the question has to seriously be asked if we are not PC enablers? We never say gook or slope or anything that isn't PC...so how are we going to alter PC if we don't do un PC things? We're just sitting on the bus complaining about PC this and PC that an no one has the moxie to step out of line..I would but the first thing that would happen..... ..I'd be banned from the site..yep we're enablers.

#7 Habu on 2007-11-26 23:45 (Reply)

well, remember that to persuade, you have to have credibility, and that credibility is the first thing that goes when run naked through the streets screaming the commies are coming. patience and persistance are your weapons to hand at this point in time. or am i wrong? hell i don't know.

#7.1 buddy larsen on 2007-11-26 23:58 (Reply)

Habu you ask an excellent question re 'sitting on the bus'. But I'm not sure that it is exactly 'PC' that is the problem. Being un-PC plays right into their hands... you know that. They have circumscribed the semantics.

The real problem is the success that the 'other' side has had over the last fifty years. They were the 'stars' in this instance. But in certain aspects the curtain has nearly closed on that particular act, and the play goes on. But you know that as well.

So, we need be smarter... learn how to work with what we have left... a rough and rocky road for sure. I don't think the old ways will work anymore, we need develop new tactics and strategies, new and different ways to assault their paradigm. Talking here at MF, or other sites, is a first step on that road.

Great and thoughtful words Buddy... as usual.

I hate being outnumbered on Biden... the man is an egotistical trollop. Sad that the Dem's have no better.

#7.2 Luther McLeod on 2007-11-27 07:47 (Reply)

middle age hair transplant = not presidential material

#7.2.1 buddy larsen on 2007-11-27 10:50 (Reply)

ha - great example. If you can't be honest with yourself who can you be honest with?

#7.2.1.1 Luther McLeod on 2007-11-27 11:05 (Reply)

i mean, ask yourself, what if Paul Revere had jumped the gun by a day?

nobody would even remember his name, and the kingsmen would've made it to the rebel weapons stores and back with hardly an indicent.

no Lexington & Concord to rally the friendlies, and the whole revolution wrong-footed for who knows how long.

#8 buddy larsen on 2007-11-27 00:03 (Reply)

questions we need to be asking: how would the US military react to the election as president of an open communist or foreign agent? if the military establishment will brook none of such nonsense, then habu, all you have to do is communicate your take on the doin's as widely as you're reasonably able.

the time to hit the bricks with signs and placards or something may surely come, and when that moment will have come, you don't want to have priorly been heavy-thorazined and stashed at the funny farm.

#8.1 buddy larsen on 2007-11-27 00:20 (Reply)

you might find yourself in the same padded cell Patrick Henry would've been in if he'd given his ''liberty or death''speech two years too soon.

#8.1.1 buddy larsen on 2007-11-27 00:24 (Reply)

lastly, come Nov '08 the Red Queen could lose 47 states and by default and counter-example usher in a re-birth of the American ideal. best possible outcome--we have to give it a chance. overdoing the Red Peril Alert before the election will only help her. So, yes, we have to sit on the bus and mutter for the nonce. write posts at Maggie's Farm and such.

or, i could be completely wrong and we ought to be mustering on the village green this very night. hell i don't know.

But what do we do after we muster? can't fire on Fort Sumter--that's our kids out there. guess we could tap a keg and play dominos.

a revolution would first have to make the national guard into the enemy--almost unimaginable under any conditions resembling the current.

hell, maybe that's your point--we're pretty far up the creek already. or down the river, one of the two. I blame Hitler--he centralized all his enemy governments--antichrist dog.

#8.1.1.1 buddy larsen on 2007-11-27 00:41 (Reply)

anyway--she has an enormous capitalist support base--all those limousine libs have holdings to protect--so what we'll get is another Carter Admin--full of academic Marxists without any real ambition besides making everyone as miserable as possible. plausible? or not?

#9 buddy larsen on 2007-11-27 00:55 (Reply)

Yuk!

Miserable defeatism.

Very PC, gents.

#10 Leag on 2007-11-27 10:39 (Reply)

if Lee had listened to Longstreet, George Pickett's Division might have soon encamped outside DC and have helped force terms, rather than dying on the slopes in front of an entrenched army atop Cemetery Ridge.

#10.1 buddy larsen on 2007-11-27 10:47 (Reply)

Defeatism... really.

As in calling for a change in tactics... as the present ones have worked so well over the last fifty years.

#11 Luther McLeod on 2007-11-27 11:01 (Reply)

exactly. conservatives run this tattered rump party which legislatively survives only at the pleasure of the Blue Dog dems.

#11.1 buddy larsen on 2007-11-27 11:07 (Reply)

Add Comment

Name
Email	(Your e-mail will not show in your comment)
Homepage
In reply to
Comment	By commenting on this site you agree to the site rules listed here. Email addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for email notifications. Quick reference guide: [i] italics [/i], [b] bold [/b], [u] underline [/u], [url] (web address) [/url]. More tips here. Enclosing asterisks marks text as bold (word), underscore are made via _word_. E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications. To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly. Enter the string from the spam-prevention image above: BBCode format allowed
	Remember Information? Subscribe to this entry

Maggie's Farm

Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page

Categories

Quicksearch

Links

Blog Administration

RSS Readers

Monday, November 26. 2007

Dem Celeb Politics