Otto F -

That was a very nice snarky comment. The sort of which I approve. You used clean language and did not call me an idiot. Thank you.

I agree that we need to united again and hope that it happens sooner than later.

-Susiehussein

Riesz-

I apologize for my side. Since there seems to be more Obama posters than Clinton posters at TPM, offensive posts would be more noticeable on that side. I do hope that it isn't representative of the mainstream Obama supporters, because it isn't in keeping with Obama's message. Please don't stereotype us - we're not all rude. Just as I know that not all Clinton supporters are rude.

You're kidding, right? History will show quite another story when all is said and done with the Clinton/Obama campaigns. I'm sure of that.

MSNBC said those things, so why did you try to pin them on TPM Obama backers?

You are a perfect example of what the thread is complaining about, and yet the thread writer bought into your con game.

I'm not quite sure I agree with your type-casting. I've seen plenty of nasty stuff from both sides.

CAN"T WE ALL JUST GET ALONG! We could if the Obama crowd were over 25 and had ever worked for a living in the real world. Eating Twinkies and worrying about a test next week isn't conducive to rational intercourse. Enough said.
Posted by ricksramblings
-------------------------------------
The academics, legislators, professions, generals, union workers, etc who support Obama have worked for a living. The college students will have to deal with the consequences of decisions being made in their names.

Many of us view Hillary as truth-challenged. Some of her statements about NAFTA and the outsourcing of jobs do not appear to be based in fact.

If you vote against someone because of what a subset of supporters say on any given website, then you deserve the President you would get. I did not change my opinion about Sen Clinton because of posts made on any website by her supporters. The candidate herself made me an Obama supporter.

While she may view her sniper fire comment as a joke for Jay Leno, I view it as a major character flaw. I have been sleep deprived. I am also a SciFi fan. I never misspoke about receiving phaser fire from a Romulan vessel. In my profession, that type of misspeaking would be grounds for a psychological review. Has Sen Clinton ever been in ANY situation in which she received enemy gunfire.
It is not a joke.

I watched Sen McCain get confused about Sunnis and Shiities. He also fabricated a story about supporting the MLK National holiday on the 40th memorial observance in Memphis. I see Sens Clinton and McCain as willing to say whatever needs to be said to whatever audience they address.

I see that Barack Obama can't bowl. I am not worried. I don't want to have a beer with him, I want him to be a President. Now having a good Boureaux with President Obama might be another matter.

So you extrapolate the offensive statements of one radio jock (and a tv reporter)and condemn all Obama supporters for it? You use this as a reason justify your support of Hillary Clinton? You can support Clinton for whatever reasons you choose - hopefully that support is grounded in positive policy reasons or a genuine respect for Senator Clinton. But if you believe no Clinton supporters say offensive "stuff like that" I suggest you visit Hillaryis44 or MyDD for regular, vitriolic, and virulent personal attacks on Barack Obama.

Unlike you, I don't blame you or all Clinton supporters or even Senator Clinton for the hateful attacks of a few intense partisans.

Riesz-

I must disagree on several points. There are many observers, myself included, who would happily support a candidate who happens to be a woman. While I have no doubt that some of the anti-Hillary sentiment is sexist, there are many who don't like her for solid reasons, many feminists included. There are feminists who have pointed to questions of character in the way she treated women involved with Bill. There are also many democrats who don't like Bill for many reasons, the least of which his "triangulation" steps to the right. So, please don't cast all anti-Hillary energy as sexist. It's not.

Again, I can only speak for myself.

First of all, I'm not sure how it can be determined on any given day, how much more hateful blogging or sentiment is coming from one side over another. We all have our impressions, but really, that's all they are.

But I will honestly say, Mr. Fischer. My strong antipathy towards Hillary is not based on her surrogates. It is based on her actions. Her calculated response to the question posed to her whether or not Obama is a Muslim reveals how low she will go. She has stepped over the line too many times during this campaign for me. And when we look at this campaign in future years, perhaps a more accurate version will emerge.

Riesz -

Well, I would love to vote for a woman! (and I am a woman!) So that is not why I support Obama. For me, Obama is the once in a lifetime candidate, he is special. I believe he transcends other candidates. You may say that I've had too much koolaid, but it is my true feeling, one that I've had ever since I heard his speech announcing his candidacy. So, I am an Obama lover, not a Clinton hater!! I'm sure there must be others like me.

Are you a Clinton lover or an Obama hater? It is easier to debate with lovers than haters, don't you think? Perhaps it's the haters that are ruining it for us all!

-Susiehussein

Although you could be right, Riesz Fischer, I don't think the anger toward Hillary has to with gender. The exception is the notable case of trolls who are here to make us all mad at one another by masquerading as Clinton and Obama supporters and insulting both candidates.

There have been some gender-specific attacks on Hillary. There's no justifying David Shuster of MSNBC saying Hillary was "pimping out" Chelsea, or Randi Rhodes calling Hillary a whore, even if Rhodes was, as some people claim, telling a tasteless joke. Shuster is not, as far as I know, an Obama supporter. He's a journalist who thought he was being clever. Since Rhodes is a woman, it seems unlikely she was telling her tasteless joke just because she saw an opportunity to attack a woman instead of a man.

The anger of most real Obama supporters toward Hillary has to do not with gender, but with Hillary's campaign tactics. The anger toward the Clinton campaign is just like the anger toward the notable male Republican Karl Rove for conducting campaigns that systematically divide people based on things like race and use anger to motivate their chosen demographic to go vote Republican. To Obama supporters, it seems clear that Hillary's campaign is using similar tactics against a Democrat in a Democratic primary. She's trying and succeeding at getting whites to vote against the black guy and women to vote against a man.

Apparently Hillary's supporters don't notice Hillary's campaign practices at all, or else think it is fine to use them against Obama for some higher purpose. Hillary can't seem to remember whether Obama is Muslim or Christian. The Clinton campaign supplied the photo of Obama in native African dress to reinforce the Muslim aspersions that started with rightwing sources. We keep hearing about Wright from Hillary herself, Harold Ickes and others. Mark Penn must have said the word "cocaine" twenty times in one TV interview about Obama even as John Edwards' campaign manager Joe Trippi tried to get him to stop. The Clinton campaign tried to get mainstream media to write about Obama and a Weathermen connection based on his service on a charity board that had an ex-weatherman as a board member. If you're an Obama supporter, it has been hard over the months not to notice that the Clinton campaign is carefully painting a portrait of Obama as an angry, black, muslim drug-user with terrorist friends. That's awfully nasty stuff. I really don't think the Obama campaign has done anything comparable.

Also, when it comes to anger at people within the Clinton campaign, it is directed equally at the male contingent: Bill Clinton and the impressive roster of male political operatives: James Carville, Mark Penn, Harold Ickes, Howard Wolfson, etc.

Then there's the way the Clintons personally and Hillary's campaign as a whole have reacted to complaints about their own negative campaigning. Bill says the negative campaigning is a good thing and everybody should "saddle up." Hillary says it's "the fun part." James Carville assures us this is a very "mild" campaign. Harold Ickes says it's "genteel." They not only do nasty divisive things, they celebrate themselves for being such clever political operatives and for showing such wonderful restraint in not doing even nastier things. What they apparently see as the "fun part" of politics is precisely what turns a lot of people's stomachs. Getting mad about their blowing off protests against negative campaigning has nothing to do with anybody's gender.

Hillary's changing positions on the nomination process are another source of anger toward her - changing positions and rationales on things like casino voting, seating delegates from Florida and Michigan, the legitimacy of caucuses, etc. The contradictions are pretty stark between her original positions and the ones she switched to when she feared the loss of delegates or suddenly was behind and needed to get delegates somehow. The contradictions make people see the sniper fire claim and other inaccuracies as a pattern of intentional misrepresentation rather than slips of memory.

I think Obama supporters express their anger at the Clinton campaign's actual behavior and inappropriately attack Hillary's supporters in the process. When Hillary's supporters defend themselves by defending or repeating her tactics, saying Obama's total accomplishments amount to giving a single worthless speech, that he is a phony, an empty suit, not fit to be commander-in-chief, just words, then act as though that justifies any and all nasty tactics against Obama, that makes Obama supporters madder.

Then, between us, we waste a lot of time and generate still more ill will.

That's actually what bothers me is when Clinton supporters (not many anymore, but there used to be a lot, and it still hurts when I hear it) start tossing hatred at the supporters such as the infamous line "drinking the Kool-Aid." I really hate that line, and I wish it would just go away. It doesn't make any important argument that couldn't be phrased better, and it doesn't add anything to the discussion. It just acts as a personal insult. I know that Obama supporters are guilty of this too, but it actually bothers me more when it's against the supporters than when it's against the candidate.

Oh if only it were true. I've heard amazingly hateful stuff said about Obama's morals and general character by Clinton supporters. I get pretty ticked about Obama supporters doing the same thing.

This site has more Obama supporters, so there's a higher frequency of Clinton hating than on a more balanced or even Hillary-esque site. And perhaps those of us who know better should say more. Unfortunately, when I see a Hillary-hating post I tend to get mad at the author myself and then get rude too.

I wish this site required you to preview a post before you could send it; seeing my words formatted can make me tone things down.

Now that would be a great feature. Then I could downrate my own posts when I get too cranky and hit 'send' before editing.

Thank you for that model of rational discourse.

As for the specific argument you make, there appear to be counterexamples. I'm over 60, have worked since my teens, and haven't eaten a Twinkie for 40 years.

Not that I object to Twinkies in principle.

So you think all Obama supporters are white and go to college. Not much to say about, well the rest of us.

I am an Obama supporter.

I am white; 60 years old; a nurse practitioner; have supported myself all my life; have travelled to England, Norway, Italy, Japan, South Africa, Botswana, Egypt, Israel, Australia, New Zealand, Sweden, Germany, North Caicos, Canada, Mexico, Brussels, Scotland, Spain, Portugal, Slovenija, Austria, Finland, (and others) -- and lived in France for a year.

I have raised three children -- one 22, and two 18 year-old twins. I am an excellent cook and I read good authors every day. I have written many health-related articles. Two years ago I started a new job in a new field (infertility) and I had to learn new drugs, new treatments, and new procedures.

I never eat Twinkies, and I am not a lightweight. I am not worried about a test next week; I am worried about my childrens' futures. I don't want a President who will declare war for bogus reasons. I don't want a President who is a serial liar. I don't want a President who feels entitled to the office. I want a President who has earned our trust and is legally elected.

What if the Hillary crowd would open their eyes? See? I could have hurled an insult to you like you did about Obama supporters, but I didn't.

FYI - I'm 49 and white and work for a living. I guess I'm in the offensive, latte drinking demographic. Most of my 40-50 something friends are for Obama too.

-Susiehussein

Well, I guess someone needs to defend the college-aged, so I'll try. Hi, my name is Lauren. I'm a freshman double-major at American University. I'm Jewish, but not very observant, since I feel closest to G-d when I'm studying Torah rather than in services. I want to know what I'm going to do after college since it's more than likely that the economy will be tanking, and it's less than likely that I'll be able to find a good job. This fear isn't alleviated by going to a restaurant with my family and finding out that our waiter went to my university for graduate school. I'm sick of having watched the entire world seem to erupt in flames since the time I entered middle school (September 11th occurred while I was in seventh grade, and I watched as the second plane hit the tower from my classroom), and even sicker of watching other cultures distorted on my television set. And sickest of all of knowing that too many people believe in it. I watch the concerns in my parents' discussions with each other, me, and my sisters about various issues, and believe it or not, they influence me the most on politics, not my friends. I'm worried about things just like you are, and please don't dismiss that worry as any less human or real than yours.

Oh yes, and I've never touched a Twinkie either, although I don't think it makes much of a difference. Just thought I'd let you know.

Not mine to judge, but I think there's a form of redemption in whom you cuss.

During WWII, Eisenhower was the top allied commander. By his rules, it was OK to call somebody an SOB, including calling a British officer an SOB. But if an American officer called a British officer a British SOB, the American was relieved of command and sent home.

The Democratic Party might have a better chance of winning this fall if Democrats could agree not to do the equivalent of calling one another SOBs.

Good point. A lot of the headlines are way out of line.

Pissing off Hillary supporters will just make it harder to elect Obama if he is nominated. And vice versa, of course, though the balance of nasty headlines is tilted against Hillary.

There's this weird online joy-of-flaming thing that I find hard to comprehend. It doesn't seem like a great way to choose a president.