billysumday's Blog

Bill Clinton can win this election for Obama

2008-09-16T15:46:35Z

Just read an interesting post over at Marc Ambinder's site, where he talks about how AIG going under could start a cascade of bank closures. We are on the precipice of financial meltdown. And right now, nobody trusts the Republicans on economic issues, and they don't quite trust Obama enough, either. Greenspan is not really trustworthy considering he's largely responsible for this mess. Who does that leave? I'd guess Warren Buffet is still high on the list of trusted public figures, but he's less of an economist and more of an investor. That leaves Bill Clinton who still retains huge public trust when it comes to economic issues.

I realize that Obama and Clinton have issues. But now would be a good time for Obama to swallow his pride and do a tour through the rust belt states with Bill Clinton by his side. A message of economic security will resonate with people worried about the meltdown on Wall Street, and with Clinton vouching for Obama, those conservative Democrats and Independents who still have fond memories of the prosperous 90's will have some of their fears of Obama assuaged.

The New and Improved Maverick

2008-09-03T13:00:33Z

Isn't the biggest story out of the entire Palin kerfuffle the fact that McCain caved to his own party?

I mean, I watched Joe Lieberman stand up on stage and yammer on about how McCain stood up to the power brokers in the Republican Party time and time again - yet of course when it came to putting Lieberman on the ticket, he caved. (!!!!) If bipartisanship is so tough and so admirable that only a Maverick could do it, why didn't he put Lieberman on the ticket?

Am I wrong here? This seems to be the biggest story out of the entire VP pick. It completely negates the entire story of Maverick John McCain standing up to his own party. In the most important decision of his campaign, he folded to the far right.

John McCain - "I'll stand up to the people in my own party for a day, maybe two tops, then I'll throw in the towel. Uncle, uncle! You guys win!"

That's my kind of maverick.

IMPORTANT - List of Palin's foreign policy experience below...

2008-08-29T15:08:18Z

Exactly.

The Convention is a Failure

2008-08-26T21:01:39Z

Bill Clinton running around telling people to vote for McCain (essentially). The media covering nothing but the Clinton/Obama feud. Polls dropping. McCain slamming Obama on foreign policy. Hordes of Republican strategists and talking heads speaking with one voice, whinging Democrats bickering amongst themselves. And to top it off, Democratic speakers talking about watching the Brady Bunch and bipartisanship instead of slamming McCain and Bush at every opportunity.

We will look back at this week and see it as the beginning of the end. Obama is not going to get a bump. Any bump he gets will be immediately wiped out by a bump for McCain. Hate to say it, but there are enough people who are willing to take a pass on Obama and wait out four years to elect another Democrat. What they'll do when Hillary loses another primary, I have no idea, but that's where we're headed. Personally, I blame William Jefferson Douchebag and his wife, but then again, that's just what the PUMAs want to hear.

Dear Greg

2008-06-06T17:21:01Z

I find it quite disingenuous of you to point out that the VoteBoth movement has gathered over 25,000 signatures without also recognizing that Rush Limbaugh and various other conservative pundits are urging their 20 million+ listeners to essentially sabotage the signature list.

I know it's not something that is verifiable, but your breathless "Late late updates!" in which you cite different people calculating the importance of the number of signatures is just really shameless when the verification of the signatures is completely suspect, and especially after a number of commenters alerted you to the fact the signatures list is being freeped by dittoheads.

At the end of the day I realize it's not that big of a deal, but your reputation should be at least relatively important to you, and by disingenuously omitting the fact that there is a huge push by conservative media to continue the candidacy of Hillary Clinton sort of undermines the neutrality of opinion you attempt to maintain.

Simple Advice to Campaign Surrogates Accused of Offensive, Racist Remarks: SYFPH

2008-05-02T16:05:49Z

Dear Campaign Surrogates (But Especially Mickey Kantor and Rev. Wright):

When a YouTube video is released showing ugly and offensive comments (like, for example, your contempt for the good people of Indiana), you have one responsibility and one responsibility only: to shut your effing pie hole. I can see from this Huffington Post article that you are not taking this simple and obvious advice.

Even the good Reverend Wright realized as much - at least for a month and half, that is, before the spotlight became too tempting. But you're an old political hand, Mickey. You really think that claiming a "conspiracy" is going to make this go away? You think people aren't going to inspect this tape and pass it around even more now that you've weighed in? You think you're helping Hillary by trying to get into a public wrestling match with the originator of this video? You do realize, right, that you still quite clearly called the people of Indiana "shit." Buddy, you just don't get it, do you. In fact, I'm starting to think that you must be out of your damn mind, you worthless white...

BREAKING: Greg Sargent Gets His Feelings Hurt

2008-04-27T17:23:26Z

On Friday, a prominent Obama adviser confided in Greg Sargent that Obama was going to "take Fox on" during his interview this morning on Fox News Sunday. Well, now that the dust has settled, it's clear that Obama merely discussed issues in a reasonable way with Fox News correspondent Chris Wallace. And though Sargent agrees that, "Obama turned in a perfectly solid performance," and, " he probably succeeded in making a positive impression on many voters he might otherwise not have reached," the real issue here is that the prominent Obama adviser LIED to Greg Sargent.

Yes, he was lied to! Or, at the least, was slightly misled!

Now, if you don't think that's a big deal, be sure to check out Greg Stoller who, according to Sargent, "has some strong criticism" of Obama. In other words, Sargent has some harsh words for Obama, Stoller links to Sargent's post, then Sargent links back to Stoller's post. It's a veritable consensus! Clearly the blogosphere agrees that Obama's interview should be viewed as an outrage! Obama went on Fox News Sunday and DID NOT punch Wallace in the face!

I am confused. I have no idea what the issue is here. Why is this a post? Why the multiple updates and the breathless condemnation of Obama's performance? When did it become unreasonable for Democrats to appear on Fox News? What other Democrats are engaging in a boycott of Fox? Why is this not an issue when Clinton appears on Fox? Why is Sargent picking fights with people in the comments? What the hell is going on here?

Hillary's Weather Underground Problem - Either She's Lying or She's Not

2008-04-25T18:08:43Z

Damned if she is, damned if she isn't.

Hillary made a big mistake the other day on Inside Edition when she said, in regards to her husband's Weather Underground pardons, "Well, I didn't know anything about it."

Oh, reeeeeeeeeally.

I'm glad to see that Josh is diving into this story, because a response of "I didn't know anything about it," just begs reporters to prove her wrong. Any sort of flat denial like this raises more questions than it answers, because a touchstone of Hillary's campaign has been the implied assertion that she was something of a co-president or at the least a trusted adviser during her husband's tenure. Hilariously, any time a current issue becomes unpopular (NAFTA, pardons), Hillary seems to have been magically absent from those White House discussions or was, even more amazingly, "secretly" lobbying against it.

Simply put, Hillary put her foot in her mouth big time in the Inside Edition interview. If she would have instead just obfuscated or ducked the question, I'm sure she'd keep skating for a few more weeks. Instead, she flatly denied knowledge of the pardons and pricked the ears of journalists around the country. Bad move.

The fact is, Bill's pardons are a huge deal and they are going to be a big issue in a general election should HRC get the nod. And so it comes down to: either she knew about them or she didn't. If she knew about them, and I think there's ample evidence that she must have known about most of them and possibly even lobbied on behalf of some of those who were pardoned, then she needs to explain herself. On the other hand, if these were all done without her knowledge, let alone without her consultation, then it raises serious questions about how much of the White House operated on a level above Ms. Clinton's head.

To sum: either she knew about the pardons and is outright lying, or she didn't know about them and her claim to have been a major player in the White House should be seriously questioned.

So, which is it, Hillary? Are you lying to us, or have you been exaggerating your role in the White House? You can't have it both ways.

Hillary Lied About the Weather Underground - No Mention at TPM

2008-04-24T18:05:15Z

It's interesting. Obama puts his foot in his mouth when talking about voters in Pennsylvania, and "bittergate" becomes non-stop news for days.

Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, lies about her knowledge of Bill pardoning two members of the Weather Underground, and all is silent.

This is a big deal. Hillary Clinton continues to lie. And the hypocrisy here is that she is trying to hit Obama about his relationship with William Ayers, while she sat on her hands and did nothing to stop her husband from pardoning
two members who were actually convicted of violent crimes (Ayers, on the other hand, was acquitted at trial).

So, thanks again, news media. Fair, balanced, and unwilling to take Hillary Clinton to task for her implausible denials of any of her husband's poor judgment.

Information can be found here.

...You Might Be an Idiot

2008-04-23T21:11:43Z

During the long course of this primary, supporters of both Obama and Clinton have touted the strengths of their candidate and slammed every misstep of their opponent. In turn, some supporters have become blind to the failings of their guy (or gal), and deaf to the ridiculousness of each camp's spin. Chances are, all of us have harbored idiotic thoughts these last few weeks. Check below to find out whether or not you are or ever have been an idiot! GUARANTEED to piss off just about everybody!

Delivered, of course, in the style of America's favorite funnyman - Jeff Foxworthy!

Without further ado...(drumroll...)

If you're not worried about Obama's ability to win working class white voters, you might be an idiot!

If you think that the votes of Michigan should count in a popular vote tally, you just might be an idiot!

If you think that a caucus where people can waltz in and vote with a paper ballot and then leave is "undemocratic," you make idiots look good, moron!

If you think Obama is a cross between JFK and MLK, there's a chance you're an idiot, idiot!

If you sincerely think Hillary Clinton is a fighter for the working class, then make no mistake about it - you are without a doubt a certifiable idiot!

If you think that this long primary process is the best thing to happen to the Democrats in a long time, you might need to take a look in the mirror, you goddamned idiot!

If you think that African-Americans are "racist" for voting for Obama, you just might be a fucking idiot!

If you think Obama is going to win Kansas and Montana in a general election, you might be a very hopeful idiot!

If you think Clinton doesn't have a chance in a general election against McCain, you might be an idiot!

If you think Obama is lucky to be a black man running for President, you could be the world's biggest idiot!

If you think Randi Rhodes is anything besides an unhinged conspiracy theorist crackpot, you might be an idiot!

If you think the media has been easy on Obama, you just might be drinking the idiot juice!

If you think Obama's campaign has been playing the race card, you might have to change your name to Idiot McIdiot!

If you think Clinton would be able to push her healthcare plan through the House and Senate without it getting watered down and altered significantly, then I've got some land to sell you, you idiot!

If you think Obama is going to stop the loss of manufacturing jobs, you might be an idiot!

If you think Clinton would be where she is if she hadn't married Bill, you just might be a revisionist idiot!

If you don't think Rev. Wright is going to hurt Obama in the general election, you're Time Magazine's Idiot of the Year!

If you think Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton is good for democracy, you might be an idiot who would love living in a South American country!

If you think Bill Clinton has, in the past 8 years, refrained from having sexual relations (finger wagging)...with lots of women...like Ms. Lewinsky...you might be an idiot!

If you think Fox News is more "fair and balanced" than MSNBC, you might be an idiot!

If you don't think Obama needs a new stump speech, you might be an idiot!

And finally....

If you're thinking about voting for McCain over either Democratic candidate in November, THEN YOU ARE WITHOUT A DOUBT A HUGE FUCKING IDIOT, YOU DOUCHEBAG IDIOT!!

Laughably Awful New Hillary Ad

2008-04-21T15:25:11Z

What do you look for in a President? Me, I look for someone who is a leader, has a cool head, is articulate, a deep thinker, fearless, progressive, positive. Those are a few reasons why I support Barack Obama.

However, if for any reason you prefer candidates who act like WWE wrestlers, and who say things like "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen," then maybe Hillary is the choice for you.

Seriously though, I have to ask, because I'm seriously confused here: this isn't for real, is it?

A Response to Stephanopoulos

2008-04-17T20:17:23Z

George, in your interview with Greg Sargent, you said:

"We decided to focus at the top on the issues that had been at the center of the debate since the last debate. Everything we brought up in that front section had not come up since the last debate. And they all focused on the same theme -- which candidate would be a stronger Democratic candidate in November."

This argument is intellectually dishonest, and it is sad to me that you don't understand why this comment, and the heart of your entire argument, is fundamentally flawed and fatal to the prospect of intelligent political discourse in this country. You see, George, you have a television show. Every Sunday. I usually watch it. So don't give me this bullshit line about how you had to cover the recent topics of discussion in the last few weeks - you are one of the people that peddles this senseless nonsense in the first place! You are one of the people who picks and chooses what gets discussed in the weeks leading up to a debate. Then you act like you have no choice but to discuss this nonsense in a debate because, well, hey, the people are interested in it! I wonder why!

Garbage in, garbage out. Of course the American people want to know whether or not Obama hates his country because he doesn't wear a flag pin. This is the tripe that counts as "news" nowadays. And for you to put on your pundit hat on Sunday mornings and dissect every misstatement or wrong look between Clinton and Obama, which in turn further propels a certain storyline and narrative about competing personalities, while neglecting discussing other issues, only to step to the plate on debate night and act as though the people have demanded to know whether or not Obama shook Ayers' hand twice or three times and are they or are they not Freemasons who want to blow up the Capitol building?

You had a choice, George. You could have left your Sunday morning horse-race, focus-on-the-minutia hat at home, but you didn't. You were a moderator, you got to define the debate. And you chose to define it in as small a way as possible. Don't blame the "American people" for your pettiness. You could have made it bigger last night. You could have asked about food shortages, China, Afghanistan, the energy crisis. You chose instead to inquire as to whether Obama was more patriotic than his minister. Or why Clinton lied about Bosnia, as though that hadn't gone through the ringer already either.

Own up to it, man. Just own up to it and say that you messed up. You blew it. You're better than the stunt you pulled last night.

"Ordinary Pennsylvania Resident" in Clinton ad not actually from Pennsylvania

2008-04-16T14:25:34Z

Is it just me or does the Clinton campaign have a strange knack for producing Onion-like headlines of hilarious irony? Didn't we all see this coming? Hillary's latest ad in which (to quote from Sargent's post on TPM Election Central) "ordinary Pennsylvania residents express their displeasure about Obama's comments" includes - you guessed it - a guy from New Jersey.

So here's a question - is the Clinton campaign putting us on, or are they really this dense?

Hillary's Appeal - The Diva Theory

2008-04-10T14:00:29Z

Lately I've been bouncing the idea off of friends that at least some of Hillary's appeal - at least with some middle aged women and homosexual men - has to do with what I call her "Diva Appeal." Now, before I go on, let me say that this theory is not grounded in anything resembling facts or statistics or anything beyond my own mere observations and extrapolations. But then a couple of things caught my eye that so perfectly reinforce my (shabby, overgeneralized) theory that I just have to share this and get it out there - maybe someone else can better articulate what it is I'm trying to say.

The first example was at last night's Elton John concert in which he basically said to all the haters out there: "to hell with them!" And then, this morning, I read what is perhaps the most perfect distillation of the Diva Theory: the post Hillary is My Revolution by Billy Glad.

There is something weird going here. Hillary is the diva, the fabulous woman who is fabulous just because she says so. She's the woman who is abused (by her husband), ridiculed (by the press), hated (by Republican mouth-breathers), yet she's still standing. She's like from some exploitation film where the heroine is beaten and barely raped before pulling a knife out of her sock and slicing the mean guy's balls off. Her supporters have stood by her and fought her battles with her - and sometimes for her - since the 1990s. The emotional connection runs too deep. R-e-s-p-e-c-t, she shakes her finger. Find out what it means to me. And the crowd eats it up.

Nevermind that Hillary Clinton hasn't ever really ever done anything for the gay community. They just like her moxie. It's the defensive/aggressive posturing of a member of an ostracized community, and they identify with that. I see it my friends who are gay who support Hillary. They say the same trite things over and over: she's a fighter, she's a strong woman, people hate strong women, people are jealous... Surprisingly, they like my Diva theory. To them, a diva is exactly what we need in the White House.

And to go back to Billy Glad's post, I have no desire to call him out personally, but the post is just too rich in odd, projected emotionalism. All the signs of an abusive relationship are there. She cheats on him, lies to him, lets him down, but damn if she isn't a fabulous woman. And this weird idea that she shares a relationship with him? I quote:

Hillary and I have been together a long time. We have a history. You know the story.

No you don't. She doesn't know you from Adam. This is projecting. She is a politician. She doesn't care about you. She plays the victim because being a diva works for her. She thinks that people hate her because she is a fabulous woman. You think people hate because she's fabulous. This is her schtick.

One last thing. Wouldn't you know it, I type in "Hillary Diva" in Google, just to see if this path has been tread before, and, well, of course it has. I'm not the first one to see it at all. Here are just a couple:

The Diva's Camp: The Appeal of Hillary Clinton

From her burlesque biography to her faux-marriage; from her stylized overemotionality to her pseudo-drag admixture of male and female traits and gestures; from her synthetic stump speeches to her outrageous pronouncements and staged lies; and from her international acclaim to her most recently discovered wealth, Hillary, whether intentionally or not, embraces melodramatic excess at every turn.

and...

In Texas, Gay Bar's Patrons Love Hillary

"The thing is, Hillary's been a victim," says Leo Bartlett, taking a drag of his cigarette. "Hillary's a real fighter." She's been picked on, ridiculed, bullied. Those haircuts, that laugh, the clothes. Oh, and Monica. But she never gives up. She's got good policy positions. She bullies when she needs to. She's "a diva."

destor23's Obama microchip kicks in just as mine is sputtering

2008-04-07T14:18:56Z

By now you've probably heard the big news - destor23's preferential candidate microchip has finally been activated by the Obama campaign. Where and when the Obama campaign was able to surgically implant the chip into destor23's brain is still a mystery, but sadly his story is not unique. The lifeless, unthinking, hopeful automatons are growing in numbers. Like heat-seeking missiles, they travel in packs to Costco, purchase bulk cases of Kool-Aid and then transport them to local Obama campaign field offices. Following instructions beamed to them through their chips, they are ordered to purchase Obama's books and donate weekly to his campaign. Before long destor23 will personally be fighting poverty by trying to keep his own finances above the national line. Like a shell of a human, his lifeless eyes will blink slowly and from his mouth will come empty platitudes, and he will speak of "community involvement" and "a new dialogue" and "a fresh direction."

It's interesting, because his activation comes just as my chip is getting weaker and more infrequent signals. Why, just last week I went an entire day with baaahing like a sheep, as RaeK so often accurately depicts. Long an Obama supporter, reader of his first book, and close follower of his campaign, I'm simply waiting patiently for Obama to kick it into the next gear. And, even more surprisingly, I'm starting to admire the ruthlessness of Clinton.

Now, before the goon squad comes in here and compliments me for seeing the light, and calling Obama and his supporters all sorts of names, let it be known that I still support Obama, I do not think Clinton has a chance in Hell of winning the nomination or the general, and that at the end of the day, I largely despise Clinton's tactics and the meanness and cynicism that she brings out in people. In addition, I recoil at the thought of 4 years of a Clinton White House, the constant soap opera drama that she and Bill seem unable to live without, the gridlock between a slight majority Dem House and Senate and the rabid defiance of Clinton-hating Republicans. No, that is not a pretty picture. That is not what I want. But I do want the young Jedi to learn from this fight.

First of all, Clinton is out-hustling him. She does more campaign events, more one-on-one meet and greets, and in general looks like she works harder than he does. Of course it helps their campaign that they have two strong advocates and that Bill Clinton is out-hustling the both of them, but Obama would do well to learn from these two. Even if he is working as hard as them, it doesn't come across. Let us see you sweat a little, Barack. Loosen your tie at the end of a long day and look a little exhausted. It'll seem like you've been going 150 all day, and that's a good thing. We want to see you put in the elbow grease for this nomination.

Second of all, Clinton doesn't give a shit about looking mean. She's in it to win it. You can say that hurts the party (personally I don't think it does), but I do want someone who's going to kick and thrash about a bit before giving up. Shows me that they really want the job. Now, Obama's personality is not well-suited to this kind of behavior, and he's exhibited a calm, even, cool demeanor throughout this process. But at some point, I'd love to see him get his blood up. Not in a "SHAME ON YOU, BARACK OBAMA!!" kind of a way, but perhaps he could show a little, teensy bit of anger at McCain's idea of continued war in Iraq. Or a little anger at the fact that this economy has been destroyed by this administration. And because of his demeanor so far in the campaign, all it would take is one press conference with a clenched jaw and an icy stare. I want to see the eye of the tiger, Barack. The "I'm coming after you, muthafucka" stare that will show us that you're going to fight your way to the White House, not hope your way there.

Lastly, the Clintons are just better at playing the press. Earlier in the campaign, they strong-armed them into going after Obama. They showed their effectiveness again by demoting Penn without actually firing him. Releasing their taxes on a Friday at 4PM. And besides the Bosnia mishap, she's gotten away with a series of exaggerations and misstatements. Most importantly, we see now that they and their surrogates are aggressively pushing to frame the last part of this race as a matter of civil rights - the counting of the popular vote in FL and MI. Obama could certainly learn from this endless assault of press that spews forth from the Clinton camp.

Ultimately, the Clintons are ruthless, strategic, selfish, and they really, really, really want to get back to the White House. Those may not be admirable qualities, but they certainly don't hurt an aspiring Presidential candidate. Obama's chip is still firmly implanted in my brain, but the signal is getting fuzzier. He needs to increase the volume a little bit if he wants the instructions to keep getting through. I often thought he would turn up the heat in the general election, but maybe now is the time.