Hillary, You Didn’t Win. Now Don’t Whine

« Return to Article

Discuss

Member Comments

  • Posted By: Hill2008 @ 06/01/2008 12:28:13 PM

    WE POST CAPS AND " !" BECAUSE WE ARE ANGRY - A WELL DESERVED ANGER - AN ANGER THAT HAS THE POWER TO - dare I say it - CHANGE WRONGS AND FIGHT EVIL -- AND DON'T TELL OTHER PEOPLE WHAT DO...

    • Posted By: HDavidson @ 06/01/2008 1:16:52 PM

      It's not only a shame but it's embarrassing.
      Countless women, including Hillary, are showing why it is preceived a WOMAN could NEVER be President. One word, E-M-O-T-I-O-N.S, you (hot as a whole, but in great part) are incapable of separating logic from emotion, seeing the greater good. Instead of showing a cool head and a true support for this country we love, and the party you belong to, women almost literally CRY about the loss, HILLARY LIES to try and further only one thing...HERSELF! Not this country, not any cause, just HER, and women, so desperate to finally get the golden goose, and break through the "highest glass ceiling in the country"..(Hillary says), have lost sight of what is truly important, OUR CHILDREN, OUR COUNTRY, and righting the wrongs that BUSH has committed, not just against this country, but against the world also. If she was the "best candidate" TRULY the best, she would not have to beg, cry, scream, lie, and whine for it, neither would her supporters. She would just have it, like OBAMA does.
      You are incapable of controlling your "rage" and so is she, and you think that makes her "tough", if a guy doesn???t control his rage, he has to take classes for it, but Hillary is just "a fighter". You can't control your desperation, and neither can she, she LIES, USES KARL ROVE as a "source" for her "math". and equates he "struggle" to everything you can possibly imagine, to try and get support for herself.
      And then to cap it all off, you can't control your "scorn"...Quoting almost every one of you so called Hillary supporters..."if she does'nt get it, I will vote for McCain"...embarrassing, and sad. "You" as a gender are not ready to hold such a position of POWER and RESPONSIBILITY, sorry to say, that is the impression she is giving to America, and THAT is why she has LOST, not FL, not MI, not OBAMA, none of the LIES she has come up with, She can't do it, TOO out of control of herself, and Bill is just an enabler.
      Like it or not, it is what it is...
      If you want to betray your country because your feelings are hurt, that's sad and sick, but it just proves the point.

      • Posted By: NeverSurrender @ 06/01/2008 5:12:18 PM

        Can you honestly look at the ranting and ravings of Obama's pastor, Jerimiah Wright and his friend and mentor, Rev. Pfleger and say it is not men who are more emotional? Can you look at the percentage of men who are in jail for murder and other violent crimes and not say it is men who are unable to control; their emotions? Can you look the statistics on domestic violence with over 1000 American women who are murdered by a husband or domestic partner each year and say it is not men who need to be less emotional. It is women who are far better to control their emotions. No offense meant.

        • Posted By: HDavidson @ 06/01/2008 5:48:51 PM

          Really, REALLY, pick any thread on NewsWeek that has to do with Hillary, Obama, McCain, whatever and read the Hillerites comments, and then the RESPONSES if you like, but listen to how many have said if not Hillary, then McCain or death. Read the posts here, listen to her protesters at the hearing yesterday...VERY Presidential, not to mention Hillary's threat to go the the Crunentials Commity (lol).

          What do you call it?...oh yeah, she's a fighter...LMAO

  • Posted By: sathena @ 06/01/2008 5:23:10 PM

    As feminist with European roots, I am disappointed by white American feminists, who insist that Clinton is the only acceptable candidate for the Democratic Party and disregard to (primary and caucus) results and will of the majority of voters that voted for her opponent. Despite Clinton???s failure to properly manage her campaign and funds, they still claim it is all due to sexism and mistreatment of Clinton by men and the media. Were Clinton a guy and Obama a white woman, the feminists now behind Clinton would cry foul for the other end of the pendulum.

    These same feminists, who claim it is all because of sexism, conveniently ignore their own short coming in respect of racism, classism and a lot of other isms. We can not claim the aspect convenient to us and ignore the justice for all other segments in society. For them it seems that it was ok for Clinton to use any dirty tactic out of Karl Rove???s playbook, but damn those, who use them against her.

    Core feminism is about including ALL. What I see missing among Clinton???s female followers, is the understanding of the feminine principal in a candidate. Edwards and Obama demonstrate an understanding of feminist qualities in way Clinton lacks. I want a president that embraces the symbolic principles of feminism and not just a president in a female body.

    Hillary Clinton is smart and brilliant politician and she deserves credit for that. Yet, the way she will loose the nomination, will show us her greatness or lack off.

  • Posted By: the_shelton @ 06/01/2008 3:05:12 AM

    I'll tell you what is really happening. Don't you know where all of the supporters for each of the candidates end up? They get to be directors of something or other, or they get to be a diplomat for some country, or they get a nice position in the government somewhere where the civil servants do all the work and they get the money and perks.

    You do remember all the people that used to be in the King's/Queen's Court in England or France? Those are the people who sucked up to the upcoming royalty and were rewarded with land and possessions, call them Earls or Dukes Or Marquees. Now we don't have the courts but we do have the idea that to the victor goes all the spoils and perks. So when one person gets in, they replace all these handed out positions which rewards all the people for working to get the person elected.

    Look at the names and the people who were on the committee today. Sound familiar?

    Anyway, what Hillary is worried about is that all the people who have sucked up to them are going to come back at her and say, "Hey, what's in this for me?", because believe me, they aren't in it for Mom and apple pie. That's how we got that dumbo as head of FEMA when Katrina struck. He didn't know enough about emergency action to fill a thimble. He was appointed.

    When you see these guys like Ikes or whatever his name is, he isn't fighting for Hillary, he is fighting because he is on the wrong side and he knows it. He doesn't want to give up his perks. Now us poor slobs out here who are really hyped up and fighting for a cause are doing it for all the right reasons. But don't bet your butt on any belief that anyone else in there is doing it for that reason. These are politicians folks, don't ever forget that.

    Hillary is going to fight until the end. She has to, otherwise she has to go back with her tail between her legs and set at the back of the Senate like some whipped dog. She is going to try to milk this to the very end, and then hope she can get Obama and the DNC to pick up the tab for this fight she is putting on. It's either that or pay up the 21 million and call it quits. What would you do? She's not paying for it right now and she hopes she won't have to.

    Follow the money people, no one does this for the ethical side. This fight isn't over until she is wiped out and has no chance of trying to pressure someone else into giving it to her.

    What kind of agreement do you think she got from Bill in exchange for not hanging his dumb ass out to dry when she had a chance?

    • Posted By: loriw @ 06/01/2008 5:05:18 PM

      I would pay really good money to see Hillary hang Bill's ass out to dry.
      I wonder if she's wishing now that she had done it a long time ago. Wanna bet on how many minutes it takes her to call her lawyer for a divorce once she finally admits her nomination bid is really over?? How fast can you say Speed Dial? Hind sight is 20/20 Hillary, honey.

      • Posted By: loriw @ 06/01/2008 5:06:54 PM

        oops , I miss quoted you, change that to "his DUMB ass out to dry"!!!!

    • Posted By: Concerned Ctzn @ 06/01/2008 4:53:15 AM

      I agree!

  • Posted By: mseic @ 06/01/2008 2:07:10 PM

    Hillary Clinton DID NOT WIN! Barack Obama will be the nominee. I hope he does not choose Hillary as a running mate, I still do not except her assassination comment from a few days ago!

    • Posted By: loriw @ 06/01/2008 4:58:55 PM

      Are you referring to Hillary's Feudian Slip when she spoke of assassination changing the course of a nomination race?????

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 06/01/2008 1:42:41 PM

    She'll get more write in votes than Nader. What party is he running in?

    • Posted By: NeverSurrender @ 06/01/2008 4:49:30 PM

      Ralph Nader is running for President with Matt Gonzalez on the Independent Party. He does have the best health care program and is truly independent of special interests. Some people think that a vote for Nader is a vote wasted. I think that the only vote wasted is the vote not cast. We should vote for the candidate we believe will be the best President.

  • Posted By: Debbie from PHoenix @ 06/01/2008 3:04:01 PM

    Being one of those 40-something women that has spent the majority of her life banging her head on the proverbial glass ceiling I am appalled at the behavior of Sen. Clinton and her supports as this late stage of the game. The "every trick in the book" strategy has failed Mrs. Clinton, so now she turns over the emotional sexism card to see if this one last ploy can somehow change in inevitable. into something different, miraculous and wholly undeserved. I RESENT the implication that if you lose a hard fought race as a woman you are then entitled, if not honor-bound to cry sexism. Perhaps in January, if Harold Ickes and Sen. Clinton had spent less time touting Mrs. Clinton as the returning sovereign stepping forth to claim her crown, things would have turned out differently for them. But ANYONE who seeks to destroy their own party for personal gain is a traitor of the worse color. This brings shame and disrespect to all women who have dedicated their lives to improving the plight of our sisters through out this country and the world. This is NOT the noble cause the Clinton's would like everyone to believe it is. It is the case of a sore loser who besmirches us all. To my fellow sisters and feminists everywhere, I most respectfully offer this advice: Take a step back. Take a deep breath, Take a good hard look at this. You are being played. To Mrs. Clinton: Is this really the way you thing Americans would want their President to behave?

  • Posted By: Debbie from PHoenix @ 06/01/2008 3:02:25 PM

    Being one of those 40-something women that has spent the majority of her life banging her head on the proverbial glass ceiling I am appalled at the behavior of Sen. Clinton and her supports as this late stage of the game. The "every trick in the book" strategy has failed Mrs. Clinton, so now she turns over the emotional sexism card to see if this one last ploy can somehow change in inevitable. into something different, miraculous and wholly undeserved. I RESENT the implication that if you lose a hard fought race as a woman you are then entitled, if not honor-bound to cry sexism. Perhaps in January, if Harold Ickes and Sen. Clinton had spent less time touting Mrs. Clinton as the returning sovereign stepping forth to claim her crown, things would have turned out differently for them. But ANYONE who seeks to destroy their own party for personal gain is a traitor of the worse color. This brings shame and disrespect to all women who have dedicated their lives to improving the plight of our sisters through out this country and the world. This is NOT the noble cause the Clinton's would like everyone to believe it is. It is the case of a sore loser who besmirches us all. To my fellow sisters and feminists everywhere, I most respectfully offer this advice: Take a step back. Take a deep breath, Take a good hard look at this. You are being played. To Mrs. Clinton: Is this really the way you thing Americans would want their President to behave?

  • Posted By: txitxe @ 06/01/2008 2:37:58 PM

    Hilllary is a very brilliant and capable person and she was my choice before Obama entered the picture. He is a brilliant and capable person as well, I listened to him and to her and it was Obama for me after that. For a long time, my attitude was: We have two people here I would llike to be my president. But tje longer the campaign went on and the more it appeared that Obama was to be the nominee \, the more a very unbecoming side of Hillarly came through--that of a whining, spoiled llittle chjild throwing a tantrum and adopting a scorchjed earth campaign.. I also liked McCain but now his willingness to become Bush III has done it for me. And what about Obama--the worst I hear is that so many want to blame him for what a couple of screwball ministers say. My God, no wonder religion is in trouble. We need t to rally around this ray of hope we have--we need to make Obamb our next president.

  • Posted By: TruthForward @ 06/01/2008 2:11:21 PM

    Obama economic address
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23827413#23827413

    Latest McCain Economic Proposal Seen As Incoherent. May 21st
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/21/latest-mccain-economic-pr_n_102865.html

  • Posted By: pactzin @ 06/01/2008 1:21:50 PM

    1. They should have let 100% votes count in Florida.
    2. They should have dumped the Michigan primary because Obama was not on the ticket.

    I voted for Hillary and this would have satisfied me. I am a gay white man living in the most conservative backwards Republican State of Texas. I looked at both democratic candidates carefully, weighed what they stand for and want to do and made my choice.

    In the beginning, the media (except Republican Fox) all favored Clinton unfairly and then changed the unfair bias towards Obama. The media no longer report the news but TELL Americans who they should vote for and why.

    When Hillary started to show she would lose the nomination, I reached out to Obama.com to see if there were ideas there I could live with. I was open to unity and reconciliation.

    However, the HATE I see from the Obama supporters for my carefully chosen candidate has caused bitterness and resentment in me to the extent that I can not vote for Obama.

    I will probably note vote or if I am angered and ostracized further by Obama supporters, I will commit the worst vote possible for a gay Texas and vote for McCain. I am sorry but I cannot vote for HATE.

    • Posted By: griffin1 @ 06/01/2008 2:06:11 PM

      Pactzin, I will like to say someone who also would have voted for Hilary I change my stance for CHANGE our country, no candidate is perfect and we have to understand that and stick together as democratic, I do ask you not to judge Obama based on the words of other people, Obama has learned a lot from campaigning and I have never seen him suggest hatred towards anyone. All candidates have surronded themselves at some point with someone who came out and said something stupid, HILLARY AND MCCAIN AS WELL, but we must not lose focus and flip republican especially when our country is in this shape, Bush has the lowest ratings as any President in History. Let's stand together

    • Posted By: griffin1 @ 06/01/2008 2:00:59 PM

      Pactzin,

  • Posted By: franpd @ 06/01/2008 5:32:30 AM

    until yesterday i was a clinton supporter. i was repulsed by harold ickes performance-that venom and desperation convinced me that the good of the party is not what the clinton side is about- i was embarassed as were most of my friends-we are gladly behind sen. obama now-there is no place for clinton politics any longer- f. depolito

    • Posted By: Mimi13 @ 06/01/2008 6:57:56 AM

      I'm so glad I wasn't the only person to notice Ickes big drama. He acted like he just wandered into the room and discovered these rules -- like he never saw them before, like he never voted for them, like he wasn't the ARCHITECT of the rules structure of the 2008 primary season. Ironically, he created those rules in a way that he thought would advantage Clinton. The Rules Committee was stacked with CLinton people. Yet, most of them could not muster up the degree of bluff that Ickes managed. Most of them, could not sell out their intellectual honesty and disown in May what they created in December. Most of them actually had some integrity. Ickes' father is turning in his grave -- his son is a disgrace to his heritage.

      • Posted By: 18anapple2 @ 06/01/2008 9:45:13 AM

        Rules!!
        How about PRINCIPLES!!..the principle of one person one vote..a person's inherent right to CHOOSE who they want to represent them and their inalienable right to have that choice respected!!

        If we followed rules and laws ,AA's would be still be sitting at the back of the bus and women would still not have the right to vote ! But we choose to BREAK those rules and stand on principle s. the prnciples of freedom for all the equality before the law!

        As democrats I would imagine it was our duty to break rules that do serve our principles!!
        Harold Ickles seemed to me one of the few people that understod that!!

        • Posted By: Mimi13 @ 06/01/2008 1:50:38 PM

          Then why did he write those rules in the first place? He objected to the rules, HIS rules, only when his candidate was losing. That's not principle. That's opportunism and grandstanding. The Democratic Party is not a country. It does not have "civil rights." It is essentially a club -- not much different from the Elks or the Moose or the PTA. All of these clubs have local branches. All of them send delegates to a national convention. All of them have a method to select those delegates. All of them could -- if they wanted -- run a candidate for president. If you don't like the rules of the Democratic Party (and I sure do not) then get off your duff and work to change them. Grousing about it after the fact makes very little difference.

    • Posted By: babzter @ 06/01/2008 8:03:51 AM

      I'm not voting for Harold Ickes either! He would make a terrible president. I'm not voting for Father Pfleger either - can you imagine? Gee, good thing they're not running.

      It's obvious that objectivity has died a slow, stupid, and painful death.

  • Posted By: scot1323 @ 06/01/2008 12:54:27 AM

    For an objective perspective on the race versus gender argument. There have been 33 women serve as senators and 3 black, and Carol Mosley-Braun was of course both. There have been 22 women elected govenors and 3 blacks. There is no doubt this country is sexist and racist but as far as electing to high office the numbers point to racism being more of a handicap.So much anger from Clinton partisans, I think theyr'e looking at HIllary as a symbol of womahhood and not as the politician and person she is.

    • Posted By: fjstratford @ 06/01/2008 1:47:17 AM

      oh please. Your numbers dont say that at all. 50% of the country us female, while 10% is black.

      That means, Sexism is a bigger problem than racism!

      • Posted By: HDavidson @ 06/01/2008 2:12:17 AM

        WHAT!!! How many women have been hanged, drug behind a truck until dead, shot for their gender, burned to death, how many women have found a cross bruning in their front yard? Women have and still do SOME WHAT have it "tough", but that STILL does NOT justify voting for teh WRONG candidate just because she is a woman.

        • Posted By: Grassroots1 @ 06/01/2008 3:57:48 AM

          Answer: hundreds of millions. Hundreds of thousands of women - literally - are raped, abused and tortured in this country every year. Scores of women and girls are kidnapped and held in sexual slavery or killed. There is rarely a conviction. Go to an abused women's shelter for an afternoon, then blog. That's not even considering the world, where millions of women are mutilated, treated as slaves, killed as baby girls, etc. Or the millions and millions of women burned as witches or for rituals - this even goes on today. If you think we shouldn't vote for a woman because she's a woman, why do you think for 219 years there have only been male presidents? Do you think no woman was the "right" candidate? Or could it just possibly be sexism?

          • Posted By: ladeyday @ 06/01/2008 1:49:48 PM

            Ditto people of color, trans-gender, bisexual, homosexuals, cross dressers, Muslims, Sikhs, other non-Christians, etc. And these people are villified regardless of gender................

  • Posted By: notroubleatall1963 @ 06/01/2008 1:48:03 PM

    Why are the Clinton supporters so bitter about Obama? He has won more votes, fair and square -- it's not like they're tied, in a dead heat, and the DNC gave Obama the lead! You're all acting like spoiled children who lost a game of checkers (I wouldn't dignify it with 'chess') and now you're throwing your tantrums in a most unreasonable way.

    A winner is a winner - and a loser must show strength in the loss and help heal the hurts - it's just part of living. We all lose, and sometimes we win. It's not a matter of life or death - it's just politics. That is the way it goes. And for once, it doesn't seem to be crooked. It seems to be honest.

  • Posted By: hannahsister @ 06/01/2008 1:32:56 PM

    It sounds as if you mean, 'neither side should show it if they feel angry over the RBC votes,' because, of course, there is a difference between real feelings of unity and a 'show" of unity. The RBC made some progress toward unity, but missed their best chance. Their best chance would have been to treat MI just as FL was treated, seating all the delegates resulting from the votes as cast, but with only 1/2 a vote. Really, taking 4 of Sen. Clinton's delegates and giving them to the other candidate was an outrageous act. It's hard to believe that experienced, professoinal politicians did this for any reason than pandering to the frontrunner. Would you 'whine' if that had been done to your candidate? Probably. And, as for the pack of Obama supporters who blog, they are so malicious and overwrought emotionally, we would hear the howling all the way to Alaska if their candidate had been treated that way.

    • Posted By: joe_mama @ 06/01/2008 1:44:53 PM

      You read blogs? (yiikes!)

      Those people speak for nobody but themselves. They have no checks or balances, and every incentive to overhype and fabricate stories (that's how they attract readers). What you are reading is their opinion and their opinion only.

      Vote Clinton because you think she's the best candidate. Vote Obama because you think he's the best candidate. But PLEASE don't vote for anybody based on what you read in a blog.....you make us all dumber when you do.

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 06/01/2008 1:40:07 PM

    Lucymiami, I believe that Hillary is actually running as an independent now. Go ahead and write her in.

  • Posted By: Hill2008 @ 06/01/2008 12:29:34 PM

    Who cares about the Dem big-whigs when they are sexist and pushing their power to the candidate they want - not who the American majority wants. I care about my United States of Americam! WE ARE NOT STOPPING THE INDY 500 AT LAP 475 BECAUSE SOME GUY (WHO WILL BREAK DOWN SOON) AND HIS CRONIES SAY SO !!!! It's Hillary Clinton for me and many like me or McCain second choice. I care about protecting my beautiful wonderful USA over all else.

    • Posted By: Mimi13 @ 06/01/2008 1:40:02 PM

      Harold Ickes wrote the rules. Harold Ickes is Clinton's delegate hunter. When he wrote the rules, he assumed they would work to her advantage. He was wrong. But he certainly wasn't sexist.

    • Posted By: Obamanator @ 06/01/2008 12:47:24 PM

      Why would the Dem big wigs want to push a candidate who most Americans don't want? 'cos they hate women so much? Is that what you really believe? Wow......

      • Posted By: HDavidson @ 06/01/2008 1:13:22 PM

        Hate to break you're femminist bubble, but the rules were made before they even knew who was running, so tell us again how is that sexist? DUH! STOP BEING AN EMOTIONAL WRECK, IT'S JUST LIKE A WOMAN.

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 06/01/2008 1:36:56 PM

    Sort of like the way everybody felt in Texas when Rock Hudson, the star of Giant, turned out to be gay. Almost as bad as they felt when they found out that Bush wasn't a cowboy, just another blowhard. Didn't mean a pun, there. Just meant that he's full of bluff and bluster.

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 06/01/2008 1:34:18 PM

    Texas is supposed to be a cowboy place. Look at Bush. He is a cowboy. Hunt 'em down, smoke 'em out and string 'em up. John Wayne style. What is this about a gay Texas?

  • Posted By: Lucymiami @ 06/01/2008 1:32:49 PM

    I love the Clintons but, Hillary Clinton is causing damage to the Democratic party. If she ran as an independant I would not vote for her now.

  • Posted By: olderwiser @ 06/01/2008 1:30:19 PM

    Shoot, pactzin, gay is supposed to mean happy. That's a pretty unhappy picture you are painting there.

Reply

Report Abuse

Enter comments if any for reporting abuse