An Internet hub with domestic and international news, analysis, original reporting, and popular features from the left, center, indies, centrists, moderates, and right
Barack, It’s About What’s Best For America
I am listening on NPR to Sen. Obama’s victory speech in North Carolina – he really thinks that our Democratic Party will unify behind him! Such denial of reality should automatically disqualify him from serious consideration for the Presidency.
It’s About What’s Best For America – NOT What’s Best For Barack Obama.
Change? We? Can? Believe? In? – Every Word is False.
It is clear to this center-left Democrat that Barack Obama is NOT the best choice for the Democratic Party, let alone for America. He is, rather, a disaster in the making.
95 Responses to “Barack, It’s About What’s Best For America”
Holly, you're vile. Really. I think many of us are still waiting eagerly to hear your reasons of why you so passionately hate Obama. I just hope it's something with substance rather than belched platitudes of “why he can't win.”
Even if that was the case, then that's an issue you should be taking up with the Democratic party's “activist base” rather than Obama himself. But then it's much more fun to pout like a spoiled child and simply kvetch until November. If McCain wins in November, try not to have an aneurysm from the schadenfraude you'll doubtlessly experience.
Holly,
I have watched with glee how you seem to so despise Obama. From the one sentence posts that simply say “he is not electable”, I truly wonder if you are seriously more inclined to vote for McCain over Obama. I mean, he might not be your favorite this time around, but would you seriously vote for someone else who agrees with you on virtually nothing?
I'm not one of the Obama disciples, but if you agree with Hillary on much of her platform, I find it very hard to believe that you wouldn't vote for the other guy who shares the majority of her views.
Amen Lit3Bolt. Holly, you just pouted your way right out of my feedreader. The Moderate Voice has generally been a voice of reason with some great reporting, but this type of post negates all of that. If I want a cesspool of ad hominum attacks, I can go read the comments section at The Politico. [unsubscribe]
Waah, waah, waah. Poor little baby Holly throws a temper tantrum, picks up her ball and goes home. Waah, waah, waah.
Seriously, does Holly's knee-jerk sputum belong on the MODERATE voice? Seriously?
Holly, it's hard to know if you're whistling in the dark or just venting. I suspect a little of both. In any case, your use of the phrase, “denial of reality” is one you ought to reconsider given your own attitude on the subject.
Gee, Holly, BITTER much?
Are you sure you want to live your life that way. Full of hate and bitterness? Angry at the world because your candidate ran a bad campaign. That is not Obama's fault. It is Hillary's. She made the choices she did. She failed to see the country has changed since 1992 and the old politics do not play anymore.
We cannot afford the luxury of the game playing of the Clintons.
We need someone who will be honest and decent and with the intellect to deal with the problems. Someone who can run the country like he's run his campaign.
And someone with newer and fresher ideas.
The era has come and gone for the Clintons. They have had their turn and now it's time to move on and say goodbye.
If you want a glimpse of Obama and how he deals with the world and how the world sees Obama I would urge you to read this and then do some thinking:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/Mea…
Wow. So he wants to the party to unite behind him if he gets the nomination, and that suddenly makes him unelectable? But, I'm sure if Clinton said that, it'd be “Yay! Good for her. She's right!”
Look, I defended Clinton this morning on attacks she's getting about turning into a Republican because of the campaign she's run, pointing out the the likes of MoveOn won't be too nice either. So, what I say is definitely not some blind Obama supporting.
But, you cannot deny the facts. Obama got North Carolina by a lot. Clinton just didn't have such a good. Whining about it certainly doesn't help.
Hillary Clinton deserves a tremendous amount of respect for getting so many people involved in the political process, and for the many battles she has fought over her life. Holly, you are representing your candidate when you post on this site, and it is unfortunate that you have chosen to do so solely by issuing ad hominem attacks; many who read this site (including myself) would have welcomed the opportunity to gain additional insight into the arguments in favor of Senator Clinton being the nominee.
Hillary Clinton deserves a tremendous amount of respect for getting so many people involved in the political process, and for the many battles she has fought over her life. Holly, you are representing your candidate when you post on this site, and it is unfortunate that you have chosen to do so solely by issuing ad hominem attacks; many who read this site (including myself) would have welcomed the opportunity to gain additional insight into the arguments in favor of Senator Clinton being the nominee.
I just have to ask the question…you say that Obama is not electable. Do you really think that Hillary is? If you really want a get-out-the-vote operation for the Republicans, what better could you hope for than for Hillary to be the nominee? Republicans truly hate her. Half of the Democrats hate her. That seems to me to not be good math for someone to win the general election.
I just have to ask the question…you say that Obama is not electable. Do you really think that Hillary is? If you really want a get-out-the-vote operation for the Republicans, what better could you hope for than for Hillary to be the nominee? Republicans truly hate her. Half of the Democrats hate her. That seems to me to not be good math for someone to win the general election.
By the way, the so-called Limbaugh Effect needs to be kept in mind when looking at Sen. Clinton's numbers in Indiana. Most democrats don't get terribly thrilled about republicans trying to tip a primary.
By the way, the so-called Limbaugh Effect needs to be kept in mind when looking at Sen. Clinton's numbers in Indiana. Most democrats don't get terribly thrilled about republicans trying to tip a primary.
I don't really have anything against Holly, and I think it's good to air out Obama's problems, and not get caught up in magical thinking. But at the same time, the level of discourse needs to be raised. There has to be something more than, “I hate him, all my friends hate him, we're all moderate Democrats in Ohio, ergo, Obama cannot win the general election.” Why cannot Obama win? Is he too liberal? Black? Anti-war? Too nice to Republicans? Inexperienced? Lies too much?
I'm eager to hear evidence and reasons and to argue with your analysis. But “He can't win” or “He's a disaster” is not analysis.
I don't really have anything against Holly, and I think it's good to air out Obama's problems, and not get caught up in magical thinking. But at the same time, the level of discourse needs to be raised. There has to be something more than, “I hate him, all my friends hate him, we're all moderate Democrats in Ohio, ergo, Obama cannot win the general election.” Why cannot Obama win? Is he too liberal? Black? Anti-war? Too nice to Republicans? Inexperienced? Lies too much?
I'm eager to hear evidence and reasons and to argue with your analysis. But “He can't win” or “He's a disaster” is not analysis.
Hey, what is this? I don't see how this post contributes meaningfully to the dialectic going on at themoderatevoice. Honestly, this post reads like an run of the mill internet troll. My vote for worst post on this blog in the couple of years I've been reading it, this one!
Hey, what is this? I don't see how this post contributes meaningfully to the dialectic going on at themoderatevoice. Honestly, this post reads like an run of the mill internet troll. My vote for worst post on this blog in the couple of years I've been reading it, this one!
There is something missing from this rant Holly – you didn't call Obama or his supporters anti-semitic.
There is something missing from this rant Holly – you didn't call Obama or his supporters anti-semitic.
I can understand Holly's perspective. Barack has a lot of catching up to do before he even breaks even in a one-on-one match with McCain.
I can understand Holly's perspective. Barack has a lot of catching up to do before he even breaks even in a one-on-one match with McCain.
Come on, guys- lay off Holly. We all know who Holly is rooting for and who her second choice is. Holly has said many times that Obama does not meet her “experience” threshold and she will vote for McCain. McCain certainly does have tons more experience than Obama, especially in the issues which Americans consider the most important, the Iraq war and the economy. With the Iraq war McCain will continue the current policies and will not withdraw the troops and in regards to the economy McCain wants to make the tax cuts to the wealthy permanent. Personally I don't like the way Bush has handled either of these issues and I don't like McCain being 100% behind these issues. But hey, a lot of voters find the Bush experience, which is promised to be carried on by McCain, the new Republican standard bearer, to be comforting. But that's the American way- we get a say in the process.
So we all know Holly is anti-Obama because he doesn't have enough experience but let's not knock her if she votes for her second choice. It's Holly's decision and if she chooses not to go into much detail about her choice, then so be it. Democracy in action.
So yeah, it might be nice if Holly were to engage us on this topic, but after months of showing no inclination to do so let's just accept Holly's decision and move on to more productive issues. Nothing is accomplished otherwise. Our overtures to Holly have all been rebuffed and when she is ready to discuss she knows where to find us.
Come on, guys- lay off Holly. We all know who Holly is rooting for and who her second choice is. Holly has said many times that Obama does not meet her “experience” threshold and she will vote for McCain. McCain certainly does have tons more experience than Obama, especially in the issues which Americans consider the most important, the Iraq war and the economy. With the Iraq war McCain will continue the current policies and will not withdraw the troops and in regards to the economy McCain wants to make the tax cuts to the wealthy permanent. Personally I don't like the way Bush has handled either of these issues and I don't like McCain being 100% behind these issues. But hey, a lot of voters find the Bush experience, which is promised to be carried on by McCain, the new Republican standard bearer, to be comforting. But that's the American way- we get a say in the process.
So we all know Holly is anti-Obama because he doesn't have enough experience but let's not knock her if she votes for her second choice. It's Holly's decision and if she chooses not to go into much detail about her choice, then so be it. Democracy in action.
So yeah, it might be nice if Holly were to engage us on this topic, but after months of showing no inclination to do so let's just accept Holly's decision and move on to more productive issues. Nothing is accomplished otherwise. Our overtures to Holly have all been rebuffed and when she is ready to discuss she knows where to find us.
Holly,
Just a few hours ago, I defended your right to support the candidate of your choce,
I've even defended Clinton, even though I think she practices what I dislike most about politics.
This is your response?
Thanks for making it so hard to defend you
BTW, you're not doing Clinton any good, either. It makes it harder to defend her as well.
2nd BTW,, This is exactly the mistake the over-eager Obama fans made. They lived to regret it. Learn from their mistakes, instead of duplicating them.
Holly,
Just a few hours ago, I defended your right to support the candidate of your choce,
I've even defended Clinton, even though I think she practices what I dislike most about politics.
This is your response?
Thanks for making it so hard to defend you
BTW, you're not doing Clinton any good, either. It makes it harder to defend her as well.
2nd BTW,, This is exactly the mistake the over-eager Obama fans made. They lived to regret it. Learn from their mistakes, instead of duplicating them.
Gee Holly, just because America is more ready to elect an African-American as President before they are ready to elect a closeted lesbian is no reason to go so postal.
Gee Holly, just because America is more ready to elect an African-American as President before they are ready to elect a closeted lesbian is no reason to go so postal.
i know ALL posts on TMV are not “moderate,” but i expect them to be moderately insightful. there are plenty of blogs specializing in simple-minded rants. it's a shame to see one here.
i know ALL posts on TMV are not “moderate,” but i expect them to be moderately insightful. there are plenty of blogs specializing in simple-minded rants. it's a shame to see one here.
I have been reading TMV for about a year now, but I've only just now registered for the comments section
I think the TMV editors need to consider cutting Holly off the staff. Her posts represent everything I come to this blog specifically to avoid. This inexplicable troll level analysis has no business in the comments, much less the front page. Does anyone remember this surly post that rages about how Obama lacks the poise to lead because some Clinton signs in Holly's neighborhood may or may not have been stolen?
http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/primaries/…
I have been reading TMV for about a year now, but I've only just now registered for the comments section
I think the TMV editors need to consider cutting Holly off the staff. Her posts represent everything I come to this blog specifically to avoid. This inexplicable troll level analysis has no business in the comments, much less the front page. Does anyone remember this surly post that rages about how Obama lacks the poise to lead because some Clinton signs in Holly's neighborhood may or may not have been stolen?
http://themoderatevoice.com/politics/primaries/…
I think someone might've hacked Holly's account. There's no way she actually posted this…
I think someone might've hacked Holly's account. There's no way she actually posted this…
HappySurge: I doubt that anyone hacked Holly's account. This has been her standard fare for months now. In fact I would think that someone had hacked her account if she HAD contributed something thoughtful on this.
HappySurge: I doubt that anyone hacked Holly's account. This has been her standard fare for months now. In fact I would think that someone had hacked her account if she HAD contributed something thoughtful on this.
Wow, what a dog-in-the-manger attitude. I can't believe I'm reading such unprofessional tripe on TMV.
Wow, what a dog-in-the-manger attitude. I can't believe I'm reading such unprofessional tripe on TMV.
Holly's a 'Joe Lieberman Democrat'. As long as she has it her way it's her party but as soon as it doesn't…
Goes to show you that wing nuts come in all flavors.
Holly's a 'Joe Lieberman Democrat'. As long as she has it her way it's her party but as soon as it doesn't…
Goes to show you that wing nuts come in all flavors.
::snark::
Sheeesh… Even Michelle Malkin can write a more persuasive post than that, and I haven't agreed with her since… Well, I'll stop there. It makes me feel old.
::/snark::
I have to agree with NordicAngst and Leebot here. There is very little in the previous posts by Holly that make me believe that she is an example of a Moderate Voice. (For another example of a non-moderate philosophical outlook, see Shawn Mullen's recent postings.) This post is yet another example of the same trend.
Yet we, as commenters and readers, are not exactly in a position of power to demand that those with posting privileges be cut from the roster. Instead, I would ask that more obviously conservative individuals be brought into the fold as a counter-balance to keep the general philosophical balance on the level.
Might I suggest Karl from Protein Wisdom as a start? His presence would definitely be enough to balance the scales.
::snark::
Sheeesh… Even Michelle Malkin can write a more persuasive post than that, and I haven't agreed with her since… Well, I'll stop there. It makes me feel old.
::/snark::
I have to agree with NordicAngst and Leebot here. There is very little in the previous posts by Holly that make me believe that she is an example of a Moderate Voice. (For another example of a non-moderate philosophical outlook, see Shawn Mullen's recent postings.) This post is yet another example of the same trend.
Yet we, as commenters and readers, are not exactly in a position of power to demand that those with posting privileges be cut from the roster. Instead, I would ask that more obviously conservative individuals be brought into the fold as a counter-balance to keep the general philosophical balance on the level.
Might I suggest Karl from Protein Wisdom as a start? His presence would definitely be enough to balance the scales.
Oh, don't start talking about more conservatives here – that REALLY pisses Joe off.
Back in the day, there were a lot of us conservatives here, both top line writers and readers/commentators, but almost all of them have been chased away by the Kos-lite attitudes here.
There are only a couple of us that bother coming around anymore, and rarely for more than the occasional bomb-lob. Just no point, really.
Oh, don't start talking about more conservatives here – that REALLY pisses Joe off.
Back in the day, there were a lot of us conservatives here, both top line writers and readers/commentators, but almost all of them have been chased away by the Kos-lite attitudes here.
There are only a couple of us that bother coming around anymore, and rarely for more than the occasional bomb-lob. Just no point, really.
AustinRoth,
The conservatives that stopped posting here were extremely intolerant of their opponents. I think they chased themselves away by insisting on codes of speech from which they, themselves, were exempt.
Tit-for-tat just doesn't work.
AustinRoth,
The conservatives that stopped posting here were extremely intolerant of their opponents. I think they chased themselves away by insisting on codes of speech from which they, themselves, were exempt.
Tit-for-tat just doesn't work.
Some were (as were/are some from the left, too). But many tried to have conversations, and 50 – 100 comment runs were not uncommon. HArd to do that when everyone is just piling on with variations of the same viewpoint.
And there were many very introspective conservatives, as well as the flamers, but even they have been made to know they are not really welcome here anymore.
Some were (as were/are some from the left, too). But many tried to have conversations, and 50 – 100 comment runs were not uncommon. HArd to do that when everyone is just piling on with variations of the same viewpoint.
And there were many very introspective conservatives, as well as the flamers, but even they have been made to know they are not really welcome here anymore.
Speaking of inconsistently applied codes, isn't this exactly the sort of comment thread where the management typically steps in to remind everyone that the degree of moderateness of the bloggers here isn't open for discussion? That there's a rule against attacking the blogger instead of just debating issues?
I know that whenever criticism is written about Shaun Mullen, for example, that's what happens. And I have no problem with any blog owner who sets and enforces those kinds of rules. Let's hope they're not selective though, as Holly's coming under some pretty nasty attacks here.
It's interesting how much response she generates with very succinct posts. I happen to agree that it'd be more convincing if she'd elaborate on why she supports Hillary over Obama, but it certainly is telling about the readers here to see the animosity that she generates just by having the gall to prefer McCain to Obama if Hillary doesn't get the Dem nomination.
Speaking of inconsistently applied codes, isn't this exactly the sort of comment thread where the management typically steps in to remind everyone that the degree of moderateness of the bloggers here isn't open for discussion? That there's a rule against attacking the blogger instead of just debating issues?
I know that whenever criticism is written about Shaun Mullen, for example, that's what happens. And I have no problem with any blog owner who sets and enforces those kinds of rules. Let's hope they're not selective though, as Holly's coming under some pretty nasty attacks here.
It's interesting how much response she generates with very succinct posts. I happen to agree that it'd be more convincing if she'd elaborate on why she supports Hillary over Obama, but it certainly is telling about the readers here to see the animosity that she generates just by having the gall to prefer McCain to Obama if Hillary doesn't get the Dem nomination.
CStanley, I agree with you there. I don't understand why folks continue to try to engage her when doesn't engage back. And then they get mad. These sorts of posts (whining about her choice) seem petty to me when we all know what Holly's response (or lack of one) will be.
If folks really want to engage on TMV, then they should move on to other posts. If they want to moan and complain, then they can continue to do so under Holly's.