Watch the 2008 Democratic hopefuls at YearlyKos.
CNN – Many of the most active and outspoken members of the liberal blogosphere – dubbed the “Netroots” – gathered over the weekend for the 2007 YearlyKos Convention. CNN’s Internet Reporter Abbi Tatton reports on how the Democratic presidential contenders fared before an important part of the Democratic Party’s base.
Related: Clinton draws boos from bloggers
I wonder who voted to approve Bush's terror surveillance bill just after gleefully attacking him for it in front of these netroots? How do you texted "suckers"??
"Netroots"? More like "nutroots" ! American voters of both parties are disgusted with their parties' pandering to extremists, and might vote for a third-party centrist in 2008 (Bloomberg, Powell, etc.).
I've been trying and trying to think and articulate what my major problem with Hilary Clinton is... I've really struggled with this, as I think she'd be an okay president, far better than Bush anyway. Then, just now on the drive home, it hit me. Now I know why I don't like her nearly as much as Obama or Edwards. The reason is...exactly what I said. I think she'd be competent, she'd be okay. We'd skate through the next 8 years without attacking anyone blatantly and there'd be some incremental good done. But...THAT'S NOT WHAT WE NEED!!! Our next president must be a visionary. We need a leader in the truest sense of the word. I think Hilary would be very content with all the extra power her branch of goverment would have been left by the Bush administration. Instead of reversing 8 years of damage, I think she'd be perfectly happy to keep the status quo and keep things like the patriot act and the overall "war on terror" humming along nicely for her benefit. That wouldn't serve the country well. We need somebody to come in with an almighty bulldozer and overhaul the system. Our literal survival is as stake in this next election. We are facing global warming, healthcare that's a joke, a world that shows us no compassion and a lot of hate. We have a culture of greed and instant gratification. I don't honestly believe that Hilary Clinton has the sheer vision and courage to make the kind of major changes that need to happen. Even if she logically sees what needs to be done, even if she can talk about it, she can't inspire others to pull it off. I don't believe she'll unite the congress much less the states. I don't believe she'll overcome her lobbist buddies to give us all equal and fair healthcare... she couldn't do it before, why now? I DO believe that Barrack Obama or John Edwards could do those things, especially Obama. I think he represents the kind of visionary leader that the country craves and so badly needs.
Hilary is old school politics, corporate interests, and in general a blase candidate that seems content to rest on her laurels and her reputation. She scares me, because I want to be inspired, I want to be told that Americans can sacrifice with the best, take our knocks and handle the truth. She feels like my babysitter instead of my president. Obama or Edwards feel like they understand the vibe of the country. I cried when I heard Obama speak during Kerry's convention, because he was so right, there are no blue or red states, we're all The UNITED STATES. I crave simple truths, even if they hurt. I want to sacrifice to make the world better and to unsure that my children's children still live in a free country. I don't want the country of my father's to be known as an imperial empire, bringing democracy on the backs of missles and bullets. I want the world to know the good people I know. I want the sort of knowledge, class and courage that the best politicians in history have given this country. It's time for another Abe Lincoln, another JFK, because only a leader that can harness the belief currently lying dormant in this country can pull us safely into the future. I never, ever want to be known as the generation that lost our freedoms to fear and lost our world to neglect and greed. Hilary can't inspire that. She just can't.
I do, however, believe that Barrack Obama can inspire what needs to be done. He can not only inspire it, he can pull it off. He can do it.
Give him a chance. He and Edwards together would make a great ticket. The Clintons had their chance, lets not live in the past, lets figure out what will make the future.
Obama/Edwards in '08.
The Daily Kos is, quite simply, a hateful, spiteful leftwing lunatic site. Blog=Sewer is the inevitable comparison. The fact that Democratic candidates feel obliged, if not anxious, to pander to it speaks volumes of where the party is headed, especially when none of the candidates addressed the Democratic Leadership Conference. No wonder honourable men like Joe Lieberman run as Independents.
Daily Kos is a web site for the far left fringe. Even this lefty is shocked at what is posted there. It is vulgar, juvenile, hate filled nonsense that passes for political debate. When the grown ups finally engaged in the process, the Democratics will find it hard to justify the idiotic things being said and done to their satisfaction. It going to cost us in general election.
Well you all better figure that out soon..."lets not live in the past, lets figure out what will make the future." As time is running short....When Bush decides to go ahead with sending troops into Pakistan without first discussing his plan with Musharaff sp? the world as we know it will cease to exist...as Iran will also get into the mix...and it won't much matter than who ya'll vote for...as most of the world will be against him/her anyway...
All the Best for the Future....
Yes, Lance, now you know why you believe what you believe, based on hope and well, belief. Most Obama supporters talk about belief so much they sound like Evangelicals. I'm not willing to risk the election and the future of my country to another cadre of, "true believers". That kind of irrational thinking is why we're in the mess we're in now. Let's try Intelligence, compassion and COMPETENCE this time.
Maybe we can even WIN.
The effect of special interests in Washington is the main reason Barrack Obama has made it a cornerstone of his campaign not to take money from lobbyists. You can not effectively govern a nation when every move is controlled by who has the most money. This is the reason the corporations have put us in a strangle hold over the last decade. Clinton and Bush are both in it up to their necks with lobbying money. It's blatantly obvious to me that real change on any front is only going to occur once big money and big industry is taken out of the process of writing our laws.
Barrack Obama realizes this because he's seen the effects big money has on communities like Chicago. Clinton has been sequestered in the White House and then in the media spot light thereafter, for a long number of years. To me, she seems out of touch. Barrack Obama feels like he is of the moment, that this is his time, and as he says again and again, he knows that nothing good is going to happen until the interests of lobbyists are controlled and the system is fixed.
Lobbyists have been a problem for a long, long time. I remember learning about how they control Congress back when I was in grade school in the 70s. (Yes, back then public education wasn't quite as bad and underfunded as it is currently.)
It will take someone with vision and guts to fix the problem and make us all equal under the laws of this country again. Corporate interests need to have a voice, but not to the exclusion of all others in Washington. There are literally thousands of lobbyists for every Senator. In fact, Good Ol Boy Fred Thompson used to be a lobbyist for years himself. (says something about him if you ask me.)
Barry Obama feels current, relevent, while Hilary Clinton and frankly every other candidate to me, with the exception of John Edwards, really feels dated and of a system that is broken beyond compare.
Lance: Thank you for your post...beautifully said. I, too, think an Obama/Edwards ticket would be ideal. If you haven't already, join us at BarackObama.com....our grassroots effort is growing by leaps and bounds!! GO OBAMA!!
P.S. I love what Obama had to say today. "If you don't think lobbyists in Washington have too much influence...then you've been in Washington too long."
I admire the passions of the "progressives" or "liberals" or whatever the catch word is. I only wish that they would temper their idealism and their anger at the status quo with a healthy dose of reality, practicality and history.
The fact is that we are faced with a world that is bitter and jealous of all that we enjoy in the US. Granted, we are not a perfect society, but we have experienced periods of greatness in the last century (the 40's, 60's and 80's come to mind).
There is a large segment of the globe that would like to see us humbled and/or destroyed. Yet we are the last realistic hope of the free world. Absent us, who is qualified or capable to lead the cause of freedom and human rights?
The electorate is to blame. First and foremost, we have lost sight of who we are. Read "The Greatest Generation" and then take a look at today's America. We should all be ashamed at what has been sacrificed on our behalf and how we ignore or disrepect the history of our nation and those that have gone before us.
Secondly, we install leaders and representatives that are not public servants. They go to Washington, become enamoured with power and lose sight of why they're there. They become self-serving or, worse yet, march in lockstep with those of their party to produce gridlock in government.
Personally, I find "progressives" the bane of our country. They continually try to move us further from what our founding fathers established as the bedrock of this nation. They quote things like "separation of church and state" without realizing that phrase is nowhere in our Costitution or Bill of Rights. They use it as a means of removing God from the fabric of our society. In reality, the framers realized the importance of God as the giver of all good things and were simply trying to provide freedom of worship so that all could worship freely and that there was no state sponsored denomination like the Anglican chuch.
The left advocates more taxation in order to create a Marxist type utopia, when our forefathers fought for freedom FROM taxation and to provide opportunity for each INDIVIDUAL to be able to go as far as his talents and abilities could take him. Nowhere in our founding documents have I ever seen a provision for redistribution of wealth.
Until we have the wisdom and courage to admit we have strayed from our ancestors vision, we will continue on this gradual decay and decline as a society.
Just had to get that off my chest.
You have to wonder if Hillar(it)y's "...35 years of fighting for what she believes in..." includes the years of obfuscation, and denials relating to the Whitewater Scandal as well as the White House Travel Office manipulations?
We all know where Sen Clinton gets the majority % of her campaign capital so I found the recent CNN Poll
refreshing while confirming that I am not alone in my knowledge of her NON- GRASS ROOTS funding.
As per public record she has AS MANY Corporate America sponsors (via the Billary Clinton Power Machine Lobbyists) as her GOP opponents! She speaks specifically for Corporate America energized by her overwhelming desire for PERSONAL power . . . rather than the (power)for the American people.
IMHO, She is an overwhelming political polarizing entity who NEVER responds to a question with an answer . . just with a attorney's double-talk ~ providing neither substance nor solution! IMHO, she reflects her perception of self importance and power as being above the law . . . as per her infamous comment during the
Grand Jury Investigation when she refused to provide docs on Whitewater. . . (paraphrased)she refused ti turn over the records without pourging thgem first. Her justification . . . "WE are the President" ! Jeeze. . .
CNN Poll . .
Do you care whether a presidential candidate accepts donations from lobbyists?
Yes 82% 2728
No 18% 607
Total Votes: 3335
Let's cut to the chase here people. There is only one reason that Hillary Clinton is getting any chance at all of becoming President of the USA: she's a woman and Bioll Clinton's wife. What amount of executive leadership does she have to offer the electorate? None. Hillary Clinton panders to the woman vote, the far-left vote, and any other vote that she can get to be President but she offers nothing but promises. Clinton said she wanted to be a Senator from New York and nothing else when she was elected there in 2000. It was just a ploy on her long term goal of the Presidency. Hillary is not the "great-white-feminine-hope" but she parlays that hope of others and claims that she should be elected President. Her only claim to legitimacy as a candidate is that she is a woman first, a liberal second, and that is it. She does not offer any substantive work that she will defend this nation from attack, balance federalism, run a budget, manage an entire branch of government, and yet, she is leading the polls at present.
Every bought a car from a used car salesman? Thats what this picture of Edwards and Hillary remind me of..
Use of internet for campaigning = all style, no substance.
Remember Dean's promising internet support...case in point.