You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
Democratic Base 'Ashamed' of Hillary Clinton
2005-12-08
Liberal Democrats are so upset with Hillary Clinton's waffling on the Iraq war that some are now saying they're "ashamed" of her. The Daily Kos - the political web site widely read by the party's base - is urging Democrats to move beyond Mrs. Clinton and her husband, declaring: "Shame on the Democratic Party if they ever nominate her" for president.

The scathing editorial, written by Kos contributor "Trifecta," states outright: "More than anything else, I am ashamed of Hillary Clinton."
"When you look dispassionately at some of the things [Bill and Hillary] are capable of, it should leave one very skeptical and concerned about a 'third term' for this pair." The Kos writer compares Hillary - unfavorably - to President Bush, saying she's an unprincipled opportunist when it comes to key issues while Bush shows leadership in the face of adversity.

"When faced with low poll numbers on his crappy ideas, Bush plods on," the Kos pundit says. "And [he] still gets them passed, pushing his agenda forward." Meanwhile, Trifecta complains the Clintons "put their fingers to the wind" and run away from the fight.

The left-wing blast at Hillary also compares her unfavorably to Sen. Joe Lieberman, whose defense of the war last week contrasted sharply with Mrs. Clinton's weaselly claim that she was tricked into voting to give Bush the authority to attack Iraq. "Holy Joe Lieberman is a true believer in this war," says Trifecta. "He may be scorned, but as idiotic as his views are, I genuinely believe these are his views. "Hillary on the other hand is simply unbelievable. She protested Vietnam, knows this war was a stupid mistake, but is so damned cynical that she is engaging in this twisted posturing, all to serve her personal interests. . .

The Kos Hillary slam concludes: "Shame on her. Shame on the Democratic Party if they ever nominate her."
I love it when they eat their own
Posted by:Steve

#27  that picture of the Hildabeast makes me wanna puke every time I see it
Posted by: Frank G   2005-12-08 21:53  

#26  
Democratic Base 'Ashamed' of Hillary Clinton
Get in line.

Right behind disgusted. >:=(
Posted by: Barbara Skolaut   2005-12-08 20:15  

#25  Iwasa drafted byda N-arf-L

Posted by: Red Dog   2005-12-08 20:09  

#24  Bill "I was drafted by pro baseball...ooops" Richardson? Not a chance. Let's root for the Donks to satisfy their base
Posted by: Frank G   2005-12-08 19:29  

#23  I don’t agree. The ‘08 election defiantly hasn’t started. In spite of posturing by various would-be candidates, there is little indication who whom either party will actually nominate. Speaking for myself, I would rather not vote for McCain: although I will if the Democrats nominate Clinton. Now, if the donkeys were to do something very, very clever – say, for example, nominating Bill Richardson of New Mexico – my vote would come back into play.

Unfortunately, that is very unlikely. I find it highly plausible that the ‘08 presidential race will become a “lesser of two evils” event in which both parties work very hard at making their most loyal members stay home, getting drunk and wondering why they donated their hard earned cash to the RNC or DNC, respectively.

Posted by: Secret Master   2005-12-08 18:16  

#22  The Kossacks are the base that swings the donk primaries. It's going to be 1972 redux. Only this time the donks won't even have the advantage of running against a crook. Unless the trunks nominate Duke Cunningham.

This election is almost over and I can't think of who the trunk nominee will be.
Posted by: Snoluling Croluger3412   2005-12-08 17:13  

#21  BTW, in case anyones wondering, Im not committed to Hillary in '08. I like Warner, and I think Evan Bayh is another good possibility. Im not too keen on Edwards, and I think Kerry, Dean, Feingold, etc would all be disasters.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2005-12-08 17:09  

#20  the Kossacks think theyre the Democratic Base?? Hoo boy - if theyre our based we're domed, I tell you.

Clintons claim to fame in American politics is turning the Democratic party away from idiots like that. Yeah some of them rallied around in the late 90s - that was cause Rightwing types attacked the Clintons so bitterly, and the lefties just assumed the enemy of their enemy was their friend - some still do, but not the Kossacks.

Hilary will do fine without the Kossacks - though theres increasing buzz that Mark Warner of Virginia just might emerge as the DLC candidate in '08. Meanwhile who do the Kossacks have - Russ Feingold? Spare me.
Posted by: liberalhawk   2005-12-08 17:07  

#19  Zarqawi and Sharpton '08

Beheadings in Oval effective 01-2009
Posted by: Captain America   2005-12-08 16:20  

#18  Let me see if I understand the liberal mind:

It was okay for Bill to have Lewinskis in the Oval; it was okay for Bill to tell the world that he didn't, etc.

But it's not okay by the libs for Billary to be in favor of a volunteer Army and their mission that the Donks helped send over to Iraq.

Have I got that right?
Posted by: Captain America   2005-12-08 16:19  

#17  The real progressive ticket: McKinny/Kaczynski
Posted by: Atomic Conspiracy   2005-12-08 14:25  

#16  My long-standing prediction that the Dem establishment (essentially, the Clintons) would jettison the far left appears to be coming true. That these moonbats are portrayed as the party's "base" really says more about the position of the person making the characterization than it does about the Democratic Party.
Hillary is no fool and she is obviously angling for a showdown. She either doesn't think the leftniks are any kind of base or she believes she can build a new one in time for the '08 election.
Posted by: Atomic Conspiracy   2005-12-08 14:24  

#15  Nah....try this one....

Sheehan / Streisand 2008!!
Posted by: Desert Blondie   2005-12-08 14:23  

#14  Popcorn time!
Posted by: Mike   2005-12-08 13:34  

#13  perhaps "dishonor/shame" would be a better descriptor.
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman   2005-12-08 13:15  

#12  Talk about yer honor / shame culture...
Posted by: Seafarious   2005-12-08 13:08  

#11  Secretary of Defense - Not applicable.
Posted by: Matt   2005-12-08 12:44  

#10  Kennedy - Sec. Transportation
Kerry - Sec. Defense
Carter - Sec. State
Posted by: Robert Crawford   2005-12-08 12:32  

#9  Don't be silly, even the Dems wouldn't elect leaders that could be knocked out on a technicality (foreign birth). Sheehan/Free Mumai 2008

Posted by: rjschwarz   2005-12-08 12:31  

#8  I see it already:

Jong Il/Kucinich 2008!
Mugabe - Sec. of Agriculture
Castro - Minister of Aquatic Sports
Chavez - Sec. of Energy
bin Laden - Sec. of Homeland Security
Trafficant - Sec. of Corrections
Posted by: BA   2005-12-08 12:16  

#7  Ha! Bring them on! I will crush their skulls between my nassive thighs!
Posted by: Hillary Rodham Clinton   2005-12-08 12:00  

#6  Osama / Hussein in '08!

Surefire winner!
Posted by: CrazyFool   2005-12-08 11:56  

#5  HUSSEIN/KUCINICH 2008
Posted by: tu3031   2005-12-08 11:54  

#4  What the hell's wrong with you guys? Kucinich's unelectable.

Mugabe/Chavez 2008!

Much better.
Posted by: Dreadnought   2005-12-08 11:52  

#3  KUCINICH/CASTRO 2008
Posted by: The Happy Fliegerabwehrkanonen   2005-12-08 11:44  

#2  Such hatred - and it's not even directed at the right wing! It's at a left-leaning centrist!

Anyone else think that they use the word "shame" way, way too much?

(yes, I know Hilary's a left-winger, but her public persona has been centrist lately)
Posted by: gromky   2005-12-08 11:33  

#1  KUCINICH/ SHARPTON 2008
Posted by: tu3031   2005-12-08 11:14  

00:00