Current Issue
Back Issues
 Subscribe to BartBlog Feed
How to Read
Members ( need password)
Subscribe to BartCop!
Contact Us
Advertise With Us
Link to Us
Why Donate?
The Forum  -
The Reader
Poster Downloads
Shirts & Shots
BartCop Hotties
More Links
BFEE Scorecard
Perkel's Blog
Power of Nightmares
Clinton Fox Interview
Part 1, Part 2
Money Talks
Cost of Bush's greed
White Rose Society
Project 60
Chinaco Anejo


Search Now:
In Association with

Link Roll
American Politics Journal
Barry Crimmins
Betty Bowers
Consortium News 
Daily Howler
Daily Kos
Democatic Underground 
Disinfotainment Today 
Evil GOP Bastards
Faux News Channel 
Greg Palast
The Hollywood Liberal 
Internet Weekly
Jesus General
Joe Conason 
Josh Marshall
Liberal Oasis
Make Them Accountable 
Mark Morford 
Mike Malloy 
Political Humor -
Political Wire
Randi Rhodes
Rude Pundit 
Smirking Chimp
Take Back the Media
More Links


Locations of visitors to this page

Subject:  another Hillary letter

Hello Bart,
I do not understand your backing of Hillary Clinton.  You're normally semi-smart. 

For the record, I'm going with the Democratic nominee, whoever that is.
Hillary's lead seems to be holding, so the smart money is on her - for now.

I hadn't visited your site in a while, and now I find this. 
There are too many reasons not to support her:

Damn, I love it when they use numbers!!!

1) As the recent polls showed, there are people who hate her, and will always hate her. 
She will never get the cross-over votes.  She will never get the independent votes of people 
who have already made up their minds about her.  She is not a winnable candidate in this aspect. 
It is bad strategy (something the dems seem to excel at...having bad strategy).

So, you can predict the future?
Did you also say she couldn't win in New York?

They called her everything from a carpet-bagger to a carpet-muncher - and she won.
She's got the women, the blacks, the Latinos and a 15-point lead on Obama.
Oh, and she fights like a wounded grizzly. 
Where's the "can't win" part?
After Bush, you think voters are going to trust Republicans?

2) You talk with much vitriol about Lieberman.  Why, then, do you support his good friend Clinton.

Stop it.

She is another DLC insider, and most REAL democrats are tuned in enough to know that DLC insiders 
a) do not have their best interests at heart and 
b) support candidates who (like Gore and Kerry and most likely Hillary) 
will roll over when the election is stolen from them yet again.

You say Hillary is a bandleader, I say she's not.
BTW, all that DLC talk makes me think you're voting for Nader.
Geez - you talk about a "can't win" candidate...

3) The Media Marketing Accountability Act.  Hillary took over sponsorship of this bill from her 
good friends McCain and Lieberman, which basically wants to destroy all independent music, films, 
and other media; the only true sources for dissenting voices in this country.

I don't believe you.
Got links?

4) Clinton's slamming of war protesters after meeting with Cindy Sheehan.
A few more:

I don't believe you.
Got links?

5) Clinton introduced the Flag Protection Act of 2005 proposing a punishment of one year in jail 
and a fine of $100,000.  Way to protect waste congressional time and violate civil liberties, Hill.

She did that to fool the stupidest Republicans.
Dittoes for the videogame accountability nonsense.

6) Senator Clinton voted for and still supports President Bush's No Child Left Behind Act.

I don't know about that.

7) Clinton supports the death penalty (though, most other candidates do as well).

That's how you get elected in America.

(8) I don't really have to mention her voting record showing complete support of Bush's war
you've addressed this in other letters.  Yes, Bart, people are able to "change their minds"...but c'mon...)

You might throttle back on "complete support" for Bush's quagmire.
Tell me - did you hold Kerry accountable for that same vote in 2004?
No, you didn't - so why hold Hillary to a higher standard four years later?

If you can seriously address those points, then maybe you could sway me.

I doubt you can be swayed, which is OK. But don't act like an impartial juror 
who wants to weigh all the evidence before reaching a conclusion. I'm pretty sure
your mind was made up before you drew up this litany of complaints about Her.

But, as it currently stands, 
I am among those who can not, 
in any way, be able to see myself 
as voting for someone like 
H. Clinton. 

Good thing we don't charge by the word.
BTW, Karl Rove thanks you for helping the Republicans.

If you want to support a corporate tool in the primaries, don't whine and cry and be surprised 
when many of the real left base don't show up for the national election. 

If you help a Republican get elected, don't whine to me about the next 4-8 years.
If you're one of those "She's Cheney's clone" weirdos, you can't be helped

I don't know enough about Obama to support him, but I know enough NOT to support Hillary.

Nobody asked you to.
If you vote for anybody besides the Democrat, you're helping the Fascist Bush bastards.

With Obama, people talk about his lack of experience. 
I prefer his lack of experience to an insider any day. 

When Ahmahandjob gets his nukes, when Lil Kim launches a
nuclear missle towards Japan, you want a newbie to respond? 

When Al Qaeda strikes Los Angeles, you want a president 
who's doing his best to learn the ropes as fast as he can? 

You hate experience that much?
When you have a car wreck and glass is imbedded your eyes, do you want a new intern 
to operate on you or do you want an eye surgeon with loads of experience?

And don't go using Bush as a defense. 
Yes, he was inexperienced as well, but his "team" were all long-time insiders. 
The argument doesn't hold with nepotism candidates (yes, I apply this to Hillary as well).

Bush is too stupid and too stubborn to learn.
Obama seems very, very smart.
I think he'll be a great president, someday.

Back to

Privacy Policy
. .