Oh right, you simply added a few more unfounded smears from unreputable blogs ;-)
But I dare not share my true feelings because I enjoy being able to rec and rate
Oh, I know. You have to face so much adversity on this site. Hell, I mean you throw an accusation out there like Obama hiring 400 bloggers, and as evidence, offer a blog that cites another blog that cites... nothing... for evidence.
Awesome journalism. Using this logic, remind me why we decided you weren't getting paid by Clinton? Besides the fact she's broke?
rage, why is this a big deal what is the nerve she's hit. There was a diary summoning her to the inquisition, she's accused of being a paid blogger at least ten times a day, what is your problem? I have to tell you, this over reaction makes you look suspicious. You'd think she said he's slapped four hundred puppies, for heaven's sake. What gives?
Because, we just had this argument. Someone accused her of being a paid blogger, and we had this righteous indignation from Alegre, oh, how dare you, my family, blah blah blah, etc, etc, and here's she's spreading the same sort of bullshit- with exactly zero evidence. Hell, the site she gave claims to cite FOX News- a bastion of journalistic integrity- but instead, it cites another blog. Which then cites nothing, no source this information came from whatsoever. And 400 bloggers? Give me a break. The number "400" is just used in a vain attempt to make it seem like more concrete or real information.
Alegre claims to be passionate about Clinton; fine, I can dig that. And there's plenty of Obama supporters who are just as vocal and passionate. To suggest someone's being paid detracts from that.
she accused no one personally, it isn't personal at all, the rumor is not central to her story other than she's tell Barack, and on behalf of quite a few I might add, that making nice is not just too late, it so's late it no longer matters. We're not on the same team and we won't be until the nominee is selected. We don't support the same candidate. We want to go to Denver because we think she's the best chance to beat McCain and will be the superior executive in executing plans and solutions. We're with her, and we're not bored, or tired, or in need of charming. It could have been fun, but it hasn't been. I'll support the nom, but until then I'm for taking it to Denver.
All these arguments you're making about unity, realize if somehow Clinton becomes the nominee in August in Denver, she has to reconcile the giant rift that will form in the party, campaign against McCain instead of Obama, and try to win an election in two months.
You're telling me it's too little, too late. Well, with that attitude, if you're counting on my support if Clinton takes this thing to the convention and somehow becomes the nominee, tough. Reconcile that one.
he'll get my support if he's the nom. What a goofy idea. I could possibly think it's important enough to fight into the convention, but if she lost I'd want McCain? Have you got a screw loose?
Very well, then, my bad. Unfortunately, it doesn't seem everyone shares your sentiments.
Go Alegre. There are more than a few people here who are making it easier to believe the bought blogger rumours.
she accused no one personally, it isn't personal at all, the rumor is not central to her story other than she's telling Barack, and on behalf of quite a few I might add, that making nice is not just too late, it so late it no longer matters. We're not on the same team and we won't be until the nominee is selected. We don't support the same candidate. We want to go to Denver because we think she's the best chance to beat McCain and will be the superior executive in executing plans and solutions. We're with her, and we're not bored, or tired, or in need of charming. It could have been fun, but it hasn't been. I'll support the nom, but until then I'm for taking it to Denver.
It's just more unsubstantiated nonsense from her. Like her diary a couple months a go when she showed Hillary would win the delegate race, and provided all the stats to PROVE it, but guess what, she had made all the stats up herself.
You're sooooo silly. Algere is a blogger, but she's a huge target around here and they're still whining about her over at kos, or so I hear, I don't personally go there. Stat's are all done like that, to make a case or show something is possible. What about all that 'it's the math' coming from the media, which math are they looking at, there are always more than a few ways to count. Oh, well, why bother, you want to have some target, guess it's a working mother of two for you.
You obviously didn't read the diary - it was widely ridiculed at the time, even by the Hillary supporters. The thing was, she didn't admit she had made the stats up, she was passing them off as polling data.
Stat's are all done like that, to make a case or show something is possible.
so who's the authority? Since there is none, I'd prefer to think for myself. I don't need to get agreement, my opinions don't depend on support from other bloggers.
I'm not exactly sure what you mean when you say 'who's the authority?' Who's the authority when Democrats say "global warming is a reality"? For that matter, who's the authority on whether boats can fall off the edge of the world if one sails too far?
Some things are considered settled by science, and the very strong explanatory power of statistics when practiced responsibly is one of them. Maybe as a trained statistician my bias is showing, but while in specific scenarios one should always be skeptical of statistical analysis, to mistrust it in general and doubt its ability to make strong conclusions is no different than mistrusting the veracity of evolution. One should question individual purveyors of bad stats, rather than the field as a whole. This isn't one blogger's opinion, this is the established consensus of science.
The bottom line is, there's only one political party dedicated to undermining science and I'm pretty sure it's not mine.
No thanks. I prefer the real one.
> the called us ....
The Buddha tells a story of a man walking down a path in a forest, two villages dispute ownership of the land and someone fires an arrows at him which hits his arm.
He pulls out the arrow, he's wounded but not seriously. He's angry. He takes the arrow home an put it in a velvet box by his computer (okay maybe this is an adaptation)
Then every day as he start blogging he recalls that arrow, takes it out and stabs himself with it. Arggggghhh, that hurts, that's what they did to me. And again he stabs himself, recollecting, bleeding.
Each day he end a bloody mess. And the hate grows.
Moral - you don't have to keep stabbing yourself with old arrows. It hurts, you mostly. Throw the old arrows away. You have that choice.
Hey Lost... why did you 0 my Huckabee remark? I was clearly being snarky.
I honestly don't remember. It was very possibly a mistake, where I selected the wrong box. If you could point me towards the comment I could check ;)
Found it... yep, that was a misfire on my part. Sorry about that, corrected. :)
Yeah... I thought it was weird the you would zero me for that. I thought maybe my snark was lost on you. It's hard to tell parody from the real thing these days.
It gets lost sometimes, but I'm pretty sure that was an honest mistake, though. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. Everyone needs mojo to go around :)
The 400 paid bloggers would not be a bad use of funds for the Obama camp. Clearly something needs to be done to mend fences, and god knows the Big Orange ain't gonna do it.
They're not going to do that... the interwebs are a incredibly small and uniquely inhospitable place to try to sway anyone. No point in trying, better to cast a wide net by swaying the masses and in the process catch a few of the netizens.
Well, sad to say, but as a formerly tepid Hillary supporter, the hostility I personally encountered definitely had an effect - and probably not one that the Obama campaign likes to see.
But I do agree, obvious astroturfing isn't going to cut it.
The hostility came back from Clinton supporters just as hard, if not moreso. The problem is, of course, that Obama's winning; so the Clinton-supporters' hate is excusable, apparently.
It's embarrassing. It makes them look like sore losers without a lick of sense. So when they ask for understanding or kindness before they'll vote for Obama, you'll have to excuse my lack of concern.
And yes, it's a free country. Everyone can vote for whoever they want. And ultimately we'll get the government we deserve.
You can't hold the Obama campaign responsible for everyone on here. Just like I can't hold Hillary responsible for the crap I get from her supporters.
I don't, and I was not referring to this site in particular cough Big Orange cough
It simply has not been an even-handed phenomena. AmericaBlog, HuffPo, TPM, the list goes on and on.
Sure, there are a few very partisan HRC blogs. But the big ones I've mentioned are supposed to be broad-based, you know, representative of the Reality-based community, all that. The level of foaming rage at these places has been off the charts.
And unfortunately, to me, it's the same dynamic playing out in the MSM, and upward through the Democratic Party power structure. The stuff that's been said is really hard to get past or to forgive. Marie Coco's column sums it up nicely.
I started off the campaign as an Edwards supporter. My first clue that something was very wrong came during the New Hampshire debate. I could not believe the pile-on, and I was impressed by how HRC handled herself. That led to a greater investigation of her on my part.
By now I admit my emotions are frayed and fully engaged. I see things like that "Sweetie" clip and I wonder how I will ever make myself vote for this man. It feels like insult on top of injury on top of insult.
I have a lot of more policy-based reasons why I don't care for Obama but I'd be lying if I said it wasn't personal, at this point.
OK ... Fess up. Who is making the big $$.
a whopping -$65 dollars from him this year (how much I donated to him) I got from Edwards -$50 (how much I donated to him).
Al Franken gave me -$20 Don Cazuyoux gave me -$5 The DNC gave me -$10 Scott Kleeb gave me -$5
Mr. Boccieri running in OH-16 will be giving me -$5 once I get some money, Kleeb with me giving me more -$, so will the DNC, and probably Obama.
(the - values are donations I haven't gotton anything except a letter from Don thanking me for the donation).
You're raking it in.
Barack Obama has given me -$534 since the beginning of the campaign. But I get the feeling I'll be getting another paycheck from him pretty soon.
money from the down ballot candidates you like, just because you like Obama doesn't mean you shouldn't rake in the -$ from them too.
(if you have that is wonderful) but I know a senate candidate from NE (Kleeb) or MN (Franken) that are deserving, same with some house candidates (Darcy Burner)
Oh I've been collecting little checks from all of them. Every little bit helps, I've got a busy Obama-blogger sweatshop to run here.
