Stop hitting Alegre!

I posted this in the main on the daily Kos site just a minute ago.  A commentor suggested since Alegre isn't posting at Kos I put it up here. Well,it is in invitation to respond.

Enough already.  You made your point. She is a HRC shill, she is "paid" (although that is pure conjecture) she is a "fraud", as some have said (no names so you don't embarrass yourself). What "fraud" has been committed? throwing charges like that with no backup is smear. And it is of a long time Democratic party supporter. To whose benefit is it  when you do that ?  "She only has talking points, she never discusses...blah blah blah"  You hate her style?

(more after the jump)

 Do you feel better, like a victor, a champion because you squashed or smacked down or used a smear in denigrating another poster on this site?  

 Look, there are Greenies, republicans, Trotskyites, environmental activists with no partisan leanings at all, Buddhists, Socialists, Libertarians and plenty of all sorts of Democrats posting to this site.  There are no rules or standards here that people be villified because they oppose your candidate.

Should there be a vendetta, a feud that can be used to run them off or break their spirit so you can have a thrill?

I'll answer that obvious rhetorical question. No.

It isn't easy being principled. Most of the time, if not all, the principled diaries unless they belong to front pagers or very extensively followed writers (no more than a c hundred or so ) fall right off the page in hours.  Regardless of quality, of originality, even of significance. There is a favored recognition list  and reputation that goes with success for the authors, just as there is in more traditional venues for authors.

Now Alegre who I know only from her postings on HRC and "strike" leadership and diaries, we never having met or crossed paths, doesn't strike me as a purely limited mid level mediocre writer that is forgettable. She is what she is and she is a passionate determined supporter who keeps on coming to the point of exhaustion.

If that were my wife, or lawyer, or business associate I would be overjoyed and thrilled. I don't expect Jesus Christ or Albert Einstein to be my physical friend and associate ,that's like hitting the Mega Lottery, but here as  members of the community  are hundreds and thousands of those sorts of people in part and in whole. And we are the stronger for it.

In the coarsest and most imperfect way, we have 95 IQ's and 195 IQ's and they are equal before the truth.  We don't judge members here by that metric or their spelling or even ability to navigate the Internet  except where it limits their ability to communicate here. We generally don't judge except for rejecting and HR'ing fascist and hard core authoritarian talking points and messages.

Taken as a totality there is great strength and resources here. So why oh why would there be a vengeance and animus of the type and scale shown her?  I want to know!

Is there a theft of resources,i.e. somebody lost thousands of dollars? a murder. what????

None of those reasons. It is pettiness and meanness and defects in the soul and character of the accusers. And I don't like it. There are injuries, but of the intellectual and psychological kind. What Alegre did and continues to do may annoy or frustrate but it isn't a crime! It is a rivalry that went out of bounds, that is all it is.

I can't believe there was one diary (and I am sure there are others) that was filled with hundreds of Alegre hate comments on the REC list. It was like the hundreds of Hillary hate diaries, only transferred to her person because the Democrats want to reel in the extremists and the ones keeping the feud going.

Well, suck it up and say, even privately if you don't dare say it in public you are sorry. Better yet stop the dirt and the dishing and the meanness which belongs to "QueenBees" and sixth grade private school snobbish bitches and bullies.

I don't want era of diarist wars and vendettas to continue one second longer. Enough.

Alegre, on behalf of the not so silent majority and those who like this site and what it does well and what sort of an America it promises, please accept this apology. No body was skinned or bloodied in making this statement. I hope you can suspend your "strike" and start the healing on your side of the divide.

Because God knows, if the situation were reversed and the name of the winning candidate were different, you would probably be close to doing this yourself as a logical next step. Please accept this and respond, it's not original with me. I have seen this plea in other comments recently.

The politics and facts/policy/issues have been rolled and tossed as if it were a cafeteria food fight. Ultimately it is the efforts and work of the candidates, not the jockeying between diarists and commentors that will determine our fate.

We have a huge task and a magnificent project and so many paths to success (that must be taken)to get there.

To all:don't close many of them down by eating our own and leaving a bloodied carcass on the path to dismay and discourage many others on this site.



Display:


LEAVE ALEGRE ALONE! (2.00 / 2)


by dystopianfuturetoday on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:23:02 PM EST

Re: LEAVE ALEGRE ALONE! (1.25 / 4)

You know, I didn't want to, but LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE! was all I could think about reading this.

While I am no fan of outing diarists, I think it's a fair conclusion that Alegre's real identity is in fact ... Britney Spears.  


I like baked beans.
by SpideyDem on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:29:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

is she going to leave US* alone? (2.00 / 2)

Because I'm game if she is.

* - "US" being defined as anyone who thinks, for whatever reason at all and completely beyond support or opposition, that Clinton has no chance of winning the nomination.


by DawnG on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:34:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: is she going to leave US* alone? (2.00 / 1)

It didn't take you long to start acting like you are still at Kos, did it?


by Scotch on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:33:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Tell us what to think Scotch. (none / 0)


by dystopianfuturetoday on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:14:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

well it certainly didn't take long... (none / 0)

...for people to cast blame on everyone but Alegre.  

I am sick and tired of being treated like an idiot by holier than thou wingnuts who feel it is their duty to convert us all at the end of a rhetorical sword.

Alegre has been at the head of that charge and I am all for an end to the fighting but it CAN'T HAPPEN until both sides stop.  And I somehow doubt she's ready to stop.  


by DawnG on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:45:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 2)

How bizarre!


Everybody, do the Flowbee!
by Jess81 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:24:19 PM EST

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 1)

So, after reading all that, what are we all supposed to do?
Are we supposed to stop hitting Alegre?
Or is Alegre supposed to stop hitting?
I'm confused.
Let the children lose it Let the children use it Let all the children boogie
by toyomama on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:28:05 PM EST

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 7)

If you are on so many people's mind you must be something right.

As far as I am concerned she is one of best writers out there and Hillary Rodham Clinton couldn't have asked for a better advocate than her.

She is a jewel for the clinton camp.

Do ya thing girl.


When I speak I have a southern drawl.. When you come down here Stop and say hello I'm an American from south of the Mason Dixon line
by lori on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:28:35 PM EST

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 2)

She can do her thing all she wants. When it comes to Clinton advocacy, she's a soldier. But I do have to label the taking-it-to-the-convention-floor talk childish and irresponsible.


_____________
PUMA: Perverse Undemocratic McCain Adherents
by lizardbox on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:30:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 3)

so what exactly do you think conventions are for anyway ?


When I speak I have a southern drawl.. When you come down here Stop and say hello I'm an American from south of the Mason Dixon line
by lori on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:32:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 2)

"so what exactly do you think conventions are for anyway ?"

Lots of balloons?


by Rumproast on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:37:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 2)

you know it won't be so scary or funny if it wasn't the case that a lot of folks seem to believe thats largely what conventions are for.


When I speak I have a southern drawl.. When you come down here Stop and say hello I'm an American from south of the Mason Dixon line
by lori on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:39:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

I have ALWAYS believed that.


I like baked beans.
by SpideyDem on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:41:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

"you know it won't be so scary or funny if it wasn't the case that a lot of folks seem to believe thats largely what conventions are for."

I'm not entirely sure what you meant by that, but for the record I was going for "funny."


by Rumproast on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:03:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 1)

The ones I go to are mostly about wireless technology.

Seriously though. I'm not saying Senator Clinton drops out. I just believe that any indication of militancy in handling this nomination process hurts the party. Particularly from the campaign that pleaded with the superdelegates to use their better judgment, now that they're breaking to Obama, that should be respected.

Another point, it is fact that no vote will be cast by a pledged or unpledged delegate until the convention. We all know that. But as the pledged delegates' affiliation goes without saying, and if the majority of supers are to throw their weight behind Obama, giving him the majority needed to secure the nomination in August, then we have to proceed with the assumption that he is the nominee.

All the talk of electability and the ever so talked about "October surprise" must take a back seat to what only a few weeks ago was cemented by the Clinton campaign as the key to the nomination: the superdelegates.


_____________
PUMA: Perverse Undemocratic McCain Adherents
by lizardbox on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:41:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 6)

With all the delegates she has amassed and the millions of voters she has , it would be expected she would be at the convention anyway . Infact it would be a travesty if she doesn't take up issues at the convention floor.

Either pushing her agenda if she is not the nominee or fighting for a resolve to issues she thinks are unresolved.

Ted Kennedy was a 1000 delegates short and he was still at the convention , she is just a mere 150 delegates in the hole and somehow she is not supposed to take it to the convention.


When I speak I have a southern drawl.. When you come down here Stop and say hello I'm an American from south of the Mason Dixon line
by lori on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:49:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

Actually she is about 200 delegates behind now, FYI.


by Deano963 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:57:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

157 pledged delegates according to realclear.

177 including supers if we want to be exact.


When I speak I have a southern drawl.. When you come down here Stop and say hello I'm an American from south of the Mason Dixon line
by lori on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:00:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

RealClear is slow....... (2.00 / 1)

She's behind by 166 pledged, and 20 super.

That's 186.

http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/


by Deano963 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:04:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 1)

In all fairness...You are a leaner...You have strong passions about  the GOP and their Military/National Security agenda.  I am fully behind ANY Democratic candidate, and a convention floor flight would all but do us, Democrats, in for our goal of capturing the POTUS.


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:01:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 2)

Conventions are for the party to make their case to the American people that they should be elevated into majority status.  That's why disorder and chaos are no longer acceptable at conventions.

Would you have liked it if Barack Obama, trailing by 150 delegates, took his case to the convention, and asked the party platform to include something like, "We firmly believe that the Iraq War should never have been waged, and we admonish all elected officials who voted for its authorization in 2002?"

Quit being a sore loser.  Barack Obama has spent his entire political career fighting for the core idea that brought Hillary Clinton into politics in the first place -- the idea that we are interdependent of one another, and government should embody the idea of family -- while John McCain has spent his entire political career opposing this grand idea at the top of his lungs.  This is what should be shown at the convention -- not poor Hillary, who likes to advocate winner-take-all, now wanting something when she lost.


by Brad G on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:45:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

Your rantings don't make much sense.


When I speak I have a southern drawl.. When you come down here Stop and say hello I'm an American from south of the Mason Dixon line
by lori on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:50:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'll condense it for you... (none / 0)

...if the tables were turned and Obama was the one behind, would you stll be arguing that Obama has every right to "take it to the convention?"

Somehow I doubt it.


by DawnG on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:49:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 4)

I wouldn't use the phrase "His entire political career", to try to prove a point.  It was so short, and not that impressive.


by Scotch on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:31:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 1)

Neither was that ex-one-term representative named Abraham Lincoln particularly distinguished in 1860.  Particularly when compared to his predecessor, James Buchanan, who had 10 years of experience as a House member, 10 years as a U.S. Senator, was a minister to Russia and a minister to Britian, and was Secretary of State for four years before becoming President.  Now which person made a better President?


by Brad G on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:00:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

Well then, we shouldn't even consider experience in voting for president.  What were we thinking?  I vote for Joe Schmoe the next time around, he works in a factory, and has never voted,even.  But he seems like the best pick to me because he has no experience which is even better than we could ever dream of in a president.


by Scotch on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:18:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 1)

Also, voting to authorize one of the nation's greatest foreign policy failures, and refusing to own up to that vote is so distinguished?


by Brad G on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:03:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

The Convention "floor fight" is a mythological sort of deal for Democrats. There have been some special Conventions, where no candidate arrives with any sort of even a close majority and it takes several votes to figure out who it will be.

1968 was the anti-Vietnam War protest elevated to an art form and McCarthy first getting 42% to Johnsons' 49% in New Hampshire primary. Johnson announced he was going to not run for a second term.  Robert Kennedy got into the race, Hubert Humphrey the VP got into the race, and when RFK got shot the night of the California primary (winning it), it threw the Convention into turmoil. MLK had been shot on April 4th. One hundred cities rioted and looted.  Another war supporter, Humphrey managed to get the insiders to pass by a discouraged RFK contingent and a Eugene McCarthy in Chicago to get the nomination.

 The police were sent around the delegates hotels to keep order.  Senator Abraham Ribicoff in giving a speech placing McCarthy's name in nomination scolded and told of Daley for his tactics. The NY and California delegations, after Humphrey succeeded in getting the nomination,
lit candles and swayed singing protest songs right on the floor of the Convention. Dump the Hump!  

It was a unpopular choice.  Nixon won by a small margin.  HHH was linked too closely to Johnson , and no enthusiasm for him was seen in most areas.  TV coverage of the controversies to people who didn't get what was going on proved a bigger help to the Republicans.  Their convention was very orderly.

Convention excitement is overrated. Unfortunately a troubling picture will create negatives among low-info voters.


by PeteRock on Tue May 20, 2008 at 01:37:25 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

The Convention "floor fight" is a mythological sort of deal for Democrats. There have been some special Conventions, where no candidate arrives with any sort of even a close majority and it takes several votes to figure out who it will be.

1968 was the anti-Vietnam War protest elevated to an art form and McCarthy first getting 42% to Johnsons' 49% in New Hampshire primary. Johnson announced he was going to not run for a second term.  Robert Kennedy got into the race, Hubert Humphrey the VP got into the race, and when RFK got shot the night of the California primary (winning it), it threw the Convention into turmoil. MLK had been shot on April 4th. One hundred cities rioted and looted.  Another war supporter, Humphrey managed to get the insiders to pass by a discouraged RFK contingent and a Eugene McCarthy in Chicago to get the nomination.

 The police were sent around the delegates hotels to keep order.  Senator Abraham Ribicoff in giving a speech placing McCarthy's name in nomination scolded and told of Daley for his tactics. The NY and California delegations, after Humphrey succeeded in getting the nomination,
lit candles and swayed singing protest songs right on the floor of the Convention. Dump the Hump!  

It was a unpopular choice.  Nixon won by a small margin.  HHH was linked too closely to Johnson , and no enthusiasm for him was seen in most areas.  TV coverage of the controversies to people who didn't get what was going on proved a bigger help to the Republicans.  Their convention was very orderly.

Convention excitement is overrated. Unfortunately a troubling picture will create negatives among low-info voters.


by PeteRock on Tue May 20, 2008 at 01:38:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Does it bother you that? (2.00 / 3)

No party has won the Presidency in modern history after taking the campaign all the way to the convention?

I agree with you, in principal, that the convention is technically there to "choose our nominee;" that being said, it is not very pragmatic to take the campaign that far when all evidence suggests that to do so will help McCain lock up the presidency...

that is, no reason to do so unless you would rather McCain be President than a Democrat other than Hillary.


I read the body count out of the paper; now it's written all over my face.
by JDF on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:52:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 7)

You know, I was at the 92 Democratic convention (and NOT for Clinton). Jerry Brown had a lot fewer votes and there was no huge scream-fest for him to drop out before the convention. Teddy Kennedy stayed in till the end as well, and he wasn't close either.

You have a race that is very close to tied. Why shouldn't HRC stay in it?

It's a bizarre and disturbing double-standard.


by OtherLisa on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:24:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

Because we, Democrats, will lose the General Election...geez..


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:03:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 2)

If we lose the general election, with Obama as the nominee, it will not be HRC's fault. It will be because Obama did not make the case to the voters that they should support him.

I really do not understand how you can't see that. But this sort of attitude will be why Obama loses. He and his supporters are seriously miscalculating the extent of his appeal and what he needs  to do to win.


by OtherLisa on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:12:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 2)

When did I say anything about it being Hillary's fault...Quit with the victim playing already.  I said if it goes to a convention floor flight WE will lose the General Election...The party will be divided, whoever is chosen as the nominee.  After the convention we will have two month until the General, do you think harsh feelings will be resolved in that time frame, not to mention what the GOP will do with that spectacle of Dems fighting Dems...


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:19:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 1)

See, this is a problem - where in my statement above was I "victim playing"?

What you are saying is illogical. Basically you want HRC to drop out before the convention. If she does not, "we are divided." By your own logic that would be blaming HRC for the loss.

Unless there is some other way that we can "unify" before then - Obama dropping out, maybe?

I have a feeling that is not what you are saying.


by OtherLisa on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:40:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 2)

Jesus..I said whoever is the nominee, would lose  the GE...Your the one with your head up in the clouds thinking a floor fight at the Democratic Convention would be good thng...

Good day, and good bye


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:42:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That's not what you said. (none / 0)

I asked, "Why shouldn't HRC stay in it?"

Your reply was, "Because we will lose the election."

If that's not what you meant, try rephrasing. I can only go by what you say, not by what you mean that isn't clear.


by OtherLisa on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:49:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What the implications... (none / 0)

... of all that are is that Clinton is in a no-win situation.


by kraant on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:51:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What the implications... (2.00 / 1)

Though I prefer Clinton as the nominee, there are all kinds of very good reasons why she should keep running and get as many delegates as she can. Stuff like the Platform committee, for example.

I'd like to see a real commitment to universal healthcare, and to protecting social security, not privatizing it, just to name a few issues. Even though stuff like the platform committee is generally as pro forma as the conventions, it's still an opportunity to stake out positions and change the language to reflect what we'd like to see the Democratic Party be about.


by OtherLisa on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:55:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What the implications... (2.00 / 1)

I hit post too soon.

It's about having a voice, and representing the people who voted for her. That would be at least half of the Democratic electorate, if not more (depending on your criteria). It is not trivial that these voices be heard and their interests have representation.


by OtherLisa on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:56:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's not what you said. (2.00 / 1)

OK...one more time...As far as staying in throughout the remainder of the primaries and some time for her to state her case with the SD's, I have no problem.  Once a consensus is picked, after the primaries, after resolving MI and FL, and after most SD's have endorsed...Whoever has the number of delegates needed to secure the nomination should be accepted by the other nominee.  Whoever doesn't have the majority of needed delegates should drop out and begin to unify our party for the General Election.  If Senator Clinton sweeps the remaining states and persuades SD's that she is the most electable and she receives the majority needed I would expect Obama to drop out for the good of the party.

Any type of Convention floor fight would lead to a Democratic loss in the GE...just look at the history.  Fortunately, I believe Obama and Clinton respect their party and understand the importance of getting a Democrat into the WH in 2009, and therefore would not risk taking it all the way to the convention.


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:04:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Thanks (none / 0)

Seriously. I appreciate your clarification.


by OtherLisa on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:05:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: That's not what you said. (none / 0)

That's an opinion but one mainly designed to close the race down and give it to Barack. That's a smart tactic for him to secure the nomination, if it's about him needing to close the deal by declaring a winner rather than waiting to see who wins.  There are many who disagree with you and see the continued contest as the only way to unite in the end.  If there is a fair winner, the one who comes out at the convention, we'll all back the winner, all Democrats anyway.  


by anna shane on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:09:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

August 25 - August 28, 2008 (2.00 / 1)

That is when the Democratic Convention is held.

Election Day: November 4, 2008

Do you honestly think that a brokered convention, with hard feelings on both sides, can repair itself in a measly 9 weeks?!

If he has the delegates needed to win BEFORE the convention, then you can bet he and "most everyone" else will recognize it.

And why wait till the convention anyway if there is already a fair winner before? Are you thinking that some of those delegates will all of a sudden flip to Hillary?

A presumptive nominee is a presumtive nominee, and if he earns that title (like Kerry and the many others that did before him) then it makes no sense to WAIT till the convention to get this show on the road against McSame.

A ship adrift in a sea of rhetoric & recycled clichés.
by DemsRising on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:56:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: August 25 - August 28, 2008 (none / 0)

I have such hard feelings now, not towards Barack but towards the rhetoric against her and towards Howard Dean (I was one of his first 10,000 donors, who knew he was a one issue hack) that the only way i can reconcile with my party is if they stop Barack from declaring his own victory and if it goes to the convention. If he wins at the convention, I'll live with it, but if he's bully the girl out of the race, I'm not the only one who's hard feelings won't be going anywhere.


by anna shane on Sun May 18, 2008 at 01:01:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That's all I keep hearing from Obama (none / 0)

supporters and it's getting a bit tired. Hillary has every right to go to the convention to present her case and her message on behalf of her millions and millions of supporters. When we voice our concerns that McCain will defeat Obama, we're told not to fear the Republicans, or not to let the Republicans dictate our choice. Your paranoia re the convention smacks of the same sort of fear. Or is simply fear of Hillary? Obama, Hillary, and others have shown in the past few days that McCain can be easily swept to the side as we continue our contest to determine our nominee. And there will be plenty of outside groups slamming him (McCain) hard as we go forward. We are going to the convention whether you like it or not. Hillary has earned that right. So suck it up and stop crying wolf. Every Obama supporter, bar none, at this site has told us many times over how easily Obama will defeat McCain. So stop worrying. It only gets better from here.


Obama supporter working to defeat McCain.
by Rumarhazzit on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:54:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She is a soldier... (2.00 / 1)

...and that is part of the problem when you are fighting others, they do have a tendancy to fight back.

Alegre knows that as well as anyone else.  


by DawnG on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:36:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She is a soldier... (none / 0)

Yes she is.  This is my first diary here,and I am taken aback at how few of the responses deal with the gist of the diary. No "agree" or "disagree"
just chatter about other topics mainly around the convention and are there enough delegates to declare a win or not...

We have heard that a thousand times already.

I am trying to make some unity happen, encourage the "Popular Front" to defend our democracy and save our country. Defending and inviting Alegre back to post again among many of her old friends was my intention. Some are hostile at Dkos, but many applauded the diary. 46 tips, 26 recommends for a person that was "run off." That's good.


by PeteRock on Sun May 18, 2008 at 06:59:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: She is a soldier... (none / 0)

the problem Pete is that you guys don't police your own trolls. If you don't like fellow Obama supporters smearing us and our candidate, tr them for us, there were always far more of you at kos, and we did fine when you were ignoring us and fighting with Edward's supporters.  I skipped every pro-Obama diary, and I rarely went into hit pieces on her, if I did it was to register disagreement, but they made it to the rec list, and I saw no sign that any of his supporters, or even him, though to think ahead.  I got smeared and grossed out posting pro-Hillary diaries.  We used to make a point of saying that we'd support the nominee but here's why she's our first choice, I stopped that some time back.  If you want any of us back, clean up the site first. TR and get rid of bloggers who can't behave, who have to personally smear us.  Had there been a majority of his supporters who understood that if you can't play nice, in the end no one will want to play with you, and had cleaned up your own tank, rather than blaming Hillary and us for those nasty remarks we and she were told we'd brought on ourselves, we could still be having a robust discussion on issues. This ought to have been fun, and instead it's been ugly and depressing.  Seems predictable to me, but hey, I'm  just a nobody like other bloggers, leadership was in order, and it's now too late, meaning his supporters aren't through enjoying their revenge.   He couldn't stop them were he inclined.  It's been hurting him for months, he has not won one new Hillary hater in some time I'd expect.  That can't be worth the damage.  


by anna shane on Sun May 18, 2008 at 01:11:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

why do you hate democracy? (2.00 / 4)


For Obama it now becomes: Faith, hope and CHANGE! And the greatest of these is Change!
by TeresaInPa on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:07:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: why do you hate democracy? (2.00 / 1)

In the spirit of that question:

"Do you think your pastor loves America as much as you do?"

"Have you not ceased to stop not beating your children?"

Are you from the Colbert Report?

-chris


"A ship in port is safe, but that is not what ships are for. Sail out to sea and do new things." Admiral Grace Hopper, computer pioneer
by chrisblask on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:32:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 6)

I admire her stamina, determination, and ability to be inspired.

I do not admire her absence of critical thinking skills: She parrots Clinton talking points and never, and I mean never, engages thoughtful rebuttals.  If the Clinton campaign says the magic number is 2240, then it's 2240.  Always was.  We were never at war with Eastasia.  Point out that, for months, Clinton and her senior spokespeople defined this as a race to 2025 delegates, and you will get -- crickets.  She simply will not respond.

For years, I valued MyDD for its intelligent front-pagers and thoughtful diarists and commenters.  I derive no joy from "bashing" any Democratic candidate's supporters, but the fact is that, by parroting the Clinton campaign's talking points, Alegre does everyone here a disservice by intermingling half-truths, hypocrisies, and outright lies in her exhortations.

At our best, we diarists and posters should not be like opposing camps of attorneys, making the best case for our side and the worst for the other.  We should honestly engage the facts.  Sadly--to take a recent example--Alegre echoes the blatantly false anti-feminist talking points about Obama, and her diary skyrockets to the top of recommended list.  


by deminva on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:25:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

I take your description of Alegre as a "girl" to be sexist and offensive.

/snark


by ProgressiveDL on Sat May 17, 2008 at 07:56:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 2)

Thanks for reading


by PeteRock on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:31:04 PM EST

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

Thanks for posting.  As you can see, the comments here are not  vile like many of those in your original diary on DK.  Yes, I took a peek and was reminded why we left.


by Tolstoy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:54:51 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 4)

You know why Alegre is attacked? Same reason all the Hillary bloggers are attacked, because they are effective.


by Alice Marshall on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:31:09 PM EST

nicely put. (2.00 / 2)


"Me Fail English? That's Unpossible." Ralph Wiggum
by canadian gal on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:48:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (1.71 / 7)

No, it's actually because they're mostly intellectually dishonest, divisive, occasionally insulting, and rarely in touch with reality.


by amiches on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:53:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Oooh! More unity! (none / 0)

Where's my pony?


by OtherLisa on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:26:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oooh! More unity! (none / 0)

I'm not sure what this is supposed to mean, but I couldn't care less who you vote for, and it's not my job to convince you either way.


by amiches on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:29:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Oooh! More unity! (none / 0)

It means that your rhetoric is nasty and divisive.

Which is your right as well.


by OtherLisa on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:34:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Is it your job (none / 0)

to hurl insults?


by izarradar on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:35:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Is it your job (none / 0)

Reply was meant fore amiches.


by izarradar on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:37:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No insults (none / 0)

just the truth, ma'am


by amiches on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:38:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No insults (none / 0)

I agree.


by deminva on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:26:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Truth (none / 0)

through your lens of perception.  Which I seriously question.


by izarradar on Sun May 18, 2008 at 09:32:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

Sounds like that came right out of the Kos thread.


by Tolstoy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:56:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Really? (none / 0)

You know why Alegre is attacked? Same reason all the Hillary bloggers are attacked, because they are effective.

at what, exactly?


by BlueinColorado on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:35:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Stop that! (2.00 / 2)

Jesus H Tapdancing Christ why does everything have to be a BATTLE with you guys?

You really want to know why Alegre is being "attacked"?  Because she is attacking others.  And she's not the only one.  the wingnuts in both the Clinton and Obama camps are staging their own civil war reinactment with LIVE AMMO (words). We are all democrats.  We are not enemies.  Why does she (and by extension others) insist on treating everyone ELSE like enemies?


by DawnG on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:39:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop that! (2.00 / 1)

Moho for the Tapdancing Christ.  The rest, same old stuff.  Look, I pleaded with the Obama kids who took over Kos to be civil, I practically begged for civility in the name of party unity.  What I got back was basically "you haven't died soon enought".  To hell with 'em.  


by Tolstoy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:00:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop that! (2.00 / 1)

Let me get this straight, because an internet website hurled insults at you (150,000 members) you now believe Barack Obama is terrible because of people he never met were rude to you??  Is this correct??


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:06:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop that! (2.00 / 2)

If this be true, then the poster better not go to Taylor Marsh or Hillaryis44 and read what Clinton supporters are saying today about Ted Kennedy.  The poster won't have anyone left to vote for.


by deminva on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:27:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop that! (2.00 / 1)

Never been to either site so I don't know what you're talking about.  I am certainly pissed at Teddy for obvious reasons but I have spent years defending him from those I felt treated him unfairly and he has my best wishes for a speedy recovery.


by Tolstoy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:36:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop that! (2.00 / 1)

Didn't mean anything personal about you, Tolstoy.  My point is that many, many Clinton supporters at those sites are currently posting terrible things about Ted Kennedy.  I don't think anyone should choose a candidate based upon his or her online supporters.


by deminva on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:39:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop that! (2.00 / 1)

Your comment begs the question:  why go there?


by Tolstoy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:55:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop that! (none / 0)

If you mean literally--as in, why go to those sites--I didn't.  There was a diary at Daily Kos capturing them.


by deminva on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:28:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop that! (1.00 / 1)

I no longer visit that hate site.


by Tolstoy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 11:32:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop that! (none / 0)

Fascinating generalization.


by deminva on Sun May 18, 2008 at 12:17:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop that! (2.00 / 2)

No that's not correct.  You can infer what you want.  Frankly, I couldn't care less.


by Tolstoy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:32:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop that! (2.00 / 3)

You have zero sense of proportion or perspective.  

It isn't any more Obama's fault he attracts his fair of asshats than it is that Senator Clinton attracts her own.

Don't blame the candidates for their respective groups of idiots.

To do so is itself idiotic.


by Reaper0Bot0 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:24:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 1)

Since when are cut and paste job diaries, in which no questions ever get answered, considered effective?


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Bill Clinton
by venician on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:46:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

they are not, in general. It is between the diarist and  the commentors to keep the focus on the diary content or simply rate it down or skip it if it isn't worth discussing.


by PeteRock on Sun May 18, 2008 at 07:08:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

Effective at losing.  

You guys lost to a freshman Senator who few people had heard of a year ago.  You also had a 100 delegate lead and a ton of money before a vote was cast.  


Consider that everything which happens, happens justly, and if thou observest carefully, thou wilt find it to be so. -Marcus Aurelius
by Blue Neponset on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:50:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 2)

Is this really the time for rhetorical questions?


by interestedbystander on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:34:56 PM EST

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

When is it not?


Donate to Hillary now!
by username6 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:04:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Noone ever expects the (none / 0)

rhetorical question!


Swish. Nothing but net.
by GFORD on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:34:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Stop hitting, Alegre! (2.00 / 10)

i agree that we should:

stop hitting alegre.

a fair compromise would also include:

stop hitting, alegre.

i think people have been unfair with alegre.
but i also think alegre has been unfair to others, and to Obama.

i agree a cease-fire is needed.
but it only works if BOTH sides agree to it.


the time to rise has been engaged.
by catchaz on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:35:25 PM EST

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 3)

Clinton supporters can say the most outrageous things about B.O.

"Obamabots" only say that he is the "presumptive" nominee and

most of you complain and whine about abuse.

Don't dish it if you can't take it. The majority of responses to many

Obama attacks on this blog are snark and mild disses.

On the other hand, spreading rumors and attacking the "cultists"

and their "messiah"is par for the course.


Everybody loves the Engels.
by spacemanspiff on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:40:37 PM EST

It's that doggone matter (2.00 / 4)

that she tells the truth, she calls it like it is, she uses good and respected journalistic practices to back up her positions and she has (unless and until finally provoked beyond any rational response) not broken any of the rules of this or even the other blog.
the Obama campaign has been spewing inaccurate, incomplete, and derisive remarks about Hillary Clinton since last summer, using language taken right out of Lee Atwater's, Karl Rove's and other "anti-Clinton" playbooks - all the while covering their tracks in words like unity, progressivism, and collaboration
Alegre' has vigorously challenged the ad hominem remarks and tried to educate citizens and voters who are willing to look at both sides of an issue. Alegre's job has been made much more difficult because of the silence of the MSM in challenging the Obama camp's positions and the tacit permitting of the painting of a capable, dedicated politician into some sort of monster.
It just might be possible that there's more at stake for Alegre' than having her candidate win an election. It seems many of her detractors have lost sight of this important point.

by pan230oh on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:41:56 PM EST

Re: It's that doggone matter (2.00 / 2)

Do I need to pull snippets out of her diaries to prove to you that she doesn't always tell the truth?


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:07:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You Are So Wrong (2.00 / 2)

She cherrypicks her sources, preferring Clinton sources, and continually offers the spin of the Clinton campaign as the unvarnished truth.  Because of this, her diaries never depart from the official Clinton spin of the day, and they lack any sort of historical context.  Reading Alegre's spirited defense of the voters of Michigan, you would never, ever, ever, ever know that Clinton herself said that the Michigan primary wouldn't count.  Reading Alegre, you'd think the Clinton campaign always believed strongly that this race was to 2240 delegates, not 2025.  Reading Alegre, you'd think that the Democrats never announced a presumptive nominee before official votes were cast at the convention.

When someone offers her a substantive rebuttal, she ignores it.  Almost every response I have seen from her has been on an emotional level, along the lines of "Let's go!!" or "Don't be rude."  But she's happy to break her own internal rules of decorum: When Clinton's lead in Indiana got slim, she declared that an Obama victory would only happen if the mayor of Gary committed vote fraud.


by deminva on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:37:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

More at stake? (1.00 / 1)

It just might be possible that there's more at stake for Alegre' than having her candidate win an election. It seems many of her detractors have lost sight of this important point.

Excuse me but, what EXACTLY is at stake then, if it's not to push her candidate's agenda?

Are you saying that Alegre's sensibilities have been affronted? :::stiffling a giggle:::

A ship adrift in a sea of rhetoric & recycled clichés.
by DemsRising on Sat May 17, 2008 at 08:17:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This is stalking (2.00 / 2)

The poster left KOS for a reason and probably doesn't care what they say. If she wanted to reply publicly, she wouldn't need a thread from you to do it.

Why you drag their garbage here is beyond me.


by Michael Begala on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:42:08 PM EST

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 2)

By the standards set forth by the Clinton set on this site, this is an illegal call-out diary because it mentions the name of another user in the title.  Gotcha, Pete Rock.


I like baked beans.
by SpideyDem on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:42:55 PM EST

IOKIYACS? (2.00 / 3)

I'ts okay if you're a Clinton supporter?

Because that's all I'm getting from this.  It's completely Okay for Alegre and her followers to denegrate Obama supporters but people are not allowed to respond in kind.

As a person sitting in the middle I wish y'all would just shut the Ef Up already.  it's getting ridiculous.


by DawnG on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:43:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: IOKIYACS? (none / 0)

Gravel?


I like baked beans.
by SpideyDem on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:43:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: IOKIYACS? (none / 0)

LOL!

you know the funny thing about Gravel.  I was born and raised in Alaska and I never heard of him until he tried to run for president.


by DawnG on Sat May 17, 2008 at 10:52:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

omg (2.00 / 4)

this is hilarious...


"Beauty, more than bitterness, makes the heart break." Sara Teasdale
by april34fff on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:48:20 PM EST

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 1)

... Alegre for President. She'll do better than Obama.


by SHIBAM8P on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:57:46 PM EST

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

She could just use the Hillary's Voice mailing list to get all of her legislation passed! It would be revolutionary!


by Rumproast on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:06:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I hope you aren't so lacking in irony (none / 0)

that you don't see what that means about HRC's candidacy . . .


by steampunkx on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:00:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

Conventions have and will be the formal nomination. Conventions have been and will be about speeches to fire up the base..dontcha remember the balloons dropping in 1992 while "Don't Stop thinking about tomorrow" blared out?
The Convention has allowed, and will allow for defeated candidates the opportunity to speak for unity...and also the opportunity to showcase potential future candidates....Reagan 1964/Obama 2004.
"harlequin speech of suicide, demanding instantaneous lobotomy"
by nogo postal on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:03:25 PM EST

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

I think people are responding to Alegre's one sided diaries.  If Alegre's diaries were more balanced and fair, I don't think people would have responded the way they did.


by hienmango on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:04:56 PM EST

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 1)

Come on now, if you post a diary you should be able to take the heat.


John McCain hates terrorists, except the ones that hate women. Those are just swell.
by terra on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:14:08 PM EST

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 2)

No blogger has taken more heat than Alegre during this campaign.  But for a long time now she's worn her asbestos pantsuit which has protected her.  That and her love for her family and this country.  She's as tough and determined as they come and the one person I'd want beside me in a political foxhole.


by Tolstoy on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:09:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (1.50 / 4)

No blogger has written more diaries than Alegre has...The fact is if she could write just Pro-Clinton diaries without dragging Obama into it and falsely accusing him of things it would be fine...She doesn't, she pushes the envelope and people challenge her on bogus claims, period.

On top of that, she only answers questions from Clinton supporters, if she is going to post about Obama and his doings she should have to defend her statement.


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:13:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Weird. I thought that whining wasn't allowed. This (1.66 / 3)

seems to really be a lot of whining in defense of a person who trashes the presumptive Democratic nominee. Many times with misleading facts. If Alegre doesn't want to get trashed then he/she can stop posting bullshit.


John McCain on social security.
by heresjohnny on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:27:29 PM EST

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 2)

I'm going on strike from making fun of Dead-Enders.

Until my demands are met.

My demands are as follows:

2 jelly donuts.


by DeskHack on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:35:51 PM EST

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 2)

I wanna Jet-Ski


I'm Ready For A Good Old GOP & John McCain Ass Kickin'!!!
by hootie4170 on Sat May 17, 2008 at 06:14:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (2.00 / 3)

"There are no rules or standards here that people be villified because they oppose your candidate"

Alegre recently cut and pasted the following and endorsed what it said "It was as if The Big Giant Head at Obama Central texted new marching orders to the cell phones (or perhaps directly into the brain-chip implants) of all Obamaniacs simultaneously, and that message went something like this: "OMFG REDID DA MATH: WE FD UP. 86 OPERATION HRC BASH IMMED PROCEED W/OPERATION MAKE NICEY NICE ASAYGT. ACK."

That was a bit that was left after Admin deleted other bits in the same diary by Alegre,

If you read those words you may think that is the same as merely "opposing your candidate" but I do not.

I even sometimes wonder if some people actually recommend a diary by Alegre without actually reading it.

And once you put a diary front and center regardless of the quality of the content it should come as no surprise if the writer receives more adverse comments than a writer of a diary that hits the recommended list on true individually assessed merit.


by My Ob on Sat May 17, 2008 at 05:55:09 PM EST

Re: Stop hitting Alegre! (none / 0)

I have heard that complaint before,that some people jump into a comment thread or punch up a recommend as soon as they see the author of a diary.rec'd w/o reading,and it may be worthless or just plain wrong. A rec means one is encouraging people to read it-it's supposed to be good. If you are questioned why did you recommend it, and they tell you it was awful how do you feel? Dishonest? Stupid? Embarrassed? for a blogger should be all 3 for that sort of effort.


by PeteRock on Sun May 18, 2008 at 07:26:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]