Slog - Comments on Another Washington Endorsement http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement Former Gov. Gary Locke is backing Hillary Clinton for president.... Copyright 2008 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:33:55 -0800 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:04:23 -0800 http://www.movabletype.org/?v=3.34 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss Comment by Mr. Poe Ooooh! BUT! Would he if Gore was running?!?!durrrrr?!?!

]]> Mr. Poe http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820409 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820409 2008 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:38:25 -0800 Comment by lorax Like Sims, he probably wants to be secretary of something in the forthcoming Clinton administration.

]]> lorax http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820418 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820418 2008 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:40:07 -0800 Comment by Cascadian He could be Secretary of Bland Government Projects That Don't Really Make Any Difference. Of course, that's a vast improvement over Secretary of Non-Consensual Public Sodomy, which appears to be the working title of every member of the Bush cabinet.

]]> Cascadian http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820445 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820445 2008 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:47:43 -0800 Comment by Just Me Dear GOD, things are not going to be much better if Hillary does get the nomination. She does not see us leaving Iraq any sooner than 2013......

Things are looking like I am voting for the Green Party Candidate....even if it is Nader.

]]> Just Me http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820512 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820512 2008 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:58:53 -0800 Comment by kelly o is the bomb But, who's endorsing Ron Paul with the neat homemade signs on Cap Hill? anyone but Hilary W. Bush is my guess.

]]> kelly o is the bomb http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820517 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820517 2008 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 12:59:20 -0800 Comment by Big Sven Just Me@5, would it make you feel any better to know that most all commentators believe Hills just answered that particular question with that particular answer to avoid giving the Republicans a sound bite that they can use in general election? That she, like every other Democratic candidate, plans on getting the fuck out of Iraq as soon as humanly possible?

But to *do* that, she has to get *elected* first, and that means putting politics ahead of honest discourse.

]]> Big Sven http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820560 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820560 2008 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 13:09:05 -0800 Comment by Big Sven ps-

She didn't say she didn't see us leaving Iraq before 2013. She just wouldn't *commit* to leaving before 2013. Again, for the reasons that I stated.

]]> Big Sven http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820561 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820561 2008 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 13:10:33 -0800 Comment by maxsolomon dollars to donuts, gary's going to be ambassador to china.

and that's fine with me.

]]> maxsolomon http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820583 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820583 2008 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 13:16:40 -0800 Comment by superyeadon I just don't get this hillary thing. As a rule, I don't vote for republicans, which limits my options. But please don't make me vote for hillary. She's got no soul.

]]> superyeadon http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820731 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820731 2008 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 13:54:46 -0800 Comment by Cascadian If the Iraq War was the only important issue, I could see voting for a third party candidate based on the "no withdrawal before 2013" responses at that debate.

It's not the only important issue, not by a long shot. Consider the effect of even one more conservative Supreme Court justice.

And really, even the most conservative Democrat is unlikely to simply continue Bush's policy on Iraq. They're campaigning for votes in relatively conservative "purple" parts of the country that they need for a majority, so it's not surprising that their statements are cautious, even if it is deeply disappointing.

]]> Cascadian http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820747 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820747 2008 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 13:58:16 -0800 Comment by Cascadian No soul, #9? What the hell does that even mean?

Many liberal voters, myself included, don't buy into this whole "soul" business in the first place. Taking its literal meaning, it's pretty hard to justify claims that someone has no soul (and what's next, dividing people into evil-doers and non-evil-doers, as Bush does?). Metaphorically, "soul" seems to be a stand-in for an array of unstated personal traits that might or might not be relevant to presidential performance.

Do you mean that she's emotionally cold? Do you mean that she's particularly ethically or morally compromised? Do you mean you don't like her? I hear a comment like "no soul" and it really boils down to "I don't like her." OK, but why don't you like her, really?

]]> Cascadian http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820769 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820769 2008 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 14:03:57 -0800 Comment by KY. COL. of TRUTH @9 It occurs to me that a person who recognizes someone without a soul would also be a person who could never be coerced into doing anything. Make you vote for Hillary? Are you headless?

Hillary-hating is so de rigueur and so mindless. My favorite is that she'll turn America socialist. WTF does that mean? A majority of American women voters could actually elect our first female president, but somehow I don't see that happening. Why? Would someone out there answer that? Or do we have to re-ask the infamous Freudian question: "What does a woman want [politically]?"

]]> KY. COL. of TRUTH http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820818 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820818 2008 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 14:23:13 -0800 Comment by maxsolomon @12:

because america is afraid. afraid of women, afraid of "socialism", afraid of their own shadow.

and american women are the most afraid because they are the most relentlessly propagandized population this side of NK. they are terrorized & propagandized into hating themselves. congolese gang rape victims are less afraid.

]]> maxsolomon http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820925 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820925 2008 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 14:59:54 -0800 Comment by arduous I agree maxsolomon. For some reason there are a lot of American women out there who are pretty self-hating. Actually, I should say American white women because I don't see it so often in minority women. This reminds me of the Chris Rock about why Barack will be president.

]]> arduous http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820940 http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/10/another_washington_endorsement#c820940 2008 Mon, 08 Oct 2007 15:04:23 -0800