Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Assignment:South Africa | The Idea (or Ideology) of Seat... »

Monday, January 28, 2008

Since It’s Apparently News Every Time Obama Gets An Endorsement…

posted by on January 28 at 12:20 PM

I thought it might be helpful (in the interest of equal time and all) to tick off a few of the endorsements Hillary Clinton (you know, that annoying lady standing in the way of Obama’s coronation) has scored:

The New York Times.

The American Nurses Association.

Billie Jean King.

Former VP candidate Geraldine Ferraro.

The National Organization for Women.

Barbra Streisand.

The National Women’s Political Caucus.

The Women’s Campaign Forum.

Director Steven Spielberg.

Poet Maya Angelou.

Washington State Rep. Jay Inslee.

Former House majority leader Dick Gephardt.

California Senator Dianne Feinstein.

San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom.

The United Transportation Union.

The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.

King County Executive Ron Sims.

General Wesley Clark.

The International Union of Bricklayers and Allied Craftworkers.

Rob Reiner.

The Alabama Black Caucus.

The American Federation of Teachers.

Civil rights leader and Congressman John Lewis.

The American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees.

Barney Frank.


Walter Mondale.

The governor of Ohio.

The governor of Pennsylvania.

The United Farm Workers union.

WCLA-Choice Matters.

House Intelligence chair Silvestre Reyes.

Former HUD secretary Henry Cisneros.

Former Washington governor Gary Locke.

Washington State Sen. Maria Cantwell.

Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski.


Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

The Amalgamated Transit Union.

RSS icon Comments

1

You forgot someone:

Erica C. Jealous-Hillary-Is-On-The-Downstroke

Posted by ghostlawns | January 28, 2008 12:19 PM
2

desperation is not helping the cause

Posted by vooodooo84 | January 28, 2008 12:20 PM
3

And me.

Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty | January 28, 2008 12:20 PM
4

Since it's apparently news every time your panties are in a twist, why not start a fucking RSS feed and spare us the drama?

Posted by Ziggity | January 28, 2008 12:21 PM
5

Erica,

Why are you posing this attitude? That doesn't make any sense. Hillary is heavily supported in this country and this is a neck and neck race. Frankly, most women over 50 years old are feeling like Hillary deserves to win simply because it's "women's time". Talk about a coronation! As a women, I've been guilted and chastised for even considering a vote for Obama. (At this point I am undecided.)

I respect that you are interested in another candidate, but I'm totally baffled as to why you are acting this way.

Posted by please | January 28, 2008 12:21 PM
6

You may want to reconsider the use of the word "coronation" to describe Obama's candidacy, given that your guy is the wife of the previous Democratic president and would, if she were to win, confine the presidency the United States to two dynasties over a period of 24 years. Talk about a fucking coronation.

Posted by Judah | January 28, 2008 12:22 PM
7

Quite a list of luminaries. Walter Mondale, now there's someone that matters.

Posted by AMB | January 28, 2008 12:22 PM
8

You forgot my Aunt Gert.

Posted by heywhatsit | January 28, 2008 12:23 PM
9

am i the only one who L'd OL @ billie jean king?

and i wonder if the alabama black caucus now regrets their decision to endorse hillary back in october?

Posted by brandon | January 28, 2008 12:24 PM
10

This kind of pissing contest is really lame. Cantwell, Locke -- some of these names matter, a little. Streisand? A negative, in most people's books.

There's only one endorsement that matters: voters. That goes for Obama's current Kennedy-fest too.

Posted by Fnarf | January 28, 2008 12:24 PM
11

Erika you're like the Bill O'Reily of feminists.

Posted by Rye | January 28, 2008 12:25 PM
12

I believe the NYT endorsement of Hillary got a mention on Slog, ECB:

http://slog.thestranger.com/2008/01/the_new_york_times_endorses

Posted by Dan Savage | January 28, 2008 12:25 PM
13

While there are several people on that list who I like and respect there isn't really one that makes me think, "ooh, well if he/she is supporting Hillary then I will too."

Barbra Streisand and Diane Feinstein's support doesn't exactly help the cause.

Posted by monkey | January 28, 2008 12:25 PM
14

Tom Tomorrow appears to be right on this week. (It's at Salon.com so you might have to wait through a lame ad)

Posted by skweetis | January 28, 2008 12:26 PM
15

Or the influential power of the Barbara Streisand voter

Posted by vooodooo84 | January 28, 2008 12:26 PM
16

Oh Erica...

Posted by Amelia | January 28, 2008 12:26 PM
17

Whoa, the unibomber endorsed Hillary? And when the hell did he become Governer or Oregon? I bet you anything it was due to an unusually large turnout amoung hippies in Eugene.

Regardless, I don't think that will win her many votes outside of the morally depraved areas of San Fran and ECB's bedroom.

Posted by Johnny | January 28, 2008 12:26 PM
18

Exactly! I feel like Hillary is "supposed" to win because she's the establishment favorite. I like her, she's a great candidate, but she is not inspiring me and yes, inspiration isn't just for weak-willed lightweights, it's about communicating a vision and Hillary's not doing that.


I understand that men are overwhelmingly leaning toward Obama and Hillary is splitting the women vote, so in that light, I can understand Erica's frustration. However, she's not giving women a reason to vote for her right now except that she's female. Not very compelling.

She doesn't have to do a tap dance, but she has to do something special because she's got a unique rival on her hands.

Posted by please | January 28, 2008 12:26 PM
19

you forgot madonna!

Posted by um | January 28, 2008 12:27 PM
20

You're right, Dan: One mention of one Clinton endorsement on Slog. But Ed Murray (who?) endorses Obama and it merits a whole post?

Posted by ECB | January 28, 2008 12:28 PM
21

I find Billie Jean King's endorsement compelling. I saw a documentary about her last year and she's pretty much the biggest badass I've ever seen. That dumb match with Bobby Riggs was just a tiny part of her contribution to our society.

Posted by me | January 28, 2008 12:29 PM
22

Is this a shocker? That the establishment's darling has endorsements? A couple decades as first lady of a state and a country followed by a senate seat will win you some friends. She has been the front runner for the whole race and lots of folks are lining up for future favors. so what's your point?

Posted by longball | January 28, 2008 12:30 PM
23

I was kinda kidding, ECB. There's a lot of attention/posts about Obama because, as you may have noticed, there are a lot of Obama supporters on staff at the paper. It's going skew the percentages. It's not a conspiracy.

Posted by Dan Savage | January 28, 2008 12:30 PM
24

Gary Locke supports her? Well, this changes everything.

Posted by tsm | January 28, 2008 12:31 PM
25

Oh, and to be clear: The "coronation" I'm referring to is the coronation by Obama fans on Slog - I totally agree that Hil's competitive nationwide.

Posted by ECB | January 28, 2008 12:33 PM
26

Hey ECB, you missed Janet Reno. I believe she endorsed Hil today.

I'm starting to feel Obama is a lot like Jesus lately. Cool guy, but lord save me from his followers.

Posted by The General | January 28, 2008 12:33 PM
27

i'm sure when chris crocker endorses someone it will be the fuckin cover of the stranger from now until november.

Posted by um | January 28, 2008 12:33 PM
28

See, now this I think is more productive than just posting to complain about all the Obama coverage.

Posted by Hernandez | January 28, 2008 12:33 PM
29

the problem is, really, that she IS the annoying woman that is in his way. emphasis on annoying, and not on woman.

honestly, for a long while, i wanted hillary, but DAMN i just can't take her and her husband's crap anymore.

Posted by konstantConsumer | January 28, 2008 12:35 PM
30

Dan,

Dude, I don't think it's a conspiracy. I just think posting every single endorsement--plus the full text and video of every single speech Obama makes--is kind of, you know, boring.

Posted by ECB | January 28, 2008 12:35 PM
31

Right, Obama's coronation. Brilliant.

Well, I guess Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski and the Amalgamated Transit Union can't be wrong...

Those Obama endorsement items were news because they happened today, dude. Yesterday, when the NYT endorsed Clinton, that was the news.

But yeah, there's always a vast conspiracy against Billary.

Posted by Mr Me | January 28, 2008 12:37 PM
32

I'm with #11 and #16.

Posted by Chotchkies | January 28, 2008 12:37 PM
33
I just think posting every single endorsement--plus the full text and video of every single speech Obama makes--is kind of, you know, boring.

Hah!

and HAH!

Posted by Judah | January 28, 2008 12:38 PM
34

It seems that you have the ability to write posts on Slog, ECB. Did you write about these endorsements before? No? Were you prevented from doing so? No?

Huh.. You know it's a real conspiracy when it extends even to yourself.

Posted by Uhhh... | January 28, 2008 12:38 PM
35

I think if the Clinton's had stayed away from the race-baiting I'd be more inclined to give a fuck. Since they decided to go that route, I saw screw 'em.

Posted by AMB | January 28, 2008 12:39 PM
36

amen, @30.
i like hillary. and maria cantwell. and the SEIU. and billie jean king. janet reno scares the crap out of me, though.

Posted by kim | January 28, 2008 12:39 PM
37

Will someone fire this idiot already? She contributes NOTHING to the political dialogue. Erica, they should really use your articles in logic classes as examples of how NOT TO make an argument. You need an editor, like BAD!!!

Posted by ss | January 28, 2008 12:40 PM
38

Only yucky girls and old ladies like Hillary! They have cooties!

Posted by Obama SuperFan | January 28, 2008 12:40 PM
39

Many of these endorsements were given long ago, when Hillary Clinton was the "inevitable" nominee. It's tough to say how many were just jumping on the bandwagon in hopes of getting in the next president's good graces.

Posted by RJ | January 28, 2008 12:41 PM
40

Let's face it, the most important endorsement is Bill Clinton's. Poll after poll have shown that a significant number (as many as half) of her supporters like her primarily because she's married to Bill Clinton. She's seen by the public as a proxy for another Bill Clinton presidency. Quite a proud moment in feminist history.

Posted by mrobvious | January 28, 2008 12:41 PM
41

Hey, Erica, thanks for letting me know Ed Murray endorsed Obama! I had no idea. By the way, as you VERY WELL KNOW that is news in Seattle, which is why your lovely blog would make a post about it. Crikey, settle down!

Posted by Graham | January 28, 2008 12:42 PM
42

Best comments thread EVAR!

Posted by Jimmy Legs | January 28, 2008 12:42 PM
43

Wasn;t Hillary already in the whitehouse for 8 years?

Apparently it does take a strong man for a women to accomplish anything. If it weren't for Bill, Hillary would be some coporate lawyer skank selling out to the highest bidder.

Rank ambition is not a desirable trait in a president.

Posted by ecce homo | January 28, 2008 12:43 PM
44

Who would've guessed that NOW would endorse the female candidate? Didn't see that coming.

Seriously, this post is ridiculous. First of all, it's about the quality of the endorsements, not the quantity. Including obviously biased endorsements like NOW's (and ANA, Ferraro, etc) only makes her base seem more narrow.

Second of all..."Obama's coronation"...really? If anyone is being coronated, it's Hillary. The Clinton machine, even with some of the success Obama has had, is still almost certainly going to muscle its way to the nomination. She is still the prohibitive favorite in this race, as even the most cursory glance at the would-be delegate count shows.

Oh, and I'm actually a Hillary supporter, by the way. Please be more substantive in your arguments for her, or we'll start making the ultra-whiny Obama supporters look good.

Posted by Matthew | January 28, 2008 12:43 PM
45

"Do you hear that sound, Neobama?

It is the sound ... of inevitability."

Agent ECB Smith to Neobama

Posted by The Matrix According to ECB | January 28, 2008 12:43 PM
46

Probably not endorsing Hillary: hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis.

Posted by Doctor Memory | January 28, 2008 12:44 PM
47

sorry erica, but i don't care.

Posted by josh bomb | January 28, 2008 12:44 PM
48

Wait, I forget, who is Chuck Norris endorsing again?

Posted by Bad Donkey | January 28, 2008 12:45 PM
49

Here I was attempting to satirize the Clinton campaign when apparently I was actually satirizing Erica C. Barnett:
Clinton campaign responds to Toni Morrison endorsement

Posted by cressona | January 28, 2008 12:45 PM
50

The Clinton Machine is starting to act a bit like the Rove Machine..... scary.

Posted by Rye | January 28, 2008 12:47 PM
51

I agree with @11, @16, and @47 too.

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 28, 2008 12:47 PM
52

Erica,

Could you stoop any lower and be any more childish? "News" is, uhhh, you know, something New. Post an endorsement that happened within the last 24 hours, fine. This is just silly. Go take a cold shower or something. At this point, you're only hurting Clinton with this kind of garbage.

Posted by LayoffitErica | January 28, 2008 12:48 PM
53

erica only digs journalism that advocates her own agenda. otherwise it's totally lame and sexist.

Posted by erica "coulter" barnett | January 28, 2008 12:49 PM
54

Y'see, ECB, there's this thing called, news, see, where we find out what happened in the past 24 hours.

Posted by captain obvious | January 28, 2008 12:50 PM
55

ECB, are you still smarting over the fact that Obama got DOUBLE Clinton's votes in South Carolina? I mean, that was a serious whallop he put on the Clinton campaign down there.

Doubled her vote!

Are you fired up? Ready to go?

Doubled it!

Posted by oljb | January 28, 2008 12:52 PM
56

ecb seems desperate with name dropping like that. maybe ecb should tell hillary to cut the race baiting of clinton.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | January 28, 2008 12:53 PM
57

Yes, it's time. The fact that no member of an entire gender - spanning people of every skin color - has been president or even vice president is, to quote an old Almost Live sketch, indescribably lame. That's not the only reason I'm for Sen. Clinton but it's a big one. And I'm against Sen. Obama not because he's male but because he's all style and little substance. By the way, I'm not over 50. Yet. But if it wasn't for us older broads fighting the good fight, you young chicks would have your bare feet superglued to the kitchen floor while you spent your days preparing lime Jell-O and Hamburger Helper. Give us some cred already.

Posted by Yeah, It's Time, Damn Right | January 28, 2008 12:54 PM
58

Maybe we should dub her "Vagina O'Reily."

Posted by Rye | January 28, 2008 12:55 PM
59

Erica- did you decide on HRC or is Edwards still your horse?

Posted by SeMe | January 28, 2008 12:55 PM
60

Erica, wow. I didn't actually see the post this was from when I made my comment. My girlfriend (who also endorses Obama and also thinks you're getting pettier by the day) had the comments thread open. Holy cow, lady, sour grapes. Settle down. You know what tipped me off as to whom the Stranger was likely to endorse in the next couple days? The shrillness and desperation of your posts. Everyone else kept me guessing, worrying and wondering. Now I'd be shocked if the Stranger doesn't endorse Obama, because I can see how absolutely livid you are.

PS: From what I saw, there are three endorsements mentioned today for Obama: Ted Kennedy, who for MONTHS along with Kerry and Gore was considered one of the big three to watch. His son was mentioned in what was more of an addendum post (interesting and relevant given he's also a super-delegate.) And Toni Morrison, whose famous "black president" quote has made a few new laps lately and happens to be a nobel prize winner on top of that.

And for the record, of the "big three" we have scored two of them. The third, Gore (also a novel prize winner) I hope may be waiting in the wings.

Posted by Graham | January 28, 2008 12:57 PM
61

The fact that no member of an entire gender - spanning people of every skin color - has been president or even vice president is, to quote an old Almost Live sketch, indescribably lame.

And what better choice for the first XX president than a Presidential wife and mother of the Presidential Papoose (tm)? After all, as a woman your most important decision in life is choosing which man you're going to marry. Hitch your wagon to the stars, girls!! Marry right, and you'll never be wrong!!

Posted by libby dole | January 28, 2008 1:00 PM
62

I'll cut Erica some slack here; the Obamaload here today is a little overwhelming, especially if you're not a supporter. It's newsworthy, the attention he's getting today, but not EVERY ARTICLE.

I'm also getting a little sick of the "JFK" comparisons, because Obama doesn't remind me at all of Jack; he reminds me of Bobby.

Which is kind of worrying, not because of the assassination thing but because Bobby's promise was a false one. JFK was actually a pretty terrible president, but he did get elected as the harbinger of a new world coming; Bobby's new world was a fraud, as shown by the almost permanent Republican regime that's been in place since then.

If, to continue the analogy beyond any hope of supportability, Obama is RFK, then Clinton is Humphrey -- which actually kind of works; she's carrying the torch for her predecessor's (and her own) war, in a twisted way. RFK might have won in '68 had he lived, but I think he would have been more like McGovern. McGovern put an end to any idea of a '68-style liberal Democrat winning anything ever; even after the disaster of Nixon, the best they could do was one miserable term of Carter, then another series of Republican landslides.

A Clinton broke that series once before, and whatever the flaws of Bush I, they're nothing compared to the damage done to the Republicans by Bush II -- yet this election is looking like it might be a close one. The question is, is RFK enough? Is Obama RFK? He's certainly not McGovern.

Posted by Fnarf | January 28, 2008 1:01 PM
63

Erica, if you're still reading, I have a honest question. The poll two posts down and these, sometimes oddly hostile comments seem to indicate that a vast majority of Slog readers really favor Obama. I'm wondering why you think it is that HRC isn't resonating with them. I'm sure there are some latent misogynists that are determined that she's just a "bitch", but that can't be everyone's reason. For me, I can't shake the feeling that she's the type of "establishment" politician that I'll settle for, but doesn't inspire me. Is this a common reason, and what can she do to change this perception?

Posted by skweetis | January 28, 2008 1:04 PM
64

Dick Gephardt is a tool.

Posted by John_Bigboote | January 28, 2008 1:04 PM
65

Oops, also the Seattle Times.

Posted by Graham | January 28, 2008 1:04 PM
66

Nepotism and dynasties are always wrong! Except when its the Kennedys!

Posted by Obama SuperFan | January 28, 2008 1:09 PM
67

I think the Obama endorsements all seem like news because they are read as slaps at the Clintons. When you endorse Hillary, nobody says "Ooh, Obama's going to be pissed!" but if you endorse Obama, especially if you are a ranking Dem who has worked with the Clintons for years, then it looks like infighting. Which is fun to report on I guess.

Posted by elenchos | January 28, 2008 1:09 PM
68

Erica - your post does see a little whiny. It's funny to hear Hillary supporters acting out what seems to be desperation. The flood gates are opening for Obama, and none of the Hillary crowd seems to be able to plug the dam. (that started as a slightly different reference that would have obviously been taken the wrong way by the Hillary folks, so I'll leave it alone).

I want to support Hillary. Obama's a great speaker, but Hilary has him beat on policy, sort of. I used to try to look past her unwavering support of Bush in Iraq, but then she supported giving him authorization to invade Iran. Really, what an idiotic idea. Makes me question her on so many levels.

But even then, I wanted to keep an open mind about the Hillary - Obama race. But after her campaign made and stuck by race baiting comments in an already racially polarized state, I just can't try to look past her failings. Erica, you have to admit, what happened in South Carolina was disgusting. Right? Or do you support that sort of campaigning as well? And then this Florida thing - she basically outright lied and broke a promise - neat, I want to see more of that after the Hell Bill put the progressive movement through with his same sort of actions.

End of the day, Bill Clinton WAS Hillary's biggest endorsement, but has become her Achilles heel.

Obama isn't perfect, but he's exciting, and supporting him feels a lot better than supporting Hillary. And if you think that doesn't matter, you haven't paid attention to a presidential race in the US.

None of the endorsements Hillary has gotten are nearly as big as the three Kennedy endorsements. Not even close.

And PS - it will be interesting what the Washington State politicians who endorsed Hillary early (mistakingly) will do when Obama is having massive rallies in Washington - will they stay away? One Obama rally in SC draw close to 25,000 people. That's a political rally in a primary. Truly amazing. Can't see how folks running for office won't want to get a piece of that.

Posted by Meinert | January 28, 2008 1:11 PM
69

Just out of curiosity, are there any other Stranger staff writers who support Clinton? If so, are they just too scared of these massive attacks from Obama fans to give Clinton more coverage on Slog?

Posted by The General | January 28, 2008 1:12 PM
70

@63 - For me I was a big Hillary supporter from the beginning, but when I looked at the candidates from the big picture, from what this country needs and not what I want, I realized Hillary is too polarizing. She has extremely strong supporters and A LOT of people that hate her which causes for a divided country much like now. I think Hillary would make a great president, but this country doesn't need more divisiveness. We need to come to common ground and I feel Obama is the only candidate that can bring the people back together. I've made a lot of vagina jokes, but HRC is not what this country needs. That being said, the more I see her manipulative power games, the more I realize the Clintons are in this for themselves, not for the people. Obama is for the people.

Posted by Rye | January 28, 2008 1:14 PM
71

erica, you needn't fret. sounds like your guy is pulling some strings in florida and michigan and is also, lest we forget, still ahead of obama nationwide and will be tough to beat on super tues... so i'm not entirely clear on why all the hysterical defensiveness. the ted kennedy endorsement is a big story b/c well... it's a big story hunny. bigger than maria cantwell.

Posted by Judith | January 28, 2008 1:14 PM
72

Maya Angelou endorsed Clinton? Damn. I woulda voted for Hillary, but I don't think the nation can endure another round of Inaugural Doggerel.

Posted by O | January 28, 2008 1:14 PM
73

really, Billie Jean King AND Barbara Streisand? AWESOME!!!!

Posted by come again? | January 28, 2008 1:19 PM
74

It's no wonder Erica supports Hillary. She fits the same profile: wonky and smart but paranoid, seeing enemies and conspiracies everywhere.

Posted by BB | January 28, 2008 1:19 PM
75

I think ECB got a new thicker skin this weekend and is taking it out for a spin.

Also, Vagina O'Reily is hilarious! What say you, Erica?

Posted by Mike in MO | January 28, 2008 1:26 PM
76

Say what you will about Sen Clinton, but never forget she got more votes in every primary and caucus than the top winner in the GOP primary or caucus in that state.

Of course, the same could be said about Edwards most of the time, and even more so about Obama.

Posted by Will in Seattle | January 28, 2008 1:27 PM
77

Hillary is not annoying. Bill is annoying.

Posted by Fnarf | January 28, 2008 1:27 PM
78

Like Hillary's campaign and Bill's daily antics, your support of the Clinton machine is becoming more and more defensive each day, Erica.

Posted by kerri harrop | January 28, 2008 1:28 PM
79

thank you. the Slog's rabid enthusiasm for Obama is getting tiresome.

Posted by josh | January 28, 2008 1:29 PM
80

Totally awesome post, ECB. I loved seeing a defiant voice for Clinton after a non-stop Obamathon from the entire rest of the Stranger staff. Keep it up!

Obamatons: ECB has done nothing but provide information. She hasn't slammed your candidate, she hasn't slammed you. You can argue with her information, but all the ad hominems and the thinly veiled "well, we're all for Obama- why aren't you?!?" make all of us Clinton supporters dig our heels in further in the face of peasants with pitchforks.

Yes, Clinton is popular nationally, but the media (Stranger included) have been shamelessly biased in favor of Obama- if you were honest, you would admit so- and so we HRC supporters aren't going to be silenced with an appeal based on Obama's "outsider" status.

I still think that this mild jousting between the campaigns (and that's all it really is) is going to produce a Clinton or Obama candidacy better able to take on the Republicans in the fall. Your ugly attacks at EBC's exuberance will last a lot longer.

Posted by Big Sven | January 28, 2008 1:33 PM
81

Hill is clearly a smart lady, and I have no doubt she would have had some sort of political career on her own, but if I were a woman, I'd be a bit put off by her. I mean, her main reason for being in the spotlight is that she happens to be married to Bill Clinton.

Seriously, there are lots of great women in politics and most of them didn't fuck their way to the top.

Posted by mason | January 28, 2008 1:34 PM
82

@79: I don't want to drown in pro-Obama posts either, but ECB needs to bring her A game. If this is the best she can do, better to not post at all.

Posted by mistermix | January 28, 2008 1:36 PM
83

Teddy Kennedy > all of those.

Put together.

Posted by K | January 28, 2008 1:36 PM
84

Vagina O'Reily for Prez!!

Posted by Rye | January 28, 2008 1:36 PM
85

@13: You forgot to put the *Pro-torture* before Feinstein!

Posted by mackro mackro | January 28, 2008 1:37 PM
86

@81 - Sometimes it's the other way around - without Hillary, Bill would have never made it as far as he did; he knows it, she knows it. Hillary is not Evita singing "Don't Cry For Me South Carolina".

Posted by BELMONT PLACE | January 28, 2008 1:44 PM
87

Hey, keep that list, because some people are going to be changing their minds. Like the former President of NOW in Chicago:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OVuMYKs8iJs

What do you say to that, ECB?

Posted by chris | January 28, 2008 1:48 PM
88

of everyone you mentioned ECB, not one has this significant combination: tremendous influence and not wanting a future appointment. Ted Kennedy did this because he actually believe in Obama, not because he wants to be in the cabinet.

Posted by mark | January 28, 2008 1:49 PM
89

NAFTA, "Don't Ask Don't Tell", asses handed to them in 1994, no health care reform, "ending welfare as we know it", Waco, Omnibus Counterterrorism act of 1993, WTO, a rabidly anti-union NLRB, and my favorite, growing corporatism,the big talk of "change". Those are a few of the legacies of the 1990s. Why anyone would want to run a campaign on that legacy, and why anyone 10 degrees to the left of center would support one is truly perplexing.

Oh yeah, then there's that war thing. But only one Stranger editor repudiated his support.

Posted by tpn | January 28, 2008 1:53 PM
90

Democrats have to get a lot of young and minority voters to the polls if they want to win, in other words they need to inspire people who don't usually vote to vote. You really think they'll find Clinton inspiring, the kind of candidate who pushes someone who hasn't bothered to vote before (even during the Bush years) to vote?

Face it, Clinton is a very smart policy wonk and establishment politician who is riding her husband's coattails.

You like her policies better than Obama's? Get real, policies at this point are nothing more than talking point, most of which won't even get considered.

Posted by mrobvious | January 28, 2008 1:56 PM
91

All the Obamatons, crying that there is no bias, and all the news today is pro Obama. Right.

If you ignore the fact that Obama's 17-yrs. long pal the indicted corrupt slumlord getting hauled into jail today isn't news.

You know, the one that offered Obama a job right out of law school? The one who was the major client at Obama's law firm for years? The one who actually invested with Obama's boss at the firm ? Which specialized in getting government money to do low income housing? The one who gave Obama loads of money over the years? The one who took public loans for low income housing then let his buildings rot and the tenants freeze all over Obama's district? Without Obama knowing about it?

Uh-huh.

The one who helped Obama buy his $1 million + house? By buying the vacant land next door, which was offered for sale jointly with the house Obama wanted, where the slimeball corrupt fixer paid full price for the vacant lot while Obama paid $300,000 less than the asking price for the lot with the house on it? For Those Who Need It Spelled Out: this is a $300,000 gift to Obama from the slimeball.

At a time when the guy was indicted on corruption charges. Pretty recnetly, actually.

Fairness: Obama returned about 40K in donations connected to this guy and said the house deal was a mistake.

But he didn't return the house or the $300,000.

Nope, move along, there are no negatives about Obama, you can get a fair and blanced view of the news on Slog.

Oh by the way: the guy was jailed today because he's a flight risk because he's been moving his money around too much lately. So the Feds say. The fed prosecutor in question appears to be that Patrick Fitzgerald guy.

Posted by unPC | January 28, 2008 2:02 PM
92

I think I need to get laid more often.

Posted by Mahtli69 | January 28, 2008 2:11 PM
93

unPC, you really wanna dig up associations with questionable local real-estate magnates? Two words:

White Water. Or, Whitewater.

14 people were convicted in that mess. Real nice associates these Clintons have, huh?

Posted by oljb | January 28, 2008 2:11 PM
94

unPC -

Kind of like the way Clinton, with no experience in the futures market, made a series of brilliantly timed purchases and sales that netted her big bucks, helped out by her buddy, the counsel at Tyson.

From the Washington Post -

"Hillary Clinton has said she made all the trading decisions herself and has tried to play down Blair's role. But she acknowledged in April, three weeks after her trades were first disclosed, that Blair actually placed most of the trades."

Posted by bob | January 28, 2008 2:14 PM
95

unPC -

Kind of like the way Clinton, with no experience in the futures market, made a series of brilliantly timed purchases and sales that netted her big bucks, helped out by her buddy, the counsel at Tyson.

From the Washington Post -

"Hillary Clinton has said she made all the trading decisions herself and has tried to play down Blair's role. But she acknowledged in April, three weeks after her trades were first disclosed, that Blair actually placed most of the trades."

Posted by bobking | January 28, 2008 2:15 PM
96

#93: Add to that the fact that Clinton won't release the rest of the papers from the Health Care fiasco attempt in the 90s. And, they refuse to discuss or release the list of contributors to the Clinton Library.

The Clintons were vetted through his time in the White House, but not since. The GOP is ready to pounce in the fall.

Posted by Fitz | January 28, 2008 2:18 PM
97

#93: Add to that the fact that Clinton won't release the rest of the papers from the Health Care fiasco attempt in the 90s. And, they refuse to discuss or release the list of contributors to the Clinton Library.

The Clintons were vetted through his time in the White House, but not since. The GOP is ready to pounce in the fall.

Posted by Fitz | January 28, 2008 2:19 PM
98

I have to say, the Cantwell and Locke endorsements actually deepen my distaste for HRC, Locke in particular. That man was so ridiculously afraid of taking real action or offending anyone that if he were elected dog catcher, he'd let a pack of feral dogs rip him to pieces while he dithered over which one to capture first. His dying words would be, "Maybe the Rottweiler, if that's okay with women 36-45."

Cantwell takes action, but she's just another political windsock.

Ooh, and Feinstein, I hate her too.

As for the celebrities, I don't give a fuck about them, and it offends me when anyone assumes that I'm celebrity obsessed enough to care what Barbra fucking Streisand thinks about politics.

Posted by Gitai | January 28, 2008 2:21 PM
99

Oh, and the reason it's news is because Obama supporters are really, really fucking excited about our candidate. If HRC can't muster the kind of enthusiasm that leads to the kind of devotion Obama's getting, that's her damn fault.

Posted by Gitai | January 28, 2008 2:23 PM
100

this is great to read erica. thanks so much for posting this information for the hillary supporters out there. keep it coming!

Posted by Maria | January 28, 2008 2:36 PM
101
Posted by Emily | January 28, 2008 2:38 PM
102

Why does Erica want the GOP to win the White House in November? Why Erica? Is your support of Hillary that important that we have to watch Hillary Clinton loose the White House to John McCain?

Posted by Cato the Younger Younger | January 28, 2008 2:46 PM
103

I guess Al Gore just forgot to endorse Hillary.

Posted by Zander | January 28, 2008 2:50 PM
104

Margaret Thatcher.

Posted by tpn | January 28, 2008 2:57 PM
105

all this talk about obama is makin me hot.

Posted by superyeadon | January 28, 2008 3:08 PM
106

To all the tit for tat responders:

you miss the point.

The point is it's news that the corrupt fixer got arrested today. That's the first point. Here's a link btw:
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4204413&page=1 The tit for tat stuff about Clinton -- why yes, that's relevant and it is, or was, news, which is why we've heard about it about 1,000,000 times already. Thanks for the reminder! It's already factored into the consciousness of the whole nation. So when she is run against McCain in a poll, it's post sliming. In contrast, the negatives about Obama haven't been the subject of $100 million in hit ads -- not yet. So when he is run up against McCain in a poll today, it's presliming.

Doesn't it seem likely, or conceivable to some degree, or at the very least worthy of discussion, to consider how electable will he be, AFTER this stuff is put into $100 million in TV ads targetting swing voters in Florida and Ohio? Should we not think about that?
I think it's pretty obvious this stuff will hurt him if not hurt him very badly. He's not going to be so inspirational and post partisan. Oh he will be to us here in Seattle, and all the liberal districts across the land. No doubt. But he ain't gonna look so great out in among those middle of the road voters in the middle of Florida and Ohio -- those folks who detest Teddy K. as a murderer, who don't particularly love urban liberals in the first place, who eat tons of pork sausage and love NASCAR, and who think that big time Chicago pols are pretty corrupt and weird and different already. I didn't even mention yet that the slimeball is from Syria, but he is.

The point is this: the Obamatons are shutting down any discussion of perfectly fair and legitimate questions like these out of pure passion for OBama which is disotroting their reasoning ability.

This stuff relates to the whole premise of the Obama campaign and directly undercuts his central message of turning the page. And Obamatons want to rule this off limits to discuss.
Ignoring this stuff isn't doing any favors to Obama, to the Democratic cause, or to your nation.

Posted by unPC | January 28, 2008 3:20 PM
107

Hey, does everyone want to see a picture of that evil Tony Rezko that Obama's apparently in tight with. Well you can look at this website to see what he looks like. Rezko's the guy in the middle.


Hey, while we're talking Tony Rezko whatever happened to Norman Hsu? Remember him and that $850,000 contribution to Hillary Clinton that ended up donating to charity?

Posted by wile_e_quixote | January 28, 2008 3:27 PM
108

ECB - you forgot Wal-Mart's endorsement.

Posted by kds | January 28, 2008 3:43 PM
109

wile_e_quixote-

Thank you for proving unPC's point by countering his very current information with 5000 year old talking points that even the Republicans consider irredeemably stale. Well done.

Posted by Big Sven | January 28, 2008 4:01 PM
110

unPC, your post @106 bloviates a lot about potential Obama vulnerabilities, but your bloviation is disingenuous at best because for everything you list Hillary Clinton is far more vulnerable to attack by the Republicans than Barack Obama. Remember Norman Hsu? The Marc Rich pardon? Renting out the Lincoln bedroom to prominent donors? Whitewater? Hillary's cattle futures trading incident? There's also the fact that the Clintons have refused to release the list of donors to the Bill Clinton presidential library? Compared to all of this Obama's involvement with Tony Rezko (Here's a lovely picture of him with Bill and Hillary) is a tempest in a teapot.


Oh, and as far as the Kennedy endorsement being a liability outside of liberal districts let me just bum your self-righteous little high by pointing out that any voters who have a problem with Ted Kennedy endorsing Obama are going to have huge problems with Hillary Clinton and the fact that she's been endorsed by Babs Streisand, Rob Reiner, Barney Frank, Dianne Feinstein, Geraldine Ferraro and Walter Mondale.


If you think that the Clinton scandals are a non-issue, that they don't count because they've already been factored in to the polls, that Hillary has been so "pre-slimed" that further attacks aren't going to matter then you'd better check your ass into rehab and get whatever drugs you're on out of your system because if Hillary gets the nomination the Republicans are going to go after her with such viciousness that the attacks of the 1990s will pale into insignificance in comparison. The refusal of Clinton supporters to recognize that fact doesn't do any good for the Democratic party or for America (Not that the Clintons and most of their supporters give a shit about the Democratic Party, America or for that matter anything but winning, regardless of cost.)

Posted by wile_e_quixote | January 28, 2008 4:05 PM
111

Gitai-

If HRC can't muster the kind of enthusiasm that leads to the kind of devotion Obama's getting, that's her damn fault.

Congratulations! Coming after almost a hundred people have been tearing ECB a new asshole for having the kind of enthusiasm that leads to devotion for Clinton, your comment wins the Balls the Size of Church Bells Award. Well done! The check's in the mail.

Posted by Big Sven | January 28, 2008 4:06 PM
112

wile_e_quixote@110-

Let me see if I get this straight. According to you, we Clinton supporters:

1. Are deluded.
2. Don't care about the Democratic Party.
3. Don't care about America.

Wow. And this is what Obama supporters are like when their guy is *winning*.

Posted by Big Sven | January 28, 2008 4:13 PM
113

Hating on Hillary and insulting ECB is the most positive and effective way to campaign for our candidate! It reflects so well on him!

Posted by Obama SuperFan | January 28, 2008 4:20 PM
114

sven, it wasn't enthusiasm for hillary, it was a "oh yeah, well heres what I can do!"

Posted by Bellevue Ave | January 28, 2008 4:31 PM
115

The one who was the major client at Obama's law firm for years?

A real estate developer was the major client at a civil rights law firm?? Go ahead, pull my other leg.

The cool thing about fugitive-from-justice Hillraiser Norman Hsu was the way he got a postman and his family to cough up $200K for Hillary. A pretty neat trick when the postman made $49K a year, and the wife ran a flower shop.

Posted by obama fo yo mama | January 28, 2008 4:42 PM
116

Next up: Erica starts posting every time hetero parents do something nice for their kid.

Posted by midwaypete | January 28, 2008 9:17 PM
117

Hey Dan --

If you're reading this far down into the comments thread on this one...

Seriously, you need to consider putting ECB out to pasture. Yes, she generates lots of traffic on Slog -- which you've masterfully shepherded into a successful extension of the Stranger brand.

If your next gambit is to turn this rag into a quality news operation, she either a) has to go, or b) be repackaged into a Dowd-esque shrill columnist (with lots and lots of coaching)

You're developing a pretty damn good staff: Sanders is somebody about whom we'll soon be saying "we knew him when"; Jonah has been solid; Golob's posts to Slog are greeted with bouquets for their seriousness; Bethany is carving out a very nice niche for herself; and so on.

But ECB? Pretty weak reporting. Infantile rants. Absolutely no sense of humor. Mindlessly self-indulgent Slog posts. Columns played from a high-school composition template.

Get's to be a point where ya wonder whether she becomes an impediment to retaining quality staff.

Posted by oneway | January 28, 2008 10:18 PM
118

What, Steven Speilberg, but no Oliver Stone? LAME!

Posted by Deacon Seattle | January 28, 2008 11:08 PM
119

Rob Reiner + Barbara Streisand + Geraldine Ferraro = You lose.

Posted by wbrproductions | January 29, 2008 8:51 AM
120

MESSAGE

Posted by ISHMAel back | February 8, 2008 3:23 AM
121

MESSAGE

Posted by ISHMAel back | February 8, 2008 3:23 AM
122

MESSAGE

Posted by ISHMAel back | February 8, 2008 3:23 AM
123

MESSAGE

Posted by ISHMAel back | February 8, 2008 3:23 AM
124

MESSAGE

Posted by ISHMAel back | February 8, 2008 3:23 AM

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 14 days old).