Slog News & Arts

Line Out

Music & Nightlife

« Slog Happy at Havana | Obama Wins Mississippi »

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Re: As Long As We’re Holding Candidates Responsible for Every Single Thing Their Supporters Say

posted by on March 11 at 17:20 PM


Your post is so full of misrepresentations that I think our commenters will probably have completely picked it apart by the time I finish writing this.

But, briefly, because I’m on the run:

1) Read what I wrote more carefully. I didn’t “flat-out” say what you’re so upset about me supposedly “flat-out” saying.

2) Samantha Power and Maxim Thorne have resigned from the Obama campaign because of their statements, which Obama made clear he did not support.

3) Obama did not, “himself,” refer to Clinton as “D-Punjab.” That was from an early oppo-research paper that he repudiated.

4) Ferraro is perhaps technically in some sort of gray area in terms of her official title, but the facts remain: She is Clinton’s finance chair a member of Clinton’s finance committee (hardly an unimportant role) and has frequently acted as a spokesperson or message amplifier for the campaign (hardly your average supporter).

5) I was trying to get a quick post up on a busy day. I was also trying to deal in true facts. If I have something factually wrong in my post, I’ll correct it. Hope you’ll do the same.

RSS icon Comments


ooooOOOOH! slogfight!

Posted by brandon | March 11, 2008 5:28 PM

Thanks, Eli. ECB should stick to transportation matters. She's road-kill where politics are involved.

Posted by It's True | March 11, 2008 5:31 PM

Dude. You are so wasting your time, Eli.

Posted by elenchos | March 11, 2008 5:33 PM

Erica is clearly a McCain supporter. Her posts do nothing but split the democratic party in half allowing a GOP victory.

Hillary supporters at this point are either out of touch with reality, really republicans and possibly anti-choice and homophobic.

Posted by Andrew | March 11, 2008 5:37 PM

Andrew, it wouldn't be a stretch to say that ECB is a Republican. She hails from the big red state of Texas!

Posted by Ouch | March 11, 2008 5:49 PM

There is such a stark difference between McCain's response to his racist supporters, like Steve King from Iowa, and the response of the Clinton camp to supporters trying to play to the racist vote. McCain denounces them. Hillary uses them strategically. It's nothing short of disgusting.

Posted by Mike in Iowa | March 11, 2008 5:49 PM

Hillary supporters are obviously blinded by the cult of Hillary. They can't make reasoned arguments anymore. Sad, really.

Posted by Michigan Matt (soon to be Baltimatt) | March 11, 2008 5:51 PM

okay, here is a typical example of why i dislike eli sanders and his contributions to the political discussions. in his breathless "damn hillary!!!" screeds he lies out both sides. he repeats msm tropes that are factual incorrect and completely taken out of context, while denouncing the msm as being lazy and solipsistic. why did eli not give an accurate depiction of how the original comment was made as part of a larger discussion? why does eli again repeat that Ferraro is the 'finance chair' when that simply isn't true? i am at a loss for why so many commenters, regardless of preference for candidate, let him get away with this shit? he whips idiots on the slog into a frenzy and then (sometimes, if ever) 'clarifies' factually incorrect posts days later. all the while, your supporters are hi-fiving you for your 'reporting' they call ecb a crazy, lying bitch. stop repeating sound bytes and start doing some actual reporting and/or analysis and before posting your whiny rejoinders.

Posted by group therapy | March 11, 2008 5:56 PM

Okey dokey, pls. pass the Kool Aid!!

"Erica is clearly a McCain supporter. Her posts do nothing but split the democratic party in half allowing a GOP victory. Hillary supporters at this point are either out of touch with reality, really republicans and possibly anti-choice and homophobic."

Spoken like a true Nazi/HUAC/MCCArthy kool aid drinker.

Unity, unity, no more divisive personal politics, rah rah rah!!

About 47% of the delegates and 47% of the folks who have voted -- for Clinton -- are GOPsters sneaking into the Democratic primary and perverting the Ultimate and Rightful Victory of Our Saviour, Barack Obama!! There is to Be No Negative Argument About Him.

Anyone Who Disagrees and Who Challenges Our Orthodoxy Must Be Attacked -- They are Other, they are Unholy, They Are Satan!!

PraiseBHO! PraiseBHO! PraiseBHO! [say it enough, and you can drown out all countervailing info....]

Posted by unPC | March 11, 2008 5:58 PM

I wish there were greater policy differences between the two candidates that could actually justify this kind of rancor.

Posted by Trevor | March 11, 2008 6:01 PM

unPC = ecce homo. Please join the GOP!

Posted by unPC is an IDIOT | March 11, 2008 6:04 PM

why erica has a job is beyond me. it must be solely based on the clicks she brings in, because it certainly can't be for the quality of her thinking.

Posted by some dude | March 11, 2008 6:06 PM

When Hillary finally makes her concession speech, could some at The Stranger office please collect Erica's tears and sell them, maybe for next year's Strangercrombie? I wish to season my food with them when Barack gets sworn in. Thanks.

Posted by JC | March 11, 2008 6:09 PM

don't sweat it Eli. Most folks have flipped the bit on ECB at this point. Hope to hell that what remains of her well-earned reputation remains intact.

(otherwise) ECB Fan,

Posted by ho' know | March 11, 2008 6:09 PM

You're an idiot and a liar, unPC. No one is saying "Saint Obama" except you and the people you parrot.

Posted by Fnarf | March 11, 2008 6:09 PM

This blog sucks.

Personal attacks within the staff? Must be a pretty bummer of a work environment. My gf is taking bets on how long before Savage fires Erica, whether fairly or not. That's a shitty thing to be betting on.

Posted by STJA | March 11, 2008 6:10 PM

So ECB saw something that looks bad for Hillary, overreacted, and posted a response full of logical fallacy and misrepresentation in a desperate attempt to show that Obama looks bad, too.


Posted by w7ngman | March 11, 2008 6:11 PM

Irony, no?
Erica's colleague saying she's a lousy reporter. And what might he say about Josh? Or the doorknob licker, Dan?
Here's a grenade. Clean out the newsroom.


Posted by Editor's Note | March 11, 2008 6:14 PM

It's not necessarily about policy difference- the difference between the two candidates is mostly a matter of how they behave and conduct themselves. Obama, being intelligent, compassionate, and thoughtful- Hillary being self-serving, and just an all-around not-a-nice-person. Since the presidency is really just a figurehead position, and their policy is similar, who is it then that you want interacting with other country's leaders and representing the US on our behalf? Certainly not Hillary.

Posted by Justin J | March 11, 2008 6:15 PM


There's always HRC's wrong vote on the war.

HRC supports a partial repeal of DOMA, while Obama supports a full repeal of DOMA.

Obama supports driver's licenses for residents of the US regardless of immegration status. Clinton does not.

Then there's the "tactics" issue. Clinton attacked Obama for his "present" votes in the Illinois legislature on choice-related votes, although he had a 100% rating from NARAL.

Posted by marie | March 11, 2008 6:19 PM

Speaking of kool-aid, unPC, how's that laughable electoral college delegate matchup estimation method working out for you? Come up with anything more desperately unscientific yet?

Here's some kool-aid for you: Hillary can't win, no matter how tortured your analysis becomes.

Posted by w7ngman | March 11, 2008 6:22 PM

STJA @16: I think YOUR post is kind of offensive. Why on earth would Dan fire Erica? She's doing her job. She and Eli are disagreeing in public: that's what opinionators do -- have opinions. I think Erica is wrong too, but I would be appalled if she was fired for disagreeing with me or Eli or Annie or Dan or anyone else -- not just because because of her reporting but because of what that would say about the climate of argument in the newsroom.

Posted by Fnarf | March 11, 2008 6:47 PM

I'd be appalled if people took slog so seriously that they confronted people in public about the persona they have on slog.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | March 11, 2008 6:59 PM

@22: Yeah, I totally agree, especially when there are so many other perfectly valid reasons to kick her lardy ass to the curb. (Chicks hate it when you talk about their bottoms being overly rotund...(I feel better about myself when ECB feels bad about herself… (is that a bad thing?... (or just human nature?))))

Posted by You_Gotta_Be_Kidding_Me | March 11, 2008 7:05 PM

Who gives a shit, Bellevue.

Posted by Liston | March 11, 2008 7:12 PM

What a wad of used toilet paper you are, YGTBKM.

Posted by Fnarf | March 11, 2008 7:15 PM

Aren't you in the same office? Can you not pick up the phone and settle your disagreements?

Posted by Wolf | March 11, 2008 7:21 PM

ooooh, girlfight!

Posted by Moyshe Pipic | March 11, 2008 7:27 PM

Support of Hillary at this point does nothing but ensure a GOP victory in November and the overturning of Roe v Wade. Get your abortions now, Hillary is working on outlawing it!!!

Hillary = McCain, their is no difference at this point!!!

Posted by Andrew | March 11, 2008 7:28 PM

This is about ONE thing and that is saving the party from self destruction and getting rid of anything that is causing that disaster. The weakest link is Hillary, she must GO!!!

Hillary worked to help Nixon get elected!!

Posted by Cato | March 11, 2008 7:32 PM

i dont get what hillary achieves by still trying to win the nomination. any way you slice it, some party fracturing shit will have to happen for hillary to be the nomination.

Posted by Bellevue Ave | March 11, 2008 7:43 PM

@12: For reals -- I think it has to be for the page views. Her posts manage to be illogical and misinformed in equal measure.

Does she lie on purpose or is it accidental? Does Editorial feel guilt for giving her a soapbox?

Interesting questions.

Posted by Mike | March 11, 2008 7:48 PM

i agree, by the way, i vote for obama, just because i causually see a pic on a site named he helped a poor girl come from africa. i think he will be the winner. hope he won't become the 2nd Spitzer

Posted by karl | March 11, 2008 9:35 PM

*sigh* Eli, you're dreamy.

Seriously. Thank you for your unbiased reporting, honesty, journalistic ethics, and for bringing a touch of freakin' class to the SLOG.

You know, back in the day I used to be all like, "WTF?! Why does Eli always support HRC so much?!" But then I realized that just because there was an article or SLOG post about HRC doing well, it didn't mean that you LIKED her. It meant that you were doing your job-- reporting the facts.

You know, like, what you're PAID to do. And the fact that you don't stoop down to ECB's level and openly swoon over one candidate or another makes me respect you that much more-- I believe the things that you report because I have no reason not to. You post as many good things about Obama as you do about HRC, as many bad things about HRC as you do about Obama.

Hey, I dpn't think we even know who you actually support-- I mean, you could be a closet HRC supporter for all we know! Wouldn't ECB feel dumb then...

Journalistic ethics-- maybe you guys at the Stranger should have a staff retreat and let Eli teach y'all a thing or two about 'em...

Posted by Eli's Fan Girl | March 11, 2008 9:45 PM

Soooooooooooooo, Eli:

Are you calling Erica a monster?

Posted by NapoleonXIV | March 11, 2008 11:49 PM

thank you, eli.

Posted by thank you | March 12, 2008 12:44 AM

Does anyone know what the heck is up with the bot that keeps posting some nonsense about Obama helping some girl move from Kenya (33 in this thread)? I can't even tell what the post is trying to convey.

Posted by Beguine | March 12, 2008 6:47 AM

In Erica's world the New England Patriots are 16-1 and are the Super Bowl Champions!

Posted by Sports Fan | March 12, 2008 8:37 AM

dailykos has a nice writeup about ferraro this morning

Ferraro is playing a feminist George Wallace. Wallace appealed to insecure whites who felt that their struggles and hard work entitled them to live in all white neighborhoods, and elitist judges shouldn't be able to force them to accept black neighbors and integrated schools. Ferraro is trying to appeal to insecure white women who believe they've put in their time and now they're entitled to get their woman president, and nobody should be allowed to take away their presidency and give it to the Black guy who hasn't earned it.
It's a good read, click the URL in my name for the full story.

(and sorry for the bold treatment--couldn't resist posting this erica-style)

Posted by some dude | March 12, 2008 9:10 AM

Between the Rush Limbaugh vote growing to get Hillary elected, the sleeping white babies and the red phone ad, Ferraro, and Hillary's practical endorsement of John McCain with her "we've both got the experience" statements I don't see how any Hillary supporter can not want to take a shower hourly.

At the beginning of this primary season I was excited about both, though slightly more excited about Obama from a generational but Hillary has reminded me now of the nasty taste the Clintons left in my mouth during their second term. She's disgusting.

Posted by JJ | March 12, 2008 9:17 AM

Eli leads with his chin, and he's gonna get fact-checked hard into the boards when ECB gets back.

Posted by RonK, Seattle | March 12, 2008 9:18 AM

I think the key word here...with all its racist "uppity".

Clinton/Ferraro/et. al. cannot fathom that a black man born in the 1960s might win before a white woman. I think for them its generational hubris more than racial, but they are completely happy to play the racial/muslim/scary black man angle with ignorant "lunch pail" voters. To them the end justifies the means.

Not a proud moment. It ranks somewhere with womens' suffrage leaders in southern states playing the race card to get (white) women the vote in 1890s and early 20th century. Or Margaret Sanger flirting with anti-Catholic and Eugenics believers to promote legalizing family planning and birth control. They all probably thought the ends justified the means too.

Posted by Jason | March 12, 2008 9:31 AM

@19 While I agree that Hillary would not be the best person to represent the US on our behalf, I don't agree that the executive branch is "just a figurehead position". It took more than a figurehead position to do the damage that Bush has done to the country.

And while I like ECB, I'm glad Ferraro stuck her oar in; Hills is now officially toast.

Posted by Eddy | March 12, 2008 9:59 AM

OK, let's go through this.

#1: Yeah, where was she? She claims to have been heavily involved with the workings of government while First Lady, leading to her unreferenced "testedness" and "experience". She was so involved with the workings of being President that she didn't know who was under the President's desk.

#2: And yet when it came time to actual action, Obama voted against immunity, and Hillary was nowhere to be found. (Another "where was she?" moment!)

#3: I completely agree.

#4: Missing the point. It sounds like he's saying what he intends to do and that has been confirmed by military advisers as possible.

#5: Widely debunked. Nice try, but it's lies.

#6: It's completely fair to say that Clinton's no more ready than Obama. if he ain't ready, she ain't ready. I doubt, frankly, anyone is "ready". As the adviser that Erica carefully sound-bit went on to say:

The question is and what Barack Obama raised is, when that phone call is received for each of them for the first time, who’s going to make the right judgment? Who is going to make the right decision?

More to the point... what is the antecedent for this eponymous "3 a.m. (in the morning, right Hillary?) call"? GWB's 9/11 "call" came at 9 a.m. Where is this legendary "3 a.m. in the morning call" notion coming from?

#8: Seven and one. Obama really said that. Too bad the union-obsessed Clintoids don't realize that Clinton (like her husband) really has been pro-offshoring. (Action, not words, are important, right Hill?)

Posted by K | March 12, 2008 10:38 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).