Bill Clinton says Barack Obama must 'kiss my ass' for his support
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/barackobama/2211812/Bill-Clinton-says-Barack-Obama-must-%27kiss-my-ass%27-for-his-support.htmlParty unity, anyone? Obama's response should be to stop the check to his wife and let Bill pick up the tab for her failed campaign.
I like!
No thanks!
Favorite
5 commentsReplies
Oom Mao Mao said, (192 days ago)
ashok: It's my impression that it's not 'anybody but Hillary'. In fact, it's a little disconcerting some of the fervor that people have for Obama, particularly well-educated liberals as if his election would automatically be a panacea for everything that ills America.
It's like they've drank the Kool-Aid (I know it's Flavor Aid, purl) and really like the flavor.
ashok said, (192 days ago)
@AA: This is just a story, I don't know if it holds up or not.
At first, from the polls I saw and the way the Edwards campaign was recruiting bloggers, I thought many on the Internet were heavily siding with Edwards.
But Obama's campaign was much better organized - witness the caucus wins, wins in states Hillary could have easily had if her campaign was better run. And so when he first won, this whole Kos logic of "winnerism" came to the fore and that was that.
The worship stuff, I think, happens with any bandwagon appeal. It's just at a greater degree this time because after 8 years of a less-than-articulate President now there's a candidate who might be one of the most engaging speakers (if a bit droll) ever.
Off-topic: To what degree is Obama the candidate the Internet nominated through an "anybody but Hillary" movement?
I'm wondering about this, because the mechanisms that got the Clintons into power may not be there anymore. YearlyKos was positioned at the exact same time as the meeting of the Democratic Leadership Council - no major Democratic candidate would touch the latter. It's one thing to lose a nomination battle, but to what degree has the party changed, not so much the Clintons?