Got feedback on the new design? We're Listening! Send us Feedback

The Politics of Fear---Again »

Posted by: elzorro2162 5 months, 2 weeks ago

6.7

Scale of 1 to 10

Read: 25

Propped: 48

Comments: 27

Click Prop It to Raise Score

Prop it

Although I have supported Barack Obama in the primaries, I would not be devastated if Hillary Clinton should turn out to be the Democratic nominee. What does upset me, however, is how Clinton is employing the politics of fear and how much she emphasizes national security in order to mobilize support for her campaign.

Read Full Story at tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com

Join the Discussion

+ Add Comment

Comments So Far: 27

0%
not2needy5 months, 2 weeks ago

I have had the same attitude, for Obama, but wouldn't be upset if Hillary got the nomination.
Her dirty politics doesn't surprise me, she has taken it straight out of the republican hand book, it worked so well for them, so if it's not broken, don't fix it.
Reply
6 Replies
- 0%
  ETproductions5 months, 2 weeks ago
  
  So long as that's what America keeps voting for, that is ALL that America will ever get. It's not the politician's fault. They are simply doing what works.
  Reply
  5 Replies
  - 0%
    Radiofreeeuropa5 months, 2 weeks ago
    
    Sadly the truth. It works. It is despicable that people are this stupid. I suppose that is ultimately the pathetic truth.
    However her attacks will now divide the democrats, most of Obama's supporters who are the future of the party are being sacrificed on the alter of the old. I guess the "insiders" don't want any damn democratic vote interfering with their friends plans. Her actions of late will elect McCain.
    Reply
    4 Replies
    - 0%
      GHOSTWHOWALKS5 months, 2 weeks ago
      
      On that I'm not so sure of Radio but then I'm been wrong before. Le Muffette on steroids would be the worst thing this country ever faced. I really don't know if Shrillery is any better but who knows.
      All of this was planned long time ago and whichever hand picked boobies is chosen, we are in for a rough time.
      Reply
    - 0%
      Beau78905 months, 2 weeks ago
      
      I still have a hard time believing McCain can win, no matter how divisive the campaign for the Democratic nomination becomes. The only issue he talks about is the war, and in a way that supports a hugely unpopular policy.
      But--and this is meant as no slam to any of the candidates or their supporters, but rather just the sad truth--the largest voting bloc in the U.S. (and everywhere else) is stupid people. Who ever scores highest among stupid people wins.
      So the question becomes, who can lock up the stupid vote?
      Reply
      2 Replies
      - 0%
        ETproductions5 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        The more Hillary succeeds in convincing the electorate that only years and years of Washington experience count, the higher McCain's stock will rise. In every possible measure of experience it's McCain in a blowout. Against McCain, Obama's argument that years in Washington is a problem is a much stronger one than Hillary's, "Run me as more experienced than Obama so I can loose to an even more experienced McCain."
        On the experience argument, we can compare two successive presidents to arrive at the lie behind Hillary's foundational claim.
        James Buchanan (1857-1861) was called Mr. Government, so great was his depth of experience. Before becoming president, he had served 6 years in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, in the US Congress for 10 years, Ambassador to Russia, a US Senator and 12 years and as Secretary of State under president Polk. Yet he is widely held as one of the worst Presidents in US history, presiding over the dissolution of the union.
        Reply
        1 Reply
        
        0%
        ETproductions5 months, 2 weeks ago
        
        After Buchanan's mismanagement succeeded in wrecking the union, Americans elected one of the lest experienced men ever to hold office. His name was Abraham Lincoln. He served four terms in the Illinois state legislature as a representative. He lost in a bid to become a US Senator. His great fame wasn't his many years in Washington, but his eloquence. He knew how to us "just words".
        Many historians regard him as our greatest president. Against overwhelming odds, he restored the union. Arguably, except for his stewardship and his inspiring words, the USA as we know it would not exist today.
        Reply
0%
Radiofreeeuropa5 months, 2 weeks ago

At this time in our history the tired old filthy ways of attack and burn politics is so inappropriate. Up til the last couple days I agreed that although I preferred Obama, I would vote for her if she was the nominee. No longer, she has alienated all of those who support Senator Obama. If she gets the nomination, McCain will be the next president. She will unite republicans in numbers McCain could only dream of. By frivolously and disingenuously attacking Senator Obama, she has alienated his supporters, none of the new voters he has brought in (doubling the size of the party) will vote for her.
Only the same idiots who thought Dukakis would be a great candidate will vote for her. After this display of slimeball old style politics as usual, I will certainly not vote for her, she has simply revealed herself to be a self serving typical corporatist slimebucket. A Monster indeed.

Reply
0%
Radiofreeeuropa5 months, 2 weeks ago

A vote for Hillary is a vote for McCain.
Reply
3 Replies
- 0%
  Bacalao5 months, 2 weeks ago
  
  I am wondering who Obama will choose for his veep. 'cause heaven knows Clinton will be McCain's.
  Reply
  2 Replies
  - 0%
    mntnman4445 months, 2 weeks ago
    
    I've heard Jim Webb is on the list.
    Reply
    1 Reply
    - 0%
      MonkeyBiz5 months, 2 weeks ago
      
      That would be an excellent choice! Webb is a combat veteran who would add something to the ticket that would "out McCain" McCain.
      Reply
0%
Radiofreeeuropa5 months, 2 weeks ago

I have digressed a bit though, this is an excellent article.
Reply
1 Reply
- 0%
  GHOSTWHOWALKS5 months, 2 weeks ago
  
  Digressed? Naw. Just telling it like you believe. I hope Obama can weather the storm but few have with stood the fury of the Clinton's. It really hasn't become as nasty as it is going to be. I refuse to vote for McCain and I will not vote for Shrillery. So what's left?.
  Reply
0%
nostalgia5 months, 2 weeks ago

I'm not certain why this surprises anyone
This has been the modus operandi of the Clintons for years.
Was everyone asleep while Bill was in office for 8 years?
Reply
0%
aniokly5 months, 2 weeks ago

Any leader that looks at the fight we are waging against Islamo-terrorism, and is not afraid for their country is not adult enough to be President of the U S. Democrats do not have a clue about National Security, and their Foreign Policy plan is to double foreign aid to $50 billion dollars, and cut the Military budget. We better elect Sen McCain, or invest in a company to make Burqa's for the ladies. They are grey, and black, and nasty looking. That is enough to make me fight.
Reply
2 Replies
- 0%
  Goppy5 months, 2 weeks ago
  
  Whoa! aneeo! You some craaazie partisan!!
  Me likee!!
  I liek how you say Democrats dont have no clue bout national security.
  If we say that loud enough and long enough, poeple will forget that the World Trade towers were attacked on Goerge W. Bushs watch.
  Poeple will forget how he manipulated the 'non-specific' Terror Threat Warnings to coincide with his speeches.
  Poeple will forget how Goerge W. Bush has borrowed over $1.5 TRILLION dollors from teh Communist Chineese - a possible (and or liekly) future adversary.
  (He needed to do this on accounta he gave back all those Billions to the wealthy AND to pay for his Iraq war.
  Speakin of Iraq, this misadventure has sucked all our National Guard outta the states - so if we did get attacked - there aint no more troops here at home!!
  Speakin of misadventure - our bUsh man gave up goin after Osama bin Laden - and took down the one fella in the region that actually opposed Islamofascism'/
  Reply
  1 Reply
  - 0%
    Goppy5 months, 2 weeks ago
    
    /so when yo think about it, Goerge W. Bush has done more to endanger our nation than just about any presdient.
    I mean, after all, he IS the most incompetent presdient of all time.
    Any body coulda predicted that.
    I mean, it aint liek hes a STRATEGIST! he'S a craaazie IDEEOLOGIST!
    Reply
0%
aniokly5 months, 2 weeks ago

President Bush kept you safe for years. You just don't have sense enough to realize it. All the attacks on our embassies, and our ship that were ignored during the 90s emboldened the enemy to attack us on our own shore. Democrats are so busy apologizing for America, and all she stands for they don't have time for National Security. They will disarm us if it means the world would love us. Well, we don't need their love, besides Obama can buy their love with the $50 billion dollars a year he expects to pour down foreign rat holes in the guise of foreign aid.
Reply
7 Replies
- 0%
  rimbaud5 months, 2 weeks ago
  
  The terrorists are not rich and powerful, like us. They try to get as much mileage as they can from a few dramatic acts of terror (that's what terrorism is). If they keep you terrorized, they have done their job. The reason there has not been "another 911" is we are doing a good job, all by ourselves, of extending the "mileage" from the first one. Which of them ever imagined they would be elevated to the number-one feared enemy of the world's greatest military power? How can a handful of terrorists do so much damage to us, at so little cost to themselves? I guess thay know how to draw us in, eh? By creating a trillion dollar war against them, we have inflated their importance and amplified their effect.
  Reply
  6 Replies
  - 0%
    aniokly5 months, 2 weeks ago
    
    Bin Laden, and the terrorist leaders are rich beyond your imagination. So get over that crap. Their cells are in every country. How do you thionk they are financing their war? You are delusional if you refuse to recognize the threat.
    Reply
    4 Replies
    - 0%
      rimbaud5 months, 2 weeks ago
      
      Bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri are a couple of clowns. They should be marginalized rather than given superstar status. The are like those schoolchildren who want to blow up their schools. They have no political objective other than to lash out. Their policy of muslim on muslim killing has made them the enemy of even the Sunnis in Iraq. You can bet Allah is none too pleased with the blood on their hands. They are reverting to the pre-Mohamedan Arab behaviors.
      Reply
    - 0%
      rimbaud5 months, 2 weeks ago
      
      The arms race of the cold war wasn't a race to arms so much as it was a race to bankruptcy. Fortunately for us, it was the Soviets that won! Now it looks like WE are he ones that are winning. The USA and proxies that are being killed but our own soldiers. The enemies of those clients were not powerful enough to hit the source (us), so they resorted to terrorism against us. Now, they have a chance to fight us directly, in Iraq and Afghanistan. It is the children of the forces we armed against the Soviets in Afghanistan who are fighting us, now. The day's are gone when these countries were either the USA's bitch or the Soviet's. They want us to leave them alone.
      
      Reply
    - 0%
      rimbaud5 months, 2 weeks ago
      
      Gravel: If we continue with American imperialism, we're done as a nation. Truly are. And two things coming at us. We're going to be irrelevant in the world. You see this in foreign affairs when you see all these other countries making arrangements by themselves; don't even invite us to the meeting. Why? We come to a meeting; we think we know it all. We're the superpowerâ;;you've got to listen to us.
      http://politics.propeller.com/story/2008/01/08/...
      Reply
    - 0%
      rimbaud5 months, 2 weeks ago
      
      US companies are investing in the emerging growth markets in Asia (they cannot afford not to). They will buid AND sell there. Even the required technical and engineering skills can be had there for cheap. Only the profits will come home to Bush's "ownership sociey", those rich or smart enough to invest. Yes, those nasty corporations are us! What's good for General Motors is good for the USA! When the up and coming Chinese are driving Chevies (GMC = General Motors China) and pumping Exxon/Iran oil, all will be well for us. Jobs that must be done locally, like Agriculture and Construction, are already heavily invested in by Mexican labor. If all you have to offer is your labor, you have been devalued, unless you can invent or design products for the new growth markets.
      Reply
  - 0%
    rimbaud5 months, 2 weeks ago
    
    The oil producing countries are increasingly looking "east" (as are American companies), to the expanding economies in Asia, as their future market. We need to adjust to this changing world, instead of enforcing the old one: the days are gone when these countries were either the USA's bitch or the USSR's.
    
    Reply
0%
ChefEOD5 months, 2 weeks ago

Amazing how in this "enlightened" crowd, topics such as this do nothing other than degrade to us vs them, democrats vs republicans.
The mind set of the politician is to blame here folks. The over riding goal of any successful politician is to get and keep power, EVERYTHING else is secondary at best. And if you really want to face reality, the politician is nothing more than a reflection of the majority of the public.

Reply

Submitted By:

elzorro2162

I am Latino, I love watching and practicing sports (especially baseball), enjoy working out and living a healthy lifestyle. I also enjoy movies and acting ...

Why not submit a story?