Was the Solis Doyle hire a ‘slap in the face’?

June 17, 2008

Over the course of a few hours yesterday, Barack Obama brought Hillary Clinton’s former campaign manager onto his team, and after receiving Al Gore’s endorsement, devoted a fair amount of his speech to praising Clinton’s contributions and accomplishments.

Great news? Signs of bringing the party back together? Regrettably, not so much.

I noted yesterday that Patti Solis Doyle’s hire — she was brought in to be the chief of staff to Obama’s yet-to-be-named running mate — probably indicates that Clinton will not be on the Democratic ticket. Solis Doyle was Clinton’s campaign manager and trusted confidante for years, but internal campaign management issues led Clinton to fire her a few months ago, and the two haven’t spoken in quite some time. Given this, the Obama campaign probably wouldn’t have given her this specific position if it had any intention of bringing Clinton on as the VP candidate.

But the heated response from a few Clinton supporters seems a little over the top. OK, more than a little.

A former bundler to Hillary Clinton just called in to tell me that Barack Obama’s selection of Patti Solis Doyle as chief of staff to the campaign’s eventual vice presidential nominee is the “biggest f**k you I have ever seen in politics.” […]

The bundler said that Clinton loyalists were livid over the pick. “You don’t hire Patti Solis Doyle for her operational expertise,” said the bundler. “You don’t do that. This is someone who failed dramatically at her job. You only bring her on to f**k someone else.”

Susie Tompkins Buell, a prominent Clinton donor, said, “It’s a slap in the face.”

I can appreciate the fact that Solis Doyle is not the most popular person in Clinton circles right now, and some blame her directly for some of the campaign’s early difficulties, but this is hardly the “biggest f**k you I have ever seen in politics.”

For one thing, love him or hate him, Obama isn’t crazy. He’s been going out of his way to praise Clinton at every available opportunity. Indeed, Obama did so again last night in Detroit.

During his (lengthy) remarks tonight, Obama made his own pitch for unity — taking note of the noise the crowd had made while Granholm had been speaking [about Hillary Clinton] and then, when one audience member began booing again, singling him (or her?) out by saying “I’m talking to you up there.” Obama repeated many of the lines he’d used before, hailing Clinton for “lifting the sights of young women across America, including my daughters.” He also added one I hadn’t heard before, although I suspect it’s not new either: “And she’s tough. That’s why this race took so long. She’s a fighter. And we need fighters in the Democratic Party.”

These are not the words of a candidate who wants to deliberately slight his former rival.

For another, even the Clinton campaign is complimenting the hire and praising Solis Doyle. “Patti will be an asset and good addition to the Obama campaign,” Mo Elleithee said. “After nearly two decades in political life, she brings with her the ability to tap an extensive network that will be a huge asset to Sen. Obama. As Sen. Clinton has said, we’re all going to do our part to help elect Sen. Obama as the next president of the United States.” This doesn’t sound especially irate; Clinton’s office didn’t need to issue a statement at all.

It’s certainly possible there are personal, behind-the-scenes conflicts playing out that I’m not aware of, but yesterday’s announcement isn’t that controversial. The Obama campaign was always going to hire some of Clinton’s former aides, and Solis Doyle is a long-time friend of Obama strategist David Axelrod. What’s more, Obama had made diversity a priority, and this move brings a well-known Latino woman onto the team.

Patti Solis Doyle “devoted her adult life to working for Clinton.” For the Obama campaign to give her a reasonably important position is not a “slap in the face,” and it’s certainly not the “biggest f**k you I have ever seen in politics.” In all likelihood, the announcement makes the chances of an Obama/Clinton ticket less likely, but to characterize the hire itself as an outrageous insult seems more than a little excessive.

I guess the rule is, Obama can hire former Clinton aides, but only those who remain well-liked by Clinton supporters?

June 17, 2008 at 9:21 am

I don’t know about a slap in the face….I’d like to think of it as a kick in the pants to these menopausal malcontents threatening to take “revenge” on those who opposed their will. It’s too bad we don’t nominate our candidates by some process which measures “bitching and moaning.”

There are some in the Clinton camp who regard everything as a slap in the face. Lanny Davis could probably get insulted by the weather map.

The bundler in question was probably a friend of Mark Penn. For Burson-Marsteller to survive with some political juice, they have to keep pushing the storyline that Clinton’s loss was all Patti Solis Doyle’s fault.

I think the Clinton campaign needs to put out a manual on how-not-to-offend them and their strongest supporters. It might be long, and filled with if-then causal chains.

Someone yesterday suggested the best way for Obama to avoid slighting the Clinton camp is to drop out and hand the nomination to Hillary. Anything else is fraught with . . . well, just really fraught.

That said, the Clinton campaign’s comment was entirely reasonable, which makes me wonder if the problem isn’t solely with her “biggest fans.”

The complaint I remember about Solis-Doyle was that the campaign had money problems, and that somehow this had been kept a secret, even as they were spending money lavishly on things like a private jet for Hillary. Am I missing something here? It seems that 1) her departure did little if anything to improve that, and 2) this is precisely the kind of problem the Obama campaign would find unforgivable.

I wish you had left out the crack about menopausal. For one thing I’M menopausal so such cracks piss me off in a very personal way. Also by making a sexist crack you legitimize the Clinton meme that HRC lost because of sexism.

BTW I’m pretty tired of the victimization whining from the Clinton side,too. However by far the majority of female Clinton supporters, menopausal or otherwise, are now Obama supporters so why the hell are you being so snide?.

as some Obama supporters here are quick to remind Clintonites who take offenses to comments, the candidate’s supporters and the candidate are not the same. that applies here as well. the post above isn’t clear on the timing, but it could well be that the official Clinton campaign put out its release (as CB notes, they really had no need to) after hearing their supporters overheated comments. Clinton herself and the official campaign have made very clear statements about unity and backing Obama. as Obama supporters here often remind their detractors, a campaign can’t always control its more rabid supporters. it appears, however, that Clinton’s official campaign is trying to neutralize, negate, and distance itself from them. good on her.

of course, slap in the face or not, i’m still not convinced Solis Doyle is the best person, particularly for this job (and it is likely the specific position that is seen as the “slap,” as it send the message HRC ain’t gonna be the selected VP nominee). Someone yesterday suggested Latino Outreach Coordinator – that seems a better fit.

Seeing as the way she left the Clinton campaign made it awkward for her to return to work for Hon. Sen. Clinton, why wouldn’t this be seen as giving her a place to go to? I don’t see why it needs to be more complicated.

Beat me to it, wonkie.

The diehards are annoying because they make specious, self-serving arguments, not because they’re older women. Let’s can the cheap cracks, OK?

And there’s this quote from the link, too:

“Either one of two things happen,” said the bundler. “Hillary is selected as vice president and they fire Patti, or Hillary is not going to be the vice president.”

http://www.observer.com/2008/clinton-bundler-obamas-doyle-pick-biggest-fuck-you-ever

Somebody’s still dreaming that Hillary will be asked to be Obama’s VP and is making demands about how it will be done? Somebody’s living in a fantasy world.

Wonkie,
I like sexist cracks….if it weren’t for sexist cracks, the world’s population would still be two……and hey….just calling it like I see it.

This is more of the same by the same gracious folks that tried to hold Nancy Pelosi hostage with their threats against DNC fundraising. This is the Mark Penn wing of the Democratic Party. Frankly, I think we’re better off without them.

Look, Geraldine “I’m not a racist, why some of my best friends’ ancestors owned black people” Ferraro says that she wouldn’t consider Clinton getting the VP nod to be good enough. For the Bitter Brigade, Clinton’s campaign was never about Clinton being a strong Democrat, it was about Clinton being a woman, OR Hillary being Hillary, worshipping THAT PARTICULAR person more than believing in the causes she claimed to hold dear. Thank goodness, there really aren’t many of them who voted in the Dem primary stupid enough to march lemminglike into the voting booth to vote for McCain. Those who are, will be more than offset by the mods & Repubs who couldn’t/didn’t vote in the Dem primary, that like Obama more than McCain but (for some odd reason) like McCain more than Clinton.

For these Bitter Brigardiers, Obama could hire everyone from Clinton’s camp, even Mark Penn (ha!) and it would be the biggest slap in the face in the history of politics. Obama could ignore everyone from Clinton’s camp and it would be the biggest slap in the face in the history of politics.

Obama could throw himself to the ground, apologize to Clinton for forgettin his place, kiss her feet and beg her to take the nomination away from him, then carry her on his back to a throne he built himself out of hundred dollar bills, then show her a “BFF” collage he made of the two of them, only there are twice as many pics of Clinton & they’re all twice as big, then humbly ask to be Clinton’s chauffeur during the campaign, though Laws knows a sinner like him done don’t deserve such niceness from Pretty Mizz Hilry, and you know wht the Bitter Brigade would consider that?

“A nice start.”

tuesdaze said: “Clinton herself and the official campaign have made very clear statements about unity and backing Obama.”

That’s right, and they are doing it. I was at the WV Dem convention last weekend (yes, that WV) and the theme was broadly and specifically unity, from Senator Rockefeller to the state auditor (who, remarkably, gave a real stem winder). Governor Manchin told the crowd of nearly 2000 delegates that Hillary called him two days after Obama had clinched the lead (and before her concession speech), and asked him to tell her WV supporters that she urges them to vote for Obama, that he is a good Dem and a good man who will fight for core Dem values.

The crowd was receptive to his/her message, and there was no acting up, no boos – even among the clearly disappointed. I was more than pleasantly surprised.

The biggest f you in politics? Didn’t Dick Cheney literally say f you to a Congressman, was it? Wouldn’t that at least be in the running?

Maybe he’s moving ahead with his campaign and, I know this will sound strange, Hillary Clinton is not the center of his universe. Maybe he’s make decisions based on his own needs and those of Hillary Clinton don’t factor in. Maybe what Hillary Clinton and her little band of malcontents want is really not what the Obama camp wants, needs or should be concerned about at this time. she ran, she lost. End of story. She’s not the story anymore.

I’m a big Obama fan but wonder why a Chief of Staff would be selected for an as-yet unnamed vice-presidential nominee. Shouldn’t that person be able to make his or her own choice. A Chief of Staff is not a civil service position after all and a lot depends on personal chemistry, etc. What am I missing here?

“Menopausal” was definitely off-base, and not just because it misogynist. This spat sounds more like a clique of seventh-graders who have decided to ostracize one of their former best friends.

I guess the rule is, Obama can hire former Clinton aides, but only those who remain well-liked by Clinton supporters?

No, then he would be poaching, taking advantage of Clinton’s hard work and network, stampeding over the friendships of a more qualified woman and generally slapping face.

There isn’t anything Obama could do that will please the Susie Tompkins Buells of the world. Fortunately, only a very few of Clinton’s supporters are like this.

This is about people who thought they were made men and made women. Now they are just knee-cappers for a new boss. It is that simple: power. They saw a chance to be players and they are bitter that their own futures have been dramatically altered by people from OUTSIDE the normal operative power universe. These are all people that played by the “rules” in DC for years, working on campaigns, appearing on tv, schmoozing at fundraisers. And for what? to sit at the kiddie table while the upstarts Obama and Dean run the Party. Remember, the whole party apparatus is changing via Dean so they do not have that to fall back on anymore.

eric

A former bundler to Hillary Clinton just called in to tell me that Barack Obama’s selection of Patti Solis Doyle as chief of staff to the campaign’s eventual vice presidential nominee is the “biggest f**k you I have ever seen in politics.” […]

The bundler said that Clinton loyalists were livid over the pick. “You don’t hire Patti Solis Doyle for her operational expertise,” said the bundler. “You don’t do that. This is someone who failed dramatically at her job. You only bring her on to f**k someone else.”

New definition of sexism: All and any criticisms directed at Hillary Clinton. All other attacks against women are just fair assessments open to debate.

You only bring her on to f**k someone else Susie Tompkins Buell, a prominent Clinton donor, said, “It’s a slap in the face.”

Come on, this is really just crazy talk from the dellusional. The Hillaryland Wingnuts are having a hard time dealing with the fact that the last dog has already died in this fight.

Well maybe Suzie really feels this way, she should make a list of things that constitute a “slap in the face” for the rest of us reality based folks. When Suzie is done, we’ll all know just what constitutes a “slap in the face” or a “F**k you”

I’ve taken all of these complaints from Clinton supporters with a grain of salt, to say the least. But this one is kind of bigger. There is just no reason to hire the woman for this particular job (surely she’s qualified for others) but to send a signal about who will not be chosen to work with her. It sure comes off like a slap to me.

The “incompetence” thing is remarkably overblown, in any case. She didn’t scuttle the Clinton campaign singlehandedly, and even if she had, many men in the same position have been given more chances.

1) I’m not convinced the sexist comments are helping anything. In fact, I would suspect that they are being made by Republican trolls. Try to ignore them.

2) Every article keeps mentioning that HRC and Doyle haven’t spoken for a long time. Well, duh, Doyle was fired and HRC was just a little busy.

3) I have no particular evidence, but just from observing behaviors, Mark Penn and Terry McAuliffe did *far* more to damage HRC’s campaign than Doyle ever could have. I smell scapegoat.

my guess is that eric # 20 is pretty darned close: the real “f*ck you” isn’t to Hillary. the slap is that someone who was seen as not good enough to cut it in Camp Clinton was given a nice job by Obama while the “clearly superior” Susie Buell’s and Mark Penn’s of the world not only have not been effusively courted (much less actually hired) by Obama, but in fact they are still frantically and unsuccessfully looking for any way to remain politically relevant at all.

wvng (14) Glad to hear you went to the WV convention. A friend of mine did as well (die-hard Hillary supporter). One of the things that impressed her was the anouncement that 2000 delegates were the most ever to come to one of these conventions. What does that mean? That in previous years people just didn’t show up? I realize it is more of a party building thing, but since these people actually get elected and have alternates, I would think they would at least get full attendance.

Subroutine–as one married to a lovely woman going through menopause, I would suggest that a simple “Sorry about that” would do nicely. But hey, this is the Intertubes, where no one can stop you from being a jerk if that’s how you want to come across.

Meanwhile, for the adults of whatever age: I’m pretty confused by this too. The very fact that it’s so hard to parse tends to reinforce the “who is he, really?” meme, which is the opposite of the direction he should be moving in at this stage. I appreciate the attempt to make sense of it here, but the post basically amounts to “I dunno either.”

slappy@13,

That was a thing of beauty. 😀

I’m a big Obama fan but wonder why a Chief of Staff would be selected for an as-yet unnamed vice-presidential nominee. Shouldn’t that person be able to make his or her own choice.

Solis Doyle is Chief of Staff for the election season, where message discipline is extremely important. I’m guessing her primary job will be to keep the VP candidate in line with the campaign and keep him or her from getting off-message like Bill Clinton did repeatedly during the primaries. Letting the VP pick the assistant would defeat that purpose. This also makes it very clear that Obama is in charge even if the VP turns out to be someone like Biden with vastly more political experience.

A conflict between what Obama says and what he does? What a surprise! Who else said he was going to be a uniter and then was a divider?

I remember Obama giving the finger in a childish speech that appealed most strongly to the 12 year olds in the audience (and his fans here). Here is another example of his adolescent pique.

“In all likelihood, the announcement makes the chances of an Obama/Clinton ticket less likely…”

I disagree. I think it was never very likely. This just outwardly makes that fact more clear.

Who else said he was going to be a uniter and then was a divider?

Hm, I’m guessing George W Bush. That is to say, the leader of the party you’re apparently supporting, since you despise the guy heading up the Democratic ticket. But speaking of confusing things: what side DO you think you’re on, exactly?

…the heated response from a few Clinton supporters seems a little over the top…

RUN FOR THE HILLS! I’m shocked, shocked, I tells ya!

Honestly, I can’t believe anyone really thought Hillary was being considered for Vice President in the first place, so maybe this news was a slap in the face…you know, the kind of slap you give someone to bring them back to reality.

In the movies, they always say, “Thanks, I needed that.”

I’m a big Obama fan but wonder why a Chief of Staff would be selected for an as-yet unnamed vice-presidential nominee. Shouldn’t that person be able to make his or her own choice. -InSanity

The VP will most likely have their own chief of staff. The title is just confusing. Think of this position as more of a coordinator between the VP’s staff and the President’s staff. Her job will be to make sure all are on message, participating in the same campaign.

I think you would understand the reaction better if you reversed the names. I could see a lot of outrage here if that were the case.

I think you would understand the reaction better if you reversed the names. -Partial

I doubt any of us would care if her name was Doyle Solis.

If there’s anything that’s been “unfair” for Hillary it’s been the pathetic antics of her husband and now the equally pathetic histrionics of her supporters. I expect less-than-presidential behavior from Bill, but I’m really shocked and embarrassed by the excesses in language and tone of Hillary’s loyalists. These women, by their sheer number, are more terrifying to me than such loonies as the Revs. Wright and Pfleger. Their emotional outbursts, full of hyperbole, play to the worst female stereotype; added to that is their abysmal lack of team spirit (another stereotype). Although I actually like and respect Hillary, I worried about the baggage she would bring to the White House — little realizing it would be less about Bill and more about the many old bags who claim her as their one & only. And, by the way, I am a middle-aged, well educated, white woman — and one who is a feminist to her bones! Those women aren’t feminists: they are loud-mouthed bullies who are throwing a temper tantrum. I am appalled. They should get out of politics and back onto the set of the Jerry Springer Show.

My vote for the biggest F-you in politics:

The five fateful votes of Bush v. Gore, which was pretty major F-you to the Floridian and American electorates.

Also should count:

The mid-decade redistricting of Texas
Saxby Chambliss’s campaign against Max Cleland
Gray Davis’s recall
The response to Hurricane Katrina, whose purpose was to wreck Gov. Blanco’s career
Gov. Siegelman’s prison sentence
The middle-of-term firing of U.S. Attorneys
The current adminstration’s Signing Statement policy

And finally (I hope), what Americans are going to tell Republicans in November 2008

What if the hiring is a way to recycle talent that is already appreciated by the Obama campaign AND or AS WELL AS a way to remind the Clintons that should they abuse and exclude people while speechifying around about their political goodheartedness, there may be exposure. Seeing as Obama does not need to share the ticket with Clinton, and since he’s said the VP will be his final adviser on decisions, there’s no good reason to imagine he would choose his former rival as a running mate. It would be political suicide to have the Clintons running around managing the world and their public images from the VP position. That’s just counterproductive. I’d say there’s no slap in the face for Clinton in the Solis Doyle hiring but there is some education. Something like, this is no way to treat a friend or waste talent. Poor judgment. Poor ethics. Poor candor.

Thanks for a massively entertaining post & thread. We had a lot of these people through here last year, including Ann Lewis, Madelyn Albright and the “Big Shoulders” donors, and they’re as obnoxious in person as in print. eric #20 (a different eric, but the name is known for astute, penetrating observations) seems to have pretty much gotten it. These are the people who’ve been in charge of running the Party into the ground for years and, like a small child at someone else’s birthday party, they can’t stand not being the center of attention. They couldn’t have lost on merit, so it must be a sexist conspiracy! I’m afraid they’re going to be around for a long time. I can see them standing at the edges of the Inaugural, sniping.

How could Obama have avoided offending them? Maybe by hiring Lannie Davis. Woops, too late, Fox’s got him. As the much lamented Golden Voice of the Great Southwest used to say, “Tells you something.”

#35\

Very witty????? Avoids the point though. If Clinton had chosen a similar appointee from Obama’s campaign ( to spell it out for some), the reaction here from Obama’s supporters would have been similar–particularly from those who take their support personally as many here do.

This is nuts. When I first heard about it, I thought hiring one of Clinton’s close friends to the campaign was a sign of unity. Then people started saying it was the equivalent of flipping the bird. I don’t get it. They’ve been friends for years. How far under the bus is it possible to throw Patti? What did she do that was so wrong that she needs to be vilified?

And where is Clinton herself in all this? She should probably come out and say what she thinks about it.

Look….you may think that Hillary was a better candidate, you may think she is a better senator, you may think she is a better speaker, you may think she is a better campaigner, but you cannot think that she had the better organization. So, why on god’s earth would anyone from camp hillary think that one of their folks “ought” to be hired by Obama? As for this hire, she was booted from the campaign, which strikes me as an outsider as establishing her bona fides for thinking right about campaigning. In all seriousness, when you lose, you do not get to make decisions anymore and your feelings do not matter. The only people that matter are the voters in the general and this hire will not adversely affect them one bit. At worst it is a neutral selection given the placement, at best it is another Latina face out there officially speaking for the Obama camapign. Can we all not see the politics of that hire? For the same reason, I would not be surprised to see Snoopy named as an adviser if dogs were allowed to vote in swing states. This is such effing transparent politics, that it proves the point that the angered Clinton supporters ought not be allowed anywhere near a campaign or microphone.

If Clinton had chosen a similar appointee from Obama’s campaign… -Impartial

Oh, we all knew what you meant, but it’s a ridiculous assumption, which is why it’s more worthy of ridicule than honest thought.

No. I think not a soul here would care if Clinton were the nominee and hired someone that Obama had fired, and frankly, it is entirely pointless to speculate otherwise.

The facts are that Obama is the nominee. Clinton fired Solis Doyle in February. Obama hired her in June.

Some people are just looking for things to be angry about.

#38, good rundown on the worst F-yous of recent history, too. I would add Reagan’s Morning In America, Bush 1’s Willie Horton and Gingrich’s Contract With America, all of which f-ed the country so thoroughly we’re still recovering.

The Cheney f-bomb, by the way, was thrown not at a congressman but Senator Patrick Leahy, on the floor of the Senate, no less.

My favorite f-bomb is more local, though: Iowa Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstall, a Democrat yet, letting go a massive one to a bunch of lobbyists on behalf of VOICE, the publicly funded election plan. He didn’t realize that he was standing under the dome of the Capitol Rotunda, which has a tendency to magnify sound, or that a group of touring schoolchildren had just entered the room. The noise is still echoing around Iowa.

How do we unite this party with the kind of vernom and hatred being spewed on this website? The barbaric militancy and ignorance being expressed here is brutal, vicious, divisive, vengeful and deviod of any commonsense. This election has been very emotional and smart people ought to see that feelings has been hurt and egos bruised. If we really want to win do we have to be this stupid in our denigration of the Clintons? I wish these Clinton haters can put our nation first and out their hate aside, then begin the reconciliation process. For 8 years, the Clintons have done more good than any president since the founding of this great nation. So why do we forget so soon?

Let’s not forget, McCain is an angel when compared to Bush/Cheney. Again, let’s not forget that red states voted for Bush twice in a row despite knowing that the man was and is still a failure. Americans do not vote their conscience nor interest, they vote with their emotions such as fear, anger, who can drink beer with them etc. They do not vote for the most intelligent or the most qualified, if that were not the case, McGovern, Dukakkis, AL Gore and Kerry could have been presidents.

Insulting the Clintons will make it harder for Obama to win in the fall. Even David Gegern an avid Obama supporter said on CNN yesterday that “hiring Patty was a dumb decision”. So why are people rubbing Hillary’s nose to her defeat. Obama has won the primary, but hiring an anti-Hillary makes winning the general election harder. It was Patty’s strategy that led to Hillary’s super Tuesday loss, so what is the purpose of hiring her after being fired by the Clintons? I thought that we are smarter than this. Moreover, why hire a chief of staff for a VP that is not found yet? I thought VPs chooses their own compatible staff? This is so dumb and detrimental to every fairytale we all want to beleive about Obama’s brilliant team.

I hope people are not cutting their nose to spike their face here. Yesterday David Plouffe showcased his 270 electoral vote strategy and dismissed FL and OH as though there were provinces in Gaza and West Bank. I am amazed how a smart organization like Obama’s is aiming to a mere 270 tight razor thin victory instead of a landslide strategy. Let us not forget that Al Gore could have been the president today if he had employed the Clintons extensively in Fl in 2000, but his ego did not allow him. Obama is about to make the same dumb mistake.

The Clintons are the only Dem to ever won two consecutive presidential terms in US history since the second world war…that is since FDR (1940s). He is the only president that has done more for the blacks, the poor and the minorities in this nation more than any president since Lincoln’s emancipation proclaimation. Insulting them shows how infantile, shallow, naive and vengeful the Obama and his supporters are. So where is the so called “new kind of politics” we were hypnotized to beleive in? if Obama cannot put his ego aside and elevate his follow dem, how on eart will he have the political capital to bring in the divided and polarized nation? This is very misguided and baffling to say the least.

I hope and pray they change and honestly unite the party so that we can win back the whitehouse in November. Giving Hillary lip service (prasing her with empty words) while Obama’s actions are diametrically opposed to unity, reconcilliation, is deceiteful, hypocritical and counter productive which guarantees his lost come November. If Hillary has any negative, who else does not? Moreover, a lot of these negatives were frivolously accusations from the right wing haters and should not scare a bleeding libral like Obama.

In conclusion, if Obama want to win, he ought to include Hillary into the dream ticket and send himself, his wife, Bill and Hillary to counselling. Instead of shooting himself on the foot.

I think SaintZak got it right. Obama is making a place for Solis Doyle that helps his campaign move forward. Obama may or may not have an ulterior motive in placing her in that position, we just don’t know. Some think it’s a f-you and some think it’s to pave the way for a Clinton veep pick. It’s his decision and his campaign. She clearly has some political talent and some valuable connections, even if her record at the campaign director level is mixed (my opinion-she made mistakes and was also made a scapegoat).

The faux outrage from some Clinton loyalists should be taken with a shaker of salt. After all, every position that gets filled is one less position available. That means fewer connections and opportunities for them, both in the campaign and in the new administration. My advice for the former Clinton crew is to jump onboard before the Obama train leaves the station without them. He will soon be the president.

You want to know why Hillary should not be on a “dream ticket” because she made Republican arguments against Obama and lauded McCain’s competency. So a hearty eff you to being on the ticket. You wanna say that Obama does not live up to DEMOCRATIC ideals by being to far right or unfair to key constituencies. Fine. But you want to make arguments that McCain can make in the general? Eff you and the horse you rode in on.

I know i should be civil, but for eff’s sake. Mark effing Penn. do you not know who and what he is and how he is just about the least democratic of democratic consultants? This guy led her down the wrong path because they were so sure they would win, all the while not making a Plan B for when she did not win.

Lets not forget the horses head in Pelosi’s bed. This people made their bed and hillary lay there in it with them.

By contrast, look at the Edwards campaign. No bridges burnt there.

She is owed nothing. You wanna place at the table you need to play that way from the beginning and she did not and this is the price she pays.

This is just another example of Mr. Teenage Werewolf’s high-schoolish behavior, which no man can see nor woman fail to notice. When he flipped Senator Clinton off in that speech, women everywhere were outraged, not least by everyone telling us we were imagining it. (Gaslight, anyone? Women have always been subjected to men telling us we’re being hysterical for pointing out what’s right in front of our faces.)

I’ll never forget when Senator Snide compared Senator Clinton to a case of dandruff by brushing his shoulders, a blatantly misogynist and disrespectful move even by his low African American standards. And the time he tried to pull back her chair for her after a debate was a stunning combination of “Look, everyone, my opponent’s a woman” sexism and an obvious attempt to throw her off her physical balance so her ass would hit the floor. Fortunately, she was on to him and managed to keep her footing even as he was openly shoving her downward. Why she didn’t call for studio security I’ll never know.

Issue resolved. I put on my tin foil hat and channeled Patti. She says she has a photo of Obama and Osama Bin Forgotten embracing and is using it for personal gain.

Impartial @ 40, moot point. Clinton didn’t win the nomination, Obama did. For Clinton to have won the nomination, she probably would’ve had to run a drastically different campaign than the one she ran, and had she run a drastically different campaign (read: less bitter, less divisive, more about her qualifications and less about Obama’s supposed lack of qualifications, no racist B.S.) then MAYBE, aside from the few diehard supporters as blindly loyal as te Clinton Bitter Brigade is, you wouldn’t have so much anger.

Diane @ 28, thank you kindly.

And Black-Hole Mary @ 30, thank YOU, for being one constant in an ever-changing universe. One silly, ignorant, self-caricature of a constant.

And where is Clinton herself in all this? She should probably come out and say what she thinks about it.

Read Steve’s whole post–it includes Clinton’s spokesperson’s statement, which is perfectly rational, gracious and wholly lacking in the paranoia coming from Mary, Impartial, et. al.

Does ANYONE have the word out from the Obama Team on this issue? I mean why did Obama do this? Why create waves with all the discussion of the need for unity? Was it nasty political payback?

It doesn’t look good of Obama to do this since it seems that Obama IS showing some sightly vindictive sorts of behavior of late. So what is his official stance. I think it is important that he answer to these questions.

We all noticed that he took Lieberman aside by the hand to speak to him, so does Obama have a really nasty mean streak that we’re not aware of until now?

What say he? Is Josh or someone going to ask Obama WTF?

Lest there be any confusion, I am not an Obama supporter. For me he was the lesser of two relative “evils.” Too centrist and legislatively empty. That said, had Hillary won, I would have voted for her five times in the general if allowed. (Since Iive in Chicago, it was a real possibility)

#52…what drug are you on? Pulling Lieberman aside is not evidence of a nasty streak, even had Obama lodged the Senate’s gavel in Lieberman’s brow. I think I speak for most, if not, all of us, when I say, good effing riddance this November. There is no more insufferable, arrogant clown than that a$$hat.

We all noticed that he took Lieberman aside by the hand to speak to him, so does Obama have a really nasty mean streak that we’re not aware of until now?

Good god. You think “taking Lieberman aside by the hand” shows a “really nasty mean streak”? The rest of us Democratic voters–you are a Democrat, right?–think it shows a long-overdue willingness to address a constant burr under the Democrats’ saddle who persists in behaving like an out-of-control child with emotional problems. Thank god somebody in the party finally had the gumption to deal with him.

It has now been two weeks since The Speech(I) — the one which implied her campaign was continuing, the one introduced by McAuliffe with “The Next President.” It has been 10 days since The Speech (II).

Like most people I was willing to ignore the (figurative) guns being aimed at Clinton by her biggest Congressional supporters (such as Rangel), and haven’t pointed out that, in her position she had no choice but to make this speech.

But it has been 10 days. I am glad to see she sent a message to the WV convention supporting Obama though I wonder what else she was doing that day which kept her from attending it in person.

But I am still waiting for the following, or even one of them: (And I may just have missed these if they actually happened, so correct me, please)

A speech actually attacking McCain’s policies, with specifics.

An apology for her ‘Sen McCain and I bring decades of experience to the table. Sen. Obama brings a speech he made in 2002″ remark.

A demand to the Republican party that they cease using this remark.

A positive, public statement disavowing her authentically crazy blog supporters — I’m not talking about commenters — nobody can control them — but the Larry Johnson, Hillaryis44 blogs — stating they do not speak for her and demanding they stop attacking Obama and spreading vicious slanders (like the mythical ‘Whitey’ tape) about Obama, and demanding that they stop using her name in their blogs.

And a statement disavowing her seeking the VP post. It doesn’t have to be a Strickland total disavowal, but something like Edwards’ comments that while she would not turn down a request from Obama to serve in any capacity he asked, she was happy in her Senate post and was not actively seeking the VP. (It would be a ‘cherry on top’ were she to deny the rumors that she would see another women being chosen as a personal affront.)

No, I am not seeing these lacks as evidence of a ‘sinister plot.’ I simply they represent the least a sense of decency and honor require.

err ‘simply think’

Me-again @ 52, you seem to be negating the possibility that some people might feel that Solis Doyle was fired unjustly, that other people were more to blame for Clinton’s downfall (the fact that the campaign continued to lose momentum – not to mention money, hand over fist – after she was fired lends this SOME credence) but Doyle was the one who got the boot. Of course, since Doyle wasn’t the one running for Pres, that story isn’t nearly as juicy, but this could be Obama’s way of righting a lower-profile wrong, and starting the unity process with people who got burned by the Clinton campaign, rather than the Clinton campaign itself. q

Did Patty Solis sabortaged Hillary’s super tuesday strategy so that she can go and work for Obama? News started filtering that she has been talking to Obama to join his team since March. This is way too disgruntled and back stabbing of the worst kind. Where is the unity and reconcilliation promised by Obama? Why is Obama doing a lip-service to Hillary by praising her publicly while his actions behind the scene are counterproductive, dumb and divisive? Who is fooling who?

SaintZak & Eric and a host of others who apparently can not read. Someone NOT speaking for the Clinton camp had something snarky to say. Some who IS speaking for the Clinton camp (so most likely with HRC approval) said basically, “Great choice!” From the comments here, one would think that HRC herself called a news conference and proceeded to throw herself on the floor in a tantrum. It is not right or fair to hold Clinton responsible for her more outrageous supporters just as it is not fair to hold Obama responsible for his more outrageous supporters. And there are plenty of them. Let’s practice a little common decency – and reading comprehension.

Look. She said she would support him. She is. Loudly and proudly at every single given opportunity. What more do you want from her?

I am a Hillary supporter who is trying to warm up to Obama. This decision doesn’t help his cause at all. It just reaffirms that he’s not the best candidate and that the Democratic party is in trouble.

Does ANYONE have the word out from the Obama Team on this issue? I mean why did Obama do this? -Me-again

Perhaps (and stick with me because this is a far-out-there concept) he felt she was qualified and would do a good job in that position?

I know! It’s all outside-the-box and crazy, but you know what? It just might work.

Let’s get real. Obama has developed an organization the likes of which Democrats haven’t seen for decades. Calm down and let him make his own hiring decisions because he seems to know what he’s doing.

Slappy Maggoo, wow for you. Revisionists should be court martialed. FYI: Patty was fired for her role in the losses on super tuesday. Mark Penn was demoted and Maggie Williams was promoted. Since after these shuffles, Hillary campaign started winning again including in TX, OH, PA, KY, WV, SD, RI, PR to mention but a few. There is no congnitive logic or decent reasoning to justify hiring a disgruntled and fired employee of your rival other than to rub it in or rub her nose to the defeat. Like David Gergen said “this is a dumb idea” I concur and add that it is indefensible and betrays Obama’s deceit, naivette, hypocrisy and hatred of the Clintons. Perhaps this is indeed a taste of what to come in Obama’s decision making style.

I am not responding to Hillary or her spokesperson, but to the people here.

I do not expect Hillary herself to cheerlead for Obama. I am a do no harm guy when it comes to the primary losers. If she wants to cheerlead, that is great.

I think no less of her for not doing anything, though i would think more of her if she actively campaignes for Obama. Likewise for Edwards.

These people were fighting for arguably the most powerful office in the world, of course there are hard feelings after an unbelievably hard fought campaign.

I usually like to make my decisions based on which candidate most closely shares my world view, and who I think is best positioned to lead.

I am dumbfounded by anyone who would make a prime consideration which former staffer of a rival campaign gets hired. (Sure, it’s legitimate to *consider*, as it speaks to both the world view and the leadership quality, but it’s not exactly a cabinet post. How many of you can name a single chief-of-staff to a previous VP for the campaign?) I think some of you need to get out of your bunkers and get a little fresh air.

Or maybe you’re just grasping at any reason to dis Obama, no matter how petty?

Obama and his supporters are playing hardball with this Patty Solis as the pun in the middle. Patty is being used by both Obama and Patty herself to spite the Clintons and this is not unity nor new the kind of politics campaigned for by Obama. Lets get real, the abrassive and ruthless Chicago kind of politics is far dirty that the mainstream. What do we expect from Obama and Axelrod now that they have moved DNC to their Chicago living room. More hardball, brute force, vindictive, vicious and brass-knuckle gangsterism, of course.

um, Prup, you don’t think she is entitled to a little rest? a little decompression time? a family vacation?

there is plenty of time for campaigning, but that is probably a word that at this particular moment she wouldn’t mind never hearing again.

i think it is a wildly unrealistic, and far too easy to say from the cheap seats, to demand that she prove herself right this minute!

see a lot of Richardson, Edwards, Dodd, or Kucinich our on the trail, appearing at state conventions, etc?

(by the way, HRC has e-mailed her database twice supporting Obama, and allegedly placed calls to all of her superdelegates and state delegate slate coordinators making sure they were all on board with Obama. and she continues to issue statements to put out fires like this one. can she never please you in any reasonable way?)

The self-involved, self-entitled Clinton Crazies, who thought they were going to be ambassadors and big-time wheeler-dealers in the third Clinton Administration, are nothing more than the corporate whores and ruling class rubes we need to send over to the Republicans, where they can be the Rockefeller Republicans they are.

Geez, I see an awful lot of projection among those who say that Obama hired Patti to dis Clinton. That’s just putting on Obama what YOU wishfully think, not Obama’s motives at all.

Besides, Democratic campaign workers often move on to other campaigns as the field narrows, keeping their employment in the party. If you’re going to assume anything, you might as well assume they want to contribute to a Democratic win.

Hey “former bundler to Hillary Clinton”

F**k You.

I think some commmenters are just back to plain old Hillary hatin’ again, because she isn’t saying any of these negative things.

I think too much is being made of this all around. As the new nominee, Obama needs to increase his staff quickly, with reliable people, to cover all the new tasks at hand and upcomong. His own people probably already have their hands full, so it makes sense to get some new people for the new tasks, like coordinating with whatever VP candidate is selected. That is not necessarily a job you want to leave to one of the VP’s own people, however, as what you need is an organizer who can also be a diplomatic enforcer, rather than a protector.

Patty Solis Doyle started working for Hillary during the 1992 presidential campaign and eventually became campaign manager for Clinton’s 2000 and 2006 Senate campaigns. When she appointed Doyle as her Presidential campaign manager, Hillary said “I have complete confidence and trust in her as a person and as a professional. She was the natural choice for me when it came to picking someone to run this campaign”. So apparently Doyle has some respectable skills but was out of her depth or in some other way not up to snuff in the presidential campaign. The position Obama hired her for requires some skill and reliability, but it is not a top-dog-type job. Her job will be to pick up the phone, listen to one of Obama’s people say, “we’d like #2 to go to Iowa and Kansas and give a couple of speeches favoring ethanol subsidies in Iowa and then join us for the Teamster’s dinner in Philadelphia on Friday”, and then make that happen. She’s probably extremely good at that. She’s also going to be very thankful to have any sort of job after getting dumped and scapegoated by Hillary, so I suspect she will work hard and be very loyal to Obama.

59. PattySolis=Dumb Idea said: Did Patty Solis sabortaged Hillary’s super tuesday strategy so that she can go and work for Obama? News started filtering that she has been talking to Obama to join his team since March.

Did you fuck a horse yesterday? I have no actual evidence whatsoever, but it seems like something you might do so I thought I would throw it out there for discussion.

BTW, March would be after Solis Doyle was fired. Hillary’s campaign kept sabotaging itself for more than a month without Solis Doyle so it seems more likely that Penn was the real problem.

PattySolis-Dumb Idea: Wow. Good for you. People who believe the official word out of the Clinton camp should be sterilized (sarcasm! It’s not just for breakfast anymore!) Yeah, Patty was a good person to get rid of, and the fact that Clinton’s decline ended the moment Patty was dumped, and Clinton’s star continued to rise and rise until we now see her as our Democratic President for the President of the United States, is proof of that…

Oh, wait…you mean that DIDN’T happen?

And Mark Penn bragged to friends about how he WASN’T demoted? And he kept being a very public face of the Clinton Campaign up to and including an appearance on the Daily Show at the end of the primary, continuing to cheerlead Clinton’s failed bid?

Why, that would mean you talking points are (gasp!) wrong!

It’s OK….shhshhshhh…no woman, no cry…every little thing…gonna be all right…just remember…Obama won because he ran an awesome campaign, Clinton failed because she made tons of wrong calls, and if Patty was an awful employee to have around, Obama wouldn’t have hired her, leading me to believe Hillary letting her go might be one of those aforementioned “wrong calls.

OK, go to bed now…poor thing…bad day, I know…I know…

Steve Benen: But the heated response from a few Clinton supporters seems a little over the top. OK, more than a little.

Not when you consider the responses in terms of a cult of personality.

Aggressively perceiving slights of their “Dear Leader” is one sign…
Carping in unison is another…
Ignoring contrary but sane explanations… yet another.

Keep in mind: One can’t argue successfully with a cultist.
They are rock solid in their beliefs.
Which means: Clinton dead-enders need to be deprogrammed.
Good luck with that! Scorning them may help a little…
But I suspect, you’d have better luck trying to make a Jehovah’s Witness agnostic.

#13 Slappy: right on

#36 Maureen: Agree with you EXCEPT Wright and Pfleger are not “loonies”. They are passionate about people and their faith and sometimes get carried away. As men of the cloth, they are far from perfect, but have served their communities and their Lord well. They are sorry for what they’ve done. Give them a break.

#71 N Wells: Gosh, you really should stop making so much sense. :-p

63. On June 17th, 2008 at 11:54 am, PattySolis=Dumb Idea said:
Slappy Maggoo, wow for you. Revisionists should be court martialed. FYI: Patty was fired for her role in the losses on super tuesday. Mark Penn was demoted and Maggie Williams was promoted. Since after these shuffles, Hillary campaign started winning again including in TX, OH, PA, KY, WV, SD, RI, PR to mention but a few.
_____________________________

Ok, now I KNOW I tread on water lightly, because YOU say revisionists should be court-martialed. But why would you say:
“Since after these shuffles, Hillary campaign started winning again including in TX, OH, PA, KY, WV, SD, RI, PR ***to mention but a few***.”

…when those are pretty much ALL the primaries Clinton won after Super Tuesday? The only one you seem to have missed was Indiana.

Now…USUALLY, when someone says “to mention but a few” it means there’s a whole assload of a list, too numerous to mention. In your case? Not so much.

Now is this lying? Intentionally misleading? REVISIONIST history? Is it worthy of a court-martial? Will we be in Stupid Prison together? I get top bunk!

Sap.

tuesdaze @67:
Several quick points. The writing of two public statements — condemning the Republican’s use of her statements and disassociating herself from the nutjobs like Hillaryis44 and Larry Johnson would take 30 minutes, at most.

The letter supporting Obama is nice, but does it specifically attack McCain?

The others you mention didn’t make a statement comparing McCain favorably to Obama — and THAT is what she has to correct.

That is all she has to do to ‘please’ me.

I don’t see this would take away from her ‘resting period.’

Shorter Tom Cleaver to Hillary supporters:

“The biggest F U in political history to you all!!”

Let’s hope his guy wins or he may really haul out the harsh language to use on the fellow Democrats he doesn’t approve of so much.

colonpowwow:
We all love Tom — most of the time — but don’t worry, when Obama wins, he’ll find something to curse him about before March.

We all love Tom — most of the time

Do you have any measurable evidence on that?

Clearly this has degenerated, with a couple of postings (45 and subs, and 48) straight out in wacky Republitroll territory. Fingers? Dandruff? “How dare they tell us we’re imagining what we can plainly see!” And if only you can see it, it’s called… what?

Let me just say there wouldn’t have been these hard feelings, and the campaign could have been conducted on issues alone, if Clinton had only bowed out in late February or early March, when it became clear she stood no chance of winning, instead of hanging on by teeth and toenails for three months. Like a majority of Democrats, I wasn’t an Obama supporter originally, but the party coalesced fairly quickly behind him as an intelligent, electable candidate, with the exception of this one faction. Long after it makes sense, some are still trying to play spoiler, duped and abetted by the Republicans. How much respect does that deserve? If you honor Clinton, follow her now.

I agree this is a stupid story, but why do some of you keep feeling the need to bash Hillary and her supporters? I hate to state the obvious, but we’re going to need to get their votes to win in November.

HiIlary fired Patti last February and that makes her free to work anywhere she wants. And you know what? Obama has the right to hire anybody he wants to be on his staff, and it has nothing to do with Hillary or any of her friends.

I can now see that it would be a mess if Hillary were the VP. Her crowd thinks they own people. They acted the same way when they called Richardson a Judas.

*psst. . . ericfree. . . #48, Mary Mother of Odd is a very clever parody. just wanted you to be in on the joke.*

Ericfree,
Don’t give me that Republican troll nonsense. I voted for John Kennedy as well Robert Kennedy in the primary. I was one of the eight people in American that voted for George McGovern and I’ll vote a straight Democratic ticket in November (as I would have whether Obama or Clinton emerged the nominee).

But to suggest that I have to kowtow Clinton supporters because their feelings are hurt, or they need time to emote, or they just need more time to cry, is simply bullshit. Did Democrats need months to come to terms with their emotions when Edwards lost, or Biden, or the rest of the field? Did Edwards or Biden supporters go the boards screaming unfair treatment and they would revenge vote for the Republican candidate?

I’ve read posts on TalkLeft where those morons want to know what Obama is going to give them for their vote! What the hell do these crazy women want, a new steam iron, an upright vacuum, a box of bon bons? They’re upset that they don’t know where Obama stands on the issues but they won’t go to his website to read. I can only guess that each one wants Obama to come to their house where they’ll serve corn twists while Obama explains each position he has taken in detail replete with a 36 hour question and answer period.

Do I want a Democratic president….Yes. But if I have to drag these emotion-riddled, self-hating, vengeful, selfish, extortionists along to get there…….it’s not worth it….we can do it without them.

But OK, I’ll back off. How about if every Clinton supporter who votes for Obama this fall gets a set of Ginsu Knives? Anything to shut ‘em the hell up.

But to suggest that I have to kowtow Clinton supporters because their feelings are hurt, or they need time to emote, or they just need more time to cry, is simply bullshit

ericfree didn’t call you a Republican troll. Try to keep up, Subroutine.

And no one has remotely suggested you need to “kowtow” to anyone, so quit trying to move the goalposts to cover your ass. You could have saved yourself five paragraphs of nonsensical strawmanning by simply being a grownup and acknowledging that the “menopausal” crack was out of line, but instead you compound that shit with the iron/vacuum/bon bon remark.

As others have pointed out, the pissers and moaners are a pain in the ass because their arguments are specious, self-serving and reality-denying, not because they’re older women. If you’re unclear on the concept of criticizing the behavior rather than the gender, there are remedial tutorials that can help you.

You didn’t like the steam iron, upright vacuum, bon bon offering……damn, you’re tough. Sorry….I’m out of chocolate and nylons.

Hillary Clinton is one vote — her own. She doesn’t tell her supporters who to vote for. She makes her endorsement and then they make up their minds. If Obama wants to thumb his nose at Hillary, that’s between them, but he should be worrying about the many bystanders who are watching that exchange. It doesn’t matter what his intentions were if a whole bunch of people interpret them a particular way. Impressions matter, not his inner thoughts. He needs to explain why he did this — not Clinton (she is no longer a candidate, so her thoughts and opinions no longer matter).

You keep framing this as kowtowing to the feelings of former Clinton supporters. That isn’t what this is about. It is about winning additional votes for Obama. If you cannot do that, you cannot win. Where are you going to get such votes? Former Clinton supporters now trying to make up their minds who to support are a major source of new Obama votes. If you, and he, cannot find a way to convince those NEW voters to support him, the math is simple — he will lose. There is no more kowtowing involved than there would be in appealing to any demographic group. But, you cannot expect voters to just automatically follow Clinton’s endorsement or automatically vote the way you think they should, just because they are registered democrats (or whatever other reason you think you shouldn’t have to campaign to them).

You call me a Republican just for not supporting Obama. There’s nothing new about that. I didn’t vote for Bush and I would have dearly loved to vote for Gore again, but I won’t support Obama just because Gore has endorsed him. Obama is wrong for America and wrong for the Democrats and I cannot and will not EVER support him, no matter how close the race gets. That doesn’t mean I am for McCain or a Republican. It means I am a disaffected Democrat who is so sick and tired of the corruption of this primary that I may not vote at all. You can call that a vote for McCain, but I call it standing up for my own principles and exercising my right to vote or not vote for whomever I please.

Keep bashing the Clintons and see what happens. The 18 million who voted for Hillary are not going to think kindly of Obama if he cannot show respect for his opponents, the same people who he will have to work with in congress to get any legislation passed (dominance of the DNC or not). Clinton and Clinton supporters can make life extremely difficult for Obama if he doesn’t face facts himself and stop indulging in petty vengeance. His smallness just confirms my feelings about his being not ready and not the right guy. It is small consolation to watch Obama self-destruct, but those of us betrayed by our party need to take our pleasures where we find them these days, just as you take petty pleasure in continuing to kick around the Clinton backers here.

but mary, you sound kind of silly claiming Obama “thumbed his nose at Clinton” when she clearly disagrees with you, and in fact is having a joint fund-raising appearance with him to encourage her big donors to max out to Obama.

facts suck, don’t they?

(by the way Prup, I assume this make you happier, too!)

iIt doesn’t matter what his intentions were if a whole bunch of people interpret them a particular way. Impressions matter, not his inner thoughts. He needs to explain why he did this …….. You keep framing this as kowtowing to the feelings of former Clinton supporters. That isn’t what this is about.

Mary, how is that not a complete self-contradiction?

Obama hiring Solis Doyle as the VP’s Chief of Staff is interesting and amusing. Obama sold his campaign on change as the anti-Clinton candidate but he keeps hiring Clinton advisors. Does Obama know that Solis Doyle considers herself to be Hillary’s alter-ego? Her oft-repeated line: “When I’m speaking, Hillary is speaking.” Obama and his supporters are so adamant in not picking Hillary as his VP, but in fact, Obama has hired someone who thinks she IS Hillary Clinton. God help the new VP. Hillary may be laughing at this one.

You call me a Republican just for not supporting Obama.

Exactly right, girl! Just because we constantly repeat GOP talking points, insist that Clinton’s endorsement of McCain was a good idea and gush about how much we’re going to enjoy seeing McCain in the White House, bullying men try to intimidate us with charges of Republicanism. Well, hear this woman roar — I will not be categorized. I can vote for McCain, pretend I’m not voting for McCain and then you don’t get to call me a Republican. Ha, ha! You lose!

Comments are closed.