MyDD :: This is not how you develop the party

This is not how you develop the party

by clintonmccain, Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 04:59:06 PM EST

Okay people everyone knows that in order for the party to survive we need new members, importantly young voters to engage in the political process. They are the future of this party and we need them as the base ages. Here is a good example of throwing roaches in your own stew.

Tags: rendell, kool aid, hillary, campaign, young, voters (all tags)

Permalink :: 58 Comments :: Post a Comment

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Are you surprised?

Talk about elitism. This is insulting.

by BlueGAinDC on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:02:42 PM EST

Gawd. (none / 0)

Kool-Aid drinkers? Rendell said that?

Wow.

"This election is not about ideology, it's about competence." -Michael Dukakis

by MBNYC on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:05:37 PM EST

Way to talk down to college students (2.00 / 1)

You kids! Get off of my lawn!

John McCain supports privatizing Social Security.

by Travis Stark on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:05:47 PM EST

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

when the hell was this done?

Obama said, as Bill beamed. "Thank you, President Clinton."

by TruthMatters on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:07:22 PM EST

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Awful. Just awful.

by mefck on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:08:49 PM EST

And McCain is an exceptional candidate. (none / 0)

Ya, I just wrote Rendel off my VP list.

John McCain supports privatizing Social Security.

by Travis Stark on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:09:02 PM EST

All college students are so much (2.00 / 1)

smarter than anyone else. How dare anyone question college students. Even "C" stduenbts are much smarter than any older peopel or working class folks.

Right.

The faux outrage by a few makes me wonder what will happen when they have to get jobs in a recession. It ain't gonna to be pretty.

by TomP on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:09:06 PM EST

Re: All college students are so much (2.00 / 1)

there is one thing to say they aren't smarter then older people.

but to say they are kool-aid drinkers? you know what nevermind.

if you don't see a problem thats fine.

Obama said, as Bill beamed. "Thank you, President Clinton."

by TruthMatters on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:10:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I see a lot of games by a few (1.75 / 4)

young Obama supporters.

Whining about everything really just makes them look immature.

Get you ass out there and fight for Obama.

It's a tough world. Maybe not yet for those who do not support themselves, but they will learn soon.

Work for obama instead of whinning that someone said something "mean."

by TomP on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:15:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I see a lot of games by a few (2.00 / 1)

Do you really want to check the whine-o-meter between Hillary and Obama? Come on.

And do you really want to have a contest of who has the most obnoxious supporters when "a few" is your criteria?

You know what? The young people ARE out fighting for Obama. Like crazy. Which is why he draws crowds of 40K, and why small contributions are keeping him flush with cash while Hillary is busy stiffing the many working class folks her campaign is in debt to.

Know what else? Many college students already have jobs (sometimes more than one), because it's the only way they can afford to go to school.

Elitist, indeed.

by rhetoricus on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 06:03:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I am not a Clinton supporter. (2.00 / 2)

Just tired of the few who whine all the time.

Note all the troll ratings.

I see a few young people unable to debate and "hitting" instead of using their words.

by TomP on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 07:26:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I am not a Clinton supporter. (none / 0)

You do nothing but TR and you have yet to respond to the fact that you have been completely discredited with you claim that young Obama supporters cannot and are not debating and working for their candidate.

John McCain wants you to be poor!

by nklein on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 09:08:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

ok (none / 0)

I am a Clinton supporter, she is still a dem and is better than McCain.

Check out the New Progressive Blog EENRBLOG

by dk2 on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 10:10:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I see a lot of games by a few (none / 0)

Damn you kids and your games!

by rhetoricus on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 06:56:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

TR'd for the insult (1.50 / 2)

I just got done helping Obama. Don't tell us about work. Most of us have worked through school and are outworking the Clinton supporters. It is ridiculouse to say any different.

John McCain wants you to be poor!

by nklein on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 07:03:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: All college students are so much (none / 0)

I'm not "outraged," and I still like Ed, but come on -- you have to at least admit that this qualifies as stupid and immature on his part.

by HSTruman on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:13:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Apropos of nothing (2.00 / 1)

and I'm not going all "spelling police" on you, but I always get a chuckle out of misspellings in a thread about who's smarter. I always try to be very careful when I'm doing taht.

Nos causidicus Obama , ergo nos non suadeo

by rb608 on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:14:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

perfect Clinton surrogate. he'll say anything to get her elected.

Obama should run an ad with this.

by DrPolitics on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:11:11 PM EST

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Poor old man. I feel sorry for PA. Sometimes Ed doesn't realize how unintentionally divisive he can be.

NO 100 year WAR, NO McConnell run Senate, & NO GOP-led Supreme Court!!!

by Veteran75 on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:12:00 PM EST

Re: This is not how you develop the party (2.00 / 1)

lol its sad, that he and others really think its ok to just call all obama supporters kool-aid drinkers.

they see nothing wrong with it, then launch in to a raid about how Obama flipped Hillary off, and then go into a fuss about fake outrage on her closing ad.

wow you know what fine, if we young people aren't needed we can leave maybe its time for a 3rd party, the democratic party apparently doesn't want the youth vote.

we are too stupid to know any better anyways.

Obama said, as Bill beamed. "Thank you, President Clinton."

by TruthMatters on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:13:34 PM EST

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

The democratic and republican parties are already developed parties. When you join you become a member of that tradition. Most of us joined the democratic party when we were 18 or 20 because of what it already was- an extension of who we aligned with. We need the youth for it's enthusiasm and energy and the elders for their wisdom and experience.
The Republicans have quite a large youth group too and always have- if not - we wouldn't be here now having a presidential race between several parties. There are already many other '3rd' parties (I think 10 registered- maybe more) but I think you joined the democratic party because you believed in the tradition and platform of the party that was established long ago.

by Justwords on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 06:09:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

"The Republicans have quite a large youth group too and always have."

Really!?! I'd recheck those numbers. Youth voters are voting Democratic in proportion of something like 7 to 3. The youth vote made up a hugely significant portion of Kerry's vote and will be even more important this time. Don't count us out as nobodies, we're going to have our say this time.

John McCain wants you to be poor!

by nklein on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 07:08:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

WOW (none / 0)

I don't think Rendell realized that he just offended many of the people in that room. Right or wrong on his statements . . . a politician should have some tact.

by FOB92 on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:16:43 PM EST

Re: WOW (2.00 / 1)

That's the ting-he insulted their intelligence. But that happens nearly every day here with all the kool-aid comments....

by mefck on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:22:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Are you complaining because he spoke truth to fact? These college students couldn't name ONE thing Obama has done to be qualified to be pres. The man is eloquent and inspirational; MLK and JFK indspirational. But what qualifies him to be president beyond that? I think that's what Rendell asked. And I ask it of you.

Purity! Or else!

by ChitownDenny on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:22:00 PM EST

Re: This is not how you develop the party (2.00 / 1)

His comment about Hillary's legislation was great, but he lost much of the room after the "Kool-Aid" reference.

It is one thing for a blogosphere troll to type "cultist" or "Kool-Aid" . . . BUT the Governor of PA?!

Poor Ed. This is going to go viral in a bad way.

by FOB92 on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:25:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Do you really think these students are unaware of their gaffe-prone Gov? The rest of the country is; and the PAians love him.

Purity! Or else!

by ChitownDenny on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:27:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

I have to admit that he is better than BLAGO

by FOB92 on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:52:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Well, yeah, me too.

Purity! Or else!

by ChitownDenny on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:53:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (2.00 / 1)

what were the last 3 bills your candidate passed, if she and her supporters are so much better?

Obama said, as Bill beamed. "Thank you, President Clinton."

by TruthMatters on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:25:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Bait not taken. Answer my question.

Purity! Or else!

by ChitownDenny on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:29:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (2.00 / 1)

Aside from running a brillant campaign, he had the vision and courage to speak out against a war that our political leadership sent us headlong into. He has led on issues of loose nuclear weapons (passing legislation with Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), ethics reform (passing the Senate's version of H.R. 1), and his bill was the vehicle for ending the Iraq war in Spring of 2007. He has led on countless issues in the Illinois State Senate, including the death penalty, corruption and ethics, health care and police interrogations. Would you like a full listing of the bills he passed in the Illinois state senate? Of course, this does not even count what he's done as a private citizen.

Answer his/her question! Name three bills Hillary passed.

John McCain wants you to be poor!

by nklein on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 07:16:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Yup. Excellent campaign. Amazingly excellent campaign. Who'd a thunk? Certainly not Penn.
No mojo from me, though, for staking out a position on Iraq with little or nothing on the line. Your stating he participated in two pieces of legislation in the U.S. Senate. O.K. That's two. In the IL Senate, unfortunately, there is little/no documentation he lead. There is documentation his name was put on bills that passed. And there is documentation that Emil Jones assisted in this endeavor.

Regarding Hillary:
Hillary has sponsored 22 bills that have become law including:
a bill that extended the availability of unemployment assistance.

-- a bill which established a program to assist family caregivers.

-- a bill that provided benefits to public safety officers who were killed or injured during the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

-- a bill that protected children from injury in and around motor vehicles

I think anyone who questions Hillary's credentials to be President is being disengenuous.

Purity! Or else!

by ChitownDenny on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 07:43:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

First, those aren't the only two, but those are extremely important bills. He also passed bills on veterans housing coming home from Iraq and Afghanistan (before the Walter Reed scandal) as well as others.

I'd also dispute that the there is little documentation besides his name on the bill. There are tons of newspapers that have throughly gone through his record in Illinois before and after he ran for president. These bills were not just handed to him.

Also I never disputed Hillary's leadership; I just see so many Clinton supporters say that Hillary has a record all over Obama (who they say has no record), which is just not the case. Finally, I'm tired of Clinton supporters, like you did, telling me I don't know anything about my candidate. People know more than you think and should not castigated b/c of a misconception in the minds of partisans.

John McCain wants you to be poor!

by nklein on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 08:16:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

This diary and comments are pertaining to Rendell's asking college students to cite Obama's accomplishments. None could. This is the phenomenon of the Obama campaign. Few can. Thus the moniker "Kool-Aid" drinkers.
But let's be clear. Hillary has the credentials.

Purity! Or else!

by ChitownDenny on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 08:38:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Do you know how many Clinton supporters I've asked that can't tell him of any of her accomplishments? Uninformed voters are not a phenomenon in one or the other campaign.

John McCain wants you to be poor!

by nklein on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 09:31:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Oh yeah, on "staking out a position....with little or nothing on the line," he was running for the Senate (I can provide the evidence if you like) at the time. To take a position that was against the polls (70-30 in favor of war) is pretty courageous, especially when you're running to be a Senator.

John McCain wants you to be poor!

by nklein on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 08:19:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

He ran unopposed; unless you call Alan Keyes from DC an opposition candidate for US Senate.

Purity! Or else!

by ChitownDenny on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 08:42:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

That was a year and a half after he made his statement on Iraq. Nobody was sure who was going to be the Republican Senate candidate, but most thought it would Mr. Ryan (Jeri Ryan's husband) who was very formidable. Also there was a very competitive Democratic Primary.

John McCain wants you to be poor!

by nklein on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 09:05:56 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Right. Which is why I state on earlier comments that there is nothing at stake to take a stand on Iraq when you aren't held accountable; i.e. have to vote for the record.

Purity! Or else!

by ChitownDenny on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 09:14:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

A public statement is something with which you can be held accountable. Leaders don't just vote. And a vote is not the only sign of leadership.

John McCain wants you to be poor!

by nklein on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 09:28:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (2.00 / 1)

I'll gladly answer your question.

But first may I disambiguate your premise, given the lingering Pennitis that apparently yet ails many on this site. Penn framed the qualifications debate solely on his perceptions of Obama's weaknesses and Clinton's strengths. Rather than parading her intelligence, talents, skills, or character, we got instead those mind-numbingly repetitive mutterings about her "solutions". But many of us believe that it's WHO one is that qualifies one for the presidency - not just a trite evaluation of WHAT one has done.

Furthermore, troubleshooters perform best when they are freed from the responsibilities of leadership to focus exclusively on their solutions. The two roles rarely combine. On a ship, the captain sets direction and leads: it's the chief engineer that fronts the problem-solving office. In an effective company, the CEO provides vision, direction and leadership - instead of getting bogged down personally in "solutions" esoterica.

With a "solutions" angle, one might make an effective appeal for a mayoral post - or leadership of a school board. But when it comes to
the kind of leadership, inspiration and vision that qualifies one for the presidency, Obama blows away the competition. Add to that his credentials as a Harvard law graduate and an expert in constitutional law, and you already have a highly qualified candidate.

But I'll humor you just this once with a quick roundup of what he's done a la Wikipedia. I haven't the time or inclination to link to the referenced sources, so please don't pursue this angle with me.

He served in the Illinois Senate from 1997 to 2004, prior to his current US Senate term - giving him a longer term in elected office than Clinton. Note that his election to office did not occur as a result of extensive name recognition, or a spouse's coattails.

He has cosponsored legislation to control conventional weapons, and to promote greater public accountability in the use of federal funds. He also made official trips to Eastern Europe, the Middle East, and Africa.

In the current 110th Congress, he has sponsored legislation on lobbying and electoral fraud, climate change, nuclear terrorism, and care for returned U.S. military personnel.

Since announcing his presidential campaign he has also emphasized ending the Iraq War, increasing energy independence, and providing universal health care as top national priorities.

Does this sound qualified enough for you?

It is not because I cannot explain that you won't understand. It is because you won't understand that I cannot explain. - Elie Wiesel

by Sumo Vita on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 07:01:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Alright, here we go:
Paragraph 1;
You called experience "trite". 'nuff said by me about that.
Paragraph 2;
You state: "the captain sets direction and leads". I think George W. Shrub said the same thing. Now I'm hopeful.
Unfortunately, after reading these two paragraphs, feel a better use of my time would be to pet my dog. But kudos to you for the "big words".

Purity! Or else!

by ChitownDenny on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 07:26:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

I didn't call experience trite. I said:

"But many of us believe that it's WHO one is that qualifies one for the presidency - not just a trite evaluation of WHAT one has done". My point being that Penn condensed Hillary down to a list of accomplishments, and it was done precisely to pose a question like yours to the other campaign. This is what is trite - and, in my opinion, diminishes the candidates.

I'm sorry, but neither of the democratic candidates have any great depth when it comes to presidential-grade accomplishments - whatever those might be. I realize that's been the centerpiece of Hillary's candidacy - and in retrospect, her biggest mistake. No one outside the true-believer circle is going to be bowled over by any of her much-paraded qualifications.

But she is so much more than a list - or policy wonk. As is he. As should be any good candidates for the presidency. They are both smart, articulate, well-intentioned LEADERS - their legions of die-hard fans are testimony to that. Your reference to GWB's claims won't change that. The problem with GWB wasn't the paradigm, but that his captaincy was fraudulent to the core. What has passed for his "crew" is a gang of cutthroats that have looted and pillaged whatever they could get their hands on before running the ship aground.

Apologies to all, actually, for the big words. Eloquence need not be at the expense of clarity.

It is not because I cannot explain that you won't understand. It is because you won't understand that I cannot explain. - Elie Wiesel

by Sumo Vita on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 10:32:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (2.00 / 1)

You darn kids with your I-tubes and your U-Pods?

Rendell cracks me up, he is so old school politics.....

My mom believed in Jesus, the Pope and FDR..... Just not necessarily in that order.

by WashStateBlue on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:24:56 PM EST

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Lot's of fun with "new politics" today - obamites seem anxious.

by bobbank on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:32:51 PM EST

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

This weekend I had to explain to my 8 year old daughter what "drinking the koolaid" means. LOL It was a very funny conversation. That was totally off topic. :)

by JustJennifer on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:42:04 PM EST

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Yike, how did you do that?

"Um, well honey, there was this cult called Jonestown.."

by rhetoricus on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 06:05:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Yeah that was exactly what I did. She asked a lot of questions. "Did they know it was poison?" "Why did they do that?" etc.. She is very smart. She asked why they used koolaid because she thought koolaid is just for kids. It is a terrible subject but there were a few moments of laughter during the conversation. The whole subject came up because she heard someone say "drinking the koolaid" on TV with regards to Obama supporters.

by JustJennifer on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 06:22:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is not how you develop the party (none / 0)

Sounds like a smart kid.

Honestly, there's a whole generation out there that has no idea where "drink the Kool-Aid" came from.

(And I'm annoyed at Bill O'Reilly for stealing it--it originated on the left.)

by rhetoricus on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 06:53:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Does Rendell have a LGF account? (none / 0)

Or does he just listen to a lot of Limbaugh?

by Hudson on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 06:21:00 PM EST

The youtube video is no longer available (none / 0)

anyone have a new link? 'Cause it sounds interesting.

"You might well think that. I couldn't possibly comment"