BartCop Versus Arianna Huffington on HRC

Re: Why I Hate You-know-who ..and why you should, too
by Arianna Huffington

Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/al-gore-overcomes-the-fea_b_21191.html

Excerpt:
"There she was recently -- uptight, tentative, inauthentic -- trying to throw an off-handed bone to the U.S.
Chamber of Commerce by implying that young people are lazy and "think work is a four-letter word."
And the minute there was some blowback, she turned around and apologized to the youthful voters whose
fingers she'd slammed in the Chamber of Commerce door. And even used Chelsea as a crutch to explain
her turnaround.

She's become more processed than Velveeta. Her fear has caused a complete disconnect
from who she really is and what she really thinks (that is, if she even knows anymore)."


Bart opines:
http://www.bartcop.com/

"I read most of this, and I'm not sure I saw any facts, unless you count:

uptight, tentative, inauthentic
trying to - implying that
lazy - some blowback
turned around - apologized
fingers she'd slammed in the door
used as a crutch - her turnaround
more processed - her fear
complete disconnect - who she really is
what she really thinks - if she even knows- .

Does anyone see any facts in that sack of journalistic snakes?

Reminder: IF she is the Bush-clone/anti-Christ Arianna makes her out to be,
why can't Arianna list any facts? I'll bet she could list 100 Bush facts in 90 seconds.

So where are the you-know-who facts?
Do you think Arianna just forgot that facts counted?
More likely, the facts didn't fit her tirade, so she chose to forget them.

Maybe someone should explain to Arianna that you-know-who's not running for president.
The votes she needs right now are New York state votes, not votes from "Northern Oklahoma.".
Like a lot of anti-You-know-who zealots, Arianna wants her to run to second base before she touches first.
That's insane.
Smart base runners win the next election before trying to win the next-next election.
She was there when Bill lost the 1980 governor's race and she's no idiot.

Can we somehow get a question to Arianna?
Can somebody ask her if she plans to vote Democrat for president in 2008?
If she gives us a "We'll have to wait and see," I think we can take that as a 'no,' don't you?
IF I remember correctly, Arianna didn't vote for the Democrat for cally Governor either, right?
Just asking, but has she ever claimed to vote Democrat?

If somebody wants to try to tell me how to vote, they should at least be a Democrat.

Can we somehow get that question to Arianna?"

Someone needed to slap Arianna silly, and BartCop is just the one to do it.

I don't really have a horse in this race, since I'm not a huge fan of Bart, Arianna, or Hillary. But I've got to side with Bart on this one. More and more, I think Hillary is a mirror that reflects whatever it is that people want to see. The Republicans see an ultraliberal activist bent on world domination. The suicide dove left sees a calculating sociopath just to the right of the Kaiser. And the media just sees the ambitious office-seeking political climber that would give them the most juicy process stories.

I do believe you've hit the nail on the head regarding HRC.

is that the world is not black and white, DLC supporters versus detractors. In fact, I agree with The Wraith's analysis that HRC detractors come from different venues with different attacks, none based on an honest analysis of HRC but rather simply an exaggerated picture spelling opposition.

I have mixed feelings about HRC because it is a complex analysis, but those unwilling to weigh all the facts and are vehemently opposed to her all have their own agenda, and I don't care to be lectured by any of them. Accusations of DLC-lovin' is over-the-top rhetoric which suits an agenda. It's the boogyman of an empty/lame argument in lieu of a substantive argument.

her whole blog is that way too

But is BartCop saying that the quote "think work is a four-letter word." was not said by Clinton? because if she did in fact say that, then wouldnt that be a fact in the article?

This thread seems to state the opposite:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2284946

And surprisingly it also agrees with Huffington's claim that she turned around and apologised.

I dunno, BartCop says no facts - I see at least two facts, which brings BartCop's "no facts" claim into doubt.

Oh well, Im sure BartCop is right, somehow...

between what Huffington says and what the anti-HRC detractors say on the thread you posted is that the latter claim that HRC did not apologize to anyone but Chelsea.

"Have you taken Jesus as your personal Lord and Savior? No? Then you're probably not in politics.
How powerful are these religious fundamentalists? Powerful enough to make Howard Dean a
temporary member of the 700 Club. Well, he's on his knees, but I don't think he's praying."
-- Lewis Black, on The Daily Show, Link


I expect to read a tsunami of outraged condemnation from the left-wall huggers over this.
After all, only a war-loving, Bush-clone would suck up to the religious right, right?


I lied.
I'm not expecting them to give to Dean what they gave to you-know-who.

Lewis Black rant to the point of (paraphrasing, because I don't have time to check the TiVo right now) "I bet all the gay viewers of the 700 Club were offended."

Edited to add: That line got the biggest laugh in the routine.