The Man Who Guards Clinton's Wikipedia Entry

Timothy found a profile in The New Republic of Jonathan Schilling, a 53-year-old software developer from New Jersey who works to keep Hillary Clinton's Wikipedia entry clean and fair throughout the election season. "After he started editing her page in June 2005, Schilling became consumed with trying to capture her uncomfortable place in American culture, researching and writing a whole section on how she polarizes the public... [T]he attacks on Hillary's page mainly take the form of crude vandalism... It's different on Obama's page, where the fans — no surprise — are more enthusiastic, the haters are more intelligent, and the arguments reflect the fact that Obama himself is still a work under construction... The bitterness of the fights on Obama's page could be taken as a bad sign for the candidate. But it may actually be Hillary's page that contains the more troubling omens. Few, if any, Hillary defenders are standing watch besides Schilling. In recent days, the vaguely deserted air of a de-gentrifying neighborhood has settled over her page..."

Comments

Losing my faith in politics

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe I'm just getting older, but this election is really making me lose my faith in the political process. Elections seem to be nothing but bitter slander now. Sure, it's always been that way to some degree, but at least Bill Clinton's first run in the early 1990s, for all the debate and polemics involved, managed to be entertaining (remember Primary Colors ?). This whole process, on the other hand, is just sad.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[morgan_greywolf]

No, I think you're just getting older. Read about the U.S. presidential election in 1828 between John Q. Adams and Andrew Jackson. They really brought out the mudslinging: Jackson's marriage got attacked while Adams was accused releasing an American servant girl to the Czar of Russia to appease his sexual appetite.

The thing is that bitter mudslinging is good for the process in some ways -- the First Amendment allows us to talk trash about the political candidates and some might be true, some not, but in the end, the real truth usually surfaces.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[beakerMeep]

In some ways I chalk this up to the media. They have become increasingly good over the years at capitalizing on scandal and drama with reductionist articles like this one. Stereotyping the arguments and behaviors of each cap in order to enrage the other and you have yourself an anger inspiring sound bite a talking head can use to sell some commercials. I'll be willing to bet if you look at what candidates themselves are saying it isn't, to any drastic extent, more or less intelligent than 20 or 30 years ago. But if you look to open public internet forums for ideas on politics you may come across some people literally frothing at the mouth posting any sort of stab they can think of on both sides.

So yeah considering Wikipedia as some kind of "omen" of general consensus among voters just makes me think of the jokes (from SNL i think?) around when WP was created like: "Wikipedia this July will celebrate America's 600th anniversary of independence thanks to General Hello Kitty's heroic strategies in the war with China."

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Targon]

The problem with the mudslinging is that if you do not follow the process on a daily basis, you may hear about falsehoods spread, but do not hear when those falsehoods are proven to be wrong. The same goes for these small clips that are all over the place that can easily be taken out of context.

There really isn't a lot of press coverage for when baseless accusations are proven to be nothing, but there is a ton of coverage when those initial accusations are made.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[jcr]

Elections seem to be nothing but bitter slander now.

That's largely how they've been for most of the history of our republic. Try looking up some of the things that Alexander Hamilton said about Aaron Burr.

-jcr

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[hansamurai]

So yeah considering Wikipedia as some kind of "omen" of general consensus among voters just makes me think of the jokes (from SNL i think?) around when WP was created like: "Wikipedia this July will celebrate America's 600th anniversary of independence thanks to General Hello Kitty's heroic strategies in the war with China." That actually sounds funny, so it can't be SNL. Probably the Onion.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[morgan_greywolf]

That's not the fault of the First Amendment or of the U.S. political process. That's the partially the fault of the media's sensationalism and everybody's short attention spans. But there is press coverage when baseless allegations are proved false and, IMHO, the ultimate responsibility lies on the voters -- if you're not paying attention, maybe you shouldn't vote. *shrug*

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Flying Scotsman]

It is indeed The Onion. Wikipedia Celebrates 750 Years Of American Independence. Founding Fathers, Patriots, Mr. T. Honored

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Himring]

I'll one-up ya. Read about the political mudslinging between Octavian (Augustus) and Mark Antony during their campaign to succeed the assassinated Caesar, circa 27 BC. Back then, however, the mudslinging got a bit more personal, to the point of bloodshed and lots of it....

Bashing one's opponent with truths, exaggerations and falsehoods has been the stuff of democracries, republics and political processes since the beginning....

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[squiggleslash]

You know, the 1992 election was the first US Presidential Election I actually followed, and followed at a lower level than most elections I'd followed even in Britain, where I lived at the time. I was at University, and was getting seriously involved in Usenet at the time.

And trust me, it was just as vicious then. Which, in retrospect, is ironic because the stakes were somewhat lower. George Bush Sr was never as incompetent or dangerous as his son and McCain, the country had not suffered any major disasters beyond a single earthquake (I don't want to understate the importance of the Earthquake, but it was one of those things you had limited ability to plan for, and it wasn't man made. Bush's response to it was criticized, but it wasn't dealt with with the exact wrong response of 9/11 or the paralysis that directly followed Katrina), the economy wasn't great but it wasn't on the apparent verge of collapse, and Bush Sr - who was the Republican candidate at the time - wasn't promising 100 more years of the worst policies of his administration.

Right now it's kind of dirty in the Democratic camp, but with good reason.

1. Both candidates are pretty good. One knows how to fight, and she'll do a pretty decent job standing up for the US without isolating our friends if she gets elected. The other is extraordinary in his ability to inspire people and the rest of the world, and has better judgment when it comes to judging what is right for this country. For those reasons and more, the supporters of both are increasingly sharp in their support and terrified of their candidate losing.
2. Both candidates are convinced the other can't win the actual election. Clinton's camp thinks Obama has won the wrong constituencies. Obama's camp believes Clinton is too divisive to genuinely pull over independents.
3. McCain is becoming increasingly scary for those following what he's saying and doing. He has no idea what the situation is in the Middle East with no real idea about the actions and viewpoints of the major players, yet is pushing war with Iran. He's said he's comfortable with the occupation of Iraq lasting "100 more years". Outside of the narrow band of war cheerleaders and defensive right-wingers, it's apparent this country is facing a meltdown because of the Iraq war, with billions wasted there despite our economy being on the verge of collapse and with few friends out there to prop us up or help us. And this is ignoring traditional domestic issues that have always been a concern to Democrats. Meanwhile, the media continues its love-in with McCain, and the media continues to describe him as centrist and a maverick, with the latter term being used as an apologia for the fact McCain has a temper, itself another dangerous attribute.

The stakes are unbelievably high. The candidates are unbelievably good (and I say this despite opposing much of what Clinton stands for.) Needless to say, those who have made up their minds about which to support feel very, very, strongly about the issue.

I'd like to repeat a comment I made in my journal a few days ago, because I think it applies here especially to those who are tempted to ignore the election or politics simply because it's vicious at the moment:

Obama supporters: Clinton isn't ideal, but she's not the enemy, y'know Bill wasn't ideologically that great either but somehow the government didn't turn to crap under his Presidency.

Clinton supporters: Obama's going to be a great President, honestly, he is, he's an inspiring leader, his heart is in the right place, he's smart, and what he lacks in experience he can make up for in his choices of colleagues: he isn't the enemy.

John McCain is the enemy. John McCain wants us to stay in Iraq for 100 more years. John McCain wants us to invade more countries, already preparing the ground for an invasion of Iran. John McCain will inject judges into SCOTUS who reject the constitutional protections, explicit and implied,

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Shakrai]

Try looking up some of the things that Alexander Hamilton said about Aaron Burr.

And we all know how that one ended.

Hey! Maybe Hillary and Obama can have a duel to settle the nomination once and for all. Anyone want to place any bets? Will the brother pop a cap into Hillary's ass? Or will Hillary dodge his shots as she did the sniper fire in Bosnia before taking him out? Or will they both have to duke it out with dull steak knifes because both are in favor of gun control?

Coming soon to a pay-per-view station near you! Don King is gonna make a fortune.... ;)

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[ArcherB]

John McCain is the enemy. First, John McCain is not the enemy. America has many enemies. Osama Bin Laden would be a fine example of one. John McCain is not an enemy of America. For that matter, he's a true American hero. I'm not saying that qualifies him to president any more than it did John Kerry, but don't take an American hero and call him the "enemy". That's just hateful, partisan rhetoric. Enough of the hate speech already.

John McCain wants us to stay in Iraq for 100 more years. Typical of the left. Lying about their opponent and declaring them the "enemy". HERE is a video of what he said.

Notice he didn't say that he WANTED to be in Iraq for 100 years. He said he would do what it takes to protect America.

He then went on to note that we've had soldiers in Germany, Italy, Britain, Japan, South Korea and other places for over 50 years. If you are going to bitch about American soldiers being station over seas, you should start with these places where US forces have been stationed over 10X longer.

So please, stop lying about McCain. I didn't even finish the rest of your McCain rant. If you can't be honest about what he said in the first two sentences, you've lost all credibility over the rest.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[AlfieJ]

The problem with the mudslinging is that if you do not follow the process on a daily basis, you may hear about falsehoods spread, but do not hear when those falsehoods are proven to be wrong.

Which is one of the reasons the founding fathers instituted the electoral college, instead of letting the popular vote elect the president. The presumption is that the members of the electoral college will be paying more attention to the process and won't get as caught up in the baseless mudslinging as someone in the general populace might.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Shakrai]

He's said he's comfortable with the occupation of Iraq lasting "100 more years"

With respect, it annoys me when I see sound bites taken out of context and used against someone, even if that person is someone whom I'm opposing (and I am opposed to McCain winning, FYI). He was attempting to put Iraq into perspective -- consider the fact that we've been in Japan and Germany for over 60 years -- Korea for almost as long.

We can oppose him for his views on the war but trying to beat him to death using that single quote is no better then beating Al Gore to death for "inventing" the internet or swift-boating John Kerry. Can't we have an intellectual debate that doesn't resolve around sound bites and feigned outrage?

Obama supporters: Clinton isn't ideal, but she's not the enemy

I believed that before the voting started. I continued to believe that through Super Tuesday and in spite of the various comments (mostly from Bill) that aimed to diminish Obama's campaign. After watching how Hillary has run this campaign though I can no longer support her. She's gotten the short end of the stick at times (especially from the media) but that doesn't excuse her tactics. Saying that Obama isn't a Muslim "as far as I know", claiming that he isn't ready to be Commander in Chief (and then backing away from that assertion during the debates) and flat out lying about her past (sniper-gate) have all served to convince me that Hillary is not fit to be President. If she manages to somehow win the nomination then I'll be voting for Nader.

y'know Bill wasn't ideologically that great either but somehow the government didn't turn to crap under his Presidency.

No, it turned into crap immediately after his Presidency. Remember the recession of 2001? You can't blame that on GWB, he was only in office for a few months and hadn't enacted any of his platform yet. And the Clintons? Forget all the scandals of the 90s and think about the legislation that he signed -- remember the Telecommunications Act of 96 that gutted regulation and set the stage for the telcos and cablecos to crave up this country into a duopoly? Remember the Communications Decency Act and the blatant attempts to censor the internet? Remember the relaxation of media ownership rules that encouraged the consolidation of the newspaper and radio industries? Remember who signed the DMCA into law? Remember whose failed health care plan and Federal tax increase set the stage for the Republican takeover of Congress in 1994?

The Clinton years weren't all they were cracked up to be. They moved the Democratic Party so far to the center that it might as well have been 'Republican-lite'. Their pro-business DLC platform and obsessive focus on big-donor fundraising (something Hillary continues to rely on today) gave the impression (right or wrong) that the Democratic Party was just as subservient to big business as the Republican Party.

I'm sorry, but you'll never convince me that I should vote for Hillary because of John McCain. I've come to realize in recent weeks just how much I disagree with him (gods, remember the John McCain from 2000? This wouldn't even be a contest if he was still around), but that doesn't mean that Hillary deserves to be our President as the 'lesser of two evils'. I don't think she's morally fit to be President and I have serious issues with some of the positions (*cough* censorship *cough*) that she has advocated in the past. I won't even be voting for her for her Senate seat again, assuming she remains in the Senate.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[FBodyJim]

My name is James Hogan, I'm a software engineer from Long Branch New Jersey and I've never run for, or held, a public office before, so I decided to start high and run for US Congress ( http://www.hoganforcongress.com/ ) against a 20 year politician here in New Jersey. What you posted is what, no exaggeration, 75% of the people I've talked to have said. Each year, they find themselves more and more distanced from politics and, like myself, reference "them" and "us". It's interesting though because these people claim to want a change in government and they claim to not want politicians ruining the county. I'm only 27 and I certainly don't look "congressional", and I probably don't stand a chance of winning either because I'm knocking on people's doors asking for their vote and I've noticed two things: 1) A LOT of people want something in the mail. What the heck??? I'm the guy! I'm the one running for office and I'm at YOUR DOOR. Let's talk! I can't afford to send you something in the mail, that's why I'm AT YOUR DOOR. And still these people don't get it - "I'm sorry, I'll wait for something in the mail".. and I give them an "ok, thanks" and move on. Sad. 2) A LOT of people have told me "No thanks, I'm a democrat" or "I'll vote for you, I'm a republican" - how about the issues? Don't vote for me because I'll be in the R column, vote for me because you know who I am and what I stand for. Don't vote for Pallone (again) because he's a D, vote for him because he stands for an issue you care about and you know his background. I'd rather someone not vote for me because they find my position(s) to be opposite their own instead of not voting for me because I'm in the R column. If I don't win the primary, or if I don't win the general election - and to be honest - maybe even if I do - I'll be switching back to "unaffiliated". The founding fathers, including Ben Franklin, spoke against political parties - the party system is broken. I owe no "political debt" to any party - I've gotten myself on the ballot through my own time and money - if I lose the primary in June - it will be because another career politician who has paid into the party, has taken the party's money to get elected and now he owes "political debt" - he'll get the call "hey remember that time we raised $s for you... yeah.... can you do this for us?" and so the system continues. But again, explain that to someone and they look at you funny. I don't know you personally, I'm hoping that if you are indeed losing your faith in politics that you are at least taking the time to research all of the people on the ballot - I bet I'm not the only average working guy who is trying to make a difference and represent average working class people. Some of those working people might be Rs and some might be Ds, but don't just vote for an R or a D, find out who they are and where they stand. I'll be honest, if the D party wants to find this post and publish it as a smear against me so be it - BUT I don't even know what a congressman does! It shouldn't be a problem, the founding fathers didn't intend to have career politicians running this country - they themselves were self educated farmers and laborers - they themselves had to figure it out as they went along - they expected farmers, blacksmiths, bankers, ship builders, lumberjacks, etc to be the representatives - and yet I've had people ask me how being a software engineer qualifies for congress, my response is always the same "because a large percentage of people in this district are IT workers or otherwise work in a cube from 9 to 5, and I know what it's like to work in a cubicle for a boss just like most other people do, it's hard to be any more representative of the people than me". Anyhow, my point is just that if you find yourself losing faith in politics, just be sure that when some random guy comes knocking on your door asking for your vote, give him (or her) a minute - don't just assume the guy with the clipboard in a suit is trying to sell you something or convert your

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[twistedsymphony]

Maybe the disappointment isn't so much about the political process having "degraded into mudslinging" but the fact that, after centuries, we've failed to progress beyond that.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[KevinKnSC]

According to the story, Cain was a farmer, not a shepherd.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[ArcherB]

The South Koreans (at least all the ones I know) don't want us in South Korea. And we don't want to be there. However, they'd prefer that we be there over getting invaded from the north.

The Japanese don't want us in Okinawa (soldiers habitually raping 12 year-old girls might have something to do with that). habitual is an exaggeration at best. You make it sound like it happens daily, when the truth is that it is extremely rare, much rarer in fact than from the general population. I googled "Japan soldier rape" and came up with many cases of Japanese soldiers gang raping women and one case of a US Marine charged with raping a 14-yr old girl. The charges were dropped.

We aren't wanted in the Philippines (again, gang-raping women while sporting a large array of weaponry might make us less than welcome there) Now I was able to find a rape case in the Philippines. That soldier got life. Much more than if he were a civilian (and he deserves 100% of it!).

I imagine the Germans would like us to leave straight away. The Germans are happy we are there. Ask anyone who lived in East Germany what they think of the US presence there. It may not be needed there as much as it used to be, but those that used to live under Soviet control are quite happy to see soldiers with American flags on their shoulders.

Of course, one difference between all of those places and Iraq is that we are actually blowing the shit out of Iraq. That might make for a greater sense of urgency, don't you think? Our job there is to help stop all the shit from getting blown up. Do you think that if we left, all the violence would stop? It would actually get much worse. Eventually, it would stop, once everyone is dead or under the uber-strict control we went there to break.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[galego]

if you're not paying attention, maybe you shouldn't vote. *shrug*

Bingo! If parent wasn't a 5, I'd say mod it up. Voting is a privilege, not a right as some would have us believe. It should not be granted or denied based on irrelevant factors such as race or gender, but I worry about the effect of our cluelessness and lack of perspective when voting in America.

Admittedly, I have been guilty of clueless voting in the past.

Maybe there should be a quiz to get to the polls, replete with being cast off of a cliff (Monty Python style ... Holy Grail) for trying to vote w/o being informed on the issues. ;) Thing is ... I'm certain we'd lose those administering the quiz, just like in the Holy Grail. :O

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Shakrai]

Hey, it's nice to see somebody stand up and defend the guy. I'm a lil tired of seeing us use that quote too -- how is beating McCain to death over that quote any different from going after Gore for "inventing" the internet or swift-boating John Kerry? I do take issue with one thing you said though:

Typical of the left

Why was that even necessary and what positive thing do you contribute to the conservation by taking that sort of swipe at "the left" (as if "the left" is one monolithic entity with a single agenda and battle-plan)? I think we'd all be a lot better off if the people on both sides of the political divide could at least respect each other and avoid taking those kinds of pot-shots at each other.

I didn't even finish the rest of your McCain rant

I can't speak for the GP, but my rant about John McCain doesn't have much to do with Iraq. I disagree with him completely on Iraq but I can at least respect him for his viewpoint and acknowledge the fact that he was one of the few Republican voices that questioned the Administration on Iraq (he called for more troops long before the surge became fashionable). My rant with John McCain is how he effectively sold out his own positions to kiss the ass of the base in order to secure the nomination. He went from having the courage to stand up to the likes of Jerry Falwell to kissing his ass four years later. That cost him a lot of respect in my eyes -- he got some of it back by speaking out against torture, but still.....

I miss the John McCain from 2000. If that guy was running he'd have a decent shot at getting my vote. Hell, if that guy had won in 2000 I think we'd be a lot better off -- he wouldn't have made Afghanistan into a side-show while outsourcing the job of catching Osama to local warloads of questionable loyalty. He wouldn't have run his administration from the extreme far-right while further dividing this country. He wouldn't have cost us our creditability on human rights by torturing prisoners. He wouldn't have stopped talking about Osama until he was "dead or alive".

Karl Rove has done his country a lot of disservices in the last eight years -- but as far as I'm concerned his biggest disservice was using his gutter politics against John McCain in South Carolina's 2000 Republican Primary.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[morgan_greywolf]

But people still perpetuate the nonsense that Gore claimed he invented the Internet. But he did claim to have invented in the Internet. It's just that later he clarified his misstatement and spoke about his real accomplishment, which was to provide the funding for the transition from the old Internet infrastructure, centered around NSFNet and Milnet to the new consumer- and ebusiness-centric Internet infrastructure centered around commercial networks. Which is very laudable, but the oringal misstatement is so obviously humorous that it gets repeated. I even repeat, tongue-fully-in-cheeck, now and then.

As for the SBVT thing, I didn't actually pay attention, because, IMHO, John Kerry's military service record was really irrelevant to his presidential candidacy. If something that happened that long ago really mattered, many U.S. presidents, including Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush would never have been elected. (Reagan once did porn, Clinton smoked pot and dodged the draft, Bush snorted coke).

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Moofie]

"Voting is a privilege, not a right as some would have us believe."

I need for you to point out to me in the Constitution where you got that ridiculous assertion.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[sheldon]

A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. - Churchill

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Shakrai]

The South Koreans (at least all the ones I know) don't want us in South Korea

Which ones are you talking to? When I was in Korea I didn't see any hostility towards our troops and the few people that I talked to were either supportive of us or neutral about it. I didn't meet anybody that seemed anxious for us to leave.

The Japanese don't want us in Okinawa

Maybe that's why we are planning on leaving Okinawa and moving our forces there to Guam? We aren't occupying them -- it was a basing agreement that they signed willingly back in the day.

soldiers habitually raping 12 year-old girls might have something to do with that

"Habitually"? I can think of three cases in the last 15 years. That's "habitually"?

I imagine the Germans would like us to leave straight away

Think again. Our forces in Germany are a great economic benefit for those areas where they are stationed. A lot of Germans (in and out of Government) were disappointed when we announced that we'd be pulling upwards of 50% of them out of the country.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[aproposofwhat]

I miss the John McCain from 2000.

As you say above, he's sold out to get the nomination.

Now that he has the nomination, I'd expect him to return to his 2000 persona - by far the most sensible Republican that I can remember (though Bush Senior wasn't too bad - he just upset the pro-Israel lobby by threatening to cut subsidies if they didn't stop illegal settlements).

All I can say from a British standpoint is that we certainly would prefer it if you didn't elect Hilary ;P

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[cjb658]

Obama is intelligent and very slick. After listening to G.W. speak for nearly 8 years now, it's no wonder Americans like what he says.

But I can't vote for him because he is just so far away from me on the issues. He supports universal health care (though his stance is still better than Hillary's), he's anti-gun, supports giving illegal immigrants drivers licenses, he's pro-choice and voted against banning partial-birth abortion, wants to raise income and capital gains taxes... I could go on, but you get the idea.

I don't know why McCain's camp never mentions this.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Fozzyuw]

"Voting is a privilege, not a right as some would have us believe."

I need for you to point out to me in the Constitution where you got that ridiculous assertion.

Go commit a felony and you'll see.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Necrobruiser]

Not all felons lose their constitutional right to vote.
http://www.hrw.org/reports98/vote/usvot98o.htm
It appears to vary from state to state.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[megaditto]

We've lost how many lives in Iraq? 4000 American troops dead

We've killed how many innocents (an inevitable consequence of war, which is one of the reasons why war needs to be considered a last resort, something you fuckers have serious problems understanding)? About 100k to 200k by indirect estimates. Which is much less than the 1,000,000 Iraqi lives lost under Clinton. Look it up, asshole: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_sanctions (ref 5 and 6 in particular)

And we're losing how many trillions of dollars on this at a time when the economy is on the brink of complete collapse? Less than 0.3 trillion. Which is a small price to pay for liberating an entire nation (and securing our future hydrocarbon supply).

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[1729]

"Voting is a privilege, not a right as some would have us believe."

I need for you to point out to me in the Constitution where you got that ridiculous assertion.

Go commit a felony and you'll see.

Felons lose a lot of rights. Or do you think that freedom (i.e. not being incarcerated) is merely a "privilege"?

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Shakrai]

and the sooner the "I'll vote for McCain rather than vote for my party's nominee because my party's nominee called my prefer candidate a poopy-head" Democrats GROW UP and face reality

And where did I say that I'll vote for John McCain?

and face the fact that your little tantrum is going to help destroy this country

"My little tantrum"? That's the way to convince me that your point of view is the correct one. Did it occur to you that there's a bit more of a difference between Hillary and Obama then one calling the other one a 'poopy-head'? I see little difference between the tactics of HRC and those of George W. Bush. Hillary's entire campaign since Super Tuesday has consisted of FUD. Fear (who do you want answering the phone at 3AM?), uncertainty (he won't survive the Republican attack machine) and doubt (he hasn't been vetted). Her stated goal is to throw the "kitchen sink" at him and hopefully create enough doubt in the minds of the superdelegates that she can overturn the will of the voters.

The best part of it all is that she has no one to blame for it besides herself. If she hadn't started drinking the "inevitability" kool-aid then she might have realized that she'd actually have to compete beyond Super Tuesday. Instead, Obama somehow managed to squeeze out a near-draw on Super Tuesday and proceeded to run away with the next 11 contests because Hillary had no plan to win them and no orginization on the ground. She didn't take any of her follow Democrats seriously enough to make the effort to win the nomination until after Super Tuesday and by then the damage had been done. Her own arrogance is directly responsible for the position she's in.

you'd have thought after losing two Presidential elections because you thought your guy wasn't any different to their guy, you'd have learned this by now. "Gore and Bush are exactly the same, I'm going to stay home", "Kerry voted for the war, so even though he has a history of liberalism, and now opposes the war, I'm going to pretend he's exactly the same and stay home."

Your painting with a pretty broad brush here. Personally, I voted for Gore and Kerry. I've spoken out against people who claim that the Democrats and Republicans are the same. That doesn't change how I feel about HRC though. Gore and Kerry didn't run their campaigns the way she has -- I could find things to like and respect about both of them. Try as I might I can't say the same about HRC.

Clinton is not McCain

Your right. She's not. John McCain is capable of taking a principled stand for something even if his own party disagrees with him (torture) or even the majority of the electorate (Iraq -- his quote was "I'd rather lose an election than lose a war"). Hillary doesn't seem to be capable of moving much past the latest focus group or opinion poll. And since the Iraq War seems to be a major issue for you, you do know that she voted to authorize it, right? That was her chance to take a principled stand (23 other US Senators had the backbone to oppose the war) and she made the wrong decision.

She's not the enemy here. Don't fuck up for a third time.

As far as I'm concerned the only way people can "fuck up" is if they allow themselves to be scared into voting for someone they wouldn't otherwise vote for. I won't vote for HRC. I won't vote for John McCain. If Obama doesn't get the nomination then I honestly don't know what I'll do -- probably give Nader a good long look. But I won't be scared into voting for Hillary.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[ArcherB]

I didn't lie about him. McCain has made it clear he's not going to pull out of Iraq. The "100 years" quote is great because it nearly and succinctly describes McCain's actual position on Iraq. Not only does he not want to pull out, he wants to expand the war. He's talking seriously about us invading Iran. No, you actually said that McCain WANTS to be in Iraq for the next 100 years. That's a lie, plain and simple.
Fact is, no one sane really WANTS war. However, many, like McCain realize that it is necessary when talking and sanctions don't work. Did Roosevelt WANT war? How about Churchill? If anyone in this election understands the horrors or war, it is John McCain. He knows first hand what is involved. I trust him to make the correct decisions and not take them lightly.

Yeah, damn straight he's the enemy at this election Adversary, maybe. Enemy? No. And that is the problem with so many like you. You consider everyone on the other side the "enemy". You'll make yourself believe whatever it takes to justify your raw hatred for them. I don't hate Obama nor Clinton. I do not see them as the enemy. I'll back whichever of the three make it the office because I love America more than a political party and partisanship. I can't say the same for people like you.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[slackoon]

"Voting is a privilege, not a right as some would have us believe."

I need for you to point out to me in the Constitution where you got that ridiculous assertion.

Amen to that. Voting is a right, a right that should be thought of as a privilege, but a right none the less. The media should feel responsible for having just as much coverage and enthusiasm for proving falsehoods to be incorrect as they do for printing the slander in the first place. Not all of us have the 20-30 hours that it would take to be truly informed. Lets face it, the media IS what informs us

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Ironsides]

The dot.com stock bubble.

Started in 2000, not 2001.
Yahoo. The NASDAQ was down over 2000 points from the high in 2000.

One could easily argue that Bill Clinton was the best Republican President we've had in 50 years. :-)

Only if we can say George Bush is the worst Democratic President since Carter.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Shakrai]

I don't see a whole lot of Democrats calling Code Pink, ANSWER, MoveOn.org, Air America, Huffington Post, Daily Kos and so one what they truly are

I honestly don't have a clue what Code Pink or ANSWER are, but I'd really love to hear why MoveOn/Daily Kos are anything besides left-leaning blogs that have their fair share of counterparts on the right? And Air America? Is Air America even still relevant? And why mention all of those things but not Fox News, Drudge, Limbaugh, etc, etc? Is the left-leaning elements of the media/blogosphere somehow doing more damage to meaningful dialog then the right-leaning media/blogosphere? Both share the blame for inflaming passions and reducing politics to a shouting match of soundbites.

I see Obama's preacher of 20 years saying that the US brought on 9-11 itself

And I see Jerry Falwell blame 9-11 on lesbians, abortionists, the ACLU and secularists.

and that the white led US gov't started AIDS to kill black people

And that comment was disgusting and was rightfully condemned by just about everybody I can think of, including Senator Obama.

Democrats, on the other hand, have a real life Klansman [wikipedia.org] in their party as a respected senior senator from West Virginia.

Yeah, good thing the Republicans never had some barely still alive formerly racist old white guy as a US Senator. I don't know that I would vote for Byrd if I lived in West Virgina (I get leery of politicians that have been in office long enough to become institutions in-of themselves and he certainly qualifies), but bringing up viewpoints from his past that he has denounced serves what purpose exactly? Do you think he's still a Klansman? Do you think he still holds those views?

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[MillionthMonkey]

"But he did claim to have invented in the Internet. It's just that later he clarified his misstatement and spoke about his real accomplishment, which was to provide the funding for the transition from the old Internet infrastructure, centered around NSFNet and Milnet to the new consumer- and ebusiness-centric Internet infrastructure centered around commercial networks. Which is very laudable, but the oringal misstatement is so obviously humorous that it gets repeated."

Can you actually quote his original misstatement, then? Because from what I remember he never said he "invented the Internet".

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[operagost]

What has been will be again,
what has been done will be done again;
there is nothing new under the sun.

Is there anything of which one can say,
"Look! This is something new"?
It was here already, long ago;
it was here before our time.

There is no remembrance of men of old,
and even those who are yet to come
will not be remembered
by those who follow.

-Ecclesiates 1:9-11

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Intron]

"But it will emerge from my dialogue with the American people. I've traveled to every part of this country during the last six years. During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet. I took the initiative in moving forward a whole range of initiatives that have proven to be important to our country's economic growth and environmental protection, improvements in our educational system."

The link claims that Wired magazine added "invented".

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[ArcherB]

You're right. Maybe I should have said "far left". You can not deny the raw hatred that comes from the far left of this country. Granted, I'm sure there is just as much from the far right (the KKK for example), but Republicans tend to distance themselves from that level of politics. I don't see a whole lot of Democrats calling Code Pink, ANSWER, MoveOn.org, Air America, Huffington Post, Daily Kos and so one what they truly are. You may want to look at yourself. This attack is laughable and shrieks of parody. I have. I have never compared Clinton to Hitler. Unfortunately, it's not just the "FAR" left that does it. Take a look at MSNBC's highest rated commentator comparing Bush to Hitler. At Huffington, you see comments like the following:

* "Like her evil husband, she has lived far too long. Here's hoping the hag suffers for several weeks, then croaks in the tub."
* "The old bat will probably steal everything in the hospital room."
* "I feel no pity for the b---- who took delight in watching thousands die of a horrible disease and watching the poor having to eat out of dumpsters because of her husband's political beliefs." They are speaking of Nancy Reagan when she was in the hospital.

You don't see me carrying signs calling for the forced sterilization of Democrats.

You don't see me comparing Democrats to Nazis. ...
Or calling for war against the US.

Other quotes from Huffington Post:
(talking about Dick Cheney)

I'm embarrased that this guy hasn't had a heart-attack yet. The kind that end's life.

Get a rope for Dick..

hang cheney for war crimes this week.
hang cheney for treason against america this week.
hang cheney. And that is just page 1.

And that is just after about 2 minutes research....

Nope, sorry. I never called Clinton Hitler. I never called for the overthrow of our government when a Democrat was in office. I never accused our soldiers in Bosnia of war crimes. I've never hoped for the miserable death of anyone on the left side of the aisle (or their families!). Sorry, but I'm nothing like these people. Maybe you should remove your partisan colored glasses when you read Huffpo or any of the other left wing sites to see what I'm talking about. What I've offered here is just an sampling of the hate coming from the left. All of it is over the line and none of it is justified.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Foobar of Borg]

(1) put Saddam in power

Care to show some proof? I haven't found anything that said we put him in power.

You're joking, right? Or are you really so willfully ignorant? This is something that has been so well established you would have to be totally immersed in your own little dream world to have not noticed it. But, here are a couple of quick links: here and here.

(2) invaded in the first Gulf war

Last I checked, Kuwait was not part of Iraq, as much as Saddam may have wanted it to be. If we had actually invaded, Saddam wouldn't have been in power after that.

*Boggles* Man, you really are a clueless one, aren't you? Saddam invaded Kuwait. We invaded Iraq in 1991. We did not invade Baghdad, take out Saddam, and completely conquer the country, but we did invade Iraq, set up things like No-Fly Zones, and occasionally conduct bombing campaigns (which generally did not get into the American press).

3) imposed strict sanctions, a no-fly zone, and bombed the country from time to time (and *why* did any of you stupid fuckers for a minute think there was the slightest chance he would have WMD? are you just stupid, or what?)

As did the UN and several other countries. Also, supposedly Saddam wanted others to think he had WMDs.Link

invaded again without any thought of the consequences

you mean, without thinking that foriegn fighters would be coming into the country with outside support?

You seem to have missed the part about it being Americans who were always pushing for the harshest sanctions and the part about it being American and British forces that were always bombing Iraq.

As for the foreign fighter, WTF is your point? There are domestic insurgents as well, as there have been from the beginning. Not counting on foreign fighters coming in as well as al-Qaeda (another American product since we set them up, armed them, and trained them to fight the Soviets) who were not even in Iraq or had anything to do with Iraq before the war is just another of many examples of Cheney et al sticking their heads in the sand (or trying to get us to) and insisting that we would be greeted as liberators. Anyone, including myself, who had been paying any attention to what was going on in Iraq before the war knew already that WMDs and "greeted as liberators" was a load of horse shit. How can a country that we keep bombing the fuck out of for over 10 years possibly have a WMD program and why would they greet us as liberators?

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Necrobruiser]

But the 15th Amendment refers to the voting as a "right".
"The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."
So the Constitution basically says that it is a right and it can be taken away, just not for the reasons listed.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[GungaDan]

And don't forget that you don't have a right to vote to determine your state's electors - unless your state legislature gives you that right. It is up to the state legislatures to designate electors, and there need not (by Federal law) be any voting involved in its doing so.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Fozzyuw]

Once released, an ex-con is once again able to move about and to vote.

Actually, Necrobruiser (611198) has a good link that shows that this is not always the true.

Your analogy is fallacious

It cannot be because "right" = "privilege". A little reflection or pondering on this topic will probably confirm this for yourself. (in fact, all the comments from this thread prove this as they're all arguing the same thing but changing the term).

Voting is a right, and it's also a privilege. The confusion is when the GP implied that they cannot be the same thing, when in fact, they are. It actually through me for a loop for awhile as well until I went and double checked the facts. (Magna Carta, France's Human Rights Declaration, and the definitions of right and privilege). So the point is, there is no point to try and argue the difference, because there actually isn't any except those self defined by oneself. And one cannot argue points if one is using a different, personnel, definition of a term than the other.

In the end, we're all just arguing semantics.

the moderators who modded you up are clueless.

The moderators are, in fact, cluefull given that they probably understood the same before I ever did.

Cheers,
Fozzy

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Lemmy Caution]

Securing our future hydrocarbon supply, by giving Iran a new best friend and setting off a civil war?

If this really was about oil, then the US has botched it more badly than I feared. Just what are the Iraq oil industry's production figures since the war began?

I was a critic of the sanctions against Iraq (which were put in place by the UN largely at the behest of Bush 1, not by Clinton - though I'm no fan of Clinton's foreign policy in Kosovo or Iraq, either.)

The war was unjustified, both in principle and in its results.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[niktemadur]

You can not deny the raw hatred that comes from the far left of this country.

For a taste of the far right, have a look at the forums of The Free Republic. The freepers are quite a piece of work. It bears mentioning that right after 9-11, many people wearing turbans were randomly attacked within the US, even though many of them were Sikhs. I can't see anybody from the far left acting with that particular brand of blind hatred, can you?

Sadly, there is a deep polarization currently prevalent in United States society in general, which also comes from vicious attacks and infuriating, meaningless yet effective catch-phrases (aka talking points) from the right wing, and a pretty good argument can be stated that they began the contemporary cycle of bile. The list is long and thoroughly undistinguished - Hannity, Limbaugh, Coulter, et al.

- The incessant bombardment of John Kerry's status as a flip-flopper, whatever the hell that means.
- The purple band aids worn as fashion accessories by the GOP faithful during the 2004 convention.
- "Cut and run", repeated incessantly whenever Iraq policy was questioned.
- Limbaugh, among many other things, mocking a man with Parkinson's Disease, in his crony opposition to stem-cell research.
- Coulter's insane comments, among many other things, about John Edwards - "Total fag".
- And of course, "You want the terrorists to win, don't you?", or "Why do you hate America?"

In the last seven years, progressives have been dismissed or loudly ridiculed to the breaking point and beyond, all the while witnessing how their government attacked the wrong country with fabricated reasons, tortures people in their name, severely eroded their rights as citizens even as the vice-president literally got away with shooting another man in the face.

In 2004, after the dirtiest of dirty campaigns, a textbook Karl Rove campaign, serious allegations of electoral fraud surface again, four years after Florida was yanked from Al Gore. And with a margin of less than one percentage point, with bizarre pro-Bush discrepancies in Diebold paperless machines in key states, Bush pronounced a "mandate" and that "the people have spoken", showing not the slightest hint of acknowledgement at the massive level of dissent on his hands. This attitude will inevitably generate a simmering outrage.

Progressives also witnessed in disbelief how an extensive intelligence operation in Africa and the Middle East was treasonously blown sky-high, to target the wife of a "political enemy", as revenge and an example for all detractors, nobody in government held accountable, Scooter Libby awarded a Get Out Of Jail pass. And then, the consequences of the current administration's policies became apparent in the tragic wake of Katrina and beyond. Also, crucially, every year we hear about the polar ice caps shrinking, and the current administration does exactly nothing. Corporate shenanigans like Halliburton and Enron are just the icing on the cake.

If progressives are furious, with a deep sense of urgency, they have every reason to be. And make no mistake about it, they are also mad as hell at their own party (Pelosi and Reid, in particular), for what they regard as either lack of backbone or complicity. To interpret that as hatred is to not acknowledge the astonishing series of debacles of the last seven years.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[QRDeNameland]

Bush snorted coke and dodged the draft.

Which, ironically, may be the two most admirable things in his biography.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Mix Master Nixon]

McCain would merely be a bad president; we survived Bush, we could certainly survive McCain. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, is a walking embodiment of the repudiation of the American Revolution itself. Bushclintonbushclintonbushclintonbushclinton - President or Vice President since 1980. The New World has gotten a little too Orderly for my taste. No more.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[galego]

While I haven't read the constitution lately and admittedly can't cite where that is. IANAL and suppose are a rocket scientist. I would equally challenge you to show me where it is specifically cited as a right. And whether or not it is a *right*, the point is ... voting is of significant consequence and should not be performed by masses of uninformed. Any party could complain equally on uninformed voting toward the other I'm sure. Thing is, it hurts us all. Is that a ridiculous assertion?

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Shakrai]

McCain and Falwell were far from buddies

Where did I imply that they were buddies? In fact, where did I even mention John McCain in the post that you replied to?

Apparently you think every Republican is some belligerent religious radical

I'd be real interested to know why you've drawn that conclusion, seeing as how I never made any such comment.

I feel sorry for anyone who thinks anything you post could possibly be based in fact with this kind of malicious, misleading rant.

What "malicious, misleading rant"? Are you sure you didn't mean to reply to the GP? I wasn't ranting -- I was providing contrast to his rants. He ranted about Dailykos/Moveon but somehow neglected to mention Fox, Drudge and Limbaugh. He ranted about Rev. Wright's intolerant comments but somehow forgot to mention Jerry Falwells. He pointed out an old white Democratic Senator from West Virgina who used to be a racist but didn't think of the old white former racist Republican Senator from South Carolina.

My post had no other purpose then to encourage a dialog and provide the left-wing point of view. You are the one who made a connection to John McCain that wasn't there. You are the one who drew a conclusion that I was somehow attacking "every Republican". You are the one who called my comment 'malicious'. I think my words speak for themselves and you are clearly more interested in encouraging an argument then any constructive dialog.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[jesdynf]

I have a donation for your campaign below.

<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>

Please employ them responsibly. If you run out, I may have some more.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[DesScorp]

"Go commit a felony and you'll see."

Don't commit one and you'll never have that problem.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Squirmy McPhee]

"Voting is a privilege, not a right as some would have us believe."

I need for you to point out to me in the Constitution where you got that ridiculous assertion.

Have you ever read the Constitution? For starters, the 14th Amendment specifies that people denied the vote for "participation in rebellion or other crime" still be counted for purposes of apportioning Representatives, implying that voting is not a right. More importantly, nowhere does it guarantee voting rights to anybody for any reason -- eligibility to vote is left completely up to the states, and prior to the 17th Amendment the only office for which it even mandated a popular vote was Representative. The 17th Amendment mandates a popular vote for Senator, but even now it doesn't require a popular vote for President -- your state legislature can forego the popular vote for the Presidential election and choose your state's Electors itself, or empower the Governor to do so, or choose them with a coin flip if it wishes.

Now it's true that the 15th, 18th, and 26th Amendments prohibit states from denying or abridging voting "rights" on the basis of race, gender, and age, but beyond that it still leaves voting eligibility up to the states. They're free to put whatever other restrictions they wish on voting. Many states deny the vote to felons, for example, and a growing number deny it to people without government-issued photo ID.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[Panoramix]

May I give you an observation?

You say South Koreans prefer having Americans there, rather than being invaded, and that Germans are happy to have you even if you're not needed "as much as it used to" (which I read as still needed, just not as much). And then you go on about your "job" in Iraq, whatever that is. I didn't really get that part, I blame that on my poor English.

I won't argue the merits of those statements --- I mildly disagree with you, more strongly on the notion that you have any "job" in Iraq whatsoever, but that's not the point I want to make. I want you to note the underlying assumption in these statements, because I'm not sure you are aware you're making it. It is that other countries can't defend themselves, or manage their own affairs, without your "help". It's making you sound like a really annoying and arrogant prick.

Now don't get me wrong, I don't mean to sound ungrateful or anything, I think we all know how worthy and helpful America has been, and still is. I'm sure South Koreans and Germans like you there. I mean, who doesn't like a friend who comes through when needed? When you ask for help to fix something at your place, and this friend comes over and bears the grunt with you... man, that's the kind of guy we all like to share a beer with afterwards, and help back whenever we can.

When that friend stays in your house for days, and weeks, and months, in case you need their help again... well, it's not that great, to be honest with you. But c'mon, he's a good friend, you have a spare room, he chips in for the rent. But when the guy starts crowing about how you need him there to fix your problems, with the underlying assumption of how great he is and how useless you are... ah crap, we're friends and everything, but that shit is annoying. And I mean: Really. Annoying.

And when the guy starts picking fights with everyone, owes money all over the town, and even has a booze and drugs problem that's starting to make it really embarrasing to hang around with him... that's probably when you start having second thoughts about this friendship, no mather how helpful he's been in the past. But let's not get carried away with the metaphor.

All I'm saying is, you may wan't to think about this if you're noticing some friends seem less than thrilled with you recently. This can probably be phrased as, "buddy, take a hint, please".

That is all. Carry on.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[CrimsonAvenger]

No US soldier ever died of hostile fire during the Germany or Japan occupations.

This is true. Note, however, that in 1945 this was not the expected result. The Army fully expected that Germans and Japanese would be killing American soldiers for years to come.

And we occupied them anyway. And based on what my father has said on the subject, the only reason we're having problems that way in Iraq is that the Rules of Engagement we're operating under give every advantage to the enemy.

Re:Losing my faith in politics

[ArcherB]

That's odd, I've never made any statements similar to the random comments you extruded from various random websites. Sorry, but MSNBC's primetime show is not exactly some "random website". Oh yeah, the same guy also did commentary for NBC Football. Not exactly someone outside the mainstream.

Yet you just made a statement upthread claiming that I and ALL of the other commentors over at DailyKos Hate America, and unless the Democratic party as a whole rejects DailyKos, they too Hate America. No, I said that many of the comments at Daily Kos and Huffpo are hate filled and bigoted. I also pointed out that no one on the left seems to mind. Besides, I wouldn't exactly call Markos Moulitsas some commentor on the Daily Kos. He's the founder! What was he said? What did the FOUNDER of daily Kos say when talking about Americans whose charred bodies were mutilated and hung from a bridge in Fallujah?

That said, I feel nothing over the death of merceneries [sic]. They aren't in Iraq because of orders, or because they are there trying to help the people make Iraq a better place. They are there to wage war for profit. Screw them. Of course, not all liberals agree with him. Juan Williams slammed him. However, there are WAY too many that think it's OK to say stupid shit like that. There are those out there who defend that kind of hate filled garbage. Congratulations! You are one of those people.

I just don't see the logic in all of this. It's hard to logically justify such hatred. That's why so many people on the FAR left vilify their opponents. That's why you hear so much "Bush is Hitler" talk. It's the only way they can justify such blind hatred.

And besides, don't you think it's possible that someone could do a search of right-wing websites and find similar comments? What would such a summary say about you? If you could find it, I would be the next to denounce it. I looked it up, why can't you? While I'm sure there is hateful things said from the right, they are not nearly as prevalent and others on the right are the first to slam them down. Also, you don't find these hate filled people from the right getting over a million hits on their blogs like the DailyKos.

(I was going to link to another story at Kos where the writer was hoping for America to be invaded, conquered and occupied, just so we'd know what it felt like and would become peace loving hippies. I figure, that has worked so well in Israel and the Palestinian territories that it has to be worth a shot. However, the story "can't be found", however, it has tags and 102 comments! I guess some things are too vile for Kos... Oh wait! It's an election year!)

WP:OWN

[Anonymous Coward]

Just make sure to keep http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Ownership_of_articles in mind, Jonathan.

It's just a property of wikipedia

[rve]

It's not just Hillary Clinton's page.
Just for a laugh, check how often pages on completely neutral and uncontroversial subjects are vandalized.

The Carrot (vegetable)
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carrot&action=history

Just in the past week:
- Replacing the entire page with "carrots cause wicked diarrhea"
- Replacing paragraph headers with "==Uses== (I LOVE NICK JONAS) .com! everything free!"

Re:It's just a property of wikipedia

[rve]

Should have used the preview button...

Just in the past week:
- Replacing the entire page with "carrots cause wicked diarrhea"
- Replacing paragraph headers with "==Uses== (I LOVE NICK JONAS) 3" and "==History== (I LOVE THE JONAS BROTHERS)"
- Inserting "CARROTS A.K.A Juno's mum!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
- Adding nonsense like "the carrot was invented by the fairy princess Isis in 5009" and "The Glazed Carrot was Alexander Graham Bell's Favorite Food."
- "The carrot/ Reece(who likes the carrot) Hannam"
- Adding nationalistic bullshit
- "They look like penises."
- replaced page with "Everyone Go To www.some url.com! everything free!"

Re:It's just a property of wikipedia

[nguy]

Just for a laugh, check how often pages on completely neutral and uncontroversial subjects are vandalized.

Neutral? Uncontroversial? I'm being haunted by killer carrots from outer space, you insensitive clod! Aieeeee....

Re:It's just a property of wikipedia

[Anonymous Coward]

For some reason I'd really like to vote for the humble carrot for our presidential candidate for 2008.

Re:It's just a property of wikipedia

[Riff10111]

My own two favorites I spotted were Edgar Allen Poe's entire article reduced to "Edgar Allen Poe was a homosexual." and the list of discontinued flavors of Doritos including the item "Creamy Cock".

I find it interesting...

[Gordonjcp]

... that one of the Obama "editors" calls himself "Bellwether".

  Until recently, Bellwether, a.k.a. Kevin Bailey, was an analogue to Schilling on Obama's page.

Anyone know what a bellwether is? No? It's a neutered male sheep, with a bell on a cord around its neck. You let it loose in open grazing, and it will find other sheep, and then you find it by listening for the bell ringing as it ineffectually tries to mate with the ewes it's found.

Probably not the best nickname to choose, I'm thinking.

Re:I find it interesting...

[El_Muerte_TDS]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellwether

A bellwether is any entity in a given arena that serves to create or influence trends or to presage future happenings.

Re:I find it interesting...

[mh1997]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bellwether A bellwether is any entity in a given arena that serves to create or influence trends or to presage future happenings.

and the very next sentnece reads: "The term is derived from the Middle English bellewether and refers to the practice of placing a bell around the neck of a castrated ram (a wether) in order that this animal might lead its flock of sheep." Which is what the parent stated.

Re:I find it interesting...

[howdoesth]

The definition of a word is not the same thing as its etymology.

Re:I find it interesting...

[Jeff DeMaagd]

Given that just about no one uses Middle English anymore, and that almost no one uses the term that way, the more current definition applies. This is just another example of the many words we use that effectively don't mean what they originally meant, just like the surname "Smith" doesn't mean you're a blacksmith.

Re:I find it interesting...

[squiggleslash]

This is true, but it's still worth being careful. The word "Cretin", for instance, is (ultimately, via a level of indirection) derived from the word "Christian"; for those who know the etymology it's generally wise to be careful about whose company you use the word in.

Re:HOLY CRAP

[rvw]

This is the worst slashdot story I've ever read and I'm an avid reader, have a shirt and everything. Make a bookmark people, this is it, one of the milestones of the decline and fall of slashdot. You have a shirt!?! And everything??? Wow, that's impressive.

I've bookmarked your reply. I think it's even worse than the article. Not that I read it.

Re:Original research?

[grimJester]

True, the research may be searching for sources. It still looks like he has his own ideas he wants to get across. That might count as POV rather than original research, but is still not very objective. From tfa:

"At the same time, he also believes Hillary the woman is widely misunderstood. "One of the things I've tried to get across in the article was how much people were impressed by her before she got married to Bill," he says."

Re:HOLY CRAP

[Anonymous Coward]

You clearly don't have a shirt or anything.

born for the job?

[superwiz]

His name is Schilling? And he shills for Hillary? Is her campaign manager Miss Moneypenny? Am I the only who sees the irony?

Just my two pence worth ...

[daveime]

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

And for those of you who can't be bothered to google for the Wiki entry ...

"Who guards the guardians".

I thought the whole point of Wikipedia was that is was essentially a public resource, where anyone could add to it. If the whole whing is moderated, who draws the line between "vandalism", and just something that might put the subject "in a bad light" (regardless of the factual accuracy of it).

So anyone looking for "real" opinion may as well stay away from Wikipedia, as it's being managed by some of the same spin-doctors who manage the actual campaigns (and we all know how unbiased they are) :-(

"The Man" who guards clinton's wiki

[Flaming Babies]

He's got 5 of the last 500 edits to the page. Yeah, he's a real one man army defending the wiki...

Re:As Steven Wright says...

[baldass_newbie]

You can't have everything. Where would you put it?

Everywhere?

Self-appointed dictator?

[GauteL]

Having browsed through the Hillary Clinton page today I can't help feeling that the article has been vacuumed clean of any real criticism against her. One thing is removing obvious vandalism, but has Schilling (or someone else) gone too far in removing any reasonable criticism of Hillary?

1. Where is the mention of her being criticised for taking lobbyist money?
2. Where is the mention of critisism for her "exaggerating" her own stories for dramatic effect?

These are just two issues I can list at the top of my head which are completely missing from the article. Instead there is ample reference to awards she has been given.

As far as I know, Schilling has no official authority at Wikipedia and at the moment just acts as a self-appointed dictator that spends so much time on it that he manages to keep it "clean". When this happens, it is only fair to question whether he actually has an overly censoring position with regards to this article.

Re:Self-appointed dictator?

[dkleinsc]

The campaign page has a few more of the criticisms, but you're right that her biography page is carefully missing anything negative.

Re:Self-appointed dictator?

[sheldon]

That's pretty common for any wiki entries relating to current political events. Any criticism will be removed.

For instance looking at John McCain, there is some small mention of the Keating Five but it's limited to simply saying "He survived it", Which is interesting considering it is probably the biggest blight on his career. It doesn't even acknowledge the lessons he learned from that, which one can either see as smart politics, or cynicism. That being, when caught with your hand in the cookie jar, attack the makers of cookies. aka his "Maverick" quest for political reform.

Or if you want to get into games of political gotcha. There is no mention at all of his quotes on not knowing anything about the economy, or wanting us to stay in Iraq for 100 years.

Whether criticism is fair or not is entirely dependent upon your biases.

OT comment on her body language

[Froze]

I finally decided to watch one of her speeches the other night and discovered that she has an amazingly obvious tell. If you pay attention to her head motion you sill see that every time she make an affirmative statement she nods her head (as if to agree with herself). Contrary, every time she make a negative statement she shakes her head from side to side. There is also a diagonal gesture to accompany the ambiguous statements as well. She does this for every fact that she speaks, however if you watch her head during her declaratory statements, she does the same thing, but these are the promises she is supposed to be making and she will actually show which ones she really believes in. For instance at one point she made a statement to the effect that

.. this will provide health care for all Americans while simultaneously shaking her head as if to say no, not really, not all - only some.

When I watched her speech and payed attention to her body language, almost all the "good" parts (IMNSHO) are qualified as negative or ambiguous and all the self serving political promises are affirmative. If anyone else cares to post some specific examples that lay out what her real intentions are I would gladly like to see them.

Re:OT comment on her body language

[gatkinso]

The only body language you need to watch to know if a politician is lying is any movement of their lips.

I giet speaketh Middle English...

[snarfies]

ye insaensitieve clode!

Article Date???!

[kc2keo]

Published: Wednesday, April 09, 2008

Pot, meet kettle

[LanMan04]

That's just hateful, partisan rhetoric. followed by

Typical of the left. Lying about their opponent Hello pot, meet kettle!

Re:As Steven Wright says...

[autophile]

You can't have everything. Where would you put it?

I'd leave it all right where it was.

An Intellectual "Car Wash"

[The Angry Mick]

Nothing gets rid of the mud quicker than an intellectual "car wash". The more people become aware of sites like Media Matters and Fact Check, the less likely they'll be to buy into the bullshit.

I see what you're saying

[hassanchop]

That's it is a right and can only be removed by due process of law.

I agree.

Re:Didn't any of you guys ever work on a farm?

[Gordonjcp]

Bellwethers are not necessarily male, or neutered, and they aren't used to find other sheep (that is something that could work, but not because a neutered ram "ineffectually tries to mate with ewes". Where'd you hear that?). Bellwethers are frequently older females.

I breed sheep, oddly enough. You're right about the older females, though. They're often "pet lambs" that have grown up and are prepared to sell out the rest of the flock for a munch of something tasty ;-)

I for one...

[KoshClassic]

I am really sick of the Obama bandwagoners who are going around the internet insinuating that we're all supposed to give up our right to vote for whom we want to vote for, even if they aren't necessarily popular or have the best chance of winning. And its sad to see that creeping its way on to /. now too. What is the point of this article? Since there is supposedly only one guy watchng over Hillary's page, we can conclude that she's in political trouble and we shouldn't vote for her? WTF?

Hell, I am going to head over there right now and volunteer to help this guy out if it will shut up the author of this article and people like him.

Frankly, this is appalling

[Hillgiant]

How dare you compare the present administration to a bunch of carrots. Carrots are far to intelligent to warrant such a comparison.

Dismissed might be a bit of overstatement

[hassanchop]

In the last seven years, progressives have been dismissed

This doesn't really hold with the indisputable fact that the Democrats have controlled the House since the 2006 election. It's impossible to claim they have been dismissed while being in control of one of the most powerful institutions in the world, unless you're trying to destroy your own credibility.

And your entire post is one large Tu quoque argument.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

If you're going to get upset about the "debacles of the last seven years" you need to lay blame where it belongs, and you haven't.

Answer me THAT, Mr Churchill!

[SteveFoerster]

And what was the truth doing with its pants off that gave the lie such a big head start, hmm?