<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Hillary&#8217;s Troubling Implication</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html</link>
	<description>This is China</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 04:48:33 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Bobby</title>
		<link>http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-407</link>
		<dc:creator>Bobby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2008 06:29:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-407</guid>
		<description>Hey Eric,

Did you ever hear the speech he gave just before the vote on the war? There was a line that went "I'm not against all wars, just stupid ones." Unless you are implying that he would have thought it was a 'stupid war,' been 'against' it, but voted for it, I'd say his record is pretty clear.

I'm an Edwards guy myself, but let's be fair about this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Eric,</p>
<p>Did you ever hear the speech he gave just before the vote on the war? There was a line that went &#8220;I&#8217;m not against all wars, just stupid ones.&#8221; Unless you are implying that he would have thought it was a &#8217;stupid war,&#8217; been &#8216;against&#8217; it, but voted for it, I&#8217;d say his record is pretty clear.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m an Edwards guy myself, but let&#8217;s be fair about this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bobby</title>
		<link>http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-406</link>
		<dc:creator>Bobby</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2008 06:25:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-406</guid>
		<description>Nan:

Do you count as being a son of an immigrant if your father lived in the US two years and went back to Kenya?

Wasn't his mother's second husband Indonesian or something? That family was like a tiny United Nations.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nan:</p>
<p>Do you count as being a son of an immigrant if your father lived in the US two years and went back to Kenya?</p>
<p>Wasn&#8217;t his mother&#8217;s second husband Indonesian or something? That family was like a tiny United Nations.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eric</title>
		<link>http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-344</link>
		<dc:creator>eric</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jan 2008 00:35:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-344</guid>
		<description>in regard to the war. obama was not in the senate to vote for the war. no one could be sure what he would have voted if he was.  historical perspective. it DID seem like the right thing to do at the time. at least the part where her representation of opinions of new york state is concerned.

your examples of dean and romney are solid.  but romney's prob isnt no one cares about him. its that he is a fake. people in massachuessets are disgusted by his changes in position. he hardly need to cry to prove that he is not genuine.
although i wasnt particularly referring to these candidates.  i was thinking more in the line of JFK.  maybe most people think she isnt at that level yet. 

my interpretation of her speech is that she doesnt think that obama would win the general election if he was the nominee. and another republican, especially given how conservative the repulican field this year is or inept when they are not conservative or both (with the notable exception of mccain). it would be disastrous for both the united states and the world to have another republican in the white house.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>in regard to the war. obama was not in the senate to vote for the war. no one could be sure what he would have voted if he was.  historical perspective. it DID seem like the right thing to do at the time. at least the part where her representation of opinions of new york state is concerned.</p>
<p>your examples of dean and romney are solid.  but romney&#8217;s prob isnt no one cares about him. its that he is a fake. people in massachuessets are disgusted by his changes in position. he hardly need to cry to prove that he is not genuine.<br />
although i wasnt particularly referring to these candidates.  i was thinking more in the line of JFK.  maybe most people think she isnt at that level yet. </p>
<p>my interpretation of her speech is that she doesnt think that obama would win the general election if he was the nominee. and another republican, especially given how conservative the repulican field this year is or inept when they are not conservative or both (with the notable exception of mccain). it would be disastrous for both the united states and the world to have another republican in the white house.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh</title>
		<link>http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-342</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 13 Jan 2008 00:22:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-342</guid>
		<description>Romney got hammered on Meet the Press for 'crying'. The difference is no one cares about Romney.

Dean's entire candidacy went down the tube with one yell. That was played even more than the tearing up Clinton. 

The most troubling part for me was what she actually said in that speech
"I have so may opportunities in this country, I just don't want us to fall back"
(ie- Obama would make the country slip 'back')
"some of us are right, and some of us are wrong" 
(which issue is it exactly that they are so far apart on? The only one I can think of is the war, and she's right, one of them was right and one of them was wrong.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Romney got hammered on Meet the Press for &#8216;crying&#8217;. The difference is no one cares about Romney.</p>
<p>Dean&#8217;s entire candidacy went down the tube with one yell. That was played even more than the tearing up Clinton. </p>
<p>The most troubling part for me was what she actually said in that speech<br />
&#8220;I have so may opportunities in this country, I just don&#8217;t want us to fall back&#8221;<br />
(ie- Obama would make the country slip &#8216;back&#8217;)<br />
&#8220;some of us are right, and some of us are wrong&#8221;<br />
(which issue is it exactly that they are so far apart on? The only one I can think of is the war, and she&#8217;s right, one of them was right and one of them was wrong.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: eric</title>
		<link>http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-340</link>
		<dc:creator>eric</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jan 2008 23:58:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-340</guid>
		<description>Hillary Clinton voted for the war along with the majority of the senate. and that includes a lot of democrats.  American consensus at the time was not overtly anti-war. Was it a wise choice? NO. but should she be blamed for representing the opinions that she was supposed to represent?

Hillary Clinton is not a flip-flopper like Romney. at least not a blatant one. in massachuessets,  romney is not particularly well-liked for all his changes in positions. but in new york state, the support for the clintons are going even higher.

nanheyangrouchuan mentioned that being black/son of immigrant. but that IS his platform. where do people see obama as an agent of change?  his record in chicago? which is mediocre at best.   or the raw greed he had exhibited towards power? i personally do not even find obama likeable.

the show of emotion by clinton had been much ridiculed. but what people have to understand is that the reason it had worked is because it was RARE.  im not going to go to a debate over whether or not it was genuine. but why is it that men in politics could cry but when a woman politican makes a RARE show of emotion, she is ridiculed? this precisely why she thought she had to appear tough at the beginning of her campagin.  LATENT SEXISM!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hillary Clinton voted for the war along with the majority of the senate. and that includes a lot of democrats.  American consensus at the time was not overtly anti-war. Was it a wise choice? NO. but should she be blamed for representing the opinions that she was supposed to represent?</p>
<p>Hillary Clinton is not a flip-flopper like Romney. at least not a blatant one. in massachuessets,  romney is not particularly well-liked for all his changes in positions. but in new york state, the support for the clintons are going even higher.</p>
<p>nanheyangrouchuan mentioned that being black/son of immigrant. but that IS his platform. where do people see obama as an agent of change?  his record in chicago? which is mediocre at best.   or the raw greed he had exhibited towards power? i personally do not even find obama likeable.</p>
<p>the show of emotion by clinton had been much ridiculed. but what people have to understand is that the reason it had worked is because it was RARE.  im not going to go to a debate over whether or not it was genuine. but why is it that men in politics could cry but when a woman politican makes a RARE show of emotion, she is ridiculed? this precisely why she thought she had to appear tough at the beginning of her campagin.  LATENT SEXISM!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh</title>
		<link>http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-334</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 23:34:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-334</guid>
		<description>@Chuck,

It's true on style Hillary really is Mitt Romney. 

While I do tend to dismiss the Ron Paul 'movement' it would be nice if you made a fuller argument before you call a poster out by name. Can you expand you case a little (at all)?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Chuck,</p>
<p>It&#8217;s true on style Hillary really is Mitt Romney. </p>
<p>While I do tend to dismiss the Ron Paul &#8216;movement&#8217; it would be nice if you made a fuller argument before you call a poster out by name. Can you expand you case a little (at all)?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chuck</title>
		<link>http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-333</link>
		<dc:creator>Chuck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 04:42:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-333</guid>
		<description>Uh, and anyone in favor of Ron Paul for president should both pay $200 and not have their favored candidate get more than 10% of any vote.  Zach Kang, you win!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Uh, and anyone in favor of Ron Paul for president should both pay $200 and not have their favored candidate get more than 10% of any vote.  Zach Kang, you win!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chuck</title>
		<link>http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-332</link>
		<dc:creator>Chuck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 04:41:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-332</guid>
		<description>Yes!!!  I finally agree!  Actually, I think HIllary is a horrific candidate, but not for the reasons that Howard Dean was.  You made a perfect comparison with Mitt Romney.  Two people who revoltingly make their positions based on what will get them elected.

Let's hope we aren't faced with the choice between the two of them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes!!!  I finally agree!  Actually, I think HIllary is a horrific candidate, but not for the reasons that Howard Dean was.  You made a perfect comparison with Mitt Romney.  Two people who revoltingly make their positions based on what will get them elected.</p>
<p>Let&#8217;s hope we aren&#8217;t faced with the choice between the two of them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: zach kang</title>
		<link>http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-331</link>
		<dc:creator>zach kang</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2008 02:47:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-331</guid>
		<description>If you really care about US, lets chant "Ron paul 4 president!"
  Hillary is fun to watch...Obama is boring, Edward is retarded. And don't underestimate the entertainment value of Bill.
  She will win the same reason why you guys elect GwB. Who doesn't want to think themselves cleverer than the president.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If you really care about US, lets chant &#8220;Ron paul 4 president!&#8221;<br />
  Hillary is fun to watch&#8230;Obama is boring, Edward is retarded. And don&#8217;t underestimate the entertainment value of Bill.<br />
  She will win the same reason why you guys elect GwB. Who doesn&#8217;t want to think themselves cleverer than the president.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: nanheyangrouchuan</title>
		<link>http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-328</link>
		<dc:creator>nanheyangrouchuan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2008 03:18:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cupofcha.com/2008/01/09/hillarys-troubling-implication.html#comment-328</guid>
		<description>Part of Hillary’s platform is that she is a woman.

There is no part of Barak’s platform that includes being black or being the son of an immigrant.

Hillary has all but said that she deserves the White House by saying that it’s high time the US had a woman in the White House. Why not Condi or Jean Kirkpatrick?

Further more, Hillary either faked tears for support or couldn’t hold composure after a few barbs from the press. In a Clinton administration will she really have a break down or lash out ala Richard Nixon when the press comes after her for policy missteps? And its not that women can’t lead, Golda Meir, Indihra Ghandi and Benazir Bhutto actually suffered personal and family loss as well as living under the threat of death (two lost their lives for their countries) and rose to the occasion. Hillary is none of them, especially because she wants, demands and thinks she deserves such power and influence.

And for women around the US to jump on the Hillary bandwagon just because she is a woman does not say much for our voting population. This group believes it is “bad men” vs “good, female Hillary”.
That is a sexist, horrible and dangerous thing to believe when we are talking about someone who will inherit the world’s economy and world’s police force. And as if women are incorruptible?

If she does win the Dem nomination, I hope McCain wins the Republican nod because that is where my vote will go.

Otherwise, I vote for hope, positive thinking and coming together. Aka Barak Obama.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Part of Hillary’s platform is that she is a woman.</p>
<p>There is no part of Barak’s platform that includes being black or being the son of an immigrant.</p>
<p>Hillary has all but said that she deserves the White House by saying that it’s high time the US had a woman in the White House. Why not Condi or Jean Kirkpatrick?</p>
<p>Further more, Hillary either faked tears for support or couldn’t hold composure after a few barbs from the press. In a Clinton administration will she really have a break down or lash out ala Richard Nixon when the press comes after her for policy missteps? And its not that women can’t lead, Golda Meir, Indihra Ghandi and Benazir Bhutto actually suffered personal and family loss as well as living under the threat of death (two lost their lives for their countries) and rose to the occasion. Hillary is none of them, especially because she wants, demands and thinks she deserves such power and influence.</p>
<p>And for women around the US to jump on the Hillary bandwagon just because she is a woman does not say much for our voting population. This group believes it is “bad men” vs “good, female Hillary”.<br />
That is a sexist, horrible and dangerous thing to believe when we are talking about someone who will inherit the world’s economy and world’s police force. And as if women are incorruptible?</p>
<p>If she does win the Dem nomination, I hope McCain wins the Republican nod because that is where my vote will go.</p>
<p>Otherwise, I vote for hope, positive thinking and coming together. Aka Barak Obama.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
