I am a lifelong Democratic voter.  I am not a "concern troll" or any other kind of troll.  I am voting for Barrack Obama because he is a Democrat.  I believe that Barrack Obama will be far better for this country than John McCain or any Republican.  

Yet, I have to get something off my chest. And unless I do,  I wont feel like I am fully "on board" with this election.  

Joe Biden said today that "Hillary Clinton may have been a better pick than me."   I respect Joe Biden. I always have, and I always will.  And the purpose of this diary is not to write a "shoulda woulda coulda" rant like Hillary warned against in her heartfelt concession.

But why the hell didn't Obama even consider Hillary Clinton as his runningmate?   I honestly don't get it.  She won 18 million votes.  Every time someone mentioned "the dream ticket" at a public forum, the person who mentioned it received a standing ovation.  

I just want to know why.  Hillary would have made history,  added excitement to the ticket,  would have helped Obama bring the full brunt of the Democratic Party to the GOP.  And now, it turns out, that Hillary's top fundraisers have been lukewarm to Obama, while he is having trouble meeting his financial goals.  

Hillary received 18 million votes.  Thats more than any candidate running for their party's nomination ever received besides Obama (no I am not going to get into a pissing contest about which candidate received more votes,  but the undisputable fact is that Hillary was more popular than any Democrat who ever tried to earn their party's nomination, with the exception of perhaps Obama).  What does it take to get a spot on the Democratic ticket these days?   I just dont get it.

I wrote this (rather lame) diary just to vent.  But I also think it would be nice if Obama would give us some sort of an explanation as to why Hillary wasn't considered.  Seeing Sarah Palin in the limelight making history just drives me nuts.  She did nothing to earn her place.  Hillary did.  And yet Hillary was not even considered.  It also makes me enraged when I see Hillary stumping for Obama, like a true warrior, reminding us what "could have been", all the while knowing that as for right now, Sarah Palin, an anti-choice, anti-gay bigot, with zero experience, has a better shot at the vice presidency than Hillary.

Like I mentioned, I am on board with Obama.  I support him.  I just would like some answers-  something, anything to latch onto-  that would ease my mind about this.  There has to be a rational explanation for Obama not considering her.  I believe there is, and I just dont know it yet.  

I look forward to your comments offering plausible explanations. I am sure I am not the only Hillary Clinton Democrat who is looking for the same type of explanation either.

UPDATE: WHILE I RENOUNCE AND REJECT "HILLARYIS44" I JUST LOVE HARRIET CHRISTIAN. SOME FOLKS THINK MY S/N WAS HIJACKED. I ASSURE YOU ITS ME. I WANT TO ADOPT THE LADY! I AGREED WITH EVERY WORD SHE SAID!!!! BUT THAT WAS LAST WEEK! THIS IS THIS WEEK. SO NOW I SUPPORT BARRACK OBAMA, BECAUSE HE IS THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE. HE IS NOT MY CHOICE OF A NOMINEE. BUT HE IS OUR NOMINEE AND I WILL WORK TO SUPPORT HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Listen folks, Obama's policy's are 95 percent the same as Hillary's.  How could I not support him (even though I am pissed off)????

I have long defended the site "Hillaryis44" on MYDD.  While I admit their methods were "hardball" and the site was very negative towards Obama,  I assumed the methods of the site were "just politics."  I have donated to the site, and have sported "Hillaryis44" buttons and gave many to my friends.  Sadly, I now denounce and reject the site.  

It has become a "dead-enders" site and will attack anyone who tries to provide a reality check to them.

Please accept my apology for ever being involved in such a subversive website.  I am still praying for the dream ticket!!!   And I still love Hillary, but I will throw my full support behind our nominee!!!!!!!!!!!!!  

UPDATE...........SOME comments from Hillaryis44 about my decision:

dot48 Says:
June 8th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
sandy .. I'm resentful you'd post here and say you'll vote obama. Right now is a very hard time for us. could you just go away with your cheerleading for bambi. We are working to defeat him .. go find an Obama site to parade around on.

dot48 Says:
June 8th, 2008 at 8:14 pm
just don't talk about voting for bambi. we are trying to be sure he stays OUT of the WH. If you want to celebrate bambi go to his site.

dot48 Says:

June 8th, 2008 at 8:27 pm

sandy, for one thing .. he is the nominee unless something takes him out .. the DNC has already made sure of that. Hillary had her option of going to the convention blackmailed and shoved with threats of all sorts. She was shy 150 delegates .. yesterday 300 superdelegates bailed. So now she is about 450 delegates shy.

I hope scandal cripples him before the convention ..but I'm not holding my breath. Whoever had the tape has most likely been bought off.

basil9 Says:

June 8th, 2008 at 8:43 pm
Sandy,

We KNOW what she said and we also know what she DIDN'T say! We know what she meant by the look in her eyes, the tone of her voice, the poetry of her language, the subtlty of her gestures.

No one here needs you giving us a play-by-play of her speech.

Why don't you go over to Taylor Marsh's `new' site. They're very receptive to your message.

WE AREN'T!

curiosityhasme Says:

June 8th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
sandy1938:

In all due respect, although you have every right to your own opinion, our loyalty is so deep to HRC (allergic to koolaid) that we can in no way vote for the arm of the party that has resorted to blackmailing and distorting democracy. I dunno, perhaps the study that says biology dictates how you think and how you'll vote may be valid. There are supporters who can't divorce the treatment of almost eighteen million citizens by "our" partythe BHO camp or Big Media and intend to protest to the last dog dies.

If you feel differently, then - like the study says, it could be biological. Meanwhile, back at the ranch - this is not the sentiment that is an option to our cause, and that is why others have mentioned other pro-Obama sites. It is unrealistic for you to think your plans would be met with any other feeling but disdain.

In no way do the loyal HRC supporters intend to sit back and watch this site we respect and hold dear be overtaken as others have by BHO supporters. So, having blogged that, I have to agree that it is an afront to view "logic" that we do not subscribe to, as the sentiment here is that there is no logic that justifies support for BHO. NONE whatsoever. Sorry to be so blunt, but again, your intentions would be welcome many other places, but not here. Thank you for understanding that we will not be undermined in spirit

1950democrat Says:

June 8th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
sandy and others,

I will work twice as hard for McCain against an Obama/Clinton ticket than an Obama/anyone ticket.

The idea of Hilllary as Obama's VP is TOTALLY OBSCENELY OFFENSIVE. He abuses her, almost destroys her -- then she gets to IRON HIS SHIRT for four or eight years? After SHE gets him elected in November, which he could never do for himselfl!

She is 60. She has an excellent and comfortable career in the Senate, is in line for another Pres run in 2012 (or 2008 if the DNC come to its senses) -- and she's supposed to give up EIGHT YEARS to propping up her abuser? Effectively the rest of her active life!

Sorry but that is not the message I want to see given to our daughters.

Hillary has said she doesn't want VP but will take it if the party wants her to help him get elected. Some people are spinning that she WANTS it. I doubt that -- but even if she did, I'm not going to be a party to lettting her tie herself up as an enabler of her abuser. I'll fight that harder than any other Obama ticket.

moononpluto Says:

June 8th, 2008 at 9:38 pm

well that just about confirms you are a troll in to sew discontent. I won't lower myself to respond to your words now but suffice to say, we all know who the real hillary supporters are here. No one asked you to not voice your opinion but you are shouting, you are being disrespectful and now downright rude.

GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!!

You know what is really sad???????   I just love those women.  I felt like Hillaryis44 was a movement.  And this is how I was treated.  

But if you look in the comments section of my previous diary, I guess on this site, I am not allowed to support Harriet Christian either.  

I remember the days when Democrats were Democrats and we all could speak our mind!  Evidently those days are gone.  

UPDATE: WHILE I RENOUNCE AND REJECT "HILLARYIS44" I JUST LOVE HARRIET CHRISTIAN. SOME FOLKS THINK MY S/N WAS HIJACKED. I ASSURE YOU ITS ME. I WANT TO ADOPT THE LADY! I AGREED WITH EVERY WORD SHE SAID!!!! BUT THAT WAS LAST WEEK! THIS IS THIS WEEK. SO NOW I SUPPORT BARRACK OBAMA, BECAUSE HE IS THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE. HE IS NOT MY CHOICE OF A NOMINEE. BUT HE IS OUR NOMINEE AND I WILL WORK TO SUPPORT HIM!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have long defended the site "Hillaryis44" on MYDD.  While I admit their methods were "hardball" and the site was very negative towards Obama,  I assumed the methods of the site were "just politics."  I have donated to the site, and have sported "Hillaryis44" buttons and gave many to my friends.  Sadly, I now denounce and reject the site.  

It has become a "dead-enders" site and will attack anyone who tries to provide a reality check to them.

Please accept my apology for ever being involved in such a subversive website.  I am still praying for the dream ticket!!!   And I still love Hillary, but I will throw my full support behind our nominee!!!!!!!!!!!!!  

GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!!

On October 4, 2007 Elizabeth Edwards discussed voter disenfranchisement from the 2000 and 2004 elections:

"I was very disappointed, not just because we did not count the votes, but because we promised people that if they stood in line and fought for the right to vote, that we would fight with them," Mrs. Edwards told Richard Green, the host of "Clout" on Air America Radio.

But perhaps Ms. Edwards most eerily prophetic statement about voter disenfranchisement came earlier in the year (July 2007):

"The votes don't belong to Al Gore or John Kerry or John Edwards, they belong to the voters."  

I believed Elizabeth was right then, and I believe she is right now.  Those votes didn't belong to the politicians.  They belonged to the voters.  The same holds true with the votes of Florida and Michigan today.  They do not belong to Howard Dean.  They are not his to throw away!

Hillary Clinton has published a wonderful webpage titled "The Hillary I Know"  www.TheHillaryIKnow.com  where doubters can get a glimpse inside the actual person that is Hillary Rodham Clinton.  The site features moving accounts from some of her close friends and collegues, and has inspired me to write about my own experiences with the Senator from New York.

While I have only been in the same room as Hillary twice (once in 1992 and once in 2007), her example of "grace under fire" served as an inspiration to me during many troubling circumstances.

This is not really a diary but I just wanted to share a Happy Thanksgiving to all, espescially to those in need, during this horrible economy.

If you live in California, Nevada,  New Hampshire, Iowa, OR South Carolina,  Hillary Clinton's campaign is collecting canned goods and other non-perishables,  to help fight hunger.  Just stop by the campaign headquarters and drop it off.  

If not, Hillary's campaign advises that you give directly to America's Second Harvest, 1-800 VOLUNTEER, End Hunger Network, or Hunger Free America.

I have to say,  I am very happy that Hillary's campaign has decided to participate in this work to help the hungry.  It reminds me of why I am a Democrat!!!!!

WTG HILLARY!!!!!!

I am new to this site, and new to writing in BLOGS.  I have been reading this blog, as well as others, for quite awhile now.  In my first DIARY,  I would like to know why so many people seem to hold HILLARY CLINTON to a different standard than other Presidential candidates?  

For example, while HIllary did vote to authorize to use FORCE in IRAQ,  she also made it clear in her speech on October 12, 2002, that her vote was not to authorize a new foreign policy of pre-emptive warfare.  Furthermore,  Hillary Clinton also supported the BYRD AMMENDMENT, which would have limited the IRAQ war to ONE YEAR.  John Edwards both voted against, and lobbied against this ammendment to the joint resolution.

I keep reading that HILLARY CLINTON accepts FEDERAL LOBBYIST MONEY, but I have read that OBAMA and EDWARDS both accept LOCAL AND PAC LOBBYIST MONEY themselves.

I am not knocking any DEMOCRATIC CANDIDATE.  That is not the point of this diary, AT ALL.  The point is to ask others what they make of the seemingly DOUBLE STANDARD that people apply to HILLARY CLINTON.  Is it sexism?  Is it that familiarity breeds contempt (since she has been in the public spotlight for 15 years now), or is it that she is taking the heat for the perceived mistakes of her husband?  I honestly would like to hear what others have to say.