Booman Tribune ~ A Progressive Community

What do I think? About the Hillary speech?

by Arthur Gilroy
Wed Aug 27th, 2008 at 08:57:37 AM EST

TerenceDC posted an article today simply titled Hillary.

In it, he wrote:

In the first two sentences, she unequivocally supported Barack Obama. Then she talked about her campaign -- about the people she was in it for -- and then she laid it on the line with one question: "Were you in it for me? Or were you in it for them?"
The answer was clear: You've got to be in it for them, and if you're in it for them, you've got to elect Barack Obama.
But you saw the same speech. What do you think?

On the basis of what I heard last night from the pundit brigade...GOD how I loathe most of them!!!...and a quick morning survey of the media/blog reactions, her motives are still being deeply mistrusted by a large portion of the so-called "Democratic" segments of this society.

So I started to write a reply to TerenceDC's post.

It grew.

Read on for my own views if you are so inclined.

I think that after 35 years of consistent effort in the name of the best parts of the American dream...political effort, the prime component of which game is compromise if one is to succeed...Hillary Rodham Clinton ought to be given the benefit of the doubt about her motives.

And she is not. Not in Lower Leftiness Blogovia and not in its big brother, the mass media. (A big brother that the leftiness blogoshpere is increasingly coming to resemble in its hunger for "stories", its delight in controversy for its own sake. As above, so below. Little meta on the blogs, big meta in the media. "She said what!!! About WHOM!!! We are OUTRAGED!!!" Etc. Whether that sort of thing is about some slob couch potato blogging from a trailer park in Iowa or about HRC...same same. It brings attention. It sells.)

What if...what if Hillary Clinton was simply telling the truth up there last night?

Were you in it for me? Or were you in it for them?

What if that is the whole truth of the matter when reduced to its essential base?

Is that an impossibility, O you Hillary haters, doubters and parsers?

What do I think?

I think that she would have been a great President.

I think that she would have been a great Vice-President.,

I think that either a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton ticket would have cold cocked the Ratpublican machine and that the Dems would have won big in November.

I think that the unrestrained daily input of two people who have already dealt with the BIG DC dogs...intel, the military establishment and the rest of the massive PermaGov bureaucracy...would have smoothed Obama's way once he is elected, and that such a possibility is now probably lost because he tried to isolate her.

I think that the Dems traded a sure 16 years in power and a real mandate for change...8 for HRC, the 8 for Obama...for an iffy election and (if successful in said election) a rough first term presidency that may well resemble Jimmy Carter's tenure in the White House more than say FDR's.

That's what I think.

Your results may differ.

We shall see.

Soon.

Very, very soon.

Bet on it.

What do I think? About the Hillary speech? | 9 comments (9 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

And don't you DARE try to lump me in (none / 1)

w/the PUMA fools.

Ain't about that.

It's just about winning, and winning as big as possible.

All tips and recs gratefully accepted.

Later...

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Wed Aug 27th, 2008 at 09:00:26 AM EST

Re: And don't you DARE (none / 0)

I agree with you somewhat on the issue of Clinton's motives.

I don't think she should be given the benefit of the doubt, exactly. But we have an election to win. Hillary did what she was supposed to do and she did it well. We don't need more division because that is the only thing that can lose this election for us now.

On the other hand, not everything is roses with the Clinton Camp. It benefits us to ignore that as much as possible. Obviously, the Media is not going to ignore it.

by BooMan on Wed Aug 27th, 2008 at 09:14:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: And don't you DARE (none / 0)

Unfortunately, division is NOT "the only thing that can lose this election for us now. "

If Obama runs a perfect campaign.

If And if THEN only internal DemRat-style division can lose this thing.

That's a WHOLE lotta "ifs", Booman.

Ifs that would have been largely ameliorated by Hillary Clinton's inclusion on the ticket.

We shall see.

I pray for the best, because I do not want to have to leave this country.

I pray for the best.

If McCain wins, I am gone within the year.

Bet on it.

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Wed Aug 27th, 2008 at 09:28:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Misprinted. Sorry. Here's the whole thing. (none / 0)

Unfortunately, division is NOT "the only thing that can lose this election for us now. "

If Obama runs a perfect campaign.

If the still potent Ratpublican smear machine does not succeed in totally Swift Boating Barack Obama.

And if there is not still a working majority of white American voters who are in their heart of hearts racist to the core.

THEN only internal (and apparently eternal as well.) DemRat-style division can lose this thing.

That's a WHOLE lotta "ifs", Booman.

Ifs that would have been largely ameliorated by Hillary Clinton's inclusion on the ticket.

We shall see.

I pray for the best, because I do not want to have to leave this country.

I pray for the best.

If McCain wins, I am gone within the year.

Bet on it.

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Wed Aug 27th, 2008 at 09:32:50 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: do not overlook (4.00 / 2)

AG,

Hillary may have been sincere. I listened on radio. She said all she had to say. Most of it was plenty late.

About the ticket Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama.

Let it go.

There are two points worth repeating:

- Thanks to the Clintons, it was a very divisive campaign. As seasoned politicians - 35 or 40 years worth - the Clintons violated the most cardinal rule in politics:

"Thou shall speak no evil or make any criticism of a fellow party member that will in turn be used as a sword against the Party or the member during an election"

we're witnesses to the recent McCain Ads. The Clintons were warned these would be the end result. But you know it has been all about the Clintons. They've used the party and the OoP for personal gain.

Shamelessly.

Memories are indeed short. Very.

- Bill Clinton would not allow vetting. Too many post White House skeletons (read Bloomberg, WSJ or FT) Clinton will not release the funding donors for his presidential library and all that influence peddling - WOW, he earned on ONE deal $131 million dollars. And there's more.

This couple has a lot of new baggage and we need not remind of the others.

There is a 'best before date,' an 'expiry date and 'time chart date.' The Clintons time charts have expired. {Let give me a reminder: All last summer '07 into winter, within this community, I wrote "Hillary's campaign will implode and if by a fluke she gets the nomination she'll not win."}

One last point on the GE and Dems being divided. The media reminds us every two minutes. NPR takes the award .

Imho the HRC supporters who won't come around to supporting Obama "because they're so committed to her" is a ruse. They have a problem and it's not that Hillary lost. Those holdouts won't be voting for a black man or half white man or any candidate that is not DNA true blue eyed...in need of some color enhancements like the Queen Elizabeth I cousins.

They'll live to regret because a loss to McCain will be first laid at their feet.

Well, "You can't vote for war and disown the results"

by idredit on Wed Aug 27th, 2008 at 08:08:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What do I think? About the Hillary speech? (none / 1)

Artie, you and I both know the next several years are going to be a complete disaster in this country. Some truly ugly stuff is coming that the last eight years (if not the last 28 years) have all been leading up to.

The tools are in place to complete the transformation into America the police state. All that remains is the excuse to use them.

If the fix is in for the GOP to execute that plan, the inclusion of Hillary on the ticket wouldn't change a damn thing and you know it, not with Diebold running things.

Either Obama can win without Hillary over McSame, or he can't. The margin Hillary could have provided wouldn't matter a piss in the wind if the fix is in. Once again the exit polls across the country would be "consistently wrong across the board" just like they were in 2004.

The problem is much, much larger than the Clintons.

More at Zandar vs. The Stupid.

by Zandar1 on Wed Aug 27th, 2008 at 09:55:09 AM EST

Re: What do I think? About the Hillary speech? (none / 0)

Could be.

At which point...it's Plan B for me.

Outta here, probably forever.

But...I believe that Diebold-style fraud cannot fix elections past a certain point. That kind of vote theft is a fence, a temporary restraining order. In the face of a landslide, it would be worthless.

And I believe that the combination of Clinton and Obama would have produced that sort of landslide.

Now?

Now the whole thing is in play.

The best position for which the right could have possibly hoped given the disasters of the last 8 years under right-wing stewardship.

A minority candidate in a country that has been racist to the core for over 400 years.

An almost Adlai Stevenson-style intellectual running for President in a country that elects primitive red meat like Reagan and Bush II to multi-term incumbencies.

And a divided opposition party.

Good work, NeoCon fellas.

You are starting off in the best position possible.

And good work, Dems.

You done shot yourselves in BOTH feet, this time.

Why am I not surprised?

Later...

AG

Goodness had nothing to do with it, dearie.-Mae West

by Arthur Gilroy (arthurgilroy<at>earthlink.net) on Wed Aug 27th, 2008 at 10:56:29 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What do I think? About the Hillary speech? (none / 1)

..."either a Clinton/Obama or Obama/Clinton ticket would have cold cocked the Ratpublican machine and that the Dems would have won big in November."

l think that assumption is wrong. clinton on the ticket, as vp, would have united and energized and united the RATpublican base behind mccain like no other single issue or candidate could.

there's a reason talking heads like carville...a traitor if ever there was one...giuliani, mcstains campaign, william 'he bloody' kristol, etal, keep trying to make hillary the issue...aside from the fact they've got nothing to run on...it's because there is a visceral ~~dislike~~ hatred for all things clinton out there. add all the baggage that she and bill bring, especially from big dogs' second term, to the specter of racist driven voting, and you'dve ended up with prez. mcstain for sure...that l do believe.

as for the supposition thet she would've been a great president, or vice-president, l disagree, but at least we've been spared the ignominy of finding that out the hard way.

the revolution will not be televised...Peace

by dada on Wed Aug 27th, 2008 at 01:43:30 PM EST

Re: What do I think? About the Hillary speech? (none / 1)

Hillary might well have been a good president, or vice president. Last night she reminded us of how she got this far.

but she has way too much baggage. Bill would get in the way, I'm certain of it. His big mouth did a lot to cost her the candidacy, and his slimy business associates are the biggest reason she shouldn't have been picked as VP.

The Four Horsemen of Bushism: War, Corruption, Hypocrisy and Greed

by esquimaux (esquimaux1 at gmail dot com) on Wed Aug 27th, 2008 at 03:22:26 PM EST

What do I think? About the Hillary speech? | 9 comments (9 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Go to: [ Booman Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

. Home
. About
. Contact
. Advertise
. FAQ
. Search

Username:
Password:

. Make a new account
. Reset password

Proud member of

The Liberal Blog Network

a FeedBurner Network

Advertise in The Liberal Blog Network

Subscribe to this network

Gift Cards * New Arrivals

NOTE: Overstock bests Amazon's prices and is "blue."

THE BOOKS WITH "BUZZ":
______________

Learn the real story behind the WMD in Iraq:

The Way of the World: A Story of Truth and Hope in an Age of Extremism
by Ron Suskind

Read Barack Obama's vision for America:

The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream
by Barack Obama

DaveW recommends:

I Am a Strange Loop
by Douglas Hofstadter

Need some laughs?

I Am America (and So Can You!)
by Stephen Colbert

rae recommends:

Dark Ages America: The Final Phase of Empire
by Morris Berman.

On BooMan’s shelf:

The End of Iraq: How American Incompetence Created a War Without End
by Peter W. Galbraith

This looks interesting:

Adventure Divas
by Holly Morris

Here’s a good one from
Elizabeth Gilbert:

Eat Pray Love
by Elizabeth Gilbert

"Crash" * Best Motion Picture, Academy Awards * Only $11.79 at Overstock * 2006 SAG Winner, Best Ensemble

Check out
Powell's new section:
NEW FAVORITES
Selected new arrivals at 30% off

Recommended by Indianadem and ejmw:
The Conscience of a Liberal
by Paul Wellstone

From northcountry’s bookshelf:

The New Golden Age:
The Coming Revolution Against
Political Corruption and Economic Chaos by Ravi Batra

A novel about contractors in Iraq from the woman that runs The Spy That Billed Me:

Outsourced: A Novel
from RJ Hillhouse.

Download Sleeper Cell on iTunes

(Better than "24") Download Weeds on iTunes

(Hilarious 1/2-hour adult comedy starring Mary-Louise Parker) Download Late Nite with Conan O'Brien on iTunes

Download South Park on iTunes

James Hunter - People Gonna Talk:

Great Deals
----- * ^ * -----

Find mystery novels by Nancy Pickard ("Kansas")

Challenging Empire: How People, Governments, and the UN Defy US Power by Phyllis Bennis (interviewed on DN!)

Featured by Keith Olbermann, New (Powell's Sale): Rogue State: A Guide to the World's Only Superpower by William Blum (whose other books merit serious consideration)

"Explosive" State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration
by James Risen

The book the CIA doesn't want you to read: Jawbreaker: The Attack on Bin Laden and Al Qaeda: A Personal Account by the CIA's Key Field Commander
Larry Johnson's review

BT's all-time best seller:

PERMACULTURE:
A Designers' Manual
$79.95 * Sale: $59.95

Unequal Sisters: A Multicultural Reader in U.S. Women's History (Third Edition)

The Undercover Economist: Exposing Why the Rich Are Rich, the Poor Are Poor And Why You Can Never Buy a Decent Used Car!

The Worst Hard Time: The Untold Story of Those Who Survived the Great American Dust Bowl
by Timothy Egan

Green Press Initiative
----- * ^ * -----

Journalistas: 100 Years of the Best Writing and Reporting by Women Journalists by Eleanor Mills * NYT review

Bury Me Standing: the Gypsies & Their Journey

1491: New Revelations of the Americas before Columbus

Brokeback Mountain
by Annie Proulx
----- * ^ * -----
Check out Powell's
"At The Movies"

Imperial Ambitions: Conversations on the Post-9/11 World by Noam Chomsky (Power & Terror: Post 9-11 Talks)

The Price of Privilege:

How Parental Pressure and
Material Advantage Are Creating a Generation of
Disconnected and Unhappy Kids
by Madeline Levine

Save 35-70% on
name brand clothing,
footwear, and outdoor gear
at SierraTradingPost.com
:

We listened to PEN American Center's "State of Emergency" and found 1940s books by Curzio Malaparte only at Alibris. (Selection (MP3) excerpted from "The Skin.")

Banned Books * Are you a fan of Film Noir, Art House, Documentaries or Hong Kong Action? * Searching for a long-lost children's book or a first printing of Miles Davis' Kind of Blue on vinyl? Find it at Alibris!

:
:

Booman Tribune Homepage
admin@boomantribune.com
powered by Scoop

More blogs about Blogs at Technorati.