Reading this morning about Hillary Clinton getting all emotional the day before in New Hampshire, I just thought, "Well, she did a Muskie," and put it out of my mind as I went on with my day.
But tonight, when I heard someone on the telly speculate as to whether that was what caused her upset squeaker victory tonight, I realized we have just entered the Double Standard Zone: Ed Muskie cries in New Hampshire, he’s toast. Hillary cries in New Hampshire, she gets a come-from-behind victory.
The cynic in me wonders whether she got any coaching on this from Bill. I need to see the video: Did she bite her lip, or give the thumbs-up? But ultimately I doubt that.
I also doubt that the touchy-feely incident was what put her over the top. But then, maybe it’s just because that stuff doesn’t appeal to me. I asked Inez Tenenbaum (an Obama supporter) whether she thought it was possible that the incident had an effect on the outcome, and she didn’t rule it out. She thinks it helped humanize Mrs. Clinton.
Well, whatever caused her win, things are going to be very interesting down in South Carolina, and it’s hard to predict who’s going to be crying when it’s all over.
Never count out that Clinton magic. Go Hillary!
Muskie’s breakdown was real.
Hillary’s was calculated, and orchestrated, probably with the collaboration of a “journalist” setting up the question.
Both of them are people who cannot think on their feet, incapable of handling pressure and problems coming at them without a script.
But there is one big difference between Hillary and Muskee. One day people will be calling Hillary – President Clinton.
The excitement of another 8 years of a Clinton in the White House send goosebumps down my spine. Imagine 8 more years of unbridled proseperity. 8 more years of progress in world affairs culminating in a much more peaceful world. 8 years to bring about the dream of universal health care.
All you folks on the right should just admit that the Clinton years were much better than the disasterous years we’ve had to endure under our current leader. We’re now well on our way to a second Bush recession. We occupy harmless foreign nations on the basis of unwarranted fear while we ignore real threats that culminate in the slaughter of 3,000 Americans.
It’s time we dig deep down into our memories and reflect on the progress we made during the 1990s to bring about a much better world for all people, not just for a handful of privelaged Americans. There is still some magic left in the Clinton bag of tricks. It’s time to re-open that grand and glorious chapter in America.
The sentiment appears to be (not like it ever changed) that all Black people must support Barack Obama, regardless if his political positions differ with that Black voter. Any who deviate are fair game from the traditional attacks.But it would appear, not all Blacks are toeing the line. It’ll be interesting to see if the effort is made to denigrate the “blackness” of those not so accessible?Among blacks, Obama’s favorables are high (60 percent), but Clinton’s are higher (85 percent). Plus, Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, have deep roots in the black community always supporting black community, they have allot of excellent history for helping minorities. Black leaders are not interested as much in Obama as one might think either, how does that necessarily affect what the general Black American population thinks of him? We learned in NH not to trust media coverage any longer. Truth is and some of you may have noticed Barack is not getting the automatic support from African Americans that many assumed he would get since throwing his hat into the ring for the Democratic nomination for the presidency and (Louis Chude-Sokei, L.A Times article) makes an effort to inform us as to why this might be true. Unfortunately, while it has a few good points it misses the mark in too many ways. The main point, Obama isn’t “black enough” to get the support of the standing Black American leadership because of his White/Hawaiian/African (meaning NOT African American, but real African) heritage. all this goes to explain why Black leaders don’t seem to be warming to Obama as far as this University professor is concerned. Obamas public line of thinking, all things black in the US threatens the lock on the dem nominamtion, turning away non-black and educated black voters who won the iowa caucus for him. The tides have changed Obama will need to use more than ½ of his race to get educated black voters to support him. He now needs to begin showing substance and back away from the preaching. NH is a perfect example of whats to come.
Bud, I think you have been drinking too many “buds” and you are no “wiser” for it.
As for the black voters not supporting Obama will if that is your choice then don’t expect any sympathy when you start crying about blacks not having a chance.
I am white and a Libertarian and Obama is the only democrat I would even consider voting for. He is the only democrat that has any hope of getting anything done. Besides that Hillary is who the republicans want to run against. She is very beatable, Obama would be hard to beat.
Since the US Treasury is tapped out, all the handouts being promised by Obama and Hillary can only be accomplished by cannibalizing other social welfare programs.
Raising taxes even a tiny bit will put us back into a recession, as Clinton did 3 times.