Widgetized Section

Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone

Hillary’s historic achievement?

By
August 7, 2008

“Obama has never shown proper regard for a campaign she (Hillary) believes was as historic an achievement as his,” according to an article in Time. It is a zero sum game to make the comparison between overcoming American racism vs. sexism. Just the same, here’s some perspective. There are about twice as many females as blacks serving in Congress.. We have had 29 female governors and only two black governors. Of course we had Ferraro run for VP. How many women who “didn’t know their place” were lynched by the Klan?

Time article: “Have the Clintons Gotten Over It?” link.

Add to the positions of power women have achieved in the United States the fact that England, India, Switzerland, Ireland, Finland, Chili, the Philipines and Germany among many other countries (see list) have or have had women as presidents or prime ministers.

True enough that this does not diminish the fact that Hillary Clinton came “this close” to breaking America’s rigid sexist presidential glass ceiling. This is a significant accomplishment.

With some noteworthy female exceptions like Benazir Bhutto (eldest child of former prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto) and Indira Ghandi (daughter of India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru) Hillary can thank a family member for opening the door to her own political career.

If Obama looses and she runs in 2012 I’ll campaign for one of her opponents in the primary. If she wins I’ll vote for her, but I will do so mentally holding my nose to avoid the memory of the stench of self-serving resentment emanating from her today.


Related – With friends like these department

Hillary Clinton makes debut in McCain attack ad

What about the Hillary Factor (from Fox)

Why is this even an issue? Hillary seeks delegate strategy at convo

and then there’s this: Romney vs. Clinton in 2012

32 Responses to Hillary’s historic achievement?

  1. Hal Brown

    August 7, 2008 at 7:38 pm

    If Hillary had won the nomination I would have supported her, albeit begrudgingly, against McCain. I’d be lambasting McCain six ways from Sunday here on Capitol Hill Blue despite my anger at Hillary for running what I considered a nasty campaign.

    McCain, not surprisingly is using this statement from Hillary in his latest ad:

    “I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002.” See video and note that the other Democrats shown praise McCain but only Clinton both praises him AND attacks Obama.

    Here’s a transcript”

    CHYRON (narrator): John McCain is a Maverick. Just ask Democrats.

    SEN. DASCHLE: He can work with Democrats on key issues whether it’s campaign finance reform or tobacco policy. He’s worked with us.

    SEN. BIDEN: John McCain is a personal friend, a great friend and I would be honored to run with or against John McCain.

    SEN. KERRY: I have enormous respect for him. He’s a courageous, patriotic American who stands up for what he believes.

    HOWARD DEAN: I admire Senator McCain greatly, he’s one of the people we modeled our campaign over because he is very direct, very blunt, and nobody has to guess at what he’s thinking.

    SEN. FEINGOLD: I love John McCain, he’s a great guy.

    CHYRON: Even Barack Obama has praise for the maverick.

    SEN. OBAMA: Since coming to Washington, I’ve believed that the right approach begins with the proposal put forward by Senator Lieberman and Senator McCain.

    CHYRON: Let’s let Hillary Clinton have the final say.

    SEN. CLINTON: I know Senator McCain has a lifetime of experience he will bring to the White House. And Senator Obama has a speech he gave in 2002.

    CHYRON: John McCain – Country First

    I can’t see how some Hilary supporters are sitting idly by and and giving free rein to McCain, a man who would appoint Supreme Court Justices who would overturn Roe vs. Wade and is likely to make Bush the imperial president look like Woody Allen’s tinpot dictator Gen. Emilio M. Vargas (Carlos Montalban)in “Bananas”.

    Worse, I can’t see how they are aiding and abetting McCain by trying to undermine Obama.

  2. colocritic

    August 7, 2008 at 9:18 pm

    Sherry, your defense of Hillary is admirable. I would feel the same way had Obama lost. However, I don’t agree with you that Obama is whining. It is such a pleasure to hear someone speak that can put a whole sentence together and pronounce the English language as is written. After 8 years of bumbling Bush, Obama’s ability to speak so intelligently and eloquently is catharses to my ears. He is a very brilliant man and will lead this country well, in my honest opinion.

    Perhaps if Hillary were to be more visible and vocal to her supporters about how she is trying to move on and support Obama, they, too, could be encouraged to do the same. Just today the stations are showing her in CA. still calling Obama her opponent. Words do matter. And, I think Hillary’s nasty politics and negative campaigning hurt her. Words do matter!

    colocritic

  3. RafaelApollo

    August 8, 2008 at 12:14 am

    EVERYTHING BUT THE VIOLINS! Hillary Clinton is the consummate, shape-shifting opportunist. All these supposed encores by her PUMAS supposedly calling her back on stage are pathetic. You have to keep in perspective that she’s a vehicle for Billy to get back into the oval office and that’s all this was for. Not for women. Not for Democrats. Not for anyone but the Clintons. Not for party, country or anyone or anything.

    The sad and transparent demonstration of voracious ego masquerading as a campaign is seen by too many for what it was, and the great historic value of this that she demands acknowledgment for, is nil. All those that I know were hooked into the slimy web that is the Clintons have slipped through and are no longer caught up in their smarmy games.

    I do not believe that there are many of her so-called eighteen million left. Those who bought her game the first time are off to something else now-having seen that she would have leapt at being with McCain if that “opportunity” presented itself. She goes where and does what benefits her and the petulant monster that is Mr. Executive Orders-the Constitution-be-damned. William Jefferson Clinton and his moll are falling through the cracks.

    Like vampires from their coffins they keep rising from obscurity to remind you that you owe them and-quite honestly-speaking from experience-they don’t get over it.

    Playing her women’s rights zealots against Obama-in the hopes that his class and eloquence and dignity and integrity and his brilliant campaign would fail did not work so she tried for Florida and Michigan. The whole scheme fell apart like their web. They don’t like that. So here they come again with their intimidation and manipulation trying to leverage whatever they can get from it. Like a remora or suckerfish attached to a shark…feeding on whatever is available. Perfect parasites.

    Obama doesn’t really seem too concerned. Really. He just keeps on keeping on and lets them bluster and babble and try to validate themselves with their pitiful corner of the spotlight. And he just keeps rising up above it all.

    I mean puh-lease-why would women’s rights activists ever vote for McCain with his rape jokes and his Miss Buffalo Chips and his doddering, stumbling misogynist mumblings. Obviously his Stepford robotress Cindy is his backdrop and any woman who really cares about women’s issues is not going to head in that direction and still look at herself in the mirror in good conscience.

    For the record I am non-party. I just happen to be endlessly amused at the parry and thrust between the Clintons and their quarry-Obama. McCain had been tailor-made for their part-time adversary and has been their ace in the past but I think the parade has passed them all by and the last band is folding up their tubas and going on to a victory that has little, if anything, to do with them.

    It can only serve to more clearly illuminate the truth about the self-serving Clintons and that they are simply attempting to get back out once more into the public eye. The public, though, is not what it has been. They see the Bushes and the Clintons pinch-hitting for each other and have had enough.

    Too many people see the evil for what it is.

    Historical? Hysterical, more like.

    Good work, Hal.

    The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be lighted.
    Plutarch

  4. sherry

    August 8, 2008 at 8:11 am

    I don’t know how many of the 18 million there are left, but this is one of them. I will work for the McCain campaign.
    Obama is great with speeches. Unfortunately, when he doesn’t have a teleprompter, he sounds like Bush. Note his response to the 7 year old yesterday who asked him why he is running for president. So help me, he sounded like Bush.
    He has taken more money from the oil industry than John McCain. To the poster who railed the Clintons about NAFTA, please note Obama has reassured the Canadians NAFTA is in place and will stay there.
    Hill’s flaws are legion, but she is not so arrogant that she would serve the US Senate for 143 days before deciding she has learned all she needs to know, and is now ready for POTUS.
    Obama would just like to pretend Hillary never happened. The scene with him dusting his shoulders as if to rid himself of something annoying relating to Hillary comes to mind.
    Dear Michelle came off the trail because she is about as popular as cancer. Her comment, “any woman who can’t run her own house has no business in the White House” comes to mind. What an arrogant shrew. Note to Michelle: comments like that tend to come back and haunt you. Just ask the Senator’s wife who said she would Bobbitt her husband if he cheated. It was revealed he spent a fortune on hookers.
    Perhaps I am just a pragmatic person. Having a person of color or a woman doesn’t impress me. I want someone who can get things done. Obama’s resume’ simply doesn’t support that.
    His treatment of HRC since the primaries ended is reprehensible.

  5. colocritic

    August 8, 2008 at 10:08 am

    Sherry says: He has taken more money from the oil industry than John McCain.

    An article from Political Intelligence says:…. McCain has raised more from nearly every other top giver in the oil and gas industry, including Hess Corp. — $91,000 to Obama’s $8,000.

    And, overall, McCain’s campaign has received about three times more from the oil and gas industry than Obama’s has — $1.3 million compared to about $394,000.

    http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008

  6. sherry

    August 8, 2008 at 10:29 am

    Colo, it was reported several times on BSNBC that Obama has taken more money than McCain from oil industry employees.
    Perhaps your article is outdated, or you actually believed that Obama’s millions came from $25 donations, rofl.

  7. pollchecker

    August 8, 2008 at 10:37 am

    Hal, despite the statistics, I believe it will be harder to elect a woman as our POTUS than a man of ANY minority ethnicity. Why?

    Mostly because of this “commander in chief” thing. People just don’t see women as Military leaders….at least not in this country.

    Governors, Congressmen, even Senators are not the same. They are elected by a regional group of people. None of those people are in the position of commanding men and women going into war.

    I do not believe that Hillary could have ever beaten McSame because of this issue….not to mention energizing every Clinton Hater in America to vote for McSame.

    However, I’m getting really tired of men dictating what is right and wrong for women. The sexism within our government is horrible. Hell, the sexism within our society is horrible. The problem is we can speak about racism as unacceptable. Sexism gets belittled and women get treated like we should Just get over it…and that is nothing but BS! I do not want a POTUS that thinks it is OK to publicly call his wife a C**T! That shows exactly what he thinks of women.

    My experiences with men show me that they often make things much more complicated than they should be. I would love to see a woman for POTUS…just not Hillary(again for reasons stated above and blogged about prior).

    Now, McSame is going to pretend to cater to women by probably nominating one as VP. The problem with that is he keeps preaching “EXPERIENCE” but if he picks a woman he is most likely going to go exactly OPPOSITE of his experience thing.

    So if we end of with this old man as our POTUS, we will have a green, inexperienced woman as VP who could be our commander in chief if and when McSame drops dead in the WH. What’s the difference then?

    As for those Hillary supporters who would rather vote for McSame rather than Obama……in the OLD DAYS, they would be called POOR LOSERS! They obviously don’t give a damn about what is good for women in our country…just their own hurt pride!

    Just more proof that elections are about emotions and not issues.

  8. sherry

    August 8, 2008 at 11:30 am

    pollchecker wrote:As for those Hillary supporters who would rather vote for McSame rather than Obama……in the OLD DAYS, they would be called POOR LOSERS! They obviously don’t give a damn about what is good for women in our country…just their own hurt pride!

    I outlined why I can’t vote for Obama. I don’t trust him. He has a pencil thin resume. He has accomplished nothing as a US Senator.
    As a woman, I don’t believe a president can single handedly take away women’s rights.
    I am not a one issue voter and while I would love to vote for a democrat, it is most unfortunate the DNC appointed Obama.

  9. pollchecker

    August 8, 2008 at 11:42 am

    As a woman, I don’t believe a president can single handedly take away women’s rights.

    That is where you and I disagreee. And the federal judge issue is a good example. Another good example is the HHS article I blogged about how the bureaucracy can change the rules at their own whim without repercussions about rules that effect women only. (you might want to check it out).

    I could go on and on. But if McSame becomes POTUS you will see for yourself.

    Btw, the DNC did not appoint Senator Obama and your comments throughout this entire blog as well as past comments made on other blogs (including mine) indicate to me that you are one of those voters who will vote emotionally which is why we have all these obnoxious lying ads aimed expressly at this very intent.

    But hey, for NOW, it is still a Free Country and you can vote or not vote for whoever you damn well please. It just seems odd that there are other candidates than Obama and McSame that perhaps would represent your views better but you choose McSame. Oh, well, to each their own. My conscious would not let me vote for someone who thinks they know better what I should be doing with my body than I do.

  10. colocritic

    August 8, 2008 at 11:42 am

    Sherry, here is another link just posted this morning on Think Progress’s website that says almost the same thing.

    McCain leads the money race with nearly every other top giver in the oil and gas industry, though — Koch Industries, Valero, Marathon Oil, Occidental Petroleum, ConocoPhillips, the list goes on. (You can see detail on all these companies in the spreadsheet linked below.) McCain also has a big edge with Hess Corp. — $91,000 to Obama’s $8,000 — which has gotten some attention. And, overall, McCain’s campaign has gotten three times more money from the industry than Obama’s has — $1.3 million compared to about $394,000.

    http://thinkprogress.org/

    Sherry, I just want you to let go of your anger. It’s only hurting you. Maybe when you hear Hillary speak it will help. She’s trying very hard, I think, to do all of the right things for the party. Write in her name, if you must, but please don’t vote for McCain. I think he will be worse than Cheney/Bush by far, if possible!

    colocritic

  11. JudyB

    August 8, 2008 at 12:02 pm

    Hillary has been out there for Obama and she will continue to be. I cannot understand why any Hillary supporter would support McCain, if they truely supported her. Hillary does not want to see a Republican by any name become president, and the fact that she lost to Obama will not be changing that fact. If you were for what Hillary stood for a few months ago, you would still be behind her..she wants unity in the party and will bite the bullet in order to make it happen. Hillary has a keen understanding of how politics go. I will vote for Obama fully aware that the politics of it all stink, always have and always will . I am not a dyed in the wool democrat, and in truth don’t give a damned about party lines.. but I am diametrically opposed to voting in anyone who has been a supporter of anything “Bush/Cheney”, and are willing to support its continuing. America is financially in deep trouble, and its citizens morale is low..things must change, and soon if we are too pull out of this mess. I am not so stupid as to believe that all the support for Hillary was genuine, nor that people don’t harbor racial biases..there are and will always be Clinton haters, racial biases, and bias toward having a woman as president. I will vote for Obama and for Democrats this time thanks to Bush/Cheney and their henchmen.

  12. sherry

    August 8, 2008 at 12:07 pm

    I am not angry. I know it makes you feel better to make that suggestion. I am resolved to work in the best interest of the nation, not the DNC.
    I am very pragmatic person. I look at facts. I don’t believe a community organizer has the experience to be POTUS. You are listening to his speeches. I am looking at the facts.
    We will have a democratic congress. McCain has a history of working accross the aisle. How soon we change. In 2004, it was suggested McCain be Kerry’s running mate.
    Not a McCain fan, but he is likely to do the least damage.
    As for the DNC appointment, their rules were such that the person getting the most votes didn’t win. Just calling it like I see it.
    At least you didn’t call me a racist. That is a favorite of the Obama team, or an angry Hill supporter. I mean if we dont all come on board, we must be crazy, right?

  13. Helen Rainier

    August 8, 2008 at 12:40 pm

    Initially, I was happy that the Democrats had both a female and a black male candidate. However, as the primary campaign wore on, I became very frustrated and disappointed with Ms. Clinton’s trying to “be a white man” politician instead of one who was willing to break out of the “traditional” political candidate role.

    I am a female, grew up and was one of the original hippies, served in the US Army (honorably) for nearly ten years, and have always advocated for women’s rights, particularly with respect to birth control, the right to chose to have an abortion, and against sexism and harassment against females.

    Over the years I have learned how to deal and function successfully in the “traditional male” work force while not compromising my personal beliefs, ideals and values, being true to myself as a female, and calling it as I see it.

    I am so tired of the “sore loser” female Clinton supporters who don’t seem to understand that Obama won the democratic primaries and Clinton didn’t. In my view, Ms. Clinton has only herself to blame — she tried to be a combination of a female John McCain and George Bush.

    Conversely, I have been very impressed listening to Mr. Obama’s ability to speak contemporaneously, articulately, and intelligently on a vast array of subjects. His appearance at the Tiergarten in Berlin literally blew my socks off. He was amazing.

    I felt the resurgence of the “hippie values and ideals” that I embraced years ago and still hold dear — those of human rights, justice, and equality.

    What is most important for our country at this point is to ensure we turn the tide of this country around and get back on the right path particularly over the past eight years. We are in deep doo-doo right now and WE are the only ones who can begin to effect change by electing people as representatives who will work towards the betterment of all citizens — not only of the US but the world at large.

    We simply can’t afford more of the same-o same-o. Let’s put our grievances aside and look at the choices we have intelligently for both the short-term and the long-term.

    Obama offers a refreshing change from the same-old same-old of Bush’s that McCain is espousing.

  14. sherry

    August 9, 2008 at 12:04 am

    Hal has YET to say anything complementary of Hill. Reading his articles just absolutely piss me off in ways I never imagined.
    I guess Hal represents the reason I absolutely cannot stand Obama. Obama is black. It is apparently time to elect a black man, but hey let’s not talk about race unless Obama brings it up. NEVER EVER use Obama’s legal middle name. His shrew of a wife is off limits too.
    Hal does his psycho babble as a means to demean Hill, yet I don’t see him analyzing why for instance we never see the white side of Obama’s family.
    BHO is a whining pos and unfortunately his kool aid drinking followers give him a pass at every turn.
    During the primaries, I have been called every name in the book for supporting Hill. Hal even went so far as to sugguest my comments aren’t helpful. Helpful is only if you are in the tank for BHO.
    Hal more than anyone has convinced me to never change my mind about voting for McCain.

  15. Helen Rainier

    August 10, 2008 at 12:07 am

    Sherry,

    For someone who says she’s not angry, you sure sound angry — in fact, more than angry — you sound very, very bitter.

    If Hal’s articles “piss you off” don’t read them. It is a choice you choose to make so stop your whining. If you’re going to dish it out, you’d better be able to take it.

    Hold onto your anger and bitterness if you want to. It won’t hurt anyone else except for yourself — that kind of hostility will only hurt you and I’m only talking about the physiological damage it can do your body — stress and high blood pressure.

    Don’t know what your age is, but if you’re a younger person, you’re going to be in for a lot of disappointments in life whenever something doesn’t go the way you think it should.

  16. sherry

    August 10, 2008 at 4:11 am

    God knows I have had my share of disappointments. I handled them rather well all things considered.
    You and another poster suggested I am bitter. This means according to BHO, I should be clingin’ to Gawd and guns.
    I don’t own a gun. I do cling to God, but that goes for the good times as well.
    Interestingly, you has well as another poster are o so concerned for my well being (blood pressure is excellent by the way without any sort of meds (120/60 consistently).
    Yup, Hal pisses me off. Can’t belive Doug allows such drivel, but I can’t resist when he mentions Hill in the title. It’s always, wonder what stones Hal is going to throw at Hill today? Can’t help wondering why Hal is apparently so bitter against women?
    And people wonder why I can’t just be a good democrat and jump on board.
    Helen, you aren’t helpful either. You can only address me, not the obvious bias.
    Makes me wonder how happy you would be had BHO not won?

  17. Helen Rainier

    August 10, 2008 at 6:04 am

    Sherry,

    My god, where do you get the idea that you should be clinging to Gawd and guns — according to Obama? I don’t own any guns, but I qualified as an expert on an M16A1 while in the US Army.

    Just for the record, I am not a registered Democrat nor am I a registered Republican. I have always remained as an independent and prefer it that way so I remain as neutral as possible about each and every candidate and look at them as potential leaders and not politicians.

    I don’t get it — if I know something is going to make me as angry and bitter as you obviously are, then I avoid it. Life is depressing and tough enough as it is without going out of my way looking for things to tick me off.

    You’re right — I can’t address what you perceive as “obvious bias” in favor of Mr. Obama. In my opinion, the obvious bias was towards Ms. Clinton and not Mr. Obama. I initially began as being relatively neutral towards or in favor of each of them and wanted to hear what they said and see how they conducted themselves. As things evolved, I came to the conclusion that Ms. Clinton had morphed from being a strong, intelligent and articulate female legislator to one who would resort to casting aspersions on the character of Mr. Obama and stating many times that she believed both she and Mr. McCain had “what it took” to be President but Mr. Obama didn’t.

    From my perspective, she was the one who played dirty Rovian tricks — not Mr. Obama. I know you won’t agree and that is certainly your prerogative, but get a grip.

    Your mind is obviously closed to any fruitful discussion or discourse because it is clouded by your bitter anger. If you want to continue to dwell on it, go ahead.

    I have better and more important and meaningful things to focus my time and energy on and have nothing else to say on this matter. It would be equivalent to bashing one’s head against a brick wall.

    Go ahead and keeping stewing in your own juice.

  18. RafaelApollo

    August 10, 2008 at 11:54 pm

    Helen,

    I have been following the thread of conversation between you and Sherry with great amusement. I had to comment on your last post which would be nearly word for word what I would have said.

    It seems that these PUMAS, for all their babbling, have not been able to retire old Hill’s debt…which must mean the 18 mil is dwindling. Maybe the Hillarialites, I call them, have begun to see what kind of ego-maniacal gal they bet on. I know some of my friends have taken a different view after seeing the malevolent and brutal campaign she ran.

    One of my good friends, an old-line ERA member and writer for MS and actually a confidant of an old time libber, told me that she thought Hillary Clinton was so vicious and so self-centered she set women back thirty years.

    To play that game-of childishly encouraging her “people or PUMAS or whatever” to vote for the horrid misogynist MCCain just blew her away. She told me that if Clinton was a man she would have understood it. Men will do anything to win but a woman who utilized the woman’s vote and then cashed them out to McCain because she lost-she said, was simply an abomination. “Hillary Clinton has no conscience,” she went on “and she has enlisted the zealotry of women who hoped that there might be a female president in her unconscionable endeavour.”

    As a long-time politico like me she also felt that there was a juxtaposition between the campaign and the manuevering of Bill back into the White House.

    Knowing far too much about the Clintons and how corrupt they were and always will be both of us reached the conclusion that the 18 mil were “had.”

    I am not registered as either party. I have always been independent. I can say, unqualifiedly, though, that Clinton would have gone in any direction it took to further her cause. This was a monstrous exhibition without scruples or any regard for anyone but herself and Bill, who was hanging around for his return trip to the White House.

    I really do like Obama. I think he out-classed her and out-smarted her and simply out-ran her.

    I am sure Sherry and the rest of the wild-eyed PUMAS, etc. will continue to stew in their own juices. There is nothing to be done for that and they are spinning their wheels and wasting their time.

    What they should be doing is researching sites like Ron Paul’s where he has a compendium of all the Executive Orders Bill exacted to override the Constitution and the other crimes that were committed by old Hill and Bill.

    But I am sure that would be too much to ask.

    We dodged a bullet. An ugly, rancid bullet..

    Well done, Helen. And Hal. People like Sherry will continue to find fault with you and your wisdom before they will ever look solidly on the truth. That would be too blinding for them.

    The mind is not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be lighted.
    Plutarch

  19. Helen Rainier

    August 11, 2008 at 11:03 am

    Rafael,

    I am taken aback by your very kind words and comments and thank you for them.

    I learned a long time that holding onto anger and bitterness does nothing except make me miserable and contributed to problems with high blood pressure and migraine headaches. I can do nothing about what other people choose to do nor how they choose to behave. The only thing I have control and power over is how I react and what I choose to do.

    I am a long-time feminist and have always stood up for myself and for other people (male or female) when I believe they have been wronged. If I am anything, I am a (curses) secular humanist.

    Interesting you would point to McCain’s misogynistic treatment of women. My “red flags” about him first went up in the 90s when he spoke abominally about Chelsea Clinton looking like a dog and whose mother was Hillary and father was Janet Reno. That was totally uncalled for and cruel. Those red flags have just kept popping up in the ensuing years — the treatment of his first wife when he returned and shacking up with Cindy while he was still married to the first Mrs. McCain. That was followed up by the reports that he called Cindy a trollop and a c*nt. Am I sure he said it? No — but more importantly — it wouldn’t surprise me in the least based on his past pattern of behavior. The latest was the pimping of wife for the Ms. Buffalo Chip contest — and her standing there smiling and laughing and letting herself be humiliated like that in front of thousands of people. Inexcusable behavior from the perspective of a humanist. It was certainly not what I would consider “Christian” behavior either.

    Mr. Obama, much to his credit, has, in the big picture, conducted himself with intelligence, grace and dignity when all of these verbal attacks have been levied against him by both Ms. Clinton and now McCain. Obama’s response re the tire gauges fiasco about how the Republicans take pride in being ignorant was a classic zinger. However, I would have used the word stupid as opposed to ignorant. There’s a slight difference in the definition of the two words — ignorant means not knowing something, stupidity means knowing but ignoring what you know.

    As a proud veteran, it did my heart a world of good to see Mr. Obama at the Tiergarten with such a massive crowd of Europeans, Americans living overseas, and people literally of all colors, religions, countries of origin gathered together to hear and see an American presidential candidate speak. Mr. Obama is restoring my faith in our country and that we can return to our former status as a world leader.

    No one deserves something simply because of who they are or what they have experienced. What is more important, to my mind, is have they learned from their experiences and are they focused on improving the morale and welfare of all people, and not just their hand-picked friends (who most likely aren’t really friends but uneasy allies who have been bribed in some way, shape or form)?

    Again, Rafael, thank you for your kind words.

  20. colocritic

    August 7, 2008 at 11:03 am

    I can understand her disappointment, it was a long, hard fought campaign. However, hard feelings toward Obama doesn’t make any sense to me. He actually ran a much better campaign, well thought out and better managed than hers. It’s not his fault she lost. She needs to look at her campaign staff and maybe, a glance in the mirror. It’s over, get over it! They don’t own the Democratic party anymore, grow up, move on!

    I hope they don’t put her name up for nomination at the convention, don’t go that far. Maybe give her some special recognition to please her and her supporters, but that’s enough! Obama got elected, not her.

    I didn’t support her, but would have voted for her, never for McCain. Maybe there is a spot for her in his administration, but not v.p., I hope.
    colocritic

  21. Sandra Price

    August 7, 2008 at 11:04 am

    Clinton has requested that her delegates be added to the vote in Denver. She may try to pull off a switcheroo for the women. Wait for 2012? hell no! Let’s go for the gold in November 2008. The problem here can be found in the Republican campaign. They are shooting Obama in the foot with propaganda that he is an anti-Semite Communist. It would appear they are working for Senator Clinton. None of this lying crap ever works for long. We will never get anything other than mediocre candidates when lies and slander run the campaigns.

    So it seems we have a three-way race. Woman, vs a black man vs corruption. Who knew?

  22. JudyB

    August 7, 2008 at 12:24 pm

    Just thought I’d say… Hillary did have a historic achievement. Despite the biased media against her, she managed to take some 18 million votes in the primaries, taking more popular votes than anyone in history, and still walked away the loser.

  23. Southerner

    August 7, 2008 at 6:46 pm

    You left out one other achievement. She actually ran two campaigns at the same time, her own (such as it was) and a campaign for McCain. First time I know of that a Democrat laid the groundwork for a Republican presidential candidate’s campaign. Quite an achievement, indeed.

  24. sherry

    August 7, 2008 at 1:55 pm

    Poor Hal. Hill must be the bane of his existence.
    Hal. Get over yourself. Your man won. Despite Hill’s actually receiving more votes.
    I doubt Obama will win. And when he loses you will blame racism or Hillary, but never the man himself.
    No worries my friend, should O actually lose, the press will no doubt hold some coronation or whatever.
    O has proven himself to be quite the whiner. Hal you can support him without becoming one too.

  25. Hal Brown

    August 7, 2008 at 2:06 pm

    Sherry, comments like “get over yourself” and references to me being a whiner have no place in the comments to my columns. Please stay on topic and avoid the personal asides.

    By far most of the posts here advance the discussion. This does not.

  26. Flapsaddle

    August 7, 2008 at 3:07 pm

    As she said, “either of us could make history.”

    It is historic that a woman ran for the nomination of her party for president, and that is not in any way diminished by the fact that a woman has already run as the VP candidate, that there are more women than blacks in the legislature, that there are numerous women serving as judges, or that women have served in governor’s offices for more than a century.

    Her bitterness and frustration are understandable – she is a politician who lost a campaign that she considered to be in the bag. She got outmaneuvered by a guy who correctly perceived the paradigm shift that she missed completely. She is arrogant and conniving and she is not used to losing and she believes in her heart of hearts that she was entitled to the nomination and that she is owed a presidency.

    If Obama loses, she will be able to smirk that I-told-you-so! smirk and pass the blame to the ball-less wonders that pass for “leadership” in the Democratic establishment. If Obama wins, she’ll receive a cookbook entitled “1000 Ways to Eat Crow”.

    That said, please understand that I have/had not a dime in the Democratic or Clinton dollars; I would not vote for her under any possible circumstances; I am a “yellow dog” ABC – Anyone but Clinton. Nor will I vote for Obama, nor will I vote for McCain.

    Most sincerely,

    T. J. Flapsaddle

  27. sherry

    August 7, 2008 at 3:26 pm

    Time is right Hal. BHO is so busy basking in his cheat win, Hill can just go under the bus. Articles such as yours try to perpetuate that action.
    No women have not been systematically lynched. They have been murdered and beaten at the hands of their husbands with little recourse.
    Hillary had 18 million votes. That is about 200,000 votes more than your man.
    While I don’t want to see Hillary taint herself by running with Obama, he should be showing some respect.
    You should as well, but it is clearly beyond your capability to recognize Hillary’s historic accomplishment.
    Every article you have posted regarding Hillary is an attempt to diminish her and raise Obama. For me, it has had the exact opposite affect.

  28. Southerner

    August 7, 2008 at 6:52 pm

    Also seems to be beyond your capability to recognize Obama’s historic accomplishment. Why is your nastiness and disrespect toward Obama OK, and anyone else’s annoyance at Hillary’s supporters refusing to accept the outcome not OK? What’s the difference? Why should anyone respect Hillary when she and her supporters won’t respect Obama?

  29. colocritic

    August 7, 2008 at 4:31 pm

    Sherry says “I doubt Obama will win.” Don’t be so sure of your doubts. Have you not seen the electoral college map? At this stage it shows Obama ahead at 217 electoral votes to McCain’s 189 electoral votes. And Obama has more states leaning toward his column than McCain does. So, it would seem to me that Obama is far ahead of that wrinkly, old, white haired dude, to quote Paris.

    I saw on Huffington Post today that McCain schedules one appearance a day and then has the remainder of the day to rest up. He is a tired old man that is too old for the office of the president of our nation. I repeat, I think Congress needs to pass a law that no one over 60 can run for that office! We need someone that is alert 24/7 100% of the time!

    colocritic

  30. sherry

    August 7, 2008 at 5:23 pm

    While America is desperate for change and a democrat, Obama hardly fits the bill. As in the primaries, Obama has yet to close the deal. With the political landscape being what it is, Obama should be beating McCain by double digits.
    Articles such as Hal’s are not helpful. He apparently believes that continuing to demean Hillary will some how win her supporters over.
    It makes me all the more determined to vote for the old man. sorry as he is, I still believe he will do less damage than Obama.
    I don’t believe Americans want to listen to 4 years of Obama whine.

  31. bryan mcclellan

    August 7, 2008 at 7:00 pm

    The whining wheel gets the grease,
    the shrieking harpy will steal your fleece.

    The last thing we need to be,
    is a village for another Clinton to pillage.
    NAFTA, CAFTA, we got the shafta.

    No more Clintons,
    No more bushes.

    Last night Chuck Schumer told the Daily show audience that Hillary had advised him she would be returning to the Senate with him to get on with the nations business, and it’s about damn time.

  32. baliboy

    August 8, 2008 at 1:15 pm

    What a smug comment from Brown: Do comments like those in your column such as, “If Obama looses (SIC!) and she runs in 2012 I’ll campaign for one of her opponents in the primary. If she wins I’ll vote for her, but I will do so mentally holding my nose to avoid the memory of the stench of self-serving resentment emanating from her today,” ADVANCE THE DISCUSSION?? Seems you can dish it out, but can’t take it. Much like the over-rated, over-hyped NOVICE that you so unabashedly ROOT FOR–making everything you write so biased and calculated that it is devoid of meaning.

    If, as you write, “Obaman looses,” then it will be because NOT ALL Americans believe the “hype” and while McCain is a sad, pathetic candidate (the only factor, along with Bush’s ineptitude, that is keeping this close), it will be (oh my gosh, I must be a racist!) Barack’s fault.

    And while this might not be “advancing the discussion,” at least not to your satisfaction, it might help you understand that “journalists” who are so “in the tank” are hardly worth reading.