Letters posted here are associated with the following article:

703
Letters
Friday, February 22, 2008 12:00 AM

Hillary Clinton's Texas-size moment

All that mattered about the showdown in Austin was whether she could stop Barack Obama's momentum. Were her powerful closing words a magic bullet?

The letters thread is now closed.

View:
Friday, February 22, 2008 05:14 PM

@ zebra1: The Sport Of Vilifying Hillary Clinton

Clinton will say anything and do anything to win, even if it means NOT winning, she's going to do her best to take the party down with her.

This line is getting really old; it is really, really moldy.

The line and the mentality behind it are straight from Karl Rove's playbook. It certainly has the smell of right-wing tactics and talking points about it -- as does every single smear line directed against Hillary Clinton.

For starters the mentality is like a square peg in a round hole: when you try to fit it into Barack Obama's "unity" and "time to turn the page" campaign message it doesn't fit.

It smells a lot like "scorched earth" politics -- the kind of politics that Barack Obama is campaigning against, unless something has changed in the last few days.

It also smacks of sexism, which is particularly fascinating given Barack Obama's campaign message of "post-[fill in the blank] politics".

I suggest you stop, take a deep breath and a long, hard look at the type of politics and rhetoric you are engaged in. Is it truly the politics of change? Of unity? Of "turning the page"? Of a post-"scorched-earth" politics?

If so, maybe you'd like to reconsider the way you portray Sen. Hillary Clinton.

If you really believe in Sen. Obama's message of hope, maybe you will reconsider what seem to be parroted lines and rhetoric from right-wing GOP operatives like Karl Rove.

If not, I guess we know how much Barack Obama's message really menas to you...

Friday, February 22, 2008 05:15 PM

err, sunspot

"(thank God Nancy and her parade of psychics didn't run for the Oval Office - even she wasn't that arrogant)."

I wouldn't be too sure of that. The man was already suffering from the onset of Alzheimer's by his second term. (Nancy herself and others close to them have admitted as much: Reagen confession he was "confused" and "needing help"). LOrd knows, we'd need astrologers and psychics to unravel that hot mess of who was "really" in charge by the end.

Friday, February 22, 2008 05:35 PM

Hlillary, how do you do it?

How do you work on our fears while you turn on your tears? They called Reagan the great communicator. Perhaps they could call you the great manipulator. No crocodile tears are gonna catch my vote, I'm gonna cast my ballot for some genuine hope. You so movingly talked about Iraq war veterans and amputees, but YOU'RE the one who sent them overseas.

Friday, February 22, 2008 05:35 PM

The Audacity of Hillary

www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJ7Cs3QvT3U&feature=bz301

Whoever posted this page, this is classic! She really has no class or integrity at all. To accuse Obama of plagiarism 10 minutes before she committs it herself is over the top. I was never on the Hate Hillary team, but I hate her now. This is almost as callous as the statement about the soldiers being her biggest hit. Someone should have hit her over the head with that report she did not read before voting to authorize the most ridiculous war in the history of the country.

Friday, February 22, 2008 05:38 PM

Open your minds

Anyone who says that what Hillary Clinton said at the end of her debate was as much plagiarism as what Barack Obama said when he used the words of his friend Duval Patrick is clinging to an infantile belief that Mr. Obama is perfect.

"Plagiarism is the act of taking someone else's ideas or written word and passing it off as one's own" (definition - courtesy of answers.com).

Barack Obama took Governor Patrick's ideas and words, and he presented them as his own. It is simple and indisputable. Barack Obama admits that that is what he did. He just says he had permission, but permission does not change the fact that it was plagiarism

Hillary Clinton expressed a sentiment that is widely held by most politicians and expressed it her own way. This election is about the people, not me. There was nothing particularly unique or original about what she said or even how she said it, but it was not lifted in a direct way from anyone. I am sure that you could find her saying pretty much the same thing in a similar way at some point when she ran for the Senate years ago.

I really think that people who defend Barack Obama when there is no validity to what you say are not lacking in intelligence. You are just so damn stubborn in your loyalty to Obama that you cannot think straight. It reminds me of the way two children will say, "you are ugly." "No, you are ugly." You are stupid." No, you are stupid." Obama plagiarized. It doesn't mean Hillary Clinton did too.

What I believe really distinguishes these two candidates is that I think that Barack Obama, in his heart, does not really think that this race is about anyone but him. He would have difficulty expressing the same sentiment that Hillary Clinton did in a convincing way, even though he is quite glib when he is telling everyone how uniquely capable he is of bringing everyone together.

Despite the non-stop slanderous accusations about Hillary Clinton, I think she really does care.

The Obama supporters will probably argue with or ignore what I have said, but to me it is the simple truth.

Friday, February 22, 2008 05:43 PM

Parsing the Clintons

What was THE MOMENT in your life thus far that tested you the most and therefore qualifies you the most to be the next leader of the United States of America?

This was actually the last question that was asked in the debate.

The Obama answer: It was not one moment, it has been an accumulation of experiences over the course of his life coupled with the realization over time that every experience is a learning experience. Perhaps the most significant aspect of that total experience has been the cultivation of a deep sense of empathy that provides him with the capacity to see the commonality across diverse groups and leverage that capacity for understanding to generate rationed solutions to seemingly intractable problems. The summary of which points toward a desire to do what he can to help the American people bring out of themselves the inherent strength that all humans possess. A strength that has effectively been negated through the build up of partisan politics.

The Clinton answer: The set up paints the senator as a victim of injustice suffered at the hand of the unstated but implied 'vast right wing conspiracy' (which inflicted totally unjustified wounds) for absolutely no justifiable reason.

The distraction segues into part two, where a similar and much much deeper emotional scene is created of Americans who have been physically victimized by that same unstated hand (of course you need to forget here that the senator herself voted to send others like those described to the war). Creating the illusion that the senator too is part of this parade of casualties. A victim on the side of the oppressed, not complicit in the oppression.

The closer then becomes a complete switch of roles where you are supposed to forget the plagiarism comments toward Obama as the senator herself plagiarizes her (loving and caring victimized) husband and John Edwards (when valued by her own publicly stated standards) and leaves you with a lingering doubt that the Clintons offer the only hope (yes, the senator actually used the very word and concept that they have been ridiculing) for salvation from the enemy and that they, the Clintons really deserve the job because it is their destiny (religious allusion to having been granted this right by the some other unseen yet ever present power i.e. this job is a birthright).

The Obama 'praise' line is then thrown in there to completely distract anyone (Obama, Clinton, McCain supporters alike) from raising this illusion to the surface of consciousness where, by rational analysis is would be exposed for the convoluted mind game that it was undoubtedly intended to be.

Please do not take my word for this, watch it again yourself here where you can pause, rewind and detach from the emotional smoke screen.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CZVjurveVz8&feature=related

So, there you have it according to me.

I can clearly see that if you are one of the many who have been hypnotized by this sort of chimera. An art so skillfully practiced by the Clintons over the years, you were left with some sort of uplifting feeling coupled with a deep sense of sympathy. Now more than ever cemented in your commitment to anoint your chosen one, the only one who can and will solve all of your problems. To do your part to fulfill destiny.

(If you had the time or the inclination to actually watch both Obama and the Clintons speak you would notice how Obama constantly reminds the listener of the work that lies ahead for them while the Clinton message is that all you need to do is get the Clintons into the job and the rest is taken care of). If that is what you are feeling, go splash some cold water on your face and watch the video again.

It's not too late to break the spell.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=6h3G-lMZxjo

Most Active Letters Threads

680

Obama's exceedingly familiar justifications for escalation

The "new" approach to Afghanistan touted by White House officials seems quite old
543

The crazy, irrational beliefs of Muslims

Tom Friedman explains the real problem: stupid Muslims think the U.S. is about war and aggression.
440

The face of rotted Washington

Evan Bayh demands more debt-financed war - fought by others - while boasting that he's a stern "deficit hawk."
287

The commendably missing element from Obama's speech

There was no pretense that human rights is our goal, or the likely outcome, in escalating the war
254

Yes, it's Obama's war now

An uninspiring speech sells a dubious policy, but progressives who feel betrayed have only themselves to blame

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon