- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
She never said anything specific about Obama being good for the country, mostly that McCain (she called him "her friend," did she say something like that about Obama?) was worse and that Democrats, as some amorphous anonymous force never mind the particulars of who, could do better for the country.
It was classic Clinton spin: it sounds like it has content but turns out to be empty. If she turns agains Obama later, or runs against him in 2012, she can say she never really supported his politics or his presidency, just the general party. Couldn't she have said something about what specifically Obama would bring to the White House?
And did the whole speech have to be about her and overephasizing that her supporters fought all the way (against Obama)?
And the whole diva thing about holding up the convention when she was already supposed to be giving her speech? Theoretically, she was fine-tuning it. Did she wait until the last minute to have the thing written? It was like, even up to the last second, she just had to force herself to do this. Even after the nomination had decided, and what everyone needed was unity. It just seemed so small of her.
I really don't understand the accolades she's received, though there's no doubt she's receiving them everywhere.
