Monday, January 07, 2008


What do you think about Senator Clinton's tears and the surrounding brouhaha? Of course, because she's clearly such a hardened woman, we must ask if they were faked or genuine. After watching the video several times I, in my official role as arbiter of all truth, declare that Hillary's tears were, indeed, real.

Had it been Bill . . . we all know how well he cries, off the cuff or on cue. But all accounts suggest that Hillary doesn't do crying. She's never struck me as much of an actress, nor easily emotive. The emotions seemed genuine, though I doubt the impetus was the topic at hand during the meeting. Every liberal commentator has declared her sky is falling, she's a goner. Who wouldn't cry, given how much she's put into this? But, yes, again it's all about her (per yesterday's blog).

John-Boy, aka my candidate, said something foolish in response when asked for comment: "I think what we need in a commander-in-chief is strength and resolve, and presidential campaigns are tough business, but being president of the United States is also tough business."
Ack. Apparently Elizabeth toned him down later and he was able to sound a bit more sympathetic.

While Obama gets points for not jumping all over Hillary's tears, he's still in negative territory with me today. His NH campaign chair has served as a state pharmaceutical lobbyist (he has also lobbied in many other areas). Seems like poor judgment to me. It's hard for me to take him seriously as an advocate for health care reform if he's hired a pharmaceutical lobbyist to help run his campaign.

As I read through the blog and comments from whence this info came, the conversation between comments was very interesting. I guess the blogger who posted this info is a former Republican and alleged Hillary shill. I guess that's supposed to make me ignore the information (though it appears to be entirely factual, according to other sources). I guess I think that's short-sighted.

If it is the new inevitability, that Obama will be our candidate, it behooves us to vet said candidate well before he comes up against McHuckaRom. We really don't want to wait and let the Republicans do the dirty work for us. Democrats know what that's like--and it ain't pretty. Let's make sure we know what we're getting with each of these candidates. Giving Obama a pass because he's the first "inevitable" African-American candidate is a very poor idea, certainly not one that the Republicans will embrace.

John Kass, a Chicago Tribune columnist, keeps taking pot shots at Obama. I agree with very little that Kass says, generally speaking. But he knows dirty politics. And I am still uncomfortable with his continued intimations that Obama and Chicago politics are cozy. I would be thrilled to be convinced that it's just Kass. Feel free to do so.



Post a Comment

<< Home