Hillary the Admonisher

My favorite part of Hillary Clinton's speech last night was when she admonished her followers not to put their affection for her over the issues. When she reminded them that what's at stake is far more crucial than their loyalty to her. When she reproved them for thinking for even a moment that her historic thrilling campaign was more important than the real campaign to defeat the Republicans.

Where any of her followers could have gotten the idea doesn't seem to have crossed her mind. The fish stinks from the head down. The Clintons' narcissism (and yes, I know, it's an overused term but if there was ever a moment for it in our national life, this is it) perfumed every bit of Hillary's campaign, and it leaked down to her contributors and followers. "Were you in it for me?" was her funniest line of the night.

In this morning's Times there's a piece about the Hillraisers, the people who raised over $300,000 for Hillary, many of whom are apparently bitter and angry that they were not given rooms in the Denver Ritz-Carlton, as the early Obama fundraisers were. They are so mad, according to the Times, that some of them are flying home today and deliberately missing Obama's speech on Thursday. (If you're not nice to me I'm just going to take my private plane and go home.) These are people who, may I remind you, were thinking about their Cabinet and sub-Cabinet positions, who were dreaming of Ambassadorships, who were on the verge of looking at houses in Georgetown. They're miserable. They lost. They were wrong. They're worth millions, or in some cases, billions, and they're not used to being wrong, much less to paying a price for being wrong, and they can't stand it. There's an expression for this -- narcissistic mortification -- and you can smell it all the way from Denver.

My other favorite thing about Hillary's speech is that she wrapped herself up in Seneca Falls, and my God Harriet Tubman, even Harriet Tubman, and yet somehow she never once referred to Roe vs. Wade. She never once mentioned choice. She never once said the truth, which is that any Hillary supporter who doesn't understand that this issue alone is the reason to vote for Obama has no business pretending to be a Democrat. I realize that sounds as if I'm admonishing her, but I caught the admonishment bug last night and this blog is an attempt to shake it off.

Comments

[foolchild0]

Well said.

[see jane read]

Admonisher! That's the word I was looking for. When I was watching her speech, I thought her tone and expression resembled a high school principal lecturing her students, wagging a finger at them. Thank you for clarifying what was going on. It's not Hillary-bashing, it's calling something for what it is. And thanks for reminding us why Obama is the better candidate for true liberals -- solid pro-choice, not to mention his unwavering views about the war in Iraq **from the very beginning.­**

[sand252]

This is a great post.

[fnygy]

I'm an Obama supporter - nothing personal against Hillary Clinton, I just don't like the idea of dynasty - any dynasty - period. But, I think she gave a fine speech and went much farther in her tone of support for Obama than any other losing primary candidate in my voting experience (back to 1980.) I don't believe she did this out of the goodness of heart but out of cold, pragmatism. She needs the Democratic Party if she is ever to realize her dream of moving back into the White House.

Politics is a blood sport - maybe it shouldn't be, but it is. To expect Mrs. Clinton to play by a different set of rules than everybody else seems both ridiculous and unrealistic. (I would have said "unfair" except it's an almost childish concept in the context of national politics.)

If progressive women are reckless enough to vote for John McCain out of spite - shame on them - not their candidate.

[Starlight5]

As an Obama supporter from the beginning, I thought Hillary gave a fantastic speech
at the Convention. She brought the ultimate challange to her supporters to get
behind Obama. Anyon who missed the point of her message cannot possibly be
a true liberal or a true Democrat. None of the policies or programs that she has
worked so hard to promote would be carried forth under a McCain administration.
Her work in the Senate would be as good as dead in the water under a McCain
administration. None of Hillary's true supporters want that to happen.

[Swerinjer]

No obama supporters want mccain to win either so you better apologize to the hillary supporters while you still can. its such a small thing, and its just the right thing to do. oboma cultists treatedd hillary and her supporter with misogyny and a profound lack of respect. the msm media followed suit and just destroyed her candidacy-an unprecedented call for her to drop out when she still had a snowballs chance-NOBODY had EVER been treated like that.

[TekMaestro]

Oh, just give it a break already. You poor Hillaryites are so unbelievably petty! And you want to Run the Country?? Apologize for what? For winning? Hillary was the opponent, and she treated the American public like schmucks. "Oh, I forgot that the little girl gave me flowers on the runway after my little speech in front of all the people standing out there - I thought we had to run for shelter under a hail of bullets. My bad!" That deserves respect? Puh-leeeeze. She destroyed her own candidacy, and then threw good money after bad, pitifully and desperately pursuing a lost cause. Then had the audacity to want Obama to pay for it. What nerve.

Hillary for President? I do not want a President that will govern out of spite. Or scorn.

[PhDiva]

I was also surprised that Hillary did not mention abortion rights. However, I think they thought she was more valuable appealing to working class moderates, many of whom are anti-choice, than appealing to progressive women. I think this was calculated to help Obama. However, I think it was a mistake. I think she could have mentioned the Supreme Court justices without mentioning Roe v. Wade by name. That way she could have covered the issue without alienating anti-choice people.

[utopian2]

You are so right Nora! If we ever had any doubts about Hillary's sincerity about caring more for the party, the country, anything but herself, the REALLY SCARY press release on HRC's website today will confirm them. When she had the opportunity to trounce this stunt by McCain for what it is--an attempt to capture the misguided and still-mourning Hillary fans who just want to vote for a woman, any woman--instead--get this--she CONGRATULATES Palin and said she is proud of her historic nomination and that she will add something to the debate! And oh, you probably shouldn't vote for her because, well, that would be bad.
Does anyone recall that Hillary was the President of the Young Republican chapter at Wellesley? Doesn't that tell you something about her true beliefs??

[StephenS]

Did you miss this joint statement from Obama and Biden?

“We send our congratulations to Gov. Sarah Palin and her family on her designation as the Republican nominee for vice president. It is yet another encouraging sign that old barriers are falling in our politics. While we obviously have differences over how best to lead this country forward, Gov. Palin is an admirable person and will add a compelling new voice to this campaign."

Oh my God, Obama CONGRATULATES Palin and says she will add something to the debate! By your logic, that means Obama wanted to be President of the Young Republicans chapter at Harvard. Sure.

[BADEN]

Actually, it shows an adult acting like an adult in a very adult situation.­...but, I'm sure you wouldn't understand that at your level of maturity.

[OisforOpportunist]

Please don't confuse this person with the facts! He or she, as well as Ms Ephron, is suffering with AHHS (Acute Hillary Hating Syndrome), a well documented malady, especially in the pages of this site, characterized by irrational thought, delusions, imposibility to recognize the truth, mendacity, flights of fancy and frothing at the mouth at the mere mention of the name Hillary Clinton. In some medical texts it goes by the name of psychotic envy with a very strong core component of total, abject prostration to anything Obama.

[Deaninphilly]

Is this post a true reflection of what goes through your mind?

[sjeanf]

Stupifying fear and smear.

[downwithbs]

Aside from the obvious policy differences between the Republican and Democratic nominees, Hillary needs to clarify the historical record for those supporters who plan to vote for McCain:
1) Obama did not "steal" Colorado. The caucus process there was well known to all candidates in advance. It was only after Obama received the endorsement of the service workers union that the Clintons scrambled to change the venues and times of the meetings with a hastily conceived lawsuit.
2) The rules of the DNC were not "rigged" against her because she was a woman. In fact, many of those rules were written by her own people (Harold Ickes, etc.)
3) The Florida and Michigan compromises, if anything, gave more benefits of the doubt to her than to her opponent. (Why does the question of "playing by the rules" keep coming up?)
4) the mis-steps of the Clinton campaign team--resulting from the in-fighting and ego battles that have come to light in recent magazine articles--are the responsibility of the candidate herself and no one else--not her opponent or the DNC or the pastriarchy or even her husband.
Jeez, the admonishment bug must be catching..­.

[Project4NuBostonTeaParty]

downwithbs, how's that Unity thing going for ya?

[Swerinjer]

obama cultists need to apologize because you were beyond obnoxious-you gleefully used fox news' and the right-wing tactics of destroy the person and her reputation. you rubbed it in hillary supporters faces. the MSM followed suit and circled Hillary and tore her down. no candidate had EVER been called upon to drop out by the msm while they still technically had a chance. THAT is blatantly disrespectful. It is so outrageously biased and vicious there HAD to be some emotional component to it-misogyny. yes, oboma cultists owe hillary supporters an apology. but its too late now. you arent quality enough people to do it anyhow.

[Nan2008]

Hillary DOESN'T NEED TO DO ANYTHING ELSE, she has done all she can DO OR SAY. It's up to Obama to win this election, IT'S NOT UPTO HILLARY, except to campaign for him. If you continue to make this election about Hillary instead of the issues the Republicans have accomplished with their VP pick exactly what they set out to do.

[elmysterio]

"These are people who, may I remind you, were thinking about their Cabinet and sub-Cabinet positions, who were dreaming of Ambassadorships, who were on the verge of looking at houses in Georgetown. They're miserable. They lost. They were wrong."

Yeah, instead you're going to have the people who gave Obama $300k+ getting Cabinet, sub-Cabinet and Ambassadorships. Again, government by and for the rich. You working-class folks who think Obama represents your interests are dead wrong. He doesn't. Neither does McCain. Both are bought and paid for.

[hopefulinpa]

McCain is not going to win with an inexperienced woman on the ticket.. IT'S THE ECONOMY STUPID
He still doesn't get it... See Obama was right, McCain was wrong

[mjtaylor22]

HILLARY IS A SMART LADY.NONE DEMOCRAT WORK ALLTHIS TIME TO ALLOW THE TRUE OPPOSITION TO TAKE THE WHITE HOUSE IN SOME NIGHTMARE FANTASY OF AN ELECTION.
NO WE DID NOT,
IT IS REAL SIMPLE THE HILLARY AGENDA WAS THE DEMOCRATIC AGENDA
AND THE OBAMA AGENDA IS THE DEMOCRAIC AGENDA.
ALL THREE EMPHAISZE THE NEED TO STRENGTHEN WORKING CLASS AMERICA IN ORDER FOR OUR COUNTRY TO BE SUCCESSFUL­........
THAT IS ALL.......­...
THE REPUBLICAN AGENDA FOR THE NEXT TERM IS AN EXACT TWIN TO THE LAST 8 YEARS OF STRUGGLE STRIFE TURMOIL, LIES DECEIT, DECEPTION, AND LACK OF PROTECTION.
ENOUGH FEAR MONGERING
MCCAIN DOES NOT GET IT
BUT OBAMA DOES GET IT........­.....
BE TRUE TO AMERICAN VALUES
ELECT OBAMA/BIDEN 08/12
FOR A BETTER FUTURE

[lakatz]

"I realize that sounds as if I'm admonishing her, but I caught the admonishment bug last night and this blog is an attempt to shake it off."

You're kidding... right? You don't really believe you can shake off the very behavior you're exhibiting while accusing someone else of it by writing about it do you? No... you can't possibly. You're a very bright woman. You certainly must know that we see in others (and criticize) what we see in our selves and don't like... speaking of narcissicism.

I enjoy your writing style very much, but I come here to get as much input as possible about the issues... which you "kind of sort of" touched on so that I "kind of sort of"got a hint of what you deem important, but the article was 99% about the person, and ultimately the person it was about was you, and I really don't want to waste my time on things so personal. So I'd really love it if you'd use that great style of yours writing about the issues. Thanks!

[trinity29]

"but the article was 99% about the person, and ultimately the person it was about was you, and I really don't want to waste my time on things so personal."

>> but you just wasted your time by responding to it.

"You certainly must know that we see in others (and criticize) what we see in our selves and don't like."
what does it say about you then given that you are criticizing Nora?

see this is an endless circle of projection leading to more projection. instead of trying to tell Nora what she can and cannot do with her writing skills, why not simply not read her posts? There are plenty of bloggers here that I don't care for and I don't read their posts. However, here I am telling you what to do, so scratch that. Do what you please. Never mind me.

But I did think one of the salient issues that Nora pointed out for the women who support Hillary. Since Roe v Wade did not get mentioned by Hillary but tons of other democrats at the convention and since Hillary or any other democrats would overturn Roe v Wade and since McCain said that he would, that if someone is a democrat, then they have no business voting for McCain unless they truly want to overturn Roe v Wade. And if they did, then they were never really aligned with one of the core beliefs of the democratic party.

[Project4NuBostonTeaParty]

trinity29,

Your final paragraph doesn't make much sense grammatically, but I still have to ask whether you ever considered that Hillary didn't mention Roe v Wade in this particular speech because:

a) Everyone else had, ad nauseum

b) She had only so much time to bring up the issues she deemed most important, i.e., health care for all, a "green jobs" revolution, etc.

c) The Democrats gave us Roberts and Alito (not to mention the atrocious Mukasey), so what's the point about the Supreme Court again?

d) NARAL turned their back on her when she needed them most and after all the work she's done for them in the past

e) All of the above.

[broed]

"...she never once referred to Roe vs. Wade. She never once mentioned choice. She never once said the truth, which is that any Hillary supporter who doesn't understand that this issue alone is the reason to vote for Obama has no business pretending to be a Democrat. "

A single issue party? Very sad.

[dreffein]

But she did talk about the Supreme Court and rather than take your narrow view, she took a broader approach about the effects of more right-wing court appointments. And by the way, every knows that Dems protect abortion rights. So get over your Hillary hatred because now that the Reps have picked a women, Obama will need to use HRC even more (according to MSNBC).

[andrea.t]

yes!

[cyndeewi]

There are only a few thousand immature women out there that would pick this woman just because she is a woman. The republicans think the democrats are stupid and from reading this comments it seems that they are. Who would people this woman just because she is a woman. I cannot believe the immaturity of you people.

[StillIRise]

The Republicans think WOMEN are stupid, Democrats, Republicans and Independents!

Sadly, there are women who are willing to put ANY woman in the White House, some of whom supported Senator Clinton and some of the same who will support Palin, which attests to the fact that these women are not ideologically driven, they are gender driven! But these women are the minority, and do not represent me or any the strong, intelligent and insightful women who are the true backbone of our country and would never diminish their hard-fought-for right to vote by casting their ballot for a female candidate just because she's a woman!

[ZekeBundren]

That Bill and Hill went some ways toward redeeming themselves from an incredibly s c u m m y performance during their primary run does not diminish the truth of Nora Ephron's analysis.

It is a hard hit right down the middle.

There is an entire class of people around the Clintons who are in my opinion despicably self absorbed, and Nora Ephron just threw down the gauntlet on them. About time someone did.