Not Until the Fat Lady Sings
As an ardent Obama supporter, I am calling on the Senator from New York to stay in the race for as long as she can stand it. Longer even. I think the calls for her withdrawal are deeply troubling, and even hysterical. Anti-democratic even. This is how an election works. And even though this particular one seems to be poorly designed at best, we are in the midst of the process. Voting: A right, may I remind Mr. Leahy, et al -- for which people have fought hard and died.
Let me be clear: I believe that the Clinton campaign has been simply tragic. It is an object lesson in failed promise and panicked, unstable, virulent war-game tactics. It has been marked by shallowness of the first order, and by the relentlessly divisive behavior of a cynical staff. She is fatally compromised in her stature as a credible voice, even perhaps in the senate, and her husband, an ex-president of the United States, is in danger of squandering what is left of his tattered reputation. The utter absence of statesmanship from the Clintons actually is painful to watch. There are lies about being under fire, there are semi-secret conduits to Matt Drudge, there are methods worthy of the Nixon playbook, in terms of sheer cynical zero-sum brinksmanship. There is an endless contempt for Obama's brilliant oratory, his ability to speak to adults like adults, which makes the Clintons suddenly seem like Bushesque boors, frankly. The sneering at his ability to connect reeks of school yard pique. It need not have been this way. There were early signs of a different kind of race, and they evaporated a long time ago. One day, we may live to see such a race. I doubt it.
However, I utterly disagree with those who cynically are calling for her to go quietly into the good night. I think that would be deadly for the fragile unity of the party, a party that should be on the brink of reclaiming control of the White House, and all that goes with it. A huge percentage of Clinton believers would be turned off. I think any Democrat alive knows what it is like to feel disenfranchised after the chaos of the last few elections.
And as any reader of the Huffington Post knows, she has fervent and patriotic supporters. (They will be writing angry letters even before they finish reading these words.) Supporters who still see more of what's good and great about her, who see her brilliance, her stamina, her staggering capacity for survival, as purely admirable, and even vital to whomever is going to be our next chief executive. I do not disagree with the need for a powerhouse in the Oval Office, I just think we need the purging energy of Barack Obama more. Senator Clinton has people who believe in her just as passionately as I believe in Senator Obama. Those supporters deserve to see their nominee fight for as long as she can, as long as she needs to. Well past the point of reasonable hope. That is America. It's in our sports, it's in our business, it's in our blood. And frankly, there is something admirable about the indefatigable Clinton appetite for power. I find it morally vacuous, not to mention shallow as hell when Bill remarks that if you can't take the hits, you shouldn't run. Really, Bill? Did you love your ongoing and disgusting hazing at the hands of right wing zealots so much that you think those tactics are a reasonable litmus test for the presidency, rather than say, oh, profound and inspirational moral force and an utterly unifying presence? Just asking. And as stomach turning as is the new college campus mini-trend of questioning of the Clinton's daughter about Ms. Lewinsky, well, so long as the Clintons are willing to put her out there to play that particular game of tennis, well then, who are we to stop 'em? Go. Go. Go. Go to town.
Maybe there's something purging about it for them. More than anything else, for purely selfish reasons, I do not, for one, think this race should end until William Jefferson Clinton is asked, and exhaustively and comprehensively answers each and every last question pertaining to the unconscionable pardoning of the crooked financier Marc Rich. Because, he too will be in the White House again, powerful, cynical, and hungry. Who knows what favors would be traded in exchange for God only knows what?
No, Hillary should remain in the race. As Frank Rich pointed out last Sunday, she knowingly fabricated the details of her landing in Bosnia, and she did so repeatedly, shamelessly, even after she was entirely revealed as a fabulator worthy of the hoariest backlot Hollywood schlockmeister. So -- Let it go on and on and on and on. The truth, as it did in the case of her trip to the "war zone", will come out. It always does. the last aria has not been sung, and the Valkyrie has yet to exhaust her lungs. And as the race continues to the bitterest end, I hope that Senator Clinton's many supporters are entirely satisfied that she did this to herself. That she exhausted her every chance.
It could have been different. As I have said before, character is fate, and that is what we are witnessing, as her campaign falters. Let it go on until all hope is exhausted. Those of us who look at the Clintons and see the full dimensions of the failure of their promise to America will also feel some sense of loss when she withdraws. She shied away from greatness, so as to hold on to power. Character is fate.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Grea Article: However, I do not agree with all your points. Hillary is a fighter. American needs a fighter, not cowards like Kerry and Kennedy! Those who support "Quit" "Surrender" "Give In" will not find a friend in the Clinton Campaign Management group!
Tenacity, Hope, Positive Direction, "Don't Give-up" Never, never, surrender will keep America from being destroyed! If that's what Hillary is then let her fight until the bell rings. It will be a Decision fight!
The Republicans and Conservative Rushrightists are constantly acquising the "DEMS" attitude of "Quit" "Surrender" "Let's Reason and accommodate" " "acquiescing" instead of standing tough on our moral principals!
The winner of this contest will be electable!! Hardened by good competition will defeat the Neo-cons. The Republicans can't wait to see you quit!!! They're betting on you to surrender and do the same old "Give-in" for the party's sake!
Fight on or be conquered! We're in a recession of Ideas! We're in a recession of "tenacity to Win"! Get up "Girly Man", get up and fight!
Hmmm? This did not seem to be the Republican's stance concerning Huckabee. There were many calls for him to drop out from the "right". There was a boisterous chorus of calls for him to go silently into the night. While I agree that a prolonged primary process will only serve to refine Barack Obama as the Democratic nominee I think the Republican party wants the primary to continue because as long as Democrats are fighting amongst themselves there is no focus on the real problem, a John McCain Presidency.
This is just my opinion after I considered yours.
We do NOT, repeat NOT need this kind of fighter.
Bush has proven that again and again...
Give me a freakin break! The poison that is spewed about Clinton on this supposedly Democratic leaning site is vomit inducing! We have the latest puff piece from some no account Obama supporter that sounds in its headline that it is a fair look at this race and quickly decends into this bitchy screed about Clinton.
Even though Obama supporters are delusional about his lead, which is NOT THAT GREAT in terms of delegates, they talk as if Clinton is some distant also ran. I wonder if the situation were reversed and Obama were slightly behind, if the question were posed that he should drop out, there would be charges of out and out racism. Evidently on the Huffington post it is perfectly okay to be sexist and bitchy against a woman, but totally uncool to be racist. Bravo, liberals. That's the shocker for me. I've always prided myself on being a liberal, but this site? I'm beginning to see that we can be just as narrow minded and nasty as the Rush dittoheads. You should all be ashamed of yourselves.
I wonder if Obama had lost eleven straight contests if he would still be in the race.
I support Obama and yet I am not delusional about him or the advertised lead. Nor am I delusional about the unfortunate tactics of desperation I am witnessing from the Clinton camp.
Liberal is a term void of any real meaning. Loving intentions, kindness, compassion for your fellow human being -- worthy attributes for any human no matter for whom they vote.
I do not see Mrs. Clinton as an also-ran, I see her as someone who allowed her integrity to run out the door or jump out the window.
As for the sexist issue, there are those in the world that will never respect women. I am not one of them since my greatest hero is my mother because she set an example of greatness rather than try to spin one.
Hillary is not my mother though, and she has not behaved as a decent human being should --no matter her gender. This is hard to take I know. I was for Hillary before I was against her. Now I am totally against her and the pile of crap she stands on. Betrayal is very painful and Hillary has betrayed integrity in pursuit of fulfilling her ambition – a most disgusting and disturbing revelation.
Just because I say something or anybody else says something does not make it fact. We would all do well to remember that in this world of spin.
philryan is looking from the finish line at a 100m sprint between 2 contestants and seeing them near the finish line relatively close and reporting that it is a close race. philryan seems to have conveniently forgotten that one contestant started at the beginning (Obama) and the other had a 75m head start (Clinton). This is not a close race - this is the biggest collapse of a candidate in the history of american elections. Even worse than Dukakis' collapse against Bush 41 - because Dukakis was not the one with name recognition and the deep pockets. As for philryans sexism rant - there are a lot of self made women out there who are insulted by your fawning over a woman who needed hubby to get ahead in life. So much so that when hubby humiliated her in front of the entire world, she chose to suck it up. Where I come from that's called being a doormat.
Philryan, not unlike Hillary, simply makes crap up when the facts don’t mesh with reality.
Hillary notoriously cast herself as the protagonist in some Arnold Swarzenegger-like Bosnian war fantasy because that was how she thought she could convince the world she’s a sturdy, plucky diplomat. Philryan, correspondingly, urgently wants this campaign to be about gender.
Sure, I could point out the palpable hypocrisy of Philryan bitching and whining about how the whole universe is part of some enormous conspiracy against Hillary and how everyone is being a meanie- all while she's tossing out respectful terms like "spewed", "vomit inducing". "bitchy screed", "narrow minded" and Dittoheads". Or, I could point out that, regardless of race or gender, Hillary will have to garner an impossible 60% - 65% of the remaining votes to catch-up, something that won't happen.
But that’s not what irritates me. What I find distasteful is that while Philryan offers not one single morsel of evidence to support this tenuous allegation of gender bias, she, instead, simply makes up in her imagination that which doesn’t exist in the real world. Philryan then uses the non-existent episode as justification be indignant and to cast Hillary (and of course all “strong, intelligent” women) as victims of chauvinism.
Newsflash Philryan: Not everything is about your vagina.
It's amusing that the first paragraph criticizes the 'poison that is spewed about Clinton" which is immediately followed up by insulting the article as a "puff piece" written by "some no account Obama supporter." I have news for you, sir. It is precisely because of the no account Obama supporters that he is winning this contest based on any legitimate yardstick used to judge. Even if you include the flawed primaries in FL/MI, in a way that favors Clinton (not taking into account the research that more people would have voted in FL if they thought their delegates would get seated, not allocating the uncommitted vote in MI to Obama), if this issue was resolved in the most Clinton-friendly way, Obama still leads in the popular vote, delegates and states. But I digress.
He then calls Obama's supporters delusional because they have a solid grasp of the facts. And the facts are, Hillary needs 65 per cent of the delegates just to catch up to Obama.
Further, reading the article and the comments, noone has made her gender an issue until you? How is it sexist to say drop out because you're losing? But what's really funny is that you're complaining about people telling her to drop out in a comment about an article telling her to stay in.
Truly, sir, you truly represent the Clinton paradigm. You accuse your opponents of what you are so blatantly doing. Shame on you, Barack Obama, i mean philryan.
Fat Lady Sings Yet Another Song --
Reminds me of the Whitewater files that went missing...
March 31, 2008
Watergate-Era Judiciary Chief of Staff: Hillary Clinton Fired For Lies, Unethical Behavior
EXCERPT
The Judiciary Committee allowed Douglas to keep counsel, thus establishing the precedent. Zeifman says he told Hillary that all the documents establishing this fact were in the Judiciary Committee’s public files. So what did Hillary do?
“Hillary then removed all the Douglas files to the offices where she was located, which at that time was secured and inaccessible to the public,” Zeifman said. Hillary then proceeded to write a legal brief arguing there was no precedent for the right to representation by counsel during an impeachment proceeding – as if the Douglas case had never occurred.
The brief was so fraudulent and ridiculous, Zeifman believes Hillary would have been disbarred if she had submitted it to a judge.
Zeifman says that if Hillary, Marshall, Nussbaum and Doar had succeeded, members of the House Judiciary Committee would have also been denied the right to cross-examine witnesses, and denied the opportunity to even participate in the drafting of articles of impeachment against Nixon.
http://www.northstarwriters.com/dc163.htm
I saw this story a couple times on comments on a couple of posts in yesterday's Huffington Post. I had never heard of Jerry Zeifman and googled him. Nothing is clear cut, including if, indeed, he had the power to fire Hillary Clinton or if, objectively, she did anything wrong. The brief that is referenced above I found defended by someone else. She seems to be guilty of not listening to Zeifman & doing exactly what he wanted. Zeifman is clearly someone with his own agenda - he more recently seems to have wanted Pelosi to be kicked out . It's so easy to spread rumors on-line - and I may have just inadvertently done it as well. But before any of us believe something that is written on-line at face value, please check it out.
You might want to check out Zeifman's website-
http://www.jzeifman.com/
Interesting.
Give Hillary a 10% victory in PA. Then she needs to win 2 votes 1 the rest of the way in order to beat Obama in delegates. Does anyone seriously think that anyone is going to hand Obama's lead to Hillary after that?
Is the Civil War at the convention Hillary is threatening worth it, considering it would kill the Nov election and damage the party for perhaps a decade or more (there will be AA's, young people and progressive who will go a different direction...)
I agree. As an ardent Obama supporter, I too feel this should go on. If she were to withdraw now, her supporters would be so bitter they wouldn't join the Democratic campaign to regain the White House. There is going to come a point where it is so obvious that she is not going to get the nomination that withdrawal will seem natural. When her situation becomes obvious and her run has played itself out, then I think the party can be unified again. We're not there yet.
NEWSWEEK
Apr 1, 2008
Substance Abuse
Debunking a bogus claim about Clinton's legislative record.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/129976
"A misleading e-mail has been making the rounds, alleging that Clinton has fewer legislative accomplishments than Obama, and that they are less substantive...We find that the e-mail is false in almost every particular...
What impresses us is how misleading the e-mail is. Its anonymous author doesn't apply the same standards to Clinton's record and Obama's, thus leading to false conclusions about their legislative records. For Clinton, the e-mail claims to examine bills that the senator has sponsored and that were passed into law during her Senate career. For Obama, however, it counts both sponsored and cosponsored bills, whether they were passed or not. And – something the e-mail doesn't state clearly – it counts bills Obama sponsored in the Illinois state Senate, before he was a United States senator."
Yes, I have always suspected that the Obama camp is sleazy--and fishy to boot. They are out in full force to dig any "dirt" on Hillary. With the MSM on their side, it's like they are always gloating. But hHllary will have the last laugh. Remember Blowback?
Come on now. At least be fair. No one has connected the email in origination , creation, or even as something passed on by anyone with a position in the Obama campaign. While no one believes that the Clinton campaign started the "Muslim" email, it was proven to have been passed on by staff members.There is no comparison.
If the Obama campaign wanted to fight dirty they could simply bring up the numerous personal, business, and political associations she has had with people investigated of wrong doings, those convicted of crimes, and the number of investigations about her own actions of questionable legality. They are well documented and many were trotted out by the Right Wing when they were going after her husband. They will bring them up again, the independents will likely be scared off her because of these associations, and even some of her current supporters will be forced to reevaluate their position, they are that numerous and that questionable. The Obama campaign doesn't though. Instead it points out the problems with what she has said compared to the facts of a situation and the differences between their policies.
Want do want?
Obama or Yomama?
If Hillary owes all the money they claim she does, how can they campaign and travel and who pays for it ? I remember that she owed money before she even got in the race, how does she get away with it ?
There was some big deal where she left a huge bill at a place where they all ate and she never left any tips for the people.
Never mind all the money she owes. What about all the money she has personally made from corporations?
Voters have a right to see her Tax Returns before the next primary election.
NO TAX RETURNS, NO VOTE
Bill and Hillary are rich mainly because of their books. I think the idea is the tax returns for '06 will be released after 4/15. I wonder what anyone really expects to find in them.
My concern isn't so much that Hillary needs a fair chance to state her case to voters because that has already been the case. In fact if Obama had lost 11 contests in a row, he would have been history. The problem seems to be that no matter how far one stretches the definition of what giving her a fair chance is, the Clintons keep moving the goalposts. Also I would like to ask this: What fair chances are the Clinton giving to the Democrats to help them beat McCain in November? Is threatening a floor fight for delegates at the convention their way of winning fair and square no matter what happens to the party? If there isn't a nasty floor fight at the convention will Hillary's supporters still feel they got cheated?
RJ Crane, topplebush.com
Actually it's the media who keep raising the bar for Senator Clinton and lowering it for Obama.
When Obama won little caucuses- the media and Obama made it sound like he could not be
beat. When the Kennedy's came out to support him, this was like the Second Coming.
When he lost the states in which the Kennedy's campaigned for him - including MA, CA,
Ohio, Texas - that was ignored. When Senator Clinton won all those states - it was
almost ignored by the media and played down.
Obama wins by one point - such as in MO - and it is hailed as a huge victory.
At the same time the media is saying - even when Senator Clinton wins double digits, her
win is too small.
The media has sunk to a new low, they are merely flacks and stenographers,
who are all on their knees to St. Obama. And issues are not being discussed, the
media has turned this into a Reality Game Show. With all of us losing...
You're missing something... context. Sen. Obama wins a state by one delegate it is in a state where he was behind by 20 points. That is a huge gain and news worthy. Sen. Clinton wins a state she was ahead by 22 points by 5 or 6... it is NOT a good victory for her.
Look at the goal posts again, each one is set by her campaign, the media just repeats her message.
(Really trying hard not to be abusive)
The reason that Hillary should be asked to drop out (perhaps by a mass migration of superdelegates) is not that she is a bad candidate - the Dems are blessed with two great candidates - but that she has turned into a bad Democrat when confronted with a better candidate.
Saying that the Republican nominee is a better choice than the presumptive Democratic nominee is - well, treason! Hillary - you should quit before you lose your future appeal.
Can you just see John McCain's commercials this fall starring Hillary? Something like "McCain has passed the CinC test, I have, and Obama hasn't", "McCain has the experience, I have the experience, Obama has a speech", and Bill's "Hillary and McCain are patriotic."
I hope more and more Super delegates call on her... no, DEMAND she get out of the race. The backlash will be fun to watch.
Why would it be fun to watch?
HAS ANY ONE HEARD THE STORY OF HILLARY'S REPLACEMENT-MAGGIE WILLIAMS, (HER
NEW CAMPAIGN MANAGER).
IT HAS BEEN BROADCAST SHE SAT ON THE BOARD OF THE BANK,THAT JUST GOT BAILED OUT
BY THE PRESENT ADMINSTRATION.
COME ON YOU GENIUSES AND HILLARY SUPPORTERS BITE ON THAT.
So?
Dick Cheney?
I can hear perfectly you do not have to yell at us. Maybe you think you are still on the campaign trail and we can't hear you for the crowds shouting obama obama
Please stop shouting.
I'm not a supporter of Obama or Clinton. But, most of these comments are from democrats. Can anyone imagine what four or eight years of these type of discussions will be like with Bill and Hill in the White House? The other 50% of republican and independent voters will also have some things to say if it is Hillary. It will be a horrible experience and a daily fare for the tabloid press.
Yes, Democracy should be a tidy neat process.
And those Bill Clinton years in the 1990s were horrible. Nothing got done. The economy crumbled. Our place in the world was diminished. How sad they were.
Are you remembering an alternative universe? Just where exactly did you live in the 90s? Was the budget surplus horrible? How about all the jobs? The amazing amount of student assistance after all those scary Reagan/Bush years with barely a Pell grant to spare? The technology boom? The economic progress? I can understand not liking Hillary but to lose complete grasp of history is mindboggling. Those were good years for most of us.
After 8 years of Cheney and Bush and their unrelenting evil you have the nerve to say something like this?
THE CLINTON INSURGENCY IS IN FULL SWING
CALLS FOR HER WITHDRAWAL ONLY FEED IT!
Fueling the current Clinton Insurgency against Obama AND the entire DEM party is the Clintons’ belief THEY were robbed of this nomination.
This belief provides them internal psychic comfort and external rationalization for ANY and EVERY behavior we have seen and will continue to see RIGHT THROUGH 2012.
Only the naive think this ends at the Convention. After losing there, the Clinton Insurgency goes underground to further expand their support of McCain's candidacy. If unsuccessful, it moves to the Senate where Hillary as Lieberman REDUX, will practically caucus with McCain to deny President Obama any success.
Between Super Tuesdays Obama won 11 straight states; and the Campaign to Elect Hillary morphed into the Campaign to Defeat Obama via this new political Insurgency we are witnessing daily.
Indeed, Hillary's campaign is an undeclared death-struggle to deny Obama not the nomination (she knows that's already lost), but the Presidency and any media coverage that would aid him.
The goal is no longer winning. Victory is in prolonging the battle and denying the favorite his expected result, while spoiling it so that ultimate victory is worth less each day the Insurgency continues. This new Clinton campaign can only be by design of our Chief Democratic Architect, former President Bill Clinton, himself.
We all know this in our hearts. The only question facing loyal DEMS, to paraphrase Sean Connery from "The Untouchables" is: What are WE prepared to do?
You say it is dangerous to the party for her to withdrawal. You must be blind or mentally ill. The democratic party is tearing itself in two. the longer this primary goes on, the more likely we are to completely lose every chance we have of winning. I like Obama - but If he didn't have the votes, I'd tell him to take a hike, too.
Just read the comments in this thread - Obama and Hillary supports are bitter and angry at each other. dragging this out is only aggravating a precarious situation. We need unity under one of them, and we need it right now, or we are in serious trouble.
Yes, and come November, most of those people who say they won't vote - will. Look folks, this is the greatest reality tv show of our lives. Democrats are paying attention, fully engaged. This is going to turn out fine. You wait and see. More faith. Hope is great. Faith is better.
I've got more faith in the American People than I've had in a long time.
We see mostly faults in anyone with the Clinton name these days because that is where the focus has been trained. These elections are unnatural for people because everyone is a mix of positive and negative and the mission of the campaign is to prove that the nominee is only all good which of course if a fantasy. Of course campaigners are seeking power and of course they get overly ambitious when the finishing line is in sight. The only real difference that Obama has been able to eek out of this campaign is that he has never really gone negative. With Clinton running a negative campaign, there is very little difference between her public appearance and that of mccain. In the end, the cheesy message of hope and change that Obama has been selling may have to be the hook we hang our hat on or we'll be bombing Iran come next summer.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
