Hillary's Speech: The Video

TPM posted the speech on You Tube:

< "No Way, No How, No McCain" | Ted Stevens Wins Primary >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    TPM? really? don't they hate her (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by DandyTIger on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 07:39:08 AM EST
    with every fiber of their being. Isn't that the site where the CDC had to be called in to try to stop the spread of CDS. :-). But seriously, how can they talk about this or show it without their heads exploding?

    I hope that (5.00 / 2) (#2)
    by chel2551 on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 07:50:45 AM EST
    Obama's continued inability to put some real distance between himself and McCain is making some people feel a bit uneasy.  They're running out of reasons for this, and it's fair to say that Hillary is no longer responsible since she's on the bandwagon.  She's no longer the enemy (as if she ever was).




    Heh (5.00 / 5) (#4)
    by nell on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:01:19 AM EST
    now she is not running for commander-in-chief, and she can be his cheerleader in chief, so they love her. Of course.

    My favorite moment of the night, when the tears just started to flow and flow, was when they showed Bill Clinton right before she started speaking and he mouthed, "I love you, I love you, I love you." He could not have looked more proud.


    "cheerleader in chief"? (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by Fabian on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:13:42 AM EST
    Deities!  I hope not.  If they'da wanted Hillary to be cheerleader in chief, they shoulda nominated her.

    He and Chelsea (none / 0) (#5)
    by chel2551 on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:06:47 AM EST
    are definitely her biggest fans, and it showed.

    He looked so cute (none / 0) (#17)
    by Jen M on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:50:02 AM EST
    Just beaming the whole time

    I need to buy Pepto Bismol stock (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:42:00 AM EST
    The CDS anti-cheerleaders must be swilling the stuff to be so nice to Clinton!  I can see there'll be a run on it.

    Me, I smell fear, not just for the election, but for the viewers they'll NEVER get back.


    She is amazing. Wow. What a great speech. (5.00 / 4) (#3)
    by rooge04 on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 07:52:07 AM EST
    Seeing Bill and Chelsea sealed the deal for me and made me cry like a baby.

    Hillary's speech was brilliant. (5.00 / 6) (#6)
    by zaladonis on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:13:24 AM EST
    Now it's up to Obama to persuade people to vote for him.  He bragged he could get Hillary's supporters to vote for him, so let's see him do it.

    If Obama can't even get Democrats unified to vote for a Democrat, there's no reason to believe as President he could convince  Republicans to support the agenda of the Democratic platform or foreign powers to support U.S. interests.

    Obama's lack of wisdom and judgment (5.00 / 1) (#24)
    by Josey on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:11:54 AM EST
    is evident by his childish and arrogant behavior "brushing Hillary off" the bottom of his shoe, falsely accusing the Clintons of racism - never thinking he'd actually need Hillary supporters to win the election.

    Obama got a convention bounce in Rasmussen today - he's tied with McCain.


    Mostly, they bragged that they could win (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by Nike on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:21:54 AM EST
    without them. Donna Brazille has given strict instructions to the base to stay home. The concept of hubris comes to mind.

    very presidential (5.00 / 2) (#9)
    by Jlvngstn on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:27:57 AM EST
    and a home run. I love HRC but was not impressed with her speeches in the primaries although I thought she won every debate.  This was by far one of the best speeches I have been privileged to watch.  It pained my wife to watch and she teared up a couple of times.  We clapped several times and swallowed hard when she threw it all behind Barack.  I still cannot vote for Barack, Nader for me and Barack for my wife.  He wins a split decision in our household.

    Amazing speech (5.00 / 8) (#10)
    by befuddledvoter on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:36:11 AM EST
    Brilliant, moving, passionate, incisive!  Seeing the pride on Bill Clinton's face will be forever etched in my memory!!  

    Ah, the things that could have been.  I suspect nothing will top this speech at the convention.  Cannot wait for Bill Clinton now and especially loved Hillary mentioning Bill Clinton's years and cleaning up the Republican mess.  

    Obama and his flock have never mentioned that; maybe never will and that is a HUGE MISTAKE!! Bill Clinton deserves great credit and respect for the achievements of his presidency.  Obama and his flock still pumping up Raegan.  How very stupid.  I think they believe they will stir up the Republicans to vote for Obama.  Stupid!!!!  It is the Democrats you still have to win over; it is the the Independants you still have to win over.  


    Well, perhaps that't the (5.00 / 3) (#14)
    by dk on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:47:04 AM EST
    real reason why Obama moved his speech to the football stadium.  He can't one up Hillary on substance, so he will just get more fans to scream for him.

    Bingo! (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Josey on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:15:44 AM EST
    DENVER (Reuters) - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's big speech on Thursday night will be delivered from an elaborate columned stage resembling a miniature Greek temple.
    The stage, similar to structures used for rock concerts, has been set up at the 50-yard-line, the midpoint of Invesco Field, the stadium where the Denver Broncos' National Football League team plays.

    I feel a song coming on . . . (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by Landulph on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:50:26 AM EST
    Stonehenge, where the demons dwell,
    Where the banshees live, and they do live well.
    Stonehenge, where a man's a man,
    And the children dance to the pipes of Pan.

    awesome (5.00 / 1) (#54)
    by AlSmith on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 10:43:57 AM EST

    That is what I was thinking.

    Nothing like walking into a punch.


    I was (none / 0) (#61)
    by Carolyn in Baltimore on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 11:41:09 AM EST
    thinking the same thing - great minds and all that.....

    Now I have to carry some little greek columns around for when I talk politics.


    I'll be shocked (none / 0) (#47)
    by Claw on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:50:05 AM EST
    If anyone tops that speech.  I was on the convention floor during Obama's in 2004 and she blew him out of the water.  I think one reason the Obama campaign hasn't been bringing up the Clintons is that the media would pounce--"Obama mentions Clinton!  Doesn't this clash with his change message?  Did the democrats nominate the wrong person? Does Obama even think he can win?"--I also think they wanted to give the Clintons a chance to talk to the 18 million, and not as sidekicks.  To start invoking them pre-convention, pre-their speeches would have been premature.  I think it actually would have been disrespectful to a candidate who still controls delegates.

    That's what I can't get past (none / 0) (#60)
    by Berkshireblue on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 11:36:15 AM EST
    The arrogant dismissal of the Clinton presidency and his inability to ever say one nice thing about our last 2 term Dem Pres. Now I'm supposed to be "loyal" when the guy I'm supposed to vote for wasn't loyal in the least which is in direct contravention of his idol Reagan's commandment about speaking no ill of fellow members of your own party.

    Sorry, I love Bill & Hill-they are smart, articulate, passionate, competent and truly committed to making things happen. UGGH, have to stop thinking about this.

    I feel about BO like I did about Reagan-I never got why everyone thought he was such a great speaker-he always seemed to be fumbling for words unless he was completely scripted or in Reagan's case reading one of his Johnny Carson like jokes-facades without interiors.


    Bothers me so much (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by pennypacker on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:40:32 AM EST
    that so many people on this site will not vote for Obama. No matter what you think he will or won't get done, the next four years are going to be crucial for our country. McCain will be bad for the environment, reckless foreign policy (his position on Georgia and Russia and his rhetoric was scary), energy policy (there is a reason why big oil is giving all there money to McCain, McCain voted against Schip (expanded health insurance for children), voted against violence against women act, and is beholden to the Christian Right.
    So maybe you don't like his health care plan, or dont hink it covers enough people, but more people will be covered then McCain...in every instance Barack will be better.

    Unless (5.00 / 4) (#13)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:43:04 AM EST
    The Democrats figure out that they're vertebrates and hold him in check.  That is what Congress is for, after all.  

    Hey, it bothers me that you are fine (5.00 / 3) (#15)
    by dk on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:48:07 AM EST
    with voting for a Democrat who, in the year 2008, had to gay-bait to win the nomination.  But to each his/her own, right?

    Especially (none / 0) (#39)
    by Claw on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:34:20 AM EST
    Since he'll be running against McCain, whose stellar record on gay rights--not to mention that of his party--is well documented.  
    Gimme a break.  If you believed in Clinton and her message, believe that she is sincere (and if she wasn't sincere she's the most incredible liar of our lifetime), you now know what she's asking of you.  Honestly, how could anyone watch that speech and still not vote for the dem nominee?  A HUGE chunk of that speech was devoted to reminding us that, while there may have been differences between Clinton and Obama, McCain and Obama aren't even playing the same sport.  Not when it comes to equality issues, not when it comes to the economy, national defense, the list goes on forever.  

    Sorry, if a Republican (5.00 / 2) (#40)
    by dk on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:40:19 AM EST
    candidate shows no respect for gay people, we can fight against it with majorities in congress.  But if a Democratic President has no respect for gay people, we are screwed.

    I am not going to support the notion that religion is a defense against being a homophobic bigot.  I will not support a candidate that legitimizes homophobia as a viewspoint.


    The difference is that McCain (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by sleepwalker on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:43:23 AM EST
    is a Republican and is expected to be all of those things we, as Democrats, disagree with. Obama says he's a Democrat, but doesn't act like one. Not sure I trust a "faux" Democrat as much as I trust a real Republican.

    Record on Gay rights (5.00 / 1) (#49)
    by CST on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:55:42 AM EST
    • sponsored legislation in Illinois that would ban discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.
    • co-sponsored legislation to expand federal hate crimes laws to include crimes perpetrated because of sexual orientation and gender identity
    • believes we need to repeal the "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy and allow gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military


    • does not support a federal non-discrimination law that would outlaw job discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity
    • on Meet the Press in November 2007, "I do believe the don't ask, don't tell policy has been very effective. We've got the best military we've ever had...I think it's logical to leave this issue alone."

    No, No. (none / 0) (#51)
    by Claw on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:59:00 AM EST
    Those guys up there said Obama doesn't care about GBLT issues.  And you're going to bring up legislation to support your point?  Pretty low.

    Obama: (none / 0) (#59)
    by dk on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 11:22:20 AM EST
    Had gay-basher Donnie McClurkin appear at an Obama campaign rally, at which he spent almost a half an hour gay bashing.  Obama knew that McClurkin was a gay basher, and did not remove him from the Obama rally program.

    Refused to have a picture of himself be taken with San Francisco Gavin Newsom, who had courageously performed gay marriages.

    Opposes gay marriage on religious grounds.

    Refused to do interviews with gay oriented media.  Once he did, he responded to a question as to whether Obama admired any gay people by pointing to a professor of his in college.  The reason behind Obama's admiration:  the professor did not proselytize his gayness (unlike, the implication goes, other gays, who apparently do proselytize).

    Strongly considered as a vice-presidential nominee, and gave the keynote address at the Democratic convention to, Tim Kaine, who opposes gay adoption and supports statewide anti-gay marriage equality amendments.

    Sorry, if that is ok for you for to come from a Democratic presidential nominee in 2008, knock yourself out.


    Why isn't Hillary the VP nominee? (none / 0) (#45)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:44:24 AM EST
    Good Question (none / 0) (#50)
    by Claw on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:56:33 AM EST
    I wish she was.  For those pushing the "trust in congress...they'll protect us from McCain," idea, please think about the last 8 years.  The things that Bush was able to do by simply sidestepping congress are too numerous to name.  There are things we can't get done without a dem POTUS.  Wouldn't you rather have a President who is at least interested in holding on GBLT support?  Or one whose brutality toward that group earns him points with his base.

    Yep, bothered (5.00 / 4) (#18)
    by marian evans on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:56:14 AM EST
    It bothers me that one of the most accomplished Americans of this generation has been prevented, by misogyny and intra-party politicking, from achieving OUR goal of a more just world.

    This is the change I've been waiting for - a politician prepared to fight the good fight for the poor, the disadvantaged, for the causes that used to make America a beacon for "those huddled masses yearning to be free" from all over the world.

    You had the chance. It was Hillary Clinton. You let her be shoved out of the race. You blew it.


    But that's soooo boring.... (5.00 / 1) (#62)
    by Berkshireblue on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 11:44:39 AM EST
    someone who actually wants to do the work and not just fill stadiums with crowds fainting at the sight of him. She's an older woman, not at all COOL, does she even HAVE sunglasses????

    Please, today I'm back to way pissed. She's a good soldier-a better one than me, that's for sure. All her speech did was once again show why she is the superior leader, maybe not the superior cool, exciting candidate, but definitely the better, more serious, adult leader.


    No reason (5.00 / 5) (#22)
    by jb64 on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:10:50 AM EST
    for your laundry list of reasons not to vote republican needed here, we all know what is at stake. I can certainly do without another lecture on the evils of John McCain, as can most around here.

    I don't like Barack Obama, I don't like his tone, or his lack of substance. I don't like his VP, or most of his advisors. I don't like the way he ran his campaign. I don't like his supporters, who feel the need to lecture me, as if I'm an idiot.  But, in spite of all that, I'm on board, and it has everything to do with the broad in Orange Pantsuit.

    Since, I am now"on Board" I reserve the right to criticize, complain about his campaign, his supporters, his lack of experience, how much I despise his VP, his silly fake Presidential sseals, or anything else that I deem worthy of comment. That's the price of my vote. Get over it.


    Echoes here of my feelings. If MD is an Obama blowout I may still write in Hillary but I'm on board. I will vote for the D and fight the R with every last breath.
    I hope the Dems take the WH. I hope the Dems get supermajorities. I hope the Dems keep to Democratic values and clean up after the Bushies and clean up some of their own s**t (maybe I'm asking for too much?).

    Regardless, in case we don't take the WH, I am now the proud owner of the HRC12.com domain. Just in case.......


    How could he be better if, (5.00 / 1) (#34)
    by Nike on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:26:21 AM EST
    as you suggest, he does not get things done?

    In theology, intention counts. Sometimes in politics, too. But not in policy.


    Obama is a talented man with immense potential (5.00 / 1) (#56)
    by esmense on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 11:01:46 AM EST
    and, I think, genuine idealism. But for a great many working and middle class Amerians these are terrifying times. And, despite all his good qualities, Obama lacks the one quality that this time around Democrats needed most in a candidate in order to reassure and gain the confidence of those voters -- experience and demonstrated competence and accomplishment.

    I can't believe that much of the inside-
    Washington establishment of the Democratic party decided to put their personal interest in diminishing the political power of the Clintons -- and increasing their own control over the party -- over the best interest of the country. I can't believe that they chose THIS election to conduct intra-party warfare and used as their instrument a politician with great promise but so little experience and accomplishment that his nomination puts a Democratic win in November, even in these favorable-for-Democrats times, in jeopardy.

    Those people that Clinton talked about last night and in whose interest she asked her supporters to cast their votes -- the single mother with cancer and no health insurance, the young Marine, the boy whose mother works for minimum wage -- were nowhere on the minds of ambitions losers like Kerry and Daschle and their associates, staffers, and big money men (whose support help Obama kick off his campaign with more money than any other primary candidate in history -- long before he had his online fundraising effort off the ground or had received even one penny from the "grassroots") when they encouraged Obama to challenge Clinton. They were nowhere on the mind of Dean, Brazile, Pelosi and the legacy-jealous Kennedys who put their support behind the effort to gain or re-gain power by destroying the Clinton legacy and fiddling with the levers of power to make the way easier for their chosen candidate. They were thinking about themselves and seeking to serve their own interest with a candidate who lacked the right qualifications for victory in November but possessed qualities that offered strategic advantages against Clinton in a Democratic primary -- qualities that more conventional inside-Washington candidates, like Biden and Dodd, did not. Their only thought beyond the primaries was the arrogant assumption that any Democratic was likely to win this time around, and the questionable assumption that affluent young, anti-war liberals and libertarian/Independent and moderate Republican voters will turn out for the Democrats in such historic and unprecedented numbers that they will make the votes of traditional working class Democratic constituencies unnecessary.

    This is the thinking of people in a bubble. People so estranged from what is actually happening to the country and from the economic realities and experience of ordinary Americans that they genuinely believe the most important issues in this elections are the trivial and/or abstract issues of political "tone," bi-partisanship and generational "change." Things that affluent voters have the luxury of concerning themselves with -- and that are most important to economically protected inside-the-beltway players like themselves and the media pundits they chose to court over voter constituencies like working class Americans.

    I agree that a Democratic victory in November is important -- especially for those constituencies Clinton most represented. Unfortunately, I don't believe that those Democrats who played on Obama's natural ambition and encouraged him to run before he had the record needed to make a winning argument for himself understood, or cared, about why it is so important. Or acted with that victory foremost in their minds.


    Why isn't Hillary the VP nominee? (none / 0) (#43)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:43:40 AM EST
    Well, pennyp, (none / 0) (#63)
    by JavaCityPal on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 11:56:17 AM EST
    If the democrats were so concerned about the critical level of need in this country for the next four years, they are using a really, really strange way of showing it. Seems to me, they have chosen another four years of unknowns and struggles.

    So, get over it. Those who are trying to right this wrong are the ones who are showing their desire to get the country back on track.


    Hillary's speech (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by sleepwalker on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:49:08 AM EST
    was every bit as wonderful as her ardent supporters knew it would be. Now tell me again why we are nominating Obama? There is no way I will settle for anything less than I could have had if the DNC had not supported a corrupt process. When democracy returns to the Democratic Party, I'll come back, too. Whether I vote McCain or leave it blank depends on McCain. I'm listening to him now, and before last night I wasn't.

    Magnificent speech from Hillary. Some in the (5.00 / 6) (#20)
    by BronxFem on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:01:22 AM EST
    audience had memorized the Harriet Tubman quote she so brilliantly included.  It was the salient metaphor to her entire campaign.  The entire arc of the speech, the references of her mother, Chelsea, the sufraggetes, Tubman was brilliant.  The speech resonated with all.  

    The best political analyst, imo (5.00 / 1) (#32)
    by Prabhata on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:23:21 AM EST
    I quote Anglachel:

    I'm sitting here, still in awe of Hillary's speech and of the woman herself.

    Her speech was a work of brilliance. I'm waiting to see the transcript and go over it in detail. It was, first and foremost, a speech about politics. It had plenty of "human interest" and even humor in it. We most certainly got a look into the mind and heart of this woman. But what it was, from the first line to the last, was a full-force evocation of what it means to be a Democrat. In a season wehere we have been bombarded by bipartisan, everybody let's hug, don't say anything bad about the Republicans, don't be partisan be Obamacan, Unity Ponies for everyone balderdash, Hillary took the party by the scruff of its dithering neck and made it look at the reason we are a party in the first place.

    There is more...

    Hillary is obviously one of (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:48:24 AM EST
    those people who would vote for a turnip if it had a D next to its name.

    But does that turnip define what it's about to be a Democrat?  That's what it takes to get my vote.

    Hillary has to say "vote for the turnip" (5.00 / 1) (#52)
    by Prabhata on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 10:25:43 AM EST
    The turnip at this point has the farmers (Dean, Pelosi, Kennedy, etc) looking for the turnips survival and other vegetable is sprayed with weed killer.  I'm going to the other farm and pick the old turnip.

    Even better the second time (none / 0) (#8)
    by DemForever on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:25:38 AM EST

    Orange Pantsuit (none / 0) (#19)
    by gram cracker on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 08:58:07 AM EST
    Well, that orange pantsuit suggested "PRISONER" to me. What else is the captive going to do, when threatened, by vicious, hateful enemies, with grievous harm?

    She's got more in common with McCain than many realize!

    Posted by ClintonFan at NQ

    Is there a point to (none / 0) (#21)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:03:19 AM EST
    posting an idiotic comment from another site here?

    How is it idiotic? (none / 0) (#26)
    by gram cracker on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:18:46 AM EST
    Lots of things from other sites get posted here. It is an interesting observation relating to the video of Clinton's speech last night. I didn't want to plagiarize ClintonFan's comment.



    Discretion is advised. (none / 0) (#28)
    by Fabian on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:21:42 AM EST
    Goodness knows I see enough stupid sh!t on DK, but I don't drag it back here!

    So your point is you (none / 0) (#33)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:26:17 AM EST
    agree with THAT idiotic comment?

    All righty then.


    Idiotic and stupid sh*t!!! (none / 0) (#53)
    by gram cracker on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 10:40:00 AM EST
    Didn't say I agree.  But I can see irony and humor in the comment.

    BTW Hillary's choice of pantsuit color was the subject of a segment on one of the morning shows today. They showed a number of suits of different colors and spoke about how the orange one was selected.  


    It reminds me (none / 0) (#27)
    by Fabian on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:19:49 AM EST
    of why I don't bother any more.

    Love the prisoner analogy (none / 0) (#41)
    by befuddledvoter on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:43:13 AM EST
    Orange suits here for the prisoners too.  Interesting observation.  Worthy of posting, IMHO.

    What more can be said that (none / 0) (#23)
    by Radix on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:11:44 AM EST
    hasn't already been said about Senator Clinton? That speech shows why she received 18million votes. As an aside, did anyone one else notice her reference to UHC? It looks like she was able to get that commitment from Obama.

    I don't think she got (5.00 / 3) (#30)
    by sleepwalker on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:22:50 AM EST
    a commitment from Obama for anything. I think she stood up there and gave him a list of what it means to be a real Democrat.

    That also could be true. (none / 0) (#38)
    by Radix on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:33:27 AM EST
    Either way, it works out well for America.

    No, without a commitment from Obama, it (none / 0) (#57)
    by Valhalla on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 11:04:02 AM EST
    will go nowhere.  Unless he or members of Congress are willing to expend political capital on it, it's worthless.

    Clinton will fight for it, but even though she's evidenctly expected to carry the party over the GE finish line, I've seen little to indicate reciprocation, in actual action.


    Gay rights (none / 0) (#31)
    by zaladonis on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:23:15 AM EST
    I haven't watched every minute of the Convention but so far the only mention I've heard about gay Americans was last night by Hillary Clinton.

    Michelle Obama certainly didn't mention gays.  Will Barack?

    Well, Obama's actions (none / 0) (#36)
    by dk on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:27:50 AM EST
    so far regarding gay rights send the message that it is ok to be a homophobe (i.e. have the view that gay people are not acceptable human beings) so long as you base your homophobia on your religion.  That gives you a free pass into the national debate, and is a position that can be advocated on Obama campaign rallies if has the effect of bringing in votes (see McClurkin, Donnie).

    I believe (none / 0) (#65)
    by lilburro on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 12:34:52 PM EST
    Michelle Obama shouted out to gays in her speech.

    In the past (none / 0) (#67)
    by jondee on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 01:41:57 PM EST
    she relied on bad intelligence vis a vis gays, but fortunatly she never voted to preemptivly wipe thousands of them off the map. They should be thankful for that.

    And speaking of Michelle Obama (none / 0) (#35)
    by zaladonis on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:27:26 AM EST
    that was one unpleasant sulk on her face during Hillary's speech -- that is, until Hillary said she'd be a great First Lady and then finally Michelle beamed.

    From the information that's been available these past months, I'm not liking this person.  And, given that, it concerns me that she clearly has a lot of power over her husband.

    I don't know. My read (none / 0) (#37)
    by dk on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:31:05 AM EST
    is that she just isn't that much into politics, and I don't really think it's all that fair to hold that against her.  I mean, her husband is the one who wants to be a politician, not her.

    What bothers me more is that the Obama campaign decided to deal with this by bringing in image consultants to try to make her come off as Mrs. Happy Housewife.  To me, that's just one more example of the sexism of Obama and his closest advisors.


    Obama supporters (none / 0) (#44)
    by Edgar08 on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 09:44:09 AM EST
    Now saying Clinton is the best person ever doesn't sit well with me.

    Sorry.  I just don't like it.  I'm not gonna like  it.

    If the situation was reversed I would probably, just what I would do, do nothing.  I would be extremely sensitive to the possibility that Clinton making a better case for my candidate than my candidate can make for himself would be .... I would be aware of the over-simplified and immensely self-serving way it would appear.

    And not to mention the whole way women are sometimes patted on the back when they take their secondary role.

    Now.  I know BTD's praise for Clinton's speech comes from a different perspective.

    I understand that (5.00 / 1) (#55)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 10:58:03 AM EST
    And you know I have been extremely critical of Obama supporters.

    But I think Clinton explained why you should vote for Obama better than I ever could.


    WTF (none / 0) (#66)
    by lilburro on Wed Aug 27, 2008 at 12:37:10 PM EST
    Please Dennis, tell me more about the types of women Bill envisions f*cking.  It's your blog, please, waste more space.