I Second the Emotion

What's "unevaluatable" about the fact that she has now publicly cried twice and each time happened to be on the day before voters go to the polls?

"Lost it"?

Penn Rhodeen, who was introducing Clinton, began to choke up, leading Clinton's eyes to fill with tears, which she wiped out of her left eye. At the time, Rhodeen was saying how proud he was that the sheepskin-coat, bell-bottom-wearing young woman he met in 1972 was now running for president.

"Well, I said I would not tear up; already we're not exactly on the path," Clinton said with emotion after the introduction.

Clinton is holding a roundtable discussion with Connecticut women to talk about childcare and healthcare.

This is perfectly normal behavior, not some kind of breakdown.

What's so noteworthy about this?

At least her half-sob wasn't followed by a perfectly formed attack on her opponent, like in New Hampshire.

Kind of funny, just talking about how hung up on the 60s Joe is over at a WaPo chat and he busts out some vintage Smokey Robinson as a post title, as if on cue.

"...amazing work that is done at Yale by the most remarkable team of doctors and psychologists..."

When they aren't being sued for showing up for work.

Cry me a freakin river.

I just hope the networks don't showcase it tonight or they don't package it as it was before the NH primary.

She clearly isn't feeling well at first read they said how she has lost her voice and was coughing.

But no matter what the case: reacting badly and insulting her or accusing her of acting will drive more people towards her campaign. I think NH established that fact.

I hope the media doesn't over hype this and let it stand and rather cover the race substantively.

I hear Obama was at the Meadowlands with Kennedy and Robert DeNiro: I'd love a post about that Mr. Klein.

"What's so noteworthy about this?"

It's not, but that won't stop the Time bloggers from going on about it, I'm sure.

I believe Hillary when she said she did *not* want to cry.

It's so annoying to see all these posters who say they plan to vote for Obama because of his inspiring message of bringing people together turn ugly and cynical whenever they get a chance to criticize HRC. Makes me wonder just how dedicated they are to his position.

HRC has been everywhere these last couple of days. She must be operating on a couple of hours asleep a night. And yet, she gets better and better when talking to his audiences, sounding less and less rehearsed and more and more open.

Why aren't more reporters commenting on HRC's stamina and strength of character?

"Why aren't more reporters commenting on HRC's stamina and strength of character?"

Because all of the candidates are doing the same thing? Why single her out for this, because she's a woman?

I couldn't disagree more.

Romney sounds like a machine, completely disconnected from his audience.

McCain looks very tired.

Obama is very light on substance, it's all about the feel-good vibes.

HRC is the one who seems to be drawing strength from her day-to-day fight.

Obama too may be a socialist, but at least he appears to be an honest socialist.

The question IS, would an American want Billary back in the WH, as either POTUS or VEEP?

That's a budget busting, business bashing, job exporting 3-way the nation can not afford.

From medicine to meatballs to mandatory coverages, the malicious costs of bogus LITIGATION are what drives up American prices and loses jobs -- and both DNC candidates are up to their arm pits in trial lawyer flotation devices.

Toss in the banking genius Boob Rubin (great annual Citi report there last year Boob), and you have the perfect storm of socialist slacker stupidity that will not only crush our fragile domestic economic position, but make us a flaming laughing stock in world markets.

Never mind the proposed unilateral surrender, and commensurate rape of the DOD, by these UN pandering dolts.

What IS is.

Southern Bell, I understand that you're a Hillary proponent which is perfectly fine, but this:

"Obama is very light on substance, it's all about the feel-good vibes."

is the only one of your four statements that has nothing to do with a comment about how the candidates are dealing with the ongoing drag of a nonstop campaign. How does Obama appear to look like he's dealing with it? From what I've seen he looks like he's been handling fairly well, probably better than the rest of the field.

Et tu, Joe? Pushing this story because you are worred that the clintons, who have been your biggest cash cow, may be on their way out?

You are nakedly trying to push this story and help foment a NH style female backlash.

Joe and the Hillary-Media Industrial Complex are desperately trying to swing the election to Hillary tomorrow. This strategy has several components:

1) Raise Obama's expections

2) Tout polls that Obama is ahead to make people not bother to turn out for him

3) Give lots of coverage to the Cry v2.0 to get it exposureto female voters everywhere.

4) Send out male pundits to criticize Hillary so that she will look like a victim of men.

5) Sit back, allow the NH-like female backlash to unfurl and then express amazement that Hillary does so well

The fix is in, my friends.

It makes me sick.

Like her or not I saw her on CNN talking about going from house to house checking whether children were staying home and not going to school, and her work in the CRM providing legal help. It was good, it said something about her early commitment to community service. I can say lots of the same about Barack in Chicago. Let us give credit to both candidates for the things have done by way of contribution when they were working in clinics and elsewhere.

These are two very capable candidates. I am glad we have a real choice. Look at the McCons!

"And let's stop trying to evaluate that which is unevaluatable."

This is the height of hyposcrisy and cynicism, Joe. Just after you evaluate The Cry v2.0, you say we should not evaluate it.

It you had one shread of intellectual honesty, you would not have made this post in the first place.

The way to not evaluate something is to not put up a post to evaluate it.

And that's really all that needs to be said about this.

Next post.

Posted by RKA | February 4, 2008 2:16 PM:

The way to not evaluate something is to not put up a post to evaluate it.

This is undoubtedly true, no matter who says it.

Damack, I watched CNN all weekend long and they showed extended stump speeches from all the candidates.

HRC come off the best.

Obama seemed to be all about the feeling, not the facts.

Southern Bell:

What facts, specifically, did HRC come off as being about, in your opinion?

An emotional response by Hillary brings out the chauvinism in media pundits - but this election is not about demographics - it is about an American Revolution - revolting against the selfishness of demographics and the pundits telling us who we are supposed to vote for based on our demographic.
Ohg
http://thefiresidepost.com/2008/02/05/this-american-revolution-2008/

Her healthcare plan and approach to getting out of Iraq.

Watching Obama this weekend only made me more nervous. His campaign seems built around his personality, not the issues.

If he's the nominee, of course I'll vote for him. I'll work for his candidacy.

I'm bothered that so many people say they won't vote if he doesn't run. That makes me doubt some of his supporters dedication to the greater cause - getting our country out its current mess.

"I'm bothered that so many people say they won't vote if he doesn't run. That makes me doubt some of his supporters dedication to the greater cause - getting our country out its current mess."

Perhaps that's simply a reflection of their opinion of whether or not Hillary represents the greater cause or the current mess.

Why doesn't Barack Obama share the failures of the Democratic Congressional majority, i.e. "the current mess"?

What specifically about his record of years in the Bush-enabling, war-continuing, Republican minority-dominated Senate allow him to escape being tarnished with "the current mess"?

So, are we saying that we are disappointed in that she has demonstrated that she is not some geek-atomoton running for office ???? Where is the world going that we make this an issue here? And Mr. Klein, as much as I admire your work as newsworthy, most of the time, I frankly question why you would need to dwell on this non-issue. But then, maybe you do see a need for this because you are aware of how the media will turn this minutia once again against Hillary for not good reason than simply to say she is unfit. She is not, and I resent the media for making this whole election into some sort of revenue sucking machine for their shareholders. To make issues out of non-issues like this is just a ploy to draw more revenue into the media coffers.

I didn't say he wasn't a part of it, merely that this might be their opinion.

Swoosie said:

"But then, maybe you do see a need for this because you are aware of how the media will turn this minutia once again against Hillary for not good reason than simply to say she is unfit."

Did you not pay attention to New Hampshire?

"And Mr. Klein, as much as I admire your work as newsworthy, most of the time,"

Oh my.

damack:

Ahh...I get it. It's the "represents" thing...symbolism.

Point taken.

Damack--I am simply asking--what is the point of the story and moreover, what is your point...try being more direct please. And yes, I did see New Hampshire. Duh.

what's she gonna do when negotiating with dictaors in the middle east, cry???

HRC is the one who seems to be drawing strength from her day-to-day fight.

You've got to be kidding. She's lost 15 points in the polls over the past three weeks, her opponent just raised $32 million in January, she's cried twice (both times exactly 20 hours before the polls open), and Maxine Waters is her highest profile endorsement.

Swoosie, if you saw New Hampshire and the following analysis by pundits which credited a significant amount of her success in the state's primary to the crying incident, why would you then accuse Klein of turning this against her when it in fact appeared to have helped her?

We both agree that this is a non-story, but you seem to think that it is something that would hurt her when the opposite seems to have been the case in the recent past.

e_five, I'm talking about how she's holding up under the stress of campaigning.

From FOX News

Michelle Obama probably will not be the first person to jump on the Hillary Clinton bandwagon if her husband loses the Democratic presidential nomination.

That’s not to say that she wouldn’t work for whoever becomes the eventual Democratic nominee, but the wife of presidential candidate Barack Obama indicated that if her husband doesn’t win, she’d have to take a closer look at Clinton before coming up with an assist.

“I’d have to think about that. I’d have to think about policies, her approach, her tone,” she said in an interview Monday morning on ABC’s “Good Morning America.”

Can anyone imagine what the press and bloggers would be doing if Bill had said this about Barack?

Your collague Tom Bevan really attacks Hillary on this today and also brings up the "cackle". Perhaps you can relay to him how wrong he is and how demeaning his comments are.

Posted by ericrsiny | February 4, 2008 4:13 PM
.....snippet of Michelle Obama interview
(AKA FoxNews CliffNotes News)
From Salon online

When ABC's Deborah Roberts interviewed Michelle Obama on "Good Morning America" Monday morning, she asked what Obama would do if her husband's rival got the Democratic Party's nomination:

Roberts: "Could you see yourself working to support Hillary Clinton if she gets the nomination?"

Obama: "I'd have to think about that. I'd have to think about policies, her approach, her tone."

That's not everything that Obama had to say on the subject. As Roberts followed up, Obama immediately softened her previous comment.

Roberts: "That's not a given?"

Obama: "You know everyone in this party is going to work hard for whoever the nominee is. I think that, you know, we're all working for the same thing. And, you know, I think our goal is to make sure that the person in the White House is going to take this country in a different direction. I happen to believe that Barack is the only person who can really do that."

If you leave out that part about working hard for whoever the nominee would be, the impression is left that she would not support any other candidate
http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/index.html

ericrsiny said:

"Can anyone imagine what the press and bloggers would be doing if Bill had said this about Barack?"

Are you seriously trying to compare the stumping of an ex-President and arguably the most famous and influential member of the party to the that of the wife of a primary candidate?

I don't see you checking to find out if Romney's wife will be stumping for McCain.

Come on now.

Actually, Damack... given the swipes that Obama's taken at Bill, I wouldn't expect Bill to help him much in the general. Hillary's never out and out attacked Michelle.

Mike M.
Did you see the last part of the lA debate where both Hillary and Obama agreed that come the general election, everyone would be working together?
When Michelle Obama says, "You know everyone in this party is going to work hard for whoever the nominee is. I think that, you know, we're all working for the same thing as a clarification, what do you take that to mean?"
Hillary is the candidate, not Michelle. Bill takes shots at Barack, the candidate, not at Michelle. Bill is a former President. Does Michele Obama = Bill Clinton?

Wow what a choice.

Obama: Honest, and devoutly socialist. Promises to bankrupt the country AND unilaterally surrender to Al Queda within first 100 days in office. Cool wife, cute kids, could gain a few pounds and a few decades. No record of any actual day job. Votes when he feels so compelled (not so much). Everyone you ever met under the age of 30 during 1974 in some bicoastal airport. Nice and clueless lawyer. Metrosexual god. Your basic vague and vapid sports suit. Bears fan.

Hillary: Dishonest, and semi-socialist. Promises to surrender to UN Smurfs AND bankrupt the country within first 100 days in office. Spousal unit goes AWOL more often than PT Barnum went to the circus. Will cut and run faster to the center than Manu Genobli, come the day after Super Tuesday. Vast experience includes co-impeached successes in Rwanda, Somalia, Waco, and South Beach. Screams at own kid like there was no Alec Baldwin birth control tomorrow. Lawyer, corporate board baby sitter, shoe box miner, FBI files fondler. Uses language only a French sailor can love. Heavy dike inflection (with shallow regrets). Your basic vague and vapid sports suit. Bears and/or Yankees and/or Cubs fan.

QH: Speaking of Socialism...

Oh - here we go again... Crying when she fears losing... Where were the tears for the thousands of lives lost in Kathrina, or in a war she authorized WITHOUT BOTHERING TO READ the 95-page Nat. Intell. Estimate (no staffer had access to...) I bet she did read the polls that day... Even in showing emotion, it's all about HER! Please don;t let the circus back in town - we deserve so much more!

I seem to recall Plaxico Burress speaking last night about a contest in which he was directly involved with tears streaming down his face.

Incidentally, this was not to do with Katrina, nor the pre-invasion NIE, imagine that.

Can't the haters in the Obama cult let the hatred go for one minute? It's really gross. She was normal. People tear up. It's normal. Let it go.

A question for the dems to ponder: How will she fare in Nov, where the "Clinton haters" on the GOP side will vote GOP, on the independent side, will flock to McCain, and on the Dem. side (there are enough of us, because of the scorched-earth campaign and the "all-about-Clinton all over again no matter the cost to the party and its future) will be staying home... (Do you really wnat to talk about Bill's Kazakhstan and other -gates allover again for the next 7 months?! ) WIth hard negatives in all 3 camps, there is NO WAY she can win this. Rove smiles - and all McCain's problems are solved with HRC on the ticket - a "fatal" one (McCaskill) for red0turning-purple states out West, with heavy down-ticket damage. The only party HRC unites is the GOP....

Oh, you're absolutely right, Stuart. It is a total coincidence that the only time Hillary has cried in front of cameras has been before she was facing potentially fatal Obama momentum.

And yes, you must be right that anyone who questions that is a "cultist" and a "hater."

Gosh, what would I do without you. Now I see the light. Up really is down!

RKA:

Please.

Watch the video.

Come back and tell me that there is something extraordinary about it in any way.

Please.

"Can anyone imagine what the press and bloggers would be doing if Bill had said this about Barack?"

"given the swipes that Obama's taken at Bill, I wouldn't expect Bill to help him much in the general."

I can't believe you're so biased as to equate Obama's wife with Bill Clinton. Let's see, what about the swipes that Clinton took at Obama:

"This whole thing is the biggest fairy tale I've ever seen."

"Jesse Jackson won South Carolina in '84 and '88."

RKA,
I know that the Clintons are masterful politicians (well, Bill at least), but could you just for a moment imagine that not everything they say or do is calculated for public appeal. I wouldn't use "cultist" or "hater" to describe the way you're coming off, but rather "conspiracy theorist."

How many times do I have to say this, Stuart.

Let me pit this in clintonian terms you can understand:

It's the coverage, stupid.

It does not matter whther it is real or fake, calculated, or genuine.

What matters is that this is the story of the news cycle:

AP:
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20080205/D8UJRH4O0.html

Reuters:
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN0442454120080205

Ok, lets say this. I will, for the sake of argument, absolve Hillary of all complicity in this. Lets suspend disbeleif and assume its genuine, not calculated.

Do you agree or disagree with the news decisions of the wire stories to feature this so prominently in stories that will be local papers thoughout the country?

Secondly, who does it help to have these stories out there written like this?

My answers: I don't agree and I think it helps Hillary.

Sure, it may not be a moment worth noting. Just look at the video. The question is, why do the wire services, which are supposed to be the least biased of our MSM, feature this non-moment so prominently?

I find it hilarious that you think I am the one making a big deal out of this. Hello! I am not the one printing this story in local papers throughout the country tomorrow.

But yeah, I am overreacting and I should just accept your CW that the media is really out to get Hillary.

Give me a break.

Cicero

You can always vote for Nader -- since he's likely to announce shortly.

وصلات 1
وصلات2
وصلات3
وصلات4
وصلات5
وصلات6
وصلات7
وصلات8
وصلات9
وصلات10
وصلات11
وصلات12
وصلات13
وصلات14
وصلات15
وصلات16
وصلات17
وصلات18
وصلات19
وصلات20
وصلات21