Anyone else not particularly impressed by Hillary's concession speech?

[Cruzan]

I'll say right off that I found it to be perfectly fine, in the sense that it said all the right things -- clearly conceded defeat, clearly endorsed Obama, and clearly pledged to fully support and do everything she can to work for his election. Beyond that, though, the tone and content seemed largely boilerplate, with the exception of the whole 'glass ceiling' business which came across as a bit too hey-look-at-me. In the end, my impression was that it was a satisfactory and entirely adequate speech, but not a whole lot more.

[BlooInBloo]

1. I thought it was very, very good.

[LSparkle]

2. I thought she was also trying too hard to polish the Clinton legacy

Although I will grant her that the DELIVERY of the speech
showed how much she has improved as a speaker. At the beginning
of this campaign, her voice was like nails on a chalkboard to
me but she gave yesterday's speech in a much more modulated
tone and I enjoyed listening to it. Someday, mark my words,
she WILL be president -- just not this time.

[justinsb]

3. Yeah I think it's just you n/t

[Tellurian]

138. agreed, along with... to be precise ...

It wasn't a concession speech, it was a suspension of her campaign and an endorsement of Obama as the presumed nominee. Hillary is NOT releasing her pledged delegates to Obama. Simple enough, Hillary has suspended campaigning for herself and will campaign for Obama.

[bunnies]

147. You just made the case for why some Obama supporters are pissed. nt

[PeaceNikki]

149. But why should that piss anyone off? He has enough delegates for the nomination.

She doesn't need to do it as some act of contrition to Obama or his supporters. A LOT of people voted for her and the issues about which she is passionate.

I am not trying to be thick-headed, but nobody's been able to rationalize the anger about her not releasing delegates. It's not required that she do it and not unheard of for her not to.

So... why be "pissed"?

[bunnies]

154. ok. Heres my opinion:

We have never had such a tightly contested Dem primary and unity is paramount to our success in November. We need to take extra steps to heal the divisions created by this long and painful contest.

So, in my own experience, people are upset with the appearance that she seeks to continue the division. By holding onto delegates, they are still supporting her when we *should* be uniting behind Obama.

The status-quo doesnt apply this year, imho. More effort needs to be made.

[PeaceNikki]

157. Well, there are those, including those who voted for Clinton, who

probably would like to have their delegates stand.

People were able, for the first time in US history, to cast a vote for a woman as the major party nominee. "Taking them away" could also be symbolically divisive. Let them stand, we're all behind Obama whether she releases or not.

[bunnies]

158. I can see both sides.

I just wish we could all stand together. :(

[PeaceNikki]

159. Most of us are.

:) for that.

[bunnies]

161. Either way...

we're going to kick McCains ass. :toast:

[Madam Mossfern]

174. I have a huge problem with the emphasis

on 'being able to cast a vote for a woman'. That is not what this election is about. Sure it would be a fine thing, but IMHO voting for someone because of their gender is stupid (yes, I said stupid). If one really really cares about women, then one would urge Hillary to release her delegates and push for party unity as quickly as possible in order to get on with the real campaign to ensure a Democratic victory in November, thereby ensuring the cause of women's issues.(I'm not fixing the run-on sentence)

Hillary got far, she's an intelligent woman, she has already made her mark in history, let's not risk the election for a gesture.

[PeaceNikki]

176. Many didn't vote for her BECAUSE she is a woman.

But were damn glad that they COULD vote for a woman that they believe in.

[Madam Mossfern]

180. That's fine

I'd prefer to say that they were glad to vote for a person that they believe in. BTW, your post was ambiguous, but I think I figured out what you meant.

[Bake]

198. At this point the delegate count is irrelevant.

Does it matter if he wins the nom by 100 delegates or by acclamation? The idea that releasing the delegates contributes to Pparty unity" is an illusion. Unity, if it happens, will happen during the campaign.

Bake

[donheld]

182. How soon will you receive your tombstone?

[QueenOfCalifornia]

195. Why are you

even over here?

Don't you have some dusting and laundry to do over at Hillaryis44?

[Condem]

4. After the speech Tuesday night

It was the one she HAD to give. That being said, excellent.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

5. Oh, No Doubt There Are Tons Of Morons Out There That Weren't Impressed.

It's a given.

But thankfully the clear thinking and rational amongst us recognized quite readily that it was something to be excited about!

[Faygo Kid]

19. What's with the personal insults by HC supporters here today?

All over the posts on DU, and it does you and your ex-candidate no credit.

[Liberal Veteran]

45. Hangovers from the whine made from sour grapes are particular painful.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

60. My Statement Stands Firm.

[TahitiNut]

73. "Firm"?? I'll say! More like rock-hard stupid! Coprolitic, even.

Yup ... coprolitic it is.

:rofl:

[Faygo Kid]

101. "Coprolitic" definitely describes its substance. Have to remember that one.

Thanks!

I think some of the Hillary backers who aren't going to come around (and so leave us on Wednesday) are a tad angry.

[sybylla]

111. LOL! Coprolitic.

I'd use that more often but finding people who know WTH it means is not easy. Just shoots over their heads.

[tomp]

192. here, here! nt

[QueenOfCalifornia]

196. I have that person

on ignore but from your post you said the right thing to "ignored"

thanks!

[Yael]

69. I have dumped my iggy list for the second time

With the exception of 2 nasties who will remain on there indefinitely for attacking for the sake of attacking.

I see one of them showed up.

Given that they both claim to live in the same town, I have to wonder if it is not the same person as no 2 people on this planet could possibly be that nasty.

[sybylla]

114. You're a bigger person than me

I won't be dumping mine for a while. I only put people on there who were either flat-out delusional (defending fallacies, seeing things that weren't there, etc.) or deliberately and consistently nasty. Until I figure out a reason why their opinion on anything should matter to me - even on those things I agree with them on, they're staying right where they are.

Sad thing is some of them were people I had formerly a great respect for and held off for a very long time before I finally put them on ignore. People say that when you lose a spouse or suffer some like tragedy, you often learn who your true friends are. This is one of those circumstances. I take no issue with those who simply have a difference of opinion from me. But those who acted with absolute disregard to the facts an with disrespect for fellow dems are no friends to me.

[rebel with a cause]

123. my ig list has 26 people on it and

they were all put on it for their nasty remarks. I keep thinking about clearing it, but then I see people angery answering unseen posts and I am afraid of doing so. I think I am better off not seeing and getting upset at people that are having either fun or getting revenge by saying horrid things.

Most of the people here have different names than they had when I use to come here, or their attitudes have greatly changed. I believe you are one of the few that I remember who remain the same. My memory is not what it use to be so I swear to nothing. ;)

[sybylla]

167. "...or their attitudes have greatly changed..."

This primary seemed to bring out the worst in so many people. I'd like to think that in a few weeks it will settle down, now that HRC has left the race. But I'm not counting on it.

BTW, my memory is not what it used to be either, but I do remember you. Nice to see you around! :hi:

[rebel with a cause]

171. Thanks,

You and FrenchieCat are the two I remember the best. Some of them I think I remember but then I read their post and I am not so sure. Like you, I hope things settle down. If not, my ig list may just have to expand. :D.

I'm glad you remember me. It is nice to have someone know you when you come back. :hi:

[mrreowwr_kittty]

202. Do they both spell their names in the SAME style? nt

[AspenRose]

89. Three more days.

Time to retool the ignore function until then. *sigh*

Ad hominem attacks are so beneficial for "unity," dontcha know. :eyes:

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

164. In 3 Days My Post Would STILL Be Perfectly Acceptable.

People who keep touting that line for every little post they disagree with come off looking monumentally ignorant.

[ExPatLeftist]

79. Ah, so "everyone that disagrees with me is an idiot!!"

What grade are you in?

[ElsewheresDaughter]

106. It is a given.

[bunnies]

148. What a total dickhead thing to say.

You post a thread about unity one day and commence shitting on people the next. Whos side are you on anyway?!

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

163. The Statement Stands Firm.

It is what it is. If you can't see it, it's cause you're not trying. Her speech yesterday does not mean all should be forgiven to those who feel the need to harbor ill will towards her. But in spite of that, and regardless of it, there should be no problem with admitting and accepting that her speech yesterday was spot on and amazing, and did a huge deal to help bring people together. To shit on that sentiment and to try and diminish the impact and positive energy of that speech, is an attempt to DIVIDE the party and HURT the party, not help it. Is it that hard for you to see that? The speech yesterday should've impressed any real democrat in my opinion, even if just for the speech itself without having to feel the need to let alllllll the resentment go. But there was nothing in that speech that warrants diminishing. It's ok to let it stand on its own merits and be relieved that it was as powerful as it was, during a time that we so badly needed it to be. So yes, having that said, I think anyone feeling the need to wipe it under the carpet does so out of ignorance, irrationality, or sheer will and desire to continue the divide and hurt our party.

[Madam Mossfern]

6. The problem:

I thought that Hillary originally said that she was not impressed with speeches and big rallies. Remember she has experience and Obama only has a speech.

Just saying.....

What will her more inflexible supporters say now that she has given a speech. Do they listen to her now, or do they stay faithful to what she claimed during the campaign. This is a dilemma that many foresaw.

[JNelson6563]

7. I'd like to see you or anyone here do better.

Ever lose an election? It's brutal. And to lose one as big as this, well it's almost unimaginable to me. To get through that speech after all this, not a voice wobble, not a lip quiver, no sign of weakness, frankly I couldn't be more impressed. But then again I've been down this path as a campaign manager and know how much this sort of thing smarts.

So, tell us of your vast electoral experience that makes you qualified to know what such a thing would be like.

Julie--weary of shitting-flinging keyboard commandos

[crankychatter]

10. always with the personal insults - nt

again, no text because you deserve no text

[JNelson6563]

26. You don't even know me

And I didn't play a shit-flinging moneky in GDP through the pirmaries (don't take my word for it, do a DU search). When I watched that speech yesterday I marveled at the strength required to get through it as she did. To see some dissing that effort is astounding to me. I gotta believe they have no clue what they are talking about. The only other alternative is that they cannot possibly be human and are unfamiliar with that whole "emotion" thing.

Julie

[QC]

36. You're joking, right? n/t

[crankychatter]

46. sometimes but not this time - the mildest perceived criticism is met with incendiary flamebait

if you're defending it you're probably one of them

[MonkeyFunk]

67. You're one of the biggest flamebaiting

shit-stirrers here. You've got no room to talk.

[ExPatLeftist]

80. Hahaha You are a fine one to talk, Monkey.

I have been impressed with your complete lack of a sense of irony or hypocrisy during this primary.

[MonkeyFunk]

112. What flamebait or shit-stirring threads have I ever started?

What democratic candidate have I ever attacked or smeared?

Or are you going to be like all the other ignorant cowards who make that charge, and then can't back it up?

[ExPatLeftist]

135. You and I both know that you don't have to start a thread to stir shit.

And if multiple people are accusing you of the same thing you might just want to consider the possibility that there might be some merit to it...

[XemaSab]

183. You do NOT want me to answer this

n/t

[JVS]

204. Oh, but you must!

Please

[QC]

98. LOL! That's like Dean Martin complaining that somebody's a drunk,

or Charles Manson calling somebody crazy.

You are not in a position to start lecturing people on tact and civility,

[QC]

92. delete

wrong place

[Cruzan]

12. I can't hit a big league curve ball either.

[Condem]

13. Yeah, JNelson

Lost an election for Frat president back in '81. Still not over it.

[genna]

47. Tell us a little about what bile, rancor, and loving concessions mean

especially when you are seeking love and tenderness. I can see through your warm kind words we are well on our way.


Embrace the long goodnight

[dansolo]

53. Poor little Hillary

I'm sorry, I can't feel any sympathy for Hillary. It's not like this was a single election night. This was a drawn out primary, and if Hillary was truly deluding herself up until the very end that she was going to win, then she didn't deserve to win. And if she saw things for the way they were, then she had to know a long time ago that eventually she would have to concede.

[Cha]

68. Some of us have been dealing with

hilary's lies and political expediency for a long time and one concession speech is not going to erase the reality of hilary clinton.

I appreciate that she did us ALL a big favor and finally conceded but it will take years for me to trust her if that's where's she's goin'. Time will be the decider of that.

[JNelson6563]

74. Hi Zidzi!

I was no fan of Hillary's during this primary either. I do think though that she deserves some credit for her speech. Frankly I think if hte Hillary we saw yesterday was the one we'd seen in the primary race, many more of us would've supported her. i also think she deserves some credit fro getting through what must've been the toughest speech of her life with a strong performance.

As I watched I just kept imagining myself in that situation and knowing for sure I dould've never done so as well as she did.

I don't think the speech was enough to erases all the animosity or wipe out the things she did that made many (including myself) angry, but it doesn't prevent me for giving credit where it's due and, because of that, I can say she did a good job. Better tha I'd dared hoped to be honest with you.

And I can't help but wonder how well any of us would've done in the same situation. I am pretty confident I would not have managed so strong a performance.

Julie

[Cha]

83. I know how you feel, Julie, and

that's good for you..but, hilary's my senator and I don't appreciate her political expediency with voting for the IWR and enabling bush all those years. I took those Soldiers' and Iraqis' deaths to heart.

hilary has chutzpah and I'm not surprised she gave a good concession speech..look at all the liv's votes she got with bashing of Barack and political ads that lied about him. And, the academy award performances she gave with her pandering on the gas tax and getting down drinking shots to show she's just one of the guys.

Of course, it's not easy to give a concession speech when you were the inevitable one who had a lot riding on this elecition with the dlc getting it's grab on the power seat in DC again.

But, as I've written..I do appreciate that she gave it.

Sorry, we have to disagree on this one, Julie.

[JNelson6563]

88. I still love ya though

And indeed, it was the war vote that lost me for Hillary years ago.

I hope it's all good in your world. :toast:

Julie

[Cha]

178. Hi Julie,

Thanks for understanding and I still love you, too:)

:hi:

[rebel with a cause]

125. I promised I would not say anything more negative about Hillary

but you mentioned of what you thought of as you watched her speech. What thought that kept popping in my head as I watched her speech was of Evita Peron. Maybe it is because I like the movie Evita and think it is the best thing Madonna will ever do, or that I have watched the movie several times, but Hillary's delivery and her arm/hand motions were so much like those of Evita (even those caught in films of the real Evita) that I got caught up waiting for next Evita moment. My daughter watched the speech later and had the same reaction. I had not mentioned it to her, but when she saw it too, I almost fell out of my chair laughing.

As far as the speech, it was okay, I even had a bit of pity for Hillary but it is a shame that I could not have empathy for her. And the reason that I could not have empathy is that I could not put myself in her place, I cannot identify with her because I would not be as she has been. I can have pity for her but that is as far as I can go. Like you and others, my anger will take time to lessen and what happens in time to come will determine if it does do that or increases.

[Carolina]

131. so true, so well put...

She did what she had to do ONLY after the party forced her! Remember she was going to drag this out for another week or two or whenever.

So I hear ya. Trust and forgiveness are not won with a single speech. And forget her campaign behavior? Never!

[bunnies]

150. Many people here could do better.

The speech was only marginally cohesive. You see... is not about a lip quiver. Its about the SPEECH. Which was average, at best. If you've never been more impressed, I assume you were not an english major. People form opinions from different perspectives. Many people here could write a better speech.

[JNelson6563]

173. Read it again

Apparently, for all your brilliance, or perhaps just close proximity to it, my emphasis was more on her delivery than what she said. While you are right, I wasn't an English major, yet somehow I managed to achieve a reasonable level of reading comprehension.

Man, years ago if someone would've told me that I'd be treated to a pile on for giving credit to another Dem for a strong delivery of a very difficult speech I would've never believed it. How things have changed!

Julie

[dailykoff]

8. Laughably overrated.

Yes, she promised to campaign her heart out for Barack Obama. But the other 29 and a half minutes were the usual Kabuki telling her supporters to do just the opposite, aided and abetted by the media (CNN particularly) who spent the day asking "Where will her supporters go?" as if voting for McCain were a perfectly reasonable option.

And of course, the interviews on every news show of angry Hill supporters pledging never to vote for Obama. Not unexpected, because that is frankly what I heard her telling them to think and do. From an earlier post:

If Obama had pulled what Hillary pulled, yesterday or during the preceding five months, he wouldn't be getting high fives and accolades. He'd be getting the Jeremiah Wright Al Sharpton treatment and run out on a rail.

Since it's been twenty-four hours, I hope I can safely say that I found Clinton's speech to be a disgrace. Nearly every sentence was a dog whistle to supporters to continue their efforts to "restore" the Clintons to their rightful place.

Did she praise Michelle? Did she rail against McCain? Did she mention Obama's legislative accomplishments? Did she even invite the Obama's to share the stage?

The answers tell me all I need to know about where the Clintons are headed and it isn't "unity" except by the most wishful of interpretations.

[wvbygod]

29. praise Michelle for what?

She was not running for anything. Name one thing Michelle has done that would deserve praise
from Hillary or Bill for that matter.

Do you have a link to Obama's legislative accomplishments or bills he has introduced? I could use
them to help bring around some more hardcore Hillary supporters that still plan to write her name in.
I searched for Obama's legislative accomplishments and the only ones that jumped out were some
anti second amendment issues that I can't exactly use to bolster his image here in WV. thanks!

[dailykoff]

32. For being a fine person and an inspiring future first lady.

What the hell was Hillary's speech but a lot of hot gas anyway? She could have blown a little Michelle's way.

Legislative accomplishments: there are many good compilations on the subject (FrenchieCat's recent thread comes to mind) but here's one I have handy:

"Barack Obama's Stirring 2002 Speech Against the Iraq War"

"I stand before you as someone who is not opposed to war in all circumstances. The Civil War was one of the bloodiest in history, and yet it was only through the crucible of the sword, the sacrifice of multitudes, that we could begin to perfect this union and drive the scourge of slavery from our soil.

I Don't Oppose All Wars

"I don't oppose all wars. My grandfather signed up for a war the day after Pearl Harbor was bombed, fought in Patton's army. He fought in the name of a larger freedom, part of that arsenal of democracy that triumphed over evil.

"I don't oppose all wars. After September 11, after witnessing the carnage and destruction, the dust and the tears, I supported this administration's pledge to hunt down and root out those who would slaughter innocents in the name of intolerance, and I would willingly take up arms myself to prevent such tragedy from happening again.

Opposed to Dumb, Rash Wars

"I don't oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.

"What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

"That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics."

from full speech at link: http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/Obama2002War.htm?rd=1

............

CLINTON:

- NO on Amendment No. 4882 that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.

- YES on Bankruptcy bill (S.256) which stripped protections for people in debt.

- YES on Kyle/Lieberman bill that sets the stage for the US to take military action against Iran.

- YES on the Iraq War Resolution.

- Refused to sign the AFC Anti-Torture Pledge.


OBAMA:

- YES on Amendment No. 4882 that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.

- NO on Bankruptcy bill (S.256) which stripped protections for people in debt.

- Drafted legislation stating that Congress did not grant President Bush the authority to attack Iran, either through the Kyl-Lieberman amendment or any resolution previously adopted.

- Vigorously opposed the Iraq War and took a public stand against the Iraq War Resolution

- Signed the AFC Anti-Torture Pledge.


McCain:
- NO on Amendment No. 4882 that would have banned the use of cluster bombs in civilian areas.
- YES on Bankruptcy bill (S.256) which stripped protections for people in debt.
- YES on Kyle/Lieberman bill that sets the stage for the US to take military action against Iran.
- YES on the Iraq War Resolution.
- McCain refused to sign the AFC Anti-Torture Pledge.

original post by grassfed: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4990975&mesg_id=4990975

............................

[wvbygod]

33. thanks for the list!

Yes, Michelle is a fine person as are many of us. I know that spouses hold a lot of bitterness
when someone talks smack about their loved ones and likely there are some wounds that still need
some healing there. One can only hope the personal rifts between them will elicit some words
that mend rather than offend in the future.

[dailykoff]

43. You bet! Here's a better one:

Here's a link to the FrenchieCat thread I mentioned:

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=6303258&mesg_id=6303258

[sunnystarr]

62. Here's the link you asked for:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=6303258

[genna]

52. Are you suggesting that the media is not color blind? I thought Obama was the symbol we want?

If Obama had pulled what Hillary pulled, yesterday or during the preceding five months, he wouldn't be getting high fives and accolades. He'd be getting the Jeremiah Wright Al Sharpton treatment and run out on a rail.

Hilarious.


Is that like giving them the business? How about the perp walk shuffle?


No, Obama needs to treat the media like he has been doing from a distance. I heard Howard Kurtz on CNN's Reliable Sources telling the media they shouldn't allow the historic nature of Obama's run allow for "special treatment".


I've continued to hear how nice the media has been to Obama and how the media needs to toughen up on him. Exactly what is the 6 or 8 weeks of Pastor Wright wall to wall coverage, bittergate, or can he get the white male/white female voter convo? sweet?

I'd like to say their filter is broken on race and gender discrimination and they can't see how poorly they do in presenting the issues in a nonbiased fashion.

[dailykoff]

59. Race and gender are wedge issues. The real issues are war and oil.

Specifically, the obscene profits imperiled by an even remotely progressive presidency. Of the three alternatives, Hillary was the most reliable shill for the MIC, McCain being slightly unpredictable, and the race-gender puppet show staged by CNN and other big-business megaphones is just one of the many dragons Obama will have to slay to win the prize. I think his chances are good but he's up against a deadly serious and deep-pocketed foe.

[genna]

105. I thought the real issues were monopoly busting like defense and petrol

or the health care industry but overturning the democracy's profits for elites.

When the benefits of democracy are extended beyond elite classes (I'm talking the top 1 to 5%), then any and everything is possible.


I think the best kept open secret of Obama's campaign is that he has more than 1 million people capable of making sure he is not beholden to media coverage for the next 5 months and he might have a field of bloggers who push the media to cover different agendas.

[dailykoff]

179. I think I'd agree with you on those points.

I heard David Sirota call the Obama campaign a revolution along the lines of FDR's election in 1932 and I think he's right. A lot of fat cats are going to get rolled Obama gets elected which makes me very worried for his safety.

[genna]

189. I don't think he is safe which is why the Secret Service have doubled up their coverage.

I will look up David Sirota to see if I agree with what his analysis is.

Obama has no qualms about saying he is going to change the way politics in Washington work. Listen to the underground conversation going on with those elites...economic Republicans on Wall Street saying we can work with him because he listens.

Listens to what I wonder?

He has told them he will raise tax rates on businesses and on elites NOT MORE than Clinton 28%.

He is going after them for their 'fair share', but this is different from the Republican shake down where they decrease elite taxes and expect campaign donations. McCain never played ball. He can't raise money to save his life because of campaign finance. Feingold had the same problem.

What is Obama's stance on the issue? My conspiracy idoled brain (only opinions no facts to support my thoughts): I think they are negotiating what the terms of what an Obama administration look like.

When I hear people like Murdoch talk about he likes Obama, I have to believe the elites are courting Obama and trying to feel their way to an arrangement. Surely it didn't escape anyone's notice that Obama fought Clinton or her turf (he didn't reframe the issues or redefine the wedges) AND WON. This is behind the public eye negotiations.

I don't think McCain is a part of them.

[genna]

190. David Sirota is EXACTLY ON POINT

Luckily for Democrats, their candidates ignored the "experts" and started echoing Lamont's message. After the 2006 election, polls confirmed that these anti-war campaigns were precisely what won Democrats control of Congress.

Lamont, though he lost his own general election, showed that representing the public's anti-war sentiment and ignoring Washington's self-appointed gurus wins national elections. And as the current campaign unfolds, the Lamont Lesson is resurfacing.

Today's political landscape has not changed from 2006. America still opposes the conflict, and Democrats not only refuse to use their congressional power to cut off war funding, but have opted to insult the public's intelligence. Indeed, at the same time the party is airing ads attacking John McCain for wanting to continue the war, Democrats in Congress are championing a $165 billion military spending bill that indefinitely prolongs the occupation.
The party's leaders are not debating strategies to end the war, but "the kind of pro-war Democrat that we ought to be," as Rep. Lincoln Davis, D-Tenn., said a few months ago.

Now, instead of one candidate crashing the party, there are more than 50. That's how many are backing A Responsible Plan to End the War in Iraq. Initially launched by Darcy Burner, a Seattle-area congressional candidate, this plan has been endorsed by the likes of retired Maj. Gen. Paul Eaton, who served in Iraq, and Lawrence Korb, former assistant defense secretary under President Reagan. It supports an immediate withdrawal from Iraq.

http://www.creators.com/opinion/david-sirota/the-lamont-lesson.html

[dailykoff]

201. Newsweek Q & A on Sirota's latest book, "The Uprising":

Pitchforks For Change
By Tony Dokoupil | NEWSWEEK
Jun 2, 2008 Issue

In his new book, "The Uprising," author and populist gadfly David Sirota argues that a "fist-pounding, primal screaming" revolt is brewing in America—and it's about to boil over. He spoke with NEWSWEEK'S Tony Dokoupil:

Q: What kind of uprising are you talking about?

It's actually more than a dozen separate uprisings, connected by a common backlash against the elite domination of government. On the left, it manifests itself as a backlash against the war, economic inequality and conservatism; on the right, it's a backlash against illegal immigration and liberal elites.

Q: They sound more different than the same.

They are different in the specific issues they focus on, but the same in what they are reacting against: the establishment and the status quo.

Q: If the people are always right, what keeps them down?

Social and cultural divides, territorialism and a kind of vanity. There is a huge amount of power to be wielded on the local level, but all the focus is on national targets, like Congress and the White House. Becoming a movement would require less of the glamorous stuff, like the presidential race, and more community organizing, far from the media spotlight. It also requires more democracy. I reserve some tough criticism for organizations whose leaders are not elected and thus face no accountability. Moveon.org, for instance—its leaders are great individuals, but the organization has an undemocratic structure that expresses a lack of trust in the people they serve.

Q: What would a cohesive movement look like?

Something akin to history's past movements—multicultural, locally based and broadly themed so that different individual issues fit under the movement's umbrella.

Q: Why is the time right for a populist revolt?

There is an extremely intense wave of dissatisfaction building right now that mirrors the wave in 1980 that helped the conservative uprising explode into a full-fledged conservative movement.

Q: Do you worry that you ' ll turn off elite readers with a pitchfork mob on your book cover?

Not at all, because this book wasn't written for the establishment crowd. It's not a book by Tom Friedman. It's not a book for wealthy people.

Q: And yet you ' re rather establishment, as the son of a Philadelphia doctor.

"Establishment" is a point of view—do you worship power or challenge it? No one who knows my work would say it is establishment.

Link: http://www.newsweek.com/id/138528

Link to Sirota's May 27 Huffpo column about the book: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/launching-the-uprising_b_103672.html

[Willo]

65. To really put it in perspective, those media attacks on Obama were

hyped up at key times to cover for Hillary's mistakes.

Specifically,

1) When Obama put a stop to her inviting him to be VP and to who was winning.
2) When she had no answer for Penn and Nafta - laughter.
3) Her Bosnia lie

[rebel with a cause]

126. When you are right, you are right

But there was also attacks to cover up some of mccains mess ups also. I think the MSM's tactics is to cover up fro the opponents and attack Obama whoever the opponent is. I think by this we see who most of the MSM want to be elected. And although I got a little tired of MSNBC's Hillary obsession, they are the only ones that are giving us the other side. Now if we will have to see if they will give us the truth about mccain's weaknesses the way they did the Democrats during the primary. Funny thing is that Pat Buchanan does not like mccain so he may not be attacking the democrat (Barack) this time around. Time will tell.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

77. Three More Days...Three More Days...Three More Days...

And the incorrigible and unrepentant haters will be banished...

Hallelujah...

[1Hippiechick]

109. Love your posting name - your parents must have been boomers! :)

:kick:

[RoyGBiv]

9. I was incredibly impressed ...

Excellent, simply excellent.

Or, as Skinner put it, she nailed it.

[faithfulcitizen]

11. I wasn't impressed by it. I think it was about her and was a speech she needed to give.

Not so much an endorsement of Obama, more an application speech for VP. Sorry, just my opinion... I'm just glad this primary is over.

[PeaceNikki]

14. I think there are people who can find fault in everything.

It's never good enough, never gracious enough, too late, too long, too loud... on and on and on.

Some people can and will never be "impressed" by her. And it's silly to pretend otherwise.

[Cruzan]

17. No, my point was I found it to be quite entirely 'good enough.'

But otherwise fairly unremarkable.

[ExPatLeftist]

81. Perhaps some people are like that.

But what is your point?

Some people also honestly were not impressed by the speech and feel that it does not make up for her recent actions. And it's silly to pretend otherwise about that as well.

Attempting to disregard the valid opinions of others by labeling them or assuming that "nothing would be enough" is illogical and offensive.

[PeaceNikki]

You're illogical and offensive.

:eyes:

[ExPatLeftist]

97. Great comeback. "I know you are but what am I?!"

Now away from the grade-school flashbacks and back to the issue...

Are you honestly saying that you think that EVERYONE that was not absolutely impressed by the speech is worthy of disregarding on the basis that "nothing would have been enough"?

Is there no place in your world for respect for other opinions, or must everyone simply toe the line?

No, I have stated my feelings on this issue and I will not be written off based on some closed-minded black-and-white view that has no place in the Democratic party. That is my genuine opinion about the speech I watched, not based on some pre-drawn conclusions. If you do not like or cannot accept that, then that is your problem, not mine.

[PeaceNikki]

100. I was unaware that I was engaged in a "comback contest"

[ExPatLeftist]

130. So I see that you also do not care to address the point. n/t

[PeaceNikki]

145. What fucking point, Sparky?

If you reread the 1st post of mine to which you responded, you will see that it says "SOME" people. Not ALL people, not the OP, not "ExPatLeftist".

You stumbled in here looking for a fight. You're trying to create drama everywhere you can.

Eat me.

[crankychatter]

15. A whole lot of Clinton supporters think it's just fine - Most Obama supporters are satisfied

Many Clinton supporters on DU have expressed admiration for Obama and some have announced their full support as did Hillary.

I keep thinking of Val Kilmer's, Doc Holliday line in the movie, Tombstone.

"That's why I love Wyatt. He can talk himself into ANYthing."

[wvbygod]

16. Other than focusing on Obama too much and not enough self praise...

It was a successful speech. The woman at my side appreciated the glass ceiling comments.

She could have noted that the race was a tie and Obama squeaked in a win and it would have been fine too.

[Faygo Kid]

21. LOL

Your post is an intentional joke, right?

[wvbygod]

30. Well...you are half right :o)

So I have to answer with a definite maybe.

[otohara]

113. She Got in One Last Dig

she had to repeat " I'D MAKE THE BETTER PRESIDENT " Wild cheering..............pause...............pause.......wait for cheers to die down.......pause.......BUT....BUT....

then on with to rest of the speech.

[papapi]

18. Sounded to me like the same speech she gave Tuesday night with some...

of the things she left out stuck in. Every time she said 'Barack Obama' I could here the disdain in her voice as if it was coming from a robotic voice box or something. Overall an acceptable speech. I think she just sort of rewrote her nomination speech to fit the occasion.

[dailykoff]

22. Good call.

That's exactly what it was -- her usual gender card monty with a few forced and unconvincing Obama lines stuck in.

[sandnsea]

20. I guess you're not a woman

I don't think it really took off until about half way through, when she talked about breaking the glass ceiling and a woman winning state primaries for the first time. I thought it was terrific and not about her at all.

[cherokeeprogressive]

127. What other woman who won primaries was she talking about?

Not about her?

[rebel with a cause]

134. good question

:rofl:

[sandnsea]

146. She was talking about the women in the future - DUH n/t

[cherokeeprogressive]

193. "a woman winning state primaries for the first time"

So she didn't win any primaries, then?

[Kitsune]

23. Thoroughly unimpressed.

In fact, I actually shouted at the TV a few times. Less than usual for a Hillary speech, but when she said that line about "no prejudice being acceptable" I had to shout "Then why aren't you for fucking marriage equality?!"

Overall, it was more boneheaded things like that which left me unimpressed, but also the fact that she was 45 goddamn minutes late to her own political swan song left a bad taste in my mouth. At least she's finally out. With any luck, after the next few days of OMGHILLARYing, we'll never have to see or hear from her again.

[bread_and_roses]

24. I wasn't, but so what?

Most people seem happy with it.

[Saturday]

25. I see the bashing Hillary still continues here. nt

[ExPatLeftist]

85. Voicing a genuine opinion contrary to the prevailing winds is not "bashing".

Viewing it as such IMO is oversimplification and an attempt to quash any sort of dissent - in other words, undemocratic.

[FrenchieCat]

27. I think the speech was great as a first step.

Hillary Clinton must now show what kind of leadership she is capable of in terms of bringing that percentage of her voters who currently state that they will vote for Warmongering NeoCon AntiChoice John McCain over Obama or those who say they will not vote at all.

It is really up to Hillary to be the leader that she professes to be and bring them under the Democratic umbrella. If she cannot do this, than I will have to question the damage that she did via her campaign, and I will have to question her leadership capabilities.

Sure, Obama has to do what he has to do as well, but if Hillary Clinton doesn't direct her followers towards OBama, as only she can do, persuasively, then Obama's efforts will be left unheard, as these voters have to give him a listen. Currently, many of these voters haven't even bothered to listen to anything Barack Obama has had to say.

Can Hillary lead when it is required for the health of this country, even if her name won't be on the ballot? We shall see.

[Kittycat]

28. As an ardent non-Clinton supporter... I found her speech one of the best she's ever given.

Even when you take out the endorsement part (around 6-7 minutes worth I think) - it was a phenomenal speech. I told my DH that I wish she would have run her entire campaign like that speech.

She derserves :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[Buzz Clik]

31. I liked it.

[JohnnyLib2]

34. My wife, who is near her age, very much liked it. As did our daughter.

At did I.

[jgraz]

35. She did what she had to do. She did the right thing.

I'll admit I wasn't expecting that.

[MarjorieG]

37. Many say her ability to compartmentalize allows stregth/denial in public. She doesn't think she lost

Not enough was said about Obama winning fair and square, and certainly she needs to work on the anger and her mischaracterization of him. She's no longer saying she won the popular vote, but she does believe every one of those 18 mil were decisively for her, not name brand. I agree she was polishing legacy up.

Presentation very effective...

She could have said something complimentary about his qualities, why he'd be a good president, not just rehashing her adventure. Her supporters are all over TV rebuilding perception. Obama just wants to win, whatever she's playing.

The Clintons always play rough when losing, and will do anything. The media says if Obama loses will vindicate what she thought-that he couldn't win. What about saying Hillary accept some of the blame if he doesn't do well?

What about the eights weeks where she knew she'd lose, ultimately, but continuing on to damage both of them. The later states were those she should have won, however much Obama had to face the re-emergence of Wright-only to win NC and a tie in IN.

Somen women/people would excuse everything she said as a justified part of her campaign; yet the negative attacks brought media criticism she deserved. She had become a joke, but some of her stunts were outlandish; that willingness to look foolish endeared her to men and women turned into votes.

Already the media is easier if Hillary were the candidate and de-emphasizing Obama's appeal. It starts.

More selling the war as going well, and McCain as moderate. His maverick label hard to dispel, and voting process puts us at risk.

(sp)

[JVS]

38. She's taking advantage of low expectations.

[faithfulcitizen]

48. very well said.

[ExPatLeftist]

87. Exactly. n/t

[TwilightGardener]

39. She did what she had to do. She gets a big shrug and a "See ya, wouldn't

want to be ya" from me.

[JohnnyLib2]

40. It was a finale. Now, Obama stands alone in the spotlight.

Right?

[CakeGrrl]

82. He will, finally, after all the VP speculation goes away once he chooses someone other than HRC

Make no mistake, her backers are using this as the springboard to keep her name in the news as long as possible with "What's next for Hillary?" speculation.

But I'm confident that Obama and company will not let the talking heads distract them from the proper vetting that she certainly would not pass. It's just an annoyance that the MSM, aided and abetted by some of her high-profile support, continue to beat this drum, and it takes a little luster off the speech when you consider that it may indeed have been crafted with an eye toward getting on the ticket.

I agree with those who say the speech was a good first step. But I also remember that we may not yet have heard this speech had it not been for Charlie Rangel and her other congressional supporters stepping in a few days ago to persuade her to end this.

It also saved her from having to explain her tone in the Tuesday speech.

[genna]

41. We must be supportive even when we think the substance is self-denial and self-deception

It is not polite in mixed company (Obama and Clinton supporters must unify no matter what) to talk about self aggrandizement except when we talk about Obama as Messiah.

We must all believe she ran a brilliant, balanced campaign which was ethical on all respects, above reproach and a model for every future democrat.

To say less than that would be not giving a fair shake for all the women who stood by her.


:shoo reality, we have some unifying at all cost to do:

Don't make any mention for all the HRC apologists in the media trying to reframe the entire primary like we didn't live through it. Ignore reality, go back to sleep. Republicans care about Hillary.

[Elidor]

76. Well said n/t

[totodeinhere]

90. She gave Obama about 7 minutes and the rest was all about her.

[Jakes Progress]

42. Whoa, dude, sure.

It's really going to cut into the beer money that the dorm trolls were making from the rnp. Bummer.

[HCE SuiGeneris]

44. It was an obligatory capitulation.

She elaborated well on women's issues and lauding "her" supporters.

[dansolo]

49. I wanted her to address what voting for McCain would mean

She knows that there are people who are supporting McCain in her name. She needed to not only endorse Obama, but she needed to explain in clear term what 4 years of a McCain presidency would mean for this country, and especially for women. Her endorsement is a little hollow if she makes it seem like she was forces to do it, as apposed to something she truly believes in.

[AspenRose]

86. I was looking for that too.

Otherwise it was a decent speech.

[Poll_Blind]

50. I agree but, really, this is about as magnanimous as Sen. Clinton gets.

  Look at how she ran her campaign and how low she brought it. And then brought it lower. She denied reality and threatened (through Ickeys) to rip the party farther apart. And the whole time, dragging her followers along, confusing them and intentionally stirring up divisiveness with her "disenfranchised" commentary about Florida and Michigan.

  Going from that hurricane of entitled selfishness to the speech she gave on Saturday was a huge leap from her previous position and I'm "pleased" with it in that regard. Very pleased, actually.

  She said the right things, she said them many times more than I expected. And except for the joyless way in which she would shriek-enunciate "Barack Obama as President", I think mostly her speech worked in the way that the Democratic party was hoping it would.

PB

[DerekJ]

51. Let me put it this way. I was not impressed by her facial expression during her endorsement for Obam

The first thing my wife said that she looks pissed. But after that her speech was very good.

[genna]

102. I would say she looked CRUSHED and like she had been crying

Her ability to disconnect from the reality most of share is both inspired and terrifying.

[elfin]

54. It was better than I expected - the only part

that I found jarring was her LENGTHY section on women's issues that I thought was framed in such a way as to once again blame sexism as the main reason she lost.

Not that Obama took this all A student to school on how to run a campaign in the face of persistent racism in this country, which has been more vicious for eons longer that prejudice against women.

Not that there isn't gender bias as well -- but I felt it was more anti-Hillary bias than anti-woman bias.

[sellitman]

55. My anger at her has clouded my judgement of her speech.

Maybe it will be diluted with time but I wasn't as impressed at all.

[Carolina]

140. I feel the same

especially because this speech is not something she did willingly. She gave it because party leaders took her to the woodshed after Tuesday's stunt.

Her speech was a lot about her and women, blah, blah, blah and I say that as a woman in her demographic.

She should have undone some of her kitchen sink damage by talking up Obama's qualifications and his fair and square win. I still found an undertone of victimhood in her speech and she is NO VICTIM. Or rather she is a victim of her own delusion, narcissism and arrogance.

[StevieM]

175. She did nothing wrong on Tuesday--it was wonderful of her to bow out this early and

Obama should be grateful.

Steve

[Carolina]

185. oh puhleeze

nothing wrong... yeah right that's why the party leadership took her to the woodshed!

Buzz off, I wasn't talking to you.

[SoCalDem]

199. Thankfully , I was busy, and missed the whole day of "news"

I understand that she finally admitted he would be the candidate and offered her support..Good for her..

I did not expect her to be effusively supporting him..no one would have believed it anyway..

Here's hoping that she goes back to the senate, does her senator-job and thoroughly enjoys the rest of her life :)

The people she whipped into a frenzy need to calm down, and start researching the candidate, and it's hard for them to do that with her in their faces every time they turn on a tv.

When people who quit smoking or drinking or who dump a paramour,do that difficult thing, absence from the proximity to those things ( or the people involved) is the most important part of recovery.

Every time they see her, they receive the "message" from her that she was "done-wrong", it only sets back the process..

We have not seen Richardson, or Kucinich, or Edwards, or Biden or Dodd on tv 24-7 reviewing their campaigns and why they lost.. It's a hard thing to do, but when someone loses, they have to leave the stage..

Hillary should actually consider writing a book about her campaign, and do it honestly...as a primer for the woman/women who will follow. It should be a straight-forward approach to what not to do. and how NOT to choose staffers and managers.

Hillary actually might have done better without many of the MEN she surrounded herself with during her campaign. When she campaigned as a woman candidate, she did much better, than when the men were pushing her to be "manly" and experienced.

Done right, the sales of that book might offset some of the debt too.

[The Stranger]

56. The first part was her continuing, destructive campaign for herself, and really contained all of the

energy. The second part where she was supposed to unite the party sounded like she had been asked to read something to someone.

But at least we have the Clinton criminals out of the way. Now we can finally move forward.

[Diane R]

57. I wasn't impressed, either, but I kept quiet yesterday out of respect for her supporters.

I thought that she could hardly bear to make herself say his name. She certainly showed no enthusiasm for her words of endorsement. She only got animated when she spoke about herself, and her place in history. I thought her bitterness was palpable.

That said, I'm glad that her speech was interpreted by many, and reported as, a resounding success. It's best for Obama and for our party for the headlines to be positive.

But, her speech yesterday does nothing to change the opinion I formed of her during this primary season: Hillary is all about Hillary, she'll do anything to promote herself, she won't admit a mistake, she can't be gracious in defeat, and she's already plotting to rise from the ashes. I see no indication that she plans to be a team player.

[crickets]

96. My sentiments exactly.

I had the same impression of her speech, kept quiet yesterday for the same reason and have the same concerns about her future conduct. (Get out of my head, hee.) Here's hoping she will finally prove my fears unjustified.

[rebel with a cause]

133. Heard today that she is petitioning to have her name

put on the ballot(?)at the convention so the deligates can chose between her and Obama. (that is what was said on the McGaughlin Report) Part of them were saying that they think she will half-heartedly support Barack while Bill works against him and rallies the troops behind her, while trying to convince the SD to cross over to her side. This may be all phooey but it worries me. Is it enough to get me to start running around like a chicken with its head cut off? No, it is just something to watch out for.

[Diane R]

142. If that's true, there should be a thread devoted to discussing it. Do you have a link?

[rebel with a cause]

153. No link, I just heard it on McGaughlin Group

I gave the wrong name to the program before. I cannot find anything on today's program in print. The show was on PBS today at noon, and there were as usual four reporters talking to Mr. Mcgaughlin. One of the reporters was a MSNBC reporter Michelle Bernard and the other was Monica Crowley. Pat Buchanan was there along with Eleanor Clift, but I don't think they were the ones talking about this. Here is the link to the shows web site where you may be able to get the transcript in a few days. I will check back and see then and so can anyone else.

http://www.mclaughlin.com/library/library.htm

Note that I am not saying this is true, only what I understood these reporters to say that they thought was going to happen. I'm not into beginning a thread on something unless I have it in writing and it comes from someone I half way trust.

[progetto]

58. Her speaking ability has greatly improved over the past year.

After a day to digest it, I'd still say it was a very good speech. Not a 10, but few are.

The glass ceiling part seemed more a tip to her supporters that really expected Hillary to be the first woman president and the milestone it represents. These supporters were her most dedicated and the most disappointed now. It seemed appropriate to me.

Obama's own historical significance sometimes over shadowed Hillary's. From this point of view, it's unfortunate that they were pitted against each other.

[Hart2008]

61. Unimpressed: Talk is cheap and deeds are precious.

The reality is that Billary took the low road in the campaign.

All the talk in the world can't change the negative campaign that they conducted.

She needs to redeem herself by working her tail off to get Obama elected, and not just talk about doing it.

Ask me after election day if I have been impressed with Hillary's work to elect Obama.

[Cha]

170. They can ask me too..

Anybody who trusts hilary to do the right thing after a concession doesn't know what she's been up to for the last 8 years that I know about.

[Hart2008]

200. My knowledge of the Clinton camp goes back to '87 when Bill flunked an interview to be Hart's VP.

Carville was the guy spreading the rumors that Hart "couldn't keep his pant on".

But who was the self described female "Liberal Democrat" who kept calling the Miami Herald about Hart and Donna Rice?

[TexanDem]

63. agreed - the speech a whole lotta "me." She was forced to give it! People/MSM are pretty gullible nt

[2008]

64. 1st viewing: unimpressed, 2nd viewing: assuaged, 3rd viewing: impressed

I think her tone was that way because she's still experiencing possibly her biggest disappointment ever.

[jonestonesusa]

66. It was fine.

Although "Shame on you, Barack Obama" made better theater!

[intaglio]

70. It matters not

What now matters is fighting and defeating the Republican demagogues and playing to the fears of those dispossessed Hillary supporters is unnecessary

[slinkerwink]

71. I was very impressed with the speech, and thought it was Clinton's best.

[Zavulon]

72. Color me extremely unimpressed.

"Yeah, yeah, we lost, vote for him, but look at everything I did!"

I'd have been more impressed if she had ENDED her campaign on Tuesday or Wednesday instead of SUSPENDING it yesterday, but we all know she still needs her donations. She will, of course, have to cover her debts without my help. And if Obama wastes his time helping her with her financial problems, my donations to him stop, too.

[rustydad]

75. Puff fluff

She said the *right* things sure. But that cannot make up for months and months of slamming Obama directly or through surrogates. She ran a filthy campaign, there is no way around that. And one speech praising Obama comes no where near being the mea culpa that would let her have my support for anything. She and Bill should go quietly into the night. They are non players. Bob

[ExPatLeftist]

78. I agree. I am wondering if I watched the same speech as so many others here...

I just do not think it was fantastic. That is my honest opinion.

I wonder how much of the immense praise being slathered originates in an effort to mend fences...?

I felt like she went exactly as far as she absolutely needed to and no further.

She was pressured into even that much, and she blew her chance to show any grace, IMO, last Tuesday.

I will move on and focus on the GE, but I felt like she could have done so much more, and that it was not enough considering recent actions.

Personally I hope she campaigns for Obama very little - I believe that it would be better for the campaign if she keeps a low profile.

[rucky]

84. No, I was not not particularly impressed.

[ginnyinWI]

91. my take--

I have been annoyed by all the media coverage given to HRC since it was Obama who clinched the nomination. He's been very gracious about all the space she's been taking up in the media, which can't get enough of the Hillary saga, it would seem. Not her fault, though. I wish she would have conceded on Tuesday, but it was true to her character to drag it out for a few more days I guess. So okay, fine. I don't understand all the hoopla. Just concede and get out of the spotlight.

I suppose her speech was okay. It's typical of the speeches she likes to give. But I never can really believe what she's saying or trust that she means it, so it didn't move me. This has been true since before this primary season and it's still true. To me, take away the Clinton name and you just have a very ordinary female politician.

[JimGinPA]

93. I'll Just Say I Think Some Of The Praise For Her Speech Was A Little Over The Top...

She said what she was "supposed" to say I guess. I wasn't all that convinced of her sincerity.

[sfam]

103. What exactly would you have liked her to do?

Part of the praise was that Hillary didn't go way over the top in a non-believable "Obama is great" session. While I absolutely agree that Hillary hasn't at all mended all the bridges she broke, I don't see how you could argue she could have done more or better on Saturday.

[1Hippiechick]

128. Talked more about the Party taking back the White House, and much MUCH less about herself!

[Max_powers94]

94. They had to FORCE her to do this. that is why I am not impress.

[Carolina]

143. Thank you! Exactly.

She is not gracious. She did what she was forced to do by the party leadership. Do you think she'd have conceded if she hadn't gotten that conference "call" from Charlie Rangel, the House cohort and 8 senators?! Her narcissism knows no bounds.

[indimuse]

95. STFU!

really! What she didn't bLEED enough for YOU?

[sfam]

99. I absolutely loved it. Thought it was geared towards those who were bugged but might consider Obama

The hard Hillaryis44 supporters are pretty much gone from us, but for the rest, I thought it was the perfect speech. As an Obama supporter, I give it a hearty (or "full throated" as the MSM seemed to enjoy saying) A+.

Hillary can bash McCain another time, preferably when she is on stage with Obama. The time to do that wasn't Saturday.

[rocktivity]

104. It was more of a "Evita Peron" speech to me--garnished with self-pity

By clinging to her 18-million strong popular vote lead; declaring that the race was close (from Feb 5 through March 4, she won the majority of pledged delegates only 11 times out of a possible 38); and implying that she had hit a "glass ceiling," she didn't completely wash away the taint of her speech the previous Tuesday.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GVd8Fl22cP0

:headbang:
rocknation

[Faygo Kid]

110. "Don't cry for me, Pennsylvania. . ."

Don't cry for me Pennsylvania
Though you're no West Virginia
All through my campaign
My mad persistence
I lost my premise
Bill keep your distance. . .

[rocktivity]

117. .

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

rocknation

[Faygo Kid]

122. Glad you liked it. I'm humbled.

Of course, I have a lot to be humble about.

[genna]

115. That video is kind of creepy...is she a popular singer or what?

It is the outstretched hands that wig me out. What is that about?

[rocktivity]

116. Patti Lupone is a Broadway stage institution

who got her big break singing the role of Evita Peron nearly thirty years ago. "Don't Cry For Me Argentina" is her signature song, and it requires acting like a self-piteous drama queen.

:headbang:
rocknation

[genna]

188. I am woefully ignorant about Broadway. Thanks.

If it requires the feeling of a drama queen, I guess the comparison is apt.


Buh.

[rebel with a cause]

139. oh my gosh!!!!

I posted the same thing up thread. Although I pointed out her mannerisms and speaking seemed very similar to Evita's. I would suggest anyone that doesn't believe this to rent the movie "Evita" and watch it. The similarities are astounding. My daughter questioned whether Hillary had studied her style (or those protrayed by Madonna) before she gave this speech. Maybe that is why it took her four days to be ready. :shrug:

[ElsewheresDaughter]

107. don't choke to death

[faithfulcitizen]

124. So, the OP has a ho-hum opinion about a speech, and you imply that she die? real sweet.

[gulfcoastliberal]

108. My girlfriend said it best: she was "just going through the motions".

Waaay overrated. I totally agree.

[lamp_shade]

118. For pete's sake... get over yourself

Good Lord! Grow up.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

119. UNITY PARTY POOPER!

:*

[RichardRay]

120. It was good, and as long as she keeps making it

it will continue to be fine. If it was a flash in the pan and we don't hear from her in an active role and a similar vein as the days and weeks go on, then I'll be less impressed.

[janx]

121. I disagree!

I loved it, as did my female friends who are around Senator Clinton's age. (I'm about 11 years younger.)

Her emphasis was not just on the cliche glass ceiling, but on the strides women have made in general, herself included. And she made sure to include other people in what her campaign meant for the country and for women.

It was wonderful.

[1Hippiechick]

129. Your post says it all - it was all about her and her women supporters...that's the problem.....

[janx]

136. No, I don't think so.

The speech was about women in general, and while I think she may have spent a little too much time on it, causing some divisiveness, what she said needed to be said. She wasn't my choice, but I respect her and was glad she ran for the Democratic nominee.

[onetwo]

132. "...and that's why we must elect Barack Obama!" x 37

Even to Obama supporters that must have gotten annoying by the last one. Reeks of the sore loser doing the "right thing," wrong out of quietly held spite.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

137. An 8 for the speech.

:thumbsup:

[Sparkly]

141. I don't know how many you've seen, then.

Hers was a historic campaign, and it was a historic speech.

No concession speech is a surprise. Many supporters are there, with countless more watching, and the candidate understands they're disappointed. They can't just say, "Oh well, thanks anyway" and exit. They repeat their messages or themes and vow to continue working for those things; they emphasize what they've accomplished, showing the campaign was not a waste of money and effort; and they endorse the winner.

She went beyond that. The message for women (and men!) about equality is nothing short of profound, and she linked that directly to Obama's own campaign in several ways. Rather than just end with an endorsement of Obama, she kept returning to him, encouraging her supporters to unite with him from several different angles, and interweaving that with the rest of her speech.

It was an important speech, and I can't think of a thing she could have done better.

[bunnies]

152. Compare it to Al Gore 2000.

You dont think the speech could have been better?

[Sparkly]

162. That was another historic concession speech.

Different context, different needs to address, and no other candidate to endorse.

[Obama4prez4life]

144. I was not impressed

[meow mix]

151. i dont watch speeches from those dead to me

i will never acknowledge that persons existance again.

[grantcart]

155. Over 80% of DUers in this poll rated it very highly so you are not alone but out numbered

Part of the problem is that Obama has changed the rating sensitivities for what constitutes a good speech.

Comparing it to Obama's speeches will get you one type of reaction but

compare it to any of the Repbulicans speeches - not on substance but purely on delivery - and it is excellent.

Senator McCain would give anything to be able to say his name as effectively as Senator Clinton gave that speech.

Moreover if you look at the speech again it is clear that her faces muscles are clenching at that there is real emotion

in giving this speech.

Senator Clinton was not giving a speech; she was giving up a dream she had for years and on a purely human basis it is

remarkable to see someone give a speech that goes against the emotions that go so deep for her.

Given how hard it was for her to give that speech I think she did a remarkably good job.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x6314056

[RBInMaine]

156. Aw, quit this SHIT ! It was good. TIME TO UNITE !!

[ejpoeta]

160. i thought she gave a great speech.

she used obama's phrasing and endorsed him wholeheartedly. It looked like a difficult speech to give. She must have been crushed by the loss. But she stood there and gave a great speech. I don't understand why so many didn't think it was great. I personally thought she did a great job.

[tamzins]

165. NOT GENUINE

How could she go from raking Obama over the coals a few days earlier to suddenly vowing to support him with all her heart - well having her debt paid off might do it. Best acting job so far. Watch the facial expression while she made the speech - eyes cold as a fish, squirming at every mention of his name.

[hardbop]

166. Sort of agree

... the content of the speech was exactly as it should be (save for the 18 million cracks comment).

But every time she said "...must elect Barack Obama", it just felt forced. A smidgen of insincerity.

It was a very bitter, disappointing defeat. We need to give her time and then both her and Barack need to campaign TOGETHER and heal their relationship. Both personally and professionally.

[Major Hogwash]

168. Hell, I'm still waiting for Joe Biden to make his concession speech.

He'll probably plagerize all the best parts of all the other concession speechs before he gives his.

[AngryOldDem]

169. I have been one of HRC's sharpest critics.

Not always on these forums though, but I have had my fill of her and her campaign tactics for awhile now. But I was extremely impressed with her speech yesterday and thought it hit all the points it needed to hit.

Short of carrying two planks of wood and nailing herself to them, I really don't know what the hell more she should/could have done.

Speaking as an Obama supporter, it's time get past this and begin looking toward November.

Christ...Wednesday CANNOT get here soon enough.

[QC]

172. Well, she did not commit seppuku, or even flagellate herself with barbed wire,

so no, I am not pleased at all.

:sarcasm:

[Breeze54]

177. It was fine.... move along...

:eyes:

[XemaSab]

181. Her speeches always sound like she's reading off a list

:shrug:

[Apollo11]

191. got hate?

I would give the speech 9/10 for content and 8/10 for delivery. Plus 11/10 for courage.

[Major Hogwash]

203. "4 decades of being involved with politics"

Really showed, huh?

[JPettus]

184. Oh Good God

Are Obama supporters never satisfied?

What did she need to do, threaten to light herself on fire if Obama isn't elected?

It's done, Obama won, you got the candidate you wanted and Clinton made a concession speak that, by your own admission, said all the right things.

Now can we PLEASE move on and concentrate on defeating McCain and winning the election in November?

[vaberella]

186. I was probably one of the few NOT impressed by her speech. I felt every time she said Obama it was

1 million dollars for each mention into her debt fund.

[skids]

187. It was better than most of her others I have seen...

When I watched it I had to carefully weigh whether it was actually better, or just relief on my part that she was finally doing what was needed to bring the party back together. It's easier to uprate things you want to hear when you hear them. But, after filtering out that emotion, I still think it was a very good speech -- well written, well delivered. It was a good note to end on, even if the song leading up to it was grating.

(edited to add -- if I had had to change one word in it, it would have been "enterprise" -- that part sounded like she was at a board meeting.)

[greguganus]

194. Hillary? Hillary who? n/t

[Beacool]

197. Frankly, her supporters probably couldn't care less if the Obama crowd liked it.

Why should we? She agreed to campaign her heart out for Obama, that should be more than enough to satisfy his camp.

What more did you people want? It was hard enough for those who where there to have to hear that speech in the first place.

[Apollo11]

205. You are wrong. It was an outstanding speech. Pure class!

Hillary's speech was addressed to her supporters. These are 18 million people who have heard Barack Obama's message, watched him on TV, and decided that Hillary Clinton would be a stronger general election candidate and a more effective President. Many of these people have honest doubts about Barack Obama's preparedness to serve as President of the US.

Hillary said all that needed to be said and then some ...

Hillary Clinton - Speech in Washington DC - June 7, 2008

The way to continue our fight now, to accomplish the goals for which we stand is to take our energy, our passion, our strength, and do all we can to help elect Barack Obama, the next president of the United States.

Today, as I suspend my campaign, I congratulate him on the victory he has won and the extraordinary race he has run. I endorse him and throw my full support behind him.

And I ask all of you to join me in working as hard for Barack Obama as you have for me.

I have served in the Senate with him for four years. I have been in this campaign with him for 16 months. I have stood on the stage and gone toe-to-toe with him in 22 debates. I've had a front-row seat to his candidacy, and I have seen his strength and determination, his grace and his grit.

In his own life, Barack Obama has lived the American dream, as a community organizer, in the State Senate, as a United States senator. He has dedicated himself to ensuring the dream is realized. And in this campaign, he has inspired so many to become involved in the democratic process and invested in our common future.

Now, when I started this race, I intended to win back the White House and make sure we have a president who puts our country back on the path to peace, prosperity and progress. And that's exactly what we're going to do, by ensuring that Barack Obama walks through the doors of the Oval Office on January 20, 2009.

Read the full transcript here:
www.nytimes.com/2008/06/07/us/politics/07text-clinton.html?ref=politics&pagewanted=all